The conclusion is brief as each chapter has its own part-conclusion. It summarises the argument to the effect that Greek historiography was moral-didactic from its inception, and that techniques developed while lessons stayed largely stable, with individual historiographers having individual quirks and preferences. The stability of the moral messages is surprising considering the time span and changes in political situation and so demonstrates the power of tradition in morality and of imitation in literature. The thorny question of whether moralising meant inventing details and writing poor history is then discussed, and the conclusion is ventured that no historiographer is ever objective and that Moral History was in and of itself no poorer than any other kinds of History. The quality of the history writing was determined by the historian’s handling of sources and ability to analyse them, and not by his, probably unconscious, decision to view the world through a moralistic lens.
Edinburgh Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.