|
|
Author's Note
Basic Bibliography
Appendix #1 - The Origin of the Word Pornography
Appendix #2 - Discrepancies between Ancient and Modern Calendar
Chapter Three - Messalina and the Gladiators
Chapter Thirteen - Agrippinilla and Uncle Claudius
AUTHOR'S NOTE
Before you'll start getting involved with my novel, I want you to know that I wrote LADY CALIGULA with the specific purpose to offer my readers an exciting account of a thrilling period of history yet unaffected by Christian morals.
The monotheistic religion that pervades modern times, influencing every aspect of human lives, simply didn't exist in any shape or form in the times of Caligula. No one was brandishing the Bible screaming against "sin" in the name of a single God because neither the Bible, nor "sin", nor a single God existed in the polytheistic religions and mythology of the Greco-Roman World.
The idea of "guilt" was unknown; "repentance" absolutely unnecessary. No "divine commandment" was known outside a small minority of Hebrew people living in a remote corner of the huge Roman Empire. The hundreds cultures thriving under the Pax Romana (Roman Peace) enjoyed hundreds of different and very imaginative religions. Everyone was free to chose one or the other God or Goddesses or even all of them if they so preferred. No religion was considered to be superior to any of the others.
In the time of Emperor Caligula, giant steps in the creation of Western civilization had already been taken starting 3,000 years before him by great rulers and people, from Sumer to Egypt, from Babylon to Persia, from Greece to Rome. They built fantastic monuments, cities, roads, bridges and canals, wrote superb poetry, made unparalleled works of art in all the domains of the Muses, initiated all basic laws, commerce, guilds and political institutions which are at the core of Modern Age, conquered nations and organized societies without any necessity of any single God, nor of any particular "divine commandment".
Now pay full attention to the following:
In Classical Times Sex Was Not A Sin!
The notion that "Sex for Pleasure" is Sinful, Evil, Bad, Wrong and Immoral was totally unknown! No preacher or teacher or parent was angrily attacking children or adults telling them to control their sexual impulses! People would have laughed at this foolish notion!
Like most people living during these times, Romans began having sex at a very young age for they developed earlier than modern children. Sometimes they did it with siblings or with relatives or quite openly during banquets, or even with animals.
Their fantasies were populated by a plethora of Gods, demi-gods, heroes, nymphs, satyrs and sorceresses who explored all kinds of sexual luxuries with utter abandon.
The legendary antics of these mythological characters were available in written form for anyone to read without restrictions. Paintings, frescoes, statues, objects, comedies, depicting full female nudity, phalluses, erected penises and explicit sex acts were everywhere to see.
The word "pornography" didn't exist. It had no reason to exist since there was no difference between art portraying sexual events and other forms of art. Art was art, period. If you want to know how, when and why the word "pornography" was invented in modern times, read my short essay in the Appendix #1.
Prostitution was highly respected. It had quite often religious connotation, or motives related to education, sensual awareness, improvement, loveliness and natural desires. The Roman Prostitutes' Guild received funds from rich, enlightened patrons and from the State in order to train newcomers in the arts of sex.
Extra-marital affairs were common practice. They didn't provoke serious consequences besides the spontaneous--sometimes violent--jealousy which humans and animals feel when they fear that the object of their lust could be taken from them by their rivals. Adultery was a problem with married women only if they became pregnant ("adulterated") with the semen of a man other than her husband's. In this case a bill of divorce was usually presented by the husband to the wife (mostly upon her own request) and that was enough to solve the problem.
Egyptian contraceptive devices made with extracts of acacia plants (still used today to manufacture spermicide) and Greek olive-oil-based pregnancy-preventing ointments were suggested by physicians and even by Aristotle, the widely-esteemed Greek philosopher and naturalist. So-called venereal diseases were virtually unknown. Syphilis was imported to Europe after Columbus discovered the Americas 1500 years after Caligula.
