Chapter 2: Introductory Assignment
The purpose of the following chapter is to get students to practice reading and analyzing primary sources. The goal is to learn to evaluate sources critically. Historians try not to take any primary source at face value, but to question its purpose and understand its bias. It is also important for readers to be able to distinguish between fact and interpretation when doing this activity. When reading any source, we want to try to put ourselves into the historical past, to try to understand what the source was trying to accomplish in the period in which it was written. Our job here is not to judge these past societies, but to try to come to understand them. Certainly, what we learn might be distressing from a modern perspective, however we must set aside our modern biases in order to gain a deeper understanding of the historical past.
As you read the following sources, think about the following five questions. You must approach each of these questions from the perspective of when the source was originally written, not from the modern day
- Who is the author? When was the source composed?
- Knowing the author helps us to better understand perspective. Is this a person who is a religious leader? A political leader? Both? Are they not associated with the government in any way? Knowing this basic information will help us to ascertain the agenda/purpose of the source.
- Knowing the time something was written gives us better historical context. Does this come from a period of conflict? Is it from the beginning of a dynasty? Its end?
- Who was the intended audience?
- Was this meant for general consumption? Was it a personal letter whose contents were not meant to be known publicly? If so, was it to a close friend or maybe an adversary? Throughout history people will write different ways when it is meant for different audiences.
- What is the purpose of the source?
- This can be a difficult one. Sometimes a stated aim is not always the truth. Other times, something that seems straightforward is not.
- What is the historical context in which the letter was written and read?
- Context gets at why this, why now? What is going on that would lead the author to produce this particular source at this particular time? Sometimes we can find the answer to this in the source itself, but oftentimes we need to look outside of the source to understand what was happening in the wider society.
- What biases are detectable in the source?
- Bias gets at who is advantaged or disadvantaged by what is written. Sometimes this is intentionally done, sometimes it is unintentional and can simply show us something about the society that the author had never intended, mainly because the concept was common at the time.
If we begin with these general questions in mind, as we read there is a lot more that we can learn from each source beyond simply what is in them. In the end, as we read we really want to ascertain the why of something, not just the what. Yes, it is important to understand what is in each source, but we also need to understand the meaning behind it, the why. Understanding the meaning is much more important than just understanding the facts of what is in each source.
2.1 Herodotus: On The Customs of the Persians (c. 430 BCE)
Herodotus is often called the “Father of History,” though this shows a Western European bias as there were many in Asia who wrote comprehensive histories before he did. Writing in the 5th-century BCE, the Greek historian documented the cultures, peoples, and events of the ancient world in his work The Histories. In the section On the Customs of the Persians, Herodotus offers a detailed account of Persian society, focusing on their values, practices, and daily life. While his observations are shaped by a Greek perspective, his work provides valuable insight into how the Persians were viewed by their contemporaries and serves as an early example of cross-cultural documentation. In this section, Herodotus describes a range of Persian customs, from their religious rituals to their social norms and attitudes toward truth, honor, and foreign cultures. Herodotus also contrasts Persian openness to adopting foreign customs with what he sees as Greek conservatism. His account reflects both admiration and critique and serves as a crucial source for understanding how the ancient Greeks perceived their powerful neighbors to the east.
The following has been adapted from William Stearns Davis, Readings in Ancient History: Illustrative Extracts from the Sources, Vol. 2: Greece and the East (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1912), pp. 58-61.
Now the Persian nation is made up of many tribes. Those which Cyrus assembled and persuaded to revolt from the Medes were the principal ones on which all the others are dependent. These are the Pasargadae, the Maraphians, and the Maspians, of whom the Pasargadae are the noblest. The Achaemenidae, from which spring all the Perseid kings, is one of their clans. The rest of the Persian tribes are the following: the Panthialaeans, the Derusiaeans, the Germanians, who are engaged in husbandry; the Daans, the Mardians, the Dropicans, and the Sagartians, who are nomads.
