Talk:The Roses of Heliogabalus

message: I've removed the following, leaving the bare measurements, as I can find no references in the literature (I've checked several offline sources) that suggest the theory that Alma-Tadema used the Golden Mean in choosing the dimensions of the painting. I'm not saying that he would have been unaware of the Golden Mean, but all I can find is copies of this Wikipedia article.
"The canvas measures 52" by 84 1/8", which may, like ratios within the painting itself, be intended to encode the golden mean. (84 1/8 inches divided by 52 inches equals 1.6177884..., and the golden mean equals 1.61803398875...)"
Ken 03:10, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
:I just removed a similar statement with slightly different dimensions.  Even if these dimensions are right, our connecting it to the golden ratio violates WP:NOR unless we cite a source that makes such an observation.  Dicklyon (talk) 06:33, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Golden Mean 

message: I was wondering if anyone could translate the inscription partly visible on a bowl in the painting. MagistraMundi (talk) 09:59, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Inscription

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:The Roses of Heliogabalus.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on June 26, 2017. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2017-06-26. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 03:03, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:The Roses of Heliogabalus.jpg]] to appear as POTD soon 

message: Why would  Alma-Tadema paint this scene with someone other than Heliogabalus placed almost at the upper dead centre of the painting? Martinevans123 (talk) 16:10, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the new refs, though neither actually WP:RSs, are enough to settle it. I wish the refs were formatted properly though. Johnbod (talk) 16:12, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, of course. If you think they are adequate, I will run ReFill when I have a moment. Or feel free yourself. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:19, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

text: No, probably not the complete answer. We certainly wouldn't want to pull some random new sources off a Google search, would we, as that might suggest we were just lazy and had no knowledge of Classical literature. I wonder would Sir Larry himself have read those? Or else I wonder what other paintings he might have taken as his inspiration for this composition - the article doesn't seem to mention any. I think book sources, by known art experts, which describe the identities of the those in the picture, plainly and unambiguously, might be a good idea. Perhaps those "other sources" you mention might be suitable? I guess Archdeacon Frederic Farrar must have known what he was talking about, as he was a Classics scholar, so yes we could always re-use that one. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:37, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

text: Well this was brought to my attention through Talk:Elagabalus. I'll state what I was about to say on that page. Elagabalus was famous for his choice of effeminate lavish clothing:  from Herodian of Antioch 5.5.3 and  - from 5.5.5. The uchicago source cites 5.3.6 which is similar in description to 5.5.3. I don't know why his robe is pure gold, instead of purple with gold, but that's almost certainly Elagabalus in the gold. You might also wish to compare this photo of a contemporary bust of Elagabalus to the face and hair of the man in the painting, they are quite similar. I'm fully aware of the OR aspect to this comment, but I did a search of both google and google books and came back with very little, and nothing related to the characters depicted. Mr rnddude (talk) 10:59, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: One more thing, you can discount anyone wearing cloth wool from being Elagabalus, per 5.5.4: . Mr rnddude (talk) 11:02, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: And which petals belonged to the rose by any other name? Randy Kryn (talk) 11:07, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed! Did Ancient Rome even have that cultivar?? We probably need advice from a horticulture expert like User:PaleCloudedWhite. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:14, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The Romans grew a lot of roses, but they would not have been that cultivar, nor anything resembling it, as that cultivar is a hybrid tea, a class of rose that only came into existence in the 19th century, as a result of reliably remontant roses being traded from China. Exactly which cultivars (if any) the Romans grew isn't known, though it would have been cultivars of European and possibly Middle Eastern roses (e.g. Rosa gallica, Rosa x alba and possibly Rosa x damascena etc.), which were all in shades of pink, red, white etc. - no orange or yellow, which again came from Chinese roses. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 13:06, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

text: You see, I told you he was an expert. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:07, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It took me too long to realize. Yes, indeed. A silk cloth is a cloth by any other name. Textile vs material. Mr rnddude (talk) 11:59, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

text: Yes, I had noticed the similarity to the Palazzo Nuovo Musei Capitolini bust, but I didn't like to say anything! Martinevans123 (talk) 11:08, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which one is Heliogabalus? 