Abortion was extensively practiced and available to women of all ages. Virginity was required only for young girls dedicated from infancy to the Roman cult of Vesta--the patroness of the sacred fire. But since there were only six Vestals at any given time, and their chastity obligation ceased after thirty years, virginity was the exception rather than the rule.
Defloration was customarily provided for in early age by mothers or midwives, mostly through careful insertion of phallic objects, in order to free the girls from what was seen as an embarrassing inadequacy.
Because everyone was free to have sex without anybody proclaiming it was wrong, evil, etcetera, there was no need for sexual violence and crimes such as rape, sexual tortures or the serial murders of women were virtually unknown.
* * *
Members click on pic to enjoy original
|
Under these factual, historical circumstances, should I really deprive my readers from the truth? Should I do like some great modern authors of Roman-based novels such as Robert Graves (*1) and Colleen McCullough (*2) who despite their remarkable historical erudition and literary style, cannot avoid but presenting ancient Roman characters as if they were thinking and acting according to, or in comparison with, Christian restrictive sexual values which were obviously unknown in the periods the two authors are so vividly describing?
I would never do that. That would betray the spirit of the times and my own beliefs if I would hide behind innuendos, suggestions, clever phrasing or blatantly lie to conform my characters with today's moralistic views. It would be absurd and fraudulent to picture the Ancient World as if someone thought that there was something wrong with sex.
Consequently, my descriptions of sexual events are explicit.
If you're attracted by Roman times and characters but you are incapable of reading accurate reports on their irrepressible sexual mores and behavior because of your personal beliefs, do not read LADY CALIGULA, but read the wonderful novels of the authors I've mentioned before. They're politely censored and conformed to current morality.
If you are daring and mature enough to read my novel, do not compare your morals with those of my characters. My narration is not intended to change your beliefs, and I'm in no way recommending that you emulate any of my characters' sexual behavior.
If you strongly believe that having sex for pleasure is a sin, you may be offended by my candor and my sexually arousing prose. In this case I sincerely suggest that you don't buy this book and stop reading this note or any page of LADY CALIGULA right now.
* * *
LADY CALIGULA is not a novel about history. Which means that I do not get involved in boring, didactic style interpretations or theories adopted by historians, whose goal is research and not story-telling.
Nevertheless, I want you to feel comfortable with the historical references and genealogical connections which lay at the foundation of my tale. They are as accurate as they can be when it comes to basic facts recorded by historians of the past. Yet, too many original documents have been lost, or hidden, or deliberately destroyed, and too many gaps have been filled with implausible interpretations.
Therefore, I've resorted to my university studies of Roman law, to my life-long passion for Roman history, politics, mythology and mores, and to my vast research on the characters, conflicts, geography and heroes of pre-Christian Rome, in order to dispute what doesn't make sense in the accounts and literature of the official scholars of recent times.
In particular, Caligula has always stirred up controversy. Misrepresentations of his life as Emperor are abundant despite the lack of any sources contemporary with his 4-year-long reign or with the years and decades immediately thereafter.
Long time ago, when I started to read about him, I was amazed! Most scholars and novelists were bashing the young man, calling him a "monster," a "madman," and other epithets, yet all what they knew of Caligula had been handed down by two --I repeat two--highly unreliable, scandal-monger Roman historians (Suetonius and Dio Cassius) who wrote about Caligula 60-to-180 years after his death! And the more I read between the lines, the more I understood the origin of all that animosity.
Yes... the same visceral envy, and jealousy and self-righteousness, the same hateful moralism which covers with lies and slander all the rebels who fought throughout history against the "champions of the status-quo" were concentrated upon Caligula.
In part it was coming from the boni a.k.a. the "optimates" or "the good ones"--the Roman right-wing faction founded by the infamous Cato the Censor some two centuries before Caligula and later responsible for the assassination of Julius Caesar. In part it was also coming from the Christian "moralizers" of the Middle Ages who were used to torture and kill anyone who didn't conform with their morality, and was duly reported by their lackeys down to our times.
