Edited by Lutz Doering and Sandra Gambetti. Special Issue of Journal of Ancient Judaism 8 : — Abstract Lollia Paulina, who was the granddaughter of Marcus Lollius and the sister-in-law of Decimus Valerius Asiaticus, married at first marriage Memmius Regulus, a legate in the service of power, before being forced to unite with Caligula.
Presumably at the end of the year 39, the imperial couple separated, the young woman could not get pregnant quickly. After her divorce from the emperor, Lollia Paulina was, once again, forced to respect the imperatives set by Caligula. Claudius' choice of privileging his niece to Lollia is less marked by rationality.
Indeed, the day after the death of Messaline, when she had been approached to become the new empress, she was finally ousted by Claudius, for the benefit of Agrippina for obscure reasons. The " deadly enemy of Lollia " , with the tacit consent of her uncle and new husband, fought against her to the point of exile, then murder.
Cicero's Speeches in Suetonius' Life of Caligula. Holy Hebrew Arithmetic. Was Jesus really thirty years of age when he became a Teacher-Priest? Not according to our modern way of thinking but certainly according to Hebrew arithmetic used in regnal years.
The Teacher took office at thirty and was the central Luke's gospel was written for and addressed to High Priest Theophilus, son of Annas. He was, says Luke, catechised by a Temple Teacher. He was in office during the entire reign of Emperor Gaius Caligula, who threatened the Jews and the Nazarenes with destruction and nearly succeeded. Luke 3 declares that Jesus began his work as he was 'beginning to be thirty'.
Thirty was the age of senior priestly functions, given in the Torah. Jesus was also anointed while the high priests of the time were not. What does this mean in a Hebrew context? Summary: Recent studies on Flavius Josephus emphasize a distance between the historiographer and the Flavian court as well as the Roman nobility. In view of these results, the analysis attends to the presentation of the Roman emperors in In view of these results, the analysis attends to the presentation of the Roman emperors in books 18 and 19 of the Antiquitates Iudaicae. Especially the assassination of Caligula seems to be strangely parenthetic and unconnected within the overall narration, leading one to seek links between ant.
Insbesondere das Attentat auf Caligula wirkt innerhalb des Werkes eingeschoben und unverbunden. Die Studie fragt nach der Verbindung von ant. Besides many other changes, Late Antiquity witnessed the upcoming of new forms of representing the past. The emergence of Christian chronicle writing from the beginning of the 4 th century AD onwards is one of the most prominent examples The emergence of Christian chronicle writing from the beginning of the 4 th century AD onwards is one of the most prominent examples of this development.
The so-called Chronographia of the Antiochene writer John Malalas is usually conceived as part of this genre. Written under Justinian 6 th century AD , it tells a year-long " world history " in 18 books from Adam to the author's own lifetime , melding Greek mythology with Old and New Testament narratives as well as Roman history.
More than half of the work is dedicated to the Roman Empire, focusing mainly on the emperors themselves, whose personal deeds in the provinces founding, building, restoring form the backbone of the narrative. In my paper, I want to trace back the traditions as well as the contemporaneous notions that contributed to shape this narrative through an exemplary analysis of the reigns of Caligula and Vespasian. Both sections of the chronicle show how strongly the perception of the early empire is shaped by Antiochene local memory as well as by reflections on prevailing problems and fears of the 6 th century, e.
Malalas's picture of the past highlights continuity and stability, both of which are guaranteed by the time-transcendent figure of the emperor: The ruler is shown time and again handling threats in an effective manner; he thereby models a local memorial landscape characterized by continuous destruction and recreation. Interview radio Caligula juin Camus' vision of the ancient world goes to the heart of understanding not only his Absurd literature but ultimately, I suggest, reveals a writer at a crossroads between Europe and Africa.
In the fifty years that have passed since Albert Camus' death he has become recognized as one of the most important figures in modern French literature.
