Why did later historians value Polybius despite criticism of his writing style?

Later historians valued Polybius primarily because he rejected the sensationalism common among his contemporaries, which he criticized for confusing history with tragedy. While other writers sought to thrill or charm audiences with plausible but false narratives, Polybius insisted that the historian’s duty was to record the truth—however commonplace—to instruct serious students.1

His enduring reputation rests on several key contributions:

• Pragmatic Approach: He championed pragmatikē historia, or practical history, which focused on political and military matters to provide lessons for future leaders.1
• Methodological Rigor: Like Thucydides, he emphasized the importance of personal experience, travel, and the cross-examination of eyewitnesses, viewing oral testimony as a vital foundation for historical judgment.23
• Universal Perspective: He was among the first to conceptualize universal history, recognizing that the rise of Rome had interlinked the affairs of the Mediterranean world into a single, connected whole.31
• Analytical Insight: He provided profound insights into the Roman state, particularly his analysis of the Roman "mixed constitution," which influenced political thinkers from Cicero to Montesquieu.31