Customer Reviews

Julian

5 star:		(59)
4 star:		(10)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

In keeping with my belief that one should clearly label one's biases, let it be known that I am not only a pagan myself but that Julian Augustus is my personal folk hero.

_Julian_ covers the time leading up to, as well as including, the reign of Julian the Apostate. Several dynamics were present: his precarious youth as a potential threat to the Roman throne of Constantius, his strong philosophical leanings toward Hellenism, and his personal courage, among others. Vidal incorporates all of these factors, which shaped Julian's character, to weave a portrait of this emperor.

One of the more entertaining aspects of the book is that much of it is a letter exchange between Libanius (Julian's prinicpal contemporary biographer) and Priscus (a philosopher of sorts and adherent of Julian) after Julian's untimely death in Persia. We thus are treated to humourously scathing margin notes by Libanius, generally expressing disdain for Priscus, who seems to be covering his posterior and his pocketbook. A lot of the book is Julian's memoirs themselves. It's an interesting and creative way to write a book, and a tribute to Vidal that it flows smoothly.

The book would be incomplete without speculation on the real reason for Julian's death (besides the fact that he took a spear in the chest while wearing no breastplate, which is historical fact). I will spare you the spoiler; suffice it to say that this part is something to look forward to. I cannot easily refute the claim that is made when they get to it.

If you like the late Roman Empire, are interested in Julian himself, or simply enjoy a good historical novel, _Julian_ is a bargain.

The fourth century AD is a period I have never known much about. The first I ever heard about the emperor Julian the Apostate was actually the unflattering caricature by St Gregory Nazianzen, quoted here again in the novel. There is a plus-side and there is a minus-side to reading a historical novel from ignorance of the background, the plus-side being obviously that one is not distracted from appreciating it for what it is - creative writing. I feel sure the downside outweighs that, all the same. There is obviously considerable erudition behind this book, and if I ever improve my grasp of the background I would expect to find real historical insights, whatever the author may have adapted, removed or added. What is clear to me is that Vidal at least thinks as a genuine historian - his narrative is about the right things that should go into a historical analysis.

The novel is partly concerned with rehabilitating Julian, but it is about more than that, indeed about more than his life-story altogether. It is about early Christianity and the mind-sets that went with that. Julian was appalled by Christianity, and so, quite evidently, is Vidal. For him, early Christianity was a noxious perversion of human thought-processes. Christianity of this period tried to enforce beliefs, and would stop at nothing in the process. This should make us pause to ask - how can any belief be obligatory? Only our actions can be subject to our own will, let alone anyone else's, and holding a belief is not an action. There is a restricted sense in which it could be described as that, namely the sense in which `holding' means `propounding', as in a book or a lecture. In more normal usage to `hold' a belief is just to `have' a belief, and we either do or do not believe something - it's a state of affairs like having a headache, not a voluntary or enforceable act like holding a sword or holding a meeting. On top of that there is the question - what, if anything, did the doctrines the Christians were slaughtering one another over even mean? The doctrine of the Trinity was something to kill for, it seems. Even in my time the answer to rational questioning was that some `truths' (in whatever sense) were above reason but revealed by God, but of course one had to take someone's word for that. It was all of a piece with mortification of the flesh and repression of natural instincts, as Vidal quietly implies - any faculties, brain or body, that the Creator may have given us, presumably to use, were not only suspect but evil and those who saw the matter otherwise would be dealt with, as Julian himself was finally dealt with at the age of 32.

The book ends with a fascinating question left suspended, as much good history does. Julian was killed in his early prime, through treachery by one of his own officers, at Ctesiphon on the Tigris, the scene of new unresolved issues even as I write. He had made a serious error in that battle, the first of his brilliant military career, but all was not lost by any means. If he had lived out a natural lifespan, or even postponed being murdered for some years, would he have stopped Christianity in its tracks throughout the Roman empire? Vidal does not go into the question of its origin in any depth, but what he highlights clearly is that it was unique among religions in being new. The associated myths and legends that in other faiths had grown up gradually from the dawn of time were being strenuously created for Christianity at top speed and even more strenuously enforced. Julian and his author saw it as still having only shallow roots, but it was an idea whose time had come, it commanded fierce loyalty as Julian's own beliefs did not, and the odds must have been against him.

Julian's reign is well documented, not least by himself, and the story rests on his own accounts supplemented by those of two familiars. The narrative is accomplished, the writing style elegant and often ironic and witty as one would expect. However the reasons that led Vidal to put nearly five years of his life into writing about Julian in particular go far beyond the availability of copious source-material. There is nothing mysterious about these reasons - the author makes them abundantly clear. The real mystery, as he leaves me in no doubt either, is how human beings in the mass manage to think the way they seem to.

I consider Julian to be a romantic novel more than a historic document. The book serves two purposes for Vidal; one, depict the Apostate Julian as a tragic hero in true Hellenistic style, and two, provide a modern criticism of Christianity. The period of Constantine (Julian's Uncle) through Julian's death marks the foundation and development of Christianity, and it is no coincidence that Vidal chooses a hero from this era to create his epic novel. The main narrator of the story is Julian himself, through his personal memoirs. However, two rival philosophers, Libanius and Priscus, regularly intercede with their personal notes. The perspective of three chroniclers broadens the capacity of the novel so that Julian can give his personal views, but events can also be editorialized from alternative angles.

