<span>Herodotus and Thucydides take two different approaches in recording history. They are both considered fathers of their respective branches of historiography. Herodotus, although he has some interest in the facts, is mostly writing to entertain his audiences. He writes a history of the Persian Wars, but spends most of his time writing about the histories of different places involved in the story. He sensationalizes stories to make them more interesting, and changes facts in order to show a moral or lesson, and sometimes completely makes things up (like giant gold digging ants, ect.) Its unsure to what extent he consciously made these things up, or if he believed them and had just heard them from unreliable sources. There is truth to his writing, but one must consciously glean what is true from what is false, and go into his work knowing that you can't trust everything he says. </span>
Cities couldn't thrive in the harsh winter of New England but villages could work together to protect each other against it.
It was the very first election that contained a female candidate with the second being in 2012, which Obama won again, and coming up which has not been completed yet, but will be soon.
Because History has many secrets and everyday historians are finding out more about history than we could have ever imagined. plus history is always changing so there is always gonna be something new thatsomeone could learn from history
It was the elite and wealthy who were opposed progressive reform, because the purpose of this reform was to eliminate corruption in both big business and the government, and both of these entities were highly intertwined with the wealthy.
