historiography Archives - Page 2 of 3 - Tales of Times Forgotten

The “Great Man Hypothesis” Briefly Debunked

If you have much interest in history, you have probably heard of the so-called “Great Man hypothesis,” which holds that history is completely—or at least primarily—shaped by the deeds of a small number of so-called “Great Men.” If you have heard of this hypothesis, chances are you have probably heard why most modern historians reject it. In case you haven’t, though, here is a quick look at the so-called “Great Man hypothesis” and a few of its shortcomings.

Heinrich Schliemann Debunked

Anyone who has studied archaeology has heard of Heinrich Schliemann. He is popularly acclaimed as the bold, talented, German-American amateur archaeologist who discovered the lost city of Troy at Hisarlık in what is now northwest Turkey. In truth, this image is largely a fabrication of Schliemann’s own making. The real Heinrich Schliemann was a lying, cheating, grifting, thieving charlatan and overall scumbag who only became famous because he was extremely rich and highly skilled in the art of lying to make himself seem more impressive than he really was.

Even though Schliemann is popularly credited as the “discoverer” of Troy, he was not the first person to identify Hisarlık as Troy. He was not even the first person to excavate there. Furthermore, his attempts to excavate the ruins of Troy were so hopelessly incompetent that he ended up actually destroying most of the ancient site.

Eight Things That Would Surprise Most People about Life in the Ancient World

There are a whole lot of things that would surprise most people about what life was like in ancient times. As historians sometimes say, “The past is a foreign country.” When reading about the past, we learn about people whose lives were, in many ways, utterly different from our own. Here are a few facts about life in the ancient world that would probably instantly shock a modern person travelling into the past.

What Evidence Is There for Atheism in Ancient Greece?

A frequent question I have encountered is the question of whether there were atheists in ancient Greece. This is a question that is surprisingly difficult to answer and I think the most appropriate answer is something along the lines of “sort of, but not exactly.” Although it is certainly possible that there were people in ancient Greece who rejected the existence of all deities, the historical evidence for the existence of such individuals is extremely limited to say the very least.

We have solid evidence for the existence of people in ancient Greece who criticized certain aspects of traditional Greek religion and we even have solid evidence for the existence of people in ancient Greece who might be termed “agnostics,” but we have no clear, unambiguous, contemporary historical evidence for the existence of people in ancient Greece who outright denied the existence of all deities altogether.

What Makes Alexander the Great Different from Genghis Khan or Attila the Hun?

King Alexandros III of Makedonia, or, as he is more commonly known today, “Alexander the Great,” still looms large in our history books and in popular culture, where he is often portrayed as a benevolent ruler and a glorious conqueror, spreading the light of Greek civilization to the supposedly barbarous peoples of the east. In Greece today, Alexander is widely revered as a national hero.

Nonetheless, we must wonder why it is that Alexander is portrayed as such a glorious conqueror; whereas other historical figures known for their conquests, such as Attila the Hun and Genghis Khan, are remembered as ruthless barbarians and destroyers of civilization.

A Life of Herodotos

The ancient Greek historian Herodotos of Halikarnassos is renowned today as the “Father of History,” a title that was first conferred on him by the Roman orator Marcus Tullius Cicero (lived 106 – 43 BC) in his dialogue On the Laws. Herodotos is often credited with having been the first person to methodically collect and critically analyze different accounts of events from different sources, compile them into a detailed historical narrative, and attempt to assess the causes of those events and analyze the motives and politics behind them.

Herodotos did these things in a book in nine volumes titled Ἱστορίαι (Historíai), meaning “researches” or “inquiries,” describing his research on the Greco-Persian Wars and their historical context. It is from the title of Herodotos’s book that we have gotten our English word history. Ironically, even though Herodotos has contributed so much to our understanding of history, very little is known about Herodotos’s own, personal history. In this article, I intend to discuss what is known about Herodotos’s own life.

No, the New Testament Canon Was Not Decided by Constantine I

Many people today, especially many freethinkers and atheists, wrongly believe that the Roman emperor Constantine I (lived 272 – 337 AD) was the one who decided which books would be included in the New Testament. This idea, despite its widespread popularity, is completely wrong.

The truth is that most of the Biblical canon was already decided long before Constantine I was even born. The remaining questions about the Biblical canon that still existed during Constantine I’s lifetime were not resolved until at least several decades after his death. As far as we know, Constantine I himself had no significant involvement whatsoever in the selection of texts to be included in the New Testament.

Was Pontius Pilate a Historical Figure? Yes.

I have now written several articles on this website in which I have presented the evidence that is currently available for the historicity of various figures from ancient times. For instance, I have written entire articles presenting the evidence for the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth, Alexander the Great, and King David. I also presented the evidence for the historicity of Pythagoras in this article and the historicity of Socrates in this article, although in neither case was historicity the main subject of the article. In this article, I intend to present the evidence for the historical existence of Pontius Pilate.

Although we can never be absolutely, 100% certain about anything in history, we can be about as certain that Pontius Pilate was a real historical figure as we can about anything historical. Furthermore, contrary to the claims you frequently hear from evangelical apologists, no sane historian has ever disputed that Pontius Pilate was a real historical figure. There may have been some kooks at some point who disputed it, but the real historians have basically always agreed that Pontius Pilate existed, since the historical evidence for his existence is so overwhelming.

Was King David a Historical Figure?

As many of my readers are probably already aware, an article that I published on this website back in March 2018 about the historicity of Jesus recently stirred up quite a bit of controversy and criticism—some of it constructive, some of it not so much. As I noted in one of my comments under that article, the historicity of Jesus seems to be perhaps the one subject in the entire field of ancient history that is the most capable of consistently inciting outrage and controversy. The historicity of King David, on the other hand, is a bit less contentious, since David is not nearly as important a figure in Christianity as Jesus is. I certainly hope that this article does not provoke quite so much outrage as my Jesus article, but I suspect it will probably just lead to more nasty comments telling me how everything I write is rubbish and how I will never be a real scholar. In any case, here we go.

What Evidence Is There for the Existence of Alexander the Great? Quite a Lot.

One of the things that bothers me the most about the internet are all the pernicious articles claiming that such-and-such well-attested historical figure from ancient times actually never existed at all. One of the most annoying claims out there on the internet is that there is no evidence for the existence of Alexander the Great. This claim is blatantly ridiculous, but yet I have seen multiple people on the internet claiming it, repeatedly and in earnest. In this article, I intend to offer a sound debunking of this assertion by presenting some solid evidence for the existence of Alexander the Great.