DB: Caligula’s Tomb Found

[techboy]

Techboy said Caligula was a brilliant leader when he was young, I also remember something about competent and leading soldiers.

I don't see why you're relying on your memory... my post is right in this thread, and apparently you need to read more carefully (I never, for instance, said that he led soldiers).

All we have to work with are the limited accounts of Caligula's reign, and by all accounts he was well loved by both soldiers and the general public, and not just because he wasn't Tiberius.

As I have already noted, the Romans believed that positive traits were inheritable, so they thought that he'd be a great leader like Germanicus.

Moreover, his initial reign was successful. He cleverly destroyed documents that would have been very uncomfortable for the nobility, he gave bonuses to the soldiers, and he provided restitution to people wronged by Tiberius' taxes. For that initial period, he was doing very well, and he was very popular.

Then he disappeared, and when he showd up again, he did all of the things you reference, and thus we have the judgement of history you reference.

Surely you can't believe he was always that way, though? The Senate would have never let him come to power were that the case.

[JMS]

Techboy,

Your wife might like the book Rome and Jerusalem. I was a little disappointed in it, only because I was hoping for more info on Bar Kochba, but it's more of a book on a meshing and clashing of cultures with the wars taking up only a small portion.

I watched a movie the other night which you guys might be interested in. It was from 2010, and stared Rachel Weisz. The name of the movie was "Agora". Weisz plays the first notable woman in mathmatics, the greek philosopher, astronomer, and mathmatician Hypatia who was associated with the Great Library in Alexandria around the time it was looted and burned by Christians, 400 AD. The flick is about the colapsing Roman empire and how the old pagan cultures, the jews, and the early christians coexisted. The science is sketchy especially the empirical enquiry they show Hypatia conducts which wasn't really done until Galileo, but I liked the story and ejoyed being introduced to Hypatia. The story is basically told through her eyes and the interactions between her students who became some of the leaders in the Christian community and among the Romans.

---------- Post added January-20th-2011 at 09:06 AM ----------

Surely you can't believe he was always that way, though? The Senate would have never let him come to power were that the case.

If the senate had anything to say about it, Caligula never would have come to power. Rome was an empire, and Caligula was the next in line for sucession since Tiberius's son had died. It's not like there was any love lost between Caligula and the Senate.

And as for "always being that way"... The guy was only in office for about 4 years. It's not like he reigned as long as Elizabeth or Victoria in Britian. I don't disagree that folks were "hopeful" when Caligula took office because Tiberius went out with a reign of terror. But those same people didn't have long to wait until Caligula eclipsed the abuses of Tiberius. Caligula being so young and inexperienced probable had some powerful advisors when he first assended to the throne. That problable explains his achievments in his first year. Once he got the lay of the land, he was a combination of Idi Amin mixed with Charlie Sheen; concentrated.

[mardi gras skin]

my post is right in this thread, and apparently you need to read more carefully

The force is strong in this one, techboy.

[JMS]

I don't see why you're relying on your memory... my post is right in this thread, and apparently you need to read more carefully (I never, for instance, said that he led soldiers).

The thing that always intrigues me about Caligula is just how loved and respected he was, both by the soldiers he led and the general public, early in his life. He was apparently brilliant and competent, and should have made a great leader.

"Earlier in Life" meaning a few months before he started having senators murdered ten at a time, and crowds of spectators at the arena feed to lions by their ticket section number .

Beyond that, you're pretty much correct.

Whatever.

[Homercles82]

Everyone needs to watch, "I, Claudius" BBC miniseries. It details the Augustan Dynasty's rise and eventual fall. Amazing television.

EDIT

It should be noted they are historical fiction but fun nonetheless.

[techboy]

The contemporary sources to Caligula, Philo of Alexandria

Contemporary source? Great idea!

