THE ART OF HISTORY

...sailed for this reason, as the emperor was sending him. From this, the passage of Apuleius regarding the teachings of Plato gains clarity: Furthermore, some malicious people criticize his (Plato's) three arrivals in Sicily, differing in their various opinions. But he set out the first time for the sake of history, to understand the nature of Etna and the fires of that hollow mountain; the second time, at the request of Dionysius, to assist the Syracusans, and so on. Where he says "for the sake of history," he means as Plutarch says, original: "ἱστορίας καὶ θέας ἕνεκα" (historias kai theas heneka) "for the sake of inquiry and observation." Plutarch expressed a similar idea regarding Solon: original: "πολυπειρίας ἕνεκα καὶ ἱστορίας" (polypeirias heneka kai historias) "for the sake of wide experience and inquiry." Enough has been said regarding the second opinion.

The third opinion is that of Cicero a and Cornificius b, for whom history is the narration of deeds removed from the memory of our own age. This view is diametrically opposed to the second opinion. For what Livy wrote about the Punic Wars would not be history to Verrius Verrius Flaccus, a scholar who argued history must be recorded by an eyewitness, but it would be history to Cicero and Cornificius. Conversely, what Livy recorded concerning his own age would not be history to Cicero and Cornificius, but would be to Verrius. One may refute the opinion of Cicero and Cornificius using Cicero himself. In that learned letter to Lucceius c, Tully Marcus Tullius Cicero requests that Lucceius write a history of the things Cicero had done during his consulship. Yet those events were certainly not removed from Cicero's memory.

The fourth opinion is that of Agellius d Aulus Gellius, for whom, in his Attic Nights, history is any narration of deeds whatsoever. Thus, for him, history and annals differ as genus and species biological or logical categories: history is the broad category, while annals are a specific type. All annals are histories, but not all histories are annals.

The art of history original: "Historice" does not specifically indicate a method for recording only those things remote from our century, nor does it teach how to report only what one has seen or could have seen personally. Therefore, the interpretations of Verrius, Cicero, or Cornificius do not fully apply here. Instead, it generally demonstrates the method by which both annals and any other histories may best be committed to writing. Nevertheless, because someone who knows how to produce a history—in which causes, intentions, and other details not required for annals are explained—will also have a thorough understanding of the skill of composing annals. For this reason, Servius e says that annals are also contained within history. Thus, almost the entire work of the art of history concerns the composition of the kind of history that Sempronius Asellio alone deemed worthy of the name. Enough has been said regarding the word; let us now proceed to the matter itself.