Talk:Curtius Rufus

Untitled
There is the question over whether this individual in the same a Quintus Curtius Rufus, the historian of Alexander the Great. I have referred to this as probable following Barbara M Levick of Oxford who says the view "holds the field" ( see link on page)  at the same time it is not hard to find other authorities that doubt this e.g. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0104:entry=q-curtius-rufus-bio-1

For this reason I thought it best to leave the pages separate but draw attention to this debate on my page at least. It might be worth doing the same on the page for Quintus Curtius Rufus.

Hconscious (talk) 08:10, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Confirmation of arrangement
I agree with the above editor and I believe that is generally the arrangement due to the fragmentary nature of the sources and the uncertainty of the identification. There are those who write about the historian and those who write about the consul even though in either case there is an assertion of probable identification. Some few combine them but generally these combinations are very confusing, as so much of the topic borders on guesswork. Now after 4 years it is time to move on. The article was never more than a stub. Temporary statements such as the quote from Tacitus being worth repeating don't do us any credit. They make the public think we are about to reveal something lurid, but actually nothing is being revealed. I will be altering and expanding the stub piecemeal.Botteville (talk) 09:31, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

The missing years
The first 3½ paragraphs of this section don't mention Curtius Rufus at all and seem to be mostly about the career of Sejanus. Could somebody who knows the history of this period please edit it to remove unnecessary detail? Thank you Kiore (talk) 01:23, 4 December 2016 (UTC)