The Emperor Caligula

 The third of Rome’s emperors, Caligula achieved feats of waste and carnage during his four-year reign

 unmatched even by his infamous nephew Nero. The son of a great military leader, he escaped family intrigues to take the throne, but his personal and fiscal excesses led him to be the first Roman emperor to be assassinated.

 During his childhood, his family lived at his father’s posting on the Rhine, where the general’s troops gave the future emperor his nickname “Caligula,” meaning “little boot,” in reference to the miniature uniform in which his parents dressed him.

Did you know? Though known for his harsh treatment of others, the infamous Roman emperor Caligula lavished attention upon his horse Incitatus, giving the animal his own house with a marble stall and ivory manger. As an expression of his absolute power, Caligula planned to appoint the horse to the high office of consul, but he was assassinated before he could do so.

After Germanicus died in 17 A.D., Caligula’s family fell from favor in the eyes of the emperor Tiberius and the powerful Praetorian guardsman Sejanus, who saw the elder sons of the popular general as political rivals. Caligula’s mother and brothers were accused of treason, and all died in prison or exile. Caligula’s grandmother Antonia managed to shield him from these intrigues until Sejunus’ death in 31. The next year, Caligula moved in with the aging Tiberius, who gleefully indulged his great-nephew’s worst habits, commenting that he was “nursing a viper in Rome’s bosom.”

Tiberius adopted Caligula and made him and his cousin Gemellus equal heirs to the empire. When the emperor died in 37, Caligula’s Praetorian ally Marco arranged for Caligula to be proclaimed sole emperor. A year later, Caligula would order both Marco and Gemellus put to death.

The Emperor Caligula

Caligula was not quite 25 years old when he took power in 37 A.D. At first, his succession was welcomed in Rome: He announced political reforms and recalled all exiles. But in October of 37, a serious illness unhinged Caligula, leading him to spend the remainder of his reign exploring the worst aspects of his nature.

His relationships with other individuals were turbulent as well. His biographer Suetonius quotes his oft-repeated phrase, “Remember that I have the right to do anything to anybody.” He tormented high-ranking senators by making them run for miles in front of his chariot. He had brazen affairs with the wives of his allies and was rumored to have incestuous relationships with his sisters.

Caligula was tall, pale and so hairy that he made it a capital offense to mention a goat in his presence. He worked to accentuate his natural ugliness by practicing terrifying facial expressions in a mirror. But he literally wallowed in luxury, allegedly rolling around in piles of money and drinking precious pearls dissolved in vinegar. He continued his childhood games of dress-up, donning strange clothing, women’s shoes and lavish accessories and wigs--eager, according to his biographer Cassius Dio, “to appear to be anything rather than a human being and an emperor.”

Caligula’s Downfall

Caligula’s profligacy was draining the Roman treasury faster than he could replenish it through taxes and extortion. A conspiracy formed between the Praetorian Guard, the Senate and the equestrian order, and in late January of 41 A.D. Caligula was stabbed to death, along with his wife and daughter, by officers of the Praetorian Guard led by Cassius Chaerea. Thus, Cassius Dio notes, Caligula “learned by actual experience that he was not a god.”

The Senate attempted to use the disastrous end of Caligula’s reign as a pretext to reestablish the Roman Republic, but Claudius, the heir designate, took the throne after gaining the support of the Praetorian Guard. The Julio-Claudian dynasty would remain secure for another 17 years, until Nero’s suicide in 68.

Caligula: murderous and depraved, or a victim of history? Plus four big questions about his reign answered

Caligula: murderous and depraved, or a victim of history?

The story of Caligula has long been about the corruption of absolute power, murderous madness and sexual perversion, but historian and author Dr Philip Matyszak reveals how the Roman emperor’s reputation is far more seductive than the mundane reality

The Roman Empire produced some spectacularly bad emperors over the centuries. There was the brutally egotistical Commodus, who moonlighted as a gladiator in the Colosseum, and the bizarre Elagabulus, who dressed in women’s clothing and got about the Palatine in chariots pulled by slave girls. Then there was Nero, whose orgies and tyrannical excesses were notorious.

No list of the worst Roman emperors would be complete without Caligula. Everybody ‘knows’, after all, of how he threw obscene orgies, had sex with his sisters and was an ingenious and sadistic torturer. And, of course, he was stark, raving mad. Yet most of what we think we know about Caligula comes from accounts (both ancient and modern) based on the authors’ highly active imaginations, rather than historical record.

It is true that few lives have come close to the absolute heights and profound depths Caligula experienced in just 25 years. He was the youngest son of Germanicus, the rising star of the imperial dynasty, and part of a revered family, which combined celebrity glamour with monarchy and a cult of personality.

As the youngest in this Roman pantheon, he was the ‘chick’, the darling, the mascot. The name Caligula, or ‘Little Boots’, came from adoring soldiers to whom Germanicus liked to display his son dressed as a miniature Roman legionary. Uncomfortable with the moniker, Caligula later insisted on the given name he shared with a famous ancestor – Gaius Julius Caesar. (Many historians today use Gaius rather than the sensational alter ego of Caligula.)

The next six years were stressful beyond belief for Caligula. The biographer Suetonius tells us that he was scrutinised day and night for any signs of disaffection or hints of disloyalty, deliberate or unintentional. Let’s not forget that this was an era when a senator could be put to death for going to the toilet while wearing a ring with the emperor’s portrait.

