diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old/64433-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/64433-0.txt | 9662 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 9662 deletions
diff --git a/old/64433-0.txt b/old/64433-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index df1912f..0000000 --- a/old/64433-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,9662 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Amazing Emperor Heliogabalus, by John -Stuart Hay - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and -most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms -of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you -will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before -using this eBook. - -Title: The Amazing Emperor Heliogabalus - -Author: John Stuart Hay - -Contributor: John Bagnell Bury - -Release Date: January 31, 2021 [eBook #64433] - -Most recently updated: February 2, 2023 - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -Produced by: MFR and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at - https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images - generously made available by The Internet Archive) - -*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE AMAZING EMPEROR -HELIOGABALUS *** - - - - - - THE AMAZING EMPEROR - HELIOGABALUS - - [Illustration] - - MACMILLAN AND CO., LIMITED - LONDON · BOMBAY · CALCUTTA - MELBOURNE - - THE MACMILLAN COMPANY - NEW YORK · BOSTON · CHICAGO - ATLANTA · SAN FRANCISCO - - THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, LTD. - TORONTO - - - - - THE - AMAZING EMPEROR - HELIOGABALUS - - BY - J. STUART HAY - ST. JOHN’S COLLEGE, OXFORD - - WITH INTRODUCTION BY - PROFESSOR J. B. BURY, LITT.D. - REGIUS PROFESSOR OF MODERN HISTORY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE - - MACMILLAN AND CO., LIMITED - ST. MARTIN’S STREET, LONDON - 1911 - - - - -PREFACE - - -The life of the Emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, generally known to the -world as Heliogabalus, is as yet shrouded in impenetrable mystery. The -picture we have of the reign is that of an imperial orgy—sacrilegious, -necromantic, and obscene. The boy Emperor, who reigned from his -fourteenth to his eighteenth year, is depicted amongst that crowd -of tyrants who held the throne of Imperial Rome, by the help of the -praetorian army, as one of the most tyrannical, certainly as the most -debased. - -Few people have made any study of the documents which relate to this -particular period, and fewer still have taken the trouble to inquire -whether the accounts of the Scriptores are trustworthy or consonant with -the known facts. - -To this present time no account of the life of this Emperor has been -published. Histories of the decline and fall of Imperial Rome there are -in plenty; other reigns have been examined in detail; German critics have -sifted the trustworthiness of the documents, few in number and all late -in date, which refer to other reigns; so far nothing has been done on -the life of Elagabalus. - -The present writer started this study with the view that the Syrian -boy-Emperor was, in all probability, what his biographers have painted -him, and what all other writers have accepted as being a substantially -correct account of the absence of mind, will, policy, and authority -which he was supposed to have betrayed, along with other even more -reprehensible characteristics. - -The first reason to doubt this estimate came from the continually -recurring mention of a perpetual struggle between the Emperor and his -female relatives; a fight in which the boy was always worsting able and -resolute women, carrying his point with consummate tact and ability, -while allowing the women a certain show of dignity and position, where it -in no way diminished the imperial authority or his own prerogative. - -This circumstance alone was scarcely consonant with Lampridius’ account -of a mere youthful debauchee, who had neither inclination nor will for -anything, save a low desire to wallow in vice and unspeakable horrors as -the be-all and end-all of his existence. - -On further inquiry, another circumstance obtruded itself, namely, that -the boy had a vast religious scheme or policy, which he was bent on -imposing on his subjects in Rome, and indeed throughout the world. This -policy was the unification of churches in one great monotheistic ideal. - -Religion may be neurotic in itself, but the scheme of Elagabalus was -not essentially so. Certainly the course of action by which he purposed -to effect his ideal was not that of a mere sensualist. It showed -understanding, persistency, and dogged determination; it was not popular, -because in the general incredulity, the earlier deities had lost even the -immortality of mummies. - -Yet another reason which forced one to disagree with the usual summary of -the character under discussion was that, despite (1) the awful accounts -of the imperial orgies; (2) the accusations brought against the cruelty -and incompetency of the government; (3) the announcement that all good -men were exterminated in the general lust for destruction of such -worthies; (4) the account of the class and calibre of the men employed -in all state offices; (despite all this) the authors inform us that the -state did not suffer from the effects of the reign. This was obviously -an impossibility at the outset, and the terminological inexactitude -became even more apparent when all the known good men were mentioned as -peaceably holding office, not only during the reign in question, but in -that of Elagabalus’ successor; either they had been resurrected or had -never been exterminated. - -Again, the account given of the military policy is not that which would -be the work of a weakling. The fiscal policy may have been unchanged, -but the edict which enforced the payment of Vectigalia in gold, showed a -considerable amount of sense, in demanding the payment of taxes in the -one coin whose standard had been maintained when all others had been -debased by preceding Emperors, and no one had been worse than the great -financier Septimius Severus in this debasing of the currency. - -In legal matters alone we are told that the period was sterile, because -only five decrees of the reign are recorded by the editors of the -_Prosopographia_. This may be true, but it is quite possible, in fact -more than probable, that in later redactions much of the work which -Papinian, Paul, Ulpian, and other such produced during this reign has -been embodied in later decrees or codifications, and one can scarcely -imagine that these men were entirely sterile for four years in the zenith -of their authority. - -Again, it is most noticeable that in the mass of abuse and obvious animus -which the “life” exhibits, there is not one definite act of cruelty -reported; no wanton murder is cited; no hint given that the people were -discontented with the appointments made, or that they suffered from any -of the misrule which had been so prevalent for years past. On the other -hand, we are told that the people considered Elagabalus a worthy Emperor, -despite all that could be said to his discredit. - -Chiefly it was this too obvious animus, shown on each page of the -documents, which led the writer to examine the opinions of German -and Italian critics on the measure of credibility which could safely -be attached to the Scriptores Historiae Augustae. It was an agreeable -surprise to find that their estimates of the Scriptores ranged from -those of men who stigmatised the whole collection as an impudent and -unenlightened forgery to men who, like Mommsen, contended that, though -originally the lives might have had some real historical value, they had -been so edited and enlarged as to lack the essential weight of historical -evidence, and contained, as they stood, but a modicum of consecutive and -unvarnished fact. - -Authorities being so far in accord, the present writer set to work to -sift the accounts which were obviously quite unnaturally biased, and to -separate what was merely stupidly contradictory from what was mutually -exclusive. - -This method has been applied merely to the first seventeen sections of -Lampridius’ work, the portion which professes to contain a more or less -historical account of the events from Elagabalus’ entry into Rome to his -disappearance into the main drain of the city. - -In the latter portion of the life there is a wealth of biographical -detail, which, in plain English, means an account _in extenso_ of what -has been already described too luridly in the foregoing sections. It is -written in Latin, and has never been translated into English, to the -writer’s knowledge, nor has he any intention of undertaking the work -at this present or any other time, as he has no desire to land himself, -with the printers and publishers, in the dock at the Old Bailey, in an -unenviable, if not an invidious and notorious position. - -Those, however, who are capable of reading the Latin tongue, and -therefore inured against further corruption, will find an excellent -edition published in Paris by M. Panckoucke in 1847. The last three -chapters in the present volume are an attempt to bring together all the -material capable of publication in these seventeen sections, and take the -form of three essays on the main figures of the Emperor’s psychological -imagination. They are in no way an endeavour to expurgate the sections -referred to, as any such attempt would leave one with the numerals as -headings and the word “Finis” half-way down a sheet of notepaper. It is -better for the sapient to read the chapters for themselves, and so all -men will be satisfied. - -It has also been impossible, on the same grounds, to criticise -the statements here made; the greater part are, like those in the -biographical portion, frankly impossible, when not mutually exclusive. It -is needless to say that the author accepts the whole with all the Attic -salt at his disposal. - -Another anomaly that may strike the reader is the fact that various names -are used to designate the Emperor. Tristran remarks that “they are as -many as the hydra has heads.” The present idea is to use the titles -which the boy bore at the different stages of his life, rather than apply -to him on all occasions the nickname which was attached to him after his -death. - -In the earlier part of the work I have referred to the youth as Varius -and Bassianus, the two names which appear most frequently, in reference -to his reputed fathers, but have neglected Avitus, by which title he is -occasionally known, in reference to his grandfather, as also that of -Lupus, which is sometimes found in Dion, because, as Dr. Wotton remarks, -there is no means of finding out whether he was so called (if ever he was -given the name at all) on account of some ancestry, by reason of a false -reading, or on account of some other matter now long laid to rest. - -After the Proclamation, I have preferred to call the Emperor by his -official name, Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, or Antonine for short, as -this is the only manner in which the coins, inscriptions, and documents -describe him. After his death, it seems allowable to give him the -nickname which his relations and later biographers have applied to -him, namely, the latinised form of the name of his God. I have nowhere -adopted the later Greek spelling or adaptation, Heliogabalus, either -when referring to the God of the Emesans or to the Emperor himself. The -only form in which the name occurs in inscriptions is in describing -the Emperor as “Priest of Elagabal” or the Sun. Lampridius certainly -Hellenised its form a century later, on what grounds is by no means -clear, when one realises that neither the boy nor his God had any -trace of Greek blood, tradition, or philosophy about them, and that -the identification of a particular Syrian monotheism with Mithraism -or general Sun worship is not universally admitted as a necessary -consequence, either in the case of Elagabal, Jehovah, or indeed in that -of any of the other “El” claimants to exclusiveness, though the balance -of probability may lie on the side of the identification. It is further -unnecessary to drag in the Hellenised form of the Emperor’s name in -order to pander to a popular and erroneous conception of the reign, -which conception this book is designed to combat and generally offend. -Heliogabalus is nevertheless the sole title by which this Emperor is -known to the world at large, in consequence of which I have allowed the -name to stand on the title-page, chiefly in order that Mrs. Grundy’s -prurient mind may know, before she buys or borrows this volume, that it -is the record of a life at which she may expect to be shocked, though she -will in all probability find herself yawning before the middle of the -introductory chapter. - -As I understand the reign, the main object on the part of the boy’s -murderers in nicknaming him Elagabalus after his death, was to throw -discredit on his memory by depriving him of the venerated title Antonine, -and substituting therefor the name of a Syrian monotheistic deity, who -by his exclusiveness was an offence and a byword in the eyes of the -virile, pantheistic philosophy which then held sway. - -A word must also be said as to the attitude in leaving untouched much -of the scandal attaching to this Emperor’s name. I have only been able -to deal with the public side of his character, as there are no coins or -inscriptions which refer to his private life, and have in consequence -been forced to quote what the tradition, gained from his traducers’ -writings, states was his unfortunate abnormality. - -These traditions may be true wholly or in part, they certainly could only -be disproved by the actual persons implicated, who have written neither -for nor against the Emperor’s psychological condition. The traditions, -however, as far as they treat of the public position and reputation of -the Emperor, have been shown to be grossly unfair where they are not -horribly untruthful, and may be—in all probability are—of an equal value, -when they discuss private practices about which no one can have had any -particular knowledge except his actual accomplices. Suffice it to say, -that any stick is good enough to beat a dog with once he is incapable of -defending himself, and in this case it has been laid about Antonine’s -shoulders with almost diabolical ingenuity. - -I much regret that I have been unable to find any portraits of the -Emperor for whose authenticity Bernouilli will vouch. Alone of the whole -family there remain authentic busts of Julia Mamaea and Julia Paula, -neither of whom are important enough to be included, since we are unable -to give a portrait of Elagabalus himself. I have therefore confined -myself to the use of coins, whose veracity is undoubted, hoping that the -reader will supply from his imagination that charm and beauty which the -biographers have been unwillingly forced to allow both to the Emperor and -his mother. - -In the preparation of this work I have had much valuable and kindly -assistance, for which I desire to acknowledge my deep indebtedness here. -First, to Professor Bury of Cambridge, for his unwearying and sage -advice on my whole manuscript; also to Dr. Bussell, Vice-Principal of -Brasenose College, Oxford, for his interest and kindly corrections; to -the authorities in the Bodleian Library; to the assistants in the British -Museum, especially to Mr. Philip Wilson and Mr. A. J. Ellis for their -continued help in my work there, and to Mr. Allen for the time and care -he has spent in helping me find the coins that explain the text. - -I have also to acknowledge with sincere thanks the permission of Mr. E. -E. Saltus of Harvard University to quote his vivid and beautiful studies -on the Roman Empire and her Customs. I am deeply indebted to Mr. Walter -Pater, Mr. J. A. Symonds, and Mr. Saltus for many a _tournure de phrase_ -and picturesque rendering of Tacitus, Suetonius, Lampridius, and the -rest. I also desire to thank Dr. Counsell of New College, Oxford, and Dr. -Bailey of the Warneford Asylum, not only for their help in correcting my -proofs, but also for their assistance in the preparation of my chapter on -Psychology. - -To all these gentlemen I owe a great debt, which, I hope, the general -public will repay by an appreciation of their work. We have endeavoured -to right a wrong; if our efforts are in any way successful, the reader -will acknowledge that this _mauvais quart d’heure_, which has been -stigmatised as full of impossible situations and intolerable surprises, -is in reality a very human life which, like our own, has its exquisite -moments of which we would as soon deprive ourselves as Elagabalus. - - - - -CONTENTS - - - PAGE - - INTRODUCTION xxiii - - PART I - - CHAPTER I - - General sketch of conditions, 1. The Augustan Histories and their - writers, 2. Lampridius, author of the Life of Elagabalus, 4. First - attempts at criticism, 4. Modern criticism, 4. Latin sources: Marius - Maximus, 5. Greek sources: Dion Cassius, Xiphilinus, 7. Herodian, - 8. General attack on the authenticity of the “Lives,” 9. Mommsen’s - opinion, 10. Peter, Richter, Dessau, Seeck, Klebs, Kornemann, 11-15. - Italian opinion, 15. General opinion of the biographies, 16. Reasons - for the tainted sources, 18. Church historians, 19. Jurisprudence, - 21. Numismatists, 21. Object of this work, 23. - - CHAPTER II - - Emesa, 24. High-Priest Kings, 25. Septimius Severus, 27. Julius - Bassianus, 27. Julia Domna’s marriage, 28. Caracalla’s birth, 29. - Septimius Severus, Emperor, 30. Julia’s court, 31. Maesa comes - to Rome with her family, 31. Marriage of Soaemias, 34. Birth - of Elagabalus, 35. Paternity of Elagabalus, 35. Birthplace of - Elagabalus, 36. Julia Mamaea, her marriage, and her connection with - Caracalla, 38. Macrinus Praetorian Praefect, 41. His plot against - Caracalla, 42. Election of Macrinus, 43. Julia’s position, 43. Her - work to recover the empire, 43. Banishment and death, 44. - - CHAPTER III - - Maesa’s return to Emesa, 46. Macrinus’ weakness and tyranny, 47. The - legion at Emesa, 48. Bassianus High-Priest, 49. Worship of Elagabal, - 50. Bassianus’ religious outlook, 51. Eutychianus and Gannys corrupt - the soldiers, 53. Date of the proclamation of Elagabalus, 55. - Macrinus astonished, 56. The Empire in favour of Bassianus, Julian’s - expedition, 59. Deserters to Bassianus, 61. Macrinus at Apamea, - and Diadumenianus’ elevation, 63. Macrinus retires to Antioch, 66. - Bassianus wins allegiance of soldiers at Apamea, 67. Dion on the - dates of proclamation and battle, 67. Arval Brothers’ meeting, 68. - Wirth, 69. Battle of Immae, 69. Antonine at Antioch, 71. Macrinus’ - escape, 72. Capture and death, 74. Character of Macrinus, 75. - - CHAPTER IV - - Antonine’s refusal to allow the sack of Antioch, 77. Chief minister, - 78. Antonine’s temperament, 79. Acts of the new Government, 81. - Amnesty, 83. Position of the Senate, 84. Delight of Rome, 86. - Dismissal of troops, 87. Treasonable attempts and pretenders, 88. - Elagabal to accompany the Emperor, 91. Journey to Nicomedia, 92. - Winter in Asia Minor, 93. Illness of the Emperor, 94. Xiphilinus on - Antonine’s religion, 95. Monotheistic or Mithraic not polytheistic, - 96. Death of Gannys, 101. Antonine’s character, 102. His popularity - and his taxation, 104. - - CHAPTER V - - Date of arrival in Rome discussed, 107. The entry into the city - according to Herodian, 110. First marriage, 111. The temples, 112. - The scheme for the unifying of religions, 114. The worship, 115. The - Eastern cults, 115. Date of scheme discussed, 118. Reasons for its - failure, 118. Women in the Senate, 119. Senaculum, 121. Lampridius on - the Emperor’s popularity, 124. Charges against the Administration, - 125. Divorce of Julia Paula, 126. Pastimes, 127. Summary, 128. - Elagabal’s alliance with Vesta, Antonine’s with Aquilia Severa, 129. - Pomponius Bassus’ plot, 131. Antonine divorces Elagabal from Minerva, - himself from Aquilia Severa, 132. Sends for Tanit from Carthage, 133. - Marries Annia Faustina, 134. Alliance of Maesa and Mamaea, 135. - - CHAPTER VI - - Lampridius on Alexander, 137. Seius Carus’ plot, 139. Military - expenditure, 140. Maesa’s plan for the adoption of Alexander, - 141. The Emperor’s reasons for concurrence, 142. Name Alexander - accounted for, 144. Date of adoption discussed, 145. Position after - adoption, 146. Alexander’s titles, 147. Antonine’s endeavours, 148. - Antonine’s resolve to divorce Annia Faustina and disown Alexander, - 150. Accusations against the Government, 151. Antonine’s attempt to - assassinate Alexander discussed, 152. Antonine goes to Praetorian - camp, 154. Camp conference, 155. Hatred of Maesa and Mamaea testified - against Antonine, 157. Mamaea’s precautions, 158. Antonine’s - preparations for suicide, 160. Alexander designated Consul, 160. The - Emperor’s refusal and reasons for his compliance, 161. Lampridius on - Julius Sabinus, 163. Ulpian and Silvinus, 164. Reasons for the murder - and the various accounts, 165. Criticism on the above, 170. The - treatment of Elagabalus’ body, 171. - - CHAPTER VII - - The Emperor set free to further his cult, 173. The procession, 174. - Mismanagement and appointments, 178. Freedmen, 180. Return of - Aquilia Severa, 183. Desire for military glory, 184. The names of - the Emperor, 185. Activity in building, 186. Military disaffection, - its causes and result, 188. Date of Elagabalus’ murder and length - of reign discussed, 191. Date for renewal of tribunician power - discussed, 194. Elagabalus’ interest in public affairs, 198. The - treatment of inscriptions, 198. Outlook of the Roman world, 200. - - CHAPTER VIII - - Roman views on matrimony, 203. Elagabalus’ marriage with Julia Paula, - 205. Position of Julius Paulus, 206. Serviez, etc., on Julia Paula, - 207. Dates of this marriage and divorce, 208. Elagabalus’ marriage - with Aquilia Severa, 211. Vestals discussed, 211. Roman religion, - 212. Elagabalus’ lack of prejudice, 214. His explanation to the - Senate, 215. Family of Aquilia Severa, 215. Probable dates of - marriage and divorce, 216-18. Maesa’s desire for an alliance with - the nobility, 218. Annia Faustina chosen, her family discussed, 222. - Her age and her divorce, 223. Further marriages discussed, 224. - Elagabalus’ return to Aquilia, 225. - - PART II - - CHAPTER IX - - Lampridius’ Life of Elagabalus impossible, 227. Elagabalus a - psycho-sexual hermaphrodite, not wicked, 229. The condition quite - usual then as now, 229. Virtue a virile quality, not a neurotic - negation, 229. The Phallus natural and omnipresent typifies joy and - fruitfulness, 230. Elagabalus has strong homosexual nymphomania and - every inducement to gratify his feminine instinct, 231. His nature - incredibly open and affectionate, 232. Maesa an aggravating factor, - 234. Modern authorities on similarly inverted cases to-day, 234. - Biblical parallels, Greek instances, modern religious tendencies, - 234. Normal intolerance largely hypocritical, 235. The usual - instincts of such natures, 235. Elagabalus’ love of flowers, feasts, - and teasing, 236. His marriages psychologically considered, 238. - His castration and desire for an operation which might produce the - female organs discussed, 238. Elagabalus’ marriage with Hierocles, - 239. Hierocles and Zoticus discussed, 239. Comparison with Messalina, - 240. Spintries, 240. Elagabalus’ love of colour, 241. His frankness, - 241. Greek love opposed to effeminacy, 242. Gulick on the psychology, - on Christianity, 242. Effeminacy, not homosexuality, disgusts Roman - world and gives reason for Elagabalus’ downfall, 244. - - CHAPTER X - - Description of Nero’s golden house, 245. Elagabalus compared with - Nero, 246. Pastimes, prodigalities, and dress, 246. Extravagances of - ritual, 250. Congiaries and games, 251. Table appointments and food, - 252. Maecenas’ feast, 254. Perfumes, 256. Fish, 258. The spectacles - described, 260. Gladiators discussed, 262. Elagabalus’ skill as a - sportsman, 263. The lotteries, 264. Elagabalus’ devices for suicide, - 265. The psychology of extravagance, 266. - - CHAPTER XI - - Elagabalus’ piety, 267. Constantine the opponent of other monotheisms, - 268. Theories of religion, 269. Civilised religion becomes - philosophical, 269. Rome both atheist and credulous, 270. Civic - religion leaves the forces of sex and superstition out of count, 270. - Gods always necessary to the superstitious, the more mystical the - more attractive, 271. Semitic rituals attract the mob, 273. Elagabal - exclusive and absorbs other cults, 273. Elagabalus’ scheme Erastian, - compared with Tudor conception, 273. Elagabalus will not persecute, - 276. Religion and castration, 276. Elagabalus no idolator, 277. His - mistake in trying to amalgamate the hated Judaism with Roman deities, - 277. Marriages of Elagabal, 278. Human sacrifices discussed, 280. The - column for the meteorite, 281. Contest between religion and dogma, - 282. The numbers of the mob prevail against the rationalists, 284. - Rome bored with all Gods, hence Elagabalus’ failure, 285. - - BIBLIOGRAPHY 289 - - INDEX 299 - - - - -LIST OF COINS - - - FACING PAGE - - Coin of Antoninus Pius, struck at Emesa (British Museum) 26 - - Coin of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (Caracalla) (British Museum) 26 - - Medal of Julia Domna Pia, Empress (British Museum) 40 - - Coin of Julia Maesa Augusta (British Museum) 40 - - Coin of Julia Soaemias Augusta (British Museum) 40 - - Coin of Julia Mamaea Augusta (British Museum) 40 - - Coin of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (Caracalla) (British Museum) 60 - - Coin of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (Elagabalus) (British Museum) 60 - - Coin of Macrinus recording Victoria Parthica, A.D. 218. (From a - woodcut) 60 - - Coin of Diadumenianus as Emperor, A.D. 218 (British Museum) 60 - - Coin of A.D. 219 commemorating the arrival of Elagabalus in Rome - (British Museum) 110 - - Liberalitas II. Coin struck in A.D. 219 for the Emperor’s marriage - with Julia Cornelia Paula. (From the collection of Sir James S. - Hay, K.C.M.G.) 110 - - Coin struck in A.D. 219 concerning the grain supply (British - Museum) 110 - - Coin struck in A.D. 219 to commemorate the Emperor’s recovery - (British Museum) 110 - - Thyatira Coin of Elagabalus (British Museum) 142 - - Coin struck to commemorate Alexianus’ adoption, A.D. 221 - (British Museum) 142 - - Coin struck to commemorate Alexander as Pont. Max., A.D. 221 - (British Museum) 142 - - Jovi Ultiori. The Eliogabalium as reconsecrated to Jupiter, - A.D. 224. (From a woodcut) 174 - - Coin struck to commemorate the Procession of Elagabal, A.D. 221 - (British Museum) 174 - - Coin of A.D. 221 representing the Eliogabalium. (From a - photogravure) 174 - - Coin of A.D. 220, misread by Cohen as T.P. III Cos. IIII - (British Museum) 196 - - Coin of A.D. 221, misread by Cohen as T.P. IIII Cos. IIII - (British Museum) 196 - - Coin of A.D. 222 (British Museum) 196 - - Coin of Julia Cornelia Paula Augusta (British Museum) 216 - - Coin of Julia Cornelia Paula Augusta, A.D. 220-21 (British Museum) 216 - - Coin of Julia Aquilia Severa Augusta, A.D. 220-21 (British Museum) 216 - - Coin of Annia Faustina Augusta, A.D. 221-22 (British Museum) 216 - - Coin of Julia Aquilia Severa Augusta, A.D. 221-22 (British Museum) 216 - - - - -INTRODUCTION - - -The Emperor who is studied in this volume has commonly been treated -as if his reign had no significance, unless it were to show to what -deep places the Roman Empire had sunk when such a monster of lubricity -could wield the supreme power. If the chronicle of his naughty life has -been exploited to illustrate the legend that the pagan society of the -Empire was desperately wicked and infamously corrupt, he has not been -taken seriously as a ruler. Yet Elagabalus appeared under too ominous a -constellation to justify us in dismissing his brief attempt to govern the -world as unworthy of more than a superficial description and a facile -condemnation. His reign lasted less than four years; but those years fell -in a period which was critical for the future of European civilisation, -and he was brought up in a circle intensely alive to the religious -problems which were then moving the souls of men. Mr. Hay has broken -new ground, and he has done history a service, in making Elagabalus the -subject of a serious and systematic study. - -The third century, so obscurely lit by poor and meagre records, saw the -Empire of Rome shaken to its foundations. There was a manifest decline -in its strength and efficiency, marked by the insolent domination of -the common soldier, and luridly illustrated by the statistical facts -that from Septimius Severus to Diocletian the average reign of an -Emperor was about three years and that there were only two or three -sovereigns who were not the victims of a mutiny or a conspiracy. As -one of the efficacious causes of this decline has often been suggested -(most recently by M. Bouché-Leclercq) the detachment of men’s interest -from the public weal by the attraction and influence of individualistic -oriental religions, which did not aim at securing the stability of the -state, like the old religions of Rome and Greece, but undertook to save -the individual and ensure his happiness in a life beyond the tomb. It is -undoubtedly true that in this period religious currents were stirring -society to its depths, and several rival worships were engaged in a -competition of which the issue was decided in the following century. And -if the state was really weakened by a cleavage which had become sensible -between the private spiritual interests of the individual citizen and -the public interests of society, if its cohesion was endangered by -the tendency to place the former interests above the latter, we can -understand the statesmanship of Constantine the Great, who, by closely -connecting the state with one of those individualistic religions, -conciliated and identified the two interests. I do not suggest that -Constantine formulated the problem in the general terms in which we -may formulate it now; he was pushed to his far-reaching decision by a -variety of particular social facts, which involved the general problem, -while they forced upon him a particular solution. But the problem which -he solved had long been there, and a hundred years before Constantine -established Christianity, another Emperor had attempted to solve it. That -Emperor was Elagabalus. - -The religious currents of the age of the Severi did not escape the -notice, or fail to engage the interest, of the Court. Julia Domna, Julia -Mamaea, Alexander Severus, were all under the influence of the spirit -of the time. These were the days in which Julia Domna and Philostratus -discovered for the world a new saviour in the person of Apollonius of -Tyana. But the religious zeal of Elagabalus was more passionate than -the intellectual interest of any of his house. He conceived a universal -religion for the Empire, and his abortive attempt to establish it -is examined by Mr. Hay with a full sense of its significance and an -unprejudiced desire to understand it. - -With all his unashamed enthusiasm, Elagabalus was not the man to -establish a religion; he had not the qualities of a Constantine or yet of -a Julian; and his enterprise would perhaps have met with little success -even if his authority had not been annulled by his idiosyncrasies. The -Invincible Sun, if he was to be worshipped as a sun of righteousness, -was not happily recommended by the acts of his Invincible Priest. I have -said “idiosyncrasies”; should I not have said “infamies”? But it is -unprofitable as well as unscientific simply to brand Elagabalus as an -abominable wretch. His life is a document in which there is something -demanding to be comprehended. If all men and women are really bisexual, -this Syrian boy was of that abnormal type in which the recessive is -inordinately strong at the expense of the dominant sex; he was a -remarkable example of _psychopathia sexualis_; but in his age there -were no Krafft-Ebings to submit his case to scientific observation. -From this point of view, which Mr. Hay has taken, Elagabalus becomes an -intelligible morbid human being. And the young man, though so highly -abnormal and spoiled by the possession of supreme power before he had -reached maturity, was far from being repulsive. A salient feature of -his character was good nature; he appears to have wished to make every -one happy. His pleasures were not stained by the cruelties of Nero. It -amused him to shock people, but he was always good-humoured. He is said -to have genially inquired of some grave and decorous old gentlemen who -were his guests at a vintage festival, whether they were inclined for -the pleasures of Venus. The anecdote, if not true to fact, seems to be -characteristic. It is told in the _chronique scandaleuse_ of Lampridius, -one of the writers of that Augustan History round which a forest of -critical literature has grown up in recent times. The outcome of all the -criticism is generally to the discredit of these authors, and Mr. Hay has -the merit of having strictly applied this unfavourable result to the Life -of Elagabalus. - -But though the religious enterprise of this eccentric Emperor was doomed -to fail, it was not by any means the wild project of a madman, which -those who judge _post eventum_—after the triumph of Christianity—or who, -like Domaszewski, see in it merely _eine Vergöttlichung der Unzucht_, -are apt to take for granted that it was. In those days, it was not in -the least certain, as yet, that Christianity would be chosen and its -rivals left; this religion was not, as its apologists would have us -believe, the only light in a dark world. To a disinterested mind it would -appear that Mithra or Isis might have become the divinity of western -civilisation. They were certainly well in the running. We may guess what -circumstances aided the worship of Christ to rise above competing cults, -but for inquirers, like Mr. Hay and myself, who hold no brief, and do -not accept the easy axiom that what happens is best, it is unproven -that Christianity was decidedly the best alternative. Perhaps it was. -Yet we may suspect that, if the religion which was founded by Paul of -Tarsus had, “by the dispensation of Providence,” disappeared, giving -place to one of those homogeneous oriental faiths which are now dead, we -should be to-day very much where we are. However this may be, it seems -that in the third century the Christians were far from commending their -doctrine to the rest of the world by any signal moral superiority in -their own conduct. The bad opinion which pagans held of their morals in -the time of Tertullian cannot be explained as a mere wilful prejudice, -and Tertullian’s reply that the charge is only true of some but not of -all nor even of the greater number (_Ad nationes_, 5) is a significant -admission that, taking them all round, the Christians were not then -conspicuous as a sect of extraordinary virtue. Moreover, there was -nothing in the ethics of their system which had not been independently -reached by the reason of Greek and Roman teachers, and they are entitled -to boast that the success of their religion depended not on any -superiority in its moral ideals to those of pagan enlightenment, but on -its supernatural foundations. - -Slander, with ecclesiastical authority behind it, dies so hard, that -I may take leave to add a remark which to well-informed students of -antiquity is now a platitude. The offensive performances of Elagabalus -prove nothing as to the prevailing morality of his time, just as the -debauches of Nero prove nothing for his. To judge the private morals of -the pagan subjects of the Empire from the descriptions of Suetonius and -Lampridius is even more absurd than it would be to portray the domestic -life of Christian England from the reports of the Divorce Court. The -notion that the poor Greeks and Romans were sunk in wickedness and -vice is a calumnious legend which has been assiduously propagated in -the interest of ecclesiastical history, and is at the present day a -commonplace of pulpit learning. If pagans, in ignorance or malice, -slandered the assemblies and love-feasts of the early Christians, it will -be allowed that Christian divines of later ages have, by their fable of -pagan corruption, wreaked a more than ample revenge. - -Among readers of Gibbon, the very name of “Heliogabalus” will always -“force a smile from the young and a blush from the fair.” But it may be -expected that, after Mr. Hay’s investigation, it will be recognised that -this Emperor made, according to his lights, a perfectly sincere attempt -to benefit mankind, which must be judged independently of his own moral -or physiological perversities. - - J. B. BURY. - - - - -PART I - - - - -CHAPTER I - -THE CRITICAL LITERATURE CONCERNING THE AUGUSTAN HISTORIES - -_The Scope of this Book_ - - -The age of the Antonines is an age little understood amongst the present -generation. The documents relating thereto are few in number, and for -the most part the work of very second-rate scandal-mongers. Like the -Senate of the time, these writers had so far lost their sense of personal -responsibility that they were quite willing to record anything that -their “God and Master” ordered. The pleasures and vices of the age were -lurid and extravagant. The menace of official Christianity, with its -destruction of literature and philosophy, was almost at the gates of -the city. All which facts serve to render this most magnificent period -of Roman history unreal and fantastic to men of our more practical and -rationalistic age. - -The reign of Elagabalus is not a record of great deeds. It shows no -advance in science or in military conquest. Save in the realm of -jurisprudence, it is not an age of great men, because these are born in -the struggles of nations. It is not an age of poverty or distress. It is -rather a record of enormous wealth and excessive prodigality, luxury and -aestheticism, carried to their ultimate extreme, and sensuality in all -the refinements of its Eastern habit. Such were the forces that swayed -the minds of these eager, living men, made idle by force of circumstances. - -It was a wonderful and a beautiful age, full of colour, full of the joy -of living; and yet, as we look back upon its enervating excitements, who -can wonder at the greatness of the decline which followed the triumph -of so much magnificence? Rome was at the apex of her power; the Empire -was consolidated; the temple of Janus was closed; the Pax Romana reigned -supreme, and with it order and government in the remotest corner of -that vast dominion. What mattered the extravagances of a foolish boy -to the merchants of Lyons or to the traders of Alexandria, so long as -they were undisturbed and taxation was at a minimum? What mattered the -blatant outburst of a Semitic monotheism, when men’s minds—amongst the -superstitious—were already attuned to the kindred mysteries of Mithra and -the spiritual chicanery of Isis? The harm had been done both to reason -and to ancient belief by the secret dissemination of other superstitions, -whose effete neuroticism, whose enervating and softening influences had -done almost more to ruin the glorious fighting strength of the Empire -than all the luxury and effeminacy of the bygone world. - -It was a pitiful exhibition, the powers of ignorance and mystery -undermining the strength of knowledge and virility, till the barbarians, -whom the very name of Rome had conquered and held entranced, overthrew a -greatness which, in the age of reason, the world had found irresistible. -It is pitiful, but it is true, and the record of merely a part will be -found in the Augustan Histories. - -The difficulties presented to the student of the Scriptores Historiae -Augustae are manifold and ever increasing. Not the least of them lies in -the variation of standard by which this collection has been judged, and -in the diametrically opposing theories which eminent scholars have drawn -from the same passages. - -The criticism owes its origin to the confusions which are bound to exist -in any series of lives covering a period of 167 years and purporting to -be the work of several—though none of them contemporary—writers. - -The Biographies which have survived are nominally the work of six -authors, to wit, Aelius Spartianus, Julius Capitolinus, Vulcacius -Gallicanus, Aelius Lampridius, Trebellius Pollio, and Flavius Vopiscus. -The author of the Life of Elagabalus in this series is Aelius Lampridius, -of whom personally nothing is known. Peter[1] postulates that he was not -a plebeian, as he wrote at Constantine’s bidding, and presumably, from -the virulence of his attacks, with some ulterior object in view. This was -probably an attack on the Imperial author of that species of Mithraic -worship which Constantine desired to extirpate, as the most formidable -opponent of his own new religion. - -Lampridius dedicates his Life of Elagabalus to this Emperor, which -at once shows us that at least 100 years had passed since the events -recorded had taken place, and calls for an inquiry into the sources -of Lampridius’ information. The text as it stands to-day is at times -incomprehensible, largely through the efforts of scholars of the Bonus -Accursius and Casaubon type,[2] while Dodwell in 1677 played his part -in corrupting, according to his lights, what must always have been a -document whose need of further mutilation was highly unnecessary. The -first attempt at modern criticism of the texts began in 1838, when -Becker[3] of Breslau endeavoured to reassign the various lives to their -respective authors, without very much success. In 1842 Dirksen[4] of -Leipzig attempted to ascertain the sources employed by the various -Scriptores, and their use or misuse of the material to their hands. He -founded his criticism mainly on the recorded speeches and messages of the -Emperors, which, unfortunately for the theories then put forward, were -discovered by Czwalina,[5] in 1870, to be largely spurious. - -The next work of any importance was done by Richter[6] and Peter,[7] -when the former tried to date the Scriptores themselves from internal -evidence; the latter threw light on the time when the actual lives were -written, and, amongst others, assigns Lampridius’ Life of Elagabalus to a -period in or about the year A.D. 324. In 1865 the same author[8] placed -the study of the Scriptores on a firmer basis altogether, by introducing -the system of textual criticism as applied to the sources, both Latin and -Greek, from which the writers had drawn their facts. - -Amongst Latin sources the chief name mentioned was Marius Maximus, of -whose works nothing now remains. He was Consul under Alexander Severus -and a devoted servant to that Emperor, at whose direction he attempted -to complete Suetonius[9] by a popular and scandal-mongering edition -of recent events. Mueller,[10] in 1870, after a careful investigation -of all the references to this author, concluded that his work was the -compilation of a volume styled _De vitis imperatorum_, which contained -the lives of Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antoninus Pius, Marcus, Commodus, -Pertinax, Julianus, Severus, Caracalla, and Elagabalus. That the last -of these lives should have been written by the friend and servant of -Elagabalus’ murderers is in itself unfortunate, as one immediately -suspects that some attempt will be made to justify the crime, or at -any rate that veiled malignancy rather than a true historical portrait -will be the result. It is easily discovered from the shortest perusal -of the wealth of mere abuse which it contains that no veil was -considered either necessary or expedient, and that if Lampridius drew his -information of the Emperor Elagabalus from Maximus, as a sole source, -his work was, historically speaking, as worthless a caricature as that -with which Maximus had bolstered up Alexander’s government. Mueller, -therefore, propounded the theory that though Maximus was the main Latin -source, other authors were used by the Scriptores in a supplemental way. -In this theory he was supported by Ruebel, Dreinhoefer, and Plew,[11] who -cite, amongst other names, that of Aelius Junius Cordus, an author who -is quoted with considerable frequency throughout the lives. This theory -of one main Latin source—Maximus—held ground until quite recently, when -the work of Heer, Schulz, and Kornemann, as we shall see, put a somewhat -different, if less satisfactory, complexion on the matter. It may be -remarked, in passing, that Niehues,[12] in 1885, attributes the earliest -life of Macrinus and his son Diadumenianus—amongst other Emperors whose -period does not concern us in this present inquiry—to Cordus rather than -Maximus, which may account for a certain amount of impartiality about -Macrinus’ life, there being no special end to serve either way. - -The Greek sources used by the Scriptores are more easily fixed, for, -though most of the authors have perished, the work of Herodian is -preserved, and the abbreviation of Cassius Dio, which was made by -Xiphilinus of Trebizond for ecclesiastical purposes, is still readable. -It is perhaps necessary to state Haupt’s[13] opinion that the Scriptores -did not actually transcribe the Greek sources, and that these can only -give one a certain idea as to how the writers used their materials. -Unfortunately for the reign in question, neither of these two authors -can be considered as unprejudiced authorities. Indeed, circumstances -have conspired to obscure the history of Elagabalus at every point. -Cassius Dio is by unanimous consent the best historian of the third -century, infinitely superior to Maximus as a man of literary ability -and historical insight; he is not highly exciting, and has an annoying -habit of mistaking sententious platitudes for speculative philosophy. -His impartiality is certainly very questionable, and his obviously -superstitious credulity notable. But these defects are easily overlooked -by the student, because his work does embody a vast store of information -on the workings of the Imperial system. In all probability he was absent -from Rome during the reign of Elagabalus, since he tells us (79-7) -that Macrinus appointed him Curator of Smyrna and Pergamum in the year -218, from which posts he was not removed by Elagabalus.[14] When next -he appears it is as the friend and servant of Maesa, at the beginning -of Alexander’s reign. He was then—successively—twice Consul, Proconsul -of Africa, Governor of Dalmatia and Pannonia Superior, and presumably -died under Alexander at 80 years of age, as we have no work from him -after that date. As servant of the dominant faction, Dio’s history must -have been compiled to support Maesa’s action in causing the murder of -Elagabalus, and to justify the succession of Alexander, when once the -women had cleared the headstrong boy and his mother from their path. Dio -advances his information as that of an eye-witness, and as such it was -presumably derived from the same source as that of Maximus—so much so, -that Giambelli[15] in 1881 tried to prove that Dio’s main source for his -history was Maximus throughout and none other. - -The other Greek contemporary is Herodian, the facts of whose life are -by no means certain. Kreutzer[16] thinks that he came to Rome about -the beginning of the third century, and subsequently held some minor -administrative posts in the government. He stands on a different plane -from Dio, as he possessed very small qualifications as a historian. He -narrates, it is true, salient features of court life and current foreign -affairs, though he has small conception of their bearing and less regard -for their chronology. In this matter it is only fair to remember that the -ignorant emendations of Bonus Accursius and a tribe of mediaeval scholars -may account for much that now looks so outrageous. - -As regards the sources from which Dio and Herodian took their facts, much -has been written, though the attempts[17] made since 1881 to show that -both used Maximus are at best poor and inconclusive. Mueller[18] in 1870 -pointed out with some considerable weight that the similarities which -exist between the parallel accounts found in Herodian and the Scriptores -were probably due to the fact that both had used Maximus. This line -of argument was developed by Giambelli and Plew[19] on the basis of a -supposition that Herodian had been worked over before he was used by the -Scriptores, thus endeavouring to account for the discrepancies between -Herodian and Maximus, and supporting the Maximus-as-root-base theory of -both authors. Boehme[20] in 1882 introduced the name of Dexippus as the -probable intermediate writer, and pointed out that the references made -by certain Scriptores to Herodian, under the name of Arrianus, are hard -to understand if the scriptor had the correct name before him. Certain -passages can however be shown to have been taken direct from Herodian, on -account of which Peter[21] entirely rejected the Dexippus intermediary -theory a few years later. In the main, however, the general authenticity -of the sources, whether Greek or Latin, was accepted up to the year 1889, -though one or two discoveries had been made which weakened their hold and -prepared the way for the general attack. - -The first was made by Czwalina[22] of Bonn in 1870, who declared that -the documents and letters in the Life of Avidius Cassius were spurious; -and in 1880 Klebs[23] destroyed the authenticity of those at the end of -Diadumenianus’ Life. Things were more or less quiet until the year 1889, -when Dessau[24] opened his attack on the general authenticity of the -Scriptores’ work, asserting from the strongest internal evidence, such as -their mention of persons and things—in lives dedicated to Constantine as -Emperor—which did not happen till after his death, that the lives were -the work of a forger in the later part of the fourth century; a man who -had been stupid enough to give an appearance of antiquity to his work by -the use of names and dedications borrowed from older sources, but not -smart enough to avoid the inclusion of glaring anachronisms. - -Mommsen[25] at once undertook to defend the authenticity of the -collection, asking saliently why a forger of Theodosius’ time should -undertake to praise the extinct dynasty founded by Constantius. The very -patchwork, he says, is enough to prove the collection no forgery. Again, -the use of pre-Diocletian geographical names, such as those given to -the legions, all date from a period prior to Diocletian. Mommsen then -proceeds to his criticism, in the course of which he divides the lives -into primary and secondary, which to his mind solved the problem, and -on this basis he drew entirely different conclusions from the facts -which Dessau had adduced as proofs of forgery. The progress of Mommsen’s -study forced him to admit what he had so entirely repudiated at first, -that the lives do contain hints of a later period, all of which, he -asserts, can be accounted for by the manner in which the collection took -form. Mommsen’s opinion, as finally stated, was that about A.D. 330 an -editor collected the available material and then filled in the gaps with -his own work. Again, at a later time a reviser retouched this whole -collection and added the evidence of the latest period, which has caused -all the trouble. By him also the work resembling Eutropius and Victor -was inserted. It is not the clearest of statements, and had to be so -modified, as it proceeded, that it certainly has not the weight attaching -to it that others of Mommsen’s works carry. - -During the year 1890 two works appeared, the first by Seeck,[26] who -attempted to assist Dessau, the other by Klebs,[27] who had accepted a -modified Mommsen estimate of the authenticity of the Scriptores. Seeck -began by pointing out that a work which was first heard of in the latter -part of the fourth[28] century was not likely to arouse sufficient -interest to induce any one to revise it during the earlier part of -that century. He attacked the work attributed to Vopiscus, Pollio, and -Spartianus in particular, pointing out, in the case of Vopiscus, that had -he written under Constantine he would not have put him second in the -dedication,[29] or, if Pollio had written in the third century, when the -title Mater Castrorum was commonly given to the Empresses, he would never -have spoken of it as a speciality in Victoria’s case.[30] If Spartian -wrote under Diocletian, it is obvious that he must have had a prevision -of that Emperor’s sudden change of plan as to the succession. Klebs[31] -in the same year further modified Mommsen’s position, and explained -the similarities to Victor and Eutropius as due to the use of the same -sources by these authors and by the Scriptores, and rejected the idea of -a revision by a late hand on the ground that no one would be so foolish -as to imitate the style of the original writers for the sake of inserting -nonsense; certainly not the most convincing of the arguments which might -have been used by a man who presumably had at least heard the history of -the Gospel additions. A later article (1892)[32] was more conclusive, -as here he attempted to prove that no one forger could have adopted the -variety of attitude towards both the Senate and Christianity which we -find expressed in the various sections of the “lives,” while the presence -of geographical names and official titles, lost before the beginning of -the fourth century, point to earlier authenticity, not later forgery. - -Woelfflin[33] in 1891 supported Mommsen on textual grounds. He traces -the differences of style to the fact that certain authors had used -Suetonius, others Maximus, while others again had trusted to their own -retentive memories, not altogether a safe historical criterion. He states -that the traces of similarity running through the works are due certainly -to a reviser, but that the reviser was Vopiscus,[34] which either puts -Vopiscus at a much later date than had ever been done before, or resigns -the idea of a late reviser in the Mommsen sense. - -Dessau[35] in 1892 replied with a scathing attack on this same Vopiscus, -from the point of view of his age and the impossibility of his having -seen and heard all he claims to have done. Seeck[36] in 1894 published a -second article supporting Dessau with six points culled from titles and -names not known till after the reputed dates of the Scriptores. He now -considers that plurality of authors, or forgers, as the case may be, is -certain, and that they wrote, or forged, as Diocletian and Constantine -gave command, using for their work many sources, including the Imperial -Chronicle. But it is an inconclusive article. - -In 1899 an American, Dr. Drake[37] of Michigan, published some studies -in detail on the life of Caracalla, which tended to establish the -genuineness of certain portions which had been thought spurious. Heer[38] -of Leipzig followed in 1901 with a critical survey of the life of -Commodus, dividing it into two parts, the first chronological, the second -biographical, and came to the conclusion that, though the chronological -part was trustworthy, the biography was derived from very poor sources, -and was only in part contemporaneous. Schulz[39] in 1903 applied the same -methods to the lives from Commodus to Caracalla, in 1904 to the life -of Hadrian,[40] and in 1907 to the lives of the house of Antonine,[41] -unfortunately leaving out Elagabalus. - -Kornemann[42] in 1905 attempted to bring together the materials of the -lives from Hadrian to Alexander Severus, much on the lines of Schulz’s -work. He points out that the characteristic note was to be found in -the author’s interest in the affairs of state, as opposed to those of -war, and how Alexander Severus has been raised to his pinnacle of smug -propriety on account of supposititious favours to the senatorial body, -while extreme animus is betrayed towards the warlike Emperors or those -who, like the paternal despots of the Antonine House, trusted in the -army and only used the “slaves in togas” for ratifying any decree that -they might think necessary, a mode of procedure in government to which -that body had long been slavishly subservient. Kornemann goes on to -suggest that this fondness for Alexander presupposes the writer’s work -having been published during that Caesar’s reign, especially as no -trace is found of his work later. Kornemann then invents a new name for -our old friend Marius Maximus, and calls him, with some further show of -scholarship, one Lollius Urbicus,[43] a theory which still only interests -Kornemann. Heer[44] in 1901 had given him a certain support, however, -in refusing to believe that any one could have credited Maximus with -any part in the chronological side of the lives, and Schulz in his Life -of Hadrian adopted the same view, assigning the references to Maximus -to a later hand. It was Peter[45] who, in 1905, asked pertinently why -Maximus should be ousted from the authorship of the chronological source -in favour of an _unknown_ contemporary, though he admitted, with some -freedom, that many of the citations from Maximus stood in passages of -questionable value, or seem to have been thrust into the text. - -In 1899 Tropea[46] of Padua published a treatise on the general -literature of the S.H.A., in which he shows that the aim of the -collection was political, and in the interest of the reigning house; in -consequence of which he postulates that it is either falsified in fact, -or wholly fabricated in the sense that Czwalina had already suggested. -Tropea was followed by his pupil Pasciucco,[47] who examined the life -of Elagabalus in detail in 1905. The result of this examination was -to show that Lampridius had not only failed to examine his sources of -information, but had exhibited a singular lack of order and proportion -in his imaginations. Pasciucco concluded with the illuminating remark -that Lampridius’ sources are either fabulous or of little value, and -answer only to the political complexion which that writer had adopted. - -In 1904 Lécrivain[48] published an admirable conservative presentation of -the available material, which, with Schulz’s work on the Imperial House -of Antonine in 1907, leaves the textual criticism of the sources in a -sufficiently nebulous condition to please the majority, at any rate for -the time being. - -In the light of the foregoing criticism and the almost universal -conclusion, drawn by both parties, as to the obvious want of impartiality -not only amongst the sources but also in the lives themselves, the -scope of this work will limit itself to a psychological criticism of -the life of Elagabalus, as contained in the Augustan Histories. These -documents, as will be remembered from the foregoing summary, are a -collection of heterogeneous and unenlightened compositions, to which -Lampridius, by no means the ablest contributor, has added the life of the -Syrian boy-emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus. Lampridius exhibits to a -striking degree the want of method and order, the vain repetitions and -frequent contradictions, the lack of historical insight and love of petty -detail which characterise the whole collection. This he shows to such a -degree that it would be as obviously unfair to regard his biographical -compilation on Elagabalus as historical fact, as the more than -questionable “Tendenzschriften,” which were his sources of information; -the perusal of which must have left the compiler with a distorted view -of events, even had he started with a fair and unprejudiced mind. -This certainly was not Lampridius’ outlook, as is evinced by the -obvious animus against his subject portrayed on every page both in his -unsupported accusations and in his puerile fault-finding. - -In all probability this series of lives was never intended to be more -than a succession of scandal-loving biographies, designed to take the -place of the improper little novels which used to be imported from -Greece, but whose supply was falling short with the decadence of Greek -literature. - -In the result, the biographies of the Augustae Historiae Scriptores are -for the most part an inartistic farrago of unordered trivialities, which -modern criticism has shown to be late in date, and with little or no -individual significance. Their whole value depends on their source, or -sources, and these have been proved, at least biographically speaking, -to have been only too often untrustworthy. The Life of Elagabalus, as -caricatured by the particular Scriptor, or forger, is not even an attempt -to portray historical events in either their chronological or natural -order; it makes no mention of the origin of the Emperor, his claims -to the throne, his fight with Macrinus, nor yet of the facts of his -subsequent government. It is merely one vast stream of personal abuse -and ordures, directed against the memory of the great exponent of that -monotheism which was the chief danger to Constantine’s theories in a -similar direction; while Lampridius’ sources are vitiated by the fact -that they are Imperial attempts to blacken the memory of a murdered -Emperor, whose popularity with the masses made his murderer’s position -insecure on the throne of the world. - -It may not be altogether fair to charge the young Alexander personally -with the murder of Elagabalus, and even if one does, it is only right -to remember that he claimed a certain justification for the deed.