Gaius Caligula - help needed

[Titus Maccius Plautus]

Salve! Long time no see! I believe this is the proper part of the forum where to post this. Here it goes: I'm doing what I call a 'pseudo' research on the emperor Gaius (for a faculty research project) and I was wondering if the original texts of Suetonius, Cassius Dio, Philo of Alexandria, Plinius the Elder, Tacitus, Flavius Josephus, Seneca, Juvenal have survived, and if so where can one find them now?

Are there any other sources that mention him apart from these ones? I'm mainly interested in the contemporary ones. :S

Another question: how intense were the 'fights' between the optimates and populares at that moment, and I remember reading some time ago about his parents siding with the populares.

Please shed some light upon this.

[Primus Pilus]

Salve! Long time no see! I believe this is the proper part of the forum where to post this. Here it goes: I'm doing what I call a 'pseudo' research on the emperor Gaius (for a faculty research project) and I was wondering if the original texts of Suetonius, Cassius Dio, Philo of Alexandria, Plinius the Elder, Tacitus, Flavius Josephus, Seneca, Juvenal have survived, and if so where can one find them now?

Are there any other sources that mention him apart from these ones? I'm mainly interested in the contemporary ones. :S

Another question: how intense were the 'fights' between the optimates and populares at that moment, and I remember reading some time ago about his parents siding with the populares.

Please shed some light upon this.

 

You'll find most of the sources with English translations available in this post.

 

As for the "populares/optimates"... the issue was relatively moot in this period of Roman politics. The parents of "Caligula" were Germanicus and Agrippina. While Germanicus was definately a popular figure, he was a member of the ruling family and his political position was completely dissimilar to the political battles of the late Republican period. I am by no means suggesting that political "conservatives" and "populares" did not exist, but the ideological differences in philosophy that defined the late Republic was not as relevant in the politics of the empire. For all intensive purposes, the politicians of the imperial era would've been considered populares by Republican standards.

 

Are you perhaps mixing a touch of Gaius Caesar the 3rd emperor with Gaius Octavius (later Augustus)? If so, the issues of the populares vs. optimates would be more relevant. His father Gaius Octavius Thurinus was a relatively obscure figure, but since he was married to Caesar's niece Atia and was appointed to the governorship of Macedonia while the first triumvirate dominated Rome in 60 BC, one might assume he was a "populares". He died when Augustus was only 4 while en route to Rome in 59 BC to stand for the consulship for 58 (presumably with the support of the triumvirate). However, Atia remarried Lucius Marcius Philippus and Augustus' step-father seemed to have anti-Caesarian leanings. When war broke out between Caesar and Pompey he actually sat it out without openly supporting either side.

[Titus Maccius Plautus]

You'll find most of the sources with English translations available in this post.

 

I found all the English translations, but I was wondering if the original texts, not even the Latin transcriptions, but the real things are anywhere to be found. Maybe in a museum or library.

 

As for the "populares/optimates"... the issue was relatively moot in this period of Roman politics. The parents of "Caligula" were Germanicus and Agrippina. While Germanicus was definately a popular figure, he was a member of the ruling family and his political position was completely dissimilar to the political battles of the late Republican period. I am by no means suggesting that political "conservatives" and "populares" did not exist, but the ideological differences in philosophy that defined the late Republic was not as relevant in the politics of the empire. For all intensive purposes, the politicians of the imperial era would've been considered populares by Republican standards.

 

I see. Maybe it was Germanicus's popularity that led to his association with the possible 'populares'.

 

Are you perhaps mixing a touch of Gaius Caesar the 3rd emperor with Gaius Octavius (later Augustus)? If so, the issues of the populares vs. optimates would be more relevant. His father Gaius Octavius Thurinus was a relatively obscure figure, but since he was married to Caesar's niece Atia and was appointed to the governorship of Macedonia while the first triumvirate dominated Rome in 60 BC, one might assume he was a "populares". He died when Augustus was only 4 while en route to Rome in 59 BC to stand for the consulship for 58 (presumably with the support of the triumvirate). However, Atia remarried Lucius Marcius Philippus and Augustus' step-father seemed to have anti-Caesarian leanings. When war broke out between Caesar and Pompey he actually sat it out without openly supporting either side.

