Editing Elagabalus (section)

== Sources ==

===Cassius Dio===
[[File:INC-2961-a Ауреус. Элагабал. Ок. 218—219 гг. (аверс).png|thumb|An ''[[Aureus]]'' of Elagabalus, marked: {{Smallcaps|{{abbr|imp·caes·|IMPERATOR CAESAR}} {{abbr|m·aur·|MARCUS AURELIUS}} antoninus {{abbr|aug·|AUGUSTUS}}}}]]
The historian [[Cassius Dio]], who lived from the second half of the second century until sometime after 229, wrote a contemporary account of Elagabalus. Born into a [[Patrician (ancient Rome)|patrician]] family, Dio spent the greater part of his life in public service. He was a senator under emperor [[Commodus]] and governor of [[Smyrna]] after the death of [[Septimius Severus]], and then he served as suffect consul around 205, and as proconsul in [[Africa province|Africa]] and [[Pannonia]].{{sfn|Dio|loc=Book 80.18}}

Dio's ''Roman History'' spans nearly a [[millennium]], from the arrival of [[Aeneas]] in Italy until the year 229. His contemporaneous account of Elagabalus's reign is generally considered more reliable than the ''Augustan History'' or other accounts for this general time period,<ref>Maggie L. Popkin, ''The Architecture of the Roman Triumph'' (2016), p. 170: "[of] Cassius Dio, Herodian, and the ''Historian Augusta''[,] Dio is generally considered our most reliable source for this period [the Severan era]"</ref><ref>Martin M. Winkler, ''The Fall of the Roman Empire: Film and History'' (2012), p. 63: "Dio, a close contemporary [of Aurelius] and generally considered the most reliable source for his own time"</ref> though by his own admission Dio spent the greater part of the relevant period outside of Rome and had to rely on second-hand information.{{sfn|Dio|loc=Book 80.18}}

Furthermore, the political climate in the aftermath of Elagabalus's reign, as well as Dio's own position within the government of Severus Alexander, who held him in high esteem and made him consul again, likely influenced the truth of this part of his history for the worse. Dio regularly refers to Elagabalus as [[Sardanapalus]], partly to distinguish him from his divine namesake,{{sfn|Dio|loc=Book 80.11–12}} but chiefly to do his part in maintaining the ''[[damnatio memoriae]]'' and to associate him with another autocrat notorious for a dissolute life.{{sfn|Syme|1971|pp=145–146}}

Historian Clare Rowan calls Dio's account a mixture of reliable information and "literary exaggeration", noting that Elagabalus's marriages and time as consul are confirmed by numismatic and epigraphic records.{{sfn|Rowan|2012|p=169}} In other instances, Dio's account is inaccurate, such as when he says Elagabalus appointed entirely unqualified officials and that Comazon had no military experience before being named to head the Praetorian Guard,{{sfn|Dio|loc=[https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius_Dio/80*.html#79-4 book 80.4]}} when in fact Comazon had commanded the Third Legion.{{sfn|Southern|2003|p=301}}{{sfn|Icks|2011|p=20}} Dio also gives different accounts in different places of when and by whom Diadumenian (whose forces Elagabalus fought) was given imperial names and titles.{{sfn|Scott|2018|p=62}} Martin Icks has written that "It is clear that Dio was not attempting an accurate portrayal of the emperor", an assessment endorsed by Josiah Osgood, who described it as "put[ting] it mildly".<ref name=":0" />

=== Herodian ===
[[File:INC-1854-r Ауреус Элагабал ок. 218-219 гг. (реверс).png|thumb|Reverse of an ''aureus'' of Elagabalus, marked:{{Break}}{{Smallcaps|fides exercitus}} ("''the Faith of the Army''")]]
Another contemporary of Elagabalus was [[Herodian]], a minor Roman civil servant who lived from {{circa|170}} until 240. His work, ''History of the Roman Empire since Marcus Aurelius'', commonly abbreviated as ''Roman History'', is an eyewitness account of the reign of [[Commodus]] until the beginning of the reign of [[Gordian III]]. His work largely overlaps with Dio's own ''Roman History'', and the texts, written independently of each other, agree more often than not about Elagabalus and his short but eventful reign.{{sfn|Herodian}} Herodian may have used Dio's work as a source for parts of his account about Elagabalus.<ref name=":0" />