Caligula’s illness

Caligula went to bed every night wondering if he would be woken in the small hours and taken to the cells for summary execution. Even as Tiberius lay dying, the capricious emperor could have abruptly appointed a different successor, which would have meant certain death for Caligula as no other emperor could tolerate his claim to the empire.

Once Tiberius died, Caligula went literally overnight from a near-hostage to the acknowledged master of Rome. His return to the city was welcomed with wild enthusiasm. Soon afterwards, he had a nervous breakdown. In an age familiar with post-traumatic stress we should perhaps expect this. As veteran soldiers will testify, the true psychological impact is felt only upon returning to normalcy and safety, then experiencing utter alienation from others who have not shared the same experience. Caligula’s collapse left him bedridden in delirium while an anxious Rome prayed for his recovery. Ancient biographers report that he arose from his sickbed as a madman.

The truth proved to be worse though. Caligula, ruler of Rome, had been out of action for weeks – and nothing had happened. The provinces had been governed as usual, the senate met and passed decrees and the praetorian prefects administered justice. The empire had gone peacefully about its business. The way that the imperial system functioned meant that Rome did not actually need a hands-on ruler.

Caligula’s mental collapse left him bedridden in delirium while Rome prayed for his recovery

Caligula was not really necessary and, to someone with his upbringing, ‘unnecessary’ meant ‘disposable’. As a headstrong young man with a survival instinct ingrained across every fibre of his being, Caligula set about rectifying what he saw as an unacceptable situation. He would make himself necessary, and make the senate and the people of Rome dependant on his rule. It ended up being a flawed and fatal strategy, but it followed logically from Caligula’s life experience to date.

e immediately jettisoned the example of his immediate predecessors, who had carefully pretended to work through the senate, even while slaughtering individual senators. By explicitly taking direct control of the empire, Caligula was not only ahead of his time, he was declaring war on the senate. Therefore, Caligula’s reign is not about the antics of a young madman, but the story of a political struggle for supremacy – a story told by the victors, for whom libel laws were non-existent and the truth optional.

The last ruler of Rome to openly place himself above the senate was Caligula’s namesake, Gaius Julius Caesar, and the Ides of March shows what they thought of that. Nevertheless, Caligula elevated himself above the senate by declaring himself a God. Later, that was less unusual – the emperor Domitian entitled himself Master and God – but at the time this seemed blasphemous and bizarre.

The senate twisted Caligula's every action. Mud was hurled with gleeful disregard for the truth

Even in Caligula’s time, it was not unprecedented. In the Greek east, rulers were almost routinely deified, and the divine status of the Egyptian pharaohs had been adopted by their Macedonian successors. Caligula awarding himself the same status in Rome was only insane in the sense that it was a political gambit certain to fail.

Caligula the God had the support of the people and the army, but was a political neophyte with a personality totally unsuited to fighting a senate of ruthless fixers hardened by savage, often fatal, political battles. Senators had connections, clients and a hidden grip on the levers of power. Both sides in this struggle used any and all means at their disposal, but it was Caligula who was outmatched.

One of the weapons of the senate was propaganda. Here, a comment by the great orator Cicero is revealing: “I call this man a gladiator, not as the usual rhetorical insult, but because he really was one.” In other verbal attacks, Cicero labelled opponents as arsonists, patricides (even those with living fathers), pathics, coprophiliacs and murderers, and even claimed – with no proof whatsoever – that one man killed children to use their organs in necromantic rites. In Roman political invective, mud was hurled with gleeful disregard for the truth, just to see what would stick.

As for Caligula, the senate seized upon his claim of divinity and interpreted it as madness. They twisted every action of an emperor who was in any case young, headstrong and thoughtless, and simply invented other cases. Even the fact that his wife loved him was seen as evidence of his madness (he allegedly threatened to torture her to discover why). Caligula was also a loving father, but apparently only because his child shared his sadistic inclinations, which excused Caligula’s eventual murderers bashing the toddler’s brains out against a wall.

Staying with family relations, the biographer Suetonius reports that Caligula enjoyed sex with his sisters during banquets while appalled guests looked on. Yet Suetonius wrote a century later, when the legend of Caligula as a lunatic had been well established. By then, some believed he had become a sex-crazed madman because his wife had overdosed him with a love potion. Since much of the detail of Caligula’s mental state comes from Suetonius, the claim of incest merits further examination.

The historian Tacitus was born 15 years after Caligula died. Unlike Suetonius, he scrupulously reports allegations as just that – allegations rather than fact – and he does not mention any such dinner party entertainment. Nor does the philosopher – and senator – Seneca, who actually knew Caligula. Both writers do not shy away from the topic, but mention Caligula’s sister Agrippina in connection with incest only with her uncle and son, not her brother.

As to Caligula’s murderous side, there is a definite shortage of victims. While Suetonius is fond of saying the emperor had people slaughtered by the dozen, he is curiously reticent about naming them. Other writers, such as Appian and Plutarch, meticulously document the senators killed in the much bloodier purges of Sulla and the Triumvirs.

Caligula did order the execution of Tiberius’s son and his Praetorian prefect Macro (who appeared set on emulating Sejanus in ambition), as well as his cousin, the king of Mauritania. But most of his other victims are dubious, like the gladiator who died of an infected wound after Caligula had visited him. So in all there are less than a dozen names. Compare this to hundreds killed by Augustus, dozens by Tiberius, and many more by Nero and Claudius, with most of their high-ranking victims carefully named.