https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-67484645
Museum reclassifies Roman emperor as trans woman
North Hertfordshire Museum will now refer to emperor Elagabalus with the female pronouns of she and her.
It comes after classical texts claim the emperor once said "call me not Lord, for I am a Lady".
A museum spokesperson said it was "only polite and respectful to be sensitive to identifying pronouns for people in the past".
Cassius Dio, a senator and contemporary of Elagabalus, writes in his historical chronicles that the emperor was married five times - four times to women, and once to Hiercoles, a former slave and chariot driver.
In this final marriage, Dio writes that the emperor "was bestowed in marriage and was termed wife, mistress and queen".
The debate over Elagabalus's gender identity is long-standing and often splits academics.
Dr Shushma Malik, a Cambridge university classics professor, told the BBC: "The historians we use to try and understand the life of Elagabalus are extremely hostile towards him, and therefore cannot be taken at face value. We don't have any direct evidence from Elagabalus himself of his own words.
"There are many examples in Roman literature of times where effeminate language and words were used as a way of criticising or weakening a political figure.
"References to Elagabalus wearing makeup, wigs and removing body hair may have been written in order to undermine the unpopular emperor."
However, councillor Keith Hoskins, executive member for Enterprise and Arts at North Herts Council, said texts such as Dio's provide evidence "that Elagabalus most definitely preferred the 'she' pronoun and as such this is something we reflect when discussing her in contemporary times, as we believe is standard practice elsewhere".
@no1marauder saidKnee slapper right there.
Deceased figures rarely "want" anything as far as we know.
Meant when they were alive.
@vivify saidHa! You look for certainty???? Has SHouse ever said anything certain in his life?? Opinions , unbased, abound here, together with an occasional sueann contribution.
Unless there is absolute indisputable certainty that a deceased figure wants to be labeled as trans I don't think it's a good idea to take such a step.
Need more meat! Have we done sex changes yet?!? My 6 yr old boy is wanting to be a girl, I told him go for it, and he almost turned his Cheerios over !!!!!
8 edits
@no1marauder saidGender roles and identity are such an intrinsic part of people throughout history that a label like trans shouldn't be given unless there's absolute certainty.
Why isn't labelling them according to the best evidence "not a good idea"?
Will it hurt their feelings?
If RuPaul (a famous drag queen) was a historical figured from 200 years ago he'd be mislabeled as trans by a museum like this one, even though he identifies as male.
So even putting their "feelings" aside, it could at the very least be historically inaccurate unless there's indisputable proof.
@vivify saidThere's little "indisputable proof" in ancient (and even not so ancient) history.
Gender roles and identity are such an intrinsic part of people throughout history that a label like trans shouldn't be given unless there's absolute certainty.
If RuPaul (a famous drag queen) was a historical figured from 200 years ago he'd be mislabeled as trans by a museum like this one, even though he identifies as male.
So even putting their "feelings" aside, it could at the very least be historically inaccurate unless there's indisputable proof.
From the article, there seems to be contemporaneous written evidence supporting the use of feminine pronouns in this case and none to the contrary. I don't agree that there should be an extraordinary levels of proof to make a historical judgment based on best evidence.
3 edits
@no1marauder saidAgain, see people like RuPaul. Most of his public appearances were as a female but he identifies as a gay man. A historical figure like him could be misgendered.
There's little "indisputable proof" in ancient (and even not so ancient) history.
From the article, there seems to be contemporaneous written evidence supporting the use of feminine pronouns in this case and none to the contrary. I don't agree that there should be an extraordinary levels of proof to make a historical judgment based on best evidence.
Furthermore there are only second-hand accounts about his gender, no writings from Elagabalus.
I think it's fine to speculate he could've been trans. But taking the step of making it official, that should take a reasonable degree of certainty that I don't see in this case.
@vivify saidI think both you and the headline of the article are mistaken; the museum did not label Elagabalus as "trans", it merely said it will use the pronouns "she" and "her" in referring to this Emperor. That is in keeping with what a contemporaneous historical commentary said was Elagabalus' own practice before her death.
Again, see people like RuPaul. Most of his public appearances were as a female but he identifies as a gay man. A historical figure like him could be misgendered.
Furthermore there are only second-hand accounts about his gender, no writings from Elagabalus.
I think it's fine to speculate he could've been trans. But taking the step of making it official, that should take a reasonable degree of certainty that I don't see in this case.
There's no writings from many, if not most, ancient historical figures but that does not stop us from making conclusions regarding them based on the evidence we do have. It would be nice to read an autobiography of Attila but since we don't have that, we rely on writings from his lifetime or close to it for most of our information regarding him. I see no reason to vary from this practice just because you think there's something unique about pronoun use for some odd reason.
1 edit
@vivify saidHe’s a roman emperor so I’m not sure how much I care about his feelings given that he was probably a de facto mass murderer of all genders.
Gender roles and identity are such an intrinsic part of people throughout history that a label like trans shouldn't be given unless there's absolute certainty.
If RuPaul (a famous drag queen) was a historical figured from 200 years ago he'd be mislabeled as trans by a museum like this one, even though he identifies as male.
So even putting their "feelings" aside, it could at the very least be historically inaccurate unless there's indisputable proof.
However the hesitation and need for ultimate proof to trans an historical figure is interesting given that we we don’t require it to label someone gay or straight