Arrizabalaga writes that Herodian is in most ways "less detailed and punctilious than Dio",<ref>Leonardo de Arrizabalaga y Prado, ''Varian Studies Volume One: Varius'' (2017), p. 131</ref> and he is deemed less reliable by many modern scholars, though Rowan considers his account of Elagabalus's reign more reliable than Dio's{{sfn|Rowan|2012|p=169}} and Herodian's lack of literary and scholarly pretensions are considered to make him less biased than senatorial historians.<ref>{{harvtxt|Sorek|2012|p=202}}: "Modern scholars have regarded Herodian as unreliable. However, [...] his lack of  literary and scholarly pretensions make him less biased than the senatorial  historians".</ref> He is considered an important source for the religious reforms which took place during the reign of Elagabalus,{{sfn|Sorek|2012|p=202}} which have been confirmed by [[numismatics|numismatic]]<ref>{{cite book |last=Cohen |first=Henry | author-link=Henry Cohen (numismatist) |title=Description Historiques des Monnaies Frappées sous l'Empire Romain |year=1880–1892 |location=Paris |page=40}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Babelon | author-link=Ernest Babelon |first=Ernest Charles François |title=Monnaies Consulaires II |year=1885–1886 |location=Bologna |publisher=Forni |pages=63–69}}</ref> and [[archaeology|archaeological]] evidence.<ref>''[[Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum]]'', {{CIL|02|1409}}, {{CIL|02|1410}}, {{CIL|02|1413}}, and CIL III: 564–589.</ref>

=== ''Augustan History'' ===
The source of many stories of Elagabalus's depravity is the ''[[Historia Augusta]]'', which includes controversial claims.{{sfn|Syme|1971|p=218}} It is most likely that the ''Historia Augusta'' was written towards the end of the fourth century, during the reign of emperor [[Theodosius I]].<ref>{{cite book |last=Cizek |first=Eugen |title=Histoire et historiens à Rome dans l'Antiquité |publisher=Presses universitaires de Lyon |year=1995 |location=Lyon |page=297}}</ref> The account of Elagabalus in the ''Historia Augusta'' is of uncertain historical merit.{{sfn|Syme|1971|p=263}} Sections 13 to 17, relating to the fall of Elagabalus, are less controversial among historians.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Butler |first=Orma Fitch |year=1910 |title=Studies in the life of Heliogabalus |journal=University of Michigan Studies: Humanistic Series IV |location=New York |publisher=MacMillan |page=140}}</ref> The author of the most scandalous stories in the ''Historia Augusta'' concedes that "both these matters and some others which pass belief were, I think, invented by people who wanted to depreciate Heliogabalus to win favour with Alexander".{{sfn|Ball|2016|p=464}}  The ''Historia Augusta'' is widely regarded to have been written by a single author who used multiple pseudonyms throughout the work, and has been described as a "fantasist" who invented large parts of his historical accounts.<ref name=":1" />

=== Modern historians ===
[[File:Elagabalus aureus - obverse only.png|thumb|209x209px|''Aureus'' of Elagabalus, inscribed: {{Smallcaps|{{abbr|imp·c·|IMPERATOR CAESAR}} {{abbr|m·aur·|MARCUS AURELIUS}} antoninus {{abbr|p·f· aug·|PIUS FELIX AUGUSTUS}}}}]]
For readers of the modern age, ''[[The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire]]'' by [[Edward Gibbon]] (1737–1794) further cemented the scandalous reputation of Elagabalus. Gibbon not only accepted and expressed outrage at the allegations of the ancient historians, but he might have added some details of his own; for example, he is the first historian known to claim that [[Gannys]] was a [[eunuch]].<ref>Leonardo de Arrizabalaga y Prado, [http://www.cambridge.org/gb/download_file/202595/ "Pseudo-Eunuchs in the Court of Elagabalus"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210404013038/https://www.cambridge.org/gb/files/7113/6689/9908/8871_Pseudo-eunuchs_in_the_court_of_Elagabalus.pdf |date=4 April 2021 }}, 1999, p. 4.</ref> Gibbon wrote:

{{blockquote|To confound the order of the season and climate, to sport with the passions and prejudices of his subjects, and to subvert every law of nature and decency, were in the number of his most delicious amusements. A long train of concubines, and a rapid succession of wives, among whom was a vestal virgin, ravished by force from her sacred asylum, were insufficient to satisfy the impotence of his passions. The master of the Roman world affected to copy the manners and dress of the female sex, preferring the distaff to the sceptre, and dishonored the principal dignities of the empire by distributing them among his numerous lovers; one of whom was publicly invested with the title and authority of the emperor's, or, as he more properly styled himself, the empress's husband. It may seem probable, the vices and follies of Elagabalus have been adorned by fancy, and blackened by prejudice. Yet, confining ourselves to the public scenes displayed before the Roman people, and attested by grave and contemporary historians, their inexpressible infamy surpasses that of any other age or country.<ref>Gibbon, Edward, ''The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'', Chapter VI</ref>}}