message: Alma-Tadema was known for his careful research and realism. If you search for images of Heliogabalus, you will see what he looks like and recognize that he is the youth in a white robe holding a handful of grapes. He was assassinated when he was still in his teens. The man in the golden robe is clearly older than his teens and does not look like Heliogabalus. The fat bloke next to Heliogabalus is also obviously older than his teens. MagistraMundi (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 09:44, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the subject of your post here might be relevant to the one above. So you might want to just join it on. The edit that you just made here is not supported by the current sources - so you've introduced a contradiction. Also your edit summary "True description of Heliogabalus" seems a little too bold, looking at the discussion here so far. So I think you ought to self-revert until consensus has been clearly established. I suspect that pictorial representation of figures from Classical Rome have often involved a certain amount of"poetic license" as far as age is concerned, especially when the event depicted was not an actual historical one. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:58, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed the description until consensus is reached. The claims that the bloke in the golden robe is Heliogabalus are not by classical historians and are obviously wrong. Have you searched for images of Elagabalus from the relevant era? If you have, you should clearly see which figure in the painting is Heliogabalus. MagistraMundi (talk) 10:19, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I think searching for images of Elagabalus, from whatever era, and comparing them with this painting, might be construed as WP:OR. I think we need to rely on good i.e. expert sources, such as those mentioned by User:Theramin above. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:25, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The woman in white robes with a handful of grapes is seated at the table to the right of a quite plump individual holding a blue cup of ... wine presumably, given the redness of the cheeks, a sure sign of intoxication. Mr rnddude (talk) 11:09, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Hilarious. No wonder Wikipedia has such a big reputation for accuracy and honesty. MagistraMundi (talk) 11:15, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

text: But she's a woman (and the quite plump man looks a bit demonic, if you ask me). Ah, maybe Elagabalus has drunk so much he's actually under the table? Not surprised he's hiding if, as the Augustan History suggests, this is actually a murder scene.  Martinevans123 (talk) 11:17, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh dear oh dear. How can I report you for homophobia and perhaps transphobia too? You appear to know nothing about Heliogabalus and are now mocking xir appearance. You know, my only interest here was to improve the article. Your interest seems to be in playing adolescent games. Natura abhorret vacuum, as Heliogabalus might have said. MagistraMundi (talk) 11:15, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I think he'd need quite a big vacuum to deal with all those petals. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:28, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Positively Wildean! How blessed Wikipedia is to have individuals of such intelligence, maturity and wit working on its articles. But it's no skin off my nose if this article makes false statements, so feel free to revert. After all, as Heliogabalus might also have said: Infinitus est numerus stultorum. (Your cue, Oscar.) MagistraMundi (talk) 11:48, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Why, thank you so much. As you know, I never joke. But feel free to offer some actual sources in support of your claim. Thanks! Martinevans123 (talk) 12:01, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

text: *Looks at painting* is it me or does the golden-robed man have a slightly older and uglier appearance than one would expect of someone described by Herodian in this way: "Bassianus, in the prime of youth, was the handsomest lad of his time. With physical beauty, bloom of youth, and splendor of attire combining to produce the same effect, the youth might well be compared to the handsome statues of Bacchus. [...] His youthful beauty attracted the eyes of all."? And are there perhaps classical sculptures extant enabling us to compare the features of the golden-robed man with those of Elagabalus? You know, I have a funny feeling there are. MagistraMundi (talk) 10:11, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I think there is nothing but MagistraMundi's personal OR. We've had enough fun, & should stick with what sources we have. Johnbod (talk) 01:52, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I'm sure MagistraMundi's personal view may be perfectly genuine. But there is no place for it in deciding the content of this article. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:39, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Heliogabalus' position in the painting

message: Sorry, girls: I was joking about transphobia, so your trans-Wildean wit super-scintillated in vain. BTW, Mr rnddude, in terms of issues around LGBTQIA+ issues: you haven't said whether you think Mr Gold-Robe matches this description by Mr Herodian: "Bassianus, in the prime of youth, was the handsomest lad of his time. With physical beauty, bloom of youth, and splendor of attire combining to produce the same effect, the youth might well be compared to the handsome statues of Bacchus." I don't think he does, but then, unlike your good self, I'm neither deeply versed in the classics nor capable of being honest. Obvs. MagistraMundi (talk) 09:59, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It didn't look like a joke. But if you're "not capable of being honest", at least we know where we stand. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:31, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: But if I'm not capable of being honest, how could I admit my incapacity? Are there perhaps two of me, one honest and one not? Anyway, Martita, let's test your own honesty. If poss, please answer the question I addressed to Mr rnddude. And of my two candidates for the role of Heliogabalus in TRoH, do you think the figure in the golden robe looks more or less like the bust of Heliogabalus than the young woman? Or is it impossible to say, cozza artistic lincense, adverse astrological factors and the vast gulf of time that separates us girls from the Victorian era? MagistraMundi (talk) 10:40, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Martita now, no longer Oscar? Those are your two candidates, no one else's. But I gave you my honest answer already that "the young woman looks nothing like the bust, from any angle." I hope that's clear enough. Again. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:49, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Martita now, no longer Oscar?. You're a shape-shifter and chameleon, like the late, great David Bowie. Of whom I assume you are a veteran fan. Please don't throw my compliments back in my face. MagistraMundi (talk) 10:54, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: You could at least compare me to a real man, like Martina. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:36, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

text: The book I linked to above notes that there are I think 6 contemporary unaltered (after his damnatio memoriae) portraits that are thought to be E. But none are certainly of him, unlike the coins. It would be unwise to assume that these identifications are the same now as pre-1888. Vast numbers of identifications have changed over the intervening years. If taking this seriously< one would need to check in 19th-century books what portraits were then thought to be of E. Johnbod (talk) 10:57, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

text: Hmm, presuming you want a serious answer; I would not consider myself "deeply versed in the classics", I simply said I am familiar with them. It's difficult to answer your question, I don't find the male form attractive at all. So, I'd be naturally inclined to agree that the white robed individual fits the "youthful attractive" description better; but again, I see a cute girl, not a "handsome lad". Moreover, I'm concerned with Herodian's comparison to Bacchus given the "stud"-like qualities on display in this painting (my attempt at humour). I do think you're being honest in your selection, I just don't see that it matches.  Ignore appearance for a second. Can you explain why Julia Soaemias, mother of Elagabalus, in a purple robe and wearing a crown, would be sitting next to somebody other than her child? Can you explain why Elagabalus would not be a) in a controlling position and b) the focal point of the painting? Can you explain why Elagabalus, who by Herodian's own account hated Roman clothing and wool, would be wearing a traditional white woolen robe instead of a gold embroidered silk one (should be purple and gold, but oh well)? Why is Elagabalus not wearing any of the gold necklaces, bracelets, crowns, tiara's or any other jewellery, that they were known for? (both from Herodian 5.5) "Mr. Gold-Robe" matches all of these descriptions, yet the white robed youth does not. Returning to appearance for a moment, can you explain how snow white matches the descriptions of Syrian heritage from either Dio or Herodian? or where the facial hair from the busts are?  I can't imagine why on earth Elagabalus would be half tucked away behind another courtier, lost in a day-dream, and munching on grapes, while the scene plays out around them. Thanks though, this was the first serious look I've had at anything to do with the Severans in a very long time. Mr rnddude (talk) 11:04, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for a considered answer, and yes, I was being serious. You're right that, if we ignore appearance, there are some strong factors supporting him-of-the-golden-robe. But we can't ignore appearance. For Sol's sake, this is a painting by one of the most skilled artists and meticulous visual researchers who ever lived. Heliogabalus was notorious in Victorian times for his youth, his effeminacy, and his good looks. He-of-the-golden-robe doesn't match those criteria. And the youth clearly looks much more like the bust that AT, we can assume, saw during his research. Furthermore, the youth is wearing a crown of roses. I think AT was playing artistic games and deliberately misdirecting spectators, but winking at the cognescenti with details like the crown of roses. Who might we expect to be wearing roses in a painting called The Roses of Heliogabalus? Heliogabalus, of course. Heliogabalus was also famous for his practical jokes and his subversion of conventions. This painting reflects that. It is much more complex than some commentators recognize. MagistraMundi (talk) 11:52, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Are there historical sources which suggest Elagabalus wore flowers in his hair? So AT is allowed artistic license when he is "playing artistic games", but not when he adjusts the subject's face to fit his compostion? Martinevans123 (talk) 12:02, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: How did making a good-looking youth of 18 into an ugly man of 20+ "fit his composition"? And although I don't know of any sources saying explicitly that Heliogabalus wore flowers in his hair, I do know of numerous sources saying that he was exactly the kind of person of whom one might expect such flamboyant floralistic fashioneering. Assuming, that is, one has some grasp of human psychology and LGBTQIA+ culture. (LGBTQIA+ is another joke, btw. I'm not a size queen.) MagistraMundi (talk) 12:11, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Can we please stop all this? Wikipedia is based on sources; editors should, with due weight, present information according to how it explicitly appears in reliable sources. Everything else, including large chunks of the preceding discussion/s, is WP:SYNTH and original research, and thus irrelevant on Wikipedia. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 12:15, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

text: He could be 18. He's not "ugly". But again, these are just subjective opinions. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:17, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Toxic Transphobia