Self-study
Conclusion The traditional view of the Roman emperor Caligula as a cruel and insane tyrant has been challenged by some modern historians. ████ █████ ███ ████ ██████ █████████████ ██ ██████████ ███████ ███████ ██ ██████████ ████████ ████████ ████ ███ ████ ██ ███ █████ ███ ████ ███ █████████ ████ ████ ████ ████ ██ ██ ████ ███████ ██ ███ ████████
The Modern Historians' Argument
The traditional view of Caligula is that he was a cruel and insane tyrant. Some modern historians think this view is wrong. Why? Two reasons.
First, very little documentation of Caligula's alleged cruelty or outrageous behavior survives from his actual reign. The suggestion here, though not explicitly stated, is that if Caligula really were as cruel and insane as the traditional view suggests, you'd expect more documentation from his time to back that up. To the modern historians, the scarcity of that evidence casts doubt on the traditional view.
Second, the histories that do survive were written by Caligula's enemies. The modern historians find this important because enemies probably have a motive to exaggerate or fabricate claims of cruelty and insanity. If the only accounts we have come from people who had reason to make Caligula look bad, then modern historians think those accounts might not be trustworthy.
Put these two points together, and the historians' challenge amounts to this: the evidence for the traditional view is both thin and biased, so we shouldn't accept it at face value.
Anticipation
We're looking for an answer that adds support to the historians' challenge. That means we want something that gives us more reason to doubt the traditional view of Caligula as a cruel and insane tyrant.
The historians' argument rests on two premises: the surviving evidence is scarce, and the evidence that does exist comes from hostile sources. But have the historians done enough to show that those premises give us reason to doubt the traditional view? The relevance of that evidence is based on at least two assumptions.
First: if Caligula were a cruel and insane tyrant, more documentation would have survived.
Second: The fact reports of his cruelty and outrageous behavior were written by his enemies suggests that those reports are not accurate.
You might have overlooked those assumptions because they seem very reasonable, and maybe you yourself even made those assumptions in order to make better sense of the historians' argument. But they're assumptions nonetheless, and so we can strengthen the argument by helping to show that those assumptions are true.
Let's keep an open mind, though. The correct answer might strengthen the challenge in a way we haven't anticipated.
Analysis by Kevin_Lin
23.
Which one of the following, ██ █████ ████ ███ ████ ███████ ███ ███ █████████ ████ ███ ██████ ███████████
a
There is less █████████████ ██ ███ ████ ████ ██████████ █████ ████ ████ ███ ██████ ██ ████ █████ █████ ████████ ██ ██████████ ████
b
People who have █████ █████ ███████ ████████ ██ █ █████ ██████ ███ ████ ██████ ██ ████ ████ ██████ ███████████ ████ ██████████
c
The specific outrageous ████ ██████████ ██ ████████ ██ █████ █████████████ ███ ████ ███████ ██ ████ ██████████ ██ ███████ ████████ ██ █████ ██████ ███████ ██ ██ █████ ████████
d
The little documentation ████ ████████ ████ ██████████ █████ █████████ ████ ███ █████ ██████ ████████ ████████ ██ ██ ███████ ████ █████ ████████ ███ ████ ██████ ███████ ██ ██ ████████
e
There is ample █████████████ ██ ██████ ███████ █████ ███████████ ███ ██████████ ████ █████ ████ █████ ██████████ ██ █████████