Among the whole galaxy of Roman historians, such an author as Suetonius was not particularly appreciated. They preferred Tacitus or Plutarch to him. Probably because the rulers of Ancient Rome in his description look “dissected” into black and white, bad and righteous, and the author takes this for granted. He does not fall into excessive rhetoric and does not begin to talk about how such opposites could fit in one person. Suetonius is also criticized because he does not like to analyze the political context of events, but he presents to the reader various details from the life of Caesars right down to anecdotal ones. Indeed, this historian is not like the others. And did he need it? Each biography writer has his own goal. Suetonius also had it.
The historian created in ancient Rome during the time of the emperor Hadrian. He became famous as a patron and patron of muses. Using this, the historian begins his brilliant career at his court as a clerical clerk, and then organizes reporting from the provinces. In this position, he was able to work with archives and use them for the composition that has glorified it for centuries. This is “The Life of the Twelve Caesars” - a biographical list where the rulers of Ancient Rome of imperial times pass before us. And, based on this, we can quite see in Suetonia a rather serious historian who responded to topics of relevance to his contemporaries.
In those years, the Romans began to analyze the three hundred years of the rule of their emperors. This was very important, because it was precisely such a political system that allowed this great state to maintain a balance of power between Caesar and the Senate for a long time. The author of this system was August. It was finally consolidated during the Flavian dynasty, and it was then that Roman historians saw that this was the most bloodless and acceptable option for managing such a "motley" and huge country. Therefore, they tried in their works to justify the imperial power structure of Ancient Rome, despite the fact that traditionally there was a very high respect for the republican mode of government.
However, this was a very difficult question. Despite the desire for order, the problem of succession after August remained very tense. This was reflected in the assessment of predecessors. During the life of the ruler, he was flattered and curious, and after death they began to indefatigably slander. It is very difficult for modern historians even now to understand that from this sea of bloody strife and praises that characterized the rulers of Ancient Rome of that time, it is true, and what is propaganda. Therefore, Suetonius tried to approach this problem without unnecessary moralizing and just to see where good prevailed in the actions of the rulers, and where evil prevailed. Therefore, for example, creating a biography of such an emperor, who became a byword, like Nero, he separately describes his good deeds, and separately - what he considers to be crimes.
The historian also made a rather interesting observation that both the rulers of Ancient Rome committed both acts on the basis of the same motives. But to prove this, he sets out the facts, and only the facts, distracting from politics. Therefore, the motives themselves are not very interesting for him - for the historian, the result is important, with which the next emperor completed his reign. For him, it’s more interesting not the psychological “digging” in the soul of each lord, but the details, “gossip”, randomness - something that was close to the then reader, but indeed, also interests the modern one. Are not the chronicles of social life popular with us? Amusement and the selection of interesting facts - this is the main historical method by which Suetonius was guided, portraying his Caesars.