Thucydides spent a lot of time gathering information and analyzing it. He made sure his work was really good. He didn't have a lot of information but it was all very accurate and had information to back it up.
Herodotus on the other hand, had a lot of information but it wasn't accurate or true. He basically wrote down everything he was told or heard.
An article that shows Thucydides type of writing is http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/s/sept_11_2001/index.html?scp=1-spot&sq=September%2011&st=cse . This shows his writing because its shorter but has a ton of a good information. It's not all his opinion and what other people have told him. Its mostly made up of all true facts that can be proven. he wanted to make sure all of his information was completely accurate before he let anyone else know or read about it.
This one, http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/08/opinion/08bryce.html?_r=1&ref=opinion shows Herodotus type of writing because it's an opinion and it's not all proven facts. It could all be wrong but he just goes off of what other people say and what he hears. It's not all completely accurate but it's what he thinks. Herodotus would write a lot but would get a lot of criticism from people for not having accurate information.
No comments:
Post a Comment