Take the 2-minute tour ×
History Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for historians and history buffs. It's 100% free, no registration required.

In his History of the Peloponnesian War, Thucydides includes a number of made up speeches based upon "what was called for in each situation". While this is frowned upon in modern histories, it seems to have been perfectly acceptable practice then and their inclusion had no bearing on the historicity of the rest of the work. Every work by an ancient historian that I have read contains such speeches, although the quality and relevance to the situation varies.

What was the first documented case of a historian expressing opposition to the use of fabricated speeches? When did the practice begin to lose acceptance amongst historians in general? What were the reasons for this change of view?

share|improve this question
3  
+1. Wow, history of historical narration. –  Monster Truck Jun 15 '12 at 13:59
2  
fascinating question, I have no idea how to even begin to tackle this –  ihtkwot Jun 15 '12 at 14:22

1 Answer 1

This answer is partial and speculative. I think that one crucial idea in the development of modern history is, (ironically, given his status as a leading "fabricator",) first expressed by Herodotus:

I am not able to say for certain, nor do I declare any question other than that which [is reported].a1

Gradually you find more and more general and refined statements of this basic idea, getting over the centuries to something like:

Let the reader be aware that whatever I mention in my book is relied on the news that were narrated by some men. I had attributed these stories to their narrators, without inferring anything from their incidents [...] If a certain man gets horrified by a certain incident that we reported in our book, then let him know that it did not come from us, but we only wrote down what we received from the narrators.
— al-Tabari, Muhammad ibn Jarir (c.915, Arabic). History of the Prophets and Kings. Baghdad.

I am speculating that this principle had to become firmly established first in order for speech-fabrication to be viewed as "off-limits."

A: actually, he named a specific source – "what the Argives themselves report" – but it's the general principle that interests us here.

share|improve this answer
1  
I don't think Al-Tabari is a typical historian, as he seems to be just chronicling events as told by others without making his own additions (whether that be dialogue or opinion). While the concerns of veracity raised by Herodotus may be related to the use of fabricated speeches, the link wasn't necessarily there in the ancient world. Thucydides makes it clear that his speeches are made up, yet these pieces of fiction have no bearing on his reliability. Polybius also uses them, yet goes to great effort to demonstrate that his version of events is accurate. –  lins314159 Jul 16 '12 at 3:17

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.