Secondary Source Analysis
“Thucydides and Spartan Strategy in the Archidamian War” was written by Thomas Kelly. It is a section of The American Historical Review and was published by Oxford University Press in 1982. Thomas Kelly claims in his thesis of this article that the Spartans are the dominant power. He asserts, “The Athenian army, however, was no match for the Spartan army, which for more than a century had been recognized as the most efficient fighting force in Greece.” Throughout the article, Thomas Kelly argues that the Athenians have the largest and finest navy in the Greek world, but the Spartans were the most vigorous and most tactical force overall. One of the problems with the Spartan army that Kelly also explains is that they …show more content…
He describes the Athenian and Spartan war strategies and resources in great detail. “Thucydides and Spartan Strategy in the Archidamian War” is based off of one primary source in particular, the book, History of the Peloponnesian War, which was written by Thucydides himself. Thomas Kelly also uses an abundant amount of secondary sources to back up his information such as other articles, prestigious college professors, and scholarly books. Almost all of these are written sources and were composed in english besides History of the Peloponnesian War, which was translated from Greek. Some of these sources were from oral interviews of other people associated with this subject.. Thomas Kelly found most of his data from Thucydides ' accounts and his written history of the Spartans and Athenians from the history written by Thucydides in History of the Peloponnesian War. His data was from published materials and interviews with knowledgeable people. One disadvantage of these sources is that all the information was coming from the same book, History of the Peloponnesian War. The book was translated, therefore, some of the information could have been misread and/or translated wrong. Also it was written based on one man’s view of the event, Thucydides. Based on that, some of the information may be unreliable. An advantage of using sources such as other historians and professors is that the author can get different views of the event to support his own and has something to compare
“Thucydides and Spartan Strategy in the Archidamian War” was written by Thomas Kelly. It is a section of The American Historical Review and was published by Oxford University Press in 1982. Thomas Kelly claims in his thesis of this article that the Spartans are the dominant power. He asserts, “The Athenian army, however, was no match for the Spartan army, which for more than a century had been recognized as the most efficient fighting force in Greece.” Throughout the article, Thomas Kelly argues that the Athenians have the largest and finest navy in the Greek world, but the Spartans were the most vigorous and most tactical force overall. One of the problems with the Spartan army that Kelly also explains is that they …show more content…
He describes the Athenian and Spartan war strategies and resources in great detail. “Thucydides and Spartan Strategy in the Archidamian War” is based off of one primary source in particular, the book, History of the Peloponnesian War, which was written by Thucydides himself. Thomas Kelly also uses an abundant amount of secondary sources to back up his information such as other articles, prestigious college professors, and scholarly books. Almost all of these are written sources and were composed in english besides History of the Peloponnesian War, which was translated from Greek. Some of these sources were from oral interviews of other people associated with this subject.. Thomas Kelly found most of his data from Thucydides ' accounts and his written history of the Spartans and Athenians from the history written by Thucydides in History of the Peloponnesian War. His data was from published materials and interviews with knowledgeable people. One disadvantage of these sources is that all the information was coming from the same book, History of the Peloponnesian War. The book was translated, therefore, some of the information could have been misread and/or translated wrong. Also it was written based on one man’s view of the event, Thucydides. Based on that, some of the information may be unreliable. An advantage of using sources such as other historians and professors is that the author can get different views of the event to support his own and has something to compare