(8) For who-when he saw Gaius, after the death of Tiberius Caesar, assuming the sovereignty of the whole world in a condition free from all sedition, and regulated by and obedient to admirable laws, and adapted to unanimity and harmony in all its parts, east and west, south and north; the barbarian nations being in harmony with the Greeks, and the Greeks with the barbarians, and the soldiers with the body of private citizens, and the citizens with the military; so that they all partook of and enjoyed one common universal peace-could fail to marvel at and be amazed at his extraordinary and unspeakable good fortune, (9) since he had thus succeeded to a ready-made inheritance of all good things, collected together as it were in one heap, namely, to numerous and vast treasures of money, and silver and gold, some in bullion, and some in coined money, and some again being devoted to articles of luxury, in drinking cups and other vessels, which are made for display and magnificence; and also countless hosts of troops, infantry, and cavalry, and naval forces, and revenues which were supplied in a never-ending stream as from a fountain; (10) and the sovereignty of the most numerous, and most valuable, and important portions of the habitable world, which is fact one may fairly call the whole world, being not only all that is bounded by the two rivers, the Euphrates and the Rhine; the one of which confines Germany and all the more uncivilised nations; and the Euphrates, on the other hand, bridles Parthia and the nations of the Sarmatians and Scythians, which are not less barbarous and uncivilised than the Germanic tribes; but, even as I said before, all the world, from the rising to the setting sun, all the land in short on this side of the Ocean and beyond the Ocean, at which all the Roman people and all Italy rejoiced, and even all the Asiatic and European nations. (11) For as they had never yet all together admired any emperor who had ever existed at that time, not expecting to have in future the possession, and use, and enjoyment of all private and public good things, but thinking that they actually had them already as a sort of superfluity of prosperity which happiness was waiting to fill to the brim: (12) accordingly now there was nothing else to be seen in any city, but altars, and victims, and sacrifices, and men clothed in white garments, and crowned with garlands, and wearing cheerful countenances, and displaying their joy by the brightness of their looks, and festivals, and assemblies, and musical contests, and horse-races, and revels, and feasts lasting the whole night long, with the music of the flute and of the lyre, and rejoicings, and holidays, and truces, and every kind of pleasure addressed to every one of the senses. (13) On this occasion the rich were not better off than the poor, nor the men of high rank than the lowly, nor the creditors than the debtors, nor the masters than the slaves, since the occasion gave equal privileges and communities to all men, so that the age of Saturn, which is so celebrated by the poets was no longer looked upon as a fiction and a fable, {2}{the golden age was said to have existed during the reign of Saturn upon earth. So Tibullus and Virgil.} on account of the universal prosperity and happiness which reigned every where, and the absence of all grief and fear, and the daily and nightly exhibitions of joy and festivity throughout every house and throughout the whole people, which lasted continually without any interruption during the first seven months of his reign. (14) But in the eighth month a severe disease attacked Gaius who had changed the manner of his living which was a little while before, while Tiberius was alive, very simple and on that account more wholesome than one of great sumptuousness and luxury; for he began to indulge in abundance of strong wine and eating of rich dishes, and in the abundant license of insatiable desires and great insolence, and in the unseasonable use of hot baths, and emetics, and then again in winebibbing and drunkenness, and returning gluttony, and in lust after boys and women, and in everything else which tends to destroy both soul and body, and all the bonds which unite and strengthen the two; for the rewards of temperance are health and strength, and the wages of intemperance are weakness and disease which bring a man near to death.

Hmmm... The most widely respected and loved emperor ever, great for the first 7 months, in the 8th month something changed. This sounds vaguely familiar somehow...

If the senate had anything to say about it, Caligula never would have come to power. Rome was an empire, and Caligula was the next in line for sucession since Tiberius's son had died.

Ah, no. Once again...:

When Tiberius died on 16 March A.D. 37, Gaius was in a perfect position to assume power, despite the obstacle of Tiberius's will, which named him and his cousin Tiberius Gemellus joint heirs. (Gemellus's life was shortened considerably by this bequest, since Gaius ordered him killed within a matter of months.) Backed by the Praetorian Prefect Q. Sutorius Macro, Gaius asserted his dominance. He had Tiberius's will declared null and void on grounds of insanity, accepted the powers of the Principate as conferred by the Senate, and entered Rome on 28 March amid scenes of wild rejoicing. His first acts were generous in spirit: he paid Tiberius's bequests and gave a cash bonus to the Praetorian Guard, the first recorded donativum to troops in imperial history. He honored his father and other dead relatives and publicly destroyed Tiberius's personal papers, which no doubt implicated many of the Roman elite in the destruction of Gaius's immediate family. Finally, he recalled exiles and reimbursed those wronged by the imperial tax system [[4]]. His popularity was immense. Yet within four years he lay in a bloody heap in a palace corridor, murdered by officers of the very guard entrusted to protect him. What went wrong?

Emphases mine. Caligula got the powers of Rome to go around legality to get himself named Emperor.

Whatever.

Fair enough. I didn't mean to write that he led soldiers in battle before his ascension, only that he was well liked (and the bonus after he rose to power didn't hurt either, I'm sure ), but apparently I did.

[JMS]

Everyone needs to watch, "I, Claudius" BBC miniseries. It details the Augustan Dynasty's rise and eventual fall. Amazing television.

EDIT

It should be noted they are historical fiction but fun nonetheless.

I haven't seen that, but I have heard it was good too.

