How was Herodotus different from Thucydides as a historian?

Herodotus and Thucydides represent two distinct approaches to ancient historiography. While Herodotus is celebrated as the "father of history," Thucydides is often viewed as his most famous critic and the pioneer of a more scientific, analytical method.12

The primary differences between them include:

• Methodology and Scope: Herodotus combined historical inquiry with anthropological and ethnographic research, recording the customs, traditions, and stories of various peoples to preserve their glory. In contrast, Thucydides rejected "storytelling" and romantic elements, aiming instead to establish a diagnostic science of history by analyzing political and moral complexities.1342
• Critical Rigor: Herodotus was known for recording diverse traditions, even those he found dubious, which led to a reputation for credulity, though he often exercised critical judgment. Thucydides was more austere; he rigorously cross-examined eyewitness accounts to account for bias and memory failure, focusing on the "truth" of events.1342
• Purpose: Herodotus sought to preserve the memory of great deeds from decay. Thucydides wrote for posterity, believing that by studying human nature in times of war, his work would remain useful for future generations facing similar circumstances.142