Apart from fifteen pages in book one, in which he briefly recounts the events of the
fifty years prior to the war, Thucydides never strays from the day-to-day and year-to-year details
of the war. The only significant Greek historian who predates him is Herodotus, whose account ended
where Thucydides' begins, in 479 BC; but Herodotus was a story-teller where Thucydides is a scholar.
Reading Herodotus' "Histories" is more like sitting by the fire with a glass of brandy and an
interesting friend. Thucydides reads like a textbook, and though this is one of his strengths, it
also makes him a little harder for modern readers to approach. On the other hand, the very density
of information feels quite modern, so that although the politics is alien, once you find your feet
you'll be swept up by the story of a terrible war.

The book is full of names, places, and account
of battles and intrigues. There are several maps at the back, which are a great help, but over and
over again I found that a key place wasn't on the map, and there are no notes to help out. Where is
Naupactus? Who are the Carians? Where do the Illyrians come from? Unlike the Penguin edition of
Herodotus, which is packed with helpful notes, this edition provides the reader very little help.
Too often I found I just had to wing it, guessing the importance of a name or the approximate
location of a place from context. I'd recommend having a good classical dictionary handy while you
read, if you're the sort who wants these questions answered.

Thucydides style is to alternate
plain narration with speeches. The introduction (by Finley) makes it clear that these speeches are
generally made up by Thucydides to fit what he thought would or should have been said. On the other
hand, he was there for some of them, and did his best to interview eye-witnesses wherever he could,
so the speeches tend to sound quite convincing.

Thucydides' passion for accuracy is what makes
this book special. The account of a night battle in Sicily makes it clear how hard he worked to get
the details right; he comments that this account is less likely to be accurate because the witnesses
he interviewed were unable to see the whole battlefield, as they could in a day battle, and there's
a fascinating chapter (book seven, chapter 44) where he talks about all the difficulties of
reporting factually in these circumstances.

He sounds quite modern, and he is. He's the first
truly modern historian, and would be worth reading for that reason alone. However, the story he
tells, of twenty years of bitter conflict between two fine civilizations, is enthralling, and
brilliantly told. Recommended.