 

Nope! just good ol' Caligula

Anyway, are you familiar with other contemporary sources (with Caligula of course) or some that would praise him?

Thank you.

[Ingsoc]

Salve! Long time no see! I believe this is the proper part of the forum where to post this. Here it goes: I'm doing what I call a 'pseudo' research on the emperor Gaius (for a faculty research project) and I was wondering if the original texts of Suetonius, Cassius Dio, Philo of Alexandria, Plinius the Elder, Tacitus, Flavius Josephus, Seneca, Juvenal have survived, and if so where can one find them now?

 

 

LacusCurtius has some original latin/greek texts, and you probably could easily find the rest at any university library.

[Melvadius]

Salve! Long time no see! I believe this is the proper part of the forum where to post this. Here it goes: I'm doing what I call a 'pseudo' research on the emperor Gaius (for a faculty research project) and I was wondering if the original texts of Suetonius, Cassius Dio, Philo of Alexandria, Plinius the Elder, Tacitus, Flavius Josephus, Seneca, Juvenal have survived, and if so where can one find them now?

 

 

LacusCurtius has some original latin/greek texts, and you probably could easily find the rest at any university library.

 

If I understand the original question correctly as far as the source documents that we have are concerned I believe that they are probably all later copies (at best 5th or 6th century AD) of the original hand written Latin documents which were mostly discovered between about 1300 to 1500 in various monastic [(Edit) or Islamic (Edit)] libraries. Some parchments contained only part of particular documents and/or were compiled with other documents, be incomplete or even simply only survived in precis versions so some authors have tried to interpolate back to what was originally written.

 

In some instances more than one copy was found of particular texts and academic arguments have since raged over which version is the most accurate (or at least is closest to the 'original' source document) and what the correct sequence of copying may have been. The 'original' parchment copies may no longer survive having had another six or so centuries to rot or ain a few instacnes early printed copies exist which have become the only generally available sources. The Loeb and most other 'academic' translations will probably list the various source documents including where they were found and when as well giving an indication of how complete they may have been.

 

However you are unlikely to be able to see the original copies unless you are a recognized scholar as they now tend to be deemed too precious to allow general access to them and are kept in a variety of academic libraries. Obviously there are translations available in different languages and often transcriptions of the surviving Latin text as others have already indicated.

Edited November 26, 2007 by Melvadius

[Titus Maccius Plautus]

LacusCurtius has some original latin/greek texts, and you probably could easily find the rest at any university library.

 

Thank you, I had those saved to Favourites already.

 

If I understand the original question correctly as far as the source documents that we have are concerned I believe that they are probably all later copies (at best 5th or 6th century AD) of the original hand written Latin documents which were mostly discovered between about 1300 to 1500 in various monastic [(Edit) or Islamic (Edit)] libraries. Some parchments contained only part of particular documents and/or were compiled with other documents, be incomplete or even simply only survived in precis versions so some authors have tried to interpolate back to what was originally written.

 

I was afraid of something like this, well... inevitably, happening.

 

In some instances more than one copy was found of particular texts and academic arguments have since raged over which version is the most accurate (or at least is closest to the 'original' source document) and what the correct sequence of copying may have been. The 'original' parchment copies may no longer survive having had another six or so centuries to rot or ain a few instacnes early printed copies exist which have become the only generally available sources. The Loeb and most other 'academic' translations will probably list the various source documents including where they were found and when as well giving an indication of how complete they may have been.

 

Intriguing! I'll check that out! Thank you.

 

Is there any serious research about Caligula's actual state of mind, and the political situation at that time, and perhaps a correlation between them?

