One often hears this assessment of Tacitus from persons who have evidently not read Tacitus for themselves. By comparison with some other ancient historians Tacitus in some respects is "very careful" but that assessment applies more to events of his own time than those of the emperor Tiberius and the setting of the Jesus narrative. But even when discussing events of his own day Tacitus very often appealed to "popular rumours" as if they were "facts" that "no one doubted".Lucifer Satanel wrote: ↑Mon Jul 26, 2021 2:14 am
1) None of the Roman critics of Christianity claimed Jesus was a myth, this includes Tacitus who was very careful about is info and tells us when it is uncertain.
Tacitus wrote as historical fact that a very tall cypress tree fell down but the very next day it rose again and was even taller with a wider expanse of branches than ever before.
Read Tacitus's account of the emperor Tiberius (the time of Jesus) and you will see a narrative that is self-contradictory at so many points it is obvious that much of what he writes simply could not be true. Scholarly assessments have regularly made this point.
There are passages where Tacitus expresses confusion about certain events but if so, he could easily have consulted official records to have got his facts straight -- but evidently did not.
In other passages Tacitus reports as fact events that he says happened in "dead secrecy" -- so how could he possibly know they happened? So Tacitus could write as much like a novelist as other historians sometimes did.
Tacitus gathered much information from reading and rumours but he did so uncritically, as a rule, and very often did not check what he said were facts. There is much fiction in Tacitus posing as fact.