Every time I read a newspaper article about Lord Bath, I find it amusing how journalists accept at face value the fiction perpetuated by the Marquess that he's descended from the Roman historican Tacitus ('Wifelets fight over affections of Lord Bath', Independent, 11/6/11, p21). Historians say that there's no evidence that the historian Tacitus had any children at all, so if Lord Bath has any evidence to the contrary, maybe he would be kind enough to share it with the historical community.
Here's a similar article, in the Daily Mail....
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2002248/Police-called-Longleat-wifelets-brawl-gets-sleep-Marquess-Bath.html
Maybe Lord Bath has more in common with the insignificant Roman emperor Tacitus, who became emperor during the turbulent 270s, and being a septugenarian, lasted only one year on the throne, and his brother who succeeded him was assassinated before the year was out. The Roman emperor Tacitus invented a family tree to claim descent from the famous historian, maybe to acquire legitimacy. Lord Bath seems to have taken a leaf out of this unimportant emperor than with the famous historian.
But I'm not sure how Lord Bath can claim such ancestry. I read a historical paper on the historian Tacitus and the emperor Tacitus which states that there is no proof that the historian Tacitus had any children. And yet, the emperor Tacitus, who ruled from 275-276 before being murdered, invented a family tree to claim descent from the historian Tacitus. Well, it didn't seem to help him, or his brother who succeeded him, only to be murdered before the year was out....