Edited November 27, 2007 by Titus Maccius Plautus

[Octavia]

I know you can read suetonius online. I think also there might be something on Tacitus. I don't know if the other histories are online though by the other different authors.

Hope that helps.

[Nephele]

Is there any serious research about Caligula's actual state of mind, and the political situation at that time, and perhaps a correlation between them?

 

You'll find a previous (and quite lengthy) discussion by UNRV members concerning Caligula's mental state at this topic:

 

What Made Caligula Crazy?.

 

This discussion includes possible reasons for Caligula's mental condition, ranging from Suetonius' account of Caligula's wife having inadvertently poisoned him with a defective love potion, to a History Channel discussion on Caligula possibly having been traumatized by what he had seen Tiberius do to Caligula's own family, to lead poisoning from Rome's water supply being the cause of Caligula's troubles... To the simplest (and perhaps most likely) reason being that Caligula was merely enjoying the absolute power he had in the most unrestrained and self-indulgent manner imaginable -- to which he was entitled as emperor.

 

-- Nephele

[Andrew Dalby]

Salve! Long time no see! I believe this is the proper part of the forum where to post this. Here it goes: I'm doing what I call a 'pseudo' research on the emperor Gaius (for a faculty research project) and I was wondering if the original texts of Suetonius, Cassius Dio, Philo of Alexandria, Plinius the Elder, Tacitus, Flavius Josephus, Seneca, Juvenal have survived, and if so where can one find them now?

 

 

LacusCurtius has some original latin/greek texts, and you probably could easily find the rest at any university library.

 

If I understand the original question correctly as far as the source documents that we have are concerned I believe that they are probably all later copies (at best 5th or 6th century AD) of the original hand written Latin documents which were mostly discovered between about 1300 to 1500 in various monastic [(Edit) or Islamic (Edit)] libraries. Some parchments contained only part of particular documents and/or were compiled with other documents, be incomplete or even simply only survived in precis versions so some authors have tried to interpolate back to what was originally written.

 

In some instances more than one copy was found of particular texts and academic arguments have since raged over which version is the most accurate (or at least is closest to the 'original' source document) and what the correct sequence of copying may have been. The 'original' parchment copies may no longer survive having had another six or so centuries to rot or ain a few instacnes early printed copies exist which have become the only generally available sources. The Loeb and most other 'academic' translations will probably list the various source documents including where they were found and when as well giving an indication of how complete they may have been.

 

However you are unlikely to be able to see the original copies unless you are a recognized scholar as they now tend to be deemed too precious to allow general access to them and are kept in a variety of academic libraries. Obviously there are translations available in different languages and often transcriptions of the surviving Latin text as others have already indicated.

 

Let me just add: as Melvadius rightly says, no originals ("autographs") of classical historical texts survive. But there are printed editions ("critical editions") whose aim is to show the variants in the surviving manuscripts and to get back where possible to the author's original, or as near as possible. For Suetonius, for example, an edition by M. Ihm, published in Germany in 1908 (I have a reprint), is or was the best critical edition. Most of these aren't available on line, I don't think, but good libraries have to have them. What you usually get on line is the text as someone has worked it out, without the notes and variants.

 

Unless you are doing really detailed study of the text and its variants, it isn't usually very productive to try to puzzle out a single manuscript version -- even when the rare books librarians will let you get your hands on it! Medieval handwriting is hard work. It probably pays better to look at a printed Latin/Greek text, and, certainly, if the edition you have shows variant readings, study them too.

 

Original ancient documents do survive -- but not usually in the form of historical narratives. There are stone inscriptions from the early Empire, some of them long and very informative. There are also papyrus documents (mostly relating to Egypt) and occasional finds of documents elsewhere (e.g. Vindolanda). Those are real originals. And if medieval handwriting is difficult, believe me, ancient handwriting on papyrus and wood is much more difficult still!