Excessive Behaviour By Caligula example essay topic

Brian. A. Mills R 0069211 AA 309 TMA 02 Why were the actions of Caligula regarded as excessive? Why was such behaviour important in the evaluation of an emperor's image? When Caligula took the title of emperor of Rome, the population of that vast empire felt that a new dawn was emerging. Here was someone with youth on his side to reign over them, by contrast after the aged Tiberius. Because of his earlier travels with them on their campaigns, he had the loyalty of the troops, which was always important in a militarist empire. But the biggest thing he had going for him was his direct family contact with the revered Augustus, Caligula through his mother was the great grandson of the man and his reign was hoped to take them back to what was already become to be seen as an golden age.

Yet something that started out so good ended in tragedy for the young man, Caligula soon displayed ideas way above him self, he became ego manic, disrespectful for others, and blasphemous, by this behaviour he quickly alienated himself from everybody, who were once loyal and it became obvious that he would be killed. In everything he was excessive, but nevermore in his blasphemous behaviour made worst because as emperor he was the holder of the office of head of the Roman religion and should never be seen as impious. In the 'Excesses Of Caligula', (P 526 Roman Civilization). We have a primary source written by Suetonius, this short paragraph is taken from his great work the 'Twelve Caesars', Suetonius was an experienced biographer, the first Latin biographer, and whose work is still available to us, but he was not a contemporary of the events that he was writing about, but it's still is a primary source.

It would have been read by his contemporaries, judged by them and indeed we can say by its longevity that it has become a useful source. We know from our study of the period that Suetonius and others thought that Augustus was the benchmark used to judge other emperors and so set the standard that was to be followed by other emperors. Indeed it is significant to say that such was his behaviour during his reign of office that he was upon his death deified by senate decree, and thereafter worshiped as a god. But it must be noted that not merely having the office of emperor ensured you reached deification, whilst Augustus obtained it, Tiberius who followed him failed to receive it, Caligula however by contrast, did not wait for death, or for the senate to bestow it upon him he, 'lay claim to divine majesty for himself', whilst still alive, Brian. A. Mills R 0069211 AA 309 TMA 02 this and other excessive behaviour firmly stamped upon his short reign an excessiveness that was never matched or even neared by any other emperors.

This document is about the excesses of the rule of Caligula, and reveals them in all their shocking horrors and shows just how the population should fear absolute power. Other of his excesses emerges further into this source. We see that he also had the 'statues of the gods' including 'Zeus' brought to Rome, to have their heads removed and 'replaced with his own' this is impiety of a great degree. If this was not considered excessive enough, the most powerful man in the known world decided to stand between the gods of 'castor and Pollux and was worshipped by those that approached; being called or hailed as Jupiter of Latium'. He had his own 'Priests' and a 'golden life-sized statue ' of himself, with the influential becoming his priests, just by merely spending their money on him ensured their influence on the most powerful man in the world. Birds obtained at high cost and from throughout the empire were sacrificed in his name, 'Victims were flamingos, peacocks, woodcocks, guinea hens and pheasants' P 256).

These birds have a certain majesty that would suggest poignancy at their deaths. This is hinted at by Suetonius use of the word 'victim', truly deeply excessive behaviour by Caligula. Claudius by contrast knew how to behave better when he was offered divine status, albeit offered by a state he affectively controlled, he said, 'But I depreciate the appointment of a high priest for me and the buildings of temples, for I do not wish to be offensive to my contemporaries, and my opinion is that temples and the like have by all the ages been granted as special honours to the gods alone', (Letter of Claudius to the Alexandrian's, Roman Civilization p 286) he does not accept divine honours because to be emperor was enough, you are already the most powerful man in the world, and the holder of office of head of the roman religion. The behaviour of an emperor whilst in office was always important because following the reign of Augustus a successful creation of an image was already promoted throughout the empire and reflected upon his successors. The cult of the reigning emperor was important and any untoward behaviour from the emperor reflected throughout the empire. Statues of the reigning emperor, inscriptions and dedications were placed throughout the empire by civilians, the military or by senate decree, these were important for the obvious focal points they were to become, when the populace viewed such buildings, monuments or statues they would become talking points, they also addressed the distance between empire and emperor and his citizens, a reigning emperor would fund games, shows and gladiatorial contests, coins were in circulation bearing the emperors image, and therefore promoting his rule.

Brian. A. Mills R 0069211 AA 309 TMA 02 The emperor was always promoted as the figurehead and was part of the glue that held the empire together; he had his own cult and divine associations at the behest of the senate at death, together with being the leader of the Roman religion, such behaviour as Caligula's would undo this glue that held the empire together, because he invited scorn and ridicule on his rule, how could the troops swear allegiance to such a man? This behaviour did not promote a positive image to the army or to the population of the empire, but the worst of his excesses were displayed to those who actually resided in Rome, because they saw him face to face as he went about displaying his divine presence to his own citizens. Indeed most noted is the fact that in the end it was a soldier, one of those most loyal at the beginning who put an end to his rule. There were a few shortcomings to this source, with it being a posthumous evaluation of his Caligula's reign.

Suetonius shows some bias ness, he blames Caligula for the excessive behaviour by describing what went on, as a historian working during this period he wanted the reader to learn from the past, he shows how Caligula treated his senators, his subjects and his soldiers, to this end. History has judged Caligula's rule excessive in the extreme, as leader of the Roman religion he was supposed to proclaim and protect it, not bring ridicule upon it. He not only failed Rome, but failed the office of emperor, failing to protect himself and to provide for his successor, this would not only have benefited the individual but also Caligula himself, because his successor would have had an interest in protecting his benefactors reputation after his death, as it was his rule was judged as excessive in the extreme.

Bibliography

Block 1 Roman Civilization Naphtali Lewis and Meyer Reinhold third edition Columbia University press.