[49] -Alexander affirmed that he had himself been in danger of death at -his cousin’s hand on more than one occasion. Undoubtedly, the true -instigators of the murder were Mamaea, Alexander’s mother, and Maesa, -the common grandmother of the cousins. Both of these women saw power and -authority passing from their hands, and could ill brook a second place -in the direction of the government. By their machinations, bribery, -and corruption, they had endeavoured already three times to suborn the -Praetorian Guard. But the effort had failed. Sufficient men had always -been wanting for the project, and only an unlucky chance threw the -Emperor into the hands of those few on the day of his death. Alexander’s -complicity in this crime might have been overlooked, on account of his -youth, had not his strenuous efforts to justify the deed called attention -to his attitude, not of regret, but of exultation in the crime. This -attitude is most clearly seen in the scandalous literary productions -which alone disgrace the name of Elagabalus, all issued from the pens -of Cassius Dio, Herodian, and Maximus,—or Lollius Urbicus,—all three -servants and bedesmen of Alexander and his female relatives. - -Surely if it had been possible to give proof of cruelty, tyranny, -bloodthirstiness, deceit, or guile, the record of these deeds would have -filled the pages of the paid traducers; but contemporaries, who loved -Elagabalus too well for his generosity, charm, and beauty, would know -better. The only course open to the writers, therefore, was to attack -personal habits of which the outside world knew little and cared less, -because they were habits that affected no one save the boy’s familiars, -who were perfectly free to depart if they objected to his manners or -conversation. - -As regards the later compilers of Imperial histories, mention must be -made of Zosimus and Zonaras, the twelfth-century editors of Cassius Dio, -who, however, add little to our knowledge. They are of a certain value -because they omit many of the scandals before produced, while the same -may be said for Aurelius Victor and the _Breviarium_ of Eutropius. - -The Church historians make little mention of the period; they were -undisturbed by persecutions, and had no emperor or praefect to abuse. -They were, in fact, so busy inventing the difficulty of the diphthong -and developing Pauline theories on the doctrine and position of Christ, -that they had but little time for the real facts of life and progress -around them. Origen is a slight exception, but then his pride had been -flattered by a summons to Court, where, Eusebius tells us, he discussed -astronomical theology with the now visionary Julia Mamaea—who seems to -have aped her aunt, Julia Pia, in these matters. Origen’s pride was -further flattered by the dignity of a Praetorian escort on the journey -to Antioch—he does not mention the return voyage—which was certainly a -most astonishing honour, for which one would like to have other than -sacerdotal confirmation. - -Further literary authorities, such as Sextus Rufus, Orosius, John of -Antioch, and Jordanis, though inferior in weight, have obviously got -some of their information from sources other than those open to the -Scriptores, and their statements may be accepted with reserve, unless -they can be shown to be irrational and contrary to known facts. - -When all is gathered in, the sum total of the recorded history, as -Mr. Cotter Morison[50] says, is meagre to a degree. The investigation -of the various isolated records in the light of what is known of the -movements and tendencies of the age—combined with the psychology of -the boy’s character—is and must be the key to much that at first sight -seems contradictory and obscure in the scandals reported—none of which, -as Niebuhr has said, are capable of historical treatment with anything -like an assurance of accuracy. In this part of the biography Lampridius -himself is of considerable use. In the course of his vituperation he -is continually letting fall allusions and observations revealing a -character, instincts, and religion which he is quite incapable of -comprehending, and can only malign with a vitriolic vehemence worthy of a -better cause. His very vehemence is fortunate, since it has left the way -open for psychology and science to proclaim the abuse, what we now know -it to be, both malicious and untruthful. - -The evidences from the jurisprudence of the reign are certainly -unsatisfactory. Later codifications have left us with but few dated laws -of a reign that stands in the golden age of Roman jurisprudence. Ulpian, -Papinian, and Paul were not men to allow a break in the order of legal -succession, and though Ulpian was presumably banished in connection with -Alexander, it was not until within a few months of Elagabalus’ death. -Sufficient remains to show us that the Empire suffered no break in the -perfect autonomy of jurisprudence, justice, and government, throughout a -period which Forquet de Dorne[51] has dignified under the pseudonym of -the reign of military anarchy. - -Cohen and Eckhel are of great importance in fixing, as nearly as -possible, the chronology of the period, by their records of the medals -and coins of the reign. The same may be said of the inscriptions which -have escaped the vandalism of the Emperor’s enemies. Duruy, in his great -history, is unwilling to give the medals much biographical weight, -comparing them to the governmental journals of all times, which give -only the account of events as seen through official spectacles, and on -which as little reliance can be placed as on the published bulletins -of victories: witness the Parthian medal of Macrinus, the record of a -great victory for the Roman troops over Artabanus; the real fact being -a colossal defeat followed by a peace, the latter purchased in a manner -disgraceful to both the people and the arms of Rome. - -Inscriptions are unfortunately few and far between, owing to the fury -with which Alexander and his relatives pursued Elagabalus’ memory. -Undoubtedly it was no new thing to call upon the Senate to execrate the -memory of a murdered rival. It was, in fact, one of that body’s most -important functions during the period under discussion. Rarely has the -work been done so thoroughly and effectively, which says something for -the zeal of Alexander and the money he spent in extirpating all reference -to the memory of Elagabalus. - -The works of Valsecchius[52] and Turre,[53] amongst seventeenth-century -scholars, are illuminating on the subject of the length of Elagabalus’ -reign. Tristran’s[54] attitude shows the slavishness of tradition; -certain of Saumaise’s[55] emendations show the same tendency despite -his usual impartiality; in fact, all have accepted the tradition of -wickedness without the least question as to its _fons et origo_. This -work proposes to take the texts as they exist, and endeavour from their -unwitting statements of the boy’s psychology to convict them of untruth. -From their unsupported charges of secret crimes, to show that real -crimes were largely non-existent, and to throw the burden of all the -ordures which have covered this Emperor’s name on to the shoulders of his -relations and murderers, to whom alone it was a vital object to destroy -his fair renown before a world which loved him. That his world did love -him, despite all, there are manifold traces. The prodigal Emperors -always were adored; so were their successors, the wicked popes. Man was -too near to nature to be aware of shame, and infantile enough to like -to be surprised. That was Elagabalus’ scheme; he amused his people and -surprised them at the same time. - -The whole spirit of tolerance of the unusual makes it difficult for us -to picture Rome. Modern ink has acquired Nero’s blush; yet, however -sensitive a writer may be, once Roman history is before him although -he may violate it, may even give it a child, he never can make it -immaculate. He may skip, indeed; and it is because he has skipped so -often that you may fancy Augustus was immaculate. The rain of fire which -fell on the cities that mirrored their towers in the Bitter Sea might -just as well have fallen on him, on Virgil, on Caligula, Nero, Otho, -Vitellius, Titus, or Domitian[56] why, then, condemn Elagabalus alone -unheard, save for the fact that his relations hated him, and as far as we -can see, hated him without a cause, or perhaps because he was growing too -strong, and his unfortunate disease gave them their opportunity to gain -that power after which the women were striving like grim death? - - - - -CHAPTER II - -THE FAMILY OF THE EMPEROR MARCUS AURELIUS ANTONINUS - - -Great houses, says a historian, win and lose undying fame in less than a -century; they shoot, bud, bloom, bear fruit; from obscurity they rise to -dominate their age, indelibly to write their names in history, and after -a hundred years give place to others, who in turn take the stage, while -they descend into the crowd and live on insignificant, retired, unknown. -This is true, in some periods, but not of the Imperial houses of Rome. -Their flight across the stage was meteoric in its rapidity. A generation -saw the rise and total extinction of many of those families who aspired -to the Roman Purple, particularly the revived house of Antonine. - -On the borders of the Orontes, in that part of Syria which is known as -Phoenicia, lies a small, disagreeable, and melancholy-looking town, -which to-day bears the name of Homs, or Hems. It is a construction of -yellow and black stones mixed with mud and broken straw, and is the -rendezvous of Curds, Bedouins, and Turkomans, a straggling village, -where dirt, squalor, and misery proclaim the absence of trade, roads, -or contact with an outside world. A short distance away are the ruins -of an ancient castle, built by the Crusaders to dominate the route to -Antioch. Here alone is there a trace of fruitfulness, a sort of oasis of -green gardens, extending along the river-bank towards what was once the -graceful and beautiful capital of the Elagabal monarchy, the famous city -of Emesa—celebrated under the independent High-Priest Kings of the family -of Sohemais for the splendour of its palaces and the magnificence of its -temple, and because it was the headquarters of the worship of the God of -Gods, Elah-Gebal, or Baal, which is the name more familiar to Christian -ears. For us the chief interest in this wretched village lies in the -fact that it is the home of that race of Syrian Emperors who ruled Rome -during the period of her greatest renown and prosperity—a period when -the splendour of the Purple reached its apogee. Rome had been watching a -crescendo that had mounted with the ages; it culminated in the revived -Antonine house; but the tension had been too great, something snapped, -and there was nothing left. So it had been with Emesa; her splendours -endured sorrowfully until the twelfth century, and then were engulfed, -as her house had long since been, in a great earthquake which devastated -that part of Syria, along with lesser-known parts of the earth’s surface. - -Little is known of the early history of the hereditary High-Priest Kings -of Emesa. Strabo tells us that, like the neighbouring sovereigns of -Jerusalem, their origin was sacerdotal, to which functions they had -attached the title and jurisdiction of secular rulers on the breaking-up -of the Seleucid monarchy. - -The most famous princes of the Emesan dynasty of High-Priest Kings were -Samsigeramus and his son Iamblichus, the friend of Cicero. In the war -between Octavius and Antony this prince found he had taken up arms on -the wrong side, and was killed by Antony for fear of treachery. In the -year 20 B.C. Augustus re-established the kingdom of Emesa in favour -of the son of Iamblichus, which kingdom certainly continued until the -time of Vespasian, according to Froelich, and probably until Antoninus -Pius, during whose reign we have the first known Imperial coins of Emesa -(Eckhel). The kingdom was small, and the wealth, except the revenue -which came as religious offerings, insignificant—facts which undoubtedly -decided the rulers of the time to yield gracefully before the advancing -arms of the universal Emperor, who, in return, left the High-Priest -Kings a certain amount of political as well as their inherent religious -authority, much in the same way that he left the family of Herod their -nominal monarchy, along with the support of a similar Babylonian -religion. Certainly the fame of the temple at Emesa and the oracle of -Belos at Apamea was widespread, and the hereditary High Priest in the -year of grace 179 was an astute gentleman. - -[Illustration: Coin of Antoninus Pius, struck at Emesa (British Museum). - -Coin of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (Caracalla) (British Museum). - -_Face page 26._] - -In that first year of the reign of the Emperor Commodus there was -appointed to the command of the fourth Scythian legion then quartered in -Syria, in all probability, as Peter thinks, at Emesa itself, an African, -one Septimius Severus by name, a native of Leptis Magna in Tripoli, born -in the year 146, and therefore about the age of thirty-three years. - -Whether or not he was a widower at the time is uncertain. He had -previously married a lady, by name Marcia, but as no children by her -are known to have existed, it is probable that she was either dead or -repudiated by that year, added to which his precocious inquiries as to -the marriageable young women in the neighbourhood presuppose that the -general was either free or at least travelling _en garçon_. - -The High Priest of the period was—according to two references in the -Epitome of Aurelius Victor—a certain Julius Bassianus, descended in -hereditary line from the afore-mentioned Iamblichus. Certainly he was -not a plebeian, as Dion says, somewhat sneeringly, when referring to his -daughter’s origin, unless, of course, Dion meant in point of comparison -with the rank to which she eventually attained. - -It was certainly a happy chance that Bassianus possessed not only a wise -prophet, but also a superstitious commander in the army of occupation, -and was astute enough to work both for the miraculous profit of his house -and lineage. Unfortunately he had no daughter old enough for an immediate -marriage. She who is presumed the eldest, Domna by name, was at the time -only nine years of age, having been born in the year 170, whilst her -sister Maesa was presumably somewhat younger. - -But to return to the Oracle. In the year of grace 179, when Septimus -found himself in a peaceful province, _en garçon_ and very much admired, -he took an interest in the marriageable daughters of important persons, -like most young men of ambition in their more calculating moments, -and—being a religious-minded man—he determined to consult the gods, -especially the famous voice which spoke so near at hand. Here he learnt -that to the elder daughter of Bassianus was reserved, according to her -horoscope, the power of making the man whom she should wed a king. It was -an ambitious height to which Septimius aspired, and an ambition which -would have cost him his life had Commodus got bruit of the transaction. -Nevertheless, being a prudent man, and at the same time ambitious, he -resolved to let no chance slip. He did what Bassianus expected—demanded -the lady’s hand and obtained the reversion thereof. - -At what date the marriage took place is by no means certain; there are -two references in Dion which are mutually exclusive. The first says that -the Empress Faustine (who, by the way, the same Dion says, died in 175) -herself prepared their marriage bed in the precincts of the temple, which -sounds a highly unsatisfactory beginning to ordinary matrimony. But as -he has just told us that the lady was of an age of five in the year -above mentioned, it is highly improbable that her nuptial couch would be -prepared by any one, or anywhere, for some time to come, especially as -there is no indication that Septimius had heard of the lady before 179, -when he consulted the Oracle. Again, Dion assumes that Marcia did not -die until Septimius was appointed Governor of Lyonese Gaul about the year -187, so that her husband could only have been playing with astrology, -wise prophets, and other things against the time when the obex to solid -matrimony should be removed. Possibly even Dion is referring—when he -drags in the Empress Faustine—to Septimius’ first marriage, or, as has -been suggested, the whole thing was a dream of either Septimius or -Dion, probably both, as both were much addicted to such proceedings. -Considering the so-called scandal against the lady’s character, her -proclivities, and the knowledge that her eldest son Bassianus was born at -Lyons on April 4, 188, it is most natural to conclude that the marriage -took place some time in the spring of the year 187, though the pledges -may have been given when the child was nine years old or thereabouts, and -the actual marriage deferred till Julia’s seventeenth year, Septimius -amusing himself in the interval, after the manner of soldiers. It must -be admitted that, as the record of his scrapes is limited to two, he was -more discreet than the majority of his profession. - -His choice of a wife, if made on unusual grounds, was more than -successful. Few Emperors have had more renowned ladies or more helpful -spouses than Julia Domna Pia, the daughter of Bassianus, proved herself -to Septimius. It was fortunate that she had more than a horoscope to -assist her in her new position. Even the governorship of Lyonese Gaul -was an important post, and there she had large scope for the use of her -wit, learning, beauty, and wisdom, in addition to her Syrophoenician -adaptability for amorous intrigues. By means of which combination the -family became people of renown throughout the length and breadth of -Pertinax’s Empire, a circumstance which enabled them, on the murder of -that Emperor, to assume the rôle of avengers, the deliverers of Rome, the -saviours of the Empire, which had now three heads but no commander. - -It was Julia, we are assured by Capitolinus, who decided her husband -to assume the Purple; it was Julia who first amongst Empresses was -Domna, or Mistress, Mater Castrorum, Mater Senatus, Mater Patriae, Mater -Totius Populi Romani. Of course she had the sad notoriety of being -mother to Caracalla, and late authors (_vide_ Tertullian _ad Nationes_) -have reproached her with many indiscretions—have even accused her of -conspiring against her husband; but Dion, who is by no means partial to -her, mentions neither accusation, and the absurdity of the latter throws -doubt, at least on the public knowledge of the former story. In any case -her elevated mind, her four children, and her rank, even when combined -with her sun-warmed nature, ought to have protected her from anything -except occasional amusements, of which she might have preferred her -husband ignorant. Julia’s real fame rests on the basis of her character -as a mathematician, an astrologer, and a wise counsellor. The fruit of -her learning and philosophy has been handed down to all time by her -friend and associate Philostratus in the dedication to her of his Life -of Apollonius, the miracle-worker of Tyana, the Thaumaturge whose life -and miracles are supposed to form so large a part of the traditional life -of Jesus as it exists to-day. - -In the palace Julia Domna had gathered round her a circle of learned men, -where all subjects were discussed, and whence, in all probability, a -contemporary derived his idea of the _Deipno sophistae_. It was a circle -of rhetoricians, lawyers, astrologers, physicians, philosophers, and -historians, which included men such as Cassius Dio, Ulpian, Papinian, -Paul, Galen, and Philostratus—one and all names which speak volumes for -the gravity of the lady and the perfection of her taste. If, therefore, -any truth is to be attributed to the account of her frailties, the worst -that can be imagined of the pious Julia is, that like the Virgin Queen -of this country, she took her recreations in those ways which nature and -temperament prompted, while the main business of her life was social, -political, and philosophical. Many, like Bayle, have made merry over the -carnal anecdotes, though surely for a true judgment of her character the -preservation of a single conversation with Philostratus of Lemnos would -be worth the record of a thousand dull intrigues—in surmise—for which -familiarity has bred contempt. - -Besides which, Severus lived in the bosom of his family, or rather of his -wife’s family, the Bassiani. With his two sons and two daughters there -had come to Rome about the year A.D. 193 the family of his wife’s sister -Julia Maesa, a lady for whom fate had provided no Imperial horoscope, -and who in consequence had no right to be anything like as ambitious as -her sister the Empress. Maesa was, however, equally beautiful, equally -clever, and equally determined to climb, if climbing were possible. To -her mind Rome was the place where fortunes were to be made if you had -an Imperial connection, so to Rome Maesa came. She had married, at an -early age, the Proconsul Julius Avitus, by no means an undistinguished -government servant. The fact that he held the governments of Asia, -Mesopotamia, and Cyprus successively, and was Consul in the year 209, -says something for the trust which was reposed in him. He seems to have -been resident in Rome in his own mansion on the Aesquiline—according to -Lanciani—from the year 193, a fact which presupposes that he was already -a man of wealth and position, who considered himself justified—on account -of his relation to the Imperial home—in resigning the government of -the provinces, though at no time was the proconsulship an unprofitable -possession, even for the most upright. Herodian testifies most fully to -the wealth of the family, leading us to suppose that Maesa knew full -well that “poverty is no recommendation anywhere,” and had amassed money -accordingly. - -At the period now before us Maesa’s political ability seems to have -had little or no scope. It was gold she wanted at that time, and gold -she was getting together against an emergency. This emergency fate -provided under the Emperor Macrinus, and she was thus enabled to use -her stores of gold and statecraft with much profit both under Elagabalus -and in the early years of Alexander’s reign. She was then free, and -showed herself in her true colours, a sort of Dowager-Empress after the -Chinese pattern, greedy, with a terrible eagerness for power, authority, -and a command such as Julia with more good sense had never thought of -encompassing. It was a longing that she had to satisfy at the price of -her treasure, her popularity—if ever she had any—even at the price of -her own children’s blood. Maesa’s family consisted of two daughters, -whose sons were both to become renowned Emperors, men whose names live -by their very eccentricities, though their deeds are but far-off fables -meet for the acrimonious discussions which make historians famous. Of -the two daughters, Soaemias, or Symiamira, the elder, was less of the -politician, had less of the calculating, self-possessed individuality -which was so strong in both her mother and sister, who were both women -with the true courtesan instinct, which could turn their very amours to -substantial account. Soaemias was certainly no ruler. She was a living, -passionate, human woman, full of the joy of life, generous both for good -and evil, courageous too, according to Herodian. By common consent, she -was voluptuous, devoted to those who loved her, willing to give her very -life for that of her well-loved son. A woman who was bound to be popular -with men, and hated by her sisters for all time, both on account of her -qualities and her defects. To such a nature the position Lampridius -ascribes in the state would have been utterly impossible. Nor is this -borne out anywhere by the existing inscriptions, which always make -Soaemias take a place second to that of Maesa, except in the Senate on -the Quirinal, which was her special concern. - -Soaemias married some time before the year 204 Sextus Varius Marcellus. -He was, according to Dion, a native of Apamea, and a man of some -considerable prominence. As early as 196 we hear of him in the position -of Procurator Aquarum, and his advancement, presumably helped by his -connection with royalty, was very rapid. Through the usual grades of -procuratorships he reached the rank of Praefect in early life, and -thence the height of ambition, the Praetorian class of the Senatorial -order. At the time of his death he was about to complete his term of -office as Legatus Legionis III. Augustae, Praeses provinciae Numidiae, -or may just have vacated that position; at least such is the reading of -the inscription according to Domaszewski, who puts his death some time -in the year A.D. 217. The young couple seem to have had an estate at -Velletri, a city some twenty-five miles south of Rome; as here Varius -Marcellus’ funeral inscription was found some short time back. Whether -or not her husband’s praefectorial duties left Soaemias much to herself -can be judged by the statement, made by all authorities, that she spent -the greater part of her time with her aunt at Court, which she could -scarcely have done had her husband been at Velletri. There is a question -raised by Eckhel as to the number of her children; he cites from a -Bilingue Marmor, which contains the inscription—“Julia Soaemias Bassiana -cum _filis_,” but as this is the only mention of any children, apart -from Bassianus himself, the others have passed into obscure oblivion. -Probably this mention is responsible for more than one of the many -scandalous stories which centre round her name. She certainly had one -son, Varius Avitus Bassianus (sometimes also called Lupus). Whether he -was first, second, or last, we have no sort of information. Various -writers give the boy different names in early life; few agree even as -to the year of his birth. Dion says that he was born on October 1, 204. -Herodian, for no discoverable reason, puts it as early as 201, while -both Ammianus Marcellinus and Julianus imply that his birthplace was -Emesa, which latter fact seems most improbable. Bassianus’ very parentage -is obscure, on account of the reputation which his mother had acquired -during her residence in Rome. Certainly her cousin Caracalla admired her, -but he admired most women of the type, and if we can believe any of the -scandals, Soaemias was in no way averse to passing her time in amorous -converse with her very vigorous cousin, or indeed with any other strong -and healthy soldiers who thronged the imperial ante-chambers. This state -of affairs seems to have been one of which people in Rome were well -aware, as was testified by the vestal whom Caracalla, having impotently -failed to violate, burned alive, protesting her innocence on the grounds -that Soaemias had put it beyond the power of Caracalla to violate her -when he tried. - -In one way it was a misfortune for her son that no one could fix -exactly—perhaps his mother least of all—the paternity of Bassianus, -though, on the other hand, this very uncertainty had its peculiar uses -at the psychological moment. Certainly the discovery that she had other -children, whilst Bassianus alone comes to the front, lends countenance to -the official story that her attachment to Caracalla was not unfruitful, -while the name Bassianus, which her son bore, was the name by which -Caracalla was always known until the time of his proclamation, and -even afterwards. At any rate there is nothing unlikely in the imperial -paternity which all authors mention, some as conjectural, some even -assuming as a fact, with, however, very little chance of ascertaining the -arcana of the circumstances. There is and can be, at any rate medically -speaking, no truth in the abominable suggestion of Lampridius, that -the boy was named Varius on account of the variety of gentlemen who -contributed to his _mise en scène_, especially when Lampridius knew, if -he knew anything at all, that the lady’s husband was by name Varius. -What, therefore, was more natural than that the lad should bear the -family name along with the other belonging to his natural father the -Emperor Bassianus? - -The reputed birthplace is certainly a mystery. Why Soaemias should -have taken the long and tiring journey to Emesa, when she could have -enjoyed herself so much better in Rome, has never been explained. Even -though the birth were an accident which she wished to conceal from her -husband, why go to Emesa, where she was best known outside Rome, and -where people could talk just as well as in the imperial city? Her husband -may have been absent on military or civil duty for too long a time to -stop people talking about the interesting event (in some provinces the -tenure of office was five years), which would suggest things best left -undiscovered, but even then there were many such accidents happening in -the best-regulated families. No one would be shocked, her family was in -too good a position to allow any such expression of feeling; she was a -married woman and could claim the protection of that state of life at -Terracina, or Baiae, or any other seaside resort, until the time was -safely over. There seems no suggestion possible that will accord with -Julianus’ implication. It may be true, though we can see no earthly -reason for the journey, and, in the absence of corroboration, we may -conclude that in all probability it is merely a loose way of saying that -the family of a man belongs to a certain village or island, without -necessarily implying that the person in question was himself born there. -It may even be a backhanded way of disparaging the birth of him whose -memory had to be slighted, by saying that he was a mere provincial -nobody, whilst the birth of his murderer and successor is vaunted and -raised to great splendour by circumstantial untruth, in order to prove -him fully _capax imperii_. - -The second daughter of Julia Maesa was Julia Mamaea. While still abroad -with her family, she had married another Syrian, by name Gessianus -Marcianus, a native of Arca. Nothing is known of him except from Dion’s -statement that he had filled, more than once, the office of Imperial -Procurator. By this marriage Mamaea incurred the _capitis diminutio_ -on account of the inferior rank of her husband, but by means of a -privilegium from Severus and Caracalla she was allowed to retain her -own Senatorial rank. Of this admirable woman none of the frailties so -common amongst her family and relations are reported. She lived and died -a model of unswerving rectitude. This affectation she carried almost to -the Jesuit extreme, when she made use of her reputation and wealth to -obtain the murder of the nephew of whom she so highly disapproved and by -whose murder she would benefit so materially. There is, of course, the -story of one indiscretion with Caracalla, by means of which she consented -to gain popularity for her son. She, as well as her sister, claimed the -distinction of having been Caracalla’s mistress, and Alexianus, as well -as Bassianus, was claimed as the result of that cousin’s too amorous -embraces. The admission was doubtless due rather to a hypocritical -affectation of wickedness, prompted by the political exigencies of the -moment, than to the fact that her cold and stately beauty had unbent to -tempt a too ardent cousin by the offer of those seductive attractions -which he could get so easily elsewhere. Especially as the assumption of -this rôle of temptress might cause her in after-life all the reproaches -of a misspent youth, with little to show for the sacrifice. Perhaps -mention ought to be made of the opinion of Dexippus, that the boys -Bassianus and Alexianus were cousins-german _paternal_, which, as we -know from theologians, when they are fitting facts to theory, is the -same thing as brothers by the same father. Certainly Mamaea’s beauty is -remarkable. As we see it in her bust at the Louvre, she is a younger -edition of her aunt Julia, perhaps without the humanity and gentleness -expressed in that lady’s portrait, which is to be found in the Rotondo -at the Vatican, but there is a real resemblance between the two. Both, -though Syrian by race, are remarkably Western in type, whereas the -features of Julia Soaemias—in the statue representing her as Venus -Coelestis, also in the Vatican museum—are distinctly of a more Oriental -cast. Soaemias’ form is most beautiful, though it must be confessed that -her head and arms would have pleased Rubens’ taste better than they do -our present pre-Raphaelite ideas of attractiveness. Soaemias’ history, -however, leaves no doubt in our minds that all men considered her the -more attractive at the time; and certainly, if but a tittle of the -stories concerning her be true, she must have been as fascinating as the -goddess in whose form she has been portrayed. - -We have now before us the main personages in the political revolution of -the year A.D. 218, a revolution which displaced the Moor, the beloved -of the Senate, and replaced the house of Severus, the beloved of the -army, upon that peak whereon the young Emperors of old Rome balanced -themselves—a peak with a precipice on either side. - -First, there is the _Empress Julia Domna Pia_, clever, witty, sagacious, -and beautiful. - -Then her sister, _Julia Maesa, Sanctissima_,—for so her religiosity -is described—the widow of Julius Avitus, wealthy, hard, crafty, and -domineering, but a woman with a policy and limitless determination, as -her later history shows. Then her two daughters— - -(1) _Julia Soaemias Bassiana_, the wife of Varius Marcellus, beautiful, -voluptuous, religious, neurotic, the mother of Elagabalus, a woman with -few, if any, political aspirations, tendencies, or abilities. - -(2) _Julia Mamaea_, the upright (except when other things paid -better), classic, cold, calculating, philosophic, mildly interested in -Christianity, and devoted to the interests of her own family. - -Finally, the two successive Emperors, their sons, _Varius Avitus -Bassianus_, the impulsive, affectionate, headstrong child of about -thirteen years, with all his mother’s hereditary sexuality, neurotic -religion, and love of life; and _Alexianus_, a child of approximately -nine, Mamaea’s son, and bearing her reputation, of whom more at a later -time. - -Let us follow in outline the actions and movements of this family from -the death of the Emperor Antoninus Caracalla to the inception of the -movement which placed his, at least reputed, son in his place. - -[Illustration: Medal of Julia Domna Pia, Empress (British Museum). - -Coin of Julia Maesa Augusta (British Museum). - -Coin of Julia Soaemias Augusta (British Museum). - -Coin of Julia Mamaea Augusta (British Museum). - -_Face page 40._] - -Without doubt the family had lived securely and delicately in Rome -through the reigns of Septimius Severus and his son, growing in wisdom, -stature, and prosperity, and, as far as we know, in favour with God and -man, until the tragic events of the year 217 made it appear that the -fortunes of the family had come to a sudden and decided collapse. The -circumstances of the death of Caracalla were typical of that age of -sovereignty. As a general rule the knife gave what a dish of mushrooms -took away. Caracalla’s government had been cruel and severe in the -extreme, but he was adored by the army, with whom he lived and worked, -not as Emperor, but as comrade. For them he could never do enough in the -way of privileges, for them the treasury was depleted, and cities turned -into cemeteries that they might have the booty. Fighting was as natural -to him as to a tiger cat; and fighting he died. It was for the pursuit -of a campaign against the Parthians that the Emperor and Court had moved -to Antioch in Syria, where Julia, his mother, was acting as Secretary of -State, while the Emperor was bounding like a panther upon the various -cities of Mesopotamia. In the pursuit of her duties, it happened that -there came into her hands certain letters warning her of a plot against -her son’s life. - -With the army at that time was a praefect, Opilius Macrinus by name, a -Moorish lawyer of low birth and pedantic habits. He had been procurator -to Plautianus, the so-called traitor, whom both Julia and Caracalla -had hated. Now Macrinus had been honoured by Severus after Plautianus’ -murder, and still stood high in the imperial favour—though he was treated -by the Emperor, says Dion, as a sort of buffoon. Macrinus had dreamed -that the purple should be his, and was supported in his wish by the -African astrologer Serapion, who was obliging enough to prophesy the -speedy demise of Aurelius Antonine in Macrinus’ favour. - -Julia immediately sent dispatches containing the account of what was -going forward to her son, who, as usual, was absent from the city. When -these arrived in the camp, Caracalla was just mounting his chariot, and -gave orders that the mail should be taken first to Macrinus, who would -sift its contents and only bring what was necessary to the Emperor. Thus -did Macrinus learn that his treachery was discovered and a death-sentence -for real or supposed treason imminent, which unpleasant certainty he -resolved to obviate without further delay. In a very few days he had -discovered a discontented person willing to do his work, one Martialis, -a centurion, whose brother, according to Herodian, had recently been -executed for some military offence, or, in Dion’s version, because he was -angered at his own tardy promotion. These two discussed the matter and -resolved on the extermination of their mutual grievance, Martialis to do -the deed. - -The opportunity came on the 8th April 217, when Caracalla was on a -journey to visit the temple of the Moon at Charrae in Mesopotamia. By -the way, he had occasion to dismount for purposes of natural relief, -and withdrew somewhat from his staff, thus leaving himself unprotected. -Martialis saw his opportunity. On the pretext of having been called, he -rushed up and stabbed the defenceless Emperor in the back, then made off, -followed by the German officers, who immediately got wind of what had -been done. He was the cat’s paw, and suffered the penalty that Macrinus -had foreseen would be his. Four days later, and, _faute de mieux_, the -army offered the Empire to this same Macrinus, little wotting for the -moment what his part had been in the tragedy they deplored, desiring only -a leader against the approaching forces of King Artabanus. As usual, -according to Herodian, the Senate breathed a sigh of relief when the -Emperor died. In their effete condition they were only too anxious to -change masters as often as possible. With a want of political sense and -ability, which so well merited the treatment they received at the hands -of their tyrants, that august body continually preferred—with an entire -lack of statesmanship—the unknown to the known evils of their future. - -At the time of Caracalla’s death, Julia’s chief grief was at the loss -of her influence. During the last quarter of a century she had had the -world at her feet, and not the world of sycophants by any means. Latterly -she had enjoyed the supreme power, and must have had enormous patronage -in her hands; naturally her nominees would be men eager in her interest -and support. Dion seems to say that her first idea was one of suicide, -as a means of escaping her loss of prestige, but he shows us that her -fears proved groundless, since the new Emperor left her in Antioch with -the outward marks of her dignity unaltered. It was certainly not a wise -policy from Macrinus’ point of view. Julia, knowing at least of his -treachery, and ably assisted by her crafty sister, took advantage of the -mismanagement of the Parthian campaign, and the insensate strictness with -which this pedantic lawyer immediately attempted to reform the manners -of his young soldiers, to suggest that she herself would make a better -ruler than this pedagogue (at least, so one gathers from Dion, 78-23). -It was a chimerical scheme at best, and as Julia knew her Rome so well, -she must have realized that no woman could have a chance, as sole ruler, -in such an environment. It is therefore more natural to suppose that -if she attempted anything at all, it was to suggest some youth to the -army in whose name she could exercise the power she loved; and who was -more natural than the son of Soaemias and Caracalla? It is conjectural, -of course, but the report of his paternity seems already to have been -abroad, and will account for the extraordinary alacrity with which the -troops received the lad a few months later. At any rate, something caused -Macrinus to change his mind as to the advisability of allowing Julia and -her relations to remain longer in the Eastern capital. Thus he ordered -them to return at once to Emesa, whence they were sprung. Julia was too -proud to submit to the condition of subject under the adventurer whom -her family had raised from nothing, or to become after so much grandeur -an object of public pity. She resolved, therefore, to escape from her -distress like a Stoic of ancient days. Moreover, she was suffering from -a disease which is still considered incurable. Death was approaching her; -she went out to meet it, and either allowed herself to die of starvation -or pierced her cancer with a poisoned dagger. The report that Macrinus -had ordered her suicide is quite incompatible with his other dealings -towards the family of Bassianus. - -Maesa, more prudent and more far-seeing, resolved to obey the order -literally, and returned with her widowed daughters (Dion), their two -sons, and all her vast treasure to her native city of Emesa, some 125 -miles south of Antioch. Here, as we have already pointed out, the family -was of immense importance, not only on account of their hereditary -position, but by reason of their wealth and imperial connections. -Macrinus’ short tenure of office is one continual record of gross -blunders, of which this is about the most futile, comparable only with -a few similar acts perpetrated by our own Stuart dynasty and the last -hereditary kings of France. Emesa was the one place in the Empire -where Maesa had real power and authority. A whole city would back her -pretensions and further her schemes with a devotion that Macrinus could -only expect from the handful of Moors who formed his bodyguard. - - - - -CHAPTER III - -THE USURPATION AND FALL OF MACRINUS, 217-218 - -_Steps to Empire_ - - -As we have suggested, Maesa saw more possibilities in living than in -assaying that better part which can never be taken from men, which -circumstance shows that she at least was not tainted with the growing -superstition that a mythical eternity is preferable to a certain present. -She promptly obeyed the edict of banishment which Macrinus had published -against the relations of the murdered Emperor, and, as we have said, -took with her to her native city the whole of her wealth and belongings. -It was some time during the winter of 217/18 that Macrinus ordered the -family of Bassianus to leave Antioch, and it was this very departure that -eventually cost him his throne and life. Certainly he must have known -that plans for replacing the house of Antonine on the throne were rife. -The final result shows months of work, effected only by hosts of agents. -In fact, we may almost surmise that government servants all over the -Empire had never acquiesced in the usurpation of Macrinus at all, and -were merely biding their time. There was only one safe plan for Macrinus, -if he wanted the loyalty of the civil and military parties in the state, -namely, to extirpate the whole house of Antonine. Instead of taking -this sensible and necessary measure, he merely banished the relations -of Caracalla, whom the soldiers regarded as their natural allies, most -especially the son and impersonator of that Emperor, the young Bassianus, -now aged about fourteen years. - -They had more than one grudge against Macrinus. First, they felt the -utter disgrace of the Parthian campaign, and were disgusted at the lying -medal to celebrate a victory which all the world knew to have been a -colossal defeat. Next, they were righteously annoyed at the restrictions -put on their usual liberty. Third, they were quite unnecessarily -relegated, on half rations, to uncomfortable winter quarters, their pay -reduced, and their privileges stopped. - -It is easy to imagine the soldiers’ disgust at finding themselves -subjects to a mere legal pedant, in the place of their popular idol and -born leader Caracalla, subjects of a man whose prime object seemed to -be the infliction of harsh and unnecessary punishments in all matters -concerning the ordinary enjoyments common to their state and life—a -ruler whose first reforms were to make criminal offences those natural -pleasures which were alone considered to make the strenuous military life -endurable. Tristran, quoting from Dion, recalls a law which ordained the -burning alive of a soldier and his mistress (_junctis corporibus_); or, -as an act of grace, their walling up together (in the same interesting -condition), and their being left to die of hunger and suffocation. This -feeling of rebellion was by no means lessened when men knew that the -new Emperor was taking his ease at Antioch, the Queen of the East, and -they compared this treatment with what they had received from their -friend and comrade the late Emperor. Macrinus was full of regulations -for others, but fully impressed with the legal maxim that the lawgiver -is above the law. It is small wonder, all things considered, if the -prayers of that host were that the Gods would favour their suppliants -both in their hatreds and in their lusts, prayers that were offered in -such right Davidic fashion that Forquet de Dorne thinks the attempts -made even during this period against the Emperor’s life would have been -successful, if it had not been for the fidelity of his fellow Moors. -Macrinus, like other amateur soldiers, did not recognise the power of the -army in the government of a military empire. He seems to have thought -that the best way to play up to his electors was to adopt a title of -Severus and display it towards them in all its rigour. Not that Macrinus’ -incapacity as a statesman and military leader ceased here; he made a -yet greater mistake in leaving a large and discontented army in winter -quarters in Syria, partly at Emesa itself. These legions were nominally -for the protection of Phoenicia; actually, they kept Maesa in touch with -the outside world, and were under the direct influence of her active -brain and limitless treasure, for to such Herodian gives us to understand -that her spoils approximated. Little could the Moor have imagined -what a volcano he was preparing for himself when he left together the -discontented legionaries, the aunt of Caracalla, and the representative -of the house and name of Severus: whose title to bastardy henceforward -became of prime importance to the family and their fortunes. - -Julia Maesa had not lived for twenty-five years at the Roman Court for -nothing. She knew the men with whom she had to deal, she was accustomed -to observe and meditate; further, she had gold which openeth the heart of -man, and an intelligence quite acute enough to know where it could best -be spent in order to yield the largest return. Besides this, she had a -grandson celebrated for his remarkable beauty, his vivid intelligence, -and his admirable gaiety. For such a youth employment must be found -immediately. Here at Emesa was the very thing ready to hand, the -sacerdotal position which was the property of the family. Maesa knew that -a high position in the Church is an acquisition which, even in this life, -is of lucrative and social advantage to the holder. The High-Priesthood -of one of the most important religions of Syria was Bassianus’ possession -for the mere trouble of undergoing the ordination rite, while with it -there still went a certain amount of the former princely kudos of that -house. No sooner had the family, with apparent grief and tribulation, -covered the intervening miles, than Bassianus was endowed with the -family offices, dignities, and emoluments, while his cousin Alexianus -was most probably associated with him as a sort of priest or acolyte. A -very fitting figure the boy made as High Priest of the Semitic Elagabal -or Sun God, the God of Gods made without hands, supreme, fecund, potent, -and glorious. Elagabal was worshipped under the symbol of a great black -stone or meteorite, in the shape of a Phallus, which, having fallen from -the heavens, represented a true portion of the Godhead, much after the -style of those black stone images popularly venerated in Normandy and -other parts of Europe to-day. The temple itself was of great renown; -its celebrity was gained from the fact that it represented the greatest -natural force of all time, and its magnificence was in proportion to -its renown. Gold, silver, and precious stones had poured into it, not -only from the countryside and from Judea, but from kings, satraps, -and vassals all over the Eastern provinces. Solomon’s temple, though -nominally the last word in barbaric ostentation, was easily surpassed -in taste, richness, and splendour at Emesa. Herodian paints vividly the -sensuous beauty of the worship, the vestments, the music, the dances, the -sacrifices, and the mysteries, till one has only to substitute Jehovah -for Baal, and one has a familiar scene; rather more splendid, rather -more cosmopolitan than the Jerusalem mysteries, but equally designed to -entrance the beholder and to mystify the devout. But whereas Baal drew -all men within his warm, natural, fecund embrace, Jehovah was at best -a local deity whom no one—save those urged on by tribal necessities—had -ever thought it worth while to propitiate, let alone to serve, at least -if we can form any idea of his importance from the Semitic literature and -philosophy when compared with that of the Western Empire. - -Into all this power and sensuous beauty Bassianus stepped proudly, as -supreme lord, knowing how well it became his own splendid magnificence. -He must have been warned that it was but a means to an end, that here he -had no abiding city; but unfortunately he had a strong strain of mystical -devotion in his blood, and immediately became an enthusiast for his -deity. From the first moment that he appears upon the scene the boy is -always the same, impulsive, enthusiastic, mystical, continually dominated -by that effete neuroticism which still trades under the name of religion. -Thus Bassianus gloried in the beauty, which to his mind expressed, -however inadequately, the potency of his ineffable deity. Here was a God -who was able to make men happy, and had taken him into a very specially -protective embrace; a God who was evidently supreme, only, and alone, the -God of the Universe. Further, Bassianus gloried in his own beauty, the -perfection with which he had learnt to dance that indolent measure to the -kiss of flutes, robed in garments the like of which he had not imagined -during his residence in the city of the Caesars. - -Now, it will be remembered that Caracalla’s soldiers were wintering, -half-fed, loveless, and discontented in that place, and, as is not -uncommon with simple men of that profession, they were easily attracted -by the mysterious and the unusual. Soon they heard of this wonderful boy, -in whose face was the enigmatic beauty shared by Gods and women; and -further, it was rumoured that, unlike most religious functionaries, this -priest was more ready to give than to receive. They came in scores to -watch and worship, and found, when they came, that he possessed the charm -of the dissolute and the wayward, heightened by the divine. On his head -was a diadem set with precious stones, whose iridescence sparkled like a -luminous aureole about his brow. His frail tunic was of clinging purple -silk diapered with gold, the sleeves were wide, after the Phoenician -fashion, and fell to his feet, and he was shod with fine gilded leather -reaching to his thighs. Many of those who gazed upon him must have seen -and remarked his beauty in the great City of the Empire, whilst those -who ascended to the temple and beheld its rites believed each day more -strongly (assisted, of course, by Maesa’s well-spent incentive) that they -beheld the child of destiny. Never had his beauty appealed as now; never -had the soldiery felt the need of a deliverer as much as at present. -Still the numbers—attracted by rumour—grew greater till the lad, feeling -the return of Rome to himself, ceased to dance, and strolled amongst his -beloved soldiers, surveying them with the bold feminine eyes they loved. -Amongst the troops was a certain Eutychianus, called by Xiphilinus, -Comazon, because he took part in mimes and farces. He was a soldier of -some age and renown who had served in Thrace under the Emperor Commodus, -and was a man of growing influence and ability. Publius Valerius Comazon -Eutychianus was the full name of the man, who was highly honoured for his -part in the subsequent proceedings. It is impossible to believe that this -man was merely an actor, indeed it is most probable that the abridger -of Dion has thought fit to introduce a bit of gratuitously impossible -information when he remarks that Eutychianus was only a freed man of the -Emperor and an actor. During the reign of Elagabalus he was once Consul -and twice City Praefect, and was again appointed to this same office -under the Emperor Alexander. - -This man and the tutor Gannys seem to have been the means of forcing home -on the neglected legionaries two most important items of information. -Through them the soldiers were reminded that Bassianus was their murdered -comrade’s son and heir, issue of the Emperor and his equally popular -cousin Soaemias—that fiery-eyed woman of superb bearing, before whom -fire had been carried as before an Empress, and yet one whose favours -had ever been for the strong, whose predilections were for the military. -Here they found her again, passionate as ever, banished on account of -her relationship to their dead leader, and banished by the man they now -knew to be his murderer. And further, they found her rich. Sedulously -she caused the rumour of her generosity to circulate, until all men -knew about the lumps of gold she was ready to give to any one who would -place her Antonine on the throne of his father. It may have been that -more than one in that camp could have traced a resemblance to himself -in the young priest’s features, but none did, the lumps of gold had a -language all their own, a persuasive power so potent that not only was -Bassianus recognised with a frenzy of loyalty, but his less attractive -cousin Alexianus was accepted as his half-brother, a youth whose imperial -paternity was at least as possible as his own. - -Now the question was, could anything be done to put these protestations -of loyalty to some practical use? Bassianus was certainly accepted by the -legionaries early in the year 218 as the legitimate bastard and heir of -Caracalla; the true Augustus, deprived of his throne and heritage by the -hated Moor,—the man who had killed their idol, and was now oppressing -them (which was perhaps more to the point) with the multitude of his -civilian parsimonies. - -Already Maesa’s plans (or were they those of Julia Pia?) were taking -shape in a manner almost too good to be true, when, to the help of -the youth and his relatives, came the divine portents, which were the -accustomed foreshadowings of important events. The great God veiled his -face. Elagabal signified his displeasure at the rule of the murderer by -an eclipse, and following on the eclipse came a comet, a daystar from -on high (another frequently recurring sign of the rise of a redeemer -and of the rejuvenation of the world). These signs and portents were -doubtless adequately explained to the soldiers, and seem to have decided -them to redeem their promises. Within four days, according to Wirth, it -was decided that Bassianus should repair to the camp with his treasure, -and be proclaimed Emperor by the whole army in that province. Of course, -all this took time. Authorities differ, not only as to the method -adopted, but also as to the month in which the proclamation took place. -Dion states definitely that Bassianus was proclaimed Emperor at dawn on -16th May 218. Wirth, criticising Dion, decides that the proclamation -took place almost immediately after the eclipse, which we know from -Oppolzer took place on 12th April. He quotes Dion’s own words that the -proclamation took place ὑπὸ τὰς ἠμέρας ἐκείνας of the eclipse; therefore -16th May is obviously a scribe’s error for 16th April, as the phrase is -quite incapable of bearing the meaning within thirty-four days. Further, -Wirth goes on to explain that haste was an obvious necessity, as no -troops would ever be left in winter quarters till the middle of May. The -middle of April, in that province, was more than late enough to account -for Dion’s statement that the troops had been unduly delayed in winter -quarters that year. Undoubtedly, Wirth’s suggestion as to an earlier date -of proclamation than that stated in the present text of Dion is the most -likely; the difficulty lies in the fact that from 16th April to 8th June, -the date of the battle, there is a period of seven weeks in which the -active Maesa apparently did nothing; but more of this later. To continue -with the story. When the preparations were ready, and the portents of the -eclipse had decided the superstitious, Dion says that Bassianus, Maesa, -and the family of the Bassiani, with wagons bearing their treasure, the -ransom of the Empire, left the city, and took up their quarters within -the camp on the night of 15th April (or 15th May) 218. Herodian says -that only Bassianus and Eutychianus went, and by stealth, as Maesa was -ignorant of the final plans, though both agree that at dawn on the next -day the High Priest, Bassianus, was brought out, shown to the soldiers, -habited in the clothes that Caracalla had worn, and then, Macrinus having -been deposed, Bassianus was elected Emperor in his stead, under the title -of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, Antonini Filius, Severi Nepos, Augustus, -Pius, Felix. Herodian adds that the camp was at once fortified, both to -protect the young Emperor—who, like his putative father, preferred the -camp to the palace—and also to withstand the punitive expedition which -Macrinus was bound to send as soon as he heard of the revolt and mutiny. -The news would take at least a couple of days to reach Antioch, if not -considerably longer, considering that the soldiers had taken care to -keep the proceedings within the camp. In due course Macrinus heard of -their audacity. He was astonished and disgusted, and frankly said so. -The account which he sent to the Senate was not pleasant reading for any -of those it concerned; but except by means of the pen, the nominally -deposed Emperor did not think that much need be done. Still, that a -mere boy, with a handful of women, should have seduced the defenders of -a province was preposterous. Something must be done to show the soldiery -that, though Caracalla might have stood such freedom of choice (which -by the way he never did), he, Macrinus, was now master of the Empire, -and incidentally their master as well. It was a veritable storm in a -tea-cup, of course, but really upsetting to the man who thought that his -troubles were now over, that rest remained for the elect of the Gods. The -remarkable thing about Macrinus is, that he seems to have been absolutely -in the dark as to the state of public opinion, and the extent of the plot -for replacing the Antonine House on the throne. As we read the history -of Bassianus’ phenomenal rise to power, there is a ring of the English -Restoration. It is impossible to account for his universal success except -on the grounds that the government officials everywhere as well as the -soldiers recognised in him a legitimate sovereign and an obvious ruler. -From the moment at which he set up his standard there seems to have -been no sort of adequate opposition either from the civil or military -government of Macrinus; while, on the other hand, Bassianus obviously had -a party organised in every city and province, which was sedulously kept -informed of his progress from day to day. Not only _a_ party, but _the_ -party, as there is no instance—except at Alexandria, where the Antonines -were scarcely popular—of Bassianus’ legates being received otherwise than -with open arms. None of which facts argue well for the position of the -Moor in the state. Macrinus was inclined to overestimate his popularity, -and he certainly underestimated the influence of youths and women. -Perhaps he had no experience of female tactics, and the persistency -with which they prosecute their own designs; he obviously thought a -sententious letter to the Senate, full of smug platitudes, abuse of the -army and the house of Antonine, was what that august assembly wanted. -So far he had not missed his mark; but when he went on to inform them -that they would never have any desire to wish him any hurt, one of the -Senators, Fulvius Diogenianus by name (who was obviously better informed -than the majority as to the likelihood of their having to put up with -Macrinus much longer), answered immediately and with surprising candour, -“But that is what we are all longing for”; whereupon the Senate sent -word to the army that their general and Emperor was not to be trusted on -several counts. - -Macrinus, however, was not entirely idle; he had at least begun to think. -True, he had, for himself, preferred the pen to the sword, and then found -that the pen was a double-edged weapon like the sword, only rather more -dangerous, because it constituted documentary evidence. Still, he would -not let others err in the same way. He sent for his Praetorian Praefect, -Ulpius Julianus, to attend at his silken couch and talk business. The -result of this conference was that Macrinus resolved to strike fear, by -proxy of course, into the hearts of that “child and idiot,” his two -women, and the legion who supported him; and where, he argued, would the -revolt be when their hopes, centred in a child, too young to know even -the rudiments of politics, were suddenly blighted? Of course, he would -like news, and yes, he thought he had better say it, the boy’s head in a -charger—stone-dead hath no fellow. It would put the Emperor quite at his -ease once again to know that his rival was dead. It was perhaps foolish -to be concerned about so effete a crew, nothing could come of it all; but -still he would feel relieved if Julian would go at once to Emesa. - -We are not told how long Julian took in his preparations, or on the -journey. From Macrinus’ attitude of disregard, probably he was not -specially pressed, though from his selection of troops Julian must have -thought the rising more important than Macrinus had pretended in his -letter to the Senate. Julian’s chief anxiety was to secure loyalty to -Macrinus amongst the men he took for the suppression of this revolt. -Certain incautious speculations amongst the men led to the execution of -several before the expedition started. From his position as Praetorian -Praefect, Julian would take a fair contingent; his dignity demanded it, -and probably his knowledge of the state of politics would tell him that -a strong movement was necessary at the outset. Apparently about three -legions went in all. Julian added to his forces a large number of Moors, -unless Herodian means that he took the Moorish cohorts of the Praetorian -Guard as main body, and added other men to these; in any case, it seems -obvious that, even if the government had not got wind of what was going -forward, the army had, and in consequence the Moors, as Macrinus’ own -countrymen, were considered the most trustworthy soldiers for the work, -besides which they were never over-particular in their methods. There -is evidence that, no matter how much he might belittle the movement in -public, Macrinus knew that the “Idiot” and his two women were likely to -have a full dog’s chance, and get a good run for their money. - -The journey from Antioch to Emesa is, as we have said, a matter of 125 -miles. The report of the meeting _inside the camp_ had to reach Macrinus; -he had to get his mind attuned to the extraordinary circumstances; then -appoint Julian, who had to make his inquisition and other preparations, -and then get to Emesa. Conjecturally, he could not have arrived with an -effective force much before the 28th of April, or settled down to attack -the fortified camp outside the city till that day. On the first day, Dion -tells us that Julian all but took the camp in a long day’s fight; but -it was heavy work, and, contrary to Macrinus’ expectation, the arrival -of Julian had not struck fear into the heart of the “effeminate and -debauched Syrian lad,” who was still with his soldiers, and showed no -intention of giving way even when the sun began to decline in the west. - -[Illustration: Coin of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (Caracalla) (British -Museum). - -Coin of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (Elagabalus) (British Museum). - -Coin of Macrinus recording Victoria Parthica, A.D. 218. (From a woodcut.) - -Coin of Diadumenianus as Emperor, A.D. 218 (British Museum). - -_Face page 60._] - -Unfortunately for Julian—and incidentally for his master also, as things -turned out—the Praefect thought that “the night cometh in which no man -can work,” and gave his Moors leave to retire to their lines at sunset. -With them went certain of the Emesan legionaries, displaying a hardihood -truly heroic, unless they were fairly sure of their ground. All that -night they worked, spreading their evangel, talking, persuading, and -promising on behalf of Antonine and his gold; talking until even the -besieging Moors knew full well that those walls held not only the son of -Caracalla, but the limitless wealth which he was ready to give to all -those who would assist him in reaching the throne of his father and their -hero. It was enough. When morning broke, the vision of his Augustitude -was seen above the walls of the camp, dressed in garments which they -could recognize from their colour and shape as having belonged to -Caracalla, and surrounded by his money bags. There he stood, boldly and -proudly, certainly in imminent danger of death from the besiegers, but -without fear, while all around him rose a great shout, “Behold the image -of your benefactor! can you fight against him and us, who stand by him -for his father’s sake?” Now, the resemblance, as shown on the coins given -by Cohen (_vide_ coin 8, p. 324, and coin 1, p. 243, vol. iv.), is quite -remarkable; whether it was merely a family likeness or entirely paternal, -it was quite good enough for men who at some little distance were already -convinced, and entirely anxious to share in the largess that they had -seen was already the prize of others. - -There was no further fighting, for all Julian’s orders. The soldiers -threw down their arms and refused battle against the popular idol. True, -there was still a question of heads, but the head of the “Idiot” was not -thought about in the old connection; it was too valuable where it was. -It was the officers of Macrinus who suffered at the hands of those who -were candidates for their offices, and to whom the position and property -of the defunct had been promised by the new Emperor. The last to fall -was Julian. That trusty favourite of the deposed Emperor had managed to -escape when he saw the way that the tide was flowing, but for a general -commanding-in-chief to escape is not easy, and there were doubtless many -aspirants for his responsibility and position. Herodian tells a dismal -tale of the Praefect found in hiding, where he was given a short shrift, -because his head was wanted for a use other than that of commanding the -Praetorian Guards. The ingeniousness of the conquerors had designed it as -an evangel, or announcement of good tidings to Macrinus, impersonating -the head he wanted, that of Bassianus the Impostor. - -But to return to