Trivium Home School · Language Games
Who invented history, and how did they know? From Hecataeus and Herodotus to Thucydides, Polybius, Josephus, Tacitus and Procopius: what each historian saw, what he was told, and what he made up, with Philo, Sophia, Marcos and Demetria, grammar at every level and a gamebook for each historian.
What history is, and how to question a historian.
The beginning of history: historia as inquiry, eyewitnesses and hearsay, Herodotus and Thucydides, with the past simple and the present perfect for history, according to, and the language of sources.
Hecataeus and Herodotus: travellers, storytellers and inquirers.
Hecataeus of Miletus, the first map-maker and critic of Greek myths, humbled by the priests of Thebes, with reported speech, hedging and the language of family trees and boasting.
Herodotus’ story of Croesus and Solon, “Call no man happy until he is dead”, with narrative tenses, time linkers and the language of wealth and happiness.
Herodotus’ Egypt: the Nile flood, sacred cats, mummies and the babies’ first word, with the present simple for customs, whereas / unlike / the opposite of, used to and correcting facts.
Herodotus’ Persian Wars: Marathon, Thermopylae and Salamis, and the problem of his impossible numbers, with the passive in narrative, hedging about numbers and battle vocabulary.
The historian who wanted to be useful for ever.
Thucydides’ method and Pericles’ funeral oration, with formal relative clauses (who, whose, in which, those who), balanced rhetoric (not only… but also) and the language of historical method.
Thucydides’ account of the plague of Athens and the Melian Dialogue, with conditionals in argument (unless, provided that, were you to, had…), and the language of power and justice.
Thucydides’ account of the Sicilian expedition: Alcibiades, Nicias, the eclipse and the disaster at Syracuse, with the future in the past (was going to, would, was to, was about to) and the language of ambition and warning.
Soldiers, philosophers and wonder-tellers.
Xenophon’s Anabasis: the march of the Ten Thousand and “The sea! The sea!”, with the past continuous, had to / could / managed to, and the language of journeys and survival.
Xenophon’s Memorabilia (Heracles at the crossroads), Cyropaedia and Oeconomicus, with advice structures (should, ought to, had better, if I were you, it’s better to) and the language of choices and character.
Ctesias, the Greek doctor at the Persian court, and his wonders of India: the unicorn, the manticore and the dog-headed people, with describing creatures (has got, can, is covered in), it is said to, and the language of wonders and doubt.
Conquest, drama and the histories of Egypt, Babylon and Rome.
The historians of Alexander the Great: Callisthenes, Ptolemy, Aristobulus, Cleitarchus and Arrian, with comparing sources (whereas, according to, X claims but Y says), reporting verbs and the language of reliability and motive.
Duris of Samos and “tragic history”, and Polybius’s reply that history must teach, not thrill, with so… that / such… that, cleft sentences, negative inversion and the language of criticism.
Manetho, who wrote Egypt’s history in Greek for Ptolemy II and gave us the thirty dynasties, and Berossus of Babylon, with Oannes and the flood, with the passive for history and the language of chronology.
Polybius, the Greek hostage who explained Rome’s rise: the mixed constitution, Hannibal’s Alps and Scipio weeping over Carthage, with cause-and-effect linkers (as a result, owing to, thereby, lead to) and the language of political systems.
Roman historians, Philo himself, and Josephus.
Sallust, the corrupt politician who wrote about corruption: Catiline’s conspiracy and Jugurtha’s bribes, with describing character (known for, a reputation for, accused of), despite / although, and the language of corruption and hypocrisy.
Philo of Alexandria as a historian: the violence of 38 CE, the prefect Flaccus, and the embassy to the emperor Gaius, with formal petitions, reporting verbs and the language of rights and justice.
Josephus at Jotapata: the cave, the lots and the prophecy to Vespasian, with judging the past (should have, could have, might have, had no choice but to) and the language of loyalty and betrayal.
Josephus’s account of the siege of Jerusalem and Masada, and what archaeology found, with concession in argument (while it is true that, admittedly, nonetheless), weighing evidence and the language of archaeology.
Josephus’s Jewish Antiquities: retelling scripture for Roman readers, what he added and omitted, and the debated passage about Jesus, with paraphrasing and summarising, the passive for textual history, and the language of sources.
Josephus’s Against Apion: answering ancient anti-Jewish slanders, Greek history as “young”, and an argument that is sometimes exaggerated itself, with the language of refutation, rhetorical questions and the vocabulary of prejudice and defence.
Lives, annals and secret histories.
Plutarch’s Parallel Lives: Alexander and Caesar, Bucephalus, the pirates and Shakespeare’s source, with both… and, neither… nor, similar to, whereas, just as… so…, and the language of character and anecdote.
Tacitus: “they make a desert and call it peace”, the fire of Rome and the Christians, and his prejudiced account of the Jews, with nominalisation for concise academic style, irony and understatement, and the language of power and prejudice.
Procopius, who praised the emperor Justinian in public and condemned him in his Secret History: the Wars, the Nika riots, Theodora and Hagia Sophia, with stance verbs and adverbs (alleges, praises, supposedly), contrast and the language of bias.
Premium lessons and gamebooks need the premium password; once it has been entered, they stay open on that device.