They all heaped heinous dislike over the Roman Emperor whose impudent, deliberate, and extravagant life-style and self-assured revolutionary government, was threatening the old rules of the stiff, male-dominated Roman society, and the conspiratorial politics of the Senate.
A few liberal 20th-century historians such as my favorite Antony A. Barrett (*3) rejected as untrue and exaggerated the numerous laughable stories about Caligula but even the conservatives ones agree that the works of the two authors--Suetonius and Dio Cassius--are stuffed with rumors and innuendos.
According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, the account given in Suetonius' De Vita Caesarum (*4)--I quote--"it's seasoned with gossips and characteristic anecdote without exhaustive inquiry into their authenticity," and Dio Cassius' Romanika (*5)--I quote--"it's certainly not remarkable for impartiality or critical historical faculty."
However, the defamation perpetrated by Suetonius and Dio Cassius was reiterated in various forms by most other historians--ancient and modern--creating around Caligula a world of monstrosities and evil. But here is the question you should ask me: "What made you, Lasse Braun, think that the young ruler of Rome was a courageous, determined, significant Emperor who in his brief reign influenced and invoked such passions in his contemporaries the way that you describe in your novel?"
The only reliable source on Caligula's life and legacy would have been the famous and highly reliable Roman historian Publius Cornelius Tacitus who also wrote about Caligula more than 70 years after his death. Did Tacitus' painstaking care for historical authenticity shed a different light on the life of our friend "Cal"?
This is how I made up my mind by default. Pay attention to the facts stated and use your imagination....
In Tacitus' Annales (*6) the books from VI to X--precisely the five books dealing with Caligula--have been "lost"! This whole work was composed by 16 books and dealt exclusively with the reigns of the Julio-Claudian Emperors after Augustus--Tiberius, 23 years; Caligula, 4 years; Claudius, 12 years; Nero, 14 years.
Considering that the first five books are dedicated to a huge number of major military campaigns and events of Tiberius' 23-year reign, and that the last six-to-seven books cover the 26 years dealing with the accomplishments of Claudius, conqueror of Britannia, and with Nero's amazing life and politics, I've often asked myself: "Why did such a serious historian as Tacitus dedicate five books to the mere 4-year-long reign of Caligula?"
And why did "these" books disappear? Why "these" and not the others? Isn't this coincidence extremely suspicious?
By what we know from Suetonius, Caligula was a madman with a penchant for foolish enterprises. According to Dio Cassius this Emperor didn't conquer any land and just made a brief appearance with a huge Army of 250,000 soldiers (!) on the Roman south side of the British Channel with the intention to cross those turbulent waters and march with his Legions on Britannian soil, but finally he changed idea and went back to Rome.
So...? What else did Tacitus wrote of such a few "uneventful" years in so many books of his Annales? Well, here is where I usually quote Albert Einstein: "Imagination is more important than knowledge."
No one would ever convince me that Tacitus' books disappeared just by coincidence. And no one would ever tell me that by devoting to the short reign of Caligula the same number of books he dedicated to the eventful 5-times-longer reigns of the other Julio-Claudian Emperors, all what Tacitus had to say about Caligula was to report the same ridiculous anecdotes as his contemporary Suetonius. Would you believe that?
* * *
In my novel, I offer my interpretation of Caligula's first 12 months as Emperor of Rome along with an Epilogue which summarizes the historical events which were set in motion during these 12 months of his reign. In this context, I've especially explored the conflict between the brilliant, libertarian Julian prince who became Emperor of Rome at age twenty four, and the boni--the opponents of his revolutionary policies--who were livid with jealousy for his personal success with the people of Rome. As usual they were conspiring to assassinate the great men in order to boost their own insignificance. We'll see how Caligula is going to deal with them.