The customs which I know the Persians to observe are the following: they have no images of the gods, no temples nor altars, and consider the use of them a sign of folly. This comes, I think, from their not believing the gods to have the same nature with men, as the Greeks imagine…
To these gods the Persians offer sacrifice in the following manner: they raise no altar, light no fire, pour no libations; there is no sound of the flute, no putting on of chaplets, no consecrated barley-cake; but the man who wishes to sacrifice brings his victim[1] to a spot of ground which is pure from pollution, and there calls upon the name of the god to whom he intends to offer. It is usual to have the turban encircled with a wreath, most commonly of myrtle. The sacrificer is not allowed to pray for blessings on himself alone, but he prays for the welfare of the king, and of the whole Persian people, among whom he is of necessity included. He cuts the victim in pieces, and having boiled the flesh, he lays it out upon the tenderest herbage that he can find, trefoil[2] especially. When all is ready, one of the Magi comes forward and chants a hymn, which they say recounts the origin of the gods. It is not lawful to offer sacrifice unless there is a Magus present. After waiting a short time the sacrificer carries the flesh of the victim away with him, and makes whatever use of it he may please…
It is also their general practice to deliberate upon affairs of weight when they are drunk; and then on the morrow, when they are sober, the decision to which they came the night before is put before them by the master of the house in which it was made; and if it is then approved of, they act on it; if not, they set it aside. Sometimes, however, they are sober at their first deliberation, but in this case they always reconsider the matter under the influence of wine. When they meet each other in the streets, you may know if the persons meeting are of equal rank by the following token: if they are, instead of speaking, they kiss each other on the lips. In the case where one is a little inferior to the other, the kiss is given on the cheek; where the difference of rank is great, the inferior prostrates himself upon the ground. Of nations, they honor most their nearest neighbors, whom they esteem next to themselves; those who live beyond these they honor in the second degree; and so with the remainder, the further they are removed, the less the esteem in which they hold them. The reason is that they look upon themselves as very greatly superior in all respects to the rest of mankind, regarding others as approaching to excellence in proportion as they dwell nearer to them; whence it comes to pass that those who are the farthest off must be the most degraded of mankind…
There is no nation which so readily adopts foreign customs as the Persians. Thus, they have taken the dress of the Medes, considering it superior to their own; and in war they wear the Egyptian breastplate. As soon as they hear of any luxury, they instantly make it their own: and hence, among other novelties, they have learnt unnatural lust from the Greeks. Each of them has several wives, and a still larger number of concubines. Next to prowess in arms, it is regarded as the greatest proof of manly excellence to be the father of many sons. Every year the king sends rich gifts to the man who can show the largest number: for they hold that number is strength. Their sons are carefully instructed from their fifth to their twentieth year, in three things alone—to ride, to draw the bow, and to speak the truth. Until their fifth year they are not allowed to come into the sight of their father, but pass their lives with the women. This is done that, if the child die young, the father may not be afflicted by its loss.
They hold it unlawful to talk of anything which it is unlawful to do. The most disgraceful thing in the world, they think, is to tell a lie; the next worst, to owe a debt: because, among other reasons, the debtor is obliged to tell lies…They never defile a river with the secretions of their bodies, nor even wash their hands in one; nor will they allow others to do so, as they have a great reverence for rivers…
The Magi are a very peculiar race, different entirely from the Egyptian priests, and indeed from all other men whatsoever. The Egyptian priests make it a point of religion not to kill any live animals except those which they offer in sacrifice. The Magi, on the contrary, kill animals of all kinds with their own hands, excepting dogs and men. They even seem to take a delight in the employment, and kill, as readily as they do other animals, ants and snakes, and such like flying or creeping things. However, since this has always been their custom, let them keep to it. Buying and selling in a marketplace is a custom unknown to the Persians, who never make purchases in open marts, and indeed have not in their whole country a single market-place.
Source: William Stearns Davis, Readings in Ancient History: Illustrative Extracts from the Sources, Vol. 2: Greece and the East (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1912), pp. 58-61.
