Scholars often assume that historians in late antiquity ended their narratives with the previous regime because it was too dangerous for them to write candidly about the current imperial reign. While this was generally true, there are some notable exceptions to the pattern which, when studied together, show that this rule was not iron-clad and cannot safely be relied on to date the composition of texts and the scope of their coverage (in the case of lost works). Both the rule and the exceptions illuminate the nuanced play of “truth” and “power” in late antiquity. In assessing our evidence we must often read between the lines, but not all historians were as timid as we might assume. The Roman empire's “secret history” could sometimes be aired.
Skip Nav Destination
Article navigation
Spring 2017
Research Article|
February 01 2017
How Perilous Was It to Write Political History in Late Antiquity?
Anthony Kaldellis
Anthony Kaldellis
The Ohio State University
Search for other works by this author on:
Studies in Late Antiquity (2017) 1 (1): 38–64.
Citation
Anthony Kaldellis; How Perilous Was It to Write Political History in Late Antiquity?. Studies in Late Antiquity 1 February 2017; 1 (1): 38–64. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/sla.2017.1.1.38
Download citation file:
Sign in
Don't already have an account? Register
Client Account
You could not be signed in. Please check your email address / username and password and try again.
Could not validate captcha. Please try again.