Historical characters such as his beloved sister, the splendid redhead Drusilla (age 19); their younger sisters Lesbia (age 13) and Agrippinilla (age 14); their stammering uncle Claudius (age 47); their cousin, the sensational Valeria Messalina (age 17), are all involved directly or indirectly with the erotic/political scenery of my novel.
The life-long unsinkable friendship between Caligula and the Hebrew prince Herod Agrippa (age 47), grandson of Herod the Great; the dance of the Seven Veils of Agrippa's niece, the princess Salome (age 21); the uneasy political relationship between the Emperor and his Chief of Staff Naevius Sutorius Macro (age 35) and the sensual affair of Caligula with Macro's wife Ennia Sabina (age 25), are all reported by most historians as well. All these characters are playing their roles according to their correct age (sometime different from what commonly assumed,) physical feature, applicable mores and imaginative frolics.
Secondary characters such as Messalina's parents Domitia Lepida and Valerius Messalla Barbatus, her grandmother Antonia Maior (daughter of Mark Antony and Augustus' sister Octavia,) her uncle G. Domitius Ahenobarbus (Antonia's son and alleged father of future Emperor Nero,) are also part of Julio-Claudian history. On Servius Sulpicius Galba, Roman Army general and future Emperor after Nero, I took literary license by moving him to the command of Roman Legions stationed along the German Frontier two years earlier than what is generally recognized.
As for Lady Caligula herself I've related her with Livia Orestilla, a young woman who got married to Caligula in the time my story begins. I admit having stretched history by making her a leading character despite the fact that, even though she is named in the history books, her life and personality are not defined by any historian and remain undoubtedly mysterious. So, I've filled this gap with a good deal of imagination by making "Livia Orestilla" the Roman name of a young Britannian princess. You'll see about that.
The dates of all the events are basically accurate for as much as historical dates of antiquity can be. My considerations about the discrepancies between Roman and Christian calendar years are included in the Appendix #2.
Since LADY CALIGULA contains a number of sexual adventures purposely written with no respect for modern academic morality, I expect the same criticism Caligula received from the boni moralists of his times. However, if someone is going to tell you that my historical dates or the age of certain characters are inaccurate be sure that... I know ALL the historical dates that are reported in the history books. The problem is that sometimes I do not agree with them and--believe me--no academic will ever be able to prove me wrong!
* * *
At last, I want to say a few words about my English/American language and about some literary licenses I took for the sake of clarity.
In order to give LADY CALIGULA a certain flavor of Latin antiquity I've used syntactic constructions and linguistic approach of my native French and Italian languages. Meanwhile, as I also needed to make my English attractive to young people, I've used some modern nicknames and words such as "Okay!" "No way!" "Berserk!" "No kidding!" "Cool!" etcetera, which could sound strange in the mouth of ancient Romans.
The use of such words, along with descriptions of seemingly modern nude-look fashion, stiletto boots and lacy underwear, should suggest that I've been deliberately allowing glimpses of current jargon to spark into Roman times in order to emphasize some obvious correlations between my story and contemporary American politics and morality which is an essential aspect of my novel.
To balance these modern licenses I've used various Latin terms to keep the reader anchored to classical times but I've put the translations between parenthesis right after the Latin words (instead to place them at the base of the page) for I think it's better to read their meaning right away even if sometimes it slows down the rhythm of reading. An in-depth explaination of the most unusual terms can be found in my GLOSSARY at the end of the novel.
In this context, you'll notice that I'm using original Roman numerals to define the various years (followed by translation in today's calendar years) and I'm making extensive use of Roman day dating such as the Calends (the 1st day of the month;) the Nonae (a flexible date between the fifth and the seventh day of the month which I've arbitrarily fixed on the 9th day of the month since Nonae sounds quite like Ninth;) and the Ides (well-known even in modern times as the 15th day of the month.)