[Homercles82]

I haven't seen that, but I have heard it was good too.

I watched it in Latin IV in High School. Best 3 weeks of class ever.

[JMS]

Hmmm... The most widely respected and loved emperor ever, great for the first 7 months, in the 8th month something changed. This sounds vaguely familiar somehow...

Yes it does. Sounds oddly like a honeymoon period. 7 months where he probable was consolidating power, murdering his political rivals, and learning the ropes. Again since we now agree the man had no accomplishments of his own prior to assending to power; it's much more plausable that relief from Tiberius's reign of terror is what explains any positive feelings for Caligula as temporary as those positive feelings were ( 7 months).

I find the brain feaver explaination unconvincing. It's not like it's common for folks to get sick or have an injury and become stock raving lunitics over a matter of weeks. There is no documented evidnce of this in antiquity or in modern times. It's solely the perview of science fiction. Likewise it's not even a concensus opinions of historians.

Caligula got the powers of Rome to go around legality to get himself named Emperor

Caligula was the third of five Emperors which made up the Julio-Claudian dynasty. His assendency had nothing to do with personal accomplishment and everything to do with birth. As your own quote says he was named joint emperor by Tiberius's will. He did nothing to assend to power, but once there was ruthless enough to murder his co-ruler. Presenting that as personal accomplishment or proof of competence is laughable.

Once again

The senate had nothing to do with Caligula's assendency. The Senate would have liked nothing better than for Empire and Caligula to evaporate and the republic to be reborn. When Caligula came to power the senate was empowered because of the long absense from Rome of Tiberius. They were used to operating without oversite. That is one of the reasons why Caligula started to execute and opennly embarres the senate under his reign. The senate was nothing more than a symbol at this point in Romes history. They had no power of their own, but only were able to exert power with the support or absense of the emperor.. Caligula highlighted this for the senate by having his horse made councel.

[techboy]

Again since we now agree the man had no accomplishments of his own prior to assending to power;

"Now" agree? We never disagreed.

All I noted was that he was respected before he ascended to the throne, largely because of the Roman belief in inheritence of attributes..

it's much more plausable that relief from Tiberius's reign of terror is what explains any positive feelings for Galigula as temporary as those positive feelings were ( 7 months).

Well, except that it's well documented that he made several shrewd and popular moves.

As your own quote says he was named joint emperor by Tiberius's will.

Did you forget the part where that same will had to be overturned in order for him to ascend to power?

Who did the overturning? Who granted that ascension?

[JMS]

"Now" agree? We never disagreed. (no accomplishments of his own prior to assending to power)

All I noted was that he was respected before he ascended to the throne, largely because of the Roman belief in inheritence of attributes..

Really? You didn't say he was loved and respected by the soldiers he lead and by the general public early in life? Or that he was brilliant and displayed competence in that period?

"

just how loved and respected he was, both by the soldiers he led and the general public, early in his life. He was apparently brilliant and competent, and should have made a great leader.

Well, except that it's well documented that he made several shrewd and popular moves.

Yes he did, shortly before he started displaying his depravity.

Did you forget the part where that same will had to be overturned in order for him to ascend to power?

Who did the overturning? Who granted that ascension?

I would argue that those gestures like most of the senate's actitions since Augustus were rubber stamps. What was important for Caligula's assension was that he was supported by the military, not that he was supported by the senate. The senate merely fell into line after the military endorsed Caligula. The senate was not friendly with Caligula, all of the his natural senatorial allies had been purged by Tiberius prior to Caligula's reign. Caligula had no friends in that body, as demonstrated by how he proceeded to treat them over the next few years.

[S.T.real,lights,out]

If he found it y cant he keep it?

[techboy]

Really? You didn't say he was loved and respected by the soldiers he lead and by the general public early in life?

He was respected by the army and the general public. See Philo, who reports that he began his reign as the most widely respected and beloved emperor ever.

If you don't acknowledge this basic fact, then I guess we don't agree, then or now, which is unsurprising.

Or that he was brilliant and displayed competence in that period?

He was thought of as brilliant and competent, yes, and I'd argue that his first 7 months of rule bear that out.

Yes he did, shortly before he started displaying his depravity.

Or, as most historians argue, before he fell ill and became insane, probably because of some sort of brain damage following the illness. That sure sounds like what Philo thinks, though I wouldn't ascribe it as he does to rich food.

What was important for Caligula's assension was that he was supported by the military, not that he was supported by the senate.

Interesting. Why do you suppose the military supported him?

Caligula had no friends in that body

Not at the end, he didn't. I'll bet he made a few when he destroyed the documents that could have implicated many of them in treasonous activities, though.