Receiving his Nobel Prize in , he was asked in a Question and Answer session if he considered himself an existentialist. He replied I am not an existentialist, although of course critics are obliged to make categories. I got my first philosophical impressions from the Greeks, not from nineteenth century Germany. Camus represents a vitally important example of classical reception in two major ways.
CALIGULA | Quartier des spectacles
First, he sits at a confluence of European thought about Classics that reaches back as far as the Enlightenment. Ancient Greece held a particularly significant place in the French imagination, extending from the works of Voltaire and Chateaubriand through to Gide and Malraux. Camus' use of Greece plays a formative role in his interaction with this tradition. It also demonstrates the influence of Romantic literature on his work, present in his obsession with myth and his reverence of antique ruins. Equally, his use of Greece brought him in to contact with the contemporary resurgence of ancient mythology in the writings of Anouilh, Sartre, Cocteau and Giradoux.
Camus' literature exists at the juncture between modernity's uses of myth and the more traditional idealized and romanticized vision of Greece. His Greece was both a place of idealized beauty and cultural and artistic pre-eminence but also a theoretical construction that he used to illustrate his key philosophical and political arguments. The second context of major importance is Camus' Franco-Algerian identity.
In the literature of French Algeria there was a long tradition of using classical motifs both to justify colonialism and later to integrate the European and non-European populations. Camus' perspective on Greece and Rome was inevitably informed by these traditions. Camus was not only influenced by the literary traditions but also by propagandistic appropriations by Algerian colonialists and European Fascists. The example of Camus is instructive as he sits at a crossroads between Europe and Africa at a period of intense colonial activity. His interest in Classics tells us a great deal about how essential the discourse of classicism was to European imperialism.
It also raises larger questions about why an Algerian writer should identify so closely with Greek culture and what this says about the culture and society of the colonizers. This article will attempt to provide an introduction to thinking about Camus and the classical world, focusing on his Absurd works. Not only does this period contain perhaps his most explicit interactions with antiquity but they also demonstrate a key aspect of Camus' thought: the binary opposition between ancient Greece and ancient Rome.
Studying this opposition demonstrates not only how Camus was able to shape classical narratives to his own philosophy, but also how this fascination with antiquity was implicated in the intensely volatile period of its composition. The idea of Greece permeates Camus' writing. For Camus, Fascism and war had their roots in the modern alienation from the values of Greece. We have exiled beauty, the Greeks took up arms for her. It is the first difference, but a long-standing one. Greek thought was always founded on the idea of limits. It pushed nothing to the extreme, neither reason, nor religion, because it denied nothing, neither reason nor religion.
It gave everything its share, balancing shadows with light.
Our Europe on the contrary, embarking on the conquest of totality, is the daughter of excess. It denies beauty as it denies everything that it does not exalt. Narrow paths bordered by barbary and fig trees, olive, carob jujube trees. On these paths you meet men with brown faces and clean eyes, leading donkeys laden with olives … Greece?
No, Kablyia. And it is as if suddenly, across the centuries, the whole of Greece had suddenly been set down between the sea and the mountains, reborn in its ancient splendour. This direct contrast between Greece and Rome features in much of Camus' writing. For Camus, the term Caesar became a byword for tyrannical leadership, be it fascist or socialist. Importantly, Rome is always characterized by the rule of the Caesars, Greece as a democratic, free and peaceful state.
We are sorry...
Athens' military imperialism and the democracy of the Roman Republic receive no mention in Camus' work but this is less paradoxical than it may seem: his concepts were, after all, clearly not historical. Rather his selective understanding of the cultures of Greece and Rome demonstrates that they were ultimately both constructions of his own imagination. Considering this opposition gives a new and important context to the works for which Camus is perhaps best known: his Absurd cycle.
