Would caligula be considered a lolcow in today's standard? - and other historical lolcows..

[soy_king]

Much like the phrase "Nero fiddled whilst Rome burned" shows a bias against him because fiddles didn't even exist then. settle down Master Miller

The fiddling isn't part of the story. They said he played the lyre while Rome burned

 

[pedoguyguykrai]

King of Bithynia, actually. And it almost certainly wasn't true. Mudslinging was the great Roman political pastime in the days of the late Republic, and every single politician was routinely accused of being receptive homosexuals, corrupt, incestuous, and of being literal shit eaters.

its not gay unless your the one being buttfucked then its gay.

 

[glass_houses]

its not gay unless your the one being buttfucked then its gay.

It's only gay if your balls touch.

 

[Karl der Grosse]

The fiddling isn't part of the story. They said he played the lyre while Rome burned

That, too, wasn't part of the story until the Flavians inserted it to emphasize how far from Roman masculine ideals Nero had fallen. The original stories mention that he recited an ancient epic Greek poem (now lost) about the sack of Troy while wearing a stage costume. Well, Suetonius and Cassius Dio did. Tacitus states that he was in Actium when the fire started and quickly returned and enacted efficient and far-reaching relief measures.

I personally think Nero had nothing to do with the Great Fire starting. Rome was a tinderbox at the time, with most structures very vulnerable to fire and very little stopping a fire from rapidly spreading. Afterwards, more strict common-sense building regulations were instituted to minimize the risk of fire. I'm not alone in thinking this. Tacitus didn't think Nero was involved, and I find Tacitus to be a clearer and more reliable historian about Nero's reign. There were other sources that said the same, according to Tacitus, but none of those writings survived to the modern age. Josephus wrote that the hostile books written against Nero were clearly written by biased men who hated him, and were full of lies.

 

[soy_king]

That, too, wasn't part of the story until the Flavians inserted it to emphasize how far from Roman masculine ideals Nero had fallen. The original stories mention that he recited an ancient epic Greek poem (now lost) about the sack of Troy while wearing a stage costume. Well, Suetonius and Cassius Dio did. Tacitus states that he was in Actium when the fire started and quickly returned and enacted efficient and far-reaching relief measures.

I personally think Nero had nothing to do with the Great Fire starting. Rome was a tinderbox at the time, with most structures very vulnerable to fire and very little stopping a fire from rapidly spreading. Afterwards, more strict common-sense building regulations were instituted to minimize the risk of fire. I'm not alone in thinking this. Tacitus didn't think Nero was involved, and I find Tacitus to be a clearer and more reliable historian about Nero's reign. There were other sources that said the same, according to Tacitus, but none of those writings survived to the modern age. Josephus wrote that the hostile books written against Nero were clearly written by biased men who hated him, and were full of lies.

I don't either, but he did incur a ridiculous amount of debt, engaged in degenerate behavior, and appropriated a massive chunk of prime Roman real estate to build himself a ludicrously opulent pleasure palace. He was no Elagabalus or Caracalla, but he was also no Marcus Aurelius or Augustus.

 

[Kamiii]

L

So I'm bored and watching some historical documentaries, on my day off, and It occured to me as I watching a documentary on caligula, he could probably not only be insane, but a lolcow of his day.
As to why:

1. He had an incestous relationship with his sister to the point he lmao when she died he made her an official roman godess.
2. he married a pregnant woman and named the baby from that after his sister
3. he had a long standing war with posiden god of the sea.
4. he was a degenerate.

but idk, if it where the times, idk could he be a lolcow if such an indivdual existed in modern times?
also what other historical figures would be considered lolcows or fit the lolcow definition?

Lolcows wish they were as badass as Caligula

 

[dirtydeanna96]

Look how he treated Incitatus. Caligula would be a brony today, like Jin.

 

[07.]

Was that the one that made his horse a senator?

This anecdote is often told yet never is the context given.
Caligula made his horse a senator to thumb his nose at the Senate and dare them to contest him, which they didn't. You see most of them knew of Caligula since his father called him "little boots" at the battlefield thus didn't take him serious.

 

[Rusty Crab]

This anecdote is often told yet never is the context given.
Caligula made his horse a senator to thumb his nose at the Senate and dare them to contest him, which they didn't. You see most of them knew of Caligula since his father called him "little boots" at the battlefield thus didn't take him serious.

Ye. I trust historians about as much as I trust CNN anymore. Still amusing though.

 

[downwardspiral]

And how do we know what sort of a person Caligula really was, if our only sources are from biased individuals?

he made the senate mad. the senate were scum. ergo caligula was good