Among other linguistic characteristics, note that I'm using the adjective "Britannian" instead of Britannic or British, since I feel that people or items from Roman-time Britannia should be referred to as "Britannian" in order to sound more ancient than modern British people who are quite different than native "Britannians."
I've been taking another literary license with the use of "hours" and "minutes" as if such modern entities existed in the Greco-Roman age--which they didn't. But it would have been really difficult to use Roman hours, constantly explaining their length in comparison to modern hours, and to convey a sense of time to modern readers without using minutes. I've somehow reduced the impact of modern hours and minutes by using as few "minutes" as possible and by mentioning "hours" as before or after dawn or noon or sunset as they were indicated by ancient Romans.
Perhaps you'll also be intrigued by the fact that I never use the words "romantic" or "romance". Even though LADY CALIGULA is also a novel about love, and these words (romantic and romance) sound pretty Roman, they came into existence more than 1000 years after Caligula in Provence (former Roman Province of Southern France.) They convey a feeling of courteous love which today sounds to me not only disgustingly overused for censorship purposes but deprived from the physical tension and the transgressive meaning of "real love" which requires for people to overwhelm each other and totally possess each other bodies, minds and souls with no respect for conventional mores and no desire for commitment or social approval.
Lasse Braun / October, 1999.
|
TOP
Author's Note
Basic Bibliography
Appendix #1 - The Origin of the Word Pornography
Appendix #2 - Discrepancies between Ancient and Modern Calendar
Chapter Three - Messalina and the Gladiators
Chapter Thirteen - Agrippinilla and Uncle Claudius
Chapter Twenty One - Dialogue between Caligula and Drusilla
| Handsome, tall, blond, fair skinned, Caligula
was a Roman patrician of the highest lineage,
the Julian family. The latter traced its origin
to the Goddess Venus and to the Trojan prince
Aeneas, who escaped the destruction of his city
a thousand years before Caligula was born.
Aeneas took refuge in present-day Latium,
the region of Central Italy where Rome was
later built. His son Julus became a big king
and the founder of the Julian family. Among
Caligula's direct ancestors were no less than
Julius Caesar, the greatest and most beloved
of all Romans, conqueror of Gaul, dictator of
Rome, supreme womanizer; and Julius Caesar's
nephew Octavian, who became the first Emperor
of the Roman Empire with the name Caesar
Augustus. | |
The animosity against Caligula is due to his
overt disregard for traditional, male-dominated
Roman mores and for the liberal reforms he
initiated in contrast with the moralistic public
proclamations of his great-grandfather Augustus.
The latter, a great Emperor and administrator,
reigned for more than 40 years over Rome,
"turning a city of bricks into a city of marbles."
Caligula's revolutionary policy made deadly
enemies among the conservative party during
his lifetime, while his private and public sexual
ventures gave plenty of opportunity for slander
to the self-appointed clergymen who concocted
the Christian religion about 300 years after
Caligula, and to all later historians working
in support of Christian propaganda.
|
| BASIC BIBLIOGRAPHY |
(*1) Robert Graves:
(*2) Colleen McCullough:
(*3) Antony A. Barrett
(*4) Suetonius
(*5) Dio Cassius
(*6) Tacitus
Reay Tannahill
Joan Oates
Arther Ferrill |
"I Claudius"
"Claudius the God"
Vintage International, New York 1934.
"The First Man in Rome"
"The Grass Crown"
"Fortune's Favorites"
"Caesar's Women"
"Caesar"
Avon Books, New York 1992-1997.
"Caligula, The Corruption of Power"
Yale University Press,
New Heaven 1990.
"The Lives of the Caesars"
Written in Latin around 100 CE.
"Romanika" / 80 books.
Written in Greek around 210 CE.
"Annals"
16 books‹minus 5 books missing.
Written in Latin around 110 CE.
"Sex in History"
Scaraborough House, 1992
"Babylon"
Thames & Hudson, London, 1979
"Caligula, Emperor of Rome"
Thames & Hudson, London, 1991
|
|
