When mad emperor Caligula declared war on the sea ... and then claimed he had defeated it

The reign of Emperor Caligula, which spanned from 37 to 41 AD, unfolded in a period of Roman history where the empire was still adjusting to the concept of a monarchical rule under the guise of a republic.

Following the death of his great-uncle and adoptive grandfather, Emperor Tiberius, Caligula ascended to the throne amidst a climate of optimism.

The public, weary of Tiberius' reclusive and paranoid rule, initially embraced Caligula's accession, hoping for a return to the more prosperous and open days of Augustus.

Caligula's early reign showed promise; he granted bonuses to the military, eliminated certain taxes, and released many who had been imprisoned unjustly under Tiberius.

However, this favorable beginning soon deteriorated. The year 37 AD marked the onset of a severe illness that some historians believe drastically changed Caligula's personality and governance style.

Upon recovery, his administration began to take on an increasingly despotic tone, marked by extravagant spending on gladiatorial games and architectural projects, alongside a growing ruthlessness against perceived enemies.

The Roman Senate, once the powerhouse of the Roman Republic, had seen its influence wane significantly under the Julio-Claudian emperors.

Caligula's relationship with the Senate was particularly strained; he is reported to have treated senators with contempt and cruelty, further eroding the already fragile relationship between the imperial power and the traditional republican governance structures.

Socially, Caligula's reign was a time of uncertainty and fear. His erratic behavior, including claims of divinity and the demand for public adulation as a god, was unheard of and unsettling for Roman society.

Such acts challenged both the Roman religious sensibilities and the traditional social order.

The emperor's seemingly unpredictable nature left the populace and the elite in a constant state of unease.

In 39 AD, Caligula embarked on a campaign to the northern frontier of the Roman Empire, ostensibly to launch a military campaign against the Germanic tribes.

This expedition was highly publicized and anticipated, as it was meant to emulate the conquests of his predecessors, Julius Caesar and Augustus, and solidify his reputation as a military leader.

Caligula ordered his troops to line up along the shore of the English Channel and, instead of directing them to engage an enemy army, commanded them to attack the sea.

This bizarre military exercise involved soldiers brandishing their swords and hurling spears into the waves, as if fighting an invisible enemy.

The culmination of this surreal display was when Caligula declared victory over the sea and ordered his men to collect seashells as spoils of war, which he later exhibited as evidence of his conquest.

The motivations behind Caligula's attack on the sea have been the subject of much speculation.

One prevailing theory is that it stemmed from Caligula's possible mental instability.

His erratic behavior, documented in various historical sources, suggests that he may have been suffering from a mental illness that affected his decision-making and perception of reality.

This theory is supported by accounts of his sudden mood swings, cruel punishments, and eccentric decrees.

However, there is caution in this approach, as diagnosing historical figures with modern medical knowledge is fraught with challenges.

Another interpretation posits that the attack was a calculated political maneuver designed to demonstrate his absolute power and humiliate the Roman military.

By forcing seasoned soldiers to partake in a seemingly absurd exercise, Caligula could have been asserting his dominance over the military, a critical institution in Roman politics.

This act could be seen as a message to both his supporters and detractors: that his authority was unchallengeable and that he could bend Rome's most respected institution to his will.

Some historians suggest that the attack might have had symbolic significance.

In this view, the act of "conquering" the sea could be interpreted as a metaphor for Caligula's divine aspirations or a theatrical display intended to reinforce his self-declared godlike status.

By claiming victory over the natural world, Caligula was elevating himself above the realm of ordinary mortals, further blurring the lines between emperor and deity in the Roman imperial cult.

An alternative explanation considers the possibility that Caligula's actions were a response to a thwarted actual military campaign.

Facing logistical challenges or potential mutiny, he might have redirected the mission towards the sea as a face-saving measure.

This interpretation paints Caligula as a more pragmatic leader, albeit one prone to unconventional solutions to political and military setbacks.

The primary sources on Caligula's reign, particularly the attack on the sea, come from a handful of Roman historians who wrote after his death.

The most notable among these are Suetonius and Cassius Dio, whose works provide the most detailed accounts of this event.

However, the reliability of these sources has been a topic of considerable debate among modern historians.

Suetonius, writing in "The Lives of the Twelve Caesars" around 121 AD, nearly 80 years after Caligula's death, provides a vivid and often sensationalized account of his reign.

He portrays Caligula as a tyrant driven by whims and madness, with the attack on the sea depicted as one of many examples of his irrational behavior.

Suetonius's narrative is compelling but is often criticized for its reliance on rumor and anecdote, raising questions about its accuracy and objectivity.

Cassius Dio, who wrote his "Roman History" in the early 3rd century AD, offers a slightly more restrained account than Suetonius, but still paints a picture of Caligula as an erratic and despotic ruler.

His portrayal of the attack on the sea similarly emphasizes the absurdity and futility of the act, suggesting it as a clear sign of Caligula's incompetence and madness.

There is a growing consensus that Caligula's portrayal as a mad tyrant in ancient sources may be exaggerated, influenced by the political agendas of the writers and the ruling class.

Both historians wrote their accounts well after Caligula's death and were part of a senatorial class that generally viewed him unfavorably, which may have colored their narratives.

Their works reflect the political and social biases of their time, particularly the Roman elite's disdain for what they saw as Caligula's disregard for traditional Roman values and institutions.

This event further strained Caligula's already tumultuous relationship with the Roman Senate and the military.

The Roman military, a respected and disciplined force, found itself partaking in what many viewed as a humiliating and nonsensical exercise.

This incident likely contributed to the growing resentment among the military ranks towards Caligula, eroding their loyalty to him.

The Roman Senate, which had already been uneasy with Caligula's erratic governance, found additional reason to question his judgement and intentions.

This event reinforced the perception of Caligula as an unpredictable and potentially unstable ruler, widening the rift between him and the traditional governing class.

Caligula's behavior, which challenged Roman religious and cultural norms, likely caused confusion and fear among the populace.

His claim of victory over the sea, a seemingly divine feat, could have been perceived as blasphemous or megalomaniacal, further alienating him from the Roman people.

His increasingly autocratic rule, marked by extravagance, cruelty, and erratic decisions, culminated in his assassination in 41 AD, just a year after the sea attack.

His assassination was orchestrated by members of the Praetorian Guard, with support from senators and other high-ranking officials.

This act of regicide was a direct response to the growing dissatisfaction with Caligula's rule and a desperate attempt to restore stability and traditional values to the Roman Empire.