The traditional view of the Roman emperor

Answer choices

1. A

   Weakens, if anything26% picked this

   There is less documentation of any sort from Caligula’s reign than from the reigns of most other Roman

   If Caligula was anomalous for providing us with less documentation than other emperors did, then it somewhat hurts the author's argument. Our author is thinking, "There's little documentation because his reign was unremarkable. There really weren't these cruel and insane deeds to document." But if we say, "Actually there's little documentation for some other reason; his reign in general is a blind spot when it comes to documentation" then the lack of documentation no longer works as a premise for the author's case.

   26%
2. B

   Weakens, if anything14% picked this

   People who have lived under someone regarded as a cruel tyrant are more likely to view that

   This starts to sound like the objection we were making: maybe it's "written by his enemies" because anyone living under the reign of a cruel and insane dude would be his enemy! Overall, this answer should seem like it's telling us very little more than common sense. People who are subjected to cruel overlord are more likely to have an unfavorable than favorable view of that person. It doesn't have anything to do specifically with Caligula, so it's not helping us to assess whether he was / wasn't a cruel and insane tyrant.

   14%
3. C

   Correct47% picked this

   The specific outrageous acts attributed to Caligula in Roman documentation are very similar to acts attributed in earlier writings to other rulers

   Why this is right

   Before I defend this answer, I want to acknowledge that I definitely didn't pick this, and when I found out it was correct it basically broke my heart. I believe I said stuff like, "I just don't get you anymore, LSAT." :) The idea behind this answer is that it adds some plausibility to the author's argument, by making it seem like the allegations of cruelty and insanity leveled against Caligula were just recycled fabrications that had been used on previous leaders. It's kind of like if parents who were nervous about TikTok recycled all the bad things people used to say about Facebook, which recycled all the bad things people used to say about video games, which recycled all the bad things people used to say about MTV. The idea is that when the same accusation is continually leveled against different things, it starts to lose credibility. If Megan keeps breaking up with people for the same reason: they "have a toxic energy", then maybe her friends start doubting that accusation and think the problem is really with Megan. What's supposed to make this answer sound "suspicious" is that the specific things attributed to Caligula were very similar to things attributed to other rules alleged to be cruel. If we hear that "Caligula used to rip the fingernails off his political opponents" it sounds scary. But if we find out that earlier writings accused previous rulers of being so cruel that they would "rip the fingernails off their political opponents", then it starts to sound less like an honest description and more like fear-mongering done by opponents. So, again, the intent of this answer is that it tries to make the specific allegations against Caligula sound more phony because it's unlikely that multiple cruel tyrants would engage in specific outrageous acts that were very similar. [face palm]

   Skill tested: Strengthen · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   47%
4. D

   Weakens, if anything7% picked this

   The little documentation that survives from Caligula’s reign indicates that the Roman people believed Caligula to be crueler than other emperors who

   The author has tried to devalue the legitimacy of the surviving evidence, saying that it's written by enemies. This answer makes Caligula sound crueler than other tyrants, so that goes in the opposite direction of the author's argument.

   7%
5. E

   No Impact6% picked this

   There is ample documentation of modern tyrants being responsible for outrageous acts worse than those

   If this answer referred to other ancient tyrants and said, "For these other tyrants, who are known to have been cruel, there was ample documentation", that would strengthen the argument. It would rule out the objection that we lack documentation, not because Caligula didn't do awful things, but because it's been a couple millennia so documentation is just hard to come by no matter what. Since this is instead about modern tyrants (who live in a world of smartphones and digital cameras and 24 hour news and the internet, etc), it's not really surprising that there's ample documentation.

   6%