Because Plutarch's moral judgment is more important than his historical judgment, he sometimes makes odd errors (., praising Pompey's trustworthy character and tactful behavior), but he is not a bad historian. For example, unlike his Roman contemporary Suetonius , he sums up all his moral anecdotes in a more or less chronological sequence. (Suetonius does not adhere to this principle.) To return to Alexander: most authors of books on the Macedonian king took their material from either the 'vulgate' tradition (which follows a biographer called Cleitarchus ) or from the 'good' tradition (which follows Ptolemy , one of Alexander's generals). Plutarch, on the other hand, tells his own, moral story and takes elements from both traditions.