Texts and Contexts: Learning from History

In the preface to his work, Polybius highlights the knowledge (ἐμπειρία) to be gained from reading his history (1.1.6). The emphatic placement of this word at the conclusion of the opening section suggests that Polybius’ choice of terminology here is intentional. But, while Polybius elsewhere in his work (e.g. 1.35.9, 5.31.3) will again use the term ἐμπειρία to refer to knowledge acquired vicariously through the reading of history, this definition represents a marked contrast with the more common meaning to describe personal experience.

Thucydides’ anxiety to prepare the reader to identify a calamity similar to the events he relates, the basis for his claim of his work’s “usefulness” (1.22.4 ὠφέλιμα), is one of his more puzzling stances. This identification must not be obvious if even the intelligent audience he envisions requires his guidance to make it, but he does not specify what, exactly, he proposes to enable the reader to recognize.

Plato’s Charmides, set in 429 B.C., is a dialogue between Socrates, the future democratic partisan Chaerephon and two future oligarchic politicians, Critias and Charmides, both relatives of Plato. The fact that Plato has combined in the same scenario the full spectrum of political ideologies strongly intimates that for him political history presented different shades of grey, rather than a simple dichotomy of black and white.

Seneca’s Philosophical Thyestes

Arguments have long raged about the extent to which Seneca’s tragedies reflect his philosophy. I maintain that there is a systematic and logical connection between the ideas espoused in the Epistulae Morales and the characters of the Thyestes, and moreover, I believe that the connection is one which reflects Seneca’s own relationship with Nero.

Cassius Dio's depiction of Septimius Severus is a crucial part of the author's Roman History, as it informs questions of the historian's relationship with the Severan regime, his overall goals in writing his history, and even the process of composing the history itself. Difficulties of interpretation arise because of Cassius Dio's seemingly critical stance toward the emperor throughout much of his narration of Severus' reign, in contrast to the generally positive obituary that Severus receives at the end of book 77[76].