Completely lacking in horse sense . . .

Former Clinton official Sidney Blumenthal has compared President Bush's new Homeland Security head Bernard Kerik (along with Condeleeza Rice and Alberto Gonzales) to Caligula's horse.

In line with other second-term cabinet appointments - Alberto Gonzales as attorney general, Condoleezza Rice as secretary of state - Kerik will be an enforcer, a loyalist and an incompetent. The resemblance is less to Inspector Clouseau or Chauncy Gardner than to Caligula's horse.
I have a few logical problems with this analogy. Let's take a look at Caligula's horse, named "Incitatus":
Caligula doted on his horse Incitatus most of all. It had a retinue of eighteen servants. Its diet consisted of oats mixed with gold flake, as well as a variety of meats, including mice, squid, mussels, and chicken. Not to mention wine. According to Suetonius, the emperor saw to it that Incitatus lived in perfect luxury: "Besides a stall of marble, a manger of ivory, purple blankets and a collar of precious stones, he even gave this horse a house."
While a political career for Incitatus was contemplated, it never happened.
Suetonius wrote also that Caligula supposedly wanted to make his horse a Consul.

The horse would also "invite" dignitaries to dine with him, and had a house with full complement of servants to entertain such guests.

(If interested, here are actual quotes from Suetonius and Dio Cassius.)

Clearly, Incitatus was more of a friendly, entertainment-oriented horse than a politically-oriented horse. There is no historical evidence whatsoever that Incitatus served as an "enforcer," and while horses are generally considered loyal, to call him a "loyalist and an incompetent" simultaneously seems a bit unfair. They don't go hand in hand; for example, Sidney Blumenthal could be said to have been a Clinton loyalist. Did this make him incompetent? No reason why it would.

And considering the sparseness of the Roman record, how does Sidney Blumenthal know for sure that Incitatus was either loyal or incompetent? Even attributing typical equine loyalty to him might be risky, for his appointment by Caligula as Consul (threatened but never carried out) was considered a supreme insult to the Senate. And who knows what sort of Consul he might have been? It calls for speculation.

Well, on reflection, I think it's probably a fair assumption that Incitatus would have been incompetent to serve as Consul. But then, Incitatus was a horse!

And where's the marble stable? The ivory manger? The purple blankets? The collar of precious stones? The oats with gold flake? And where's the teensiest bit of proof that President Bush feeds a single one of his officials mice?

What's with Sidney Blumenthal, anyway? Doesn't he do his homework?

Perhaps the idea was to compare Bush to Caligula. Again, the differences are too numerous to list. But for starters, George W. Bush is hardly known for abusing women. Caligula was. You'd think Mr. Blumenthal would display a little sensitivity about such things.

Tut tut.

posted by Eric on 12.09.04 at 02:02 PM





TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/1809






Comments

I've got to stop horsing around and try to think of a good comment, worthy of this post.

They keep saying Condoleezza Rice is incompetent. Who do they think would be competent -- Noam Chomsky?

Chomsky's good, but Ramsey Clark has more experience.

Eric Scheie   ·  December 16, 2004 09:03 AM


March 2007
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

ANCIENT (AND MODERN)
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR


Search the Site


E-mail




Classics To Go

Classical Values PDA Link



Archives




Recent Entries



Links



Site Credits