I couldn't agree more that the early emperors get a bad press. Don't get me wrong, some of them deserved it, like Caligula and Nero but the treatment of men like Tiberius, who I somewhat sympathise with, I think is over the top.

Recently I had to look at the style of Roman historiography throughout its history and was shocked to find out much I disliked reading Tacitus. He claims to be without indignation or partisanship (I.1) but then writes with a morbid sarcasm throughout which because of his early statement I thought verged on hypocrisy. I am not saying that Livy or Suetonius are any better but because their motives were so blatant IMHO it makes them easier to accept, while Tacitus is much more underhanded in his bashing of the Julio-Claudians, probably because it was the only way he could get away with it

I was wondering, Tom, who your favourite historian is and whether it has ever changed through an experience like mine?