The entire thing was invented by the author of the 'Augustan History', who gives the game away, probably intentionally, when he writes that the tale was spread by men who were marginalised at court because of their small penises (don’t worry, we will come back to the importance of cock size in politics). [loc. 2403]
The emperor known as Heliogabalus -- perhaps best known from Alma-Tadema's The Roses of Heliogabalus, depicting the Emperor watching with lazy amusement as his dinner guests are smothered in petals -- was a Syrian teenager, propelled to Rome and the purple by his grandmother. He'd been a priest of a local sun god, Elegabal, for some years, and brought his god (in the form of a black stone) to Rome, where Elegabal displaced Jupiter and was worshipped, under duress, by respectable Romans. Heliogabalus married several women, including the Vestal Virgin Aquilia Severa (indeed, he married her twice); he also made no secret of his desire for well-endowed men, several of whom he appointed to various powerful positions. After less than four years, the Praetorian Guard murdered Heliogabalus and his mother: their bodies were desecrated and thrown into the Tiber.
Harry Sidebottom has managed to write a boring book about Heliogabalus. To be fair, there is very little reliable evidence for his reign. The 'Augustan History', which makes much of his depravity, is pretty much a work of fiction; Cassius Dio is more credible but was writing of the recent past, and employed by the new regime. Sidebottom spends more time on the context of Heliogabalus' rise to power -- civil wars, the political situation, the role of the Emperor -- than on Heliogabalus himself. He's also keen to argue with other writers and historians, ancient and modern: he's not at all impressed by 'modern scholars' (a phrase which occurs 26 times in the book) though he names no names. ('the idea can be dismissed straight away ... it is a mystery why some modern scholars have supported the idea ... knowing better than the ancients ... orientalism ... despite much bad modern history ...)
I found Sidebottom's analysis of Alma-Tadema's painting fascinating. I didn't take to his rather staccato prose style ('Sex in ancient Rome was one big orgy, where you could do anything with anyone. So modern popular culture likes to imagine. Absolutely not, says an eminent French scholar. Pas du tout.'). And I would have liked more footnotes. Fascinating subject, but given the dearth of reliable historical evidence I actually think I'd prefer to read a novel about Heliogabalus, rather than an account like this.
I am, disappointingly, unable to fit this to any rubric of the Annual Non-Fiction Reading Challenge.
No comments:
Post a Comment