The Absurd works were composed in the late s and early 40s and mark the first major phase of Camus' literary career. Weyembergh describes the essay as fully accepting the landscape of Nietzschean thought, the total absence of god and the spectre of the nihilistic impulse. Camus' Le Mythe de Sisyphe deals with one of post-religious philosophy's most pressing questions: if one accepts the meaninglessness of existence, what is the justification for continuing to live? The essay begins there is only one philosophical problem that is truly serious, it is suicide.
Judging whether life is or is not is worth living is to answer the fundamental question of philosophy. Cursed to push a rock to the top of a mountain for eternity, a meaningless and unceasing endeavour, Sisyphus is a personification of the Absurd condition. Camus was interested specifically in the moment when Sisyphus is forced to watch the rock roll back down the mountain and unquestioningly follow it to begin his labour again.
It is during this return, this pause, that Sisyphus interests me … I see this man going back down with a heavy yet equal step towards the torment of which he will never know the end … in each of these instants, where he leaves the summits and sinks bit by bit towards the lair of the gods, he is superior to his destiny. He is stronger than his rock. One must imagine Sisyphus happy. Archambault has written a thorough study of Camus' classical sources, particularly the influence of Aeschylus, Homer, and Thucydides.
His most memorable pages on Sisyphus are almost entirely the product of school book sources. It is clear that Camus has incarnated a figure of Sisyphus quite differently from one we would recognize. He effectively inverts the traditional and familiar. Sisyphus becomes a model of eternal contentment rather than eternal suffering. This is a conscious attempt to defy expectations and to disrupt tradition.
Camus immediately decentres the myth, choosing not to focus, as previous artistic depictions have, on the moment of Sisyphus' agonizing struggle but rather on the moment when he walks down the mountain.
This moment is absent from most depictions yet he makes it his prime focus. In focussing on this normally assumed moment, Camus is interacting with the myth rather than simply retelling. Both the myth's focal point and its conclusion are inverted — and in this Camus mirrors the structure of his argument. We expect a miserable, eternally suffering Sisyphus so Camus presents us with an eternally satisfied one. Equally, despite the seemingly bleak and devastating conclusions of a meaningless universe, his argument demonstrates that happiness is possible, indeed natural.
Engagement and refutation of a traditional depiction of myth helps Camus reinforce his conclusions. He engages with and challenges expectations in order to strengthen his conclusion. Sisyphus is also an example of the function mythology has played in philosophical discourse. Greek mythology has become a symbol of philosophical discourse, a part of the vocabulary of European philosophy, from Nietzsche's Dionysus to Freud's Oedipus.
A larger discussion of this phenomenon would be impossible here, but clearly Camus was interacting with this tradition and attempting to engage with it in his own use of myth. Sisyphus also allowed Camus an unbridled freedom to follow the Absurd to a conclusion not bound by practical limitations. The essential malleability of mythology permits him to mould it to fit his philosophy. Perhaps at a deeper level, mythology can be seen as a mask behind which the writer can hide. For a work that rejects religious solutions, this sense of gravity and grandeur could not be achieved with the use of biblical figures generations of Christian philosophers had done before.
Again, Camus is intentionally interacting with this tradition and attempting to find a secular equivalent. Sisyphus is a martyr to the Absurd who teaches through his suffering. Of most significance is that Camus' positive example of how one can live with the burdens of the Absurd comes in the form of a Greek myth. Sisyphus is the most famous example of this but Camus used Greek mythology in this way in a number of essays. A reference in his notebooks demonstrates that the major movements in his thought were conceived around mythic themes: I.
The myth of Sisyphus Absurd — II. The myth of Prometheus revolt — III. The myth of Nemesis. Greek mythology was a vital part of Camus' intellectual expression. It is essential to note that in each of the cases above the myth is deployed as an affirmative and positive exemplar. The antidotes to modern problems are located in these ancient models. It cannot be considered an accident that the mythology chosen to embody these ideals is that of ancient Greece, a culture that Camus understood as containing the key to humanity's potential for happiness and virtue.