Macrinus. Julian departed on his mission, the Emperor -seems to have got more and more worried; people must have told him things -which he had never heard before, and he appears to have worked himself -into a fever of excitement, a simple longing to do something, no matter -what, to get on the move, to propitiate somebody, chiefly the soldiers -whom he had neglected, and well, perhaps, just a bit persecuted. It had -all been for their good, of course, but now he had to think of his own -good; and so he set out towards Emesa. Not that he had any intention -of endangering his precious person by going anywhere in that vicinity -himself; but there was the second Parthian Legion, enrolled by Severus, -and very loyal to the house of Antonine, which was wintering at Apamea, -about half-way between Antioch and Emesa. Perhaps it would be as well -to modify that precious title of his by gifts, largesses, and other -privileges, especially in the case of this particular legion of Albano, -as it was called, a legion which was so near the danger zone, and whose -defection might simply mean flight for Macrinus. Gold had worked miracles -at Emesa, but Macrinus was not so foolish as to expect miracles, he only -wanted mercenary service; neither did he want any more talk of bribes, -which every one would accept very readily, and would as readily repudiate -the responsibility thereby incurred. But surely what had paid at Emesa -ought to pay at Apamea too. If a boy Emperor Bassianus was popular there, -why not set up a child yet younger than the impostor; in fact, why not -make his own son, Diadumenianus, Associate Emperor with himself? The -boy was quite ten years of age, and would make a fitting set-off to the -“Idiot” of fourteen, whose youthful pretensions he had just derided so -conclusively before the Senate. Besides which, it would be an additional -security for his family if anything untoward should happen, and would -furnish the occasion for a largess, which Macrinus was wanting. It would -be an occasion at which no one could cavil, no one pretend to sneer. -Neither would it be a craven act, such as the late dealings with Parthia -had been stigmatised. It was quite a budget that the ponderous lawyer had -thought out in so short a space of time. Travelling, he knew not quite -whither, had sharpened his wits wonderfully, and he did more than plan; -he executed his design without delay. The legions rejoiced once more in -their demoralising privileges, and in more than they could have hoped -for in the way of extra pay. Dion tells us that on the day when Macrinus -declared his son Antonine and Augustus (with no senatorial patent, of -course) he promised to each legionary 5000 drachmae, of which 1000 were -to be paid down. Further, in the letter to the Senate which announced -his son’s elevation, he promised to each Roman citizen a congiary of 150 -drachmae. Obviously Macrinus was changing his views; in his last letter -he had played up to the Senate and despised the army; he was now playing -up to the army, and showing the Senate and sovereign people of Rome that -he estimated their worth at just one thirty-third of the amount at which -he valued a base soldier—a man who would continually suffer himself to be -bribed, to the enormous hurt of the state, as he had so recently enforced -upon the senatorial attention. - -Macrinus was certainly not clever, his acrobatic feats were never -graceful, never gained him much applause even from the gallery. The -occasion of this congiary and donative was certainly a good bid for -general popularity; rejoicings went on apace; the obedient Senate, -having taken their bribe, poured contumely upon the house of Antonine -with a hearty goodwill, and declared its members enemies to the state and -commonwealth of Rome. But somehow no one was quite satisfied, certainly -not Macrinus; the news he was expecting did not come; the head he wanted -had not yet been sent. - -There is a certain difficulty about the date of Diadumenianus’ elevation. -Neither Dion nor Herodian state definitely when it was effected. Mommsen -postulates that it must be late in May on account of the scarcity of -evidence on the point. There are several known coins which call him -Emperor, one struck at Antioch, another at Thyatira in 218; a third -obviously earlier in the same year omits the title. Certainly the writer -of Macrinus’ letters to the Senate places it after the proclamation of -Bassianus, and leads one to suppose that it took place as given above, at -Apamea, and was the means adopted to conciliate the legionaries. - -Meanwhile at Emesa busy brains had been busily at work. A gentle reminder -of his perilous position was on the way to Macrinus. By way of showing -him that Julian had forced a battle, and was sending the spoil to grace -the festivities arranged for the Child Emperor’s elevation, Eutychianus -Comazon, the soldier whose persuasive power and influence had been of -such use to Maesa, bethought himself of a pleasant surprise. He took the -Praefect’s head and wrapped it in linen cloths, tied it with many and -elaborate cords, then, taking Julian’s own signet, he sealed the bundle -carefully and sent it by the hands of a trusty and cunning soldier. “From -the victorious Praefect Julian to his august Emperor, with greeting. The -head and source of our offence, according to the commandment.” Judge -of the fright and disgust which arose in the breast of that Moor on -discovering, when the bundle was opened, not the features of his despised -enemy, but the death-mask of his trusty and well-beloved lieutenant, the -man who had saved him from Caracalla’s vengeance at the outset of his -own plot. Merely that, and no further news to hand, because the bearer -of the tidings had departed without waiting for a reward. Bit by bit the -news trickled through: at least four legions had deserted, and, greatest -blow of all, the very Moors in whom he had trusted. The hated Antonine -was triumphant and in the ascendant. It was enough to wake even the -comatose parody of the great Marcus Aurelius. After waiting to recover -his senses, he took to his heels and ran—discretion being the better -part of valour—not, however, as Herodian suggests, with characteristic -untruth, towards Emesa, but back to Antioch, as Dion discreetly remarks, -with Bassianus and his paltry, though rapidly augmenting, forces soon -to follow. The boy and idiot was ready to fight the Praetorian Guards, -ready even to face the brunt of opposition from the conciliated legion at -Apamea if necessary. - -Bassianus’ army must have been enthusiastically loyal and keen. It was a -motley crew of men, with new officers and a disorganised commissariat; -certainly it had no adequate head. Indeed, had Macrinus taken the bull -by the horns at once, he was bound to have cut up Antonine’s forces and -silenced the revolt; but he escaped, hoping to fight another day, and -Bassianus instead came to Apamea. Here Severus’ legion of Albano was in -no mood to offer opposition to the heir of Severus, and promptly took -the suggested oaths, which added yet more strength to the rush that -was about to be made on Antioch, where Macrinus was sheltering himself -and shivering with apprehension, having left the field clear to his -adversary, and given him just what he wanted, time for accession of -strength. - -To return for a moment to the length of time during which this campaign -lasted. If we accept Dion’s date of 16th May for the proclamation, there -will only be three weeks left before the battle, in which time much has -to happen. First, The news has to be brought to Macrinus 125 miles away. -Second, Macrinus has to appoint Julian, who has carefully to choose his -men, to reach Emesa, and lose his head in the effort to take Antonine. In -the meantime Macrinus has written to the Senate to announce the revolt, -and get that body’s condemnation of the Antonine house. He has then gone -to Apamea with the court and baggage, declared his son Emperor, and, as -he thought, pacified the legion and organised festivities, during which -festivities he receives ocular demonstration of the failure of Julian’s -attempt. He then writes to the Senate a hurried letter announcing his -son’s accession, and receives an answer to his first letter condemning -the house of Antonine. He then retires to Antioch, and here there seems -to be a lull, during which time the patrolling parties, for whom Macrinus -has sent, come in to Bassianus’ standard, not Macrinus’. Herodian says -that this happened in driblets, but that these amounted to such a number -before the 1st of June, that Antonine’s generals advised him to tempt a -battle. All this, especially the wait for gradual accessions of strength, -would have been impossible to fit into less than a fortnight. - -But there is further evidence. According to Henzen, the Collegio Fratrum -Arvalium were concerned on 30th May with the “precatio cooptionis -Antonini,” to be admitted a member of the College. If the proclamation -had only taken place on 16th May, the Brothers could not have known -about it and arranged a meeting by 30th May, especially when we consider -that (according to Dion) Macrinus’ letters to the Senate had caused that -august body to declare war on the family of Antonine after that time. Had -Bassianus been proclaimed on 16th April and the Brothers heard of his -phenomenal success, they would naturally hasten to be on the safe side -by 30th May. Within a month from that date they would have heard of the -defeat of Macrinus, so that in all probability the meeting which admitted -Bassianus and sent Primus Cornelianus to announce his admission was held -about 28th June. On 14th July there is the record of a third meeting, -which merely takes further vows for Antonine’s safety, as the Emperor, -who has been already admitted a member. Dion’s date is, therefore, simply -impossible. Neither Macrinus nor Antonine could have accomplished what -they did in a fortnight, even three weeks. Rome could not possibly have -heard and answered under five weeks, even by express post. Bassianus -could not possibly have got together forces enough to assure success -under that period. We must therefore conclude that Dion’s date, 16th May, -is a mere slip for 16th April, as Wirth has postulated. - -This is very forcibly brought home to us when we realise (as Herodian -tells us) that when Bassianus did move on Antioch, it was with forces -scarcely inferior in number to those with Macrinus, and by so doing -he managed to frighten the Moor out of his lair, because there was a -fear that Antioch might fall and he would be caught like a rat in a -trap. Thus was Macrinus forced out to meet the child. Again the ancient -Procurator-Fiscal made an error of judgment by taking command himself. -He would have done better to stay in the city and give the command to a -trained general; but not a bit of it, he was too anxious, too worried to -trust any one. When he heard that Antonine was nearing Immae or Emma, not -twenty miles from Antioch, he went out suddenly, resolved to trust to his -Moors and Praetorians for the result. - -In this battle the valour of both armies seems to have been indifferent. -Herodian tells us that the soldiers of Antonine fought like lions, -fearing the results of doing anything else; preferring to die like men -than to be hanged like dogs; a report of valour which was probably picked -up from that army itself. But the stars in their courses seem to have -fought against Sisera in the person of Macrinus, while Deborah and her -leman Barak, otherwise Maesa and her similarly related Gannys (neither -of whom had ever seen red blood before save in the circus) managed so -to shut up the forces of Macrinus in the narrowness of the village, -that their numbers and superior agility, divested as they were of their -cuirasses and bucklers for that end, were of small effect. Nevertheless, -the issue of the battle would have been not a little doubtful if Macrinus -had not given it away by his cowardice. The guards made so vigorous a -stand, that Antonine’s army turned to fly. It was then that Maesa and -Soaemias showed their bravery, according to both Dion and Herodian, -for, having leapt from their chariots, they rushed into the midst of -the failing troops, and with tears and entreaties urged them to return. -The palm of victory seems, however, to lie with the boy Emperor. Both -Dion and Herodian tell us of his bravery and the mighty fury which -(like a divine inspiration) breathed from him, when, sword in hand, he -galloped through the failing ranks and cut down all those who showed an -inclination to turn from the fight. It was a good beginning, and shows -that the boy was not entirely what his biographers have painted him—the -craven, miserable, religious sensualist known to common report. He showed -in this battle that he could glory in his manhood, could forget that -salvation was by faith and prayer alone; could forget that only the -Gods can settle the great issues. It was thus that Antonine carried his -successful arms right into the opposing camp, hoping to find the Moor; -but to the disgust of all that host, the Emperor had vanished; being -tired, he had gone home. His Praetorians had sought for some time for the -ensigns that announced the presence of the Emperor, but they had sought -in vain, and deserters had told Antonine the story. - -Antonine now made a proposition to the opposing host, namely, that they -should turn and become his guards, should retain the privileges granted -by Caracalla, and above all, should fight no more for the craven. Nothing -loath, they did as they were bidden, and by nightfall on 8th June 218 -the proclaimed Emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus was the acknowledged -head of the greater part of the army, and ruler of the Roman world which -acknowledged Antioch as its capital. Maesa’s bold attempt had succeeded -beyond all her hopes. The one source of trouble was that Macrinus was -still at large. - -The Antonine policy had never been that of Macrinus. They had always -eradicated the source of their offence as far as they were able, and -to that end Marcus Aurelius sent messengers to take the ex-Emperor’s -person. From the battle-field that caitiff had gone, first to Antioch, -sending heralds on ahead to announce their master’s victory and the -destruction of the Antonine host, lest the populace should seize the city -for Antonine and kill him, or, as Xiphilinus puts it, in order to induce -them to receive him into their city at all. Had there been time, we -might have had another medal, in correspondence with the Parthian fraud, -announcing the victory of Macrinus at Immae; but stragglers began to come -in, and with them the news that Antonine would arrive shortly at the head -of the whole army, an announcement which caused bloodshed and strife in -the city, and decided Macrinus to reconstruct his plans. He would not -stay, he decided, where he was not wanted; he would make his way to Rome, -in the hope that his kindness to the Senate would at least secure them -as a bodyguard—though what use some 600 portly and middle-aged gentlemen -were going to be to him against the legions of a military empire was a -question that had not yet occurred to his distracted mind; but at any -rate Antioch was no place for him or his son. The latter he entrusted -to Epagathos, one of the few men on whom he could rely, with orders to -take him to the King of Parthia for safe keeping; whilst he himself, -having cut off his hair and beard, and laid aside the purple and imperial -ornaments for his successor’s use, set out for the capital city by the -route used for the ordinary post. It is a most significant fact that -this man, the acknowledged Emperor, should on the very day of the battle -itself have distrusted all his own lieutenants, governors, and civil -officials to such an extent that he felt the only safe mode of progress -was, disguised as a countryman, to travel by the public carriage. It -presupposes that by this time all men were merely waiting for his fall, -which was anticipated everywhere as a foregone conclusion, the inevitable -result of a weak usurper’s unsuccessful attempt. - -It is incredible that all the government servants and other accredited -agents of Macrinus would have dared to give credit immediately to the -ambassadors of an unknown pretender, and only in Alexandria (where the -name of Antonine had acquired an unenviable notoriety and there was a -personal friend of Macrinus as governor) were Antonine’s ambassadors put -to death as upstart traitors. True, there have been fugitive kings before -and since, but never after one battle and to make way for an utterly -unknown child, who by some miracle has got the whole functionaries of -imperial government, both civil and military, into his own hands in less -than a couple of hours, without even the use of the field telegraph. - -From Antioch, Macrinus went on horseback to Aegae in Cilicia, and thence -by the public post through Cappadocia, Galatia, and Bithynia, with great -expedition, giving out that he was a messenger from the Emperor Macrinus. -He intended to cross into Europe by way of Eribolus, and thus to avoid -Nicomedia, where the Governor Caecilius Aristo was seeking his life -to take it from him, in favour of the new Emperor. The distance that -Macrinus travelled was, so we learn from the _Itinera Hierosolymitana_, -750 Roman miles, covering in his haste, so Friedländer thinks, about -130 Roman miles per diem, which would bring him to Eribolus (barring -accidents, of course) about 15th June. Thence, we are told, he took -shipping and attempted to reach Byzantium; but the battle was not to the -strong; the attempt was rendered abortive by the avenging deity in the -shape of a great north-west wind, which threw him back upon the coast -near Chalcedon. There the well-informed agents of the Emperor Antoninus -came up with him, and discovered his whereabouts by means of Macrinus’ -imperial procurator, to whom, being short of funds, the Moor had -foolishly sent in his extremity. - -The discovery was tragic; the lord of the world, the man whose sceptre -threatened the Gods and commanded the sun, was discovered by his pursuers -hidden in a small house on the outskirts of Chalcedon, trembling with a -fever and fright, brought on by the fatigues and emotions of his hurried -journey. He was promptly put into a chariot and taken back towards -Antioch by his captor Aurelius Celsus. By the time the party reached -Cappadocia news was brought that Epagathos had failed in his mission, and -that Diadumenianus was killed, which so utterly upset the poor gentleman -that he deliberately threw himself from his chariot, in the hope of -ending his disappointed existence and escaping a worse fate. In so doing -he broke his collar-bone instead of his neck. There was certainly no luck -for Macrinus till he reached Archelais, about 75 miles from the frontier -of Cappadocia, when, presumably acting under fresh orders, the Centurion -ordered him to be put to death, a merciful release from the sufferings -which his stupidity and incapacity had brought upon him. The date is not -known, though it was in all probability some time before the end of the -month of June. Dion allots fourteen months less three days to his tenure -of power, counting to the day of the battle. - -As far as we know, he left neither friends, enemies, monuments (except -the arch at Tana in Algeria, erected by his compatriots), children, nor -evils to live after him. Certainly he meant well, and acted in a manner -more futile and less imperial than any of his predecessors. There was -no attempt of any sort made to revive his memory; no resuscitation of -any party in favour of his rule; no enthusiasm or even loyalty betrayed -towards him from the moment that Antonine claimed the throne. Antonine’s -campaign, on the contrary, was one triumphal procession, feebly resisted -by a counter-march on the part of the reigning Emperor; after which time, -and without even waiting to hear of their Emperor’s death or abdication, -the whole governmental world settles down without the least suspicion of -disloyalty under the headship of Antonine. Nothing is disorganised. In -less than half a day everything is absolutely at his disposal throughout -the empire, and no further question is asked as to where the late Emperor -may be. Travel quickly as he will, Macrinus was not able to take from -men’s minds what must have been a foregone conclusion, namely, that he -was doomed, and another was reigning in his stead. It was an obvious -case of a usurper about whom no one cares sufficiently to make further -inquiries. - -The Roman world had wearied of Macrinus and his pretensions, just as it -had wearied of Claudius; both were fantastic, vacillating, abstracted, -and cowardly tyrants, declaring themselves to be of the opinion of those -who were right, and announcing that they would give judgment in favour of -those whose reasons appeared the best. Slipshod and tattered they both -went through life; Emperors whom no one obeyed and at whom every one -jeered; men who, when they heard that conspirators were abroad, were not -indignant, but merely frightened. Perhaps it was the purple which had -driven so many Emperors mad, that made Macrinus an idiot; certainly he -acted like one, and made way for yet another Phaeton for the universe: -a prince for whose sovereignty the world was too small, as Tiberius had -remarked of his nephew Caius, nicknamed Caligula, the man without whom -neither Nero, Domitian, Commodus, Caracalla, or Elagabalus could have -existed. The lives of all are horrible, yet analyse the horrible and you -find the sublime. The valleys have their imbeciles, from the mountains -poets and madmen come. Elagabalus was both, sceptred at that, and with a -sceptre that could lash the earth, threaten the sky, beckon planets, and -ravish the divinity of the divine. - - - - -CHAPTER IV - -THE WINTER AT NICOMEDIA - - -Saluted by the whole army on the evening of 8th June 218, the young -Emperor, Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, set out to cover the 20 odd miles -which separated Immae from Antioch, the Eastern capital. Next morning, we -are told by Dion, he entered the city amidst the customary rejoicings. -It had been a principle with the late Caracalla to give conquered -cities over to the rapacity of the soldiers, and here the conquering -host imagined, nay, strongly urged, that this laudable custom should be -revived, but the present Antonine saw no reason for any such proceeding. -With a singular lack of subservience, which is, we are told, the first -mark of a born sovereign, he informed them that a regular toll would be -taken from the citizens instead, and each man paid a sum of 500 drachmae -from the imperial exchequer; he thus satisfied their natural expectation -of reward, and promised the population that no pillage would take place; -that, on the other hand, the ordinary contributions to the exchequer (the -marks of settled government in times of peace) were sufficient, while -pillage would suggest the wars and disturbances which were now over. - -It was certainly a bold act, this crossing the will of the soldiers at -the very outset, too bold for either a woman or a boy of fourteen to have -devised; but Antonine intended to make that city his temporary capital, -and had in consequence more than soldiers to conciliate. - -As to the question of principal adviser and chief minister, we have a -most difficult matter to face from the outset. Lampridius asserts that -Soaemias was in the position of absolute director of the Emperor and his -government, an assertion utterly ludicrous to any one who understands -that lady’s character, as Lampridius himself has expounded it. Soaemias -would have been, psychologically speaking, quite incapable of directing -any operations other than those of the nuptial couch; though she may have -thought out some of the details of costume, etiquette, and precedence -which later fell to her share as president of the Senate on the Quirinal; -besides which, her name always follows that of Maesa on inscriptions -and records where the two names appear together. Herodian, on the other -hand, states that Maesa was the ruling spirit, which is much more -likely. Maesa’s character is very different, if less attractive; crafty, -cunning, able, and persistent, she had not schemed, fought, and expended -her treasure except for her own ultimate good, and to her the ultimate -good was the possession of power and authority. Besides which, she was -fully _au fait_ with all governmental procedure in Rome, and was, in -consequence, the fit and proper person to direct the immediate policy. - -But there was much to temper her power. There was an element which even -she, far-sighted as she was, had forgotten, and left out of count, -namely, the Emperor himself. From the moment of his elevation he showed -that he had a mind and will of his own; probably he had possessed them -all along, but his grandmother had never thought that they would get in -_her_ way till she was brought face to face with them. - -By nature Bassianus was gentle and affectionate, with no other passions -than an innocent fanaticism for the cult of the only God, and a -hereditary temperament, which we know to-day is less of a vice than a -perversion; a temperament which Suetonius assures us he shared with -the majority of his predecessors, and Dion says was common amongst the -Syrian clergy. Caracalla had, innate in his being, jealousy, hatred, -and revenge. Bassianus hated no one; he was, in fact, only too prone to -love his fellows, but, like Caracalla, he had a strong and imperious -will. He had no sooner grasped the limitless possibilities of the -imperial position than vertigo seems to have overtaken him. But fancy -the position! On a peak piercing the heavens, shadowing the earth, a -precipice on either side, the young Emperors of Old Rome stood. Did they -look below, they could scarce see the world. From above, delirium came; -while the horizon, though it hemmed the limits of their vision, could not -mark the frontiers of their dream. In addition, there was the exaltation -that altitudes produce. - -The Emperor was alone; henceforward his will was unopposed. His -grandmother tried to make herself felt; on each occasion she had to give -way, to retire beaten, till one can well imagine that lady’s despair -at the unforeseen development,—almost anticipate the final resolve of -that crafty old sinner, to rid herself of the grandson whom she had -set up, fondly imagining him her mere puppet. Still, advisers were -necessary. From what we can see of the available men (and a man would -certainly be Antonine’s choice) there is but one for whom consistently -through his life the Emperor had respect, namely, Eutychianus. He had, -so Dion states, conceived the plot of the proclamation, and carried -it out by himself, while the women were still unconscious of what was -going forward. He was immediately made Praetorian Praefect, later he was -Consul, and twice City Praefect, which frequent recurrence of office, -being unusual in one person, is put down by Dion as a gross breach of -the constitution—where no constitution existed except the imperial -will. The sneer of Xiphilinus at his buffooneries is obviously an -untruth, considering the fact that we know of him as a soldier as far -back as Commodus’ reign. If he had been a mere nonentity or a worthless -person, it is incredible that, in the proscriptions and murders that -followed that of Antonine, Eutychianus should have been reappointed to -the office of Praefect of Rome for at least the ensuing year. Taking -all the evidence into consideration, it is probable that from the -outset the soldier Eutychianus was chief minister and director of the -government, and as such supported Antonine against his grandmother. To -him therefore, as well as to Maesa, may be attributed much of the sane -common-sense work that was done; work which, especially in the dealings -with the soldiers, shows a man’s hand, a soldier’s touch, indeed that of -a soldier who knows, by reason of his position, just how far he can go. - -The first recorded act of the new government was to announce to the -Roman Fathers the restoration of the house of Antonine. Now the Senate -of the Roman people was in no very pleasant position, considering the -possibilities and the knowledge that the imperial house had not a few -grudges to settle with their august assembly. Rome, as we know from the -record of the Arval Brothers’ meeting held on 30th May, was expecting -some announcement almost daily, either of the accession or extirpation -of the late imperial connection. The last communication from the East -had been signed by Macrinus. It was a distracted and illiterate epistle -announcing the elevation of his small son to the empire, and the speedy -fall of the pseudo-Antonine. In all probability the news which had -reached the Arval Brothers was common property, and the Senate was not -so sure of the result of the revolt as Macrinus would have liked them to -be. The main cause for anxiety was their answer, which was probably still -on its way to Macrinus: a dutiful response to his demand—made about 20th -April—that the Antonine family should be proscribed and declared enemies -to the state. With their usual subservience, the Conscript Fathers had -decreed as desired, had even gone out of their way to level invectives -and ordures against the memory of the house of Severus, and this with a -hearty goodwill that showed their genuineness. - -Now, if these tactless epistles, as the Fathers feared, had reached -Antioch either just before or just after the new monarch’s arrival, -they were likely to cause an infinity of trouble, especially if they -fell into the wrong hands, which, as luck would have it, they promptly -did. This circumstance quite decided Elagabalus on the amount of -respect which it was necessary to pay to the “Slaves in Togas” either -in his own or in any other state. Judge of their apprehensions when -an answer to their obedient proscriptions was brought into the Senate -House, within the first fortnight of July, if not earlier, by a herald -declaring his mission from the august Emperor, Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, -Antoninus’ son, Severus’ grandson, Pius and Happy, Tribune and Proconsul, -without so much as by your leave or with your leave from the assembled -Fathers. (Dion omits the title of Consul, despite the fact that there -are inscriptions which call Antonine Consul at that date.) Think how -willingly now the Fathers would have given their right hands to repair -the egregious mistake they had just made. They had been too precipitate, -too hurried altogether, and they knew from past experience that the house -of Antonine did not visit such mistakes in a chastened spirit. - -At last the imperial message was laid before the house. It was as though -the Gods had been for once propitious to human stupidity. The letter -contained gracious words, “dropping as the gentle dew from heaven.” Was -it a mere ruse, such as former Antonines had played, or was it in reality -the herald of a new world to come? Surely yes, for it promised amnesty, -on the word of the Emperor, to the Senate and people of Rome, for all -words, acts, and proscriptions formerly promulgated against the divine -Caesar, by command of the usurping murderer Macrinus; to whom the same -Senate and people were commanded to give neither help nor assistance, -but rather to condemn and execrate, in the precise terms they had so -recently applied to the divine Emperor now happily reigning. For was he -not an enemy to the state who had not only murdered his master, whom he -had been appointed to guard, but also in that he, who was neither Senator -nor otherwise worthy, had pretended to Empire, being a mere slave and -gladiator, whom Caracalla had raised to the rank of Praetorian Praefect? - -There was some more biting sarcasm on the ease with which that august -body had accepted the pretensions of the ex-slave without question, and -had been persuaded to confirm him in the position of his murdered master. -For himself, Antonine makes the mere announcement of his succession, -much as Macrinus had done on the occasion of his son’s elevation, with -the obvious implication that the Fathers will confirm the accomplished -facts with as little delay as is compatible with the usual decencies. He -tells them that to err is human, but Antonine, _mirabile dictu_, will -forgive, on the conditions mentioned, of course; which conditions taken -as fulfilled, the Emperor continues with an explanation of the happy -auguries for the commencement of his reign. He was come, he said, a -second Augustus; like Augustus he was eighteen years of age (an obvious -lie, and they knew it, but an Emperor of fourteen did not sound well); -like Augustus his reign started with a victory which revenged the murder -of his father, and the success, with which both he and Augustus had -met, was a good omen for the people, who might expect great things from -a prince who proposed to unite the wisdom of Augustus with that of the -philosopher Marcus Aurelius, and to rule after these truly admirable -examples. Another letter to the soldiers was delivered at the same time, -which contained extracts from Macrinus’ correspondence with Marius -Maximus, Praefect of the City. In this the vacillating duplicity of the -late Macrinus and his opinion of the army generally was made the most -of, his innate civilian distrust of the military held up to ridicule and -scorn. - -To crown these admirable productions of literary persuasiveness was a -promise to the soldiers of their immediate return to the privileges and -conditions existent under Caracalla in the case of each and several of -the Emperor’s beloved comrades. They were certainly admirable letters, -designed to rejoice the hearts of both guards and people, and to leave -the Senate in pleasurable anticipation of favours to come, if they took -immediate advantage of the opportunity now given them to change their -minds,—otherwise—well, the more stringent methods of Augustus might have -to be employed, and orders were sent to Pollio, Consul Suffectus, to -this effect. Undoubtedly the Fathers made up their minds with admirable -promptitude—they do not seem to have made a single inquiry as to the -fate of the Moor who was nominally reigning Emperor. Never was their -voice more willingly given; public thanksgivings were decreed for the -restoration of the house of Antonine, and the acts of an Emperor who -had treated them as so much garden refuse were lauded most fulsomely. -Proscription was the lot of the “Tyrant and Murderer,” who had usurped -the imperial styles, titles, and addresses; in fact anything that lay in -their power to oblige with they were most happy to offer; more than he -had ever thought of asking the Fathers hastened to lay at the feet of the -child whose origin, whose sentiments, whose feminine beauty, whose very -female relatives breathed divinity from every pore. - -There is no better example of the vast comprehensiveness of mind -possessed by bodies of men fulfilling the functions which Aristotle -calls the “collective wisdom of the many,” than this instance of the -wonderful facility with which they are able to see all points of view -in succession, especially the more advantageous. Only a few short weeks -back the infallible wisdom had decreed that the new deities were enemies -to the state. Now they knew that the existence of these very enemies was -only another way of stating the life and being of the state itself. -Their one regret was that they had not known it sooner; as it was, they -were forced to admit that, if the well-bred can contradict other people, -the wise must contradict themselves. - -Of course the young Emperor was pleased with the transports of loyalty -with which Rome greeted his accession; Maesa and Soaemias at the joint -title of Augusta which the Emperor and Senate conferred upon them; but -for precaution’s sake, Pollio might as well keep the soldiers on the _qui -vive_, as a sort of reminder to the Conscript Fathers that it would be -as well to take no more comprehensive views of the circumstances just -at present, especially as the Emperor had no intention of proceeding to -Rome just yet. But it was not wise to talk, and the Fathers knew it; they -were content, for the present, to praise the Gods for their safety, and -to register any decrees which august personages might see fit to send for -their confirmation, otherwise they decided to keep their mouths tightly -closed as to the inner thoughts of the heart. - -The announcement of his succession having been posted to Rome, and agents -dispatched to secure the person of the ex-Emperor, Antonine seems to -have turned his attention to rewards and the management of the army. As -was quite natural, the first offices were bestowed on Eutychianus, the -man whom we have just mentioned. In all probability it was to him that -the success at Immae was actually due; he was the soldier, the trained -leader, while Gannys, the boy’s tutor, to whom Xiphilinus ascribes the -victory, was admittedly an effete and uxorious leman of both Soaemias and -Maesa, who could never have been a real leader of men, even though he -were personally popular with the troops, as the Valesian Fragment states. -It is obvious that the work and abilities of the two men (Eutychianus -and Gannys) have got muddled. Xiphilinus (78.31.1) ascribes the plot to -Eutychianus; later (79.6), still presumably quoting Dion, he states that -Gannys was solely responsible for the whole plot. Dion (Frag. Vales.) -states that Eutychianus had contrived the whole revolution. Clearly -some scribe has erred in the insertion of names, or Xiphilinus is not -a trustworthy abbreviator. If we can judge by results, we see that -Eutychianus was immediately appointed Praefect of the Praetorian Guard -in the room of Ulpius Julianus, deceased, while Gannys, the personal -favourite of the Emperor and his women, got no sort of distinction. -Eutychianus’ elevation was not altogether popular. Xiphilinus considered -that he had no right to the post (though he had just remarked that -he alone set the Emperor on the throne), and that the frequency with -which he was reappointed was actually a constitutional scandal; but he -certainly did good and useful work throughout his tenure of office. - -The first move was to rectify the error of Macrinus in keeping troops -out in the field unnecessarily. The new government sent back to their -quarters all the soldiers gathered for the Parthian war by Caracalla, -and that with expedition. There are various inscriptions at Lambesa, in -Pannonia, and other places which testify to this, while at Moguntiacum -in Upper Germany there is a record of the arrival of a legion as early -as 23rd July 218, and which, by the way, gives the Emperor the title of -Consul, as well as the other imperial addresses which Dion has mentioned -that he assumed as of right. - -This dismissal of the soldiers was a prudent measure. It not only pleased -them, and gave them something to do besides stirring up strife, but -also made it possible to preserve discipline without resorting to the -enormous gifts which had impoverished the government heretofore. This -may certainly be traced to Eutychianus’ influence rather than to that of -Maesa, who would probably have preferred to keep the soldiers a little -longer, in order to see how things settled down; whereas the troops must -have been sent back to their quarters the very week of the battle, and -before Macrinus’ death, in order to have arrived in Upper Germany by -23rd July. This action, to whomsoever attributable, shows the perfect -confidence of the new government in its own stability from the very -outset. It was also a bold measure, and a measure which could only have -been taken by a general who knew his troops, who to keep and with whom to -dispense, because trouble was sure to arise through ambition and similar -causes. - -Dion tells us of at least two notables who thought themselves _capax -imperii_, because they imagined that the state was disturbed, the -occasion propitious. One was Verus, or Severus, tribune of the third -Gallic, another Gellius Maximus, tribune of the fourth Scythian Legion; -both were Senators who aspired to empire and found futurity. The same -historian mentions three others, insignificant persons; one the son of -a centurion in the third Gallic Legion (which legion, by the way, on -account of these two bids for notoriety, was practically disbanded, -the men being transferred to the third Augustan Legion). Another was a -clothier; the third a mere private person, whose temerity led him to -an attempt, the object of which was to subvert the fleet stationed at -Cyzicus during the winter of 218-219, presumably for the protection of -the Emperor when he arrived at Nicomedia. The attempts of these persons -met with the reward due to folly, and did but strengthen the position -of the Emperor by giving him an excuse to put to death others, whose -complicity or sympathy pointed them out as perilous to the state. They -were all friends of Macrinus, says Wotton, who were making difficulties -for the new government. All authorities state very clearly that there -was no man who suffered for any assistance given to Macrinus; neither -was there any inquisition made after enemies or neutrals. The heads -of the opposition party were merely put to death when they refused to -acknowledge the _fait accompli_; when they did so they were confirmed in -their offices as a matter of course. The number put to death, besides -the five aspirants to the imperial position, is placed by Dion at -eight—no enormous holocaust, when one thinks of the legions of imperial -servants confirmed in their offices. The names include Julianus Nestor, -Captain of the Guards to the late Emperor; Fabius Agrippinus, Governor -of Syria; Pica Caerianus, Governor of Arabia; Aelius Decius Triccianus, -a man of mean origin, whose death the 2nd Parthian Legion demanded on -account of his cruelty towards them; Castinus, a friend and officer of -Macrinus; Claudius Attalus, Lieutenant-Governor of Cyprus, a man who -had been expelled from the Senate by Severus and stupidly readmitted by -Caracalla. It was not clear on what count this man actually suffered, and -in consequence the story of an enmity between him and Eutychianus, during -the campaign in Thrace—when he is said to have cashiered the new Praefect -of the Praetorian Guards—is regarded as sufficient reason for saying that -Eutychianus demanded his death. - -During this same winter there was another pretender to kingship, helped -by another governor friend of Macrinus, a certain Senator Valerianus -Paetus. This man’s crime lay in the fact that, after the imperial custom, -he had coined gold pieces bearing his own image and superscription, and -distributed these amongst the people of Cappadocia and Galatia, which -was considered tantamount to a declaration of imperial proclamation. His -defence, when apprehended, was that the medals were actually intended -for the adornment of his mistresses. The court found, however, that no -sane man could reasonably possess this luxury in sufficient numbers to -justify the coining of the amount of medals discovered; besides which, -his accomplice Sylla, Governor of Cappadocia, who had just before been -tampering with the loyalty of the Gallic Legions, on their way through -Bithynia, was mixed up in the plot quite inextricably. So the judgment -given was, “guilty of usurping imperial functions, and aspiring to -empire”; rather a larger count, all considered, than the kindred count -of “coining,” which merited death in this enlightened and humane country -up to the year of grace 1832. Throughout the trials we are given to -infer that the usual course of judicial procedure was adhered to; the -condemnation was after trial and just cause found; while those who know -anything of Roman legal procedure are aware that every chance was given -to the accused, and that the burden of proof lay on the accuser. - -But to return to the chronological arrangement of the events during this -sojourn in the East. As we have said, on 9th June 218 Antonine entered -Antioch amidst the applause of the world. As far as we can judge from -Herodian’s statement, he must have stayed there for some months. The -pressure of immediate government business would be enormous, the various -legates had to be sent forth, the submission of governors received, and -the army question settled, along with other outstanding difficulties, -and in consequence the season was far advanced, says Herodian, when the -imperial family reached Nicomedia, too late for them to attempt the -crossing into Europe. Besides the business delays, much time must have -been wasted by the Emperor’s determination to take the image of the Great -God with him, and wherever he should reign, there to set up the temple of -that supreme ineffable Deity. - -Duruy states that during his residence at Antioch, or on the journey -across Asia Minor, the Emperor reconsecrated to Elagabal the temple of -Faustina which Marcus Aurelius had erected on Mount Taurus. If this be -so, it could only have been as a temporary resting-place. The Deity, we -are assured, had no settled home after leaving Emesa until the great -temple or Eliogabalium was erected on the Palatine. There was one person -to whom these delays appeared as highly unnecessary, namely, the Dowager -Empress Julia Maesa. - -In the full flush of her newly acquired position, she had every -intention of wintering in the capital. It was much more to her liking -than the provincial life to which the late Emperor had relegated her. -In consequence of this intention, we are led to infer that the lady -gave orders. Here the Emperor showed his paternity. Maesa may not have -fully credited her own assertion before, henceforward she was called -upon to believe it whether she would or no. Her grandson, perhaps merely -self-willed, perhaps wishing to settle business, certainly intending -to stay in the voluptuous East, told the lady to be quiet, and revoked -the orders. She tried reasoning, but was told that it wearied his -youthful augustitude. She persisted further, and then thought that she -had triumphed, because the Emperor, with true Antonine guile, packed -up and commanded the Court to set out for Rome. Not that he had the -slightest intention of facing the Tramontana, possibly even snow, but -it looked gracious, and many things might be done _en route_. For many -reasons the journey was slow and difficult; the dignity of the God had -to be considered; the procession across Asia would take some weeks. We -have no idea as to the route taken, though Roerth has informed us of -an inscription from Prusias, where, he says, the Emperor stayed; if -so, it was probably his last halting-place before Nicomedia, where he -had decided to winter instead of trusting himself on the billows of a -wintry sea. It was here that Antonine’s imperial life actually began; -here, under the eastern sky and surrounded by the pomp and colour of the -Orient, that the Emperor shaped his reign, and developed the two main -features of his life—his religion and his psychology. - -Before discussing either of these, however, it will be well to sum -up what we know of the work done during this winter spent in Asia -Minor. According to Hydatius’ statement, drawn from the _Consularia -Constantinopolitana_, Antonine ordered the records of indebtedness to -the fiscus to be burnt, which burning took thirty days. If the story be -true, it was either a foolish waste of indebtedness to the government, -or an acknowledgment of the hopelessness of collecting the debts, though -how the new government could have grasped this fact so quickly is not -recorded; in any case, it was a real bid for popularity. - -Much time would also be spent in the legal proceedings which settled -the fate of the various pretenders, malcontents, and traitors. Again, -the consideration of grants to legions, fitting rewards for assistance -given in time of need, in fact the thousand and one things which occupy -the official mind in the ordinary course of events, let alone on the -restoration of a house banished and proscribed by imperial predecessors, -had all to be discussed and would certainly take time. Cohen tell us of -one of these measures, of which we know nothing save from the coins of -218, some of which bear the legend “Annona Augusti,” which he says is a -reference to some measure relative to the grain supply, instituted for -the benefit of the people. - -There was certainly enough to occupy every one’s attention, but it does -not quite account for the whole Court staying at Nicomedia until May 219. -Cohen has, however, discovered a fact that no historians mention, namely -that during this period the Emperor was unwell, as some of the coins of -219 bear the legend “Salus Augusti,” “Salus Antonini Augusti,” which are -supposed to announce his recovery. If this illness had happened after he -arrived in Rome, we should probably have heard about it, besides which it -might have been a bar to his matrimony; if in Nicomedia, as Cohen thinks, -it accounts for the length of the stay. - -Business apart, of which they say little or nothing (facts have to be -culled from coins, inscriptions, reports, etc., not from the pages -of paid traducers), the historians now begin their tirades against -the Emperor’s conduct and religion. The obvious inference is that the -self-willed boy was already beginning to get on somebody’s nerves; on -whose more likely than on Maesa’s and his sensitive aunt Julia Mamaea, -who so ardently desired her own son to occupy his room. Maesa must have -learned by now, from her own sense of the fitting and the insistent -representations of Mamaea, that she would have been much better advised, -even from her own point of view, if she had set up her younger grandson -instead of this headstrong youth who was flouting her at every turn. Of -course, it was a question whether Alexianus’ elevation would even have -been possible, while an elder and a more charming son of Caracalla was -known to the soldiers, nevertheless Maesa ruminated and left records -which her scribes have copied. - -“One of the blackest of his crimes,” to quote Xiphilinus, the monk of -Trebizond, the abbreviator of Dion Cassius, “was the worship of his -God, which he introduced into Rome (though it was a foreign God), whom -he revered more religiously than any other, so far as to set him above -Jupiter, and to get himself declared his priest by decree of the Senate. -He was so extravagant as to be circumcised and abstained from hogs’ -flesh. He appeared often in public in the habit resembling that of the -priests of Syria, which caused him to be named the Assyrian. Is it -necessary to mention those whom he put to death without reason? since he -did not spare his best friends, whose wise and wholesome remonstrances he -could not bear.” These are the sum total of the great crimes which during -this period Xiphilinus brings against the Emperor, to which Herodian adds -the accusation of a disordered life. Let us examine the statements in -order. - -“The blackest of his crimes was the worship of his God and the -introduction of a foreign God into Rome.” To Xiphilinus the ecclesiastic, -in all probability the worship of any God except his own was a foul and -insolent crime, best dealt with by the holy office of the Inquisition, or -whatever took the place of that most useful body (for general purposes -of extermination) at the period. But at the moment the knowledge and -worship of Xiphilinus’ God was, for all practical purposes, confined in -Rome to washerwomen or to people of their mental calibre. Xiphilinus’ -idea that Rome had no foreign Gods is equally ecclesiastical, since -only the wilfully blind did not know that Rome was comprehensively, -sceptically polytheist, and that she admitted and was deeply attached -to many similarly monotheistic Eastern cults, notably those of Mithra -and Isis. Why then decry the worship of Elagabal alone? One can see no -reason except the exclusiveness of that worship, the vast monotheistic -ideal to which the Emperor had attached himself, and which he was minded -to spread throughout the length and breadth of the empire, by every -fair means in his power. It was this idea, later centred in Mithraism, -which was the most determined opponent of the similarly monotheistic -ideal of Xiphilinus, and, as its strongest opponent, called forth the -monk’s hatred. Rome, however, had a different reason for disliking -Elagabal. It was because he, like Jehovah, dethroned all other deities. -Rome would willingly have accepted the Syrian Deity amongst the lupanar -of divinities whose residence was the Pantheon and whose rites were -obscene; but such was not Antonine’s scheme, even _primus inter pares_ -was impossible. Elagabal was over all supreme; even Jupiter Capitolinus, -Jehovah, and Vesta must serve the one God. But Rome, whose atriums -dripped not blood but metaphysics, knew too well the futility of all -Gods to wish for any exclusive cult; such must fall to the washerwomen, -because they were unwanted, unlearned, barbaric, and out of date. But -the Emperor persisted, which annoyed his grandmother and other people -hugely (she seems to have been generally annoyed, however, so this may -be taken as said on other occasions). She had told the boy at Emesa -that religion was only a means to the end, and he, with his usual -contrariness, had flouted her opinion, backed up by his mother, and -persisted in making it the main end of his life. In so doing he went -clean contrary to the _Zeitgeist_, and eventually suffered for his -folly in not hanging up the fishing-net when once the fish was landed. -Xiphilinus makes another egregious mistake in declaring that Antonine -caused the Senate to declare him priest of Elagabal, since it was the -possession of that hereditary rank or office which had paved the way -to empire at all. Again, we are asked to believe that to this period -belong his circumcision and resolve to abstain from hogs’ flesh, whereas -Cheyne considers that these two religious peculiarities were common to -all Syrian religious, as well as to the Egyptian and Semitic peoples, -and dated with him in all probability from the usual age at which -circumcision was performed, the age of puberty, which corresponded with -his assumption of the priesthood in 217 or early 218. Lampridius, on the -other hand, dates the commencement of these observances as part of the -fanaticism of the later period in Rome; when the Emperor formulated his -scheme for one universal church, which was to include the distinctive -rites of all religions, an inference which is not by any means necessary. -Antonine’s religion was undoubtedly exclusive and fanatical, though even -here it was not peculiar, as the Christian history gives us far more -pitiable records of these vices. Antonine’s religion was never cruel, it -never persecuted, whereas from the moment that Christianity attained the -ascendancy she has considered persecution her especial rôle. There may -be joy in heaven over the sinner that repents; in Christendom the joy is -at his downfall. We can fancy the difference with which the monk would -have treated this Emperor’s memory had he been successful, had he even -had the foresight to affiliate his church with the kindred worship of -Jerusalem, to call his Deity Jehovah in the later adaptation of the term, -and had then died as other martyrs had done, a victim to the conviction -that in him resided the fulness of the godhead bodily, and further, in -the prosecution of a scheme for monotheistic worship, such as no Emperor -had ever yet formulated. It is a thousand pities for his reputation that -he did not see ahead. In that case, though he would not have formed a -fourth part of the ineffable Trinity, his life would at least have become -blameless, not only by the baptism of blood, but also in the pages of -ecclesiastical historians. We might then have seen St. Antoninus “Athleta -Christi,” a holy martyr worshipped throughout the length and breadth of -Christendom, as the upholder of monotheism against the forces of his -polytheistic surroundings. - -In connection with this question, one act of pride is recorded of the -sojourn of Nicomedia, an act which well shows the temper of the boy, -namely, his assumption of the latinized name of his God, Elagabalus -(though, apparently, this was not done for official purposes, as it never -occurs on the coins or inscriptions of his reign). Earlier Emperors had -been deified at their death; latterly it had been customary to accord -divine honours during the lifetime of the monarch. Elagabalus did not -believe that, a senatorial patent aiding, he could become a new God. He -did believe, unfortunately, like so many prophets and other religious -maniacs, that he could associate himself with his God as his earthly -emanation or expression; and henceforward, says Lampridius, none might -address him officially except on the knee. It was a weird fancy, but no -uncommon delusion, and the world has connived at his conceit by giving -him that title when all others are forgotten save amongst numismatists. -That Antonine intended others to regard him in this light, and was -thus a constant menace to Christ, is certain from the fact (recorded -by Herodian) that he sent to the imperial city during this winter his -portrait, painted in the full splendour of his Aaronic vestments, with -the command that it should be placed in the Senate House, immediately -above the statue of Victory, and that each Senator on entering should -offer incense and an oblation to Deus Solus in the image of his High -Priest on earth. Herodian records another effort, made during this -winter, to introduce the worship of Deus Solus into the minds of -men. This was an order sent to magistrates officiating at the public -sacrifices that this name should take the first and most important place; -an order which, we are told, even Montanist Christians were able to obey, -especially as there were no penalties attaching to the refusal. - -It had obviously been a gross error of judgment on Maesa’s part to -introduce a boy of such a temperament to a religion of any sort, much -more so to have made him the directing force thereof; but it was done, -and with it went the clothes she now hated so cordially. At Emesa, -Antonine had accustomed himself to the clinging softness of the silken -raiment worn by that priesthood; now he declined to lay it aside. He -hated wool and refused to wear it, neither did linen take his fancy. Silk -and cloth of gold encrusted with jewels was his ostentatious conceit, -and he was going to wear what his soul delighted in, now that he was -free to indulge his proclivities, but what had been entirely proper and -fitting at Emesa would not do for the War Lord of the Roman Empire. One -knows that circumstances alter cases, and can fancy the state of Maesa’s -mind when she contemplated the wide-eyed astonishment which would greet -the painted priest as he made his entry into Rome the conservative. The -Emperor thought he knew better than his elders; he had found the secret -of popularity with the army, and thought that similar attractions would -bring the city captive to his feet. Money, beauty, and voluptuousness, -says Capitolinus, had brought him to the throne of the world, and he had -artistic taste enough to realise that his beauty, height, and grace were -enhanced when he was robed in the silken garments of his choice. He did -not realise that the clothes were too rich for a soldier; that bracelets, -necklaces, and tiaras were the means by which priests rule women, not -soldiers the hearts of men; that now he must put away childish things, -since he had begun to be a man, the leader of armies. Again Maesa was -right, but she was overruled, and made more entries against the day when -the sum of this grandson’s iniquities against her should be so complete -that she might put another in his room. It is only fair to state, -however, that Dion totally disagrees with this other “eye-witness” when -he remarks, that Antonine always wore the Toga Praetexta at the games and -shows, thus restricting the use of the Syrian clothes to religious and -family appearances. - -But, to proceed to Xiphilinus’ third charge, that of putting men, -even his best friends, to death without reason. This almost certainly -refers to the death of Gannys, his mother’s and grandmother’s obliging -servant, and the Emperor’s tutor, to whom, Herodian tells us, he was -much attached. Forquet de Dorne says that this man considered himself -authorised to remonstrate continually with the Emperor on his conduct, -just as though his relations’ grumblings did not weary him sufficiently. -Further, Wotton tells us that a marriage had been arranged between him -and one of the imperial ladies, and that there was an idea of declaring -him Caesar. Probably these two circumstances led to the tragedy or -accident which resulted in Gannys’ death, and which, we are told, -Antonine always bitterly regretted. - -The tutor was nagging and pedagogic. Further, a plot was unmasked. Gannys -did not realise that the Antonine temper, when developed, was not a thing -to play with. The Emperor forgot himself, and in a fit of mad anger -rushed at his tormentor with his sword or knife drawn, struck, and even -wounded him. As was only natural, Gannys drew to defend himself, and the -guards, fearing for Antonine’s life, interposed, and the unfortunate -man was no more. Gannys’ fault lay in neglecting the boy’s training for -amorous converse with his female relations; putting off his duty of -moulding the plastic character until all was set, hard as bronze, in a -misshapen and distorted mould. He had put everything off till a time -when reformation was impossible, and the reckoning must be paid by the -defaulter. There is no other murder or act of cruelty, either recorded -or hinted at by any one of the men who were paid to ruin his reputation. -The worst that they can say is, that his character was debased, and small -wonder. - -As we read this Emperor’s life, we are bound to admit that his nature -was debased; but we are struck, not so much by this fact, as by the -necessary conclusion that he could never have had the opportunity of -being anything else. His faults are admittedly the faults of children, -magnified by the fact that he was a child suddenly placed in the -unfortunate position where all restraint from outside was impossible, and -where his wayward petulancy forbade any to tempt the trial. To him the -possession of supreme power meant the holding of limitless privileges, -with practically no training for the responsibilities involved. The whole -position calls for our pity rather than our censure, if we realise that -his only training was neurotic or religious, and phallic at that. All -things considered, it is a marvel that no deeds of murder, rapine, envy, -hatred, or malice have been laid to his charge, even by his enemies; such -as have been laid to the charge not only of his predecessors, but even -at the door of those whom the world honours as the righteous, the salt -of the earth. No history is immaculate. If it were, it would relate to a -better world; unable to be immaculate, history is usually stupid, more -usually false. Concerning Elagabalus, it has contrived to be absurd, by -means of the impossibility of the statements for which it attempts to -offer neither proof nor likelihood. - -It is during this period at Nicomedia, we are told by the historians -of the reign, that his popularity disappears—a statement which, on the -evidence of the medals and inscriptions, as well as from what we know of -his extraordinary generosity, is and must be utterly false. A further -statement that the soldiers already regretted their action in deposing -Macrinus is equally absurd, as they had no sort of reason to do this, -and, being largely returned to their quarters, would know little or -nothing of any scandals of which they had fully approved a few months -previously. The impression left by the adjectives used on inscriptions, -medals and coins is, that the Emperor was wildly popular, not only with -the military, but also with the civil population. The titles are fulsome, -the use of superlatives unparalleled. The frequent use of the adjective -_indulgentissimus_ tells its own story, explains what Rome thought -of his character. There is not the smallest doubt that his generous -prodigalities endeared him to the whole population as few, if any, of the -Emperors were ever endeared, and the adjectives are indicative of the -popular sentiment. Another reason for the popularity of the Emperor was -the Pax Romana which he brought to the whole world. That such was popular -and advantageous is abundantly testified by the inscriptions and many -coins still known to us. - -The fatal influences of peace