02-09-2011, 11:43 AM
I guess “older” and “newer” historians are relative. Gibbon used Caligula, as did Mommsen (at least, in my translation).
Speaking of translations, it looks like we should be careful with Seutonius. I checked Loeb and saw both names used. Curious, I looked at the Latin text and it appears as if Caligula isn’t used at all, except to explain the nickname.
Just glancing through my bookshelf, I see biographer Michael Grant used Gaius in the 1980s, but Adrian Goldsworthy used Caligula in the 2000s, bolstering Duncan’s impression.
Perhaps there is no consensus.
Which name do you prefer? I think I’ve always preferred Caligula, simply because Gaius was such a common name.
Speaking of translations, it looks like we should be careful with Seutonius. I checked Loeb and saw both names used. Curious, I looked at the Latin text and it appears as if Caligula isn’t used at all, except to explain the nickname.
Just glancing through my bookshelf, I see biographer Michael Grant used Gaius in the 1980s, but Adrian Goldsworthy used Caligula in the 2000s, bolstering Duncan’s impression.
Perhaps there is no consensus.
Which name do you prefer? I think I’ve always preferred Caligula, simply because Gaius was such a common name.
David J. Cord
www.davidcord.com
www.davidcord.com
