PHAS Elagabalus
The gender identity of Roman Emperor Elagabalus remains a topic of ongoing debate and scholarly discussion. Recent actions by North Hertfordshire Museum, choosing to refer to Elagabalus with female pronouns, have reignited the conversation around this complex historical figure and the interpretation of historical texts. This article delves into the evidence, the differing interpretations, and the ongoing debate surrounding Elagabalus as a potential Transgender Roman Emperor.
The Evidence and Interpretations
The museum’s decision stems from classical texts that quote Elagabalus saying, “call me not Lord, for I am a Lady.” This statement, along with accounts of Elagabalus’s behavior and attire, has led some to conclude that the emperor identified as a trans woman. The museum, in consultation with LGBTQ+ charity Stonewall, aims to represent Elagabalus in a manner consistent with this interpretation, believing it to be “polite and respectful to be sensitive to identifying pronouns for people in the past.” Their collection includes a coin of Elagabalus, often displayed among other LGBTQ+ items.
However, interpreting historical figures through a modern lens presents challenges. Elagabalus’s reign, from 218AD to 222AD, was short-lived and marked by controversy. Historical accounts, particularly those by Cassius Dio, paint a picture of an emperor known for sexual promiscuity and unconventional behavior. Dio describes Elagabalus’s marriage to Hiercoles, a former slave and chariot driver, where the emperor “was bestowed in marriage and was termed wife, mistress and queen.”
The Scholarly Divide
Academics remain divided on the issue of Elagabalus’s gender identity. Dr. Shushma Malik, a classics professor at Cambridge University, cautions against taking historical accounts at face value. She points to the hostile nature of many contemporary sources, which may have exaggerated or distorted Elagabalus’s actions to undermine his authority. Dr. Malik suggests that descriptions of Elagabalus wearing makeup, wigs, and removing body hair could have been employed to weaken his political standing rather than reflect his genuine gender identity.
While acknowledging that Romans were aware of gender fluidity, Dr. Malik notes that pronoun changes in Roman literature were typically associated with myth and religion, not living individuals. This complicates the interpretation of Elagabalus’s request to be addressed as a “Lady.” Was it a genuine expression of gender identity, a provocative act of defiance, or a strategy to unsettle the established norms of Roman society?
A Continuing Conversation
Councillor Keith Hoskins, executive member for Enterprise and Arts at North Herts Council, argues that texts like Dio’s offer compelling evidence of Elagabalus’s preference for female pronouns. He believes this justifies the museum’s decision to refer to Elagabalus as “she” in contemporary discussions.
The debate surrounding Elagabalus’s gender identity is likely to continue. While the available evidence offers tantalizing glimpses into the emperor’s self-perception, the limitations of historical sources and the potential biases of contemporary writers make definitive conclusions challenging. Elagabalus’s story serves as a reminder of the complexities of interpreting historical figures and the ongoing evolution of our understanding of gender and identity.