Why are the earliest parts of Livy’s history less reliable as factual history?

The earliest parts of Livy’s history are considered less reliable as factual accounts primarily because they were written long after the events they describe, often relying on limited and potentially distorted source material.1

Several factors contribute to this lack of historical accuracy:

• Temporal Distance: Livy wrote during the reign of Augustus, centuries removed from the early Republic and the regal period. He was separated by 200 years from the first Roman historian, Quintus Fabius Pictor, who himself lived long after many of the events he recorded.1
• Meager Source Material: Aside from a list of annual magistrates (the fasti) and some religious or legal records, there was very little factual documentation available for early Rome.1
• Folklore and Invention: To fill these gaps, ancient historians incorporated native and Greek folklore. Over time, these accounts were subject to patriotic reinterpretations, including the suppression of embarrassing facts, exaggeration, and the invention of spurious battles or political confrontations.1
• Moral Focus: Livy prioritized moral and character-driven narratives over scholarly accuracy. He often reshaped existing versions of history to construct episodes that illustrated the virtues or vices of historical figures, rather than critically analyzing the discrepancies in his sources.2