were as yet unrecognized, and a happy -scepticism tranquillised the mind, gave free play to the senses. Life -was nonchalant, though the world still had its one great passion—Rome, -its greatness and renown. The wheels of empire were well oiled; they -now ran with wonderful smoothness, even in provinces which the rigidity -of the Republic had alienated. It was a time when, even in far-distant -Dacia, the lover quoted Horace to his maid under the light of the moon, -a time when the toga protected the world. Life was sweet, because of the -abundance of its pleasant things. The treasure of the world was such as -has never been realised since, the resources of wealth wonderful. During -three hundred years, from Augustus to Diocletian, no new tax was created, -and at the beginning of the third century the contributions of the -citizens, fixed two centuries earlier, had become so nominal, with the -growing power of money, that their weight was almost infinitesimal. The -Roman world owed all to its Imperium; small wonder that its people adored -the youth who personified its all with such grace and liberality. - - - - -CHAPTER V - -EARLY GOVERNMENT IN ROME - -_The Government in Rome to the Year 221 A.D._ - - -To write the history of the years from 219 to 221 (as we have it in -the Scriptores) is a task which can only be undertaken adequately in a -language not understanded of the people. Not that these years differed -materially from those which had gone before, or those that followed. -“Every altar in Old Rome had its Clodius”—so Juvenal has told us—“and -even in Clodius’ absence there were always those breaths of sapphic song -that blew through Mitylene. Rome was certainly old, but Rome was not -good—not, at least, in the sense in which we use the word to-day. Of -this no one who has even sauntered through the catacombs of the classics -preserves so much as a lingering doubt. This is because the Roman -world was beautiful, ornate, unutilitarian; a world into which trams, -advertisements, and telegraph poles had not yet come; a world that still -had illusions, myths, and mysteries, one in which religion and poetry -went hand in hand, a world without newspapers, hypocrisy, and cant,” -a world into which this boy Emperor, his mind attuned to the whole -surroundings, entered proudly during either June or July in the year of -grace 219. - -The date of the imperial family’s departure from Nicomedia is uncertain, -on the information at present available; and we can only approximate to -the date of their arrival in the city by means of a comparison between -the statement of Eutropius that he reigned two years and eight months -there, and the statement of Dion that he reigned in all three years nine -months and four days, neither of which is definitely certain, as they -do not agree with other authorities. If the date, if even the month, of -Antonine’s death were capable of definite interpretation, the date of his -arrival would be clear. As it is, most authorities have placed his entry -into the city within the first fortnight of July; Wirth suggests, on the -foregoing data, 11th July, to be precise. There are, however, various -circumstances which incline us to an earlier period, most probably during -the month of June. - -It seems incredible that, unless the illness already alluded to was of -a most serious nature, the Emperor, with Macrinus’ failure before his -eyes, should have stayed away from Rome for more than a year. It will -be remembered that the Emperor Caracalla had been absent for some years -before his death, warring against the Parthians; that Macrinus had spent -the whole of his fourteen months’ precarious tenure of the imperial -power in or about Antioch the voluptuous; and that the restored house of -Antonine had ruled with undisputed sway from 8th June 218. - -Rome had, therefore, been for about five years without her Court and -her God, the personification of her greatness. All that time Rome had -clamoured and grown weary, waiting for her essential life to vivify -her magnificence. That Antonine was wanted and wildly popular there -can be no doubt, both from the statements of Lampridius and those of -Eutropius, which record the spontaneity with which both Senate and -people condemned the usurping house, and rejoiced at the restoration, as -also from the record of the warmth with which Antonine was welcomed on -his arrival. In fact, all men seem to have been pleased; the army with -their Antonine; the Senate with their Aurelius; the people with their -Augustus, or their Nero, as the case might be. Save for her strength, -Rome had nothing of her own. Her religion, literature, art, philosophy, -luxury, and corruption were all from abroad. Greece gave her artists; in -Africa, Gaul, and Spain were her agriculturists; in Asia her artisans. -Rome consumed, she did not produce; except for herself and her greatness, -she was sterile. She was bound to desire the fount of her greatness, the -embodiment of her power in her midst. - -This is, of course, supposition of a merely circumstantial kind, but -there is more than supposition that the family arrived earlier than July. -There is the record of the Emperor’s first marriage, which must have -taken place early in that month. This is commemorated by Alexandrian -coins dated LΒ, _i.e._ prior to 28th August 219. The marriage took place -in Rome, and the news of its accomplishment would take at least three -or four weeks to reach Egypt, after which new coin dies would have to -be cut, and the money, ordinary debased coins in common usage, issued. -The latest possible date, therefore, at which the marriage could have -taken place, to find coins in circulation recording the event, before -28th August, was the second week in July. This leaves neither time to -the Emperor for the choice of his consort after his arrival—which would, -after all, have been only a natural wish on his part—nor, which is more -important, time to make the necessary preparations for what Herodian -tells us were the most stupendous celebrations that Rome the magnificent -had yet witnessed. Wirth’s date is just possible, especially if Maesa -had chosen the wife and had made the preparations beforehand; otherwise, -knowing Maesa’s propensity for management, we must suppose an earlier -date of arrival, especially as no two of the biographers agree as to the -length of the reign, which is variously stated as having lasted from six -years (Herodian) to thirty months (Victor). - -Unfortunately, the one known inscription is mutilated. It is set up to -the Sun in honour of the return of somebody and Totius Domus Divinae. It -was found in 1885 under the Via Tasso on a pedestal, and bears only the -date of its erection, 29th September 219, not the date of the return of -the house. It seems therefore safest, in order to allow time before 21st -July for the marriage and festivities, to conjecture a start made either -late in April or early in May, which, after a journey of 1600 miles, -would bring the family to Rome some time in the early part of June. It -is, of course, conjectural, but allows time for the known events. - -Once in Rome, we hear little good of the Emperor’s life, conduct, -administration, or abilities. Unfortunately, we have to deal in the main -with Constantine’s friend, Aelius Lampridius, a man whose biography is a -cheap glorification of Alexander, combined with ignorant and perpetual -abuse of Antonine’s religion and psychology. All his statements in the -way of fact could be compressed into half a page of any ordinary book -of reference, and even these he manages to arrange so badly, or to draw -from such conflicting sources, that they comprise simply a mass of futile -contradictions. - -The entry into the city is the record of a scandal which only Herodian -perpetuates. This writer, as we have remarked, is nowhere famed for his -accuracy; he tells us that the cortège was a rabble of women, eunuchs, -and priests of the Sun who surrounded the Emperor. The boy was dressed in -the silken robes worn by the priests of Syria. On his head was a jewelled -tiara of Persian design, whilst his body was laden with rings, necklaces -of pearls, bracelets, and other signs of vulgar ostentation; his cheeks -were painted, his eyebrows darkened; in fact he was the very picture -of an Egyptian or Assyrian courtesan. To finish with, we have a bit of -morality, which tells us how he not only spoilt his real beauty by such -extravagances, but made himself ridiculous in the eyes of gods and men by -these borrowed plumes. - -[Illustration: Coin of A.D. 219 commemorating the arrival of Elagabalus -in Rome (British Museum). - -Liberalitas II. Coin struck in A.D. 219 for the Emperor’s marriage with -Julia Cornelia Paula. (From the collection of Sir James S. Hay, K.C.M.G.) - -Coin struck in A.D. 219 concerning the grain supply (British Museum). - -Coin struck in A.D. 219 to commemorate the Emperor’s recovery (British -Museum). - -_Face page 110._] - -This is all very circumstantial, obviously the work of an eye-witness, -but it is not supported by the evidence of any coin struck to commemorate -the event. The _Adventus Augusti_ shows the Emperor riding into the city -laurelled and habited in military accoutrements. Nor is the scandal -mentioned by either Lampridius or Dion; which means that, at least as far -as Lampridius goes, his source, Marius Maximus, the then City Praefect, -who would certainly be an eye-witness, had not noticed anything unusual. -This, one imagines, he would have been only too anxious to do, since he -appears to have vacated this office immediately afterwards in favour of -the Emperor’s friend Eutychianus, which circumstance was not likely to be -specially pleasing to Marius, and ought to have encouraged him to keep -his eyes open for indecencies. Dion, too, as we have said, is silent, and -he has lost no other chance of recording Antonine’s frailties. Surely, -then, it is at least allowable to relegate this record of inexcusable -folly to the limbo of other picturesque lies, and proceed to sift the -similar accumulation which Lampridius has collected for our amusement. - -Undoubtedly, the first act was to make an alliance with the daughter of -the well-known jurist, Julius Paulus, and to celebrate the event with a -colossal magnificence. All the authors, with the exception of Lampridius, -who ignores the marriage entirely, furnish picturesque details. They -describe the games, in which only one elephant and, to balance him, -fifty-one tigers were killed (the numbers are peculiar, but incapable -of verification); the general distribution of wheat, the unusual -magnificence of the whole scene, and the congiary in which even the wives -of Senators took part. The sums of money given are most noticeable; every -one in Rome received 150 drachmae per head, except the soldiers, who only -got 100, or very slightly more—a diminution of the promised privileges -formerly granted by Caracalla, which could scarcely have been pleasing -to the Lords of Rome, especially if, as Lampridius says, the Emperor had -already begun to lose his popularity with the army. It almost presupposes -a change of idea in the body politic, and argues that the new government -was bent on the same reforms which had ruined Macrinus, a circumstance -which would not turn out advantageously for all concerned. Certainly it -was neither wise nor conducive to peace thus to reduce the donative on -such an occasion; but of this more must be said later. - -Directly after the festivities in honour of the arrival, and, as has -been suggested, of the marriage as well, because we can only trace one -congiary and one set of rejoicings during this year—which circumstance -rather leads one to suppose that the extraordinary generosity cited -did duty for the two occasions—the Emperor set to work to provide a -shelter for his God. In point of fact, he provided two. The first and -most magnificent, was on the Palatine; the other, almost as vast and -beautiful, was a sort of summer resting-place in the suburbs. Wissowa -considers that this second was in the eastern part of the city, near -the site of Sta. Croce, near also to the Porta Praenestina, and that it -was built on a tract of land known as “Ad Spem Veterem”; in other words, -in the garden belonging to Varius Marcellus, the Empress Soaemias’ late -husband, and, therefore, imperial property. - -Concerning the position of the first temple, we have more certain -evidence. Baumeister has identified certain ruins on the Palatine as the -Eliogabalium, and though his conclusions are not generally accepted, all -the Greek authors agree as to the Palatine being the centre of the cult. -Victor tells us that the God was established in “Palatii penetralibus,” -and Sextus Rufus corroborates Lampridius’ statement that it was on the -site of a temple of Orcus (Pluto) on the Circus Maximus side of the -Palatine Hill. - -Some idea of its general magnificence may be gathered from a coin struck -in the year 222, which is described by Studniczka. “The temple,” he -says, “rises to a great height in a glorious symmetry of columns, and -is partly covered by the figure of the Emperor and his attendant. Below -the group appears the entrance to the temple courtyard, which is crowned -with statues.” On either side of the entrance are wing-halls, singularly -reminiscent of the Bramante porticoes at St. Peter’s, eagles taking the -place of statues as acroteria. - -We must not suppose, despite Xiphilinus’ statement, that the cult of this -Sun God was first heard of in Rome at this period. All the imperial money -coined at Emesa had borne his temple, stone, and eagle on the obverse -for many years past, besides which the worship of Mithra, the Persian Sun -God, is considered by Cumont to have been the most popular religion in -Rome at this time. Septimius Severus had built a temple on the Palatine -in his honour, doubtless with the help and counsel of the family of -Elagabal worshippers, and there seem to have been many others in the -city; a fact which would tend to pave the way for Antonine’s scheme. This -however could not develop itself until the temple was completed, which -from the evidence that can be gathered from coins and inscriptions does -not seem to have been an accomplished fact until the late autumn of the -next year, 220. - -No sooner was the temple finished than the scheme for the unifying -of churches, which the Emperor had himself conceived, and intended -to promote with the full strength of imperial command, was put into -operation. As we have said, Antonine had no more idea of making Elagabal -a mere rival to the Roman Deities than Constantine had of putting -Christ into that unenviable position. He intended that the Lord should -swallow up all other Deities, should make captive all the gods of old -Rome. To do this it was necessary, first, to impress the world with the -splendour, the beauty, the power, and the magnificence of that being who -had so miraculously delivered the family of Bassianus from Phoenician -obscurity, and brought them into the fierce light of the Roman noonday; -secondly, he had to make some alliance with the head and centre of the -old Roman worship of Vesta, the one religion which symbolised Rome, its -perpetuity, and its undying fame; thirdly, he had to acquire all the -objects of sacred devotion, and transfer them to Elagabal’s temple, as -well to attract worshippers as to stimulate devotion. - -For the accomplishment of the first of these objects he ordained the -most magnificent worship that had as yet been devised. He, as High -Priest, used to descend daily from the palace in order to sacrifice vast -quantities of oxen and sheep upon innumerable altars laden with spices -and odours. The libations were more ample and more costly than any that -had yet been heard of. Herodian further tells us how the rare and costly -wines mingling with the blood of the victims made great streams in every -direction; but even this waste was insufficient: with Davidic persistency -the Emperor danced, encircling the altars, followed by the Syrians, men -and women, who formed his court, while the display and waste of energy -was accompanied by the clashing of cymbals and other instruments of -music which had been brought from the God’s home in the East. At these -orgies the Senate sat in a great semicircle, and were, fortunately, mere -spectators of the show. It was the generals of armies, the governors of -provinces, and court officials of all sorts who were less fortunate. -These worthies Antonine habited in a replica of his own trailing -garments, and ordered to perform menial offices about the altars of God, -a proceeding which caused them to gnash with their teeth and run about -the city declaring very plainly (to one another, of course) that they -infinitely preferred the tents of ungodliness to all and sundry offices -of divine religion, especially in its Semitic forms. From the very outset -Elagabal was unpopular with the upper classes. They had cause to dislike -this insensate show. With the populace it was probably different, at -least for a time. One can imagine their joy at beholding, tier upon tier, -the Conscript Fathers assembled each morning as most unwilling spectators -of a show which they abominated. - -As we have already pointed out, other Eastern cults were making -considerable headway in Rome amongst all classes, and had attracted not -a few of that august body. We have mentioned the worship of the Sun God -Mithra, which, with other similar religions, had constantly increased in -importance since the year 204 B.C., the date of its introduction into the -city. - -Now the Eastern cults were popular because they supplied a felt want, -namely, a personal spiritual religion, whereas the religion of Rome, -though fine, virile and strong, was purely political. The God of Rome was -Rome, and concerned itself solely with patriotism. With the individual, -with his happiness or aspirations, it concerned itself not at all. It -was the prosperity of the Empire, its peace and immortality, for which -sacrifices were made and libations offered. The antique virtues, courage -in war, moderation in peace, and honour at all times, were civic, not -personal. It was the state that had a soul, not the individual. Man was -ephemeral, it was the nation that endured.[57] Naturally, this was -unsatisfying to the uneducated; their Rome was the abridgment of every -superstition, their Pantheon an abattoir of the Gods who presided over -death and whose worship was gore. - -Added to this had come the worship of Isis, the secrets of Mithra, of -which the chief note was one of mysticism. There was something terrifying -and yet alluring about the abluent functions, the initiations, the -secrets that it was death to divulge. Now, the rites that Antonine -introduced were entirely blatant, Semitic, Syrian. They contained, -as far as we can judge, nothing specially mysterious, either in the -way of initiation or progression, little which could even attract the -curiosity of the devout. All that Elagabal could appeal to was the public -curiosity; his worship was, in fact, designed to appeal to such and -nothing more, _at the outset_; even with such an end in view it might -have become popular had it not been that Antonine made this all-embracing -deity too easy of access, in consequence of which he became too cheap. -The Emperor seems to have recognised this early, and to have evolved a -scheme for uniting the already popular mysteries of all other Gods with -his own; to which resolve we may attribute the stories of his initiation -into the priesthood of Cybele and the rest; he thought that it would -enhance his God’s attractiveness and assure his popularity in the eyes of -the mob. - -As far as we can judge from the evidence of coins and medals, there was -little or no parade of Antonine’s religious ideals or his comprehensive -cult until the later part of the year 220, until, in fact, the temple -was ready and the necessary adjuncts to hand. With its opening came the -transference thither of the most venerable objects of Roman superstition: -all the sacred stones, even the Palladium from the temple of Minerva, the -sacred fire which was the symbol of Rome’s existence, even the shields -which had fallen from heaven, and to which the oracles had attached the -very destinies of the city itself. But of this more in its proper place. - -Certainly, for all his attempts, Elagabal did not become a popular -divinity. Men began to fear his propensity for swallowing other cults. -His rapacity in absorbing the deities of centuries made the superstitious -uneasy for the continued existence of Gods whom, they believed vaguely, -they might some day need, and who would then have lost their power and -authority. But there was yet another reason for Elagabal’s unpopularity, -namely, the Emperor’s attempt to unite the Hebraic and Christian -mysteries with those of his own God. - -Neither Christian nor Hebrew was ever popular in old Rome. Their -characters, their rites, and their machinations were sincerely -disapproved of both by the rulers and the governed; they were generally -known as robbers, thieves, liars, lawbreakers, cannibals even, men who -were lacking in every virtue that Rome held dear; men who set up their -own specimen of a creed to the exclusion of all others, the which was, -generally speaking, subversive of government, law and order. They were -men entirely displeasing to the high Gods, and therefore to be spared -only when the master of Rome refused consent to kill. - -Now, Antonine clearly protected these atheistic vagabonds, citizens of -no state, troublers of every nation; nay more, he attempted to tolerate -their blasphemies by uniting them with his own religion. As we have -said, Rome was probably familiar with Elagabal through the Syrian house -and Emesan coins, but with the other Judean religion they had not a -few disagreements, and had certainly no wish to amalgamate it with the -venerated cults of the city, as Antonine seemed bent on doing. It was -certainly a bad day for the house of Severus when the Emperor decided to -mix himself up with the hated Judaism. - -We must here leave for a moment the history of Antonine’s religious -changes and aspirations to recount the secular work accomplished between -the summer of the year 219 and the autumn or winter of the year 220, -it may be even up to the early weeks of the year 221, when the Emperor -made that vital mistake in policy which threw him into the hands of his -family, to his undoing. - -Amongst the “facts” recorded by Lampridius concerning this period, we -have two mutually exclusive statements concerning the admission of the -Emperor’s mother and grandmother to the Senate, and their governmental -position in the State. The first (in Sec. 4) states that at the very -first meeting of that august assembly Antonine sent for his mother; that -on her arrival he called her to take a place alongside the Consuls; and -that with them she signed decrees, Senatus Consulta, and other documents, -an enormity which no other woman had ever perpetrated, and which was -certainly never heard of again. He finishes with the remark that she -obtained the title of Clarissima, the only woman who has ever had this -honour conferred upon her—altogether a most circumstantial account. - -A few sections farther on (Sec. 12) he recounts how Antonine always took -his grandmother Varia with him whenever he went to the camp or to the -Senate, in order to give him the authority and dignity which he lacked, -adding, that before her no woman had been admitted into the Senate either -to give her opinion or append her signature. It is significant, by the -way, that Varia never was and never could have been Maesa’s name—so much -for Lampridius’ ignorance of the family history. - -Now, either Antonine took one, both, or neither; Lampridius says -both—each to the exclusion of the other, as each was first, each the only -woman, but Soaemias was alone Clarissima. Cannot one see the jealous -wrath of the grandmother, the real politician, at the promotion of her -absolutely incapable daughter over her head by means of that coveted -title (a title, by the way, which would have bored Soaemias’ temperament -inexpressibly), while she was relegated to an inferior position? - -The only conclusion to be drawn is that which is recorded by _all_ the -inscriptions, namely, that Maesa was the predominant factor, since her -name always occurs first where she and Soaemias are mentioned together. -Maesa, in all probability, did slip into the Senate; she would have -appreciated the dignity of the position enormously, and the fact would -give a basis to some story or other that had got about. Antonine would -certainly have had no objection; the Senate was no longer the government -properly so called; Maesa could do no harm there, and it would be a sop -to her for the small power she was exercising in the actual development -of events. - -Soaemias, we can quite believe, was president of the assembly on the -Quirinal which Lampridius sneers at as a foundation of Antonine’s, and -yet tells us had existed before his time. It was called the Senaculum -or Conventus Matronarum. Friedländer says that it was an ancient and -honourable assembly as early as the year 394 B.C., when its members voted -their jewels to help raise the tithe in connection with the spoils of -Veii. Seneca refers to it in his treatise _De matrimoniis_ as a regular -assembly. Again, in the year 209 B.C., the matrons met, in consequence of -omens, to decide on expiation; even in imperial times Suetonius says that -the Assembly met to reprove Agrippina for her vagaries; and Hieronymus -counts amongst the distractions of Roman life the daily attendance at -the Matronarum Senatus. What, therefore, this petulant and carping -critic can find to grumble about in this permanent assembly meeting to -carry out the provisions of the Lex Appia, one simply cannot imagine, -unless it be that, having been prejudiced in early youth, he declined -to listen to any arguments for the furthering of either women’s rights -or duties in the State. At any rate, it is scarcely fair to stigmatise -as an immoral and reprehensible act, the Emperor’s grant to this Senate -of women of the power to make necessary edicts on points which are now -very ably supervised by the Lord Chamberlain’s department. The points -discussed were those relating to the length of a train or the Court -uniform of a guardsman; the precedence due to rank; who must wait for -another’s salutation; to whom a carriage; to whom a saddle-horse; to -whom a public conveyance; to whom a mere donkey-cart was a fitting means -of progression; who might use mules; or for whom oxen were considered -sufficiently rapid; for whom the saddle might be inlaid with ivory; for -whom with bone; for whom with silver; or even when pointing out what -persons might fittingly wear gold and jewelled buckles on their shoes -without the imputation of plutocratic ostentation. - -To-day, despite the fact that we have progressed by eighteen centuries, -it is generally believed in governmental circles that such matters are -possibly best settled by women, and such useful, not to say necessary -functions concerning the polite amenities of civilised existence would -be most readily conceded by authority to their sex, if only such would -content and assuage that feline animosity which has of late disturbed -social gatherings, even the intercourse between authorities in the state -and ladies seeking a useful outlet for their superfluous energies. Alas, -the world is grown older, and the female mind now knows itself capable of -regulating both the social and political worlds, and has no intention of -satisfying its aspirations, like Soaemias, with the social side of life, -as long as mere man opposes her entrance into the political sphere. - -Surely, everything considered, this cavilling at what was an ancient, -and still would be a useful, body, is only another proof of the spirit -in which the biographers have poured abuse on a boy who was so obviously -striving to satisfy his relatives by giving them an outlet for their -energies, while keeping the essential powers of government in his own -hands. Of course he failed, mainly because his grandmother was not -satisfied with her function in the state, she wanted to filch from -Antonine what was _his_ right, and what she wanted she determined to get -at all costs. Whether she really aspired to the Senate and got there is -another question. It is distinctly stated that under Alexander Severus -no woman ever sat in that assembly; further, that decrees were passed -forbidding their presence there for ever. Now, Maesa was almost sole -ruler during the early years of that reign, and one can never believe -that she deprived herself of one jot or tittle of a power which she had -once acquired. There is one occasion, and one occasion only, on which we -may well imagine, as the writers state, that the women were all present, -officially, in the Senate, namely, at the meeting when Alexander was -adopted. At other times, we can believe that they were there, just as -the queen consort is present in the House of Peers, but without any real -political significance. - -To this period Lampridius assigns the winter spent at Nicomedia, which -is a very fair example of this biographer’s egregious carelessness and -stupidity. Considering that both Dion and Herodian are perfectly explicit -as to the actual date, it is monstrous that he should have put this -period just a year later than it actually occurred, nor, as we have said, -is it in this matter alone that he leads us to mistrust his accuracy, -where either fact or fiction are at stake. - -Lampridius, with a great show of moralising, and having already stated -that the Emperor had lost his popularity shortly after Macrinus’ death, -re-ascribes its loss to this current year, namely, from the summer of -219 to the autumn of 220, and this without showing cause, reason, or -mismanagement which would justify the statement, if we except the vague -statement that he neglected public business for religion, though, as far -as we can see, the Emperor did not begin to neglect the State for the -Church until his temple was opened. After that time we can well believe -that all his energies were centred on his cult, an error which, like that -made by certain Stuart sovereigns of this enlightened country, equally -lost, the one his head, and the other his crown. No act of cruelty is -cited, no accusation of glaring or vital mistakes made, until the very -end of the year 220. - -Arrived at that period, there is much to be said—the mismanagement of -affairs grows apace. First, there is his religion, which he makes a -definite eyesore; second, he is accused of selling honours, dignities, -and power, both with his own hands and by those of his favourites; third, -he appoints Senators without any reference to either their age, good -sense, or nobility; fourth, he sells the offices of praefect, tribune, -ambassador, and general, even those about the palace itself. - -Now, all this may be perfectly true. Antonine must have wanted money, -but, as we have remarked before, he had a passion for giving, not for -receiving. The most likely supposition is therefore, that he gave offices -indiscriminately to those who pleased him, and that his favourites, often -debased and unworthy people, sold what they could get hold of to the -highest bidder. The accusation is vitiated by the fact that no names are -mentioned, no instances given, except those of the two chariot drivers, -Protogenes and Gordius, intimates of the Emperor and supervisors of his -sports. It is quite possible that he admired and liked these men for -their proficiency in sport, and that unwholesome minds saw more in the -friendship than was warranted. Of Protogenes we hear no more. Cordus or -Gordius—probably the same person as the above—was made Praefect of the -Watch during the next year; perhaps he was useful, perhaps he was not; -any way he was dismissed in the autumn of 221. - -Amongst the last events of this 220th year of our salvation, or early in -the year 221, occurred the divorce of the august Julia Cornelia Paula, -Empress. We know that it was late in the year, as there are coins in -existence struck at Alexandria after 29th August which bear her name, and -others struck at Tripolis in Phoenicia after October 220 (Eckhel). In -all probability this lady was in no way averse to retiring into opulent -privacy, a woman with both a past and a future. - -Certainly her husband had neglected her scandalously if even a tithe of -Lampridius’ stories of his infidelities are true, and, from what we can -learn of his psychological state, a certain number are obviously so. -Modern investigation of such psychopathic conditions inclines us to admit -that the boy was a sort of nymphomaniac, if not entirely homosexual, at -least heterosexual, with a strong homosexual instinct, and it would be -unnatural for any woman to appreciate this temperament in a husband, -especially when she knew, as she must have known, since he was perfectly -frank about it, that he was already allied, by a species of matrimony, -with the chariot driver Hierocles—calling himself wife and Empress—and -that he was not attached to this man alone but to many others, for whom -inquisition had been made throughout the Empire, on account of their -looks and ability to satiate his mania more satisfactorily. - -This is, of course, Lampridius’ version of the Emperor’s character, and -the same sources have been used by both Dion and Herodian with similar -though varying degrees of grossness in expression. Undoubtedly the boy -was by nature abnormal, as were almost all the Emperors of Old Rome. -Antonine had his moments when he imitated a virgin at bay, others when he -was a wife, still others when he expected to be a mother, others when he -carded wool, others when he played the pandore (an instrument of music -with three strings invented by the Assyrians, according to Pollux, or, -as Isidore remarks, attributed to the God Pan himself). Again, he would -play the hydraulic organ of the period, and loved to dress himself in the -clothes of women, even in the customary undress uniform of the courtesan, -adopting the positions, voice, and manner of the most expert. - -Undoubtedly these pastimes were most reprehensible and unpleasant, to -be condemned one and all; though somehow to-day we are not altogether -inclined to regard proficiency in music amongst men as quite so -censurable and disgusting an art as the other foibles—to give them no -worse a name—which Lampridius so justly censures. Unfortunately, many of -these seem to have come quite naturally to the Emperor on account of his -untrained and unrestrained nature, though Forquet de Dorne thinks that -it was not so much evil propensities as his innate desire to please, -combined with his genuine efforts to spend all his energies for other -people, which have been misinterpreted by the evil-minded, especially as -this was not the only side to the boy’s character, as the biographers -would have us believe. And this because we are told, amongst the list of -his enormities, that he loved driving chariots both in the palace and in -the circus, habited in a green tunic, and that he was most dextrous in -the sport. - -To-day, racing is considered as the sport of kings; certainly it is -not the obvious outcome of an effeminate or degraded mind; rather the -reverse: it is a virile occupation, calling forth nerve, pluck, courage, -and other manly qualities. In third-century Rome it was much the same, -but for purposes of disgusting posterity Lampridius affected not to think -so. He pointed out that it was a calling proper only to coachmen and -lackeys, though he must have known, if he had thought about it at all, -that his readers would listen with their tongues in their cheeks when -he tried to maintain that the courage, nerve, and pluck which the boy -showed in this sport were evidences of the same degeneracy which he was -decrying when he recounted the carding of wool and the other feminine -occupations. Hosts of men, kings, and emperors of all ages have indulged -in the intoxication of horse-racing. The mere fact of Lampridius putting -this story, with its palpably stupid and far-fetched moral, alongside the -really serious scandals would be enough to make critics distrust, not -only his information, but even his ability to understand and use such -when he had got it. - -To sum up, therefore, our investigations of the months between June -219 and November 220, we must admit that no gross act of folly had as -yet been committed. The Emperor had spent his time in building his -temples, and in restoring the Flavian amphitheatre—which had been burnt -down on 23rd August 217,—in finishing the baths of Caracalla, and in -erecting his own splendid bathing establishments in the palace and on the -Aventine. He had refounded the Senaculum, and built a hall for its use; -he was attending to business, helped by his fellow-consul, Eutychianus, -and was giving righteous judgment, as all biographers admit, when he -attended the courts or the Senate. He was, moreover, most popular, -liberal, and generous, though devoted to the pleasures of the table, and -unfortunately hermaphroditic in tendency, which hereditary taint was -certainly mitigated by the fact that he was devoted to outdoor exercises, -especially those that demanded courage, nerve, and strength of will. -Underneath all this there is a predominating religious feeling, and the -simply monotheistic obsession which drove him to his doom. - -The year 221 is the time of Antonine’s utter failure. As far as we can -judge from numismatic evidence, one of his first acts was to divorce, -as we have said, the Empress Julia Paula, probably in pursuance of his -scheme for religious unity. He had conceived a notion of rendering his -God absolutely supreme by means of an alliance with the worship of Vesta. -Now this Goddess and her Sacred Stone or Phallus, called the Palladium, -her shields or bucklers, had been sent to Troy direct from heaven. -Aeneas had brought them to Latium, and they were the head and centre of -Roman greatness. Pallas, or Vesta, was too powerful to be absorbed in -the ordinary way. Antonine therefore considered that his God, being -unmarried, might well acquire possession of Vesta by a matrimonial -alliance. As Pontifex Maximus, he was head of the Vesta worship, and -had a perfect right to enter her shrine when and how he pleased, a -circumstance which Lampridius entirely ignored when he said that the -Emperor forced his way into the temple illegally. Antonine certainly did -go to her shrine at this time, and took the sacred fire, carrying it -to the Eliogabalium. Lampridius asserts that the high priestess, being -jealous of the loss of her charge, tried to palm off a false vessel upon -him, but that the Emperor saw the deceit and broke the jar in contempt -for the foolish fraud. He also transferred the sacred stone at the same -time, and in pursuance of his plan, celebrated the nuptials on which he -had set his heart. This was bad enough for Roman susceptibilities, but -he went one worse. Being himself free, he decided to marry one of the -Sacred Vestals from the shrine of his God’s new wife. He certainly seems -to have been vitally attracted by the charms of Aquilia Severa, a woman -no longer in the first flush of youth, to judge by her effigy, but one -whom his religious as well as his personal predilections pointed out as a -fitting consort. Pallas and Elagabal were united in a heavenly union like -so many others amongst Syrian and Egyptian deities; why, then, should -not Antonine, the chief priest of the Sun, and Aquilia, an important -priestess of Minerva, unite in a fruitful union which would produce a -demi-god meet for the Empire? - -The theory had its points. Unfortunately, Rome did not see them. She -stood obviously aghast, thoroughly disliking the notion. Then, as now, -Rome disliked the public repudiation of vows; it was an unforgivable -scandal. As Clement VII. remarked some years later to Henry Tudor, with -an equally genuine fervour, “Pray, please yourself by all means, but -don’t let me know.” That was and always will be the true Roman attitude. -Concubinage amongst these ladies was perfectly natural, but matrimony -never; it offended the susceptibilities, and hence the subsequent -trouble. Antonine does not seem to have grasped this fact, and, if any -one told him, he was too much enamoured of his scheme to resign it -without an effort. But even the Senate seems to have protested, and -a plot, in which Pomponius Bassus and Silius Messala were implicated -(probably inspired by that upright lady Julia Mamaea), was set on foot. -It was an attempt to substitute some other personage for the youth who -knew so little of Roman feeling as to commit this act of sacrilege. -These two men were well-known busybodies, who had already dethroned one -Emperor, and were obviously anxious for further employment in the same -direction. Unfortunately for them, the plan was discovered, and their -secret court, held to consider the Emperor’s actions, raided. They were -immediately arraigned before the Senate, and condemned for the crime of -_lèse-majesté_, or treason, probably both, thus meeting the fate they had -so richly deserved; but of these two men we shall have occasion to speak -later on. - -There is still another thing to notice in connection with this dual -marriage (that of the two Gods and of the High Priest and the Vestal), -namely, the erection of a shrine in the Forum to celebrate the event, the -which was probably built, according to Commendatore Boni, somewhere in -the summer of the year 221. Certain pieces of a capital discovered near -that place between the years 1870-1872, display the God Elagabal between -Minerva and Urania, his second wife, which leads one to the conclusion -that the union with Vesta, though no longer of earthly, was at least -considered as one of spiritual duration. - -But to proceed. By the spring of 221 Antonine must have discovered for -himself, even if his friends had not told him, that his religious ideals -were far from popular. The very fact of the plot was enough to show him -how public opinion was trending, added to which general pressure seems -to have been put upon the Emperor to rectify the two glaring mistakes -which he had just made, through his perverse religiosity. We know from -both Dion and Herodian that neither marriage lasted any length of time. -Numismatic evidence of his third wedding is dated prior to 28th August -221, which presupposes that Aquilia Severa had returned to her nunnery, -while the celebration of the nuptials between the Sun and Moon implies, -what we know to be a fact, that Minerva had returned to the seclusion -from which she ought never to have been taken. It must have been a great -blow to the boy, thus to relinquish his hold on one of the chief parts -of his scheme, but he had seen that it would do Elagabal no good to -slight the religion with which the destinies of Rome were inextricably -mixed up, and that he had merely thrown open the way to his grandmother’s -machinations. Again, as Borghesi has pointed out, probably Eutychianus -was back at his side as City Praefect, in which position that officer -would be better able to judge of the feeling which Antonine’s action -had created, than as Consul. The result was that the Emperor published -a statement, by no means conciliatory in character, which announced, -that his God liked not so martial a wife, in consequence of which he -had decided to return her to her own shrine, and send for Astarte from -Carthage instead. Tanit of the Carthaginians, Juno Coelestis or Magna -Mater as she was called in Italy, where she had grown in importance from -the third century B.C., when she was first introduced, was probably a -Phoenician Goddess with a cosmopolitan tendency. Cumont tells us that -this maiden divinity was identified with Diana, Cybele, and sometimes -with Venus. Generally she was called a moon goddess, certainly she -possessed a twofold nature—as queen of the heavens she directed the moon -and stars, and sent down life-giving rains on the earth, and as the -personification of the productive force of nature, she was the patroness -of fertility. Latterly in Rome she had been identified with the cult of -Mithra, which had taken such a hold on the popular mind and was now at -the summit of its power. Undoubtedly the introduction of this Goddess -into their midst, especially since it could hurt no local superstition, -would be a popular move, and Elagabal would gain the reflected glory; -at least amongst the ignorant and religious-minded to whom such arrant -nonsense would be sure to appeal. From the Emperor’s own point of view -the marriage was fitting, since the queen of the heavens was, not only -second in authority to the Sun, but was also rich, and with her came -the whole of her treasure, according to Herodian. This statement, -however, Dion denies flatly, asserting that the Emperor refused to take -anything from her temple except two golden lions, presumably as a sort -of protection for the journey, while he himself provided her dowry by a -general impost on the whole Empire; so much for rival eye-witnesses. - -About this same time, certainly (as we have said) before 28th August, -Antonine married again, presumably at the instigation of his grandmother, -and to gain the allegiance of the patrician classes. The bride was widow -of that busybody Pomponius Bassus, lately deceased. The alliance, like -that of the God, was sure to be popular with all classes, and the lady, -though by no means in her first youth (from the portraits on her medals -she leaves one with the impression of being about forty-five years of -age) was of Imperial Antonine lineage. Undoubtedly the Emperor soon tired -of her charms, which were scarcely likely to please a boy of eighteen, -and in consequence we are told he did not keep her long. She was a -friend of his grandmother, a well-known and ambitious woman, who was -quite pleased to dry her eyes at once and fall in with Maesa’s plan of -appointing a sort of nuptial guardian for the boy, which would naturally -be a great asset in the struggle that his grandmother and aunt had fully -decided upon, from the moment when he made his mistake in underestimating -the popular antipathy towards his unfortunate religious scheme. - -Both Maesa and Mamaea were now working together, for both were -determined to consolidate in their hands the power that was Antonine’s -by right. From this moment there is one continuous policy of corruption, -vilification, and grab, while the women, their greedy claws ever -stretching out, filch from the boy his popularity, his friends, and his -reputation. Herodian tells us of the money spent to corrupt the guards. -Every word of the biographies tells the same story. Even when they had -encompassed his death and put another in his room they could not leave -his memory in peace. The trump card in this game was played by Maesa’s -diplomacy; she knew that the only way to win the boy was to attach -herself to his religious ideals, and she therefore seems to have fallen -in with his scheme for the union of Elagabal and Urania. She sympathised -with his endeavour to make his God popular; indeed, was not Elagabal her -God also, hers by right of her position as the eldest of his hereditary -house of priests? Very insidiously she wormed her way into his boyish -confidence, lulled his mind to rest, and then suggested her great plan, -the appointment of Alexianus to help him in the government, to assist in -the secular affairs which so sadly hampered the Emperor’s spiritual and -sacerdotal functions. - - - - -CHAPTER VI - -ANTONINE’S DEALINGS WITH ALEXANDER - - -Lampridius has given us, in his life of Alexander Severus, a mass of -undigested information concerning the character and daily life of -Mamaea’s son. The narrative is as much concerned to prove the virtues -of Alexander as it is to represent the degradation of his predecessor. -Somehow the panegyric misses fire; Lampridius has produced a spasmodic -and unenlightened discourse on trivialities, together with a haphazard -essay on his hero’s moral qualities. He assures us that Alexander had -a regal presence, great flashing eyes, a penetrating gaze, a manly -appearance, and the stature and health of a soldier. Now, the practice -of idealising the appearance of royalty is not unknown, even in these -days. Unfortunately, this description is in no way borne out by the -portraits still extant. Alexander, in the Vatican bust, has certainly -the appearance of strength, but it is such as is possessed by a lusty -coal-heaver, with a bull neck and a thick skull; the undecided features -of the face, the weak mouth and chin, the low forehead, half hidden by -the hair, all betoken mild-mannered vacuity rather than manliness, while -the eyes, so far from flashing, seem, in the phrase of Duruy, to “stare -without seeing.” It is the figure neither of a Roman nor of a ruler of -men, but just that possessed by the family to which he belonged, though -cast in an effete and much-used mould; it is the face of a half-caste -Phoenician, such as he chanced to be. Alexander was an absolutely perfect -tool for the purposes of his grandmother’s scheme, and, in consequence, -Lampridius records the series of omens portending his royal nativity. The -entire menagerie of Egypt seemed to proclaim him king. Surely, argued -Maesa, such evidences of suitability would convince the truly religious -Antonine; and so, primed with her proofs, the lady repaired to carry out -her scheme. But, as we have said, the Emperor was used to her wiles; -she had tried cajoling him before and had failed; this time it was on -the score of religion, on the necessity that he should devote his full -energies to the furthering of his great and all-embracing scheme, that -she attacked him. It is a pitiful sight for us, who know the results, -to watch the guile of the serpent prostituting innocence for its own -gain. Maesa must at this time have been close on fifty years of age, -and we are assured on all hands that she was in close alliance with her -daughter Mamaea, who had long since conceived a holy horror, not only -of the sins of her nephew, but also for the person of the sinner. So -strongly was she convinced of her righteousness, that she had already -thought it her bounden duty, as well as her special privilege, to attempt -the corruption of the guards, and to support the plots, all and sundry, -which disaffected functionaries might attempt against the person of the -Emperor. - -Now, venality is a vice not confined to the modern world; then, as -now, it was possible to find men who considered that their usefulness -was underestimated, and that their position inadequately represented -their merits. The record of at least three such personages and their -attempts has come down to us: the first was that instituted by Pomponius -Bassus and his colleague Silius Messala, who had adopted Mamaea’s line -of argument as to the inadvisability of allowing Antonine’s mistaken -religious policy to continue; the second, that of Seius Carus, who in -221 attempted the corruption of the Alban Legion in either his own or -Alexianus’ interest—and in both of these plots we are led to infer that -Julia Mamaea had a considerable finger. - -The question of Seius Carus is one of considerable interest from this -point of view. The gentleman was wealthy and of the patrician order, -which facts did not prevent him, according to Dion, from spending his -money freely amongst the soldiery, obviously with an ulterior motive. -Unfortunately for him, he hit upon the wrong legion, the body which was -now quartered near Rome and had joined Antonine so readily at Apamea in -218. In the year 220 this legion had set up an inscription to Antonine’s -Victoria Aeterna, which monument had expressed the greatest possible -devotion to the reigning Emperor, and gave the lie direct to those -stories of Dion and Lampridius, which assert that, as early as the winter -of 218, the soldiers cordially hated Antonine, and placed all their hopes -on Alexianus. Lampridius gives a very poor reason for this—because, -forsooth, they could not stand the thought that he was as ready as they -themselves were to receive pleasure through all the cavities of his -body. Dion relates Seius’ trial, but ignoring the fact of the plot, -which he had just mentioned, he informs us that the gentleman suffered -for a crime which was absolutely unknown to the imperial, as indeed to -any other legal system, unless it be the ecclesiastical—“on account of -his worth and abilities.” Unfortunately, Dion does not point out why the -millions of other men in the Empire, equally worthy and equally able, -were allowed a greater longevity, though it is certainly a point which -might be considered with some show of interest. But to return to the -imperial ladies. As we have said, they were spending much time searching -out disaffected subjects, and repeating stories not conducive either -to peace or tranquillity; further, they were making use of Antonine’s -most foolish resolve to cut down military expenditure at the price of -a possible unpopularity, by giving a decided preference to the civil -element in the population, a proceeding which, as we have remarked on -more than one occasion, was not only foolish but under the circumstances -criminally wrong. Despite the manifold and splendid qualities which -soldiers possessed, it must be confessed that they were as eager for gain -as the average Hebrew grocer, and almost as ready to accept coins from -no matter what tainted source they might come. “Money,” as Vespasian had -said, “has no smell,” a sentiment with which most men were in entire -agreement. - -This is a very fair view of the state of politics about the month of -June, in the year of our Lord 221, at which time the Dowager-Empress -propounded her scheme; an attempt, she said, to transfer the odium of -Antonine’s neglect in secular matters to other shoulders, and so to -set the boy free to carry out his great policy for the advancement -of religious unity throughout the world. Maesa certainly agreed with -her grandson’s point of view, or said she did, which came to the same -thing. The work which he had proposed was great and important, and it -had been neglected for the good of the state. Now, to neglect the great -God angered him to whom the family owed their position. To neglect the -affairs of state angered the people, and gave rise to disturbances; of -this Antonine had had recent examples. Surely it would be advisable to -appoint a coadjutor in the affairs of state, and, for obvious reasons, -one of his own family, some one who would naturally have no other desire -than to serve Antonine; there was a relative ready and willing. Why did -he not adopt Alexianus? Perhaps the boy was insignificant! Well, so much -the better; but at any rate he might be used to advantage. All this was -most plausible, and may have blinded the Emperor for the moment, but we -can easily understand, from what we know of Antonine’s nature, that even -if he saw through the very specious pleas here put forward, he would -quite enjoy meeting his grandmother on her own ground. He had done it -before, and had played the game successfully. - -But the suggestion seems to have really appealed to his sense of the -fitting; he _was_ hard pressed; he was more anxious for the fate of his -God than for the fate of the Empire (a crime for which other sovereigns -have suffered similar fates at the hands of infuriated populaces), -besides which, Dion tells us that Antonine loved his cousin, stupid and -namby-pamby as he undoubtedly was. - -And there was yet another side to the suggestion which commended itself -to the Emperor’s favourable consideration. In his present position -Alexianus was a distinct menace to the government. Since Antonine’s -mistake about Vesta and Severa, his cousin had been used as a lever -wherewith to raise popular indignation. There had been two plots, as we -have pointed out, to dethrone Antonine; and, presumably, as Julia Mamaea -was behind both, to replace him by Alexianus. Why not take the boy into -his own keeping, adopt him as Maesa suggested, and, by taking their -tool from their hands in response to their own appeal, neutralise the -influence of both aunt and grandmother at one swoop? He could then train -him in his own way. Alexianus was young—Herodian says about twelve years -old—and ought, if he were a natural child, to be easily won by kindness, -friendship, and joy. This information of Herodian’s as to age is, for a -wonder, corroborated by several reliable sources; not that Herodian knew -he was right even in this case, because he puts the adoption in the year -220 instead of 221, which would have made Alexianus about eleven instead -of over twelve years old, as he states. - -[Illustration: Thyatira Coin of Elagabalus (British Museum). - -Coin struck to commemorate Alexianus’ adoption, A.D. 221 (British Museum). - -Coin struck to commemorate Alexander as Pont. Max., A.D. 221 (British -Museum). - -_Face page 142._] - -This is the only rational view to take of the Emperor’s apparent -gullibility, as Antonine was far too quick-witted not to have scented -trouble in any scheme, however specious, to which his aunt was party. He -had already heard of her dealings with the soldiers, and of the money -that she was spending with a purpose: obviously he saw in the adoption a -loophole for his own escape, and at the same time for her undoing. His -friends may have warned him to look out for rocks ahead. They knew that -the boy was dealing with two able and crafty women made desperate by -their continual disappointments; if so, he must have refused to listen to -them, for some time early in July Antonine took his cousin Alexianus to -the Senate, and there, in the presence of the women, this boy of sixteen -summers went through the ceremony of adopting the child of twelve. He -then solemnly declared his intention of training his son himself, fitting -him for the business of Empire early, in order that he might be free from -solicitudes about a successor. Now, this was by no means Mamaea’s plan, -and caused endless friction in the working. - -Antonine obviously thought that some explanation of his decision was -needed, and had the audacity to tell the assembled fathers that he was -acting on the commands of the great God, who had designated Alexianus as -the successor to the name and Empire of Severus,—this on the basis of a -bastardy almost as probable as his own. - -The name Alexander, which was then imposed upon Alexianus, is accounted -for both by Lampridius and Dion by two equally untrue and mutually -contradictory stories. Lampridius says that the boy was born in the -temple of Alexander at Arca, on the birthday of Alexander of Macedon, -18th June 208; as a matter of fact he was not born until the 1st October -of that year, and it was highly improbable that a woman in the social -position of Mamaea would allow an accident of the kind to happen in so -public and unprepared a position. Dion accounts for the new name by -relating the miraculous return from the dead of the Macedonian king, and -his spectral journey through Thrace, where he buried a wooden horse which -has not since been found,—neither has the consonance of the story been -established, for that matter. The real reason for the change of name was -perfectly simple; it was in memory of the devotion which Caracalla, his -putative father, had always testified towards King Alexander of Macedon. - -The ages of the two principal figures in this ceremony form the peg on -which Lampridius hangs not a few jeers. Perhaps it was absurd, but far -more unnatural things had been extolled: witness Septimius’ adoption -of the defunct Marcus Aurelius as his father, which was certainly an -even less possible performance in the natural order of generation. If -Lampridius jeered later, no one did so at the time; in fact, we are led -to infer that all men were pleased. The soldiers, because Mamaea had -made it worth their while to adopt that attitude; the Senate, because -they expected consideration from a little milksop brought up entirely at -his mother’s apron-strings; the people, because it was the occasion for -Antonine’s fourth congiary. Singularly enough, there is again no mention -made of a donative, or distribution of money to the soldiers, which seems -unfortunate. - -It is difficult to ascertain the exact date of the adoption. Herodian’s -statement of the year 220 is easily refuted, both by epigraphic and -numismatic evidence. These give, as near as possible, 10th July in the -year 221, by means of the following deductions:—(1st) The fasti of a -priestly college, probably the Sodales Antoniniani, dated either 2nd or -10th July in that year, describe Alexianus as “Marcus Aurelius Alexander -Nobilissimus Caesar,” and either Imperii _consors_ or _heres_, on which -discrepancy of words hangs a future tale; (2nd) the earliest Alexandrian -coins which call Alexianus Caesar are dated LΕ, or subsequent to 29th -August 221; (3rd) there is an inscription found amongst those of the 7th -Cohort of the Vigiles, which was set up on 1st June of that year, and -commemorates the Imperatores Antoninus et Alexander. The earliest date is -therefore 1st June, the latest the end of July or beginning of August. -The probabilities lie between the two, as the early police inscription -has been accounted for on the grounds that, along with her money, Mamaea -had circulated a report of the adoption before it took place. The -numismatic evidence points to a middle date, because, as far as we can -judge, the Alexandrian mint was most expedite in issuing its coins, and -here, if the adoption took place early in June, they would seem to have -allowed a month or so to elapse between the time they got the news and -the first issue of the coins. Other mints also issued their first coins, -calling Alexander Caesar, towards the end of 221. - -The one official decree is that of the Sodales. It is defective in its -designation, and has caused much disagreement both as to Alexander’s -position once he was adopted, as well as about the date of the ceremony -itself. At any rate, until more definite information comes to hand, we -are forced to be content with the generally received date, somewhere -about 10th July. The next question is as to the position of Alexander -after that date, in the year 221. Certainly Maesa and Mamaea intended -to have him “Imperii consors.” As far as we can judge, both from the -statement in the Senate and from his subsequent proceedings in the state, -Antonine’s intention was to adopt an “Imperii heres”; now, this was a -very different matter, and entirely nullified the major part of the -plan of the schemers. Antonine certainly did defeat their plot in part -by refusing to give Alexander any governmental powers. This is certain -from the fact that on no coin does Alexander appear with the imperial -insignia (the laurel wreath) before the month of March 222, though the -titles which he received at his adoption—Augustus, Imperator, and -Caesar—are frequently used before that date, because Antonine never had -the least objection to other people using titles, so long as he kept the -power. Maesa and Mamaea must have been wild with rage at having gained so -little; they had shaken hands repeatedly, and congratulated themselves so -often because Samson had at last delivered himself bound into their hands -and henceforth they were in permanent possession of the administration, -that it must have been a very disagreeable awakening when they found that -their plan had not succeeded. - -If we can believe anything that Lampridius says, we would judge that -Maesa was now genuinely frightened. She thought that Antonine’s religious -mistake had created a real wave of bad feeling in the city, and that, -if anything should happen to the reigning Emperor, her position would -be gone for good and all. Now, the last thing that she had a mind to do -was to return to provincial obscurity. With a patience and determination -worthy of a better cause, she set to work to gain for herself, and -incidentally for Alexander also, what had not accrued when the adoption -took place. As far as we can judge from the coins, Maesa had only -managed at that time to obtain his association with Antonine as Pontifex -Maximus, thereby lessening the Emperor’s authority over the Roman cults, -for which he had shown so little respect. One thing was, however, -satisfactory: Alexander was “out”; people knew about him in Rome; he was -the heir designate, and, as such, a most useful lever in the hands of the -unscrupulous. - -It was certainly not long before Antonine found that his success had not -been as unqualified as he had imagined. Alexander was Caesar by decree of -the Senate; Severus by some utterly unconstitutional decree of the army; -Antonini filius