The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which has been designated as a contentious topic.
Elagabalus is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Syria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Syria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SyriaWikipedia:WikiProject SyriaTemplate:WikiProject SyriaSyria articles
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rome, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the city of Rome and ancient Roman history on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RomeWikipedia:WikiProject RomeTemplate:WikiProject RomeRome articles
This article is within the scope of the Roman and Byzantine Emperors WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the Roman and Byzantine emperors. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Roman and Byzantine emperorsWikipedia:WikiProject Roman and Byzantine emperorsTemplate:WikiProject Roman and Byzantine emperorsRoman and Byzantine emperors articles
The gender identity of Elagabalus is a contentious topic and has been raised here before. The most radical claim — that Elagabalus claimed to be a woman and wanted confirming surgery — came from a historian who was also a public official, and answered to the same people who condemned Elagabalus's memory. This article follows the prevailing approach of scholarship by regarding those claims skeptically and thus uses masculine pronouns.
Before requesting a change related to this topic, please review the talk page archives. These are available through the header at the top of this page, which is visible only on large-screen devices. 67.180.143.89 (talk) 18:18, 29 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 month ago11 comments5 people in discussion
I was doing research into LGBTQ people with noble and royal titles, and I discovered the Category:LGBTQ Roman emperors. I'm aware that the gender identity and sexuality of Elagabalus has been widely debated, and so I was wondering if it would be appropriate to include Elagabalus in this catagory alongside Hadrian and Nero. Rylee Amelia (talk) 04:17, 16 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
No, and I've removed the category from Hadrian as it doesn't appear to be discussed at all in the article. Nero should probably be removed too looking at the sourcing for the claim, but I will wait for someone with expertise on Roman historiography to discuss it. Traumnovelle (talk) 06:16, 16 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
Sorry, let me address the actual claim. All mentions of Elagabalus being sexually depraved derive from authors who have good reason to critique and ridicule him. Historians mostly disagree with the idea of these claims having merit to them and so we shouldn't apply a category here, as the category cannot be subjected to the nuance we can give in the text. This idea has been discussed before and I would recommend you read the archives to see prior discussion. Traumnovelle (talk) 06:18, 16 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
I looked through the archives, and I may be mistaken, but all of the discussions I saw pertained to Elagabalus' potential gender identity and things such as pronouns and gendered terms. I didn't see discussions surrounding categories. I felt that it may be important to include some LGBTQ categories because Elagabalus has been seen through a queer interpretation in some sources. Other historical figures with disputed identities such as Public Universal Friend are listed in LGBTQ categories. I understand why Elagabalus is interpreted as a man in the context of this article, but I feel that LGBTQ categories could assist some people who are looking into LGBTQ interpretations of historical figures, regardless of the consensus that may have been reached regarding Elagabalus' identity. I'm assuming the current state of the article is well intentioned, and this proposal is not meant to upset that. I often look through categories as a basis for research on certain topics, so I know there are some people that may benefit from this addition. Rylee Amelia (talk) 06:31, 16 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
WP:CATPOV and WP:CATLGBT would apply here. I am unfamiliar with the Public Universal Friend and what the scholarly consensus in regards.
>but I feel that LGBTQ categories could assist some people who are looking into LGBTQ interpretations of historical figures
We have a category on this page that does just that, titled 'Historical figures with ambiguous or disputed gender identity'. If you're looking for one for sexuality 'Category:Historical figures with ambiguous or disputed sexuality' does not exist but I would recommend asking at Wikiproject LGBT Studies before creating it in case there is an existing category named differently. Traumnovelle (talk) 06:49, 16 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
Ok, I will do that. I think having one or more categories related to disputed historical identities would help a lot of people that are interested in these types of interpretations. Thank you! Rylee Amelia (talk) 07:04, 16 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
It's not OR if the article directly mentions it and has multiple sources to create context surrounding these theories. I feel you may be conflating your own personal beliefs on the validity of these claims with the function of the category, which is to recognize that the debate exists rather than give credence to the theory that Elagabalus may have been queer. Rylee Amelia (talk) 22:59, 16 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
The category as created specifies 'ambiguous or disputed sexuality'. Since the article has tons of RS debating that exact question, it's perfect. I would have had that exact objection to the LGBTQ tag which would be either OR or SYNTH – there is remarkably little evidence either way, but there is plenty of scholarly debate. Cheers, Last1in (talk) 13:19, 17 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
.svg){kind=small}
