1. Luke Dan Megan... Marcus

2. Biological Biographical Chronology – Suetonius picks up every significant event in detail Cites all his work Looks at events that insight Caesars personality ie. Games – Claudius loves games, Tiberius frugal doesn’t hold games Studied under Pliny the Younger so knows his history well – taught by the best.

3. Biographical Biological Chronology – He misses out events other historians would cover eg. Foreign policy Events taken out of context and end up bring generalised Focus on Rome and Roman people as the most records are for Rome Bias towards upper classes – if emperors follow tradition he agrees if it goes against tradition he leaves it out eg. Upsurges in Christianity and cult of emperors.

4. Traditional chronological style leads to much more context being included so we see a picture of the whole reign. Includes foreign policy and things outside Rome and is key as the only source that does this. Historical traditions mean other sources would be well cited so it’s likely he used other historians work and had a surplus of sources.

5. Doesn’t cite anything to our knowledge Missing parts such as Caligula we will never know about Doesn’t give full characterisation just gives his own anti-monarchical views. Very general about who says things so may just be putting in his own views.

6. It’s hard to judge Tacitus as some of his work is missing so he may include a full citation list it has merely been lost. Suetonius dedication to traditional Roman values make him seem like he’s trying to whitewash history as he has traditional motive and as a biographer is bound to put more emphasis on personality rather than history.