and Severi Nepos; but here it began and ended. The boy -was utterly unresponsive to the affection that Antonine was anxious to -lavish upon him; utterly incapable, so the Emperor said, of any sort of -training for the position he was destined to occupy. Undoubtedly a great -mistake had been made, the boy was a born prig, and the Emperor had given -his case away by adopting him at all, by putting him into a position in -which his popularity was bound to increase amongst those who did not know -him personally. In fact, Antonine arrived at the conclusion before the -wine harvest that he had played his aunt’s game and not his own, and in -consequence he became moody and uncomfortable. - -Lampridius’ contrast of the two characters is, as we have said, a -caricature drawn for the laudation of the younger, the reprobation of -the elder. If only a part is true, it must have been very annoying for -the Emperor of seventeen to be saddled, through his own stupidity, with -a nincompoop of twelve, a boy who quoted proverbs to a purpose, and -the maxims of a detestable crowd of female relatives at every turn. Of -course, Lampridius’ likeness of his little hero is stocked with fulsome -adulation. One would think, on reading it, that there was at least one -person in the world who did not deceive himself when he said that he was -without sin, and therefore ready to cast the first stone. The account of -his first meeting with the Senate is simply ludicrous; no child, however -disgusting, could have displayed the unction and greasiness which is -recorded as having slipped off his tongue. Were he one-half as nasty as -Lampridius asserts, we can well imagine that the whole devil in Antonine -was striving to get hold of his cousin’s prejudices, trying to persuade -him to run, dance, play, to wake him up from the self-satisfaction which -so ill became his years. All of this, we are told, Antonine did, under -the generic terms of corrupting his morals, which is after all the sum -total of Antonine’s enormities. - -But here Mamaea stepped in. She had spoilt her son’s youth, as many -another parent has done both before and since, and was not going to -stand by and see her work dissipated, blown to the winds. Not that she -need have feared. The Bassiani developed young; Alexander’s character -was moulded, and he had no desire to change, to live his life as a man, -instead of as a vegetable, or enjoy the gifts which the gods had given -to men. Antonine had thought that something might be done for the cousin -he pitied, by turning him loose; he found it was no good, and soon lost -patience. He then realised the trend of affairs; he saw the growing -influence of the women, the stupidity of the boy, and chafed more each -day under both. The nonconformist conscience, which was Alexander’s chief -attraction, and is still his only title to fame, annoyed the Emperor -continually. Friction arose at every turn. It was Antonine striving to -minimise the influence of the women, and the women striving to destroy -the influence of Antonine, together with his crew of wretched favourites. -Neither did the elderly Annia Faustina tend to mend matters. She as well -as Alexander had been a mistake, and so the Emperor resolved to get rid -of both his troubles at one swoop. To do this, however, he had to quarrel -openly with his relatives, and by a _coup d’état_ regain paramount -authority in the state. The question was, would he be strong enough? -Would a boy of seventeen, surrounded by friends who, however agreeable as -sportsmen, however able in the histrionic art were anything but trained -politicians, have much chance of regaining what statecraft, diplomacy, -and guile had filched from him at a moment when he was comparatively -helpless? - -His first act was to follow the same tactics that he had adopted on -10th July. He sent to the Senate ordering the fathers to withdraw the -title of Caesar which he had conferred on Alexander and which they had -confirmed. That august assembly, we are told, preserved a discreet -silence, not quite knowing whom to please, or which way the strongest -cat was going to jump. Here, after all that the author has said about -Alexander’s popularity and the general hatred testified towards Antonine, -occurs a strange statement. Lampridius says they were silent because, -“according to certain persons, Alexander was popular with the army.” -This, as we see, is a much-qualified expression of opinion when compared -with those in the foregoing sections, and put in conjunction with the -Senate’s reluctance to commit itself one way or another, it is certainly -significant, and points to the fact that the real hatred towards the -Emperor had yet to be worked up, like the similar hatred towards the -aristocracy in this country. Another significant fact concerning the -Emperor’s honest and straightforward intentions towards his cousin is, -that right up to the last he seems to have had command of the boy’s -person, and never took any decisive measure, either openly or secretly—in -the usual Antonine fashion—for removing him to another sphere of -usefulness in realms celestial, despite the plots formed against his own -life, of which, before now, he had had ample proof. - -It is probable that about this time Antonine made several official -appointments which were considered thoroughly bad by the older -politicians. Names are not mentioned, but we can well believe that the -Emperor had grown suspicious of his old advisers ever since he had seen -them paying court to the young Caesar and his mother. We are told that -he put men into offices, especially those about the palace, who, from a -personal and too intimate relation, he felt he could rely on. As ever, -such appointments are a gross mistake. As mere friends such men would -have tended to his undoing; as officials they tended to revolution. - -Following up his command to the Senate, Antonine sent messengers to the -army. These demanded that the soldiery should relieve Alexander of the -title of Severus, or Caesar, or whatever designation they had taken upon -themselves to confer on the boy, while the same messengers were ordered -to deface the statues and inscriptions in the camp, as the custom was to -treat those of dethroned tyrants. Now, this was unwise, without so much -as by your leave, or with your leave, because the property belonged to -the regiments, and not to the Emperor. - -Next in order comes the record of an attempt made by Antonine to -assassinate his cousin. It is a story which requires careful examination, -because Herodian never mentions it at all, and Dion only refers to it -casually in the following words: “Much as Sardanapalus loved his cousin, -when he began to suspect everybody and learnt that the general feeling -was veering towards Alexander, he dared to change his resolution, and -did all in his power to get rid of him. He tried one day to have him -assassinated, and not only did not succeed, but nearly lost his own -life in the attempt.” Lampridius is, of course, much more explicit. -This we might expect, because he lived so much later and had a century -of vilification to work upon as well as Dion’s official story. From him -we learn that Antonine sent men to assassinate Alexander, and also sent -letters to the boy’s governors (all of whom, be it remembered, were of -Mamaea’s appointment and consequently were working for her, not for -Antonine) with promises of wealth and honours if they would only kill -their charge in any way they thought best, either in the bath, by poison, -or the sword. - -This policy of bovine artfulness accomplished, Antonine went to his -gardens in the suburbs (_ad spem veterem_) for an afternoon’s exercise -in chariot-driving, certainly without any sufficient guard. At this -juncture Lampridius stops his fantastic story of the most futile -attempt at assassination ever recorded, in order to utter a few -sententious platitudes, which, however, cut both ways. He remarks with a -verisimilitude of sincerity, that “the wicked can do nothing against the -innocent.” Now this is a maxim which is not always regarded as a truism, -even on the Stock Exchange, but it was a convenient way of accounting for -the incomprehensible ending to this absurd allegation. - -Lampridius then continues that the promulgation of these orders, as -carried to the soldiers, did not increase the popularity of the Emperor, -at any rate amongst that party who were in Mamaea’s pay; besides which, -fratricide was by no means a popular, even when it was a fashionable -crime. The result of these two supposed epistles when communicated to the -soldiers (by whom or why is unfortunately not mentioned) was to rouse -them to the highest pitch of anger. Quite spontaneously they ran, some to -the palace, where Alexander was living with his mother, and some to the -gardens, where, also by some unexplained power of divination, they knew -they would find Antonine; their intention being to carry out Mamaea’s -wishes on the person of the Emperor without further delay. Soaemias, -we are told, followed them on foot with the design of warning her son -concerning the danger that threatened him. Antonine was preparing for a -chariot race when he heard the noise approaching, and being frightened, -says Lampridius, he hid in the doorway of his bedroom, behind the -curtain; surely not a very safe place to hide when thoroughly frightened -by an angry mob, and quite unlike his usual procedure in times of -danger. Next he sent his praefect Antiochianus to find out the reason -of the tumult. This man easily managed to dissuade the soldiers from -their murderous designs, and recalled them to their oaths, because, as -Lampridius naïvely remarks, they were too few in number; the greater part -having refused to leave their standard, which Aristomachus had kept out -of the treasonable attempt. - -At last Antonine’s eyes were fully opened to his danger. He now knew how -far Mamaea’s money and persuasions had gone, and whither the influence of -Maesa was tending. There had been a military rising; not strong enough -to effect its purpose, it is true, but still able to cause confusion, -strife, and divided allegiance in the city, and set people’s tongues -wagging. - -The Emperor seems to have made up his mind at once as to his line of -conduct. With a courage almost unprecedented in a boy of his age, he went -straight to the camp, resolved to show himself in their midst and settle -this matter, once and for all, with the Praetorians. It was undoubtedly -one of the finest acts of courage in his life, this going alone and -unprotected into the midst of a camp which was supposed to be in mutiny; -a camp where he had just learnt that at least a section of the men were -in his aunt’s pay, and to which, if Lampridius’ statement is correct, his -aunt, cousin, and grandmother had just retired for safety. Surely to go -there utterly unprotected was simply courting the assassination he had -so narrowly avoided, was making death absolutely certain, unless he knew -that the number of the disaffected was very small, and that Lampridius’ -statement about the imperial family and their journey thither was pure -fiction. There is not much doubt, however, despite the biographer, that -they were still in the palace, and would rather have died than go to the -camp, lest the Emperor should learn of their part in the conspiracy. - -There is yet another discrepancy between the account of Dion and that -of Lampridius; the latter says that Alexander was in the camp for -safety, the former is equally sure that Antonine took him with him when -he went to find out the reason of the disturbance. Be this as it may, -Dion states that the arrival of the Emperor put a stop to the trouble, -and that there was a conference, at which Alexander’s name was never -mentioned. The subject of complaint and mutiny was, that certain freedmen -had been appointed to offices for which, in all probability, there had -been candidates better qualified than the Emperor’s friends. With a -considerable amount of good sense, Antonine acceded to the soldiers’ -demands; he dismissed four out of the five persons mentioned, amongst -whom were Gordius, from the praefecture of the night watch, Murissimus, -from an unknown office, and two other friends, “who, mad as he was, made -him madder.” Hierocles’ name was also mentioned, but the Emperor refused -to listen to it; “he would die,” he said, “rather than give up Hierocles, -whatever they might think of his usefulness,” and this was all. Antonine -had recognised a grievance and remedied it; after which, in all -probability, the affair was dealt with by the regimental court-martial as -usual. - -A comparison between Dion’s account of this “terrible uproar” and -Lampridius’ account of the futility of the whole proceeding leaves one -with the impression that once again Mamaea had failed in a dastardly -attempt on Antonine’s life. It is unthinkable that any assassin, however -stupid, would have warned the friends of his enemy concerning his -proposed attempt, as both Herodian and Lampridius testify that Antonine -did. Herodian, speaking generally of Antonine’s plots against Alexander, -says that “the Emperor was of so shallow and wicked a character that -he announced openly and without precaution what was in his mind, and -did the same without any concealment.” Lampridius says that he had the -foolishness to write to the boy’s guardians and tell them to do the deed. - -As to the whole arrangement being a plot of Mamaea’s, there is much more -to be said. It would certainly not be to her advantage if Alexander’s -adoption was annulled: that project must be stopped at all costs; -why, therefore, should she not circulate the report that Antonine -was plotting a definite act against his cousin on a certain day? She -chose a day when, as she knew, the Emperor would be in a quiet spot and -defenceless. She could pay for a military rising, which, being quite a -usual occurrence, would account for everything, and then her troubles -would be over, her position secure for her lifetime. Unfortunately for -her, Soaemias heard of the plan and went to warn her son. When she got -to the gardens, she found that Mamaea’s money had not bought sufficient -people, and that the attempt was frustrated. If there had been any real -attempt made by an unpopular Emperor against a popular associate, some -definite arrangement would have been come to as regards the protection of -the person threatened, but, as far as we can see, things went on just as -usual. The Emperor still had command of the boy’s person, after as before -the rising, and the family still lived on in the palace, trying to brazen -out their treachery, facts which give the lie to Lampridius’ remark that -special regulations were made to keep the boys apart, as well as for -Alexander’s safety. - -There is a phrase in Dion which is fairly conclusive as to the attitude -which his family were adopting towards Antonine at this period. It reads: -“this time” (in the camp conference, where it will be remembered that -the soldiers never mentioned putting their Emperor to death at all) “he -obtained mercy, though with difficulty, because his grandmother hated -him on account of his conduct, and because, not being even the son of -Antonine (Caracalla), her inclination was veering towards Alexander, -as if he had been in reality the issue of that prince.” This is a very -fair indication of the stories by means of which these women were -trying to ruin the boy; stories inspired by hatred. It seems that they -were perfectly willing to do anything, to say anything, to contradict -anything, they had formerly said, to spend anything, if only they could -collect a faction strong enough to support their schemes of replacing -Antonine by Alexander. Here is a good attempt to crush his popularity by -denying what they had formerly stated so enthusiastically—the bastardy of -Varius—and affirming instead that of Alexianus as being the only genuine -example; in fact, they were limiting the performances of Caracalla to -the unattractive sister, and denying Soaemias’ position. If they could -do that, they were more than capable of working up fury by reports of a -definite attempt on the only genuine bastard’s life, and thus justify -their attempt in the Gardens of Hope. The net result of this plot, by -whomsoever instituted, was the retirement of Alexander from public -notice. Herodian states that he was deprived of his honours. This, -however, cannot mean what the mendacious author seems to imply; namely, -that Antonine took from him his titles of Caesar and Imperator, as both -these occur on the Monza military diploma issued on 7th January 222, and -on the majority of the coins issued up to the death of Antonine in the -spring of that year. Mere empty titles were, however, of little or no use -to the imperial ladies. - -Defeated as they had been in one scheme, their ingenuity turned to yet -another means of destroying the Emperor’s authority. The attempt above -mentioned cannot be dated precisely, but we may infer from Lampridius’ -arrangement of his matter, that it was between the wine harvest and the -1st of January, on which date Mamaea made her last and successful attempt -to get her son into a definite political position. During the interval, -both Dion and Lampridius assure us, with tears in their eyes, that the -Emperor made daily attempts on the life of his cousin: a life so useful, -so necessary to the state. - -To circumvent these Mamaea refused to allow Alexander to eat anything -from the imperial kitchens and set up a kitchen and establishment of -her own in the palace, an arrangement which would scarcely have been -sanctioned by Antonine if he had had any definite murderous object in -view, because it would have interfered too materially with such plans. -But there was obviously some gross negligence afoot. Any resolute ruler, -given a couple of days (even without Locusta’s famous stew of poison and -mushrooms, which Nero, in allusion to Claudius’ apotheosis, called the -food of the Gods), would have given the lie to that pious generalisation -of Lampridius about the impotence of the wicked, and done it in much the -same manner that Nero, Domitian, Commodus, and Caracalla had done; not -to mention others whose names it would be invidious to bring forward, -but who still firmly believe that the wicked, when suitably backed, have -a certain power in this world of woe, the wicked naturally being those -whom we personally dislike. Antonine seems to have been quite indifferent -as to what was going on; he knew that his position was precarious; Syrian -divines had told him that his doom was near; in consequence of which he -prepared several devices for a unique and splendid suicide; and lived -his life, a life in which the spintries—a form of amusement with which -Tiberius had refreshed an equally worried frame—figured largely, along -with other equally reprehensible enjoyments. - -Of the actual politics we know little or nothing from the time of this -so-called revolution, until by some means or other, unknown to the -Emperor, Maesa got Alexander designated Consul for the year of grace -222. Here Antonine struck. He refused point blank to go to the Senate -to be invested with the dignity unless some one else were designated -instead of his cousin. He saw the game as clearly as you and I can see -it, and resolved to create a deadlock in the constitution. There should -be an Emperor, but no Consuls, unless, of course, the women and Senate -were prepared to give way. He was _not_ going to give official position -and authority to enemies whose object he knew only too well. Up to -this juncture he had succeeded in nullifying their machinations; did -they think he was going to give away his whole position now? Not he, -and so on, and so on. Here was a real difficulty—Rome without Consuls -was unthinkable. Antonine without supremacy was almost as impossible -a suggestion; still the women resolved to hold on, and try whether -patience and diplomacy would not appeal to his sentimental nature, and -thus overcome the last bit of opposition. After all, he was young, and -affection with children is so much more powerful than reason. - -This time Maesa herself does not seem to have tried to influence the -boy. If we can believe Lampridius’ statements, that crafty old sinner -had already managed to worm herself back into the friendship of the boy -and his mother, by putting the odium of recent troubles entirely on to -the shoulders of her daughter Mamaea. In consequence, it was with a bold -carriage that she appeared in public with the Emperor, and in private -used her influence with Julia Soaemias, begging her to make it clear -to the dear boy that his refusal to take the consulship would be his -own undoing. Rome would never endure such a breach of the usual order. -The obvious thing would have been for Antonine to go away, but he seems -to have thought, right up to midday on 1st January, that the Senate -and his relations would give way first. Then, suddenly yielding to his -mother’s entreaties, he consented to the plan, and, going to the Senate, -he associated Alexander with himself in the consular dignity, thereby -signing his own death warrant. - -January 1, 222, was the beginning of the end. It is very pitiful to see -the multitudinous wiles by means of which, all through his reign, craft -circumvented what the Emperor obviously knew was his correct and proper -course. Sometimes, as we see, it was his zeal for religion to which they -appealed, sometimes his love for his mother. In each case the result -was the same, the Emperor did what his political instinct told him was -unwise, in response to what he considered a higher motive. The adoption -had not carried with it the authority which the women desired; the office -of Consul was, therefore, vitally necessary for Alexander’s promotion. -Antonine was bound to refuse his consent to the plan; he was permanent -Consul if he liked, and would associate no one with himself of whom he -disapproved. What did it matter to him if people talked of the discord; -had they not done so ever since Maesa and Mamaea started out on their -electioneering campaign? The truth would certainly be better for him than -his relations’ lies; for himself, he was not afraid of danger, though -Soaemias, the well-meaning and artless, was, and for her sake Antonine -gave himself up, an unwilling victim, into the hands of his enemies. -It was shortly after midday when he went to the Curia accompanied by -the self-satisfied little enormity, and there, in the presence of his -grandmother, he consented to give the women all that official power and -authority which they had hitherto struggled vainly to obtain. - -Henceforward, both Dion and Lampridius tell us that the Emperor sought -his cousin’s life to take it from him. Not that the continual reiteration -of the accusation, when contrasted with the utter futility of Antonine’s -masterful inaction, is in any way convincing; this we have already -pointed out, and can add nothing to the discussion here. - -Lampridius recounts one quite amusing action, which, if it were true, -would give a certain probability to his stories. Antonine, having -resolved to kill Alexander, because the tension of this continual running -fight had become too great for his nerves, determined to dissolve the -Senate first; fearing that, should they be sitting when Alexander died, -they might elect some one else instead of the murderer. The chief reason -for doubting this story is that no Antonine had ever yet had the smallest -occasion to fear anything untoward from the action of that august -assembly, and it is most improbable that this Antonine was going to begin -now. Emperors had always taken the Senate’s concurrence in their actions -for granted, and had invariably met with entire subservience. - -But to proceed with the beautifully circumstantial details, which, -as usual, Lampridius makes as glaringly mendacious as they are -circumstantial. The Senators, he says, were told to leave the city at -once; those who had neither carriages nor servants were told to run; some -hired porters; others were lucky and got carriages. One only, a Consular, -by name Sabinus, the personage to whom Ulpian had dedicated his works, -and who, being Severa’s father, one would have thought might reasonably -have remained, did not go sufficiently rapidly for the Emperor’s liking; -in fact, he stayed in the city in defiance of the order, and must have -walked abroad very openly, for the Emperor saw him, and whispered to a -centurion, “Kill that man!” Now, the centurion was deaf, and thought the -order was “Chase that man,” which order he promptly executed. Thus the -infirmity of a “mere common centurion” saved Sabinus’ life, and gave the -world the works of Ulpian with the dedication above mentioned. Now, if, -as seems the case, Ulpian’s dedication of his works to this Consular is -dependent on Sabinus being the man saved from Antonine’s rapacity and -cruelty, the whole story is a lie, along with the palpable untruth about -the dedication. Ulpian never mentioned this gentleman, either by name, -implication, or in any other fashion, which is just a bit awkward for -Aelius Lampridius, who might at least have taken the trouble to consult -the title-page of Ulpian’s works or have asked somebody else to do the -job for him, if he was too tired with his former efforts at inventing -fiction. The name is certainly mentioned in the commentaries which Ulpian -wrote on the famous jurist of Tiberius’ period, but that is naturally -another story altogether. - -There is yet another effort made to drag Ulpian into this same chapter, -namely, when Lampridius says that part of Antonine’s scheme for the -murder of Alexander was to deprive him of his tutors, one of whom he -banished (Ulpian), while Silvinus, the distinguished orator, whom the -Emperor himself had recommended, was put to death. Both of these men -suffered because they were great and good men. Now, Ulpian we know, -Julius Paulus we know also (though quite why he was left by Alexander’s -side when good men were banished we are not told; unless it be that, for -the moment, he was hiding his light under a bushel); but who on earth -was Silvinus? His name is not given amongst that exhaustive list of -nonentities marshalled out by Lampridius (_Alex. Sev. vita_, xxxii.) as -the men who had failed to teach Alexander Latin, after an effort which -lasted from his earliest babyhood up to the time of his death; neither -is he mentioned in any other place, either by this author or in any -other record of Antonine’s cruelties; on which account we feel inclined -to relegate him, with other doubtful blessings, to the special limbo -reserved for all similarly inspired terminological inexactitudes, and -proceed to recount the rapidity with which Mamaea found means to make up -for lost time in acquiring her authority. - -Needless to say, even here Lampridius’ fabrications are as difficult -to reconcile with Dion and Herodian’s stories as those two authors are -impossible to square with one another. Of course the two last were both -eye-witnesses of the scenes they recount, and tell us so, with some -pride, a circumstance which in no way hinders them from seeing things -double, and calling them different aspects of the same truth, after the -manner of theologians when they are in a conciliatory frame of mind. - -For the murder of Antonine Lampridius assigns no adequate reason, giving -instead two suppositions of his own—first, that the Praetorians feared -Antonine’s vengeance on account of the attack which they had made on him -some months previously, and for which he had then and there forgiven -them; but, says Lampridius, despite this forgiveness, the soldiers -killed him in cold blood. Second, that on account of the hatred he had -testified towards them (presumably in not seeing to their donatives), -they resolved to rid the Republic of this pest, and began by putting to -death, first, the friends of the Emperor by various foul and indecent -means, and then, having got these out of the way, they openly attacked -Antonine in the latrinae, and killed him. - -Dion’s account is more circumstantial, and brings Alexander and Mamaea -into the horrid scene. His story is that the two Consuls, during -a meeting of the Praetorians, summoned on account of one of the -multitudinous plots against Alexander, went into the camp, that their -two mothers followed, fighting one another more openly than usual, each -imploring the soldiers to kill her sister’s son. We are then told that -Antonine, quite contrary to his custom, got frightened, rushed from -the scene and disappeared into a chest. This was apparently a foolish -and obvious hiding-place, whence he was soon dragged in order to have -his head cut off, while his mother held him in her arms. Naturally, as -the operation of killing one without the other in such a position was -difficult, Soaemias perished along with her son. - -Herodian, always the most circumstantial and picturesque liar, -substitutes for the story of the sudden dissolution of the Senate, a -report which he says Antonine caused to be circulated. It was to the -effect that Alexander was ill, so ill that he was likely to die at any -moment. By this means Antonine hoped to keep the boy shut up in the -palace until the soldiers and citizens had forgotten him, when he would -be able to put him out of the way quietly. Of course this would have been -an admirable plan if the boy had had no fond mother or grandmother to -look after his interests, but was rather futile when one considers that -these ladies, after striving to rule for four years, had at last got -the power into their own hands by appointing Alexander Consul. It was -extremely improbable, therefore, that both Maesa and Mamaea were going -to keep their mouths closed and say nothing when, in the full flush of -their triumph, they saw their puppet, and with him their own power, being -put _hors de combat_ in a slow and lingering manner. As usual, Herodian -never thought of these things, and ascribed the whole action to the -Praetorians. These turbulent guardsmen, when they began to miss the young -Consul, decided to mutiny again, the present form being a refusal to turn -out the palace guard until Alexander should reappear in the temples. - -On the face of things, this was a most irrational proceeding. If the -Praetorians wanted to save Alexander and suspected that foul play was -about to be perpetrated in the palace, surely they would have gone to -their posts as usual, and then used their official position to rescue the -boy, instead of shutting themselves up in their camp, and leaving him -to his fate quite unprotected. This apparently did not occur, either to -the soldiers or Herodian, who announces that when the guards refused to -come to the palace, Antonine (instead of finishing the work and showing -the dead body in the temples) was simply penetrated with the usual -fear—always imputed and never lived up to, unfortunately for Herodian. -In order to demonstrate to the soldiers just how frightened he was, the -Emperor did the one thing that no terrified person could possibly have -done, he set out in a litter for the camp—utterly unprotected, of course, -because he had no guards. The litter is fully described, namely, the -state litter, sparkling with gold and precious stones. With Antonine -went Alexander, presumably, as the story develops, in order to foster -the hatred which the soldiers felt towards the Emperor, and raise to a -frenzy the love they bore Alexander. It was as usual a journey in which -the Emperor courted death; in fact, the number of times that Antonine -imperilled his precious life is simply astounding to any one who studies -these delightful romances. But to proceed. When the litter arrived, the -gates of the camp were opened, and the Consuls were conducted to the -chapel, which occupied a central position in the enclosure. This leads -one to suppose, considering also the magnificence of the carriage, that -the visit was one of an official nature, in which the two Consuls were -bound to go together. The chapel also was an ominous place, as it was -here that Caracalla had played the farce of regretting his part in, -if not of exculpating himself from, the murder of his brother Geta. -Of course, things happened just as was expected; the visit did foster -loyalty to Alexander, who was received as a deliverer with acclamation, -and raised to fever pitch all the evil passions against Antonine, who was -received with perfect coldness. Despite this inauspicious reception, -the Emperor elected to stay the night in the camp chapel, the better to -meditate on his wrongs, which was obviously an unlikely proceeding on the -part of the young Sybarite. - -Next morning he held a court-martial to try the soldiers who had made -themselves conspicuous by the warmth of their reception of Alexander. -Herodian and the Emperor seem to have quite forgotten that the guards -were mutinying, as we hear no more of that story, though obviously they -ought to have been tried for that offence first. At any rate, Antonine, -still penetrated with terror, condemned these men to death as seditious -persons. The soldiers, transported with rage at his treatment of their -companions, and filled with hatred of the Emperor, conceived the notion -of succouring their imprisoned brethren by upsetting the dishonoured -Emperor. Time and pretext were admirable; they killed Antonine and with -him Soaemias, who was present, both as his mother and as Empress; they -then included in the massacre all those of the cortège who were in the -camp, and known to be Antonine’s ministers or accomplices in his crimes. -They then gave the bodies to the mob, to be dragged about the streets -of Rome, finally throwing that of the Emperor into the Tiber from the -Aemilian Bridge. All this was presumably done under the eyes of, and with -the consent of Eutychianus, the Emperor’s friend and chief minister, who -was, it will be remembered, in command of the Praetorians at the time. - -A careful comparison of these three stories reveals the fact that none of -the eye-witnesses saw the same things, and none ascribe the deed to the -same motive. All agree, however, in shifting the responsibility from the -shoulders of the former conspirators on to those of the Praetorians. No -one except Dion Cassius mentions either Maesa or Mamaea, and he merely -says that Mamaea and Soaemias both urged murder each of her sister’s son. -No mention is made of Antonine’s supposed plot against his cousin; in -fact, all reference to plots against Alexander, Maesa, and Mamaea is here -carefully eliminated, surely with an object; since it has been the great -reason given heretofore for the Emperor’s unpopularity, and precarious -position. But let us attempt to reconstruct the events of this memorable -day. From Herodian we learn that the state litter was used; that in it -travelled the two Consuls, accompanied by at least the Empress mother; -Fulvius Diogenianus, the Praefect of Rome; Aurelius Eubulus, who, as -chancellor of the exchequer, had made himself extremely unpopular by -robbing hen-roosts (Dion), and was in consequence torn to pieces by the -mob; Hierocles, the Emperor’s friend and husband (who had recently been -designated Caesar, presumably as a sort of set-off to Alexander), and two -out of the three Praetorian praefects. - -Dion and Lampridius both suggest that the Emperor tried to escape. -Herodian, with the fullest account, makes no mention of this fact; -neither Lampridius nor Dion agree, however, as to the mode of Antonine’s -proposed escape. The incident of the latrinae, mentioned by Lampridius, -suggests a murder similar in circumstance to that of Caracalla. What -would have been easier than for one of Mamaea’s party to seize the boy, -alone and unprotected in the latrinae? The Emperor once gone, the obvious -thing would be for the conspirators to remove as quickly as possible -all those persons who might make things difficult for his successor. -Of these, Soaemias would certainly be the most troublesome. Hot and -passionate, devoted to her son and to his memory, if she had lived, -Rome would have resounded with the noise of the crime. It was obviously -necessary to close her mouth with expedition. Why Eutychianus did not -suffer the same fate is quite incomprehensible. The only theory that has -been suggested is that neither Maesa nor Mamaea felt themselves capable -of undertaking the whole administration alone; they felt that they must -have at least one man who knew the ropes at their back. - -To account for the treatment of Antonine’s body at the hands of the mob -is certainly difficult. We know that he had done nothing which could have -rendered him obnoxious to the populace. To ascribe it to intolerance -of his psychopathic condition shows, not only ignorance of Roman -susceptibilities, but also a foolish ante-dating of popular prejudice. -We certainly have no record of this Emperor’s sepulchre; and to dismiss -as mere fable the one point on which the authors all agree is equally -impossible. The probable solution lies in the fact that Mamaea’s money, -which had caused the murder, invented this scheme for disgracing her -nephew’s memory, and thus averted trouble from herself. It would raise -a popular tumult, or at any rate a disgust for the idol of the masses, -if they could have Antonine’s body dragged through the city publicly, as -the perpetrator of unmentionable crimes, concerning which the populace -knew nothing. Suffice it to say that it did the work. Antonine had the -stigma of all crimes imputed to his memory; and Alexander the good arose -superior to all human frailties. Then and not till then, Rome began to -be shocked. Men whose fortunes Antonine had made by his liberality, the -Senate, whom he had snubbed so unmercifully, the army to whose donatives -he had not attended properly, all these found it advisable to adopt -the views of the new administration; their education in ingratitude -was complete. Instead of the generous, fearless, affectionate boy whom -the populace had known, there emerged the sceptred butcher ill with -satyriasis; the taciturn tyrant, hideous and debauched, the unclean -priest, devising in the crypts of a palace infamies so monstrous that -to describe them new words had to be coined. It was Mamaea’s work, and -for 1800 years no one has had the audacity to look below the surface and -unmask the deception. - - - - -CHAPTER VII - -SUPPLEMENTARY MATTER CONCERNING THE YEARS 221-222 - -_Antonine’s Government from 221 to 222 A.D._ - - -The events of the years 221 and until March 222 are mainly a record of -internecine fights and struggles; the Emperor was trying to retain his -position in the state, the women leaving no stone unturned to possess -themselves of power in Alexander’s name. We have traced the events which -led to the adoption of Alexander, and noticed the small amount of power -which his position as heir to the Empire actually put into the hands -of Maesa and Mamaea. We have seen further how the repudiation of the -adoption by Antonine lessened even this modicum of power, and how the -successful attempt to make Alexander Consul gained for their puppet the -official position from which the terms of his adoption had excluded him. -Once that position was secured, we have watched the successful plot -against the Emperor’s life, which placed Maesa and Mamaea in actual -command of the state under the merely nominal headship of Alexander. It -only remains for us to follow the governmental acts of these last months -of Antonine’s life, as far as the authorities will allow. - -The first recorded action after the adoption of Alexander was one of -religion. The ostensible object of the ceremony on 10th July, or rather -earlier, had been to free the chief priest of Elagabal from his secular -duties, in order that he might further the worship of the Great God. -To this end, Antonine instituted a magnificent religious procession -through the city, taking his God from the temple on the Palatine to that -in the suburbs. Herodian, with his usual inaccuracy, announces that -this ceremony took place each year at midsummer. Now, the temple on the -Palatine was not finished by midsummer of the year 220, judging from -the coins which celebrate the expansion of the cult, and that near the -Porta Praenestina was even later in its completion. The inference is, -therefore, that the procession could not possibly have taken place in the -year 220 at midsummer. Further evidence is, however, forthcoming; Cohen -mentions certain Roman coins struck in honour of the procession; they -show the God on a car, and date from the latter part of the year 221, by -which time the suburban temple was finished and the procession certainly -took place. - -[Illustration: Jovi Ultiori. The Eliogabalium as reconsecrated to -Jupiter, A.D. 224. (From a woodcut.) - -Coin struck to commemorate the Procession of Elagabal, A.D. 221 (British -Museum). - -Coin of A.D. 221 representing the Eliogabalium. (From a photogravure.) - -_Face page 174._] - -Before midsummer in the year 222, according to Dion, Antonine was dead. -He did not therefore conduct the Elagabal procession, and as the authors -inform us that Alexander sent the God back to Emesa with considerable -expedition, after reconsecrating the temple to Jupiter, it is very -unlikely that Alexander continued the public parade of an unpopular -worship, even though the God was still in Rome at the time mentioned. - -Despite Herodian’s statement that Alexander, as well as Antonine, was -a priest of the Sun, it is fairly certain that the former was never -actually associated with his cousin in that priesthood, and was not in -the least likely to begin the worship after Antonine’s death. The obvious -inference is that, as usual, Herodian was speaking without his book; -_each_ year meant that there was one procession, and one only, namely at -midsummer in the year 221. - -The correct interpretation of this function belongs to specialists in -Semitic mythology. There are points about it, however, which incline -one to the idea that its institution in Rome was due to the marriage -of Elagabal and Juno Coelestis. Its real significance lies in the -fact that it took place at midsummer. Ramsay tells us of many such -processions in the East, notably those held during the month Tammuz, -which (owing to the variations of the local Syrian calendars) fell in -various places at different times between June and September. Now, these -processions celebrated the nuptials of the divine pair Ishtar-Tammuz or -Aphrodite-Adonis. The worship of this pair centred at Bylus, not 100 -miles from Emesa, and from this shrine, in all probability, Antonine -got his idea of the great procession, made memorable by the coins -struck during the year 221, and also by the inscription to Hercules, -erected either in the latter part of the year 221 or early in 222 -(Domaszewski) by the Centurion Masculinus Valens, the standard-bearer -Aurelius Fabianus, and the adjutant Valerius Ferminus, all of the Tenth -Antonine Cohort of the Praetorian Guard. This inscription records their -having taken part in the sacred procession, which seems to have been -of a military as well as of a religious character. The magnificence -was extraordinary. The chariot on which the God was transported was -richly covered with gold and precious stones; great umbrellas were at -each corner. It was drawn by six white horses (the coins give them all -abreast), and the reins were so arranged as to make it appear that the -God himself was driving, while the horses were actually guided by the -Emperor, running backwards, and supported on either side by guards lest -anything untoward should happen. Statues of the Gods, costly offerings, -and the insignia of imperial power were carried, while the Equestrian -order and the Praetorian Guards followed. - -The streets were strewn thick with yellow sand, powdered with gold -dust, and the whole route was lined by the populace, carrying torches -and strewing flowers in the path of God. Precisely the same thing may -be seen to-day following the same route and at the same time of the -year. The procession of the Corpus Domini is still a popular function -even in modern Rome, though its termination is no longer the occasion -for temporal blessings such as Antonine’s liberality provided. Herodian -mentions this liberality, and condemns it as a sort of diabolical plot -for the extermination of the citizens. He says that when the festival -was over, Antonine used to mount on towers especially constructed for -the purpose, and distribute to the crowd vases of gold and silver, -clothes and stuffs of all sorts, fat oxen and other animals, clean and -unclean, except pigs, which were forbidden to him by his Phoenician (not -Jewish) custom. Presumably the distribution was by tickets, exchangeable -for these gifts, of which he says each was at liberty to take what he -could seize. In the scramble, many citizens perished either by crushing -one another, or by throwing themselves, in their eagerness, on the -lances of the soldiers. The consequence was that the festival became a -misfortune to many families. But surely to make Antonine responsible for -the greediness of the crowd is as absurd as to record the fiction that -he smothered people with flowers, or took luncheon in the circus when he -was interested in the games, and then evince such harmless amusements as -proofs of cruelty. - -As we recorded in the last chapter, it was certainly not long before -Antonine discovered that he had made a vital mistake in adopting his -cousin. We are led to infer that the boys had not seen much of one -another for some time previously, as Mamaea had kept them apart, fearing -her son’s contamination. Now that Alexander was actually in the palace -and in daily contact with the Emperor, incompatibility of temper was the -natural result, though in several places we are informed that Antonine -loved his cousin at least up to 1st January, which interesting fact may -be doubted on psychological as well as on the historical grounds already -recorded. His second mistake had been in marrying his grandmother’s -elderly friend Annia Faustina. - -By the autumn of 221 the Emperor had resolved (as we have already -pointed out) to rid himself of both encumbrances at once. For Antonine, -divorces, like marriages, were made in heaven, an opinion which he had -no desire to hide from men. He therefore divorced Annia Faustina without -intending to live a single life, even for a time, because he had grown -weary, was tired of this struggle with his relations. Moreover, he -wanted friends; the _coup d’état_ by which he had freed himself from -the irksomeness of Alexander’s sonship, or had at least tried to do so, -and by which he had at the same time got rid of his third wife, had -naturally caused a break with his family; after which the Emperor seems -to have considered himself at perfect liberty to make any appointments -he chose, and to mismanage the state much as a Claudius or a Macrinus -might have done. It was a period, according to Lampridius, when Antonine -was specially drawn to members of the theatrical profession. Now such -persons are admirable in their proper place, but are not much sought -after in governmental positions. Unfortunately, the Emperor did not -know this fact, and, considering himself emancipated, did as Nero, -Titus, Domitian, or Caracalla would have done: he appointed his friends -everywhere. The biographers, of course, assume that the men appointed -were of loose character, as well as of base origin, without supplying a -tittle of evidence either as to who the men were or what they did when -in responsible positions. The supposition is that they were appointed on -account of abnormalities; the result, as chronicled, is that the state -did not suffer from their mismanagement. - -We can quite see the point of view of a boy feverishly anxious to regain -the power and authority which he had lost, and imagining that the one -way to do this was to put his own friends into office, whether they were -barbers, runners, cooks, or locksmiths. Lampridius tells us that men -from each of these trades were appointed as procurators of the 20th, -though how many such appointments Antonine made it is impossible to -discover. In the autumn of this year (221) the soldiers asked for the -dismissal of four such favourites, of whom the Chariot-Driver Gordius, -Praefect of the Night Watch, was one; Claudius Censor, Praefect of the -Sustenances, another. In the same passage Lampridius reiterates the old -lie about Eutychianus Comazon, who had been reappointed Praefect of the -Praetorian Guard about January 222. He again calls Eutychianus an actor, -who changed his offices as quickly as he would have changed his parts -on the stage, and records that it was the height of folly to put him in -command of the guards. In all probability it was annoying to Mamaea, -as she might not be able to bribe the guards as freely as heretofore. -Now, we have already seen that Eutychianus Comazon was a soldier as far -back as the year 182; that he had held this same office (Praefect of the -Praetorium) in 218; that he had been Praefect of the City in 219, Consul -in 220; again Praefect of the City in 221, and that, when in the murders -and proscriptions which followed that of Antonine, the then Praefect of -Rome Fulvius Diogenianus had met his end, Comazon was reappointed to the -city praefecture for the third time, and now by Maesa and Mamaea. It is, -therefore, pure stupidity to condemn Antonine for appointing this actor -(!) to a post in 222 which he had already held with honour, and which he -was to hold again with renown. If none of Antonine’s appointments were -worse than this of Eutychianus Comazon, it is small wonder that the state -suffered in no wise from the mismanagement. A further charge brought -against the administration is, that the Emperor appointed freedmen to the -posts of Governors of Provinces, Ambassadors, Proconsuls, and military -leaders, thus debasing all these offices by conferring them upon the -ignoble and dissolute. - -Here is another wilful bit of misrepresentation. A short perusal of -Petronius on the position of freedmen will disabuse any one’s mind of the -idea that they were either ignoble or essentially dissolute. Patricians -they were not, though they aped the manners and extravagances of that -class, much as the plutocracy of to-day ape the aristocracy of yesterday, -both in their wealth and their exclusiveness. Money in Old Rome carried -much the same kudos as it carries in England to-day. The democracy could -and did rise when they had acquired wealth; they were then just as -vulgar, just as ostentatious, just as snobbish as their successors the -plutocrats of this latter-day world; they had the privileges that wealth -confers and none of the responsibilities which aristocracy involves, and -were, equally with the modern plutocrats, without traditions or heredity -to guide them. But this was their misfortune, not their fault. On the -other hand, there was, as a general rule, plenty of ability amongst the -men who had risen. They were clear-headed, far-sighted politicians; -men who, being free from traditions, were best able to cut away the -overgrowth of centuries, because their respect for archaeological -institutions had not degenerated them into mere fossilized curiosities of -an antediluvian age. Certainly they were not all ignoble, if they were -plebeian in origin, and it is mere supposition to say that they were all -dissolute; so indecent a suggestion could only emanate from those who -hoped to gain in comparison. - -There was one obvious reason why Maesa and her party should object to -any and every appointment made by Antonine. Men thus appointed would not -be her nominees, and she could not therefore demand the fees payable on -such occasions. This mention of fees brings one to the second part of the -charge against the Emperor, namely, that he sold offices either himself -or through his favourites. It would certainly be more satisfactory if -we knew something as to what he sold, to whom he sold it, or for how -much he sold it. Lampridius is careful not to mention such trivial and -minor details, he just brings the accusation, without either proof or -real likelihood to support it. The main contention seems to be that -the practice is immoral; if so, immorality is as rife to-day as in -third-century Rome. Sovereigns, ministers, cabinets, universities, -churches, in fact every species of authority confers its own offices, -decorations, titles, and sinecures, for all of which fees are still -chargeable, even exacted. This practice of royalties may account for the -charge, as it is unlikely, psychologically speaking, that Antonine would -ever have sought to profit pecuniarily from his friends, and certainly he -would not have appointed enemies, even for money’s sake; he had learnt -too much about the ways of such people in the bosom of his own family. -We have remarked in other places on Antonine’s penchant for giving, and -can well believe that the boy bestowed favours broadcast; that he sought -to fill offices as they fell vacant, by the appointment of friends, -especially with men who had endeared themselves to him, men from whom he -expected loyalty in return for his devotion and generosity. Poor child, -he had yet to learn that sycophants are ever to be bought by the highest -bidder. Lampridius relates the trouble and increase of difficulty which, -by their disloyalty, venality, and unbridled gossip, these men brought -upon their benefactor in return for his trust. Fortunately for all -parties concerned, they met their deaths (doubtless unwilling victims) -along with the master whom they had betrayed. They thought they had -secured themselves, but found they would have done better to secure him, -which is not an unusual position with traitors. - -Amongst the number of appointments made for his own pleasure during this -period we must include the return of Aquilia Severa to the position -of wife and Empress. Dion relates that, between the divorce of Annia -Faustina and the return of the nun to connubial felicity, Antonine took -two women to wife; but adds sapiently that even he does not know who they -were, or when the marriages took place. Now, as the time between the -divorce of Annia and the Emperor’s death cannot greatly have exceeded -three months, and as he was obviously desirous of returning to Aquilia -Severa from the first, the story of the two odd wives may be dismissed -as not proven, another of those terminological inexactitudes which seem -to be inseparable from the political amenities of every age; added to -which we must remember that Antonine was still so passionately devoted to -Hierocles that he would willingly have died rather than be parted from -him. - -The return of the nun was the crowning point in Antonine’s folly. -Undoubtedly he was getting more and more worried, was feverishly anxious -to repair the damage to his shattered power, was ready to catch at any -straw that would give him encouragement and help. In his extremity he -turned to the one woman for whom he had ever cared,—if we except his -mother, who, poor woman, was of an artfulness so bovine that her support -was a much more useful asset in his enemies’ game than to his own -position. For Antonine, unfortunately, Aquilia Severa was also worse than -useless; she may have cared for him, but her return spelt his ruin and -destruction. - -Not that Antonine was by any means at the end of his resources as yet. If -he hesitated, no one knew it. Like Caligula, he must have spent nearly -£400,000,000 of our money, and was radiant because he had achieved the -impossible. But he was worried, and, again like Caligula, in the nick -of time he remembered the sure and certain way to glory. As an Antonine -at the head of a conquering army he would again advance against the -Marcomanni, the men inhabiting Bavaria and Bohemia, whom Commodus had -reduced. - -Now, the oracles had predicted that an Antonine should finish this war, -a circumstance which commended itself to the Emperor from more points of -view than one. Like every religious person in the Empire Antonine was -superstitious. Zonaras recounts that the boy wore 600 amulets; but, as -he was not there to see, and the contemporary authors do not mention the -fact, we can dismiss this with similarly exaggerated stories. Not that -the use of these aids to piety or tickets to heaven is even now extinct; -the idea may still be found set forth, with both precision and logic, in -any manual of prayers under the heading “Brown Scapular,” or “St. Simon -Stock.” More ridiculous and more wicked were the figments of imagination, -by means of which men tried to dissuade Antonine from undertaking this -war. They told him that these Marcomanni had been conquered by means of -enchantments and magic ceremonies, the sole property of Chaldeans and -other soothsayers. Remove these enchantments, and those same enemies of -the Empire would break out into open rebellion once more. Antonine, -therefore, sought to know the enchantments and how to destroy them, so -that a pretext might be found for recommencing the war, which he, as an -Antonine, was eager to finish, lest that honour should fall to another. -Here even Lampridius is sympathetic; he says that a war would have -enabled the Emperor to merit the name of Antonine, which he, along with -nearly all the others, had sullied; but the opportunity was not given -him; death came too soon to enable him to make the preparations. - -Lampridius now enters upon a few more pious reflections, and in the -course of his argument a few more terminological inexactitudes concerning -the Emperor’s name and family history. He states that Antonine had not -only usurped that august name, but had profaned it, until it became -a name of public ridicule; that he was called nothing but Varius and -Heliogabalus. These remarks are both unnecessary and untrue. The Emperor -was never called either Varius or Heliogabalus. The name of his God, -which he assumed at Nicomedia, was never in any sort of way an official -title; neither does Varius appear on any known coin, inscription, or -document. This Emperor is frequently cited as Priest of Elagabal, Priest -of the Most High God, which title was, by the way, often obliterated on -the monuments instead of the name Antonine, when Alexander defaced, or -partly defaced, these after his cousin’s death. - -Like the name Jahwe, the El of the Hebrews, this name Elagabal, the El of -the Emesans, was in all probability considered too holy for common use, -at least during the Emperor’s lifetime. After his death, it was applied -to him as a sort of nickname, just as Caligula or Caracalla had been -applied to former Emperors, or even like the term “Romanist” was applied -more recently to the last Stuart King of this country.