06-19-2011, 07:43 PM
I am currently writing an article on the testis unus, testis nullus principle: if you have one source, you cannot evaluate its quality. I want to offer some illustrations of well-known facts that are actually based on one source only.
For example: we have only Herodotus to prove that Cyrus the Great conquered faraway Lydia before he conquered nearby Babylon. It is usually taken for granted, and it may well be true, but I can imagine Herodotus, who is not above altering the chronology of Gelon's wars against Carthage, preferred an early conquest of Lydia, making his Lydian stories a more perfect prologue.
(Note: All other sources mentioning an early conquest, are derived from Herodotus and can be eliminated; the common date of 547 for the conquest of Lydia has been refuted; more.)
Another example: Caesar's conquest of Belgium. There is no archaeological confirmation, and all other sources (Livy' Periochae and Cassius Dio) are derived from Caesar's own account. They can be eliminated.
Personally, I am convinced that Caesar conquered Belgium: there is evidence that confirms the rest of the Gallic War. I will not say that Caesar is generally reliable, but the outline of his story is probably correct. Nevertheless, his conquest of Belgium is "a one source fact".
Are there other examples?
For example: we have only Herodotus to prove that Cyrus the Great conquered faraway Lydia before he conquered nearby Babylon. It is usually taken for granted, and it may well be true, but I can imagine Herodotus, who is not above altering the chronology of Gelon's wars against Carthage, preferred an early conquest of Lydia, making his Lydian stories a more perfect prologue.
(Note: All other sources mentioning an early conquest, are derived from Herodotus and can be eliminated; the common date of 547 for the conquest of Lydia has been refuted; more.)
Another example: Caesar's conquest of Belgium. There is no archaeological confirmation, and all other sources (Livy' Periochae and Cassius Dio) are derived from Caesar's own account. They can be eliminated.
Personally, I am convinced that Caesar conquered Belgium: there is evidence that confirms the rest of the Gallic War. I will not say that Caesar is generally reliable, but the outline of his story is probably correct. Nevertheless, his conquest of Belgium is "a one source fact".
Are there other examples?