And this, I think, is why the most thoughtful of the ancient writers were in the habit of giving their readers a rest in the way I say, some of them employing digressions dealing with myth or story and others digressions on matters of fact; so that not only do they shift the scene from one part of Greece to another, but include doings abroad.
For instance, when dealing with the Thessalian affairs and the exploits of Alexander of Pherae, they interrupt the narrative to tell us of the projects of the Lacedaemonians in the <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Peloponnese&groupId=861&placeId=1552">Peloponnese</a> or of those of the Athenians and of what happened in <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Macedonia&groupId=723&placeId=428">Macedonia</a> or <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Illyria&groupId=647&placeId=1186">Illyria</a>, and after entertaining us so tell us of the expedition of Iphicrates to <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Egypt&groupId=556&placeId=368">Egypt</a> and the excesses committed by Clearchus in <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Pontus&groupId=910&placeId=1634">Pontus</a>.
So that you will find that all historians have resorted to this device but have done so irregularly, while I myself resort to it regularly.
For the authors I allude to, after mentioning how Bardyllis, the king of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Illyria&groupId=647&placeId=1186">Illyria</a>, and Cersobleptes, the king of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Thrace&groupId=1030&placeId=509">Thrace</a>, acquired their kingdoms, do not give us the continuation or carry us on to what proved to be the sequel after a certain lapse of time, but after inserting these matters as a sort of patch, return to their original subject.
But I myself, keeping distinct all the most important parts of the world and the events that took place in each, and adhering always to a uniform conception of how each matter should be treated, and again definitely relating under each year the contemporary events that then took place, leave obviously full liberty to students to carry back their minds to the continuous narrative and the several points at which I interrupted it, so that those who wish to learn may find none of the matters I have mentioned imperfect and deficient.
This is all I have to say on the subject.
Walbank Commentary