Re: Facile dismissal of an important insight

I do take your interesting point about rhetoric, Kit, but it has important limitations. Not least, many ancient historians often remarked on one another's credibility as purveyors of the historical truth, which would be pointless if historical truth was not seen as a prime objective. Much depends on the individual. I would say Curtius Rufus is a good example for your case, but Tacitus and Suetonius are very doubtful propositions as historians who would literally invent sexual antics for rhetorical purposes. Suetonius was at pains to present alternative theories where he was unsure, especially, for example, on the ancestry of some of the twelve Caesars. Personally I agree with Hieronymouse in believing Suetonius on what Tiberius got up to in Capri. In the end, why wouldn't he have behaved like this? I have made the sexuality of the Roman emperors a special interest in view of the insight I believe it affords into how people behave sexually when free of all constraints. I think the main lesson to be learned is a strong tendency for the emperors who showed least regard for public opinion (Caligula, Nero, Elagabalus) to be open to anything sexually. I've never doubted you on what most modern historians think, just on the value of their opinions when they are dismissive of what the ancients relate. www.amazon.com/dp/1481222112