The 20th-century anthropologist [[James George Frazer]] (author of ''[[The Golden Bough]]'') took seriously the monotheistic aspirations of the emperor, but also ridiculed him: "The dainty priest of the Sun [was] the most abandoned reprobate who ever sat upon a throne&nbsp;... It was the intention of this eminently religious but crack-brained despot to supersede the worship of all the gods, not only at Rome but throughout the world, by the single worship of Elagabalus or the Sun".<ref>Fraser, J. G., [https://archive.org/stream/in.ernet.dli.2015.70276/2015.70276.Worship-Of-Nature-Vol1#page/n515/mode/2up ''The Worship of Nature, Volume I''], London: MacMillan and Co., 1926, pp. 496–498.</ref>
The first book-length biography was ''The Amazing Emperor Heliogabalus''{{sfn|Hay|1911}} (1911) by J. Stuart Hay, "a serious and systematic study"<ref>[[J. B. Bury]] in introduction to {{harvtxt|Hay|1911|p=xxiii}}</ref> more sympathetic than that of previous historians, which nonetheless stressed the [[exoticism]] of Elagabalus, calling his reign one of "enormous wealth and excessive prodigality, luxury and aestheticism, carried to their ultimate extreme, and sensuality in all the refinements of its Eastern habit".{{sfn|Hay|1911|p=2}}

[[File:Medal of Elagabalus.jpg|thumb|Medal of Elagabalus, [[Louvre Museum]]. Inscription: {{Smallcaps|{{abbr|imp·|IMPERATOR}} antoninus pius {{abbr|aug·|AUGUSTUS}}}}]]
Some recent historians paint a more favourable picture of the emperor's rule. Martijn Icks, in ''Images of Elagabalus'' (2008; republished as ''The Crimes of Elagabalus'' in 2011 and 2012), doubts the reliability of the ancient sources and argues that it was the emperor's unorthodox religious policies that alienated the power elite of Rome, to the point that his grandmother saw fit to eliminate him and replace him with his cousin. He described ancient stories pertaining to the emperor as "part of a long tradition of '[[character assassination]]' in ancient historiography and biography".{{sfn|Icks|2011|pp=345–346}}

Leonardo de Arrizabalaga y Prado, in ''The Emperor Elagabalus: Fact or Fiction?'' (2008), is also critical of the ancient historians and speculates that neither religion nor sexuality played a role in the fall of the young emperor. Prado instead suggests Elagabalus was the loser in a power struggle within the imperial family, that the loyalty of the Praetorian Guards was up for sale, and that Julia Maesa had the resources to outmaneuver and outbribe her grandson. In this version of events, once Elagabalus, his mother, and his immediate circle had been murdered, a campaign of character assassination began, resulting in a grotesque caricature that has persisted to the present day.{{sfn|de Arrizabalaga y Prado|2010|pp=1–13}} Other historians, including Icks, criticized Prado for being overly skeptical of primary sources.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Leadbetter |first1=Bill |title=An eccentic book on Elagabalus (or Varius) – Leonardo de Arrizabalaga y Prado (2020), ''The Emperor Elagabalus: Fact or Fiction?'' |type=book review |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-roman-archaeology/article/an-eccentic-book-on-elagabalus-or-varius-leonardo-de-arrizabalaga-y-prado-the-emperor-elagabalus-fact-or-fiction-cambridge-university-press-2010-pp-xxxvii-381-figs-isbn-9780521895552-99/42A0C3AAC8C849F011421E7C83A88CB7 |journal=Journal of Roman Archaeology |pages=677–680 |doi=10.1017/S1047759414001731 |year=2014 |volume=27 |s2cid=220616205 }}</ref>

[[Warwick Ball]], in his book ''Rome in the East'', writes an apologetic account of the emperor, arguing that descriptions of his religious rites were exaggerated and should be dismissed as propaganda, similar to how pagan descriptions of Christian rites have since been dismissed. Ball describes the emperor's ritual processions as sound political and religious policy, arguing that [[syncretism]] of eastern and western deities deserves praise rather than ridicule. Ultimately, he paints Elagabalus as a child forced to become emperor who, as expected of the high-priest of a cult, continued his rituals even after becoming emperor. Ball justified Elagabalus's executions of prominent Roman figures who criticized his religious activities in the same way. Finally, Ball asserts Elagabalus's eventual victory in the sense that his deity would be welcomed by Rome in its [[Sol Invictus]] form 50 years later. Ball claims that Sol Invictus came to influence the monotheist Christian beliefs of [[Constantine the Great|Constantine]], asserting that this influence remains in Christianity to this day.{{sfn|Ball|2016|pp=462–466}}