Today's Passage
In this methodological passage, Thucydides critiques popular historical understanding and defends his own historical method.
Crawley Translation (1910)
Having now given the result of my inquiries into early times, I grant that there will be a difficulty in believing every particular detail. The way that most men deal with traditions, even traditions of their own country, is to receive them all alike as they are delivered, without applying any critical test whatever. The general Athenian public fancy that Hipparchus was tyrant when he fell by the hands of Harmodius and Aristogiton, not knowing that Hippias, the eldest of the sons of Pisistratus, was really supreme, and that Hipparchus and Thessalus were his brothers; and that Harmodius and Aristogiton suspecting, on the very day, nay at the very moment fixed on for the deed, that information had been conveyed to Hippias by their accomplices, concluded that he had been warned, and did not attack him, yet, not liking to be apprehended and risk their lives for nothing, fell upon Hipparchus near the temple of the daughters of Leos, and slew him as he was arranging the Panathenaic procession.
There are many other unfounded ideas current among the rest of the Hellenes, even on matters of contemporary history, which have not been obscured by time. For instance, there is the notion that the Lacedaemonian kings have two votes each, the fact being that they have only one; and that there is a company of Pitane, there being simply no such thing. So little pains do the vulgar take in the investigation of truth, accepting readily the first story that comes to hand. On the whole, however, the conclusions I have drawn from the proofs quoted may, I believe, safely be relied on. Assuredly they will not be disturbed either by the lays of a poet displaying the exaggeration of his craft, or by the compositions of the chroniclers that are attractive at truth’s expense; the subjects they treat of being out of the reach of evidence, and time having robbed most of them of historical value by enthroning them in the region of legend. Turning from these, we can rest satisfied with having proceeded upon the clearest data, and having arrived at conclusions as exact as can be expected in matters of such antiquity. To come to this war: despite the known disposition of the actors in a struggle to overrate its importance, and when it is over to return to their admiration of earlier events, yet an examination of the facts will show that it was much greater than the wars which preceded it.
Modern Translation
Having presented my findings about ancient times, I acknowledge that believing every specific detail will prove challenging. Most people handle traditions—even those of their own homeland—by accepting them uncritically as received, without subjecting them to any rigorous examination. The Athenian public, for instance, mistakenly believes that Hipparchus was the ruling tyrant when Harmodius and Aristogiton assassinated him. They fail to understand that Hippias, as Pisistratus's eldest son, held supreme power, while Hipparchus and Thessalus were merely his brothers. On the very day—indeed, at the precise moment—designated for their attack, Harmodius and Aristogiton suspected that their conspirators had warned Hippias. Concluding he had been alerted, they avoided attacking him. Yet, unwilling to face arrest and sacrifice their lives pointlessly, they encountered Hipparchus near the temple of the daughters of Leos and killed him while he was organizing the Panathenaic procession.
Numerous other misconceptions circulate among the Greeks, even regarding recent history untouched by time's obscuring effects. Consider the false belief that Spartan kings possess two votes each, when they actually have only one; or the notion that a Pitanate company exists, though no such unit has ever been formed. The masses invest so little effort in pursuing truth, readily embracing whatever story first reaches them. Nevertheless, I maintain that my conclusions, derived from the evidence presented, can be trusted. They will withstand challenges from poets who embellish their craft through exaggeration, or from chroniclers whose appealing narratives sacrifice accuracy. These writers address subjects beyond verification's reach, and time has stripped most accounts of historical worth by elevating them to myth. Setting these aside, we may be content with having built upon the most reliable evidence available and reached the most precise conclusions possible for such ancient matters. Regarding this war: although combatants naturally magnify their conflict's significance during hostilities, then afterward resume admiring earlier events, careful examination reveals this war surpassed all its predecessors in magnitude.
Historical Context
In this methodological passage, Thucydides critiques popular historical understanding and defends his own historical method. He uses the assassination of Hipparchus (514 BCE) as a prime example of how even educated Athenians misunderstand their own recent history. The tyrant-slayers Harmodius and Aristogiton had become democratic heroes, but Thucydides corrects the record: they killed the wrong brother (Hipparchus instead of the actual tyrant Hippias) in what amounted to a botched assassination attempt. This passage appears in Thucydides' introduction, where he establishes his credentials as a critical historian who, unlike poets and popular chroniclers, bases his account on careful investigation rather than appealing stories. He's preparing readers for his analysis of the Peloponnesian War by demonstrating the superiority of his historical method.
Key Themes
Annotations & References
The Tyrannicides
Harmodius and Aristogiton became celebrated as liberators who ended tyranny in Athens, though they actually failed to kill the ruling tyrant Hippias. Their assassination of Hipparchus in 514 BCE was motivated by a personal dispute over the youth Harmodius. Despite this, they were honored with statues and became symbols of resistance to tyranny.
Learn more →Panathenaic Festival
Athens' most important religious festival, held annually (with a grander version every four years) in honor of Athena. The procession Hipparchus was organizing when killed was a central element, featuring the presentation of a new peplos (robe) to Athena's statue. This detail emphasizes the public, sacrilegious nature of the assassination.
Learn more →Spartan Dual Kingship
Sparta uniquely maintained two hereditary kings from separate royal houses (Agiad and Eurypontid). Thucydides corrects the misconception that each king had two votes in council—they had one vote each. This error about contemporary Spartan government illustrates how poorly Greeks understood even their own institutions.
Learn more →Historical Method in Antiquity
Thucydides pioneered critical historical methodology, rejecting mythological explanations and emphasizing eyewitness testimony and documentary evidence. His critique of poets and chroniclers reflects his revolutionary approach to writing history based on verifiable facts rather than entertaining narratives.
Learn more →Parallel Ancient Sources
Herodotus: Histories (Book 5.55-65)
Herodotus provides the earlier account of the tyrannicides that Thucydides critiques, presenting a more romanticized version where Harmodius and Aristogiton are freedom fighters rather than failed assassins motivated by personal grievance.
Read passage →Aristotle: Constitution of Athens (Chapter 18)
Aristotle's account aligns more closely with Thucydides, acknowledging the personal motivations behind the assassination and noting that Hippias continued ruling for four more years after his brother's death.
Read passage →Plutarch: On the Malice of Herodotus (862-863)
Plutarch discusses how historians handle traditions differently, providing a later perspective on the methodological debates between recording popular tradition versus critical investigation that Thucydides pioneered.
Read passage →Discussion Questions
- How does Thucydides' criticism of popular historical memory relate to modern concerns about 'fake news' and historical revisionism?
- Why might the Athenians have preferred to remember Harmodius and Aristogiton as tyrannicides rather than failed assassins with personal motives?
- What does Thucydides' emphasis on factual accuracy over entertaining narrative suggest about his intended audience and purpose?
- How does the example of the Spartan voting system illustrate the challenges of understanding even contemporary political institutions?