This text is part of the Internet Ancient History Sourcebook. The Sourcebook is a collection of public domain and copy-permitted texts related to ancient history. Unless otherwise indicated the specific electronic form of the document is copyright. Permission is granted for electronic copying, distribution in print form for educational purposes and personal use. No representation is made about texts which are linked off-site, although in most cases these are also public domain. If you do reduplicate the document, indicate the source. No permission is granted for commercial use. © Paul Halsall May 1998
2.2 Sidonius Apollinaris: A Civilized Barbarian and a Barbarous Roman (5th Century CE)
Sidonius Apollinaris was a 5th-century Gallo-Roman aristocrat, poet, and bishop from south-west Gaul who lived during the turbulent decline of the Western Roman Empire. As Roman authority crumbled and Germanic kingdoms rose in its place, Sidonius found himself navigating a world where the lines between Roman and “barbarian” identities were increasingly blurred. A number of his letters survive. These two are an interesting contrast: the first describes a “civilized barbarian” (the Visigothic king, Theodoric II, whose main residences were Toulouse and Bordeaux), and the second a “barbarous Roman” (Seronatus). These letters offer a unique window into the cultural tensions and transformations of late antiquity, where the old Roman order gave way to a new and hybrid world.
The following is adapted from Sidonius, The Letters of Sidonius, trans. O.M. Dalton, (Oxford: Clarendon, 1915), two vols.
Sidonius to [his brother-in-law] Agricola (Letters I.2) (454 CE?)
You have often begged a description of Theodoric the Gothic king, whose gentle breeding fame commends to every nation; you want him in his quantity and quality, in his person, and the manner of his existence. I gladly accede, as far as the limits of my page allow, and highly approve so fine and ingenuous a curiosity.
Well, he is a man worth knowing, even by those who cannot enjoy his close acquaintance, so happily have Providence and Nature joined to endow him with the perfect gifts of fortune; his way of life is such that not even the envy which lies in wait for kings can rob him of his proper praise. And first as to his person. He is well set up, in height above the average man, but below the giant. His head is round, with curled hair retreating somewhat from brow to crown. [Sidonius goes on to describe his facial features.] His shoulders are smooth, the upper- and forearms strong and hard; hands broad, breast prominent; waist receding. The spine dividing the broad expanse of back does not project, and you can see the springing of the ribs; the sides swell with salient muscle, the well-girt flanks are full of vigour. His thighs are like hard horn; the knee-joints firm and masculine; the knees themselves the comeliest and least wrinkled in the world. A full ankle supports the leg, and the foot is small to bear such mighty limbs.
Now for the routine of his public life. Before daybreak he goes with a very small suite to attend the service of his priests. He prays with assiduity, but, if I may speak in confidence, one may suspect more of habit than conviction in this piety. Administrative duties of the kingdom take up the rest of the morning. Armed nobles stand about the royal seat; the mass of guards in their garb of skins are admitted that they may be within call, but kept at the threshold for quiet’s sake; only a murmur of them comes in from their post at the doors, between the curtain and the outer barrier. And now the foreign envoys are introduced. The king hears them out, and says little; if a thing needs more discussion he puts it off, but accelerates matters ripe for dispatch. The second hour arrives; he rises from the throne to inspect his treasure-chamber or stable. If the chase is the order of the day, he joins it, but never carries his bow at his side, considering this derogatory to royal state. When a bird or beast is marked for him, or happens to cross his path, he puts his hand behind his back and takes the bow from a page with the string all hanging loose; for as he deems it a boy’s trick to bear it in a quiver, so he holds it effeminate to receive the weapon ready strung. When it is given him, he sometimes holds it in both hands and bends the extremities towards each other; at others he sets it, knot-end downward, against his lifted heel, and runs his finger up the slack and wavering string. After that, he takes his arrows, adjusts, and lets fly. He will ask you beforehand what you would like him to transfix; you choose, and be hits. If there is a miss through either’s error, your vision will mostly be at fault, and not the archer’s skill. On ordinary days, his table resembles that of a private person. The board does not groan beneath a mass of dull and unpolished silver set on by panting servitors; the weight lies rather in the conversation than in the plate; there is either sensible talk or none. The hangings and draperies used on these occasions are sometimes of purple silk, sometimes only of linen…Toasts are few, and you will oftener see a thirsty guest impatient, than a full one refusing cup or bowl. In short, you will find elegance of Greece, good cheer of Gaul, Italian nimbleness, the state of public banquets with the attentive service of a private table, and everywhere the discipline of a king’s house…The siesta after dinner is always slight…When inclined for the board-game, he is quick to gather up the dice, examines them with care, shakes the box with expert hand, throw rapidly, humorously apostrophizes them, and patiently waits the issue. Silent at a good throw, he makes merry over a bad, annoyed by neither fortune, and always the philosopher…. About the ninth hour, the burden of government begins again.. on all sides buzz the voices of petitioners, a sound which lasts till evening, and does not diminish till interrupted by the royal repast…Sometimes, though this is rare, supper is enlivened by sallies of mimes, but no guest is ever exposed to the wound of a biting tongue. Withal there is no noise of hydraulic organ, or choir with its conductor intoning a set piece; you will hear no players of lyre or flute, no master of the music, no girls with cithara or tabor; the king cares for no strains but those which no less charm the mind with virtue than the ear with melody. When he rises to withdraw, the treasury watch begins its vigil; armed sentries stand on guard during the first hours of slumber. But I am wandering from my subject. I never promised a whole chapter on the kingdom, but a few words about the king. I must stay my pen; you asked for nothing more than one or two facts about the person and the tastes of Theodoric; and my own aim was to write a letter, not a history. Farewell.
