|
|
Post by phludowin on Jun 30, 2018 7:31:16 GMT
I wasn't comparing Caligula to Christ. I was comparing Caligula's behaviours to Christian behaviours. The subject of this thread is Caligula's insanity. In my opinion a person should only be considered crazy if diagnosed as such, by psychological professionals. Psychology as a science did not exist in Caligula's time, and all the author of the article in the OP did was list behaviours they considered weird. All I did was compare it to Christian behaviours I consider weird. It's possible that Caligula was crazy, but just listing a few quirks and horrible deeds which Caligula may or may not have committed is not enough to establish his craziness. At least that's my opinion. Then why did the Romans dump him? He could have gone on for twenty years like Tiberius did, if he were only evil and not crazy. I don't know. I'm not a historian. But other rulers were in office for shorter times and are not considered crazy. It is possible that Caligula was simply caught in a struggle for power, that he was trying to implement measures against his senior officers, and that they wanted him gone, and in order to justify removing him they made up stories about him. Or it is possible that he really was crazy, and a danger to Rome. I don't know; but I know that history is written by the winners.
|
|