Skip to main content
EnglandAncient HistorySyllabus dot point

What are the prescribed sources for the Second Punic War, and how do you weigh Polybius against Livy?

The prescribed sources for the Hannibal depth study: Polybius as the careful near-contemporary Greek historian (and his Scipionic connections), Livy as the later, fuller and more dramatic Roman narrative, and how to weigh a near-contemporary analytical source against a later patriotic one.

An OCR GCSE Ancient History guide to the prescribed sources for the Hannibal and the Second Punic War depth study, explaining how to use Polybius as the careful near-contemporary Greek historian (and his Scipionic connections), Livy as the later, fuller and more dramatic Roman narrative, and how to weigh a near-contemporary analytical source against a later patriotic one.

Generated by Claude Opus 4.814 min answer

Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed

Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page

Jump to a section
  1. What this dot point is asking
  2. The answer
  3. Examples in context
  4. Try this

What this dot point is asking

Because OCR's GCSE is an ancient-history course, the Hannibal depth study prescribes the ancient sources you must study, and the source-utility question is worth real marks. This page teaches how to handle the two great sources for the Second Punic War: Polybius, the careful near-contemporary Greek historian, and Livy, the later, fuller and more dramatic Roman narrative, and how to weigh a near-contemporary analytical source against a later patriotic one.

The answer

Polybius: the careful near-contemporary

His one major limitation is his close connection to the Scipio family (he was a friend and mentor of the younger Scipio), which may make him favourable to Rome and the Scipios.

Livy: the later, fuller, dramatic narrative

Weighing a near-contemporary against a later source

A strong answer judges usefulness for the enquiry, recognising that Polybius is usually preferred for analysis while Livy enriches the narrative.

Examples in context

A model answer turns the contrast between the two authors into the heart of the evaluation, judging each by what it is good at.

Try this

Q1. Which of the two prescribed sources is the near-contemporary, and what is his main limitation? [Knowledge recall]

  • Cue. Polybius is the near-contemporary (writing a few decades after the war); his main limitation is his close connection to the Scipio family, which may make him favourable to Rome and the Scipios.

Q2. Explain why Polybius is usually preferred to Livy for understanding the causes of the war. [Short source evaluation]

  • Cue. Because Polybius wrote much closer to the events, used good sources and was carefully analytical about causation (distinguishing the deepest cause from the pretext), whereas Livy wrote over a century later and is fuller and more dramatic but less rigorous about causes.

Exam-style practice questions

Practice questions written in the style of OCR exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.

OCR J198/02 20198 marksStudy Source A (Polybius, a Greek writing a few decades later) and Source B (Livy, writing under Augustus). Which is more useful for understanding the Second Punic War? [8-mark depth-study source-utility question]
Show worked answer →

A depth-study source-utility question (AO3). Judge usefulness through content and provenance, not date alone.

Polybius. A careful Greek historian writing a few decades after the war, with good sources, a serious analytical method and a focus on causation, but with Scipionic connections that may favour Rome and the Scipios.

Livy. A later Roman writing under Augustus, fuller and more vivid, valuable for the dramatic narrative and Roman tradition, but further from the events and more rhetorical and patriotic.

Judgement. Conclude that Polybius is generally more useful for analysis and causation, Livy for the fuller narrative and Roman attitudes; usefulness depends on the enquiry, not simply on which is earlier.

OCR J198/02 20215 marksStudy a passage of Polybius on Hannibal. What does this source suggest about Polybius' aims as a historian? [5-mark source-inference question]
Show worked answer →

A depth-study source-inference question (AO3) on a prescribed author.

Make inferences. Polybius' careful distinction of causes, his interest in why events happened and his concern for accuracy suggest he aimed to write useful, analytical history for those who would learn from it.

Support each point. Tie inferences to detail: his separation of deepest cause from pretext, his criticism of other historians, and his focus on explanation rather than entertainment.

Top marks. Two or three developed inferences linked to the source, noting that Polybius' analytical aims make him valuable but that his Scipionic links must still be weighed.

Related dot points

Sources & how we know this