[58] - -To this latter period of the reign we may ascribe a certain amount -of Antonine’s activity in building. Lampridius mentions at least two -monuments of importance, the first a gigantic column which he purposed to -erect, a staircase inside, round which should be engraved or chiselled, -not the history of the Emperor’s deeds, not even the history of the -family exploits, but a record of the miracles which God had wrought, and -for which men gave thanks. Antonine was murdered before the project could -be fulfilled, and Rome lost the finest of those most beautiful relics of -antiquity—the columns which still grace her forums and market-places. The -second was a high tower which he built in accordance with the prophecy -of certain Syrian priests, that his death as well as his life should be -violent. All traces of this tower and its location have disappeared; so -have the sheets of gold covered with jewels, with which he paved the -court below, in pursuance of his desire to perish magnificently. The idea -of this extravagance was that of a splendid suicide, to be accomplished -by throwing himself from the summit of the tower on to the sparkling -beauty beneath, thus finding sensuousness even in death. Antonine had -read Iambulus; he knew the history of the men in the Fortunate Isles, -who, when they were overtaken by the ennui of sheer happiness, lay on -perfumed grass which had the faculty of producing a voluptuous death. -His conception was not so easy, but what it lost in ease it gained in -splendour. - -In addition to these works, mention must be made of the completion of the -Antonine baths, now known as those of Caracalla, the Thermae Varianae -on the Aventine, which are variously named by Pauly as Thermae Syrae or -Surae, and the hall built for the Senaculum on the Quirinal. These are -authentic works, and there are many other instances cited by Lampridius -of this Emperor’s passion for building. We hear of houses, baths, huge -salt-water lakes, built in the mountains and fastnesses of the country -districts. All these were erected, so the story goes, but for a moment, -as temporary shelters for the monarch when travelling, and were destroyed -when once he had reached his next habitation. Even Lampridius states that -such records are obviously false, the inventions of those who wished -to malign Antonine, once Alexander was possessed of the supreme power, -sycophants Lampridius calls them, who makes such a poor show himself when -occupying that unenviable position at Constantine’s bidding. - -There is yet another point which must be examined in connection with -the murder of this Emperor, namely the so-called disaffection of the -soldiers. Time and again, throughout the history of the reign, we learn -from coins and inscriptions that Antonine was popular with all ranks -of the army. On the other hand, we have the repeated assurance of all -authors, both Greek and Latin, that the Emperor was continually losing -his popularity. - -More reliance could be placed on the written testimony if the authors -agreed as to when this popularity was lost. As a matter of fact, -Lampridius ascribes the beginning, progress, and culmination of this -dislike to each separate year; on the later occasions, seemingly, because -he had forgotten that he had already stated definitely that the affection -for the Emperor was a thing of the past. Nevertheless, the story cannot -be entirely dismissed as a mere fable, since there were two military -risings or disturbances, in the second of which the Emperor lost his life. - -The question must occur as to whether these are traceable to actual -disaffection or to some conspiracy. The side-lights which all authors -throw on the progress of events leave no doubt in our minds that the two -risings were definite conspiracies, worked up by interested persons,—such -wholly unsuccessful plots as those of Seius Carus and Pomponius Bassus -may be left out of consideration here, as they were at once discovered -and as easily frustrated. The fact remains, however, that Antonine -was killed, most probably in the Praetorian camp, and that his body, -having been dragged about the city, was thrown into the Tiber, near the -Aemilian Bridge, or else cast down a drain which ran into the river, in -order to show contempt for his sacred person. Again, there was no effort -made to punish the wrong-doers. The Praetorians themselves, when they -knew of the murder, made no outcry, which circumstances tend to show a -certain amount of acquiescence on the part of the soldiers and people. -How, then, had Antonine alienated in 222 the men who in 220 testified -such devotion to his person and rule? - -A considerable amount of disaffection can be traced to the foolish -neglect which the Emperor showed towards his troops. He was their -nominee; to them he owed his throne. He had promised them the money, -privileges, and affection which had been his father’s special care. Once -in sure possession of the Empire, this policy was changed. The first -congiary in 218 was undoubtedly accompanied by a donative of satisfying -amplitude. At the second (on the occasion of his first marriage) we are -told that the Emperor gave more to the humblest citizen of Rome, more to -the wives of the Senators, than he bestowed on the men who had placed -him on the throne a year previously. There is no record of any other -liberality until the early part of the year 221, on the occasion of the -dual marriage, his own with Aquilia Severa and that of his God with -Vesta, the Madonna of Old Rome. On this occasion no mention is made of -any money distributed to the military forces. The same may be said for -the fourth liberality, given in July 221, to celebrate the adoption of -Alexander. - -These official liberalities were by no means the only distributions -by which Antonine endeared himself to the civilian populace. On the -occasion of his taking the Consulate, he went out of his way to bestow -magnificent gifts on the populace. After the great summer procession in -221 he distributed a vast number of costly presents amongst the crowd. He -instituted two lotteries, one for the comedians, one for the citizens. -He gave to his friends and to the poor more than they could carry away, -but on all of these occasions we are expressly told that he limited his -generosity to the civil population. - -Obviously Antonine was tired of the army. And, being Emperor, he decided -to give to whomsoever he pleased, to neglect whom he would. It was not -immoral, at least in our judgment, it was stupid, which is far worse, -and, as every one has discovered for himself, stupidity brings greater -penalties than immorality. - -Of the fourth and fifth congiaries, concerning which Mediobarbus speaks, -we can say nothing, as in the opinion of competent numismatists (Cohen -and Eckhel) they do not belong to this reign at all; there certainly -are coins bearing the inscription “Marcus Aurelius Antoninus,” and on -the obverse “Liberalitas V. VI.”; but science and discrimination now -assign these to the reign of Caracalla, not to that of the Emperor under -discussion. - -There is certainly one point of view from which this neglect of the -soldiers appeared immoral, namely, the military. Promises had been made -and, as is usual with promises, they had been broken. Mamaea took -advantage of this circumstance, and small wonder if, her secret, though -regular, distributions aiding, the lords of Rome felt that their position -was ignominious when they saw others, actors, sycophants, loafers, -procurers, strumpets, and the like, receiving what they felt was theirs -by right; small wonder if they listened to and profited by her promises -of the substantial gratitude which would follow the substitution of -Alexander for the ungrateful civilian who now held the purse-strings. - -It must be confessed that Mamaea’s money and promises were of little -effect while Antonine lived. The Emperor was certainly well served. -Each plot was easily frustrated; never would sufficient men turn out -in rebellion. When he died, those whom she had paid most liberally -convinced the rest of their proper attitude, and the first liberality -of Alexander’s reign was a sufficient _pourboire_ to close most mouths. -Those who created disturbances followed their master to the grave, or -rather the cloaca. - -The exact time of Antonine’s murder is, as we have said, most uncertain. -Dion ascribes to him a tenure of power lasting 3 years 9 months and 4 -days from the day of the battle in which he gained supreme command—8th -June 218. This fixes the day of his death as 11th March 222. It is -a statement with which the editors of the _Prosopographia_, Groebe, -Salzer, and Rubensohn, all agree. The _Liber generationis_[59] gives -6 years 8 months and 28 days, and is supported by the _Chronicle_ of -354, which gives equally explicitly 6 years 8 months and 18 days. The -discrepancy is at first sight most disconcerting, especially as the two -latter statements are both—at least nominally—official. The coins limit -the reign to four years at the outside, in consequence of which some -explanation has to be found for the extraordinary addition of three -years in both the _Chronicle_ and the _Liber generationis_. Mommsen has -suggested that a deflection of the two first strokes of III in the number -of the years has created the error in both these documents. Later writers -have accounted for the difference between Dion’s VIIII months and the -VIII of the Latin sources, as due to the omission of one stroke in the -latter, the confusion in the number of days by the fact that an X has -been omitted in the _Chronicle_. Mommsen’s emendation seems perfectly -plausible, but the absurd quibbles used to bring into agreement what was -in all probability for some time a moot point can be passed over without -much mention. - -Rubensohn has a much more reasonable conclusion, namely, that the times -given in the _Chronicle_ and _Liber generationis_ refer not to the date -of the battle at all, but to the date of the proclamation or to the -date of Julianus’ defeat, some time during the early days of May 218. -Lampridius, of course, chips in with another discordant note, namely, -that “A.D. pridie nonas Martias” the Senate received their new Emperor -Alexander with acclamations, but for present purposes he may be left -out of count, as we have no confirmation of this very late statement. -Eutropius’ statement of 2 years and 8 months refers only to the -residence in Rome, and Victor’s 30 months is utterly out of the question, -as is also Lampridius’ statement that this monster occupied the throne -for nearly three years. Still more disconcerting than the wild statements -of the biographers is the fact that right up to 8th December 222 certain -rescripts are dated with the names of both Antonine and Alexander, -“Conss.”; two only, one in March and one in October, appear with -Alexander as sole Consul, and this inscription occurs on a rescript dated -“III non. Febr.,” when, if any other evidence is to be accepted, Antonine -was still alive. It was on this count that Stobbe based his assertion -that Antonine was killed, or at least put out of the government, as -early as 5th or 6th January, and that Mamaea used her new power as soon -as ever Alexander was officially recognised as Consul. It is certainly -a theory for which something may be said, but would entirely dispose of -the circumstantial accounts which the historians have left of the boy’s -murder. If this supposition is true, then Mamaea possessed herself of -the Emperor’s person by means of a riot in the camp, immediately after -Alexander became Consul, deprived him of his friends and support, and -thus gradually accustomed the populace to his absence, before she killed -him. This would certainly account for the placidity with which Rome -received news of his death at some later period, but would not account -for the discrepancy of the coins and rescripts, the first of which make -Alexander sole Emperor by the early summer, the second, which call -Antonine Consul, presume that he was still alive as late as December in -the same year (222). - -From a numismatic point of view there have been further difficulties -raised as to the length of the reign, on account of Antonine having -reached his fourth Consulate and fifth tribunician year, but these have -been raised by persons who have neglected Eckhel and have not always -verified their references. The regular coins tell us that Antonine -had reached his fourth Consulate and fifth year of tribunician power -when he died. Certain writers, notably Valsecchius and Pagi, have -postulated that the Emperors always renewed the tribunician powers on the -anniversary of their succession, others, such as Stobbe, that the date -of the tribunician power would always be put on each coin when that of -the Consulship was given. Neither of these contentions can be admitted -for an instant, as Eckhel has proved most conclusively, and as can be -further demonstrated from the very coins these writers cite as proofs of -their several contentions. Valsecchius’ theory was that Antonine thought -he began to reign on the murder of his father Caracalla, and dated his -tribunician year in consequence from 8th April 217. This would make him -in his second tribunician year by 8th June 218, and the coins should -appear as “T.P. II Cos.” Unfortunately for the theory, there is not a -single example of this aberration, as Turre pointed out some centuries -ago. Pagi, on the other hand, thought that Antonine dated his reign from -16th March 218, and renewed his tribunician powers every year on that -date; he accepted Dion’s date, 11th March, for Antonine’s decease, -and, in consequence, postulated that coins struck with the legend “T PV -Cos IIII” were struck in anticipation of the event of 16th March 222. -Against this Eckhel urges that the whole theory is utterly unnecessary, -because it throws all the rest of the coins out of date in order to make -a setting for nine, which are in reality perfectly regular. - -The truth obviously lies in Eckhel’s theory, which has been rejected by -Stobbe because it is so simple and obvious, namely, that Antonine renewed -both consular and tribunician powers on the same day, 1st January, a -contention which the Fasti Romani amply corroborate. Naturally, as we -know from Dion, the first year began on 8th June, when Antonine’s name -was substituted for that of Macrinus. On 1st January 219 Antonine took -his second Consulship and second tribunician powers. On 1st January 220 -the Emperor became Consul for the third time, Tribune of the People third -time. On 1st January 221 Gratus and Seleucus were Consuls, Antonine -Tribune of the People fourth time; 1st January 222 Antonine and Alexander -Coss. IIII and I, Antonine Tribune of the People fifth time. All is duly -set out on the coins in regular order. - -The basis for other theories was found by fertile brains when Cohen -listed a few irregularities in the dating, notably three coins dated -T.P. Cos. II, which just inverted Valsecchius’ theory, and, said Stobbe, -showed that the Emperor had renewed his Consulate on 1st January, and had -not yet renewed his powers as Tribune of the People. It was undoubtedly -plausible, but Stobbe omitted to notice another coin whose date is T.P. -Cos. IIII, which, on his own theory of the number invariably affixed to -T.P. as well as to Cos., would signify that the Emperor had never renewed -his tribunician powers at all, or else had renewed his consular powers -four times in one year, both of which ideas are demonstrably absurd. -Along with his supposition that the number would always be affixed to -T.P. whenever it also followed Cos., Stobbe formulated another theory -partly based on the idea which had been enunciated by Pagi concerning the -date of the coins marked T.P. V Cos. IIII, and supported his contention -from an example listed by Cohen as T.P. IIII, Cos. IIII. It was to the -effect that as the Emperors Septimius Severus, Caracalla, Geta, and -Alexander Severus had renewed their tribunician powers about the middle -of January, Antonine had done the same, and that the paucity of the coins -marked T.P. V Cos. IIII is due to the fact that he was murdered very -shortly after, if not before the issue was completed, and the tribunicial -renewal had taken place. Stobbe’s proof lay in the fact that Cohen had -listed these three coins as above (T.P. IIII Cos. IIII), which, this -critic affirmed, were issued after January 1st and before the tribunicial -renewal,—about the middle of the month. - -[Illustration: Coin of A.D. 220, misread by Cohen as T.P. III Cos. IIII -(British Museum). - -Coin of A.D. 221, misread by Cohen as T.P. IIII Cos. IIII (British -Museum). - -Coin of A.D. 222 (British Museum). - -_Face page 196._] - -But it was mere theory on both counts. As Egbert showed later, the -tribunicial renewal in the case of Septimius, Caracalla, and Geta was -not early in January at all; it was on the 10th of December. Macrinus’ -renewal was early in January, so was Alexander’s, but this was not -conclusive evidence that Antonine renewed his powers on the same date. -There certainly are coins, three of them, listed by Cohen, two in France -at the Bib. Nat., and one in the British Museum marked T.P. IIII Cos. -IIII. This was clear proof, said Stobbe, that the tribunician powers were -renewed after the consular powers, and that T.P. V Cos. IIII were later -in the same year (222) than T.P. IIII Cos. IIII. The French coins I have -not seen, but I have had the privilege of examining that in the British -Museum (Cohen, vol. iv. p. 342, No. 197), and find that Cohen has misread -the number affixed to the Cos.; it is listed as T.P. IIII Cos. IIII, but -is in reality T.P. IIII Cos. III P.P. (_i.e._ the year 221). The first P -has been read into the number,—which same inscription is most probably -on the French coins as well as on that in the British Museum, since it -appears gratuitous to impute a mistake to contemporaries by way of making -copy for later critics. I have noted yet another mistake, namely, two -coins listed by Cohen as irregularities; they are dated, T.P. III Cos. -IIII (p. 344, Nos. 210, 211). On these another admirable theory has been -based, namely, that Antonine was going to take the Consulate, had his -coins struck, and then backed out at the beginning of 221, thus before -he had renewed his powers as tribune. Again very pretty, but the British -Museum has the coins, and they are not dated T.P. III Cos. IIII at all; -they are quite ordinary—T.P. III Cos. III, or of the year 220, and there -is no need to transpose the numbers, which is an alternative theory to -that stated above. - -The evidence from the coins is quite conclusive. The Emperor renewed his -dual powers either on the same day, 1st January, or on a day immediately -succeeding. As Eckhel pointed out in 1792 there is no coin which, if the -date be correctly read, gives any countenance to any other theory, while -all such are unnecessary and at variance with known facts. - -Lampridius gives us a certain amount of evidence that the Emperor -took an interest in the affairs of state all through his life, both -by his account of Antonine’s sagacity as a judge, and his desire to -appoint fourteen praefects of the city, under the headship of the -Imperial Praefectus Urbis or Urbi. Naturally, the desire is attributed -to base motives, namely, in order to benefit unworthy persons. The -scheme, Lampridius tells us, was actually carried into operation during -Alexander’s reign, and is then applauded as useful and necessary, an -obvious bit of special pleading on one side or the other. - -It is with a singularly unanimous voice that the authors announce the -general execration against the memory of Antonine, and the joy shown by -the populace in dragging his dead body about the city. All are certain -that the Senate made a general order to deface the name of Antonine -on all monuments and documents through the Empire, as soon as that -dishonoured Emperor was safely out of the way. - -The unanimity is wonderful; all the more wonderful because so utterly -unusual. Unfortunately, it is in no way borne out by the inscriptions. -We have mentioned the rescripts which for the most part bear Antonine’s -name throughout the whole year 222. This circumstance is hardly in -consonance with the senatorial action in ordering all mention of the -dishonoured Emperor to be expunged (_i.e._ while they themselves continue -to use his name publicly and officially). Again, there is an inscription -C.I.L. VI. 3015, set up in July 222, which commemorates both Consuls as -though alive; and another, though probably a forgery of Ligorius, No. -570, in which the two names appear on 13th April of the same year. Surely -this would have been impossible if Antonine were dead and the Senate had -ordered his name to be erased everywhere. This order, however, cannot be -taken literally; an examination of the existing inscriptions gives quite -other results. - -The name of Antonine is erased, but only in 40 known cases, while in -certain places the name Alexander is substituted for that of Antonine, -which, if usual, is rather a cheap way of getting the honour and renown -belonging to another. A few African inscriptions blot out the Emperor’s -claim to be grandson of Severus, and a few in different parts of the -Empire blot out the title Priest of Elagabal, witness the inscription at -Walwick Chesters. In 52 cases the names, styles, and titles of Antonine -are left intact, which makes it improbable that there was any great -campaign against his memory, such as Lampridius would have us believe -that every one in the Empire was only too anxious to institute. - -Dion and Lampridius both tell us that Antonine was called Tiberinus -and Tractitius after his death, in reference to the shameful treatment -which his body was supposed to have met with after his murder, and the -final act of throwing it into the river in order that it should never be -buried. Sardanapalus is another epithet applied to him by Dion and his -copier Zonaras, who also call him Pseudo-Antonine, in reference to his -grandmother’s statement made “through hatred” in 221, that not he but -Alexander was the only legitimate bastard; such and the like were the -taunting adjectives by means of which the biographers sought to defame -the boy’s memory. - -Here, for all practical purposes, Lampridius’ account of the Emperor’s -life ceases. There are still seventeen chapters of mere biographical -scandal, some of it illuminating, some hypocritically obscene. -Nevertheless, it has been possible to abstract from these sections a -certain amount of information descriptive of the boy’s extravagances and -their setting, his psychology and its result, his religious ambitions, -and with them the reasons for his downfall. - -These are all obvious traits in Antonine’s character, and can be -discerned despite the mass of exaggerations and hostility with which the -pages abound. To criticise these statements in any sort of detail is, -however, obviously impossible on the information at present available, -and furthermore, we are scarcely competent to judge the period from our -modern standpoint of prejudice. - -There is no period of history which fully corresponds to these last -years of imperial greatness; few men who embody the spirit which breathed -life into all that splendour, and even fewer in the modern world who -understand the revived paganism of the Renaissance. Here too there was a -difference. In old Rome it has been said that a sin was a prayer; under -Leo X. it was, rather, a taxable luxury. Sinning is still a luxury, but -no longer taxable; the Reformation has set us free from such extortion -and restraint, and supplied us with hypocrisy and cant to take its place. - -From Suetonius we gather that the Roman world sinned and sparkled; -we still sin, but are perforce to yawn in the process. The world of -Suetonius was the world _où on s’en fichait_. Our world is the world _où -on s’ennuie_. Hence our inability to grasp the spirit of philosophical -paganism, a spirit whose morality does not consist in improper thoughts -about other people, but in a mind set free from terror of the Gods, not -very much caring what other people do so long as they do not interfere -with us. - -It is thus that we must view Elagabalus. To look at him through any -other spectacles is to examine the restless, frivolous, perhaps debased -dragon-fly as though he were a vampire, and then, imagination aiding, -describe him as a stampeding unicorn with a taste for _marrons glacés_. - -It is absurd, purely grotesque, this caricature we have of Antonine; -perhaps that is why the world has left him alone, that they may gaze the -longer on a mask that allures. If these criticisms have done anything to -remove part of the accretions with which the world has daubed his figure -at the bidding of his relations, the trouble is amply repaid. Naturally, -this monograph is not the last word; it is, on the other hand, the first, -put forward in the hope that it may at least commend itself as a point of -view. Neither is it a compromise with the proprieties, which are, after -all, in the modern world, little else save a compromise with either our -neighbours or the police; what one expects from them, certainly not how -much they may expect from oneself, or even from Elagabalus. - - - - -CHAPTER VIII - -THE WIVES OF THE EMPEROR - - -This Antonine has been accused of building the Cloaca Maxima, into -which, a century later, all Rome rolled, largely on the grounds that he -divorced at least three wives, and was himself wife of the Chariot Driver -Hierocles, amongst others of his unusually numerous acquaintance. - -The imputation of excavating in Rome cannot be attributed to Elagabalus -alone. Augustus had done a little digging there, but hypocritically, as -he did everything else, devising ethical laws as a cloak for turpitudes -of his own; Caligula had done the same, so had Nero, Hadrian, and -Caracalla. Maecenas divorced himself and remarried twenty times, as -both ceremonies were less expensive than they are to-day. Suetonius -said of Caligula that it was uncertain which was the vilest, the unions -he contracted, their brevity, or their cause. With such examples, it -was inevitable that ordinary people should unite but to part, and that -insensibly the law should annul as a caprice, a clause that defined -marriage as the inseparable life. - -Under the Caesars, marriage became a temporary arrangement abandoned -and re-established at will. Seneca said that women of rank counted -their years by their husbands; Juvenal, that it was in such fashion -they counted their days. Paul, in a letter whose verbosity apes -philosophical phraseology, regarded the privileges of divorce as inherent -in the patriarchal theories of family life. Tertullian added, somewhat -sapiently, that divorce was the result of matrimony. - -Divorce, however, was never obligatory, matrimony was. According to the -Lex Papia Poppoea, whoso at twenty-five was unmarried; whoso, divorced -or widowed, did not remarry; whoso, though married, was childless became -_ipso facto_ a public enemy. - -To this law, as was obviously necessary, only a technical attention was -paid. Men married just enough to gain a position or inherit a legacy; the -next day they got a divorce. At the moment of need a child was adopted; -the moment passed, the child was disowned. As with men, so with women. -The Univira became the many-husbanded wife, occasionally a matron with -no husband at all; one who, to escape the consequences of the Lex Papia -Poppoea, hired a man to lend her his name, and who, with an establishment -of her own, was free to do as she liked; to imitate men at their worst; -to fight like them and with them for power; to dabble in the bloody drama -of state; to climb on the throne and kill there or be killed. The Empire -had liberated women from domestic tyranny, just as it had liberated men -from that of the state. - -Such was the position of matrimony when, early in July 219, the Emperor -Marcus Aurelius Antoninus took to wife the Lady Julia Cornelia Paula, -of the well-known though by no means patrician family of Cornelia. Her -father was Julius Paulus, probably one of the most famous jurisconsults -and lawyers Rome has ever known. As father-in-law to an Emperor, his -position was doubtless, like that of Sylla, the father-in-law of -Caesar, somewhat heady. Unfortunately it impaired his usefulness to a -considerable degree. We learn from the editors of the _Prosopographia_ -that there are only five decrees on subjects of jurisprudence which can -be definitely assigned to this reign, and from Lampridius that Paulus -was appointed to the presumably lucrative, though certainly uninspiring -office of usher to the young Alexander, on whose bovine intelligence he -could unfortunately make no impression. It is doubtless wrong to promote -relations to Court sinecures when they can be better and more usefully -employed in arduous work for the state, but it is a position to which -even the best of us aspire when fatigued with either a misspent or a -full-spent life. - -According to Barrachinus, the family of Cornelia came from Padua; -Bertrand says they were from Tyro; and in Pignorius’ estimation they may -even have seen light in Rome. Julius and his daughter are the only two of -the family who have come into prominence. Unfortunately, we do not know -the date of the birth or death of either, nor the year in which Julius -began to climb; suffice it to say, that he had published many volumes -before the death of Septimius Severus, in whose council, according to -Digest xxix., he had a place. His first office seems to have been that -of Praetor, and thence by regular stages he climbed to that of Praefect -of Rome, finishing with the height of all ambition, the Praefecture of -the Praetorium, and as such he was a Senator of the Empire. Tristran—who -knew about as much of the lady personally as you or I can—has remarked -that Julia was beautiful. His taste is certainly not a modern one, as -her effigy represents her with a sharp beaky face, and a long scraggy -neck. This author, with some show of fairness, attempts to justify his -statement by a truism, namely, that the Emperor was such a connoisseur of -beauty that he would never have chosen a lady who had not this necessary -qualification. Precisely, but did Antonine choose the lady at all? The -probabilities are that she was well over thirty at the time of the -marriage, and that the Emperor had neither seen nor heard of her before -she was presented to him by his relations, on his arrival in Rome; in -fact, that this marriage was a political move by means of which the -official classes were closely allied with the imperial house. - -We have already described the pomp and circumstance with which this -wedding was celebrated, the games, with their lavish waste of animal -life, amongst the rarest of known beasts, the congiary and donative. As -this is the sole mention of such splendour on the occasion of Antonine’s -committing matrimony, which holy estate he is said to have attempted six -times in two and a half years, it inclines us to the opinion that this -was his first experiment in that direction, especially as the evidence -of coins and medals is perfectly conclusive on this point. Tristran and -Serviez, however, place Annia Faustina as first wife, on Dion’s faulty -arrangement of the events at Nicomedia. - -Cornelia Paula was, as we have said, a lady of some renown and position. -Serviez tells us that it was generally believed she had been married -before; was already, in fact, a mother of children; and Tristran adds, -enceinte by some one else at the time of the marriage. The Emperor’s -pretext for marrying her seems to lend support to this contention. It -was that he wished the sooner to provide an heir for the Empire, though, -as Dion says, he was not as yet a man himself. Since Cornelia had no -children by Antonine, and the reason of her divorce, as given publicly, -was a secret blemish in her body, which was only discovered after -about eighteen months of married concord, the presumptive evidence is -against Serviez’ theory; in fact, it presupposes sterility rather than -some corporal deformity, or even over-fruitfulness; and it, of course, -gives the lie to the gratuitous assumption of Tristran that the lady -was enceinte when Antonine married her. What amount of genuine feeling -existed between Julia Paula and her husband we cannot even surmise. From -a psychological point of view, one would be inclined to predicate very -little. The Emperor was too much wedded to his friends, was too feminine -in character to appreciate a wife, other than, as Lampridius says, “a -strumpet who could increase his knowledge of her art.” The family of -Julius Paulus rose to the height of power as soon as a daughter of his -house became Empress. Lampridius is not by any means definite as to the -date of Julius Paulus’ domination in the state; though it seems natural -to suppose that, when Eutychianus Comazon vacated the Praefectship of the -Praetorium in order to become Praefect of Rome (July 219), the Emperor’s -father-in-law was appointed in his room, and vacated this office either -at the time of his daughter’s divorce, or more probably at an earlier -date, _i.e._ when his official year expired in July 220. - -The precise date of the divorce is unknown. As we have said, there are -coins struck at Alexandria with Julia’s effigy and inscription, after -29th August 220, and others at Tripolis in Phoenicia, after October in -that year. The most likely supposition is that Antonine divorced her -somewhere in the beginning of 221, after he had made up his mind to take -to wife the Vestal, Aquilia Severa, in accordance with his religious -scheme or ideal. - -Julia Cornelia Paula is the only wife of Antonine mentioned in -inscriptions, and, as we hear nothing of her in any other way, it is -improbable that she had much importance at Court. Possibly she was found -to be of no use either to Antonine, Maesa, Soaemias, or Mamaea, each in -their separate ways, and as such was relegated to unimportant obscurity, -neglected as a cypher. Her coin types are equally unimportant. They make -reference to the Concordia which was supposed to exist between the -pair, and introduce the deities protective of matrimony. Her portraits -vary from those of a woman of sixty odd years to the representation of -a woman about thirty years old, which latter age is almost confirmed by -her so-called bust in the Borghese collection at the Louvre; but no known -author can really do more than guess at what this lady was as careful to -conceal as her less fortunate sisters. - -Lampridius tries to leave one with the impression, that on the divorce -of this Augusta (the Senate had accorded the title at the time of the -marriage) Julius Paulus was banished. Unfortunately, he mentions him a -little later on as being tutor to Alexander (in the beginning of the -year 222). The inference is, of course, that Lampridius took the two -impressions from conflicting sources. In all probability the great -jurisconsult, having exchanged his position as Praefect of the Praetorium -for a Court sinecure as Alexander’s tutor, did not re-emerge into public -life until his thick-headed pupil was safely seated on the throne. Quite -what office he then occupied Pauly has not determined. It may have been -once again the Praefecture of the Praetorium, a position second only to -that of the Emperor himself, and one which carried with it practical -sovereignty, in the Tudor sense, only excepting the one element which -went to solidify Elizabethan greatness, the assumption of the powers, -dignities, and privileges of the ecclesiastical headship. - -Julia Cornelia Paula, shorn of her title and position some time during -the winter of 220-221, retired into opulent privacy. No sane person -would, at that time, have pitied Julia’s lot, unless it were because she -was no longer enjoying the position of Empress. Even in mediaeval times, -when divorce was an ecclesiastical privilege, and in consequence most -costly, it was not regarded as an unmixed evil. Of course, it was rare, -and, being ecclesiastical, carried a certain stigma with it. Furthermore, -as we have said, it was a privilege for which there was not the same need -as in times of women’s greater freedom. No one who, like the mediaeval -husband, had canonical permission to beat his wife when she annoyed him, -stood in vital need of dissolving the bond, (_vide_ Beaumanoir, lvii.: -“Tout mari peut battre sa femme pourvu que ce soit modérément, et sans -que mort s’ensuive”). During the epoch in question, it was the most usual -and ordinary circumstance of daily life. It was continued interest in, -not satiety with, the charms of your spouse that created wonder in old -Rome; suffice it to say, that Julia retired, a woman with a past, and the -knowledge, that if she had her wits about her, there was a considerable -future to look forward to. No one expressed regret at her going, so in -all probability Maesa was agreeable, though we can scarcely think that -the old lady knew of the scheme which her grandson was concocting when -she allowed the mistake to be made without an effort to stop his headlong -swoop to ruin; a flight which would certainly involve the whole family on -its way, unless they could dissociate themselves from the new religious -policy which dictated it. - -Probably along with predilection Antonine had seen and admired a lady, -whom Dion describes, or makes Antonine describe, as Chief Priestess of -Vesta. With this designation Preuner emphatically disagrees, accounting -for the ἀρχιέρεια on the grounds that she officiated in the chief worship -of Rome, not that she herself was the chief priestess. It was in the -early months of the year 221 that Antonine, having seconded Julia Paula, -took from her nunnery the Vestal Aquilia Severa, thereby thoroughly -shocking the susceptible. We have already discussed the reasons for this -act of folly. From a religious point of view there was much to be said by -the Emperor, and undoubtedly he said it. From an aesthetic standpoint it -was a mistake. There are still in existence a certain number of coins and -medals which bear her effigy; these give her the appearance of a sinister -and rather evil-looking woman, utterly unlike the helpless Neophyte, -young and beautiful, whom various writers have depicted in their efforts -to excite our pity for the poor nun forcibly ravished by an unattractive -and debauched Emperor. - -The whole modern opinion of the community of Vesta is founded on a -mistaken view of their position and usefulness. Our ideas of Vestals -are largely derived from the conceptions which Egyptian anchorites -bequeathed to the esoteric religious communities which flourished during -the middle ages. The truth lies in the fact that the Roman Vestals have -but one point of contact with the successors of the anchorites, namely, -their reputation for chastity, which was, however, grafted on to an -entirely different religious foundation. The Vestals were a community -of high-born Roman ladies, whose duty it was to tend and preserve the -sacred fire which symbolised Rome’s existence, and, while they worshipped -the Phallus, to keep themselves unspotted from the world, not otherwise -from its contact. In the performance of their public functions they were -admirable and most punctilious, but they were not cloistered virgins, -as we know the race to-day. They were women of the world, with a value -enhanced by an often (according to Suetonius) supposititious virginity; -women who, clad in the white linen garments of a blameless life, their -hair arranged in the six braids which symbolised chastity, were the chief -figures at all public functions, the leaders of feeling at the games -and gladiatorial shows, and the arbiters of public opinion in all that -touched religion and morals, at a time when religion and morals meant -courage, bravery, patriotism, and hardihood. - -It would be as absurd to impute to these women Christian ideas of -religion and morals as it would be to transfer the same neuroticism to -the Spartan communities of a still earlier age. The ideal was not then -suffering for suffering’s sake, not even suffering to appease an offended -deity, but suffering for the sake of virility, patriotism, and strength. - -As we have said, Roman religion was in the third century what it always -had been, purely political. It was the prosperity of the Empire, -its peace and immortality, for which sacrifices were made; with the -individual, his happiness and prosperity, it concerned itself not at -all. The antique virtues were civic, not personal. It was the State which -had a soul, not the individual. Man was ephemeral. It was the nation -that endured, and to secure that permanence each citizen laboured. As -for the citizen, death was near, and so he hastened to live; before the -roses could fade, he wreathed himself with them; immortality was, for -him, in his descendants, the continuation of his name, the respect for -his ashes. Any other form of futurity was a speculation. In anterior -epochs, fright had peopled Tartarus, but fright had gone; the Elysian -fields were too vague, too wearisome to contemplate. “After death,” said -Cicero, “there is nothing”; and philosophy agreed with him. Of such and -kindred religious theories the Roman statesmanship—realising the danger -of independent religions—had constituted her Emperor supreme governor. As -Pontifex Maximus he held much the same position as that which our Tudor -Sovereigns created for themselves as heads of the Church in England. The -Emperor was supreme over religious dogma and practice, whenever occasion -necessitated control. - -The old faiths were crumbling, but none the less Rome was the abridgment -of every superstition. The Gods of the conquered had always formed part -of her spoils; to please them was easy—from Jehovah to the unknown Gods -beyond the Rhine their worship was gore. That the upper classes had no -faith goes without saying, but of the philosophical atheism of the upper -classes the people knew nothing; they clung piously to a faith which had -a theological justification for every sin; and turned with equal avidity -to the Mithraic, Egyptian, and even to the Nazarene religion with which -Constantine finally replaced the ancient worship, as long as they were -all the same thing under a different name; the religion of the Empire -with local or foreign mysteries thrown in; the accustomed traditions, -miracles, feasts, and nature worship, unfortunately, as men found after -Constantine, grown contentious and continually more expensive to maintain. - -The Vestals were still the guardians and types of the older theories they -professed; they were the link between philosophy and superstition, and -as such they played their part admirably: in private much the same as -other women, in public exact. Occasionally there was a public scandal, -but very rarely. Domitian had recalled the archaic law and had buried one -defaulter alive. Claudius, referring to Messalina, had told them that -the fate which made him the husband of impure women had destined him to -punish such. The lady whom Caracalla buried alive protested, not against -the imputation of a broken vow, but because the vow had not been broken -satisfactorily enough for her liking. - -Apparently Antonine was quite without Roman prejudice in this, or indeed -in any other matter. He liked the lady; whether from a religious or an -aesthetic point of view is uncertain. If it were the latter, and her -portraits do her justice, Antonine’s reputation as a judge of female -beauty is irretrievably gone. She was frankly old and ugly. Nevertheless -he wanted to marry her, and what he wanted he usually got. Whether or -not Aquilia Severa wanted him is unknown, at any rate she was perfectly -willing to exchange supposititious virginity for the imperial marriage -bed on more than one occasion. Rome, as we have pointed out, was shocked, -frankly disgusted. The Emperor had the report, probably through the -Senate, and thereupon pointed out to that august body the essential piety -of the proceeding: a Vestal and the Chief Priest of the Holy God were -bound to produce children entirely divine. - -It was a veritably Tudor argument, than which nothing more specious, -for the allaying of prejudice, could have been produced by Henry, the -Eighth of that name. Unfortunately, Rome in the third century enjoyed -considerably more of that Tory virtue, and was less bored with a religion -which affected no one personally, than England was in the sixteenth -century. Rome continued to object to the Emperor shocking her prejudices. -England changed her mind, and with it her prejudices, at the bidding of -her sovereigns, and, sacerdotal extermination aiding, she forgot in a -generation what it had taken her a thousand years to learn. - -Needless to say, this union of the Emperor was productive of nothing -either human or divine, concerning which, or as a sort of mild reflection -thereupon, Lampridius utters his psychologically illuminating remark -concerning the use this Emperor had for wives and women generally. - -The history of Severa’s family is obscure. Her father was the notable -jurist Aquilius Sabinus, who had been Praefect of Rome both in 214 and -216. He was the firm friend of Silius Messala, the kingmaker, and -possibly as a Senator, was one of that gentleman’s judges when he was -condemned for treason against his sovereign. We hear further of a son, -one Fabius Sabinus, who, on account of his wisdom and learning, has -come down to history as the Cato of his age. The daughter must have -partaken of the family ability. Her father’s senatorial rank would, in -all probability, have opened to her the doors of that most exclusive of -corporations to which she belonged, but his position could scarcely have -raised her eyes to the imperial purple. - -[Illustration: Coin of Julia Cornelia Paula Augusta (British Museum). - -Coin of Julia Cornelia Paula Augusta, A.D. 220-21 (British Museum). - -Coin of Julia Aquilia Severa Augusta, A.D. 220-21 (British Museum). - -Coin of Annia Faustina Augusta, A.D. 221-22 (British Museum). - -Coin of Julia Aquilia Severa Augusta, A.D. 221-22 (British Museum). - -_Face page 216._] - -We can form no absolute judgment from the records at our disposal, -as to the precise date at which this lady exchanged the practices of -open celibacy for those of problematical matrimony. The most likely -suggestion is that it was early in the spring of the year 221, at a -time contemporaneous with the alliance celebrated between Elagabal and -Minerva. The Alexandrian coins bearing her name are dated LΔ, subsequent -to 29th August 220, while the coins “Aequitas Publica”—which also bear -her name—were issued early in 221, obviously for the third distribution -of money which was held in honour of the double marriage. No games or -excitements such as celebrated Antonine’s first alliance were at this -time attempted; the Emperor had quite enough to do in allaying the -trouble caused by the marriage itself, and in considering projects for -the furthering of his religious schemes. Of the lady’s position and -influence we know nothing, though we can quite believe that she was no -friend of the elderly Maesa, or the cross-grained mother of Alexianus, -both of whom wished her so ill. Serviez is by no means complimentary to -Severa, on account of the avidity with which she changed her position. He -calls her ambition unbounded, though it is very doubtful whether, placed -in a similar position, any one of us would have refused the flattery, and -undoubted compliment made to our superlative worth. - -The title of Augusta, of which Julia Cornelia Paula had been relieved, -was conferred on Aquilia, and doubtless the Emperor looked forward to -some considerable degree of felicity in the company of a woman of whose -marriage every one disapproved. - -As we know, Antonine found out quite soon that he had made a vital -mistake; that he had attacked the one superstition that Rome would not -allow to be touched, and, with extreme reluctance, he sent both the -Goddess and her Vestal back to their appropriate dwellings. Antonine has -been censured right royally both for his marriage and for the consequent -divorce. Now, if the marriage were wrong, as all the authors say, surely -the divorce was right; certainly Rome thought so, since his compliance -with national wishes seems to have won men over, and appeased their -minds, thus restoring the Emperor to his popularity. Why then did he -further alienate them by remarrying Severa in the early part of the next -year, as Dion and the coins relate? It is a mystery. - -Antonine does not seem to have done anything at all for the family -of this wife; there is no record of any offices held by them, or -official appointments given, taken, or received by men of their name. -Of course, they may have got jobs which came under the generic term of -“appointment of unfit persons”; if so, we have no record of what they -got, while the duration of the marriage was so abbreviated that there -was scarcely time for any scandal to develop. The date of the divorce, -like all the dates of the reign, can only be fixed approximately. It -was not before the early spring and not later than the end of June, by -which time Julia Maesa had regained her power (what she had of it) over -the mind of Antonine, that she persuaded him to return both Minerva and -her personification to their respective homes, to send for Astarte, for -Elagabal, to marry Annia Faustina himself, and, above all, to adopt -Alexianus; which latter ceremony took place some time before 10th July -221. We can well imagine the boy’s disgust at the failure of his plans -and at the early loss of a friend in Aquilia, who, as both Dion and -Herodian tell us, was Empress for only a little time. - -One of the greatest obstacles which the imperial family had met with was -their lack of connection with the Roman nobility. No doubt this could -easily have been remedied. Maesa might have tried to make her first -alliance in this direction; she seems to have imagined, however, that -such persons were extinct. They had died twice, we are told, at Pharsalus -and Philippi, and those who had not died then had suffered for real or -imaginary crimes under succeeding Emperors. The absolutely necessary -step, therefore, which Maesa had to take in this policy of alliance was -to find the most influential marriageable woman in Rome and put her -into the place that Aquilia Severa was holding to the jeopardy of all -concerned. The lady appeared as if by a miracle. Amongst other persons -who disapproved of Antonine’s proceedings were the two Senators Silius -Messala and Pomponius Bassus, of whom mention has already been made, as -having been concerned in a plot for dethroning the Emperor. Both had -been men of importance for years. Pomponius Bassus had been Consul under -Septimius Severus and Governor of Mysia under Caracalla. In fact, so -important were they in their own estimation, that nothing set bounds to -their ambition. Already between them they had contrived the deposition of -the Emperor Julianus, and the election of Septimius, and, like the great -Earl of Warwick of fifteenth-century fame, they were by no means averse -to putting their heads together once again, in order to rid the state of -whomsoever they thought _incapax imperii_. - -Now, this was just the work that Mamaea wanted. For other reasons, Maesa -was not averse to the plot. The gentlemen held a secret court to examine -into the Emperor’s actions, and presumably they found him _incapax_, so -set to work to corrupt the guards in the usual fashion. - -Unfortunately for Antonine, that infamous system of informers which had -flourished and been of such vital use under former Emperors (under his -father Caracalla, to go no further back for an example) was considered -by his own government as harsh and objectionable, an utterly intolerable -practice in a good and settled state. Antonine had, therefore, refused to -allow delators to assist the government. This being the case, he ought -to have apprehended all known traitors himself. Messala and Bassus were -known for such; they had always been dangerous persons. Nevertheless, -Antonine left them at large. True, as Lampridius tells us, he did send -for Silius Messala and probably also Pomponius Bassus to come to him -at Nicomedia, because he considered it safer to keep these gentlemen -with him in the East than to allow their tongues to wag freely in Rome, -before such time as he had dictated his own terms of government to the -Senate and people. When they returned to Rome, these men obviously -plotted freely in the accustomed way until they approached too many -soldiers, after which time they were condemned by the Senate, and sent -to other spheres of usefulness, or, as they themselves would have put -it, to an endless nothingness, where an absence of all energy could do -neither good nor evil. It is quite impossible to fix the exact date of -this execution. There is a tendency to assign it to the early part of -the reign, _i.e._, about the beginning of the year 219, whilst the Court -resided at Nicomedia; this, on the very frail evidence that their names -appear amongst Dion’s list of those who were executed during the reign, -which list was published amongst the acts of the first winter. No cause -has been shown, however, for any plot to dethrone and murder the Emperor -at that date; indeed, until the religious mistake in 221, any such plot -would have been utterly impossible, though there is plenty of evidence -concerning the various attempts of the years 221 and 222, of which almost -certainly this conspiracy was one. The execution was obviously connected, -in Dion’s mind, with Antonine’s third marriage. He says that the real -reason, as every one knew, was because the Emperor wanted to play David -to Bassus’ Uriah, with Annia Faustina taking the hackneyed part of -Bathsheba. - -But it is a stupid story. Antonine was married to a woman of his own -choosing, and certainly did not want the friend of his grandmother, even -though to please that relation he did take Annia almost as soon as her -husband was dead. This is again the only possible explanation of Dion’s -phrase that “This inhuman monster (_i.e._ Antonine) would not allow -Annia Faustina to spoil her beauty by weeping for her departed husband,” -a story either adapted from the similar lie related of Caracalla and -his mother, or designed to do honour to the work of the unconscionable -traitor Pomponius. It is quite true that Maesa found ample means of -drying any tears that the usual decencies extracted from the Lady Annia; -but, as things turned out, no one seemed more anxious than this scion of -the imperial house of Commodus to marry the present Antonine, despite all -his relations’ epithets, and, through these, what later commentators have -found to say against the boy. - -Annia Faustina was the only wife of Antonine who did not assume the -title of Julia; this, presumably, because she was the only lady who had -a name of her own by birth. Her genealogy is obscure, at least on her -mother’s side. Everybody is agreed that she was great-granddaughter of -the Emperor Marcus Aurelius through his fourth daughter Arria Fadilla. -This lady married a certain Cn. Claudius Severus, whose son Ti. Claudius -Severus was Annia’s father. Authorities disagree as to the wife of -Titus. Pauly does not mention any marriage, presumably on the grounds -that all are conjectural; Ramsay, from an inscription found in Phrygia, -postulates that he married a second cousin, one of the Cornificia family. -Tristran asserts that it was yet another cousin, Aurelia Sabina. Eckhel’s -genealogy is too obscure to be of much use, though he also traces the -descent of Titus’ wife to Lucilla, yet another relation. The main -contention is, however, the same in all cases: Annia was descended on -both sides from the imperial house of Commodus, unless the amours of the -younger wife of the Emperor Marcus Aurelius made it more probable that -some lusty soldier or gladiator, rather than her philosophical husband, -had been responsible for the accidents of her children’s birth. Be that -as it may, Arria Fadilla had passed with the rest of the family as an -imperial child, and her descendants enjoyed her worship and renown. - -As usual, we are told that Annia was young and beautiful, neither of -which statements is borne out by the coins extant; to judge from these -one would postulate that she was between forty and forty-five years of -age at the time of her marriage with Antonine. Eckhel states definitely -that she was thirty-eight years old at that period. Pauly ventures on -neither the date of her birth nor death. It is, therefore, most unwise -to assert, as the biographers do, what neither portraits nor authorities -will in any way corroborate. - -As with her age, so with her life: Annia’s words, deeds and political -aspirations are quite unknown to us. Obviously, coming at the political -juncture of Antonine’s mistake, and bringing the alliance with the old -nobility that Maesa wanted by way of support, Annia was the friend -of the Alexander party in the state. As such, she must have been an -extraordinary annoyance to the Emperor and his friends. Certainly, -from Lampridius’ accounts, the boy-husband was moody, distrustful, and -generally miserable during the whole of this period, which does not -presuppose connubial felicity. - -There is no mention of Annia having taken any special part either for -or against her husband in the network of treasonable attempts which his -family were continually trying. We do not even know how the marriage was -dissolved. The natural presumption is that he divorced Annia, as he had -divorced Cornelia and Aquilia, though it is allowable in the absence -of the usual gibe at his inconstancy, or any suggestion of foul play, -to suppose that she died—allowable, but not very probable. Antonine -obviously took her as part of his grandmother’s scheme, and got rid of -her when he tried to get rid of Alexander, by repudiating the adoption. -Dion relates that he then took two nameless women to wife, finally -returning to Aquilia Severa. The first part of the statement is obviously -a fiction. All Antonine, or any one of his temperament, wanted from a -wife was friendship and affection; this he certainly had in Aquilia, whom -he only divorced as a precautionary measure, and whom he certainly took -back just as soon as he could get rid of Annia. - -Of course, to divorce Annia, a really important imperial lady, was a -disagreeable step; it would alienate the whole of the upper classes, -unless he could show reason for the change. Annia, by the extreme -eagerness with which she had jumped at the chance of being Empress, was -certainly not going to be party to the divorce—not that her consent was -necessary in such times of freedom, when divorce was of daily occurrence, -even in the best-regulated families. Cicero divorced his wife, we are -told, because she did not idolise him; Caesar his, on the pretext that -she ought to be above suspicion. Certainly no actual misconduct was -necessary, unless the whim of the moment be regarded as such. Antonine -exercised this right to act on his whim, or rather on his knowledge that -the lady was an unnecessary burden, but it cost him dear, the lady was -not born to take such snubs in a chastened spirit, even if her imperial -relations liked to adopt that attitude, which is, to say the least of it, -an unlikely supposition. - -The odd ladies may be ignored. Dion says they were wives, not concubines. -But time did not permit of so many weddings and divorces; while the -Emperor’s inclination, continually veering back to Aquilia, would not -have let him try so many others. Dion tells us that Antonine remarried -this Vestal before the last and fatal plot was set on foot; a statement -which is corroborated by certain Alexandrian coins struck after 29th -August 221. It was a proceeding, as far as we can judge, more mad than -his first mistake. Admitting that Antonine knew that his first error, in -taking the nun to wife, had angered the people, it is impossible for us -to imagine why he took her again, thus once more upsetting the city. It -was the most unaccountable blunder, and one which would finally alienate -those whom he had so lately tried to propitiate. There may have been -goodness in the act, kindness towards the woman, who had given up so much -for his sake. There is goodness everywhere, often the basis of evil is in -that virtue; certainly much madness may be traced to it. - -In reading the account of this epoch, one feels as though one were -assisting at the spectacle of a gigantic asylum where the inmates were -omnipotent. From this disease of madness Rome might have recovered, had -not her delirium, which was fine, turned to softening of the brain. Until -a century later, there was hope, because the guilt was conscious; it was -only when guilt became ignorance, that Rome disappeared. - - - - -PART II - - - - -CHAPTER IX - -THE PSYCHOLOGY OF THE EMPEROR ELAGABALUS - - -“I would never have written the life of Antoninus Impurissimus,” said -Lampridius, “were it not that he had predecessors.” Even in Latin -the task was difficult. In English it would be impossible, at least -Lampridius’ life. There are subjects that permit of a hint, particularly -if it be masked to the teeth, but there are others that no art can drape, -not even the free use of Latin substantives. Our task therefore is to -deal, rather with their sins of omission, than with the biographers’ -offences against all canons of good taste in recording the inexpressible. -In his work on the Caesars, Suetonius displayed the eccentricities -simply, without adding any descriptive placards; therein lay Suetonius’ -advantage; he was able to describe; nowadays a writer may not, at least -not the character we possess of Elagabalus. It is not that he was -depraved, for all his house was; it is, that, like many moderns, he made -depravity a pursuit, and the aegis of the purple has carried the stories -beyond the limits of the imaginable, let alone beyond the limits of the -real. Were we to accept unexamined, the testimony of his traducers of -the Christian era, we would gather that “at the feet of that painted boy -Elephantis and Parrhasius could have sat and learned a lesson,” that -“apart from that phase of his sovereignty, he was a little Sardanapalus, -an Asiatic Mignon, who found himself great.” Of course it would have -been curious to see him in that wonderful palace, clothed like a Persian -queen, insisting that he should be addressed as Imperatrix, and quite -living up to the title. It would not only have been interesting, it would -have given one an insight into how much Rome saw and how much she could -stand. - -Lampridius himself drew breath once, to remark that he could not -vouch for the truth of the stories he was committing to paper, but he -was employed to show the contrast between Constantine’s “execrable -superstition,” as Tacitus describes it, and those of the ancient world, -so went on to record things even more impossible. Perhaps his remark -was unnecessary. His record has defeated its own end. He has come -down to posterity as the biographer whose contradictory collection of -scandalous enumerations becomes monotonous rather than amusing as he -gets deeper into the mire. For ages the world has secretly revelled over -these records, making no sort of effort to get at the truth, perhaps -because, in secret, men like to believe that their predecessors were more -inhumanly wicked than they are themselves. Not that, in the light of -modern science, any physician would consider Elagabalus inhumanly wicked, -any more than he would be inclined to apply the term to a man born blind, -or with the taint of leprosy in his system; in fact even wickedness -itself has been described as “a myth invented by good people to account -for the curious attractiveness of those whom they dislike.” The greater -part of the dislike which men have exhibited towards this Emperor and -his faults comes from the fact that he was psycho-sexually abnormal, and -was possessed of a genius for the aesthetic and the religious that his -historians wished to decry. He was evidently abnormal, even in an age -that produced abnormalities like Nero, Tiberius, Commodus, and Hadrian; -further, he was frankly abnormal, and to-day we know better than to be -frank about anything. - -Since the world began, no one has been wholly wicked, no one wholly good. -The truth about Elagabalus must lie between the two extremes, admitting, -however, a congenital twist towards the evil tendencies of his age. -He had habits which are regarded by scientists less as vices than as -perversions, but which, at the time, were accepted as a matter of course. -Men were then regarded as virtuous when they were brave, when they were -honest, when they were just; and this boy did, despite his hereditary -taint, show more than dashes of these virtues. The idea of using the -expression “virtuous” in its later sense, occurred, if at all, in jest -merely, as a synonym for a eunuch. It was the matron and the vestal who -were supposed to be virtuous, and their virtue was often supposititious. - -The ceremonies connected with the Phallus, and those observed in -the rituals of the city were of a nature that only the infirm could -withstand. Indeed, the symbol of human life was then omnipresent. -Iamblichus, the philosopher, has much to say on the subject; so have -Arnobius and Lactantius. If Juvenal, Martial, and Petronius are more -reticent, it is because they are not Fathers of the Church nor yet -antiquarians. The symbol was on the coins, over the bakers’ ovens; as a -preservative against envy it hung from the necks of children; the vestals -worshipped it; at weddings it was used in a manner which need not be -described. It was a religious emblem, and as such formed the chief symbol -in the training of the boy who was now ruler of the world. By birth a -Syrian, by profession High Priest of the Sun, whose devotees worshipped -the Phallus as his symbol, was it likely that he, the chief exponent, -should remain cold, should take no interest in what was an all-absorbing -topic? Besides which, the family was corrupted by the presence of a -living fire in their veins, engendered by the perpetual heat of the sun. -Consider the history of his relations, and no one will wonder that he -was by nature voluptuous. But it was not his voluptuousness that the -world objected to; it was the abnormal condition of his mind; because in -the body of the man resided the soul with all the natural passions of a -woman. He was what the world knew as a Psycho-sexual Hermaphrodite. - -In form he was attractive and exceedingly graceful; his hair, which was -very fair, glistened like gold in the sun; he was slender and possessed -of glorious blue eyes, which in turn were endowed with the power of -attracting all beholders to his worship; and he knew his power over men; -he had first realised it when the legionaries flocked to the temple at -Emesa attracted by the reports of this Prince Charming. He was then just -at the age of incipient manhood, and his woman’s instinct taught him, as -no outside force could have done, that virility and strength were the -finest things in the world; his religion, surroundings, and education -told him nothing about the restraint of, what was to him, a perfectly -natural, perhaps even an hereditary passion, the exercise of which so -endeared him to the soldiers that they forthwith placed him upon the -throne of the world. As Emperor he had every desire, and was under no -compulsion to abstain from gratifying the craving to study and exaggerate -that swift, vivid, violent age, when what Mill in his Essay on Liberty -desired was enjoyed by the Augustitudes, “There was no check on the -growth of personality, no grinding down of men to meet the average.” -Not that any one has ever accused Elagabalus of being average. In no -particular can he be considered mediocre. Perhaps his life and habits -were not those to which the virile Roman world was addicted, despite the -fact that Hadrian had deified, in Antinous, not a lad, but a lust, whose -worship, a half-century later, Tertullian noted was still popular; since -which time Christian diatribes of all kinds have been levelled against -the pagans of the decadence, merely because their atriums dropped, not -blood, but metaphysics. - -Were it permitted to examine Elagabalus’ extravagances in print, we -should at once realise that they are those common (in a greater or less -degree) to all animals at the age of puberty, where instinct has not -associated the developing powers with any one special person or thing, -but that they are, in this instance, exaggerated by the traits of his -heredity and surroundings. What character should we expect to-day from -a child of nature if he were free with an unbounded liberty, and rich -beyond the efforts of imagination, to say nothing of the possession of -a congenitally perverted instinct? The more one sifts the records, the -clearer it appears that Elagabalus’ actions are those of an incredibly -generous person, instinctively trusting, open-hearted and affectionate, -a mighty contrast, both in his pleasures and his punishments, to the -persons who preceded him, and to his successors, who mistook new -superstitions for progress in the development of the world. The example -he set in tolerance of opinions not his own, and his reluctance, to -punish those who opposed him, must have led men to expect great things -from his manhood. Alone of all the Emperors he stands out with the proud -boast that no murder for political or avaricious purposes can be laid -to his charge. There were a few executions, amongst the adherents of -Macrinus, rendered necessary by attempts to take the crown from the new -Emperor; but despite the fact of serious provocation, his amnesty to the -Senate and to Rome, for their participation in the usurpation of Macrinus -and his son, was scrupulously kept. In religious matters—his special -domain—no one can say that he was apathetic, and yet there is no instance -of persecution recorded, even by Fathers of the Church. His whole life -was devoted to the introduction of a fantastic eastern monotheism, -designed to extinguish the polytheistic atheism which permeated Roman -society. Undoubtedly opposition and bitterness would have been raised -if the Emperor had not shown a moderation foreign to his years, unless -he had exercised a restraining influence over a mob which was still -thirsting for the blood of the Judaisers, as later records demonstrate. -In one particular, however, we are told that Elagabalus was fierce, -namely, in the contradiction of his pleasures, none of which can in -fairness be said to have affected the outside world. He might have been -led; certainly he could not be driven; what Antonine could? His tutor -Gannys found this out too late, and suffered for his mistake. - -With a singular lack of consistency, Lampridius ascribes all Elagabalus’ -moderation to his grandmother Maesa, all his excesses to his own fault, -whereas psychologists can demonstrate from a mass of similar cases that -both his virtues and excesses are those usually exhibited by one of his -temperament, and at any rate his relations were responsible for his lack -of early training and non-association with sane, healthy-minded persons. - -Undoubtedly Maesa’s influence, in the executive government, was an -aggravating factor; but considering the state of autonomy which the -machine had then reached, and the large influence exerted by favourites, -it cannot be said that she was supreme; indeed, on more than one -occasion, we see the boy of fourteen years opposing her influence most -strenuously, especially after she had hoodwinked him into appointing -Alexianus as his coadjutor in the Empire. It was pitiable, then, to see -the old lady’s efforts to retain her position; this, however, she only -managed to do by persuading the troops to mutiny and slay her grandson. -There is not much to be said for either party, but Elagabalus obviously -found relations a tedious pack of people, and their influence, like -drugs, best taken in small quantities. - -Quite a cursory study of authorities on psychology, such as Krafft-Ebing, -Bloch, Forel, Moll, etc., will show us that characters like Elagabalus -have occasionally appeared, and are still known in history. They are -almost curiosities of nature, and are rarely if ever responsible for -their own instincts, neither are they cruel nor evil by nature. - -To-day we are inclined to regard the romantic friendships exhibited -in the stories of David and Jonathan, Herakles and Hylas, Apollo and -Hyacinth, to mention no others, as the outcome of somewhat similar -natures, and we decry some of the noblest patriots, tyrannicides, -lawgivers, and heroes, in the early ages of Greece, because they -regarded the bond of male friendship as higher and nobler than what they -called the sensual love for women, or because they received friends -and comrades with peculiar honour on account of their staunchness in -friendship. Nevertheless, psychologists have noted that this tendency -towards the more elevated forms of homosexual feeling is still to be -found, more or less developed, amongst religious leaders and other -persons with strong ethical instincts. It is only therefore when this -tendency occurs in slightly abnormal minds that we excite our passions -against men whom our imagination alone has branded as debased criminals, -men for whom the only fitting reward is an application of the stake and -faggot, without further inquiry. - -To the vulgar-minded, all persons who present deformities, whether -physical or mental, are subjects of derision and hatred; to those who -realise something of the disabilities under which these unfortunates are -labouring, they are the objects of either active or passive sympathy,—in -the abstract, of course; should the insane, the leprous, or even the man -of genius get in our way we, as normal persons, feel ourselves justified -in ridding the world of its nuisance. It is thus that the instinct of -fear, rather than that of justice, spurs us on to use the collective -strength of the average, to exaggerate the abnormalities of the few; -but it is not a high or noble instinct, this fear which has led men for -many centuries through a mire of cruelty, superstition, and deceit; and -it is under this lack of justice that the memory of Elagabalus has long -suffered. No credit has been given him for the quality of mercy which he -displayed, though an absurd charge of cruelty has been preferred, on -the ground that he occasionally took luncheon in the circus during the -progress of the games; his biographer gratuitously assuming that it was -only done when there were criminals to be executed. Another absurd charge -of cruelty has been raised on account of Antonine’s passion for flowers, -of which, says Lampridius, such masses fell from panels in the ceiling -that many were smothered; an obvious exaggeration, unless the guests -were paralytics or suicidal lunatics, and, as even the author’s account -mentions no compulsion put on these gentlemen thus to die, he would seem -to invite a verdict of death by misadventure, rather than by design, -however aesthetic. - -There was nothing sinister about Elagabalus’ feasts, nothing after the -style of Domitian’s little supper parties, where all was melanic, walls, -ceilings, linen, slaves; parties to which every one worth knowing was -ultimately bidden, and, as usual in state functions, every one that was -bidden came, only to find a broken column inscribed with a too familiar -name behind his allotted couch, and Domitian talking very wittily about -the proscriptions and headsmen he had arranged for each. - -Caligula and Vitellius had been famous as hosts, but the feasts that -Elagabalus gave outranked theirs for sheer splendour. His guests -certainly suffered from his passion for teasing, and to dine with the -Emperor in such a mood was no sybaritic enjoyment. He might serve you -with wax game and sweets of crystal, the counterparts of what he was -eating himself, and expect evident signs of enjoyment as you endeavoured -to masticate the representation; he would seat you on air cushions, and -have them deflated surreptitiously, thoroughly enjoying your discomfort; -but when that was over you would be served with camels’ heels, platters -of nightingales’ tongues, ostriches’ brains (six hundred at a time), -prepared with that garum sauce which the Sybarites invented, and of -which the secret is lost. Therewith were peas and grains of gold, beans -and amber, quail powdered with pearl dust, lentils and rubies, spiders -in jelly, fig-peckers served in pastry. The guests that wine overcame -were carried to bedrooms; when they awoke, there, staring at them, were -tigers and leopards—tame, of course, but some of the guests were stupid -enough not to know it, and died of fright. It might not be pleasant to be -promised adorable sirens, and to find oneself shut up for the night with -an elderly Ethiopian, but it was not essentially cruel or debased, at -least not from the humorist point of view, as was proved by the laughter -of the Emperor at the sight of your disgusted face when he let you out in -the morning. Unless you were fond of the water, it could not have been a -pleasant experience to take the part of a water Ixion—tied to a revolving -wheel—for the Emperor’s lust of the eye; but if you submitted to these -things, you were sure of a reward more liberal than any you had expected. -Lampridius reports that no guests left the Emperor’s presence with empty -hands. After dinner he would give you the gold and silver plate from -which you had eaten, or cause you to draw lots for prizes which varied -from a dead dog to the half of his daily revenue. Elagabalus saw no -virtue in sending men away in the style of Domitian with their heads -under their arms,—it was too conventionally the pose of the Christian -martyr. - -The description applied to Caesar’s sexual condition can with equal -justice be applied to this youth of seventeen. He was a woman for all -men, and a man for all women, at least if one can judge by the number -of wives he married during his short reign of less than four years. The -number was six, according to Dion Cassius. Three of them were well-known -women, one a Vestal, by whom he designed to produce a demi-god. The -others are only referred to, their names are quite unknown. By none of -them, however, had he any issue, which perhaps is as well, since he -frequently remarked that should he have children, he would bring them -up to his way of living, in his outlook on life, and the world could -scarcely have stood a successor of his abnormal temperament. How far his -marriages were true matrimony we do not know, but the fact of his going -through the ceremony presupposes that the statements of Lampridius and -Zonaras to the effect that he was initiated a priest of Cybele (in the -full sense) are exaggerations, and also that the operation which would -have made him a woman to outward appearance as well as in sentiment -and affections, never took place; indeed, this is impossible on both -physiological and psychological grounds. - -Despite these marriages, the one romance of this boy’s life was with the -fair-haired chariot-driver Hierocles. His identity is somewhat involved, -though Dion Cassius states that he was a Carian slave, by profession a -chariot-driver. This lad found his fortune by a mere accident. One day -he was thrown from his chariot, right against the imperial pulvinar, -and lost his helmet. Elagabalus was there and at once noted the perfect -profile and curly hair of the athlete. He had him transferred to the -palace, where on account of a similarity of taste the intimacy soon -ripened into love, and that again, according to Xiphilinus, into a -contract of marriage. - -Hierocles must have been the best, and certainly was the most powerful, -of that army of sycophants and courtesans which had always thronged the -Roman Court. We have no complaints against his exercise of authority, -though Lampridius says that his power exceeded that of the Emperor -himself. His banishment was demanded, with that of others, in the first -mutiny, but he was immediately allowed to return, despite the fact that -Elagabalus meditated conferring the imperial title upon him. He was a -good son, and in his prosperity was in no way ashamed of his mother. -He openly purchased her from her owners, and sent a company of the -Praetorian Guard to bring her to Rome, there placing her amongst the -women whose husbands had been Consuls. He appears to have been proud -not only of his position, but also of the Emperor’s love for him, as -the story of the Smyrnian Zoticus related by Xiphilinus and Zonaras -well illustrates. They relate how he gave the youth a drug which made -him useless to the Emperor during the first night, and thus procured -his expulsion from the palace, though probably the story of Zoticus’ -disgrace, on account of his treachery and venality (Lampridius’ version) -contains as much truth as any other. Certainly Hierocles had no just -cause for fear; Elagabalus’ affection was too feminine, too deep-rooted, -to do more than tease the man from whose hands, like many another woman -in history, he was more than willing to take ill-usage and stripes, if -only they were signs of jealousy or proofs of affection. - -Of course there were others. The Elagabalus of whom Lampridius treats was -a second Messalina in the variety of his tastes, and in the frequency of -his visits to the various lupanars of the city, and like this Empress he -measured his attractiveness by the amount of gold he could carry home -after such expeditions. He cultivated the class of person who could -discourse on the spintries with which Tiberius had refreshed his jaded -mind and enfeebled frame, and made much of the man who could invent new -sauces or other species of Sybaritic enjoyment. All such he treated with -consideration, teased them and excited them, it is true, but pampered and -fed them (sometimes, exclusively on their own inventions, till they could -produce something more palatable), and loaded them with gifts, honours, -offices, dignities, until they learnt that the condition of perfection is -idleness, the aim of perfection is youth. We can well imagine the fury of -the legitimate office seekers when they saw these children of pleasure -preferred before them. - -In a discussion on his psychology mention must be made of Elagabalus’ -love of colour. To the Roman, white in its cleanliness and simplicity -was the acme of an aesthetic taste, though the profusion of purple -borderings, the mingling of scarlet and gold, showed his kinship with -the children of the south. Syria, and the East generally, loved that -mass of brilliancy which relieves the aridity of the land; Elagabalus, -posing as the aesthete of his time, annoyed the Roman world by his love -of purple and shaded silk garments, by his passion for green, in all its -known shades, and for feasts in which everything was in the deep azure of -a cloudless sky. To-day we still cultivate colour schemes without much -hostile comment, as it takes the philosopher to discover their puerility, -the prurient-minded their wickedness and degeneracy. - -We are told that the blatant discussions of his amusements made -right-minded men blush, causing ultimate nausea for his tastes and -opinions. But it could only have been the few he had the opportunity -of disgusting; the majority had heard the same before and showed no -desire to be shocked. Other Emperors had been as outspoken, be it said -to their reprobation as well as to his, but other Emperors had not been -so good-hearted, so filled with the charity that thinketh no wrong. -When they had scented opposition they had removed the cause forthwith; -Elagabalus let it grow and strengthen till it swallowed him up. - -It may be that, as Lampridius says, his effeminacy disgusted the virile -Roman world. It was a vice as reprehensible then as now. The genius of -the Greek and Roman friendships was all against the weak softness of the -Semitic races. Greek love had been regulated “to strengthen hardihood, -to breed a contempt for death, to overcome the sweet desire for life, to -humanise cruelty, to which powers almost as much veneration is due as to -the cult of the Immortal Gods,” says Valerius Maximus, in his treatise -_De amicitiae vinculo_. It would have been small wonder if the whole mass -of healthy-minded individuals had turned from Lampridius’ picture of this -little painted quean of seventeen years, who never showed in himself -any traits of manliness, except when he was on the seat of judgment. -If he had been portrayed as wholly woman, or wholly man, we could have -understood him, but for this strange admixture even the physicians are -at a loss to account, almost to understand. He had his good qualities -and had them in plenty, but overshadowing them all, like a terrible -blight, there was this organic affliction of the senses, passions, and -general outlook. Unfortunately, this blight of femininity still exists -in the world to a certain extent, especially amongst religious persons. -Gulick holds that the reason why only 7 per cent of young men attend the -Christian churches is because the qualities demanded are feminine not -virile, such as passive love, passive suffering, rest, prayer, trust; -whereas Confucianism and Mahommedanism attract men because the demand is -for virile qualities, and the place for women is small. Such faiths make -even more than individual demands on the virtues of courage, endurance, -self-control, bravery, loyalty, and enthusiasm. Gulick says also, that -the able-bodied boy who lacks the courage to fight is generally a -milksop, or a sneak, without any high sense of honour. - -In this epitome of the qualities demanded of men we see the true grounds -on which the world has instinctively condemned Elagabalus, though -probably without quite knowing why they did so. It is because they have -been told that he possessed the virtues, along with the mind, of the -woman, and a voluptuous woman at that, and had nothing of what the world -expects to find in the male animal. His reign was short, so he left no -traces of his mind on the Empire, and what little he did effect was -reversed by his successor. His reign of prodigal extravagance caused not -one single new impost; his government of the city and provinces alike was -one of peace and harmony. That infamous system of informers under which -the aristocracy and plutocracy of Rome had suffered so direly up to the -death of Caracalla was never re-established by Elagabalus; despite the -fact that his rule had been subverted, on more than one occasion, by the -existing aristocrats. The people was sovereign, and it was important -that that sovereign should be amused, flattered, and fed. All was done -that had been done before by the demi-gods, and all was done with an -exaggeration unparalleled. His games in the circus were such that even -Lampridius admits the people considered him a worthy Emperor, because -he was endowed with a sense of the grandeur of the imperial position, -and expressed it by his marvellous prodigalities. They made him what he -was, and has ever remained in history, the Emperor of extravagance. In -him the glow of the purple reached its apogee. Rome had been watching -a crescendo that had mounted with the ages. Its culmination was in -this hermaphrodite. But the tension had been too great, even for the -solidarity of Imperial Rome; it was as though the mainspring had snapped, -and the age of anarchy, both military and religious, did the rest: -undermining the State, till the Emperors, whose sceptre had lashed both -gods and sky, became little better than a procession of bandits, coloured -and ornate it is true, but utterly lacking in that strength and virility -which is the essential of real government throughout the world. - -Thus did Rome make way for Attila, the scourge whom God sent for the -final extinction of art and philosophy, and incidentally for the -refurbishing of the world under its mediaeval guise. - - - - -CHAPTER X - -THE EXTRAVAGANCES OF THE EMPEROR ELAGABALUS - - -The Rome of Elagabalus was a dream aflame with gold, “a city of triumphal -arches, enchanted temples, royal dwellings, vast porticoes, and wide, -hospitable streets; a Rome purely Greek in conception and design. On its -heart, from the Circus Maximus to the Forum’s edge, the remains of the -gigantic Palace of Nero still shone, fronted by a stretch of columns -a mile in length; a palace so wonderful that even the cellars were -frescoed. In the baths of porphyry and verd-antique you had waters cold -or sulphurous at will, and these Elagabalus threw open to all whose forms -pleased him, men and women alike” (a custom of mixed bathing which had -been abolished by Hadrian and was again proscribed by Alexander Severus). -“The dining-halls had ivory ceilings, from which flowers fell, and -wainscots that changed at every service. The walls were alive with the -glisten of gems, with marbles rarer than jewels. In one hall was a dome -of sapphire, a floor of malachite, crystal columns and red gold walls; -about the palace were green savannahs, forest reaches, the call of the -bird and deer; before it was a lake, eight acres of which Vespasian had -drained and replaced by an amphitheatre, which is still the wonder of the -world.” - -Into this profusion of aesthetic loveliness the youth of fourteen -summers stepped proudly, realising how fitting a background it made -to his glorious beauty. It was Nero’s creation, and here was a young -Nero (in face and manner) suddenly reappeared to enjoy what he had been -prematurely forced to leave. - -In spite of everything, Nero was still the idol of the masses. For -years fresh roses had lain on his tomb, the memory of his festivals was -unforgettable, regret for him refused to be stilled; he was more than a -god, he was a tradition, and his second advent was confidently expected. -The Egyptians had proclaimed that the soul has its avatars; the Romans -had sneered in their philosophical fashion at all ideas of soul migration -till Elagabalus sauntered from that distant Emesa, an Antonine at the -head of an adoring army; then they began to think that the Egyptians were -wiser than they looked, for in the blue eyes of the young Emperor the -spirit of Nero’s magnificence shone. - -All men were charmed; the Senate with their Aurelius, the people with -their Nero, the army with their Antonine. Certainly in profusion -Elagabalus was destined to rival his prototype. His prodigalities were -more excessive, his mignons more blatant, his wives more numerous, -and his processions more splendid. Only in cruelty (at which none can -cavil) did the resemblance fail. Nero had regretted his ability to -write when first a death-warrant was presented for his signature; he -appended his name and soon found the taste for blood. Elagabalus wept -at the sight of suffering, poverty and misery to the end of his life; -and as he never avoided seeing it, he must have wept often. In fact, a -favourite pastime, according to Herodian, was wandering disguised through -the purlieus of the city; sometimes he would serve as potboy in the -taverns, or as barber’s assistant in the slums, as itinerant vendor of -vegetables and perfumes about the streets; which antics assume a most -reprehensible flavour in the mouth of the historians after the Emperor -had conceived the notion of taking the world into his confidence and had -ordered paintings of himself in the plebeian garbs above mentioned. Any -way, Elagabalus tried to alleviate distress, which was more practical -than tears, though an unusual extravagance amongst the Emperors of the -decadence. - -From his infancy the boy had gloried in extravagance. Even as a private -citizen we are told that he refused to stir without a procession of sixty -chariots following, a foible which had caused Maesa to gnash her teeth -instead of adopting measures which would prevent the recurrence of such -ostentation. He had never even thought of austerity, simplicity, and -poverty as necessary evils, let alone as Christian virtues, to be borne -with fortitude and temperance. Once when a friend asked him whether -he was not afraid that his prodigalities would land him in ultimate -necessity, he replied with an astounding self-complacency, “What can be -better for me than to be heir to myself.” Like many a modern child, -he objected to woollen garments, and his parents were foolish enough -to give way to his whimsies; he disliked the feel of wool, he said. -Another prejudice was against linen that had been washed. So dainty was -he that he never used the same garments, the same jewels, the same woman -twice (unless it were his wife), says Lampridius. But in Rome wool was -necessary; Rome was never healthy. Maesa knew it by experience, but -was more than willing to tempt providence by returning thither. The -Tramontana visited it then as now; fever too, and sudden death. Wool was -certainly necessary; besides, it was the accustomed dress of the country, -and Rome was intensely conservative, she would not endure an Emperor who -came dressed as an Eastern barbarian; the boy of thirteen years must -adopt the clothes, habits, and customs of his adopted country, of his -reputed father; thus the grandmother argued till Elagabalus was bored -with the discussion, and told the lady so. He was devising, moreover, -he announced, garments more splendid and more bizarre than any Rome had -found outside the temple at Jerusalem. His fancy was a frail tunic of -purple silk diapered with gold, or that even more resplendent vestment -which was woven throughout of fine gold and encrusted with gems. Alone -of the garments he had seen, this enhanced his beauty and gave dignity -to his movements. The sleeves were long and full, reaching to his heels, -open to show the rounded softness of his girlish arms; gilded leather -covered his feet and reached to his thighs; it was softer than wool and -certainly showed his form to better advantage. Sometimes after supper he -would appear in public dressed in the stiff dalmatic of a young deacon, -calling himself Fabius Gurgis, and Scipio, because the parents of these -youths had formerly shown them to the people in this costume in order to -correct their bad manners. - -Encircling his curls (but in the palace only) was a diadem of heavy gold, -studded with jewels; not the simple golden circlet known to the Roman -world, but one after a Persian design, first introduced by Caracalla, -rich, splendid, and brilliant with the numbers of rubies, sapphires, -and emeralds which he thought became him. Unfortunately, his taste -for precious stones did not stop here. Lampridius and Herodian pour -deserved scorn on the numerous bracelets, rings and necklaces, all as -rich and costly as could be made, with which he decked his person; but, -perhaps unnecessarily, on his shoe-buckles, whose stones, engraved cameo -and intaglio, were the wonder of the beholder, and their cry has been -increased to a howl by later commentators, who seem to consider it a -species of indecency that the Emperor’s shoes should be of fine leather, -his stones priceless, while theirs were of ill-dressed cowhide, held -together with buckles of paste. - -Of course, it is not a pleasant taste, this overlaying of the body with -an inordinate display of wealth, even when done merely for the honour of -one’s God, as Elagabalus protested. Unfortunately, it is still known both -in the Plutocratic and Sacerdotal worlds. Certain minds still revolt, -still see its snobbery, vanity and degeneracy, are even foolish enough -to imagine that the personal vanity of such functionaries will one day -renounce what is their main means of attraction. - -Elagabalus’ love of extravagance comes out most strongly in his ritual -of worship. Never in the history of Rome had such daily waste of life -and liquor, such profusion of colour and gold, flowers, music, and -movement displayed the honour of God or man. The Emperor’s one idea was -to eclipse all that his predecessors had imagined. It was a stupendous -task to surpass Nero in fantasy, Otho and Vitellius in greediness; but he -had read Suetonius, and not an eccentricity of the Caesars had escaped -his notice. He knew, too, where to exceed them, and still lives on the -reputation of a work accomplished. - -The hecatombs of oxen and innumerable quantities of sheep which came -daily to the temple of the Only God required a perfect army of butchers -that their slaughter might do homage to the Deity while daylight lasted. -These, with the spices, wine, and flowers, were but part payment of the -interest which the high priest felt his family owed to Elagabal for the -past and present successes of his house, while his most beloved title was -that which styled him “Invictus Sacerdos, Dei Soli.” There is a great -variety in his medals, both in those coined by the Senate and in those -struck by himself, whereon this priesthood of his is described. Chief -Priest and Invincible Priest of Elagabal, or the Sun, are commonly to -be met with round his image, which stands in a sacrificing posture, with -a censer in his hand, over an altar. It was in this supreme ineffable -spirit that the Emperor put his trust, to him he ascribed his health, -wealth, and security, together with that of his whole catholic church -militant here on earth. - -On his arrival in Rome in the year A.D. 219, Elagabalus thought well -to carry through the laudable custom (for the poor) of bestowing the -usual congiary on the people. If Mediobarbus were to be trusted, he gave -six such during his short reign of approximately four years, besides -the soldiers’ donatives (which to his cost and undoing he foolishly -neglected as time went on). To-day such liberalities on the part of a -sovereign take the form of free meals and a limited supply of beer, but -are amiable and satisfying methods of spending the public money in an -ingratiating fashion. What Elagabalus gave was from the private funds -of his house, and was given in a manner quite his own. Formerly it had -been usual to distribute gold and silver (Nero had added eccentric gifts, -of course) on such occasions, but Elagabalus signalised his assumption -of the Consulship by the distribution of fat oxen, camels, eunuchs, -slaves, caparisoned saddle-horses, closed sedans and carriages, hoping, -as he remarked, that all men would remember these were the gifts of the -Emperor; as though any were likely to forget when they found themselves -saddled with a dromedary, and expected to conduct it safely to their own -backyard through the crowded lanes of the city. Such gifts were often -more trouble than they were worth, and the scramble at the distribution -much what it would be now, at least, according to Lampridius’ description -of those yearly distributions which followed the translation of the Great -God to his temple in the suburbs. - -At times Elagabalus gave money; witness the congiary and donative to -celebrate his marriage with Cornelia Paula, when, as Herodian tells -us, not only the people, but also the Senators, Equites, and even the -Senators’ wives partook of the liberality, receiving 150 denares each, -the soldiers 250, on account, presumably, of their superior usefulness. - -Had this boy’s megalomania stopped short at donatives and congiaries, we -should know little but good of him; unfortunately, he considered that to -love oneself is the beginning of a lifelong romance, and spent his money -as best pleased his fancy at the moment, which was always with a taste -for resplendency. - -We can imagine the beauty of his reclining couches, solid silver, richly -chased, the cushions upholstered in purple woven with pure gold. Entire -services in silver for table use, very massive; even the saucepans were -in the same metal, and elegantly fashioned vases or cups containing 100 -lbs. weight of precious metal apiece, with the most obvious indecencies -engraved or repousséd on the sides; the strange part of it all being that -he took delight, not so much in the possession of all this splendour as -in the giving of it to his friends, so much so that the silversmiths -could scarce keep pace with his generosity. It is a good feeling that of -giving generously, better to give than to receive, and what Elagabalus -got in return cost the giver so little pain. - -To food and drink the Emperor was as much addicted as the traditional -city alderman, though his imagination certainly surpassed that of the -retired tradesman, at least in quality and design. His chief authority -was Apicius, the renowned author of a book entitled _De re coquinaria_, -but he had other models almost as famous, if not as long-lived, in -the Emperors Otho and Vitellius, and managed to outdo them all in -extravagance. Lampridius states that no feast cost Elagabalus less than -100,000 sesterces, and often reached the stupendous figure of 300,000, -_tout compris_. The number of dishes has been reached, if not surpassed, -by modern luxury, but to Lampridius twenty-two courses sounded absurd; -not so, however, the ablutions and courtesans who always attended and -utilised the intervals in an unbecoming manner. Occasionally these -intervals were of some length, caused by the removal of whole services -of plate to the possession of some guest who had said the right thing -at the psychological moment. Another means of delay was found in the -practice, which Elagabalus instituted, of taking each course in the house -of a different friend, an arrangement which necessitated the transference -of the whole party in their gold and ivory chariots from the Capitol to -the Palatine, thence to the Coelian Hill, and again to another friend -who might live beyond the walls, or yet to another in Trastevere. This, -with the usual impedimenta, arriving at the house of each, for the dishes -in their order, took time, and in such a fashion we can well believe -the chronicler who states that a single feast was scarce finished in -the daytime, especially as the intervals for customary enjoyments were -arranged with due regard for the utmost desires of the guests. - -It is charming to imagine a feast such as is recorded of Maecenas, where -“in ungirdled tunics the guests lay on silver beds, the head and neck -encircled with amaranthe—whose perfume, in opening the pores, neutralises -the fumes of wine—fanned by boys, whose curly hair they used as napkins. -Under the supervision of butlers the courses were served on silver -platters, so large that they covered the tables. Sows’ breasts with -Lybian truffles; dormice baked in poppies and honey; peacocks’ tongues -flavoured with cinnamon; oysters stewed in garum—a sort of anchovy -sauce made of the intestines of fish—flamingoes’ and ostriches’ brains, -followed by the brains of thrushes, parroquets, pheasants, and peacocks, -also a yellow pig cooked after the Trojan fashion, from which, when -carved, hot sausages fell and live thrushes flew; sea-wolves from the -Baltic, sturgeons from Rhodes, fig-peckers from Samos, African snails and -the rest.” A full list of the dainties set forth would weary the amateur, -might even make him envious of the times that are now long dead, times -when the ceaseless round of beef and mutton would have been considered -monotonous or bad art, and year in year out plain boiled greens were -unknown; times when the Emperor served, as we have recorded, grains of -gold with his peas, rubies with lentils, beans and amber, for the mere -pleasure of sight; though his salads of mullets’ fins with cress, balm -mint, and fenugreek, we should probably have found no greater delicacy -than the undercooked vegetables of this twentieth century of our -salvation and discomfort. - -As with food, so with wine, Elagabalus was a glutton. Mulsum, that cup -composed of white wine, roses, nard, absinthe and honey, was _vieux -jeu_. The delicate wines of Greece were always palatable; so was the -crusty Falernian of the year 632 A.U.C., to those who were of an age to -appreciate its worth. The young gourmet thought otherwise, and rendered -them noisome by the addition of crushed pine kernels and fir cones. It -was a youthful taste, such as we still distrust, but scarcely immoral -in the generally accepted sense of the term. As regards a tendency to -over-indulgence in good liquor, we have no data; there is a passage in -Lampridius (though evidently faulty) which asserts that the Emperor used -to mix wine with the baths and then invite the guests to drink, the basin -from which he had drunk being easily distinguishable by the fall in its -level; an utter impossibility, and not even clever as a bit of scandal. -Another extravagance culled from the same biographer tells how this child -realised the summer by feasts at which all was of one colour, food as -well as fittings, and how he would order all the dishes of a certain day -to be composed of a single sort of flesh: it might be pheasant under -twenty different garbs, fowls served on the same scale, even fish, if -the Court happened to be at a distance from the sea. At another time you -would be served with a vegetarian diet, or occasionally with nothing but -pork, which sounds inconsistent when we consider that the same author has -sneered copiously at the Emperor’s adoption of the Jewish superstition -in this matter. He further tells us that it was not magnificent enough -for this child’s fancy to recline on silver beds, with covers fashioned -in cloth of gold; his cushions were of hare’s fur, or down from under -the partridge’s wing, whilst the whole was strewn thick with flowers and -perfumes, those of important guests with saffron and gold dust. Wherever -he went were flowers strewing the way—lilies, violets, roses, and -narcissus. - -No mention of psychological extravagance would be complete without a -certain disquisition on the use of perfumes. Here, as everywhere else, -Lampridius tells us that Elagabalus contrived to outdo his predecessors. -The use he made of unguents was little short of dissolute. As usual, the -biographer would have us believe that the failing was an idiosyncrasy -peculiar to the Emperor, whose life he was decrying. He had obviously -not heard of the soporific nastiness of Solomon’s beloved, a lady who -is represented to us by the writer of the Canticles as a cluster of -camphire, a mountain of myrrh, a hill of frankincense, spikenard and -cinnamon, additions which would not only have made her sticky, but -noisome to boot. Mahommed and his pavement of musk was beyond Lampridius’ -ken, but he had certainly heard of the perfumes which scented the temple -at Jerusalem, and it would have been no new sight for him to have watched -Elagabalus pour tons of aromatics upon the new altars erected to the -ancient gods. - -Even to-day we know something about the odour of sanctity and -occasionally inhale its delights by stealth, because, despite undoubted -legal prohibition, the clergy have persuaded us that the Gods still love -the smell of incense. Our point is, however, that everything sacred and -profane stank horribly at the period. Thank heaven, the personal use of -_mille fleurs_ which then obsessed the world has now given place to a -smell of the open. But there was nothing unusual during the third century -in the fact that Elagabalus burnt Indian aromatics instead of coal in -his dining-rooms, balm instead of petroleum in his lamps, and heated -his stoves and bathrooms with odours instead of the more commonplace -materials. What is repulsive is the depraved use which the world made of -perfume. The tunics of men, their baths, beds, horses, rooms, streets, -servants, even their food smelt. Caligula had wasted a fortune on -perfumes. Nero had waded in them. Myrrh, aloes, and cassia, saffron and -cinnamon, not to mention others equally objectionable and even more -costly; these all made life heavy and cloying, turned conceptions of -wrong into right, made the unholy adorable, stained the thoughts and -depraved the mind, just as M. Huysmans (in _À Rebours_) describes what he -succeeded in doing during his stay at Fontenay. - -Not that Rome was as objectionable as Athens. There, we are told that -both men and women painted their faces with white lead, their eyelids -with kohl, and their nails with henna; and in order to draw attention -to the depravity, they perfumed their hair with marjoram, rubbed their -arms with mint, their legs with ivy, and the soles of their feet with -baccaris. In Greece this idea of attention to personal beauty was a -perfect cult—the latest recipes for artificial adornments were engraved -on tablets and exhibited in the temples of Aesculapius, and, this done, -the state imposed a fine for a slatternly appearance; but for all that -it was decadent and nasty. People, of course, still spend money on their -personal appearance, but patchouli, thank heaven! has gone, even from -Piccadilly. - -The Emperor’s fondness for fish was tempered by its rarity. He would -never eat of its living things whilst he sojourned near the sea; he would -have them transported to the immense salt-water tanks he had constructed -amongst the mountains and in the interior of the country, both for their -preservation and his own amusement. We are told that he invented a method -of fishing in which oxen figured, a conceit which later years has not -revived. - -First in history he conceived of sausages made from lampreys’ roes, -soft-shelled oysters, lobsters, and crayfish, and fed the country -peasants on the same. Indeed, his generosity here, as in Rome, was -unbounded, the chroniclers relating how he would throw from the windows -as many dishes as he offered to his own guests then at table. There was -nothing of our niggardly idea of charity here, no notion that any crusts -were good enough for the hungry. His dogs were fed on foie-gras, his -horses on grapes, his lions on pheasants and parroquets—an unnecessary -and unpleasant waste when one knows how much these beasts would have -preferred a more ordinary fare. - -His fish sauce was a triumph of the culinary art, which is utterly lost. -It was a transparent bluish-green, the counterpart of sea water, in which -the fish looked alive and natural, utterly unlike the ragged ugliness -which is now presented for our consumption. So famous were his dishes -that the pastrycooks and dairymen of the day were wont to reproduce them -in their own particular wares, selling the same as imperial affectations. - -The menus also were his own conception, embroidered on the tablecloth—not -the mere list of dishes, but pictures drawn with the needle of the -dishes themselves—which, of course, necessitated a change of cloth with -each service. He first, we are told, made the public feasts, as well as -private dinners, great and magnificent. Formerly these feasts had been of -a military simplicity. Elagabalus could not see why even political guests -should not enjoy themselves when they came to dine with him, and served -them with hydrogarum, the then last word in Sybaritic enjoyment. His -successor Alexander thought differently, and reverted to the old order, a -proceeding which pleased no one save the flatulent. - -Elagabalus was, unfortunately, tainted with what is perhaps natural in -young people, though in elderly plutocrats is an acquired vice, that of -overt snobbery. It is recorded by more than one of his guests that he -would often ask them to price his dishes, in order to hear an excessive -value suggested, remarking that great cost gave a good appetite, -especially when one knew that dishes were scarce and out of season. Of -course, it was bad form, even in a boy, but how much else that happens is -the same? There are other things in plenty to cavil at. - -It was not by food alone that Elagabalus drained the treasury; he had -other ways of flattering the sovereign people of Rome. The spectacles -which he gave in the amphitheatre were unique. Fancy 80,000 people on -ascending galleries, protected from the sun by a canopy of spangled -silk, an arena three acres in extent, carpeted with sand, vermilion, and -borax, in that arena were naval displays on lakes of wine, and the death -of whole menageries of Egyptian beasts (in one show, Herodian tells us, -fifty-one tigers alone were killed). There were chariot races, in which -not only horses, but also stags, lions, tigers, dogs, and even women -figured, till the spectators showed a colossal delight. The magnificence -of the spectacle almost surpasses belief: from below came the blare of a -thousand brass instruments, and from above the caresses of flutes, while -the air, sweet with flowers and perfume (for the Emperor had provided -saffron even for the cloaks of the crowd), was alive with multicoloured -motes. The terraces were parterres of blending hues, when into that -splendour a hundred lions, their tasselled tails sweeping the sand, -entered obliquely, and anon a rush of wild elephants, attacked on either -side; another moment of sheer delight, in which the hunters were tossed -upon the terraces, tossed back again by the spectators, and trampled -to death. By way of interlude, the ring was peopled with acrobats, who -flew up in the air like birds, and formed pyramids together, much in the -fashion that we know them to-day. There was a troop of tamed lions, their -manes gilded, that walked on tight-ropes, wrote obscenities in Greek, -and danced to cymbals, which one of them played; a chase of ostriches -and feats of horsemanship on zebras from Madagascar. The interlude at -an end, the sand was re-raked. Then, preceded by the pomp of lictors, -interminable files of gladiators entered, while the eyes of the women -lighted and glowed; artistic death was their chiefest joy, for there -was no cowardice in the arena. The gladiators fought for applause, for -liberty, for death—fought manfully, skilfully, terribly too, and received -the point of the sword or the palm of victory with an equally unmoved -expression, an unchanged face. It was a magnificent conception on which -the Romans, or, more exactly, the Etruscans, their predecessors, had -devised to train their children for war and allay the fear of blood. -It had been serviceable indeed, and though the need of it had gone, -the spectacle endured, and, enduring, constituted the chief delight -of the Vestals and of Rome. By its means a bankrupt became Consul, an -Emperor beloved. It had stayed revolutions, because it was felt to be -the tax of the proletariat on the rich. Silver and bread were for the -individual, but these things were for the crowd. When evening descended, -so did torches and the Emperor to take chief part in the ballet which he -considered as the culminating point in the performance. - -In a robe, immaterial as a moonbeam, his eyelids darkened with antimony, -his face painted in imitation of the courtesans who sat on high chairs -and ogled passers-by in the Suburra, he entered the arena, and there, -to the incitement of crotals, he danced with his Syrians before the -multitude, a protecting claque of 80,000 persons toasting the performer -with the magnificent cry, “Io Triumphe!” whatever they thought of its -indecency. Lampridius tells us of his importing from Egypt those little -serpents, known under the name of “good genius,” and letting them loose -amongst the audience, among whom many were bitten, many killed, in the -stampede. It was quite a likely prank to play—is even heard of to-day—but -one cannot imagine that Elagabalus wanted to disperse the audience, as -his biographer suggests, before they had witnessed the magnificence which -he had prepared for their delectation. It would have been too foolish, -especially if he wanted an appreciative reception for his own turn. - -So much for his public appearances. Many of his private pleasures are -quite repeatable, though all are extravagant, such as his chariot races -in the palace and in the Gardens of Hope, his teams of great dogs to -draw him from place to place, his naked women for the same purpose, or -when he himself, in the attributes and customary undress of Bacchus, -was drawn by lions, tigers, and the female sex. In driving, Elagabalus -had a splendid nerve, as we learn from the record of his chariot races -with camels and elephants even over the Vatican and its tombs. He -seems to have imagined that others were possessed of the same daring -and hardihood. Witness his requests to guests that they should drive -chariots, to which were harnessed four wild stags, through the porticoes -in front of his dining-rooms, which porticoes were strewn thick with -gold and silver dust, because he could not get electrum. Many found -the task most unpleasant, especially if they were portly, or Senators -whose pomposity ought to have put such antics out of the question; but -Elagabalus was no respecter of persons, unless, of course, they were -young, beautiful, and full of lust; to such he was ever considerate, -whether they were men or women. One day, because they pleased him, he -presented to the courtesans and procurers of the city the whole supply of -corn for a year’s provision, and promised a like amount to those dwelling -outside the walls. On another he collected the _cocottes_ of the theatres -and circuses, and, having harangued them as “companions in arms,” -presented them with a soldier’s donative of three pieces of gold, saying, -“Tell no one that Antonine has given you this.” - -Elagabalus is the originator of lotteries, which have since become a -source of profit to European states. There was one for the people, one -for the comedians. Of course, he provided the prizes, and there does not -seem to have been any purchase of tickets. These were singular, as were -all his other gifts, and varied from 1 lb. of beef to 100 pieces of gold -or 1000 of silver. - -In summer he had the audacity to erect a snow mountain in his orchard, in -order that cool airs might relieve the oppressiveness of Sol in Leone. -Even in the relief of natural functions he was magnificent, using only -vases of gold, onyx, and myrrhin. Whether this last is a metal or sort of -agate has been disputed, but Pliny had no doubt as to its extreme worth. -He tells us that a drinking cup was sold for 70,000 sesterces, and a -sacrificial capis for 1,000,000, to his own knowledge. - -The progresses of Elagabalus were a sight that made even the citizens of -Rome stare open-mouthed. Nero had taken a train of 500 carriages, and -the boy Emperor was not to be outdone. He ordered a following of 600 at -a time, saying that the King of Persia had a train of 10,000 camels, and -for himself, his numerous courtesans, procurers, and the rest, whom he -had bought and freed, all richly habited, could not be accommodated with -less, wherein he showed a certain chivalry, as also in the case of the -very famous _cocotte_, whom he had bought for 100,000 sesterces, and then -relegated to perpetual virginity. - -The Syrian astrologers had told Elagabalus that he would meet with a -violent death, which information seems in no way to have disturbed his -equanimity; it merely added to his extravagances, in that he built a -tower, from which he designed to throw himself, when his hour was come, -on to a pavement of gold encrusted with gems, in order that men might -say, “qualis artifex periit.” To make assurance doubly sure, he carried -with him little cases fashioned in emeralds and rubies, containing deadly -poisons, also cords of purple silk, with which he might strangle himself -if he were in any real trouble, though the adulation of the people made -it doubtful if such could ever happen. Was it a wonderful thing that the -people loved him—the originator of lotteries where no one but the Emperor -was the loser, the distributor of an incessant shower of tickets that -were exchangeable, not for bread or trivial sums, but for gems, pictures, -slaves, fortunes, ships, villas, and estates? Such a one was bound to be -adored; indeed, his lavishness deified him in the eyes of the sovereign -people of Rome. - -There is one record of wanton waste which Lampridius has laid to his -charge, namely, that of sinking laden ships in the harbours in order to -show men at what a price he valued his wealth, that it could pay any -compensation, could stand any strain. It is a foolish and criminal fault -for a statesman to squander the wealth of his country, but an accusation -which is still levelled against the statesmen of our own time, and that -not infrequently. They may not attempt to realise the greatness of their -country by collecting cobwebs by the ton, as Elagabalus once managed to -do, saying that he wished thus to realise the greatness of Rome, but they -are perfectly capable of ordering equally unproductive labour and paying -for it at an enormous price, which is, ethically speaking, much the same -thing. The psychology of extravagance has not yet been examined, so we -are still free to condemn what we do not fully understand. Megalomania -we all know something about and can all condemn as experts. It was -Elagabalus’ success, as it has tended to the progress of other equally -well-known persons. - - - - -CHAPTER XI - -THE RELIGION OF THE EMPEROR ELAGABALUS - - -One of the main causes of complaint against the Emperor Marcus Aurelius -Antoninus was his religion. Lampridius and Xiphilinus are unanimous -in their condemnation of its tendencies and beliefs. Into these it is -unnecessary to enter at greater length than has been done in preceding -chapters. If there is one point on which all his biographers are fully -agreed, it is that the Emperor was pre-eminently religious. God took the -first place in his calculations and designs. - -Had he been a private person, no one could have objected to this -tendency. In general, piety towards the Gods has been commended -throughout the world’s history. It is only when a man occupies a public -position and subordinates his civil to his religious duties that the -world is apt to look askance at the latter. This is the position of -Elagabalus, at least in part; he is accused of neglecting the business -of the state for the sake of his conscience. Other sovereigns have been -likewise accused, and have likewise suffered at the hands of a world even -more vitally religious than were the Senate and people of third-century -Rome. Similar instances may be found not far from home which have perhaps -even less justification, when we consider that the cause of offence here -was ceremonies, not vital creeds. - -A word may also be said concerning the objects which Antonine’s -biographers had in view when they condemned what we should—at first -sight—have expected them to have praised in the Emperor’s life. - -As we have already pointed out, Constantine’s determination to impose -Christianity on the empire led to grave opposition, chiefly from the -adherents of the similarly monotheistic cult of Mithra, a cult which -was certainly identified with that of Elagabal, the only God. It was—if -on that account alone—obviously necessary that, not only the opposing -religion, but also the chief exponent of that worship, should come in for -severe censure at the hands of the fourth-century monotheism. - -As one reads the story of Antonine’s life, one is struck not so much -by the record of his perverse sexualities, about which no one can have -known anything definite, and which, even if the reports be true, we are -bound to regard as congenital, in the light of modern research, as we -are by the record of his religious fanaticism. This trait is, and in all -probability justly, considered to be reprehensible. It is not, however, -restricted to the Emperor in question; probably everybody has come across -it, in one form or another, during the course of his life; some have even -suffered under its potency. Antonine was, as we have said, in a peculiar -position; he was young, powerful, and extremely religious; he ascribed -the success of his house to the favour of his God, and desired to make -some return in the shape of coercing men to that God’s worship. To this -Emperor the possession of supreme power meant limitless possibilities -for the effecting of his scheme. Further, as we have seen, he came of -a religious stock, or rather of a family whose traditions were bound -up with a very definite form of religious worship, which is generally -considered as the same thing. - -The origin of religion is a much-disputed point. Some men have considered -that the source of all religion is fright; others prefer love; both of -which appeal to the superstitious instinct inherent in man. It may be -that these instincts breed reverence, fear, or love for forces outside -man’s control, and incomprehensible to him; in any case, these forces -were the first things to be deified in the history of religions, and took -their precedence in the natural order of their mystery or usefulness, -becoming a sort of aristocracy of talent, with a supreme head, the God of -Gods. - -In process of time the older religions of Greece and Rome gave way to -philosophies; and the thinkers having reasoned away the potency of their -deities, fought against what they considered a decadent and sentimental, -not to say a baseless tradition, with all the aids that experience -gave them. Then it was that the signs, portents, and miracles which -had bolstered up the faith of the ignorant, which had kept fright and -superstition alive, even the very prophecies and revelations which were -the sacerdotal proofs of inherent genuineness became either natural -phenomena or debasing charlatanry, amongst men who knew their origin and -history, or had learned from Archimedes the principles of mathematics. - -Nevertheless, in imperial Rome the atmosphere was charged with the -marvellous, very much as it was in Northern Europe until the time of -the Renaissance. The world was filled with prodigies, strange Gods, and -credulous crowds. The occult sciences, astrology, magic and divinations, -all had their adepts, and commanded the respect which kindred practices -command amongst the credulous to-day. - -But the philosophy of the older religions was undoubtedly hard and -cold. Courage, moderation, and honour were qualities that enforced the -permanence of the state, not of the individual. Men laboured not for -hope of reward, but for the sake of duty; they knew that vice was part -of the universal order of things, perhaps an error of the understanding, -certainly an error which it was idle to blame, yet righteous to rectify. -But the older religions as they had developed during the latter days of -the republic were far from satisfying the whole aspirations of man. - -The mind of man is not his only function, he has physical parts and -passions as well, such as fright, superstition, attractions, antipathies, -and sex. Some men were incapable of thought, few were single in aim, -and there was a craving, it may be quite irrational, but still human, -which longed to create, or at least to imagine, something higher than -self, something mightier than mind, something to which the irrational -and traditional side of man could appeal; and so, as one God died, a -newer and more mystical personage took his place. Jupiter had ceased to -dominate the world with a visible potency, Mithra, more mystical, more -sentimental, took his place as a power, so intimately connected with -man’s physical parts and passions, that the world of philosophy, which -dealt with the body through the mind, could scarcely touch the fringes of -his garment. - -There was, therefore, in Rome at the beginning of the third century A.D. -a party of men strongly attached, for sentimental or neurotic reasons, to -one or other of the recently imported Eastern creeds; but there was also -a large party of conservatives whose atheism was as cool and detached -as that of Horace; and a still larger party of ordinary people whose -attachment to the old practices of Roman Polytheism expressed all that -they considered either necessary or expedient, from the point of view -of ordinary piety. But in each case the religion was subordinated to a -paramount political, not to an essentially religious life, which life -was evolving, as we learn from nearly all authors, towards degeneration, -despite the fact that culture and literature was still based upon the -philosophy of intellectual freedom. - -Unfortunately, the very rule which had made for political greatness was -now robbing men of every liberating interest, was leaving society sterile -and empty. As a consequence of this, each generation was becoming less -wishful to think, and less capable of thought; not that the intellect of -Rome had by any means descended to that ultimate plane of intelligence -from which it was ready to enslave itself under the retrograde tendencies -of Eastern theistic beliefs. Rome, the mistress of the world, had seen -good in all Gods; she had acknowledged and included in her worship the -philosophies and deities of all nations, tribes, and tongues; every -force, natural, physical, and political, was represented at her altars. -Rome was comprehensively, sceptically Polytheist, when to her palaces -flocked the engineers, astronomers, and philosophers of that vast empire. -It was only to the common people, possessed as they were by beliefs in -non-human powers, in beings that beset life with malignity, that the -restoration of cults and ritual commended itself, and even they were -eclectic in their tastes and fancies. - -Despite pulpit learning, we know that Rome was no more attracted by those -doctrines of the universal socialistic brotherhood which had emanated -from Nazareth, than she was by the system of the ecstatic visionary from -Tarsus, who was destined—by a more systematic and regular development -of his revelations—to capture the freedom of the earlier intellectual -religions, as soon as the world’s hoary wisdom, having lost its virility, -was involved in the dotage of an unreasoning antiquity. - -In the long run we know that the mob triumphed, and that every religion -of the West was orientalised, every superstition and neurotic tendency -developed, and philosophy was brought to its knees utterly debased, until -its function was merely to be the apologist of all that superstition -taught or did. For the present, rational thinking men were alive. When -they died, exclusive monotheism came, carrying before it, like a flood, -the greatness of the former world. But the issue was still uncertain. Had -Elagabalus lived; had the beauty and impressiveness of his Semitic ritual -made its way; had time been given for men to grasp his idea of one vast, -beneficent, divine power, into the empire of whose central authority men -might escape from the thousand and one petty marauders of the spirit -world, they might have been attracted to the worship of life and light -instead of enmeshed by the seductive force of obscure and impossible -dogmas, tempted by the bait of an elusive socialism and a problematical -futurity. - -It was not that Rome, atheist or religious, objected to the worship of -Baal. She had her own and a round dozen other Jupiters, as men conceived -him to be, and was quite ready to include him amongst the number. The -trouble was that rational thinking men could not bring their minds to -conceive of any supreme potency in the world, outside man himself; while -religious persons had each his own particular conceit in the way of -deities, all of which the new Emperor, with more zeal than discretion, -proceeded to make subject to his own Lord’s will. - -But there was obviously more than mere amalgamation in Antonine’s scheme. -We have already pointed out the Emperor’s position of supremacy over the -old cults, and discussed the disintegrating tendency of the mystical and -independent monotheisms, which was already apparent even in the city -itself. The danger which these new religions imported into political life -lay in the establishment of an imperium over the souls of men, which, -based on superstitious terrors rather than on any appeal to reason or -logic, claimed an authority over the mind equal to that of the State over -the persons of its subjects. - -The main attraction of these forms of faith lay in their ability to -supply men with a personal and spiritual religion, which, being free -from State intervention, was able to incite its adherents to rebellion, -against any policy of which its priesthood disapproved, on spiritual or -even on financial grounds. Statesmen had long recognised the danger, -and were obviously attempting to cope with the new forces. Antonine’s -proposal was one for the extension of his jurisdiction (as Pontifex -Maximus) to the new monotheisms, by the amalgamation of these with -the older worships over which his authority as Pontifex Maximus was -unchallenged. If he had succeeded he would have exerted his headship of -religion in much the same fashion as Elizabeth Tudor—claiming a similar -headship—exerted hers in the sixteenth century. This policy meant the -appointment of State officials endowed with the wealth, titles, and -a portion of the vesture of those old prelates, who had by their -traditions and claims to magical powers, coerced, and indeed still coerce -the minds of the credulous to the disintegration of the State. Antonine -foreshadowed what Tudor greatness effected; namely, the erection of a -State church, whose business it was to replace an independent priesthood -which fostered fanaticism, by a race of civil servants who would restrain -and modify superstition, turning all dangerous and harmful elements in -the religious life into useful and philanthropic energies, concerning -whose profit it would take an anchorite to disagree. - -We have traced the steps by which Antonine proceeded to carry out his -policy of amalgamation. The erection of that superb and gigantic temple -in the XIth region; the summer residence for his God near the Porta -Praenestina; and the procession, in which all men and most of the Gods -took part, have been catalogued already. It was, however, this very -amalgamation to which Rome, atheist and religious, objected. Antonine -could have done what pleased him in the way of introducing a new worship; -he might have caused all men to assist at his ceremonies, and no one -would have objected; but to desecrate the older religions, and deprive -them of their treasured possessions, was an offence against all canons of -Roman taste. - -There can be little doubt that one by one the temples were despoiled of -their chief objects of veneration in order that these might contribute -to Baal’s glory, and attract more worshippers to his shrine. It was in -this way that the Emperor designed to extinguish all the other cults in -the city, and so leave his God supreme; but persecution would have been -preferable to contempt. Elagabal’s temple was indeed a perfect museum of -ecclesiastical relics, all _ad majorem dei gloriam_; still it did not -attract, because it was contrary to the whole spirit of the time; no one -demanded a monotheistic creed, and, though all the worships of the city -should be comprehended in that of Elagabal, men could not raise devotion -towards an amalgamation which, they felt, was neither good deity nor good -philosophy. - -Undoubtedly the Emperor was most eager. Why he did not persecute in -order to attain his end was a mystery, until men understood something of -his psychology. He would go (according to Lampridius) to any lengths of -personal inconvenience in order that he might further his plan, but would -put no one else to unnecessary discomfort or loss. We are told that his -desire to obtain the sacred objects from the temple of Cybele led him -to sacrifice fat bulls to that Goddess, with his own hands, and, when -that was not enough (as the priests proved difficult), that he submitted -himself to their ordination (a ceremony which included castration) in -order that he might