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.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account