Who are the most and least reliable Historians of antiquity?

>>2982067
>historians
every society goes through the same story

>>2982071
At most the stories rhyme, definitely not the same.

For instance how would you guys rate these historians/chroniclers

>Diodorus of Sicily

>Thucydides

>Xenophon

>Tacitus

>>2982113
>Diodorus of Sicily

Mediocre.

>Thucydides

Very good, though people often seem to forget that he is a master at curating his history along thematic lines. e.g. trying to outdo the Iliad by making the two Peloponnesian wars into one long 27 year conflict.

>Xenophon

Distinctly underrated and seen, somewhat unfairly, as a Lacedaemonian stooge.

>Tacitus

One of the best. Though like all, still prone to engaging in tired Roman clichés.

>>2982193
To be fair, the peloponnesian war was rather long. Xenophon is next on my list, would you consider all his works around equal in quality, or are there any that stand out amongst the rest?

In terms of military history the least reliable is probably Vegetius.

>>2982067
Meant to be
>That need as much caution as Livy and Herodotus

Disregard the don't

>>2982223
>To be fair, the peloponnesian war was rather long.

My point is that it was actually two separate wars. 431-421 and then another war between 414 and 403. It is purely due to Thucydides that people believe it was one because it was his histographical intention for that to be the case. The introduction makes clear that he wants the war to be seen as a huge deal and even more important than, shock horror, the Trojan War.

>would you consider all his works around equal in quality, or are there any that stand out amongst the rest?

I've only read the Hellenica, Agesilaus and Anabasis, but the Anabasis in particular is a cracking read. The other two are pretty good also but slightly more mundane and deal with the descent into chaos and insanity that characterises the 4th century Greek world.

The Anabasis is just insane though in terms of what goes on.

how good was Sabos?

>>2982237
That makes since, I knew there was an interlude or something, but always just saw it as one war in the big picture. I've wanted to read the anabasis and have some old as fuck copy I found in a used book store, I'll have to start that one next.

Best-to-worst in reliability

1. Thucydides
2. Polybius
3. Josephus
4. Xenophon
5. Ammianus Marcellinus
6. Tacitus
7. Arrian
8. Suetonius
9. Livy
10. Appian
11. Plutarch
12. Quintus Curtius Rufus
13. Sallust
14. Diodorus Siculus
15. Herodotus
16. Ctetias

File: Herodotus 2.jpg (127KB, 800x1143px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 800x1143px

>>2982067
Historians used to think Herodotus was full of shit, but he's been consistently proved right.

>>2983691
Isn't it accepted Josephus' histories were fairly edited after the fact by people so it diminishes the reliability?

>>2983699
Like the gold gathering ants. Herodotus will never be false.

>>2983998

>Isn't it accepted Josephus' histories were fairly edited after the fact by people so it diminishes the reliability?

No, only those with a serious ax to grind against Christianity and/or Islam dismiss Josephus.

>Like the gold gathering ants. Herodotus will never be false.

I was thinking more along the lines of "Tin Island" (aka Britain) and the Romans being partially Trojan (recent genetic studies say this is possible).

>>2985449
I thought it was the Etrsucans who shared DNA similarities with the Trojans?

But I agree, I think there are people too harsh on Herodotus. He even stresses he is for a lot of things repeating what he has heard rather than filter all of it. He definitely needs to be taken with skepticism to an extent, but should also be judged fairly.

>>2985602
>I thought it was the Etrsucans who shared DNA similarities with the Trojans?
You might be right. One of those Italian groups.

Yeah, Herodotus has plenty of disclaimers.

File: 354px-D32b64b9.png (167KB, 354x239px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 354x239px

>>2983699
What about the flying arabian snakes?

>>2985618
T. Somebody who has never witness a flying Arabian snake.

Do you even go outside?

>>2985618
You have to remember "flying" was used a lot less literally in the days before airplanes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysopelea

"Chrysopelea, more commonly known as the flying snake or gliding snake, is a genus that belongs to the family Colubridae. Flying snakes are mildly venomous,[1] though the venom is dangerous only to their small prey.[2] Their range is in Southeast Asia (the mainland (Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos), Greater and Lesser Sundas, Maluku, and the Philippines), southernmost China, India, and Sri Lanka.[3][4][5][6]"

It's unclear if they ever lived in Arabia or if "Arabia" was used more broadly then.