Sidonius to his brother in law Ecdicius (Letters, II.1) (c.470 CE)
Your countrymen of Auvergne [the province in central Gaul, with its capital at Clermont (now Clermont-Ferrand) from which Sidonius himself came] suffer equally from two evils. “What are those?” you ask. Seronatus’ presence and your own absence. Seronatus… is just returned from the region of the Adour to blend in whole confusion the fortune and the blood of unhappy victims which down there he had only pledged himself in part to shed. You must know that his long-dissembled savagery comes daily further into the light…He commands like a despot; no tyrant more exacting than he, no judge more peremptory in sentence, no barbarian falser in false witness. The livelong day he goes armed from cowardice, and starving from pure meanness. Greed makes him formidable, and vanity cruel; he continually commits himself the very thefts he punishes in others. To the universal amusement he will rant of war in a civilian company, and of literature among Goths. Though he barely knows the alphabet, he has the conceit to dictate letters in public, and the impudence to revise them under the same conditions.
All property he covets he makes a show of buying, but he never thinks of paying, nor does he trouble to furnish himself with deeds, knowing it hopeless to prove a title. In the council-chamber he commands, but in counsel he is mute. He jests in church, and preaches at table; snores on the bench, and breathes condemnation in his bedroom. His actions are filling the woods with dangerous fugitives from the estates, the churches with scoundrels, the prisons with holy men. He cries the Goths up and the Romans down; he prepares illusions for prefects and collusions with public accountants. He tramples under foot the Theodosian Code to set in its place the laws of a Theodoric, raking up old charges to justify new imposts. Be quick, then, to unravel the tangle of affairs that makes you linger; cut short whatever causes you delay. Our people are at the last gasp; freedom is almost dead. Whether there is any hope, or whether all is to be despair, they want you in their midst to lead them. If the State is powerless to succour, if, as rumour says, the Emperor Anthemius is without resource, our nobility is determined to follow your lead, and give up their country or the hair of their heads. Farewell.
Source: Sidonius, The Letters of Sidonius, trans. O.M. Dalton, (Oxford: Clarendon, 1915), two vols.
This text is part of the Internet Medieval Source Book. The Sourcebook is a collection of public domain and copy-permitted texts related to medieval and Byzantine history. Unless otherwise indicated the specific electronic form of the document is copyright. Permission is granted for electronic copying, distribution in print form for educational purposes and personal use. No permission is granted for commercial use. © Paul Halsall, November 1998
2.3 Richard I of England: Charter by Which Many Liberties are Granted and Confirmed to the Jews (22 March 1190)
Richard I of England (r. 1189–1199), better known as Richard the Lionheart, was one of England’s most celebrated medieval kings. A renowned military commander, he spent much of his reign outside England, participating in the Third Crusade against the forces of Saladin and fighting to expand English controlled territories in what today is France. Although remembered for his military exploits, Richard’s accession to the throne coincided with one of the darkest episodes in the history of England’s Jewish community.
At Richard’s coronation in 1189, Jewish leaders traveled to London to present gifts and pledge their loyalty, as was customary under the feudal system. They were denied entry to the coronation festivities, and rumors quickly spread that the king had ordered attacks on Jews. Although there is evidence that Richard attempted to halt the violence once it began, anti-Jewish riots erupted in London, leading to deaths, looting, and the destruction of Jewish homes.