This impression is fundamentally strengthened when one considers the substantial departure from Sisyphus, which occurs in the Absurd work located in a culture Camus viewed as the antithesis of Greek virtue: ancient Rome. Caligula is the best known and most successful of Camus' plays. His first draft of the play was completed in but the final and much changed version was published in Caligula conversely has absolute power. This leads to the revolution of his subjects both against his tyrannical rule and against the eradication of meaning from their lives.
The play's first performances temporal proximity to the end of the Second World War has also led audiences to see in the figure of Caligula as a representation of the rise of the European dictator. Caligula is conceived in a similar mode to Le Mythe de Sisyphe in so far as once again Camus actively seeks to disrupt the familiar image of the Emperor and invert expectations.
Caligula is presented in the ancient historical accounts as an insane tyrant and it is this concept that most artistic interpretations of the Emperor have adhered to. Camus' Caligula is rather in the grip of the Absurd realization and following it to its ultimate and logical conclusion. And that is what I detest in him, that he knows what he wants'. This sense of consciously challenging the traditional portrayal of Caligula is heightened by Camus' use of notorious moments of tyrannical excess from Suetonius' chapter on the Emperor.
Bastien describes Caligula as the meeting of the absolute power of an individual with absolute powerlessness over the human condition. It can be seen broadly as a theatrical device, used by Camus to remove any practical limitations on an individual's response to the Absurd. Yet as with the case of Greece, the choice of Rome and its implications cannot be viewed as incidental or arbitrary but rather as central to Camus' literary intentions.
It remains important to recognize that Caligula's complex characterization must be located firmly in the context of Camus' reception of Rome. Caligula does not feel that he is a tyrant. When Scipio identifies him as one he responds: A tyrant is a man who sacrifices the nation to his ideas or to his ambition.
I have no ideas and I have nothing to aspire for in terms of honours and power. Caligula is both Emperor and Artist. His vision is to demonstrate the Absurd to his subjects with a vast performance of which murder is only a part. Within this there are a number of smaller performances and spectacles and his artistic talents are considerable. He dances, plays the part of Venus and is Scipio's equal in poetic composition.
Quartier des spectacles
Much as he denies his own tyranny, Caligula's actions still resemble those of a totalitarian ruler. Bastien comments on the anger and violence with which Caligula addresses to his subjects at times in the play. In all the Roman Empire, here am I, the only free man. Tomorrow, there will be catastrophe, and I will stop the catastrophe when it pleases me … After all, I do not have so many ways to prove that I am free. Caligula may be doing what he dreamed of doing and everything which is dreamed is happening. He is transforming his philosophy into corpses and, unfortunately for us, it is an uncontested philosophy.
No, Caligula is not dead, he is in each one of you. If you were given the power, if you had the courage, if you loved life, you would see this monster or this angel that you carry within you break loose. Camus specifically rejected a reading of the play that linked the figure of Caligula to the rise of the European dictatorships. In the choice of Rome as a setting, Camus includes a critique of a society that knowingly and willingly permitted absolute power to be granted to an individual.
In the play's early scenes the Patricians discuss how previously they have been successful in manipulating the young Emperor, who lacked the confidence to rule absolutely. This is presented as the political status quo that Caligula's Absurd realization disrupts. There is no sense of Caligula's power being atypical; it is only his exercise of it that creates discord. He can play the roles of artist, teacher, dictator, and god because his power allows him the absolute freedom to do so.
The most strikingly totalitarian aspect of Camus' play is not Caligula himself but rather the Roman world he occupies. Rome is presented as a world in which authoritarian leadership has always been the accepted form of government. Sisyphus recognizes and embraces the absurdity of existence yet sees a way to live with this knowledge. Caligula focuses on the crushing lack of meaning the Absurd represents yet he is not presented as being wrong. He is lucid about the constraints of the human condition rather refusing to face them.