possess himself of their sacred stone. - -Lampridius has been understood to assert this castration, using the words -“_genitalia devinxit_,” but, as Professor Robinson Ellis has pointed -out to me, _devinxit_ usually means no more than “tied up.” Aurelius -Victor, being later, is naturally more explicit. He says “_abscissis -genitalibus_,” but despite his fourth-century statement, there is -considerable ground for doubt as to whether the operation actually took -place, chiefly on account of the records which his biographers have left -concerning the Emperor’s later proclivities—matrimony and the like—in -which he is supposed to have indulged until the last moment of his -life. And it would certainly have been a miserable ending to a life of -pleasure, as he understood the meaning of the word. If it is true, it -certainly proves a zeal for the Kingdom of Heaven’s sake which we are -scarcely capable of understanding. - -Towards idols made with hands Antonine had no attraction. It was the -acquisition of stones with a claim to divinity on which he had set his -mind, even (according to a most faulty passage in Lampridius) to the -Laodicean statue of Diana, which Orestes with his own hands had placed in -its proper sanctuary. These he made, one and all, servants of the only -God—some chamberlains, some domestics. Early Christianity had much the -same idea as Antonine concerning the position of the older Gods, but, -with a singular lack of perspicacity, it turned them into demons,—where -they did not become saints,—and by so doing created a power of evil out -of what had formerly been a powerful beneficence. - -Undoubtedly, one of the Emperor’s chief mistakes was his attempt to -amalgamate the kindred worship of Jerusalem, in its various forms, with -that of the Roman deities, and even though his circumcision almost -certainly belongs to the period when he became High Priest of Elagabal -(the period when he attained to puberty), the connection of this -ceremony with the kindred Jewish observance was sufficient, in the Roman -mind, to brand Antonine as a Hebrew innovator. The same odium would not, -however, have been attached to him when it was reported that he had -submitted to the triune baptism practised by various of the Christian -sects; since this practice was well known to the Romans on account of -its inclusion amongst the ceremonies at the Mithraic initiations. The -ceremony, therefore, would only become unpopular when men realised that -it was an outward and visible sign of their Emperor’s inclusion of the -Nazarene sect in his grand reunion of churches. - -Much has been said by persons, whose business it was to find causes of -complaint, against the foolish and blasphemous proposal of the marriage -for his God. To our modern notions it was a scheme quite unworthy of the -great work the Emperor was inaugurating. In the third century modern -notions of religion were as yet unborn. There was at the time many a -divine pair, both in Rome and in the provinces, who attracted attention. -The proposal was, therefore, neither unusual nor sacrilegious. It was -certainly inadvisable to subordinate the chief cult of Rome in the -drastic fashion which Antonine employed, and the Emperor paid for his -temerity; but when he proposed Urania as consort, no one objected, and it -was only the return of the Vestal to connubial felicity that re-aroused -the annoyance which his compliance with Roman sentiment had pacified. The -idea of matrimony amongst the Gods was quite usual, so much so, that -the expressions of the biographers betray wilful ignorance, not only of -contemporary religion, but also of the Emperor’s scheme and purpose. - -Concerning the magnificence of the worship all authorities tell us -something, and from them we can gather that, accustomed as the Romans -were to a severe and simple ritual, the Syrian worship, whether on -the Palatine or in the temple at Jerusalem, was a thing for fools to -gaze at and wise men to scorn. A few grains of incense, a few drops of -wine in libation, a perfect pentameter verse, and the dignified Roman -passed on. Here there was one long succession of butchery, hecatombs of -oxen, and runlets of the finest wines, which, together with clouds of -incense, served to increase the feeling of nausea caused by the smell -of the victims. Nor was this all. Round and round the countless altars -the wonderful painted boy, in whose eyes fanaticism and mystery glowed, -led men and women through the latest and most approved terpsichorean -measures, to the accompaniment of a band whose noise recalls that of -Nebuchadnezzar; if there be any truth in either record, as we have it. -The psalms and hymns which formed part of the worship were equally -unusual in the city of the Caesars; their only place was in the Eastern -religions which gave them birth, because such a display of barbaric -worship had long been superseded amongst the intellectual and progressive -peoples of the West. Such useless waste of life, such prodigality of -movement, music, and colour, was but little in accord with the Western -philosophy of religion, and it was with a sigh for his sanity that wise -men escaped from the orgy in which their Emperor was taking chief part. - -It was all so freakish that men might have looked and listened quietly, -if the High Priest—in accordance with his scheme of reform—had not -desired the assistance of his great officers of state; naturally, these -men objected all the more strongly because they were perforce to profess -interest in their new duties, and joyfully spread disaffection, once they -were amongst the conspirators and out of the Emperor’s hearing. - -Lampridius’ legend of Antonine’s human sacrifices must be dealt with as -another calumny. He says that the Emperor used to sacrifice young boys of -the best families, preferring those whose parents were alive, and, being -present, would be most grieved at the deed. In this case the refutation -is scarcely needed, since the author asserts that such was the custom -of the Syrian worship, whereas it is now certain that Rome had caused -the cessation of human sacrifices long before the second century amongst -all Semitic peoples. It is in all probability the same legend which was -attached to the early Christian mysteries, and with even less reason, for -while the Christian worship was in secret, and so might lend itself to -the supposition of nefarious practices, that of the Sun God was public -and blatantly open before the world, following a well-known and approved -ritual. - -No, Antonine may have been mad, but there was a certain method in his -madness, and this form of lunacy would only have alienated the very -people he was striving so hard to win. It was in the method he failed, -not in the conception, for monotheism was continually gaining ground; -Paganism was obviously falling asleep quite gently; Isis was giving way -to Mary, apotheosis to canonisation, and saints succeeding divinities. -Antonine, with the true Eastern conception of religion, strove to impress -men with his vivid monotheism by means of the magnificence of the -worship, the prodigal expenditure of a gorgeous pageant. This he gave the -world right royally, but it was precisely this that the austere Roman -could not understand was meant to be connected with the simple philosophy -of his Western religion. Antonine thought to make his God great by means -of a pompous show. He succeeded in presenting him as a low comedian in -the last act of a puerile melodrama; unfortunately not the first, or -last, deity who has been thus presented before the eyes of an astonished -world. - -It had long been a Roman custom to commemorate the greatest of her -victories by the erection of gigantic columns in the forums of the city; -Antonine proposed to build the most magnificent that had yet greeted -human eyes. It was to be a memorial to the triumph of the Lord over the -deities of chance and circumstance. Its summit, which he designed should -be reached by a stairway inside, was to support the great meteorite. -Death intervened to spoil the plan and to deprive Rome of a monument -surpassing in grandeur any that the city should ever see. Such were -the methods by which the boy strove to win acceptance for Elagabal, and -through him for the great monotheistic principle in religion. It must be -clearly understood that the religion of Emesa was in no sense idolatrous. -It is true that the city possessed a huge black meteorite, which it -venerated exceedingly, because it was a portion of the being of its God. -In shape, we are told, it was a Phallus, and as such was the symbol of -fecund life, typifying the great force of light, joy, and fruitfulness, -which men regarded as the be-all and end-all of their existence. - -Of this theory in religion Marcus Aurelius Antoninus was high priest -and chief exponent, and even his boy’s mind could see the superiority -of life to death, of the supreme beneficent being to the lesser deities -who oppressed other peoples. Certainly he was so impressed, and resolved -to spread that worship and knowledge by means of the vast power which -resided in his childish hands from the year of grace 218. - -Little, when the young Emperor undertook the task of unifying churches, -could he have imagined the magnitude of the task, or the reason of -the opposition. As we have said, this opposition came from the fact -that an entirely different system of religion held sway. To-day we -would call the Roman system natural religion and Antonine’s conception -dogmatic truth. He ascribed too much to his God, which is no uncommon -failing amongst the credulous; probably he claimed a revelation from -on high, and was inclined to consign those who disagreed with him to -that special limbo which the ignorant have reserved for all those who -make them look foolish, for all that spells truth contrary to their own -limited imaginings; if so, he would not have been unusual. The genius -of natural religion is that it is comprehensive, tolerant, righteous -and just. It has no dogma save the individual experience of each. The -genius of dogmatic religion lies in the assumption to itself of absolute -exclusiveness; it alone contains truth, and in its later editions, -finality as well. Whether Antonine’s form included this latter pretension -we do not know, certainly it claimed what no Roman thinker could accord -to any faith under the sun—the proposition that God was one and God was -supreme. The Roman had been bred on Pyrrho, Epicurus, Lucretius, and -Cicero, and was more inclined to postulate that God was the cosmic entity -of spirit, something as potent as, if not analogous to, the entity of -electricity in modern science. He had no relations with the older deities -who had made life terrible by their persecutions of the human race, and -had no desire to submit himself again to a system which would erect -fright into yet another national deity. He had long since grown weary -of trying to propitiate infinity, and now understood that he might as -well sacrifice to the animals in the Zoological Gardens, in the hope of -staying their hunger, as make oblation to the deities in the expectation -of a return in kind. - -This was no new struggle that Antonine proposed to inaugurate in the city -of Rome. It is the contest between rationalism and dogma when pushed -to its logical conclusion. Doubtless there is much to be said on both -sides; certainly much has been written and more has been said during -the history of civilisation. The rationalists have set it forth as the -struggle between ignorance and reason; the dogmatists as that between -good and evil; certainly it was not a struggle on which Antonine was -either old enough or wise enough to lay down any definite line of truth -for the future guidance of the world. Unfortunately, this was just what -he attempted to do. He knew that the national deity of every nation under -heaven was fright, and forgot that its antithesis was truth. He knew that -fright was bound to predominate; that men would continue to pay their -worship as they paid their taxes, lest a worse thing should happen to -them. It had been the same in Homer’s day. Men had been brought up to -fright, and as one God died they demanded another. The Prophets had given -men Gods, laughing the while at the divinities they created, because -they believed as little in the sacerdotal fables as Tennyson did in the -phantom idylls of Arthurian romance. - -The point is, that what the mass of men demand they will get. It is the -usual law of supply and demand, where the man who can increase the demand -and satisfy it to any extent is the successful founder of a new religion. -This is undoubtedly the business of the sacerdotal caste in every -generation, and their success is assured as long as they are capable -of increasing the supply, while they whet the demand. They fail when -some one else appeals to popular imagination as more mysterious, or more -spiritual. - -Now, Antonine seemed to think that mere dictation of what was to himself -obvious should be enough to give his God a start, and, that done, all men -would discover the vital attraction for themselves. Perhaps he was right; -stranger things had happened before his day, and were to happen not long -afterwards; we can never know, as the system had no more time for a fair -trial than had that of Constantine’s successor Julian. - -For the moment Rome was bored with all Gods; they had found them so -cruel, vindictive, and malignant that the citizens had got irritated and -sceptical, had left their deities feeling that already for too long time -had blood and treasure been spent without avail. Now at last, men said, -“dread has vanished and in its place is the ideal.” Evemerus had asserted -that the Gods were just ordinary bullies who would cringe if men stood up -to them, and even the lower classes had agreed with him. - -This, Antonine felt, was a deplorable state of affairs—rank atheism if -not something worse. He knew the potency of his God, and desired, by -gentle means, to set it forth to others that they too might believe. -Unfortunately, no one desired belief, and he had to fight against -rationalism as well as convention. The Romans were not yet tired of their -chase after impossible delights; when they were, another dogma presented -itself, and as often as not it was accepted, as being the line of least -resistance. - -If Antonine had given them what Julian did, his success would have been -assured. Such was philosophy, freedom, and beauty under the guise of -a God whose existence he admitted, but whose intervention he denied. -Antonine was not Julian; he was an Eastern monotheist, far nearer to the -worship and doctrines of Jehovah than to those of any Western mode of -thought. He could not understand the deification of attributes, because -he wanted something more tangible, real, and superstitious, something -that appealed to his neurotic nature and erotic passions. - -Thus it is that his vain efforts to unite all worship, all religions in -that dedicated to Deus Solus are derided, as well by the monotheistic -Hebrew as by the tritheistic Christian. His fault lay in the fact that -he was too young for the work, too unaccustomed to the circuitous and -mole-like burrowings by which a religion captures society. But the scheme -in itself showed purpose and a precocious propensity for the mysterious, -unnatural and unhealthy in a child of his age. - -Had Antonine been born in the twentieth instead of the third century -of this era, had he enjoyed the advantages of a modern education, he -would have learned that religion and unusual propensities are the last -things a gentleman is expected to parade before the world. Further, he -would have certainly emerged from the training—which though drastic -is certainly most salutary—with his waywardness curbed, his mind and -will strengthened, his lithe and graceful body healthy and fit to bear -the fatigues and responsibilities which life was going to lay upon his -splendid shoulders. Unfortunately for him, he was a Syrian with wonderful -eyes and a mystical temperament, and was born at a time when the -monarch’s wayward will was a law unto himself and all the world besides; -yet despite these drawbacks, with so many of the elements of success to -hand, he might have triumphed, if the usual conspirators had not been at -work. “Rome was still mistress of the world though she was growing very -old. A few more years and the Earth’s new children fell upon her; then -the universe was startled by the uproar of her agony. Then and not till -then, where the thunderbolt had gleamed did the emaciated figure of the -crucifix appear, and upon the shoulders of a prelate descended the purple -which had dazzled the world.” - - - - -BIBLIOGRAPHY - - -ACCURSIUS (BONUS). Vitae Caesarum. 1475. - -ARNOLD (W. T.). Roman Provincial Administration. Oxford, 1906. - -AUDOLLENT (A.). - - 1. Carthage romaine. 1901. École française à Athènes. - - 2. Mission épigraphique en Algérie. 1890. École française à - Rome. - -AURELIUS VICTOR. - - 1. Historia Romana. 1819. - - 2. De vita et moribus imperatorum Romanorum, 1533. - - 3. Breviarium. Antwerp, 1579. - - -BAUMEISTER (A.). Denkmäler des klassischen Altertums. München and -Leipzig, 1884. - -BAYLE (P.). Dictionnaire historique et critique. Paris, 1820. - -BEAUMANOIR (JEAN DE). Variétés historiques et littéraires. (Reprint) 1855. - -BECKER (U.). Observationes in S.H.A.[60] Breslau, 1838. - -BERNHARDY (G.). - - Proemii de S.H.A. Halle, 1845-6. - - Bibliotheca scrip. Lat. Halle, 1838-47. - -BERNOUILLI (J. J.). Römische Iconographie. Stuttgart, 1882-94. - -Bibliothèque des Écoles françaises d’Athènes et de Rome. Paris, 1877. - -BINET SANGLÉ. Bibliothèque de l’École de Psychologie. Paris, 1905. - -BLOCH (IWAN). Sexual Life of our Times. Rebman and Sons, 1910. - -BLOUNT (CHAS.). Two first Books of Philostratus’ Life of Apollonius of -Tyana. London, 1680. - -BOEHME. Dexippi fragmenta. Leipzig, 1882. - -BOISSIER (GASTON). - - 1. L’Opposition sous les Césars. Paris, 1905. - - 2. La Religion romaine d’Augustus aux Antonins. Paris, 1874. - - 3. La Fin du paganisme. Paris, 1891. - - 4. L’Afrique romaine. Paris, 1909. - -BORGHESI (Count BARTOLOMMEO). Œuvres. Paris, 1862-97. - -BOUCHÉ LECLERCQ (AUG.). - - Les Pontifes de l’ancienne Rome. Paris, 1871. - - Manuel des institutions romaines. Paris, 1886. - - Leçons d’histoire romaine, République et Empire. Paris, 1909. - -BOXHORN (M. Z.). Historiae Augustae scriptores. Leyden, 1632. - -BROCKS (EMIL). - - Studien zu den S.H.A. Marienwerder, 1877. - - De quattuor prioribus S.H.A. Koenigsberg, 1869. - -Bulletin de l’École française à Athènes. Athens, 1868. - -Bulletin de correspondance hellénique. Athens and Paris, 1877, etc. - -BURTON BROWN (E.). Recent Excavations in the Roman Forum. 1904. - -BURY (Prof. J. B.). - - Gibbon’s Decline and Fall. 1909. - - Constitution of Later Empire. 1910. - - History of Later Roman Empire. 1889. - -BUSSELL (F. W.). - - Marcus Aurelius and the later Stoics. 1910. - - The Roman Empire. London, 1910. - -BUTLER (O. F.). Heliogabalus. 1908. University of Michigan Studies. - - -CAGNAT (RENÉ). - - L’Armée romaine d’Afrique. Paris, 1892. - - Inscrip. Africae Proc. Lat. Eds. R. Cagnat et J. Schmidt. Soc. - Reg. Sci. Berlin, 1891. - -CALLEGARI (E.). Quando abbia cominciato a regnare Alexandro Severo? 1876. - -CARPENTER (EDWARD). - - Ioläus. 1902. - - Love’s Coming of Age. 1906. - - Prisons, Police, and Punishment. 1905. - - Die homogene Liebe, etc. Leipzig, 1895. - -CASAUBON (ISAAC). Hist. Aug. Script, vi. 1603. - -CEULENEER (ADOLPHE DE). La Vie et règne de Septime Sévère. Liège, 1884. - -CLINTON (H. F.). Fasti Romani. Oxford, 1845-50. - -COHEN (HENRY). Description historique des monnaies frappées sous l’empire -romaine. Paris, 1884. - -Consularia Constantinopolitana. Monumenta Germ. Hist., Chronica minora, -vol. ix. Berlin, 1892. - -CONYBEARE (F. C.). Myth, Magic, and Morals. London, 1910. - -Corpus Inscriptionum Latinorum, vol. viii. - -COULANGES (FUSTEL DE). - - La Cité antique. Strasbourg, 1864. - - Histoire des insts. politiques de l’ancienne France. Paris, - 1875. - -CUMONT (F.). - - 1. The Mysteries of Mithra. 1903. - - 2. Les Religions orientales dans le paganisme romain. - (Conférences), 1906. - - 3. Textes et monuments figurés relatifs aux mystères de Mithra. - 2 vols. Brux, 1899, 96. - -CZWALINA (C.). De fide atque auctoritate epistularum auctorumque quae a -S.H.A. proferuntur. Bonn, 1870. - - -DAENDLIKER (KARL). Die drei letzten Bücher Herodians. Buedinger -Untersuch. vol. iii. Leipzig, 1870. - -DAREMBERG ET SAGLIO. Dictionnaire des antiquités grecques et romaines. -Paris, 1873 and fol. - -DESSAU (HERMANN). - - 1. Über die S.H.A. Hermes, vol. xxvii., 1892. - - 2. Prosopographia, Imper. Rom. vol. ii. Berlin, 1899, etc. - - 3. Die Überlieferung der S.H.A. Hermes, vol. xxix., 1894. - - 4. Über Zeit und Persönlichkeit der S.H.A. Hermes, vol. xxiv., - 1889. - -DIEUDONNÉ (A.). Revue numismatique. Paris. - -DILL (Sir SAMUEL). - - 1. Roman Society from Nero to Marcus Aurelius. London, 1904. - - 2. Roman Society in the Last Century of the Western Empire. - London, 1898. - -DION CASSIUS. History of Rome. Teubner Classics. 1863. - -DIRKSEN (H. E.). - - 1. Die S.H.A. Leipzig, 1842. - - 2. Über Verfügungen der röm. Kaiser. Kön. Pr. Ak. Abhdl. 1846. - -DOMASZEWSKI (ALFRED VON). - - 1. Geschichte der römischen Kaiser. Leipzig, 1909. - - 2. Abhandlungen zur römischen Religion. Leipzig and Berlin, - 1909. - - 3. Die Rangordnung des römischen Heeres. Bonner Jahrbuch, vol. - cxvii., 1898. - - 4. Religion des römischen Heeres. Trier, 1895. - -DRAKE. Studies in the S.H.A. American Journal of Philology. 1899. - -DREINHOEFER (A.). De fontibus et auctoribus vitarum quae feruntur -Spartiani, etc. Halle, 1875. - -DURUY (VICTOR). - - 1. Histoire universelle. 1846. - - 2. Histoire des Romains. 1879. - -DUVIQUET (GEORGES). Héliogabale. Paris, 1903. - - -ECHKEL (J. H. VON). Doctrina num. vet. vol. vii. Vienna, 1797. - -EGBERT (J. C.). Introduction to the Study of Latin Inscriptions. New -York, 1896. - -ELLIS (Professor ROBINSON). - - 1. Correspondence of Fronto and M. Aurelius. London, 1904. - - 2. Hermathena, vols. xiii. and xiv. Dublin, 1905-6. - -ENMANN (A.). Eine verlorene Geschichte der röm. Kaiser. Philologus, -Supplt. vol. ix. 1901. - -EUSEBIUS. Ecclesiastical History. Introduction by W. Bright. Oxford, -1872. - -EUSSNER (Dr. A.). Bericht über die neueste Literatur zu den römischen -Historikern bis zum Schluss des Jahres 1877. Jahresbericht Forch. Class. -Alt. vol. xxii. 1882. - -EUTROPIUS (F.). Breviarium ab urbe condita. (Teubner Classics.) Leipzig, -1887. - - -FERRERO (G.). - - 1. The Greatness and Decline of Rome. London, 1907. - - 2. Characters and Events of Roman History from Caesar to Nero. - London, 1909. - -FOREL (A.). - - 1. The Sexual Question. New York, 1908. - - 2. Sexual Ethics. London, 1908. - -FORQUET DE DORNE (C.). Les Césars africains et syriens, et l’anarchie -militaire. Angers, 1905. - -FOSTER (H. B.). Dion Cassius. Troy, New York, 1905. - -FRAZER (J. G.). - - 1. Adonis, Attis, Osiris. London, 1907. - - 2. Totemism and Exogamy. London, 1910. - -FRIEDLÄNDER (LUDWIG). Darstellung aus der Sittengeschichte Roms. Leipzig, -1888-90 and 1910. - -FROELICH (FRANZ). Die Mode im alten Rom. 1884. - - -GEMOLL (ALBRECHT). - - 1. Die S.H.A.I. Leipzig, 1886. - - 2. Spicilegium criticum in S.H.A. Wohlau, 1876. - -GIAMBELLI (CARLO). Gli Scrittori della Storia Augusta. Rome, 1881. - -GINZEL (F. K.). Spezieller Kanon der Sonnen- und Mondfinsternisse für das -Ländergebiet der klassischen Altertumswissenschaften. Berlin, 1899. - -GLOVER (T. R.). - - 1. Conflict of Religions under the Early Roman Empire. London, - 1909. - - 2. Studies in the Fourth Century. Cambridge, 1901. - -GOURMONT (REMY DE). Introduction to Duviquet’s Héliogabale. Paris, 1903. - -GROEBE (P.). - - 1. Pauly-Wissowa, R.E. vol. ii., article on Alexander Severus. - - 2. Die Obstruktion im röm. Senat. Beiträge zur alten - Geschichte, vol. v. 1905. - -GULICH (L. H.). The Efficient Life. New York, 1907. - - -HABEL (PAUL). De pont. Rom. inde ab Augusto usque ad Aurelium. Vrat., -1888. - -HALL (Dr. G. STANLEY). Psychology of Adolescence. New York, 1904. - -HAUPT (H.). Dio Cassius. Philologus, vol. xliv. - -HAVELOCK-ELLIS (H.). Sexual Psychology. 1897 and 1899. - -HAVERFIELD (F. J.). Translation of Mommsen’s Provinces of Rom. Emp. from -Caesar to Diocletian. 1909. - -HENZEN (G.). - - 1. Acta fratrum Arvalium quae supersunt. 1874. - - 2. Inscriptions urbis Romae Latinae. Henzen and De Rossi, Soc. - Reg. Sci. Berlin, 1876-82. - - 3. Fasti consulares. Soc. Reg. Sci. Berlin, 1863. - -HERODIAN. Herodiani ab excessu Divi Marci libri octo. (Bekker rec., -Teubner Classics.) Leipzig, 1855. - -HERZOG (ERNST). Geschichte und System der römischen Staatsverfassung. -Leipzig, 1884. - -HEER (J. M.). Der historische Wert der Vita Commodi. Leipzig, 1901. And -in Philologus Supplt. vol. iv., 1883. - -HIERONYMUS. Letters and Select Works. Eds. Wace and Shaff. Oxford, 1893. - -HIRSCHFELD (H. O.). Die Rangtitel der röm. Kaiserzeit. Sitzungsber. der -Berlin. Acad. 1901. - -HIRSCHFELD (M.). Sappho und Sokrates. Leipzig, 1902. - -HITCHCOCK (A. W.). Psychology of Jesus. Boston, 1910. - -HOPKINS (R. V. N.). Life of Alexander Severus. Cambridge, 1889. - -HUELSEN (C.). - - 1. Die Ausgrabungen auf dem Forum Romanum. Mitt. Deutsch. - Inst., Röm. Abt., vols. xvi. and xvii. 1891-2. - - 2. Vierter Jahresbericht über neue Funde und Forschungen zur - Topographie der Stadt Rom. 1892-94. - -HYDATIUS. Migne, Pat. Lat. vol. li. col. 904. - - -Imperial Chronicle. Mommsen, Monumenta Germ. Hist., Chronica minora, vol. -ix. Berlin, 1892. - - -JASTROW (M.). The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria. 1898. - -JOHN OF ANTIOCH. Edition Mueller, Fragmenta Hist. Graec. 1841. - -JORDAN (H.). Die Resultate der Ausgrabungen auf dem Forum zu Rom. Hermes, -vol. vii., 1873. - -JORNANDES. Chronica Magistri Jordanis. Monumenta Germ. Hist. - -JULIANUS. Convivium. (Hertlein, Editor, Teubner Classics.) 1875. - - -KLEBS (ELIMAR). - - 1. Die Vita des Avidius Cassius. Rhein. Mus. vol. xliii., 1888. - - 2. Die Sammlung der S.H.A. Rhein. Mus. vols. xlv. and xlvii., - 1890-92. - - 3. Das dynastische Element in der Geschichtsschreibung der röm. - Kaiserzeit. Hist. Zeitschrift, N.F. vol. xxv., 1889. - -KOERTE (ALFRED). Kleinasiatische Studien. Mitt. der deutsch. Arch. Inst., -Athen Abt., vol. xiv., 1899. - -KORNEMANN (ERNST). - - 1. Kaiser Hadrian und der letzte grosse Historiker von Rom. - Leipzig, 1905. - - 2. De civibus Romanis in provinciis Imperii consistentibus. - 1892 (Berliner Studien). - - 3. Die neuste Limesforschung im Licht der röm. kai. - Grenzpolitik. Klio. Beiträge zur alten Geschichte, vol. vii., - 1907. - -KRAFFT-EBING (R. VON). Pyschopathia Sexualis. Stuttgart, 1886. - -KRAUSE (A.). De fontibus et auctoritate S.H.A. Neustettin, 1874. - -KREUTZER. De Herodian. rer. Rom. scriptore. 1881. - -KRÜGER (PAUL). Codex Justinianus. 1888. - - -LAMPRIDIUS (AE.). Vita Heliogabali (Edit. H. Peter, Teubner Classics). -Leipzig, 1884. - -LANCIANI (R. A.). - - 1. Pagan and Christian Rome. London, 1892. - - 2. Topographia di Roma antica. Rome, 1880. - -LÉCRIVAIN (C.). Études sur l’histoire Auguste. 1904. - -LEIGH (E. and H.). Choice Observations on the Roman Emperors. London, -1657. - -LESSING (C.). - - Studien zu den S.H.A. Berlin, 1889. - - Lexikon der S.H.A. Leipzig, 1901-6. - - -MARCELLINUS (AMMIANUS). Rerum gestarum libri qui supersunt (Edit. V. -Gardthausen, Teubner Classics). Leipzig, 1874. - -MAROLLES (M. DE). L’Histoire Auguste des six auteurs anciens. 1667. - -MARQUARDT (G.). Staatsverwaltung, 1887. - -MEAD (G. R. S.). Life of Apollonius of Tyana. London, 1901. - -MEDIOBARBUS (F.). Imperatorum Romanorum numismata. 1683. - -MILNE (J.). Hist. of Egypt under Roman Rule. 1898. - -MOLL (A.). Die conträre Sexualempfindung. Berlin, 1891. - -MOMMSEN (THEODOR). - - 1. Die S.H.A. Hermes, vol. xxv., 1860. - - 2. Röm. Staatsrecht. 1876, Bände 1-3. - - 3. Monumenta Germ. Hist., Chronica minora, vol. ix. Berlin, - 1892. - - 4. Römische Forschungen. Berlin, 1864-79. - - 5. Römische Geschichte. Berlin, 1856-57. - -MOULINES (G. DE). Les Écrivains de l’histoire Auguste. Paris, 1806. - -MOVERS (F. C.). Die Phoenizier, 2 vols. Bonn, 1841. - -MUCHE (EUGENIUS). De imperatore M. Aur. Sev. Alex. Vratislav., 1868. - -MUELLER (J. J.). Der Geschichtsschreiber Marius Maximus. Buedinger -Untersuch. vol. iii., Leipzig, 1870. - - -NIEBUHR (B. G.). - - 1. Rhein. Mus. für Philol. und Gesch. Bonn, 1827, etc. (Ed. - Niebuhr.) - - 2. Römische Geschichte. Jena, 1844-45. - -NIEHUES (BERNARD). - - 1. De Aelio Cordo rerum Augustarum scriptore commentatio. - Muenster in Westfalen, 1885. - - 2. De Vulcacii Gallicani vita Avidii Cassii commentatio. - Muenster, 1885-86. - -Notizie degli scavi. 1885. - - -OBERDICK (J.). Die Römerfeindlichen Bewegungen im Orient. Berlin, 1869. - -OPPOLZER. Canon der Finsternisse. Kaiserliche Akademie der -Wissenschaften, Band 52. Wien, 1850. - -OROSIUS (PAULUS). Adversum Paganos libri VII. historiarum. Leipzig, 1889. -(Teubner Classics.) - - -PAGI (ANT.). Dissertatio hypatica. Lugduni, 1682. - -PASCIUCCO (GIAC.). Elagabalo. Feltre, 1905. - -PATER (WALTER H.). - - 1. Marius the Epicurean. London, 1885. - - 2. Greek Studies. London, 1895. - - 3. Miscellaneous Studies. London, 1895. - -PAUCKER (C. VON). De latinitate Scriptorum Historiae Augustae. Dorpat, -1872. - -PAULY-WISSOWA. Real-Encyclopädie. Stuttgart, 1894 fol. - -PETER (HERMANN). - - 1. Historia critica. Leipzig, 1860. - - 2. Die Scriptores Historiae Augustae in den Jahren von 1865-82. - Jahresbericht, Philologus, 1884. - - 3. Exercitationes criticae in S.H.A. Posen, 1863. - - 4. Die S.H.A.: sex literargeschichtliche Untersuchungen. - Leipzig, 1892. - - 5. Bericht über die Literatur zu den S.H.A. in dem Jahrzehnt - 1883-92. Jahresbericht F.C.A. vol. lxxiii., 1894. - - 6. Bericht über die litteratur zu den S.H.A. in den Jahren - 1893-1905. Jahresbericht F.C.A. vol. cxxx., 1907. - - 7. Berliner Wochenschrift für Philologie, vol. xxii., 1902, and - vol. xxv., 1905. - - 8. Historicorum Romanorum Fragmenta. (Teubner.) Leipzig, 1883. - -PETRONIUS ARBITER. - - Cena Trimalchionis. Lowe. 1905. - - Satyricon. Bohn. 1883. - -PHILOSTRATUS. Life of Apollonius. (Teubner Classics.) Leipzig, 1870. - -PIGNORIUS (LORENZ). Epistola L. Pignorii qua Paulum Romae patriae -adversus Bertrandum asserit. 1718. - -PLEW (J.). - - 1. Kritische Beiträge zu den Scriptores Historiae Augustae. - Strassburg, 1885. - - 2. Marius Maximus als direkte und indirekte Quelle der S.H.A. - Strassburg, 1878. - - 3. De diversitate auctorum Hist. Aug. Scrip. Koenigsberg, 1869. - -PREUNER (AUGUST). Hestia Vesta. Tübingen, 1864. - -Prosopographia Imp. Rom. Dessau and Klebs (Editors). Berlin, 1897. - - -RAMSAY (Sir WM. M.). Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia. Oxford, 1895. - -RENAN (J. E.). Marc-Aurèle et la fin du monde antique. Paris, 1882. - -REVILLE (J.). La Religion à Rome sous les Sévères. Paris, 1886. - -RICHTER (FR.). Über die VI. S.H.A. Rhein. Mus. vol. vii., 1850. - -RICHTER (OTTO LUDWIG). Topographia der Stadt Rom. 1901. - -ROSCHER (W. H.). Ausführliches Lexikon der griechischen und römischen -Mythologie. Leipzig, 1884, etc. - -RUBENSOHN (M.). Zur Chronologie des Kaisers Alexander Severus und ihrer -literarischen Überlieferung. Hermes, vol. xxv., 1890. - -RUEBEL (C.). De fontibus quatuor priorum S.H.A. Bonn, 1873 (Diss.). - -RUFUS (SEXTUS). Opera. Bibliothèque Latine-Française. Paris, 1843. - - -SALTUS (E. E.). - - 1. Imperial Purple. London, 1906. - - 2. The Anatomy of Negation. London, 1886. - - 3. Historia Amoris. London, 1906. - -SAUMAISE (C.). Historiae Augustae Scriptores. Paris, 1620. - -SCHILLER (H.). Geschichte der römische Kaiserzeit. Gotha, 1883-87. - -SCHULZ (OTTO). - - 1. Beiträge zur Kritik unserer literarischen Überlieferung für - die Zeit von Commodus’ Sturze bis auf den Tod Caracalla’s. - Leipzig, 1903. - - 2. Leben des Kaisers Hadrian. Leipzig, 1904. - - 3. Kaiserhaus der Antonin. Leipzig, 1907. - -SERVIEZ (ROERGAS DE). Les Impératrices romaines. Paris, 1728. - -SEYFFERT (O). Dictionary of Classical Antiquities. London, 1902. - -SEECK (O.). - - 1. Die Entstehungszeit der S.H.A. Neue Jahrbücher Phil. und - Päd. vol. cxli., 1890. - - 2. Zur Echtheitsfrage der S.H.A. Rhein. Mus. vol. xlix., 1894. - -SMITH (W. ROBERTSON). Religion of the Semites. 1889-94. - -SMITS. De Heliogabalo et Alexandro Severo. Amsterdam, 1902. - -SPON (J.). Recherches curieuses d’antiquité. Lyon, 1683. - -STOBBE (J. E. O.). Tribunat der Kaiser. Philol. vol. xxxii., 1873. - -STRABO. Geographica. (Ed. A. Meineke, Teubner Classics.) Leipzig, 1852. - -STUDNICZKA (F. J.). Mitt. Deutsch. Arch. Inst., Röm. Abt., vol. xvi. - -SUETONIUS TRANQUILLUS. Quae supersunt omnia. (Ed. C. L. Roth, Teubner -Classics.) Leipzig, 1908. - -SYMONDS (J. A.). - - 1. Sketches in Italy and Greece. London, 1874. - - 2. Studies of Greek Poets. London, 1893. - - 3. A Problem in Greek Ethics. 1901. Privately Printed. - - 4. Essays Speculative and Suggestive. London, 1907. - - 5. In the Key of Blue. London, 1893. - - -TEUFFEL UND SCHWABE. History of Roman Literature. London, 1900. - -TRISTAN (JEAN), Sieur de St. Amant. Commentaires historiques contenants -l’histoire générale des Empereurs et Impératrices de l’Empire romain. -Paris, 1644. - -TROPEA (GIAC.). Studi sugli S.H.A. Messina, 1899. - -TURRE. Dissertatio apologetica de annis imperii Marci Aurelii Antonini -Elagabali. Patav., 1713. - - -VALERIUS MAXIMUS. Opera. (Ed. C. Kempf, Teubner Classics.) Leipzig, 1888. - -VALSECCHIUS. Dissertatio historica chronologica de Marci Aurelii Antonini -Elagabali tribunitia potestate. Florence, 1711. - - -WAHLE (F. J.). De imperatore Alexandra Severo quaestiones hist. 1867. - -WEININGER (OTTO). Sex and Character. London, 1906. - -WHITTAKER (THOS.). Apollonius of Tyana and other Essays. London, 1906. - -WIRTH (ALBRECHT). Quaestiones Severianae. Leipzig, 1888. - -WOELFFLIN (EDUARD). - - 1. Die S.H.A. 1892. - - 2. Sitzungsberichte der philos.-philol. Klasse der K. Bayer. - Akad. 1891. - -WOTTON (W.). Roman History. London, 1701. - - -ZIEDLER. Universal Lexicon. Leipzig and Halle, 1740. - -ZONARAS. - - 1. Epitome historiarum. (Teubner Classics.) 1868. - - 2. Annales. (Ed. M. Pinderi.) Bonn, 1841-97. - -ZOSIMUS. Ex recognitione I. Bekkeri. Bonn, 1837. - - - - -FOOTNOTES - - -[1] _Die S.H.A. Sechs litterar-geschichtliche Untersuchungen_, Leipzig, -1892. - -[2] See Peter, _Hist. Crit._ cap. ii.; Bernhardy, _Proemii de S.H.A._ - -[3] _Observationum S.H.A._, Breslau, 1838. - -[4] _Andeutungen zur Texteskritik_, 1842. - -[5] Czwalina, _De epistularum auctorumque quae a S.H.A. proferuntur_, -Bonn, 1870. - -[6] “Über die S.H.A.,” _Rhein. Mus._ vol. vii. - -[7] Peter, _Hist. Crit. S.H.A._, Leipzig, 1860. - -[8] Peter, _Jahresbericht_, 1865-82, “S.H.A.” - -[9] _Ibid._ - -[10] “Der Geschichtschreiber Marius Maximus,” _Untersuch._ vol. iii., -Leipzig, 1870. - -[11] Ruebel, _De fontibus quatuor priorum S.H.A._, Bonn, 1872; -Dreinhoefer, _De auctoribus vitarum quae feruntur Spartiani_, etc., -Halle, 1873; Plew, _Marius Maximus, als direkt und indirekt Quelle der -S.H.A._, 1873. - -[12] _De Aelio Cordo rerum Augustarum scriptore commentatio_, Muenster, -1885. - -[13] Haupt, _Philologus_, xliv. 575. - -[14] Dio, lxxx. 1. - -[15] _Gli Scrittori della Storia Augusta_, 1881. - -[16] _De Herodiano rer. Rom. scriptore_, 1881. - -[17] Giambelli and Plew, _opp. citt._ - -[18] _Op. cit._ p. 82. - -[19] _Marius Maximus als direkt und indirekt Quelle der S.H.A._, -Strassburg, 1878. - -[20] Boehme, _Dexippi fragmenta_, 1882, pp. 10-11. - -[21] _Die S.H.A._, pp. 49, 102. - -[22] _De epistularum auctorumque quae a S.H.A. proferuntur_, Bonn, 1870. - -[23] “Die ‘Vita’ des Avidius Cassius,” _Rhein. Mus._ vol. xliii., 1888. - -[24] Dessau, “Über Zeit und Persönlichkeit der S.H.A.,” _Hermes_, xxiv. -337-92, 1899. - -[25] “Die S.H.A.,” _Hermes_, xxv. 228-92. - -[26] “Die Entstehungszeit der S.H.A.” _Neue Jahrbuch Phil._ vol. cxli. - -[27] “Die Sammlung der S.H.A.,” _Rhein. Mus._ vol. xlv. - -[28] Seeck, _op. cit._ - -[29] _Carinus_, xviii. 3. - -[30] T. Pollio, _Trig. Tyr._ v. 3, etc. - -[31] Klebs, “Die Sammlung der S.H.A.,” _Rhein. Mus._, vol. xlv., 1890. - -[32] _Ibid._ vol. xlvii. - -[33] “Die S.H.A.,” _Sitzungsber. der philos.-philol. Klasse der Bayer. -Akad._, 1891. - -[34] _Op. cit._ p. 479. - -[35] “Über die S.H.A.,” _Hermes_, vol. xxvii., 1892. - -[36] “Zur Echtheitsfrage der S.H.A.,” _Rhein. Mus._ vol. 49. - -[37] “Studies in S.H.A.,” _Amer. Journ. Phil._ vol. xx., Baltimore, 1899. - -[38] _Der historische Wert der_ Vita Commodi. - -[39] _Beiträge zur Kritik der Überlieferung der Zeit von Commodus zu -Caracalla_, 1903. - -[40] _Leben des Kaisers Hadrian_, Leipzig. - -[41] _Kaiserhaus der Antonin_, Leipzig. - -[42] _Kaiser Hadrian und der letzte grosse Historiker von Rom_, 1905. - -[43] Quoting Diadumenianus, ix. 2. - -[44] _Op. cit._ pp. 145 ff. - -[45] _Berlin. phil. Wochenschriften_, xxii. p. 489, xxv. p. 1471. - -[46] _Studi sugli S.H.A._, Messina, 1899. - -[47] _Elagabalo_, Feltre, 1905. - -[48] _Études sur hist. Aug., 1904_, Paris. - -[49] _Vide_ cap. vi. _Vita Alex. Sev._ - -[50] _Life of Gibbon._ - -[51] _Les Empereurs syriens._ - -[52] _De M.A.A.E. trib. pot._, Florence, 1711. - -[53] Bishop of Adria. - -[54] Tristran Sieur de St-Amant, _Commentaires historiques_, Paris, 1635. - -[55] C. Saumaise, _S.H.A._ vi., _Notae et emendationes_, Paris, 1620. - -[56] _Vide_ Suetonius, _Lives of the Emperors_. - -[57] As Tiberius, “Principes mortales, rem publicam aeternam esse” -(_Ann._ iii. 6). - -[58] The change of the name to its Greek and commonly received form is -100 years later than Elagabalus, in fact it occurs first in Lampridius, -and was seemingly born of the necessity, which had been suggested to -Constantine, of connecting the old worship of the only God with that of -Mithra the Persian Sun deity. - -[59] The number of years in the _Liber generationis_ is, however, -debatable, since Rubensohn gives three years in his edition. - -[60] S.H.A. = Scriptores Historiae Augustae. - - - - -INDEX - - - Aegae in Cilicia, Macrinus retires to, 73 - - Aemilian Bridge, Antonine’s body thrown from, 169, 189 - - Aeneas, 129 - - Aesculapius, 258 - - African inscriptions erase _Severi Nepos_, 199 - - Agrippina, 121 - - Alexander of Macedon, his connection with Alexander Severus, 144 - - Alexander Severus, or Alexianus, 8, 14, 18, 22, 38, 40, 54, - 123; description and career to Antonine’s death, 136-72; not - priest of Elagabal, 174; liberality at his adoption, 189; - date of accession, 193; date of tribunicial renewal, 196; - substitutes his name for that of Antonine, 199; stupidity, 205; - abolishes mixed bathing, 245; on public feasts, 259 - - Alexandria, Bassianus’ legates badly received at, 57, 73 - - Ammianus Marcellinus, on the birthplace of Bassianus, 35 - - Annia Faustina, marriage with Antonine, 134; divorce mooted, - 150; divorced, 178; compared with Bathsheba, 221; her - genealogy, 222; age and position, 223; reasons against the - divorce, 224 - - Antinous and Hadrian, 231 - - Antioch, Origen goes to, 20; Macrinus at, 25, 41, 48; news of - rising reaches, 56; distance between Antioch to Emesa, 60; - coin of Diadumenianus, Emperor, 65; Macrinus retires to, 68; - Macrinus leaves for Rome, 72; Antonine arrives at, 77 - - Antiochianus, 154 - - Antoninus Pius, 5; first Roman coins of Emesa, 26 - - Antony, 26 - - Apamea, 26, 34, 63; Macrinus goes to, and declares - Diadumenianus Caesar at, 67; Antonine at, 139 - - Aphrodite-Adonis, compared with Elagabal-Urania, 175 - - Apicius, 253 - - Apollo and his loves, 234 - - Apollonius of Tyana, 31 - - Appia, Lex, 121 - - Aquilia Severa, matrimony with Emperor discussed, 130; duration - of marriage, 132; return to Emperor, 183; position discussed, - 189, 208, 211; appearance, 214; date of marriage, 216; date of - divorce, 218; returns as Empress, 224 - - Arca, Alexander’s birthplace, 144 - - Archelais, death-place of Macrinus, 74 - - Archimedes, 270 - - Aristomachus, the standard-bearer, 154 - - Aristotle, quoted, 85 - - Arnobius, on Phallic worship, 230 - - Arria Fadilla, grandmother of Annia Faustina, 222 - - Arrianus, Herodian, 9 - - Artabanus, 22, 43; Diadumenianus sent to, 72 - - Arvalium, Collegio Fratrum, meet to elect Elagabalus, 68; - temporizing policy, 81 - - “Assyrian, the,” Xiphilinus’ name for Antonine, 95 - - Attila, 244 - - Augustan Legion, absorbs 3rd Gallic Legion on account of this - latter’s revolt, 89 - - Augustus, 23, 26; compared with Antonine, 84; influence in - Rome, 104, 203 - - Aurelia Sabina, mother of Annia Faustina, 222 - - Aurelius Celsus, captor of Macrinus, 74 - - Aurelius Eubulus, Chancellor of Exchequer, 170 - - Aurelius Fabianus, 176 - - Avitus, Julius, husband of Julia Maesa, 32 - - - Barak compared with Gannys, 70 - - Barrachinus on Gens Cornelia, 205 - - Bassianus, Julius, 27 - - Bathsheba, compared with Annia Faustina, 221 - - Baumeister, on site of Eliogabalium, 113 - - Bayle, dictionary of, 31 - - Becker, 4 - - Belos, oracles, at Apamea, 26 - - Bertrand, on Gens Cornelia, 205 - - Bloch cited, 234 - - Boehme on Dexippus, 9 - - Boni, Commendatore, on Elagabal shrine, 132 - - Bonus Accursius, 4, 8 - - Borghese, 133 - - Borghese Collection, 209 - - Bylus, centre of worship of Aphrodite-Adonis, 175 - - Bithynia, Macrinus’ flight through, 73 - - Byzantium, 74 - - - Caecilius Aristo, Governor of Nicomedia, 73 - - Caesar, Julius, on divorce, 224; his sexual condition, 238 - - Caius Caligula, 23, 76, 186; prodigalities, 184; marriages, - 203; as a host, 236; his perfumes, 257 - - Capitolinus, 3, 101 - - Cappadocia, Macrinus flies through, 73 - - Caracalla, 5; birth of, 29; and Soaemias, 33-36; and Julia - Mamaea, 38; in Mesopotamia, 41; his murder, 43; soldiers - compare him with Macrinus, 47; Bassianus accepted as heir of, - 54; conquered cities, 61, 76, 77; Antonine promises Caracalla’s - privileges to soldiers, 84; baths of, finished, 129; his - paternity denied for Antonine and affirmed for Alexander, - 158; liberalities, 190; date of tribunicial renewal, 196; - Caracalla’s influence on morals, 203; Vestals, 214; uses - Pomponius Bassus, 219; his severity to his mother, 221; his - system of informers not re-established, 243; introduces Persian - tiara, 249 - - Casaubon, 4 - - Cassius, Avidius, 10 - - Castinus, 90 - - Chalcedon, Macrinus taken at, 74 - - Charrae, 42 - - Cheyne quoted, 97 - - Christ, Pauline theories concerning, 19; and Apollonius, 31; - menaced by Antonine’s claim, 99, 114 - - Christian religion, persecuting tendencies, 1, 98; unpopular - in Rome, 118; amalgamated with that of Elagabal, 278; human - sacrifices, 280 - - Chronicle, Imperial, on length of reign, 13, 191 - - Cicero, 26, 213; on immortality, 224; on divorce, 283 - - Claudius Attalus, 90 - - Claudius Censor, dismissed from office, 179 - - Claudius, Emperor, 159, 178; compared with Macrinus, 76; and - Vestals, 214 - - Clement VII., 131 - - Clodius, 106 - - Cn. Claudius Severus, grandfather of Annia Faustina, 222 - - Cohen, 21, 61; on Antonine’s illness, 94; on the date of the - procession, 174; on number of liberalities, 190; on irregular - coins, 195 - - Commodus, 5, 26, 76, 159, 184, 229 - - Constantine, Emperor, orders life of Elagabalus, 3, 11; - reasons for this order, 17; and Christ, 114, 187; and the new - Monotheism, 214, 228; opposed by Mithras, 268; mentioned, 285 - - Constantius, 10 - - _Consularia Constantinopolitana_, 93 - - Cordus, Aelius Junius, 6 - - Cornelia, family discussed, 205 - - Cornificia family, ancestors of Annia Faustina, 222 - - Corpus Domini procession, compared with Elagabal procession, 176 - - Croce, Church of Sta., site of summer temple, 113 - - Cumont, 114; quoted, 133 - - Cybele, Antonine priest of, 117; identified with Urania, 133; - priests castrated, 238; Elagabalus ordained to this priesthood, - 276 - - Cyzicus, port of Nicomedia, 89 - - Czwalina, 4, 9 - - - Dacia, 104 - - David, compared with Antonine, 221; and Jonathan, 234 - - Deborah, 70 - - Dessau, attacks authenticity of Scriptores, 10; attacks - Wölfflin, 13 - - Dexippus, 9 - - Diana, identified with Urania, 133; the Laodicean statue of, 277 - - Digest xxix., 206 - - Diocletian, 12, 105 - - Dion Cassius, character of his work and his appointments, 7; - Maesa’s influence on, 8; quoted, 19, 27, 28, 31; on Sextus - Varius Marcellus, 33; on date of Bassianus’ birth, 35; on - Gessianus Marcianus, 38; on the date of the proclamation, 55; - on the journey to the camp, 56; on battle of Immae, 70; on - Antonine’s entry into Antioch, 77; on Antonine’s Consulate, - 82; on pretenders, 88; on length of reign, 107; on Antonine’s - character, 126; on duration of second marriage, 132; on - Urania’s dowry, 134; on Seius Carus, 139; on Antonine’s love - of Alexander, 142; on Alexander’s name, 144; on plot against - Alexander, 152; discrepancies with Lampridius’ stories, 155; - on Maesa’s hatred of Antonine, 157; on other plots to destroy - Alexander, 162; on Antonine’s murder, 166; eliminates Maesa - and Mamaea from the murder, 170; on date of murder, 191; on - duration of Aquilia’s marriage, 218; on executions, 220; on - Annia Faustina’s marriage, 221; on the nameless wives, 224; on - Hierocles, 238, 239 - - Dirksen, 4 - - Divorce considered, 204; mediaeval privilege, 210 - - Dodwell, 4 - - Domaszewski quoted, 34, 175 - - Domitian, 23, 76, 159, 178; and Vestals, 214; and feasts, 236 - - Drake, on Caracalla’s life, 13 - - Dreinhoefer, 6 - - Duruy, 21, 92; on Alexander Severus, 138 - - - Eckhel, 21, 26; on the number of Soaemia’s children, 34; - on date of Cornelia Paula’s divorce, 126; on number of - liberalities, 190; on the tribunicial renewal, 194; on Annia - Faustina’s genealogy, 222; on her age, 223 - - Egbert, on tribunicial renewals, 196 - - Elah-Gebal, monarchy, 25; Bassianus becomes High Priest of, 50; - portents of, 54; accompanies the Emperor, 91; occupies Temple - of Faustina on Mount Taurus, 92; his worship decreed to be - first, 100; position in Rome, 114; shrine in Forum, 132; second - marriage, 133; and Alexander’s adoption, 143; procession, 174; - return to Emesa, 174; analogy with use of name Jehovah, 185; - regarded as another Jupiter, 189, 273; amalgamation unpopular, - 275; worship not idolatrous, 287 - - Elephantis and Parrhasius, compared with Elagabalus, 228 - - Eliogabalium, site of, 92, 112; sacred fire taken to, 130; date - of completion, 174; relics taken to, 275, 276 - - Elizabeth, Queen, compared with Julia Pia, 31; her - ecclesiastical headship same as that of Emperor, 274 - - Ellis, Prof. Robinson, quoted, 276 - - Emesa, 25, 26, 100, 113, 231, 246; reputed birthplace of - Bassianus, 36; Maesa and family return to, 45-6; Julian’s - battle at, 60; the god returns to, 174 - - Epagathos, Diadumenianus entrusted to, 72 - - Epicurus, 283 - - Eribolus, Macrinus embarks from, 73 - - Eusebius, 20 - - Eutropius, 11, 19; on length of reign in Rome, 107, 192; on - entry into the city, 108 - - Eutychianus persuades the soldiers, 52; takes Bassianus to - the camp, 56; sends Julianus’ head to Apamea, 65; position in - State discussed, 80; compared with Gannys, 86; City Praefect, - 111; Consul, 129; City Praefect, second time, 133; Praetorian - Praefect, 169; spared from the murders, 171; epitome of - offices, 179; and Julius Paulus, 208 - - Evemerus quoted, 285 - - - Fabius Agrippinus, 90 - - Fabius Gurgis, 249 - - Fasti Romani (Clinton), on tribunicial renewal, 195 - - Faustina, 28 - - Flavian amphitheatre restored by Antonine, 128 - - Forel cited, 234 - - Forquet de Dorne, 21; on Macrinus, 48; on Gannys, 101; on - Antonine’s nature, 127 - - Friedländer, on distance of Macrinus’ flight, 73; on Senaculum, - 121 - - Froelich, 26 - - Fulvius Diogenianus, on Macrinus, 58; Praefect of Rome, 170 - - - Galatia, Macrinus flies through, 73 - - Galen, 31 - - Gallicanus, 3 - - Gallic Legion, 3rd, disloyal to Antonine and disbanded, 89 - - Gannys, 53; compared with Gideon, 70; compared with - Eutychianus, 86; murder of, 101; reasons for his death, 233 - - Gellius Maximus, a pretender, 89 - - Geta, 168, 196 - - Giambelli, on Dion Cassius, 8; on sources of Dion and Herodian, - 9 - - Gordius or Cordus, 125, 156; dismissed from office, 179 - - Gratus, Consul A.D. 221, 195 - - Groebe, on date of Antonine’s murder, 191 - - Gulick, on Christian tendencies, 242 - - - Hadrian, 5, 229; influence on morals, 203; and Antinous, 231; - abolishes mixed bathing, 245 - - Haupt, on Greek sources of Scriptores, 7 - - Hebrew religion, unpopularity of, 118; barbaric, 279 - - Heer, 6, 13; on Commodus, 15 - - Heliogabalus, Lampridius’ name for the Emperor, 185 - - Henzen, on the Arval Brothers, 68 - - Herakles, his friendships, 234 - - Hercules, inscription to, 175 - - Herod, kingship compared with that of Emesan dynasty, 26 - - Herodian, 6, 8, 19, 32, 42; on date of Bassianus’ birth, 35; - on the worship at Emesa, 50; on the journey to the camp, - 56; on the battle of Immae, 70; on Maesa’s position, 78; - on length of Antonine’s stay in Antioch, 91; Elagabalus’ - portrait sent to Senate, 99; on entry into the city, 110; on - Antonine’s character, 126; on duration of second marriage, - 132; on Urania’s dowry, 134; on corruption of the guards, - 135; on Alexander’s age, 142; on date of adoption, 145; does - not mention Antonine’s plot against Alexander, 152; on the - disowning of Alexander, 158; on Antonine’s murder, 166; on the - cortège to the camp, 170; on the liberalities, 176; on duration - of Aquilia’s marriage, 218; on Elagabalus’ pastimes, 247; on - his ostentation, 249 - - Hierocles, marriage with Elagabalus, 126, 203; dismissal - demanded and refused, 156; killed with Antonine, 170; origin - and character, 239 - - Homs or Hems, modern name of Emesa, 24 - - Horace, his atheism, 271 - - Huysmans, quoted, 257 - - Hyacinth and Apollo, 234 - - Hydatius, 93 - - Hylas and Herakles, 234 - - - Iamblichus, 26, 27 - - Iamblichus, the philosopher, on Phallicism, 230 - - Iambulus, 187 - - Immae or Emma, battle of, 69 - - Ishtar-Tammuz, parallel procession to that of Elagabal, 175 - - Isidore, 127 - - Isis, 2, 96; popularity in Rome, 117; gives way to Mary, 281 - - _Itinera Hierosolymitana_, 73 - - - Jehovah, compared with Baal, 50, 96; analogy with use of name - Elagabal, 185; character of worship, 213; amalgamated with - Elagabal, 277; akin to Elagabal, 286 - - Jerome, on Senaculum, 121 - - John of Antioch, 20 - - Jonathan and David, 234 - - Jordanis, 20 - - Julia Cornelia Paula, marriage with Antonine, 111; divorced, - 126, 129; history, 205; reasons for the marriage, 206; age, - 209; date of divorce, 209 - - Julia Domna Pia, 20, 27; married to Septimius Severus, 29; her - titles, 30; compared with Mamaea, 39, 40; Secretary of State, - 41; after Caracalla’s death, 43; her suicide, 45 - - Julianus, on birthplace of Bassianus, 35 - - Julianus, Emperor, 5; deposed by Pomponius Bassus, 219 - - Julianus, Ulpius, sent by Macrinus to Emesa, 58; defeat of, - 60-62 - - Julius Paulus, 21, 31, 111, 164; history, 205; and Eutychianus, - 208; banishment discussed, 209 - - Jupiter Capitolinus, to serve Elagabal, 97; Eliogabalium - reconsecrated to, 174; gives place to Mithra, 271 - - Juvenal, 106; on morals, 204 - - - Klebs, 10, 11 - - Kornemann, on lives from Hadrian to Alexander Severus, 6, 14 - - Krafft-Ebing, cited, 234 - - Kreutzer, on Herodian, 8 - - - Lactantius, cited, 230 - - Lambesa in Pannonia, 88 - - Lampridius, 3, 6, 16, 18, 19; on name “Varius,” 36; on - Soaemias, 78; on the period of fanaticism, 98; on the entry - into the city, 108; on Maesa and Soaemias in Senate, 119; on - Senaculum, 121; on Antonine’s neglect of state for religion, - 124; on Antonine’s infidelities, 126; on Alexander, 138; on - Alexander’s name, 144; on the reasons for Senate’s reticence, - 150; on plot against Alexander, 152; on Antonine’s danger, - 154; discrepancies, 155; on possible date of disowning, 159; - on Sabinus, Ulpian, and Silvinus, 163; reasons for Antonine’s - murder, 165; on unfit appointments, 179; on Antonine’s desire - for conquest, 185; on the Emperor’s name and history, 185; - on buildings erected, 186; on date of Alexander’s accession, - 192; on Antonine’s sagacity, 198; on Julius Paulus, 205; on - Antonine’s wives generally, 208; on Julius Paulus’ banishment, - 209; on Antonine’s use for wives, 215; on Antonine’s moods - when married to Annia, 223; impossibility of his stories, 227; - ascribes Elagabalus’ moderation to Maesa, 233; on his passion - for flowers, 236; on his castration, 238, 276; on Zoticus, 240; - on Elagabalus’ effeminacy, 241; on his fastidiousness, 248; on - his jewellery, 249; on cost of his feasts, 253; on his pranks, - 262; on his wanton waste, 265; condemns Antonine’s religion, - 267; on Diana’s statue, 277; on Elagabalus’ human sacrifices, - 280 - - Lanciani, concerning Julius Avitus’ house on Aesquiline, 32 - - Lécrivain, 16 - - Leptis Magna, birthplace of Septimius Severus, 27 - - _Liber Generationis_, on length of Antonine’s reign, 191 - - Ligorius, 199 - - Locusta, 159 - - Lollius Urbicus, confounded with Marius Maximus, 15, 19 - - Lucilla, reputed mother of Annia Faustina, 222 - - Lupus, nickname of Bassianus, 35 - - Lyons, birthplace of Caracalla, 29 - - - Macrinus, 6, 7, 17, 22, 32, 41, 43, 81, 112, 178; becomes - Emperor, 44; usurpation and fall, 46-76; date of tribunicial - renewal, 197 - - Maecenas, 203 - - Maesa, Julia, 7, 18, 27; comes to Rome, 31; her family, 33, 40; - returns to Emesa, 45-6; makes Bassianus high priest, 49; goes - to the camp, 56; compared with Deborah, 70; position in state, - 78; Augusta, 86; desires to go to Rome, 92; arranges Antonine’s - first marriage, 109; in Senate, 120; and Annia Faustina, 134; - starts Alexander plot, 138; her scheme, 141; partial failure of - plot, 147; hatred of Antonine, 157; has Alexander designated - Consul, 160; agreeable to Julia Paula’s divorce, 210; no friend - of Severa’s, 217; scheme for her divorce, 218; plan of alliance - with Roman nobility, 218; influence on government, 233; and - Elagabalus’ youth, 247 - - Mamaea, instigator of Antonine’s murder, 18; and Origen, 20; - position and character, 38, 40; helps in first plot, 131; and - Annia Faustina, 135; starts Alexander plot, 138; corrupts - police, 145; partial failure of plot, 147; Mamaea’s guardians - for Alexander, 152; part in the plot against Antonine’s life, - 156; takes precautions for Alexander’s safety, 159; part in - Antonine’s murder, 166; her probable plan for the murder, 171; - subsequent vilification of Antonine, 172; helps Pomponius - Bassus’ plot, 219 - - Marcia, first wife of Septimius Severus, 27, 29 - - Marcianus, Gessianus, 38 - - Marcomanni, Antonine’s desire to conquer, 184 - - Marcus Aurelius, 84, 144, 246; relationship with Annia - Faustina, 222 - - Marcus, Emperor, 5 - - Marius Maximus, author of _De vitis imperatorum_, 5; - credibility as a source, 6; confounded with Lollius Urbicus, - 15, 19; Macrinus’ correspondence with cited, 84; on Antonine’s - entry into city, 111 - - Martialis, the murderer of Caracalla, 42 - - Masculinus Valens, 176 - - Mediobarbus, on liberalities, 190, 251 - - Messalina, compared with Elagabalus, 240 - - Mithra, 2; the most determined opponent of Jehovah, 96; - popularity in Rome, 114, 117; identified with Urania, 133; and - with Elagabal worship, 268; takes the place of Jupiter, 271 - - Moguntiacum, 88 - - Moll, cited, 234 - - Mommsen, defends Scriptores, 10; on the date of Diadumenianus’ - elevation, 65; on length of Antonine’s reign, 192 - - Monza diploma, on Alexander’s position, 158 - - Morison, Cotter, cited, 20 - - Mueller, 5, 6, 8 - - Murissimus, 156 - - - Nero, 23, 76, 159, 178; influence on morals, 203; abnormal, - 229; palace described, 245; ever popular, 246; exceeded by - Elagabalus in extravagance, 250; his use of perfumes, 257 - - Nerva, 5 - - Nestor, Julianus, 90 - - Nicomedia, Antonine winters at, 93; length of stay discussed, - 94; Antonine assumes the name Elagabalus at, 99; Elagabalus’ - popularity disappears, 103; departure from, 107 - - Niebuhr, 20 - - Niehues, 6 - - - Oppolzer, on the date of the eclipse, 55 - - Orcus (Pluto), temple of, site of Eliogabalium, 113 - - Origen, his journey to Court, 19 - - Orosius, 20 - - Otho, 23, 250; compared with Elagabalus, 253 - - - Padua, a reputed birthplace of Gens Cornelia, 205 - - Paetus, Valerianus, 90 - - Pagi, on tribunicial renewal, 194 - - Palladium, removed to Eliogabalium, 118; history of, 129 - - Papia Poppoea, Lex, cited, 204 - - Papinian, 21, 31 - - Parthian campaign, 41, 107 - - Parthian Legion, at Apamea, 60; attempted corruption by Seius - Carus, 63, 139 - - Parthian medal, 22 - - Pasciucco, on Lampridius, 15 - - Pauly, on the buildings of the reign, 187; on genealogy of - Annia Faustina, 222; on her age, 223 - - Pertinax, 5, 30 - - Peter, Hermann, 3, 27; on Dexippus, 9; on Lollius Urbicus, 15 - - Petronius, on freedmen, 180; quoted, 230 - - Philostratus, 31 - - Pica Caerianus, 90 - - Pignorius, on Gens Cornelia, 205 - - Plautianus, 41 - - Plew, 6 - - Pliny, on value of myrrhin, 264 - - Pollio, Consul Suffectus, 85 - - Pollio, Trebellius, 3, 11 - - Pollux, 127 - - Pomponius Bassus, 134, 139, 188; plot in connection with - Aquilia Severa’s marriage, 131; Consul and Governor of Mysia, - his offices, 219; date of death, 221 - - Porta Praenestina, 113, 275 - - Praefecti Urbis, mooted by Antonine, appointed by Alexander, 198 - - Preuner, on Aquilia’s position, 211 - - Primus Cornelianus, 68 - - Procession of the God, probable date, 174; origin of, 175 - - Prosopographia, on date of Antonine’s murder, 191; on - jurisprudence of the reign, 205 - - Protogenes, 125 - - Prusias, 93 - - - Ramsay, on the procession, 175; on genealogy of Annia Faustina, - 222 - - Renaissance, compared with Roman spirit of atheism, 201, 270 - - Rescripts, bear Antonine’s name after supposed death, 199 - - Richter, 4 - - Roerth, on the journey across Asia, 93 - - Roman religion, described, 116; its civic nature and the - Emperor’s position, 213; genesis of, 269; alien to natural - religion, 282 - - Rubensohn, on date of Antonine’s murder, 191 - - Ruebel, 6 - - - Sabinus Aquilius, Severa’s father, banished, 163; confused by - Lampridius with Sabinus Tiberius, jurist, 164; position, 215 - - Sabinus, Fabius, brother of Aquilia Severa, 216 - - Salzer, on date of Antonine’s murder, 191 - - Samsigeramus, 26 - - Sardanapalus, Dion’s name for Antonine, 152, 200 - - Saumaise, 22 - - Schulz, 6, 15; on Antonine House, 16 - - Scythian Legion, quartered at Emesa under Commodus, 26 - - Seeck, 11, 13 - - Seius Carus, 139, 188 - - Seleucid monarchy, 26 - - Seleucus, Consul A.D. 221, 195 - - Senaculum, Soaemias president of, 34, 78, 121; hall built for, - 187 - - Senate, subservience of, 14; Macrinus’ letters to, 56; - desire to be rid of Macrinus, 58; informed of Diadumenianus’ - elevation, 64; Antonine’s letters and amnesty to, 82; registers - Antonine’s decrees, 85; did not declare Antonine priest of - Elagabal, 95, 97; at Elagabal worship, 116; attitude towards - Aquilia Severa’s wedding, 131; tries traitors, 131; adoption - of Alexander before, 143; ordered to disown Alexander, 150; - Alexander recognised Consul before, 161; dissolved, 163; - orders the erasure of Antonine’s name, 198; creates Julia - Paula Augusta, 209; and marriage of Aquilia Severa, 215; and - Pomponius Bassus, 220 - - Seneca, 121, 204 - - Septimius Severus, 27, 31, 38, 144; honours Macrinus, 41; - builds Mithraic temple, 114; date of tribunicial renewal, 196; - employs Julius Paulus, 206; uses Pomponius Bassus, 219 - - Serapion, 42 - - Serviez, on the order of Antonine’s wives, 207; on Aquilia - Severa, 217 - - Severus or Verus, a pretender, 88 - - Sextus Rufus, 20; on site of Eliogabalium, 113 - - Sextus Varius Marcellus, husband of Soaemias, 34, 113 - - Silius Messala, plot in connection with Aquilia Severa’s - marriage, 131, 139, 216, 219 - - Silvinus, Alexander’s tutor, killed, 164 - - Soaemias, character, 33; compared with Mamaea, 39, 40; and the - legionaries, 53; at battle of Immae, 70; position in state, 78; - Augusta, 86; position in the Senate, 120; tries to frustrate - plot against Antonine, 153; persuades Antonine to admit - Alexander Consul, 161; murder of, 166; reasons for her murder, - 171 - - Sodales Antoniniani, on date of adoption, 145 - - Sohemais, 25 - - Solomon’s temple compared with Emesan temple, 50 - - “Spartianus,” Aelius, 3, 11 - - Spem Veterem gardens, 113, 153, 158, 262 - - Spintries, 160, 240 - - Stobbe, on date of Antonine’s murder, 193; on tribunicial - renewal, 194 - - Strabo, 25 - - Studniczka, on Eliogabalium, 113 - - Suburra, district of Rome, 262 - - Suetonius, 13, 23, 79, 227, 250; on Senaculum, 121; on Vestals, - 131, 212; on life generally, 20; on Caligula, 203 - - Summer temple, site of, 112; date of completion, 174 - - Sylla, Governor of Cappadocia, a traitor, 90; compared with - Julius Paulus, 205 - - - Tacitus, on Christianity, 228 - - Tammuz, month of processions, 175 - - Tana, in Algeria, arch to Macrinus at, 75 - - Taurus, Mount, temple of Faustina on, 92 - - Tertullian, on Antinous, 231 - - Tertullian, on Julia Domna, 30; on divorce, 204 - - Theodosius, 10 - - Thermae Caracallae, 187; Varianae or Surae, 187 - - Thrace, Eutychianus fights under Commodus in, 53; Alexander’s - spectral journey, 144 - - Thyatira, coin of Diadumenianus, 65 - - Tiberinus and Tractitius, nicknames of Antonine given by Dion - and Lampridius, 200 - - Tiberius, Emperor, 117, 160, 164, 229 - - Titus, 23, 178 - - Titus Claudius Severus, father of Annia Faustina, 222 - - Trajan, 5 - - Triccianus, Aelius Decius, 90 - - Tripolis, coins struck at, 208 - - Tristran, as critic, 22; on Macrinus, 47; on Julia Paula, 206; - on the order of the wives, 207; on Annia Faustina’s genealogy, - 222 - - Tropea, 15 - - Turre, 22; tribunicial renewal, 194 - - Tyro, a reputed birthplace of Gens Cornelia, 205 - - - Ulpian, 21, 31; dedication of works, 163 - - Urania, Astarte, Tanit, Juno Coelestis, shrine in Forum, 132; - marriage with Elagabal, 133; amalgamated to the worship of - Elagabal, 278 - - - Valerius Ferminus, 176 - - Valerius Maximus quoted, 242 - - Valsecchius, 22; on tribunicial renewal, 194 - - Velletri, home of Soaemias and her husband, 34 - - Vespasian, 26, 141 - - Vespasian amphitheatre, 246 - - Vesta, Minerva, or Pallas, to serve Elagabal, 97; alliance of - Elagabal with, 114; story of the marriage with Elagabal, 129; - shrine in Forum, 132, 189; amalgamated with Elagabal, 278 - - Vestals, community discussed, 211; supporters of civic - religion, 214; arbiters of public feeling, 261 - - Victor, Aurelius, on site of Eliogabalium, 11, 19, 27, 113; on - length of reign, 193; on Antonine’s castration, 276 - - Victoria Aeterna inscription, 139 - - Vigiles inscription, 145 - - Virgil, 23 - - Vitellius, 23, 236, 250, 253 - - Vopiscus, 3, 11, 13 - - - Walwick Chesters inscription, title of _Sac. Elag._ erased, 199 - - Wirth, on the date of the proclamation, 55; on date of battle - of Immae, 69; on arrival in Rome, 107 - - Wissowa, on site of summer temple, 112 - - Wölfflin, on Vopiscus, 3, 11; on Mommsen, 12 - - Wotton, quoted, 89; on Gannys, 102 - - - Xiphilinus, 7, 52, 113; on Eutychianus, 80; on Antonine, 95; - on Antonine’s marriage with Hierocles, 239; on Zoticus, 239; - condemns Antonine’s religion, 267 - - - Zoticus, his story, 239 - - Zonaras, 19; on Antonine’s amulets, 184; on nicknames of the - Emperor, 200; on Elagabalus’ castration, 238; on Zoticus, 239 - - Zosimus, 19 - -THE END - -_Printed by R. & R. CLARK, LIMITED, Edinburgh._ - -*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE AMAZING EMPEROR HELIOGABALUS *** - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the -United States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following -the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use -of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for -copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very -easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation -of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project -Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away--you may -do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected -by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark -license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country other than the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where - you are located before using this eBook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm website -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that: - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of -the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the Foundation as set -forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, -Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up -to date contact information can be found at the Foundation's website -and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without -widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our website which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This website includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. |