The violence intensified the following year with the massacre of the Jewish community at York in 1190, where many Jews sought refuge in York Castle rather than face forced conversion or mob violence. Most ultimately died, either by suicide or at the hands of the attackers. While Richard was absent on crusade during the York massacre, his government struggled to maintain order, and local officials often failed to protect Jewish communities.
Richard’s relationship with England’s Jews reflected a contradiction common in medieval Europe. As king, he regarded Jews as royal subjects whose property and taxes belonged to the Crown, giving him a financial incentive to protect them. At the same time, widespread religious prejudice, economic resentment, and crusading fervor created an atmosphere in which anti-Jewish violence could flourish. The “Charter by Which Many Liberties Are Granted and Confirmed to the Jews” (22 March 1190) was issued shortly after these anti-Jewish riots. The charter reaffirmed that England’s Jewish population was under the direct protection of the Crown and sought to restore order.
The following is replicated in its entirety from Foedera Rymer in Joseph Jacobs, The Jews of Angevin England: Documents and Records (London, 1893), p. 134-36
Richard, by the grace of God, King of England, duke of Normandy, &c., to his archbishops, bishops, &c., greeting:
I.-Know ye that we have granted and, by the present charter, confirmed, to Ysaac, son of Rabbi Joe, and his sons and their men, all their customs and liberties just as the Lord King Henry, our father, granted and by his charter confirmed to the Jews of England and Normandy, namely: to reside in our land freely and honorably, and to hold all those things from us which the aforesaid Isaac and his sons held in the time of Henry the King, our father, in lands, and fiefs, and pledges, and gifts, and purchases, viz., Hame, which Henry, our father, gave them for their service, and Thurroc, which the said Isaac bought of the Count of Ferrars, and all the houses, and messuages, and pledges which the said Isaac and his sons had in our land in the time of King Henry, our father.
II.-And if any quarrel arise between a Christian and Ysaac, or any of his children or heirs, he that appeals the other to determine the quarrel shall have witnesses, viz., a lawful Christian and a lawful Jew. And if the aforesaid Ysaac, or his heirs, or his children, have a writ about the quarrel, the writ shall serve them for testimony ; and if a Christian have a quarrel against the aforesaid Jews let it be adjudicated by the peers of the Jews.
III.-And if any of the aforesaid Jews shall die let not his body be kept above ground, but let his heir have his money and his debts so that he be not disturbed if he has an heir who can answer for him and do right about his debts and his forfeits, and let the aforesaid Jews receive and buy at any time whatever is brought them except things of the church and bloodstained garments.
IV.-And if they are appealed by any one without a witness let them be quits of that appeal on their own oath upon their book [of the Law] and let them be quits from an appeal of those things which pertain to our crown on their own oath on their roll [of the Law]. And if there be any dissention between a Christian and any of the aforesaid Jews or their children about the settlement of any money, the Jew shall- prove -the capital and the Christian the interest.
V.-And the aforesaid Jews may sell their pledges Without trouble after it is certified that -they have held them a year and a day, and they shall not enter into any pleadings except before us or before those who guard our castles in whose bailiwicks they themselves remain wherever they may be.
VI.-Let them go whithersoever they will with all their chattels just like our own goods and let no one keep them or prevent them. And if a Christian debtor dies, who owes money to a Jew, and the debtor has an heir, during the minority of the heir let not the Jew be disturbed of his debt unless the land of the heir is in our hands.
VII.-And we order that, the Jews through all England and Normandy be free of all customs and of tolls and modiation of wine just like our own chattels, and we command and order you to ward and defend and protect them, and we forbid any one against this charter about the aforesaid to put the said Jews into plea on our forfeit.
Witnesses : Will. de Hum.’, constable of Normandy, &c., &c. Given by the hand of William de Longchamp, our Chancellor, ‘Bishop of Ely, at Rouen, on the twenty-second day of March, in the first year of our reign.
Source: Rymer, Foedera, i., 51 [Ed. 1816]; ed. Joseph Jacobs, The Jews of Angevin England: Documents and Records (London, 1893), p. 134-36
This text is part of the Internet Medieval Source Book. The Sourcebook is a collection of public domain and copy-permitted texts related to medieval and Byzantine history. Unless otherwise indicated the specific electronic form of the document is copyright. Permission is granted for electronic copying, distribution in print form for educational purposes and personal use. No permission is granted for commercial use. © Paul Halsall, November 1998