How did Polybius distinguish the goals of history from the goals of tragedy?

Polybius distinguished the goals of history from those of tragedy by emphasizing that they serve fundamentally opposite purposes. He argued that while a tragic poet seeks to thrill and charm an audience through plausible language—even if that language is false—the historian’s duty is to instruct and convince serious students through the presentation of real facts and actual speeches.1

For Polybius, the objective of tragedy is to beguile the spectator, whereas the objective of history is to provide the truth for the benefit of the student. He criticized historians who adopted the sensationalist practices of tragic poets, noting that a historian should not attempt to astonish readers with dramatic flair or by speculating on probable consequences. Instead, the historian must record what truly happened, however commonplace those events may be. Ultimately, Polybius viewed history as a didactic tool, intended to provide practical lessons and fortitude for political activity, rather than a medium for temporary emotional stimulation.1