So the overrall consensus is he was a sadistic and sarcastic figure that was just misinterpreted and was emperor at the wrong time?
Yes and no, Caligula probably did fall to bouts of madness in the latter years of his Imperial rule due to stress and illness, but was incapable of ruling the Empire as Augustus did or deferring power as Tiberius. He was unprepared for the amount of power he wielded, though I would assume few would be either.So the overrall consensus is he was a sadistic and sarcastic figure that was just misinterpreted and was emperor at the wrong time?
On the previous page you ( I think it was you) mentioned how not until after Caligula was all the work really lifted off the emperor's shoulders, and a bureaucracy to help the emperor was really established.
How wold one create such a bureaucracy? Or more rather, how and when was it created? If that makes sense.
Excellent point.On the previous page you ( I think it was you) mentioned how not until after Caligula was all the work really lifted off the emperor's shoulders, and a bureaucracy to help the emperor was really established.
How wold one create such a bureaucracy? Or more rather, how and when was it created? If that makes sense.
Excellent point.
Augustus made the position of Emperor essentially sole Supreme Court Judge of the Roman Empire. Augustus himself went through reams of legal information and intervened in judicial cases across the Empire that peaked his interest, but the man was beyond compare at his job. Tiberius sat in his estate in Capri and let others do all the work.
Many legal documents or laws that had to be signed were either held by hopelessly naive Senate staff at the docks of Capri waiting for an audience that would never come or were signed by Sejanus. Sejanus himself became incredibly attuned to the new position Augustus had created and it was through Tiberius' laziness that Sejanus managed to amass such power in order to attempt a coup.
As the Empire went on the Praetorian Guard Commander was increasingly recognised as the one of the greatest legal authorities second to the Emperor himself. Much work would inevitably be dumped on them by impatient or overworked rulers that was intended for the Emperor.
So future Emperors would look to their Praetorian Commanders to have a sound legal mind as well as military skill.
A small legal staff would grow around the Praetorian Commander and Emperor to deal with paperwork and advise them on legal matters from various parts of the Empire. Another group would deal with letters from concerned citizens over what they argued were unfair judgements in local courts.
It could simply be the Emperor seeing all these letters and legal papers and saying "Cant we get someone to deal with all of these?"
I hope that has been of help of to you and good luck on the Timeline!
I agree completely on your point about Nero.It was developed when the senate realized that young emperors was a bad idea! They knew it was their opportunity to reel in the emperors powers and in Claudius, an elderly, weak minded former member of the senate, they had the right tools at their disposal. All future heirs were groomed in by great teachers like Seneca for Nero ( who was not that bad or insane by the way) to help create more educated, knowledgeable, sophisticated men capable for rule.
Ok, thanks for clearing this up. Speaking about the TL, I was thinking about Drusus overhauling the way the state of affairs were being mannaged, and creating some form of bureaucracy.
I agree completely on your point about Nero.
Firstly....yay! A Nero apologist! We really need a TL done for him really.
Secondly, I don't know much about Drusus, but is he really the sort of person to create a sophisticated bureaucracy? Military men in history tend to err to the authoritarian side of rule. Oh....and when Caligula does appear in your TL ( if he does make a big part) could please give him a different personality? i think that given a different upbringing he could have been a good ruler.
The bold part made me lol.Hard to say really. Roman sources are notoriously bias (it's hard to find ones that aren't) and Suetonius could almost be compared to the Roman equivalent of the Daily Mirror. However, there is definitely something off about Caligula, perhaps not "insane" but very sadistic and possibly jaded about his position.
If we look at him like this, he was just a vulnerable, disturbed young man, with a abused past who tried to make the peasants happy but fell foul of political scheming of which he was utterly out of his depth. Its almost.....sad and makes you feel sorry for him really.
I have said many times in this thread how things can be taken out of context to make a point. Caligula never made Incitatus a Consul.Appointing his horse as consul is no better if he did it to mock the Senate rather than out of the inspired idea that the horse would do a good job. That's not the work of a clear thinking and crafty man, that's the work of someone too full of contempt to care about the consequences of his actions.
I have said many times in this thread how things can be taken out of context to make a point. Caligula never made Incitatus a Consul.
And even in context, he's still treating the senate with contempt at best and delusional at worst.
It's pretty clear that Caligula and the Senate did not get along. A smart ruler would have tried to deal with that - there is precedent. A flawed ruler - whether actually crazy or just full of himself - would have made things worse.
Judging by his fate, he did not manage to make things work out.
I don't know about anyone else, but I'm not using that to establish his sanity or lack thereof - I specifically said I don't think we can tell with the information we have - I'm just using it as an example of how the circumstances he was a victim of were brought on by how he treated the Senate.
So really, Caligula is only really disliked because of a slur campaign by the senate after his death in order to to steer the way for his successor. It is true that Caligula didn't compromise with the senate, but that isn't really surprising given that he had spent much of his early life either in the field with the army and no education. He didn't really understand the fragile balance of power in Rome, the politics and was thus prone to lashing out like I've seen it said " as a cornered mad dog." He just wasn't bought up to rule and his reputation with the senate ( who pretty much wrote it) suffered.