His work, which is generally quoted under the title (Gel. 9.13.6), sometimes as Historiae (Priscian. p. 697, ed. Putsch.) and sometimes as Rerum Romanarum Libri (Non. s. v. pristis), commenced immediately after the destruction of Rome by the Gauls, and must in all probability have extended down to the death of Sulla, since there were at least twenty-three books (Gel. 10.13), and the seventh consulship of Marius was commemorated in the nineteenth.

The first book embraced the events comprised in the period from B. C. 390 down to the subjugation of the Samnites. The struggle with Pyrrhus was the chief subject of the second and third; the first Punic war commenced in the third, and was continued through the fourth; the second Punic war commenced in the fifth, which contained the battle of Cannae; the siege of Capua was included in the sixth; the hostilities with the Achaean league and Numantia in the eighth, and the seventh consulship of Marius in the nineteenth, as was remarked above.

By Livy he is uniformly referred to simply as Claudius or Clodius, and is thus distinguished from Clodius Licinius (Liv. 29.22), and from "Claudius qui Annales Acilianos ex Graeco in Latinum sermonem vertit." (Liv. 25.39. Comp. 35.14.) By other authors he is cited as Quintus (Priscian. p. 960, ed. Putsch), as Claudius (Non. Marcell. s. v. Rcticulum), as Q. Claudius (Gel. 9.13.6 ; Priscian. p. 797, ed. Putsch.), as Claudius Quadrigarius (Non. Marcell. s.v. Torquem ; Gel. 2.19.7), or as Quadrigarius (Non. Marcell. s.v. Possetur ; Gel. 1.25.6.)

The fragments still extant enable us to conclude that he was very minute in many of his details, for several particulars recorded by him were omitted by Livy (e. g. Gel. 5.17; Macr. 1.16 ; comp. Liv. 8.19, 38.41.); while from the caution evinced by the latter in making use of him as an authority (Liv. 6.42, 8.19, 9.5, 10.37, 33.10, 30, 36, 38.23, 41, 44.15; comp. Ores. 4.20), especially in matters relating to numbers, it would appear that he was disposed to indulge, although in a less degree, in those exaggerations which disfigured the productions of his contemporary Valerius Antias. It is somewhat remarkable that he is nowhere noticed by Cicero. By A. Gellius, on the other hand, he is quoted repeatedly, and praised in the warmest terms (9.13.14. 13.28.2. 15.1.4, 17.2.)