Regarding Marcus Atilius Regulus

[Paullus Scipio]

If we're not trusting Diodorus about Regulus, why are we trusting him him about Regulus' wife?

If you are asking this question, I'd guess you haven't actually looked at the sources I've referred to. Diodorus XXIII.16 (which refers to the torture and execution of Regulus, but not the 'heroic legend') is a fragment preserved in Tzetzes poetry, hence second hand. It is highly inaccurate and obviously distorted, referring to the Carthaginians as 'Sicels' throughout, has the battle of Bagradas taking place at Lilybaeum in Sicily instead of near Carthage etc :roll: , and has Xanthippus drowned. It is a clearly jumbled dramatised mish-mash of the story, as is obvious to any reader. Tzetzes may have made up the 'torture' part himself, because in Diodorus XXIV.12 (also a fragment, but this time direct, not second hand) we have Regulus dying, so his widow believes, "of neglect".

Significantly, none of the historians writing about the first Punic war even mentions the 'legendary Regulus' story, it only appears in Horace ( and is referred to in Silius Italicus), who refers to it in a poem praising Augustus as 'the new Jove', and comparing him to legendary heroes of old, such as Regulus. Horace's purpose is to laud the supposed virtues of Romans, provide an example to Rome's youth etc.
It does not even make any pretence of being history and is obviously what it is - a moralistic fairy tale.It belongs in the same category as the heroic legend of 'Horatius at the bridge'

If Horace stated it that means the story had currency at least by 1st century BC.

Horace is not 'stating' fact/history, but rather waxing lyrical about supposed Roman ( and Augustus's) virtues....just read exactly what we have in Polybius, Diodorus and Horace, and it becomes abundantly obvious what is probable truth and what is obvious legend. Contrary to your suggestion, it is not a case of choosing between two alternate and equally likely versions of History. Horace's poetic story most probably had it's origins in the 'family traditions' of the powerful Atilii gens /clan. This is not simply my opinion but the commonly accepted view.

One doesn't pick a pedestrian person and write a play about him.

I don't think it is in dispute that Regulus was a famous historical person, but again a play is not history, nor meant to be....plays and poems serve a different purpose. Remember what Polybius wrote about the purpose of History!! :wink: