Julian: on Rome and reactionary romanticism.

In a different review this week, which is as disparate as it's oddly relevant, I wrote that how tempting it is to imagine the fall of empires. There is great hope and sorrow contained within, the insidious appeal of fatalism and the cathartic beauty of destruction; presented with a car crash, we stop and watch; we are moths and our light is Story; our dwelling places are in the shadow of death; thus, we "never forget."

...And Gore Vidal as an author and critic was terminally obsessed with the decline of the American Empire; there is no surprise, then, that Julian is a novel about decline and the tragedy of ineluctable decay.


For more than a millennium, the West (whatever that is) has been enraptured by the decline and fall (and resurrection (preferably by whoever is talking)) of Rome. Romans themselves excelled at it.

n  ... [T]he barbarians are at the gate. Yet when they breach the wall, they will find nothing of value to seize, only empty relics. The spirit of what we were had fled. So be it.n

Flavius Claudius Julianus (331-63 AD) was the last pagan Emperor and the last living of the dynasty of Constantine the Great. He was a Neoplatonist philosopher by choice and a Caesar by circumstance. (The circumstances being dead, often executed by means of circumstantial evidence, relatives.) His was a life mission full of the potential of doomed romanticism: no less than the reversal of Christian primacy and the restoration of Hellenism.

Julian is told as correspondence between Libanius and Priscus, another neoplatonists and dying old men facing their dying old world, trying to assemble an account of Julian's life twenty years after his death, out of the same's stolen memoir and diary, and their own memory. I found these two's framing gossip about their sexual lives boring and kind of gross and hard to get through, but what is left is a rather fascinating text that is gripping despite (or because of?) its distanced tone and dry affect.

That philosopher king's efforts are presented luminously, the acts of a fallen true hero, a man who would be a saint if he wasn't the Apostate. Julian says of his mission of restoration, as Vidal writes it:

n  To stop the chariot as it careers into the sun, that is what I was born to do.n

And we all know what befell Icarus. We learned, too late, to grieve him on his way.

It's difficult to determine what the reader is supposed to make of prophecy. Prophets' manipulations and dishonesty, the behind-the-scenes politicking that ensures a prophecy's fulfilment, are certainly clearly laid out often enough. Yet persistently prophecy is proven textually vindicated: omens doggedly follow Julian's victories and failures through Persia, Julian dies of a Roman spear, raised in purpose and religious conspiracy, in the same manner a dead lion is found in one of several moments of dread omensthe Hierophant of Greece solemnly and certainly declares himself the last of his ancient line. Thou hast conquered, O pale Galilean; the world has grown grey from thy breath...

These are all the makings of classical tragedy. One is invited to lament that dying world, that old world and what never came to pass: the restored white-columned temples and the allaying of a Dark Age, and - should you be inclined to misread Nietzsche - the emancipation of humanity from a slave mentality.

So laments Libanius, the dying Hellene, to his student John Chrysostom, the rising bishop:

n  [Resurrection] is a story to tell children. The truth is for thousand of years we looked to what was living. Now you look to what is dead, you worship a dead man and tell one another that this world is not for us, while the next is all that matters. [...] This is all we have. There is nothing else. Turn your back on this world, and you face the pit!n

... We have drunken of things Lethean, and fed on the fullness of death.

Imagining what a world could have been is also a tempting exercise. It allows for all the rosiness of nostalgia, with none of the irksome counterpoints of historiography. A negative cannot be disproven. There is a reason why alternate history, though by no means exclusive to them, tends to attract fascists.

It has been argued that Julian with its multiple points of view, with its bared process of truth-sourcing and multiple narration, prefigures postmodernist literature. I can also see within Then again, Julian's theology following the Iamblichus' Syrian Neoplatonists is profoundly mystical in its praxis, extolling ritual and tradition. Julian's attempted Hellenist revival was no heroic resistance of rationality against the dark, fog-minded encroachment of Christianity in the half-assed mode of historio-political understanding of New Atheism. Between the lines, Julian is a mirror to political reaction— so Julian's Priscus writes that "[Julian] was disturbed by the fact that the barbarians increase in numbers while we decrease.". Not quite 14 words, a bit too verbose for that. Resentment was never an original thinker.

This is a poignant text, both for what it says about politics and philosophy and for how it's telling it.

n  n

Per ricostruire la vita di un imperatore noto quasi soltanto per essere stato un rinnegato, Giuliano di Gore Vidal propone più che un romanzo storico una sorta di reportage, quasi un’inchiesta giornalistica. Al personaggio cui Vidal intitola l’opera non viene dedicato, in genere, più di qualche rigo nei manuali di storia: come risarcimento per una gloria rubata da secoli di propaganda avversa, lo scrittore americano gli riserva un trattamento opposto, dipingendolo come ultimo ellenista, imperatore illuminato e tollerante, condottiero spregiudicato e pacato filosofo, che somma in sé le virtù militari di un Giulio Cesare, quelle politiche di un Ottaviano Augusto e quelle speculative di un Marco Aurelio. Un eroe degno del mito greco, la cui grandezza viene però troncata proprio sul punto di germogliare.
‘Muore giovane chi è caro agli dei’, recita un aforisma del commediografo ateniese Menandro, ma nel caso di Giuliano vale il contrario: a lui, morto a 32 anni, quasi come Alessandro Magno, erano cari gli dei, che vedeva come simboli, nella cornice culturale e religiosa del politeismo greco, dei valori e degli ideali che avevano innervato e sostenuto la grandezza del pensiero ellenico e dello stato romano, i due elementi di cui si considerava, in quanto imperatore-filosofo, erede e custode. La sua figura tragica ed eroica insieme di grande vissuto come una meteora nel periodo storico sbagliato, nel declino del mondo pagano, riceve da Vidal una luce che ricompensa in parte l’oblio venato di disprezzo cui la vittoria del cristianesimo lo aveva condannato con il marchio d’infamia di ‘apostata’, il rinnegato.

Continua su:
http://www.lastambergadeilettori.com/...

An excellent book, an honorable companion to Robert Graves and John Williams. Yes, I have a type for books like these (read:Ancient Rome fictional imperial biographies), but also yes, this book more than meets it. Slow and meandering, but never dull, the voice of Julian is richly developed and human, ranging from wicked humor to sadness to philosophical. No mean feat. It spurred in me 100 Wikipedia rabbit holes, which is always a good sign. I greatly enjoyed it, and hesitantly recommend it— if you like Roman history, fake biographies, religious debates it’s definitely for you. But you should be able to tell within the first 50 or so pages if it actually is. Not much dialogue and, as stated earlier, definitely slow. Some of the military stuff dragged for me, so the Persian and Gallic escapades were not my favorite, but the religious reforms and the power plays were great to read. And the characters, especially our three narrators, were a blast

1.5 -> 2
It is not a badly written novel, as the commentaries by the two scholars, who taught Julian in his youth, were great, just... How could author make Julian's story so boring? If you expect plot hooks, you will be disappointed.

This is one of those books that really does immerse you into the life of its characters. I have no idea the amount of research Gore Vidal had to do before writing this book, but he manages to capture the life and times of Emperor Julian so well that you forget that you are reading a text written in the last 50 years and not, in fact, the journal of the young ruler himself.

This was a bear of a book to get through. Not exactly sure why as it is a relatively brisk 460 paperback pages, but it took me over a month to finish. I'm quite glad that I am done because while I did cherish the history lesson Vidal teaches, and ever so entertainingly, I could feel the pull from time to time to dip out of the days of the Ancient Roman Empire into a time a little more fresh. However, if you are a Rome aficionado, you will have plenty of nice things to say about this book.

Perhaps must amusingly, this book reads as a kind of philosophical treatise not just on empires of old (and new) but on human nature and the privilege and drain that comes with being in power.

Being the religion junkie that I am, I loved Vidal's not-so-subtle digs at Christianity and other organized religions and how effortlessly he exposes them for what they are- outright theft of far older myths and legends.

Vidal is certainly clever, filling this story with subtle details and sly humor. That’s unfortunately the best thing I have to say about his book. Vidal’s Julian comes across as little more than a naïve undergraduate philosophy student pretending to be an Emperor and military commander. It’s astonishing that an author of this caliber could ruin such a fascinating bit of history. Disappointing and boring.

I don't know how or why anyone would let a thirteen year old withdraw this book from a public library but someone did, and it went a long way towards forming my mind. For better or worse.

Julian the Apostate was born just a little too late: the last Hellenist (pagan) in the family of Constantine, who a few years before Julian's birth had converted the Roman Empire to Christianity. The novel chronicles his unlikely rise to power and its inevitable conclusion. Not a plot spoiler----aren't a lot of practicing pagans around, are there? It takes the form of an exchange of letters and reminiscences between two Athenian philosophers who had known Julian as a young man, the letters transmitting portions of a hitherto-unknown memoir in Julian's own hand. The memoir, naturally, is the bulk of the novel.

I don't know how to put this otherwise: this book, more than any other I've read in the nearly forty years since, made the ancient world come alive. Having done that it led me to question seriously the historical antecedents of the religion in which I was being raised.

But forget that: this book is so good that I reread it every three to five years.

Oh---funny thing about reading a 1963 novel when you're thirteen. The descriptions of sex are so circumspect that no kid can imagine what's going on.

Excellent!

A delightfully readable fictional account of Julian, a nephew of Constantine who, in his very brief 4th-century tenure as Emperor of Rome, attempted to roll back the adoption of Christianity as the religion of the empire. The narrative unfolds as a memoir of Julian, punctuated by the wry epistolary commentary of a Stadtler-and-Waldorfian pair of philosophers, Priscus and Libanius. These two take swipes at one another and at members of Julian’s retinue, while exposing some of Julian’s blind spots and revisionist indulgences.

Vidal’s Julian was something of a polymath, with a deep love for philosophy, a passion for leading armies into battle, and a reverence for the mysteries of the ancient Hellenistic religion. As Vidal constructs Julian’s story, the strain of making room for all of these passions in one man is ultimately what undoes him. Julian (under the influence of a priest/charlatan called Maximus) comes to see himself as the second coming of Alexander, destined to reconquer all the Asiatic lands as far as India. His rash leadership of Persian campaign and his arrogance in the persecution of Christians combine to cost him the loyalty of his Christian generals.

And yet through Julian’s deploring ancient Christianity, Vidal voices harsh critiques of modern Christianity, pointing up the hypocrisies of power-hungry priests and the dangers of too much mingling of religious powers with state administration. Julian is a flawed, overreaching leader who makes some shocking errors in judgment; yet he remains solidly sympathetic, and the editorial force of the book is behind his views, not those of his detractors, who restyled him as Julian the Apostate and carefully controlled the public narrative of his life.

Залезът често прилича на изгрева - ярки цветове пронизват небето, и светът сякаш се устремява към вечността. Юлиан крачи на ръба между два свята. Да си последен понякога е точно толкова значимо, колкото и да си пръв. Но е доста по-рядък избор за историци и писатели, щом си от страната на победените.

Обвито доскоро в мистика, все още младото християнство, започва да добива физиономия и ясна структура, сдобива се с власт, вярата прераства в религия, доктрина и бюрокрация. То все още търси себе си - точно колко Божи е Божият син, и колко човек? Но въпросите извън официалната линия започват да навлизат в опасната зона на ереста, и добре че в този век тази линия все още криволичи. Логиката, философията, реториката и всички останали науки скромно следва да дават предимство първо на религията и нейната официална доктрина, и едва след това на безпристастния аналитичен подход. Да, боговете на всички монотеистични религии са страстни и ревниви, и не търпят конкурентен анализ на битието.

Още повече ако конкуренцията идва от уморените, избледняващи и някак безстрастни и затова толерантни богове на гръцката и Римската античност. И Зевс, и Хермес, и Аполон отдавна са лишени от мистика и са предоставили свобода на човешкия дух. Но в човешкото сърце се се настанили скука, страх и жажда за нов огън.

Този огън ще погълне Юлиан едва на 32 годишна възраст в далечна, чужда, нажежена до бяло земя. Безсилни са сенките на старите богове да спрат колелото на времето, което ще се застопори на едно място за следващите 10 века.

Тригласието в романа за пореден път се доказва като удачен похват. Избраните гласове са интересни, спорещи и преливащи. Хапливият диалог на двамата стари философи ми стана любим. А Юлиан доказва колко подвеждаща и манипулативна е човешката памет и колко гъвкаво може да се променя миналото, с него да се влияе на настоящето и да се задава тон на бъдещето.

Един изключително увлекателен, скептичен, ерудиран, искрен и безжалостен Гор Видал! В света на римляни и гърци отеква Пакс Американа, във студентите-циници надничат децата на цветята. А властта е така добре описана, че ако човек смени термините с модерни такива, текстът остава актуален. Но това са само приятни странични екстри. А залезът може да е красив като изгрева на цяла една невероятна епоха, която е все още в пелени.

П.С. Ще дам трети шанс на пустото му “Сътворение”, дано тоя път го прочета без да заспя!

П.П.С. Аман от правописни грешки...

A fine historical novel about the last Roman emperor to accept the old gods. A favourite of mine, in a way--- Julian the Apostate will always be a hero to a certain niche group of romantic intellectuals (that would include me, yes). Witty, tragic, cold-eyed. Worth reading, if only as an antidote to the Christian narrative so embedded in our culture.

I never knew that after Constantine, the Roman Empire reverted (briefly) to the old gods. Gore Vidal does a good job of describing the man who attempted to undo the religious changes and bring back the old ways.

I really liked the style he chose to write the book in - two old friends write letters to each other, reminiscing about the now deceased Julian. You then read Julian's autobiography, interspersed with humorous and enlightening comments from both of these old friends. These comments also brilliantly remind the reader that human memory is fallible, the past is often remembered the way that someone wants, and that two people will rarely agree on the specifics of an event or a person's character. This really makes you question each of your narrators and adds another layer that is really nice.

I also enjoyed Vidal's writing style. I found myself almost not caring what the meaning of some phrase was, because it was so well put down on paper, so beautifully or succinctly written.

The only drawback is the character of Julian gets repetative in his constant denunciations of Christianity. The denunciations themselves didn't bother me in the least - they were actually pretty interesting the first time they were written. But the same arguments are made again and again. You can safely skim anything in the second half of the book dealing with religion, and you won't miss anything - it's all a rehash of something that came before.