On January 24^th, 41 A.D., Emperor Caligula was assassinated by the Praetorian Guard. Emperor Caligula’s death ended a reign of terror.

Sources have labeled the Emperor as a tyrant who spent money on lavish dwellings and banquets. The reserves from the royal treasury were nearly gone, so Emperor Caligula taxed and fined individuals with large estates. While this financial crisis was deepening, the Emperor continued to construct large dwellings for himself. In addition to this financial crisis, there was also a famine caused by depleting grain supplies. All this contributed to frustration and resentment toward the Emperor.

However, Emperor Caligula wasn’t always a tyrant. In the beginning of his reign, he was actually recorded as a decent ruler. Historians are not sure as to why the Emperor decided to change policies.

There is a theory that the Emperor may not have been the tyrant that we characterize him as, and that he was politically framed as such to tarnish his reputation. For instance, some of the reforms that Emperor Caligula made were to allow new members into the Senate class. This upset the Senate, because most of the members of the Senate came from established families with titles. Once new members were introduced, the Senate feared that they would eventually be replaced.

Perhaps the Senate was responsible for making slanderous remarks about the Emperor. We may never truly know questions like whether Emperor Caligula was insane, whether he was politically framed, or whether he was somewhere in the middle of being a tyrant and a revolutionary. The only sources from that time that we have available to us in its entirety are from Suetonius and Cassius Dio. There are also other limited sources, but the majority of comments written about the Emperor are negative. As was said before, perhaps Caligula really was a tyrant, or perhaps he was hated so much that he was labeled as such.

We’ve all heard the stories about Caligula, which include how he committed incest with his sisters and how he wanted to make his horse a consul. Events like these are questionable, because not all of these events have been reported by historians. In other words, these events may be an indication of the type of abominations he was capable of, but not the actual type of abominations that he committed. I’m not defending Caligula by any means, but it just makes you wonder why historians would make such exaggerations about someone.

Suetonius claimed that Caligula’s perverse personality was already apparent before he became Emperor. Once Caligula’s father died, he lived as a political prisoner under his uncle Tiberius. Tiberius was labeled as “tristissimus hominum” or “the gloomiest of men”. If that is an accurate indication of Tiberius’s personality, then perhaps Caligula’s early experiences were partly shaped by his uncle. Perhaps his paranoia and subsequent execution of Senators were derived from his experiences as a prisoner. The truth is, we may never know for sure.

Emperor Caligula continues to be a fascinating figure of study. Interest in the Emperor was recently sparked in January 17, 2011. There were reports that a site in Italy might have been the site of Emperor Caligula’s grave. Further excavations will be needed to prove this, but it does sound interesting!