Julian is a character of contrasts. Although raised by Christian monks, he becomes a champion of paganism. An affinity for philosophy, he becomes famous for his military prowess. He claims to be an intellectual, but his obsession with superstition drives all his decisions. Like a classic Hellenistic hero, Julian has an Achilles heel: his predisposition for craving for the vague and incomprehensible mysteries. Hence, he falls victim to Maximus, a character analogous to Rasputin in the Russian tragedy of Nicholas and Alexandra. During Julian's ascent to power and subsequent reign, Maximus is a ubiquitous presence to assist Julian in interpreting omens in a manner that benefits Maximus. Generally, Maximus seems to have two influences over Julian. First, he reinforces any omen that tells Julian to resuscitate the ancient pagan gods, and, second, to be the next Alexander by conquering Asia, starting with Persia.

With regard to Vidal's criticism of Christianity, Julian undergoes a change over the course of his life (much due to the cajoling of Maximus). Julian and his brother, Gallus, were raised by Bishops, Eusebius and Gregory. However, Julian quickly develops a disdain for the "Galileans" and spends his life restoring paganism. Some of Julian's observations regarding Christianity are quoted below (page numbers may not align with all editions, but can be used to help find relative positions):

"A religion of brotherhood and mildness which daily murders those who disagree with its doctrines can only be thought hypocrite, or worse." (pp. 31)

"The Christians wish to replace our beautiful legends with the police record of a reforming Jewish rabbi. Out of this unlikely material they hope to make a final synthesis of all the religions ever known. They borrow from our mystery rites, particularly those of Mithras." (pp. 81).

"The search is the whole point to philosophy and the religious experience. It is part of the Galilean impiety to proclaim that the search ended three hundred years ago when a young rabbi was executed for treason. But according to Paul of Tarsus, Jesus was no ordinary rabbi or even messiah; he was the One God himself who rose from the dead in order to judge the world immediately. In fact, Jesus is quoted as having assured his followers that some of them would be alive when the day of judging arrived. But one by one the disciples died in the natural course and we are still waiting for that promised day. Meanwhile, the bishops amass property, persecute one another, and otherwise revel in this life, while the state is weekend and on our borders the barbarians gather like winter wolves..." (pp. 285).

"By the time Constantine, Constantius and the horde of bishops got through with Jesus, little of his original message was left. Every time they hold a synod they move further away from the man's original teaching." (pp. 288)

As Augustus, Julian states that "no one shall ever be hurt by me because of his faith" but indicts the gathered bishops with lists of their latest crimes and calls them hypocrites. (pp.291)

"The Christians do not offer enough, though I must say they are outrageously bold in the way they adapt our most sacred rituals and festivals to their own ends. A clear sign that their religion is a false one, improvised by man over time, rather than born naturally of eternity." (pp. 331).

Julian is truly an epic novel. So rich with detail and elaborate characters, Vidal takes you to 350 AD. The political forces are delineated as if they were in today's newspaper's headlines. For a more explicit and forthright exposition of Vidal's criticism of Christianity, I would recommend "Live from Golgotha: The Gospel According to Gore Vidal." In that novel, Vidal lampoons biblical characters as they construct the modern testaments to Jesus.

This is one of the finest works of historical fiction that I have ever read. I find myself wondering why I waited so long to finally get to it. If Gore Vidal had written nothing else in his life, this volume would have been enough.

It was the religious aspect of the novel that most interested me. This book addresses issues that are still quite controversial about the early days of the Christian Church in the Roman world. It's "triumph" over Hellenism was far more complicated and messier than most people realize. Indeed, Julian, as the last great champion of the old Gods (or rather the one ultimate God of Plato with His many aspects) comes across as the most spiritually sincere character in the book. It is refreshing to follow the thoughts of a sincerely good man whose only motivation for most of his life was to lead a good life in pursuit of Truth. Even when the titles of "Caesar" and then "Augustus", are forced upon him by men who realize his goodness, his first thought is always the welfare of those he now rules and never his own glory and power. Here, is one of the very few times the ideal of the Philosopher King was ever realized in the flesh.

One comes to realize, through the words of the Emperor and his biographers, the true nature and value of both classical philosophy (love of wisdom) in it's many aspects, as well as the equal importance of mysticism, magic, and the Mysteries in the Roman world.

You also see how the myth of the good Emperor who once saved the West, and who will one day return, far predates the time of Charlemagne, or even Arthur.

Vidal has captured the transitional, turbulent world of the 4th century C.E. better than any other writer. You feel the corruption, greed, and decay that would ultimately spell the end of the empire in the next century. You find yourself mourning for the lost power and virtue that was once Rome's. It is obvious that Vidal has actually read Plato, Homer, Aurelius, Plotinus- unlike so many other writers that try to exploit this time period. Vidal understands the twilight of the empire; he understands what was lost- and why.

It can be somewhat eerie reading the accounts of Julian's legions advancing through Mesopotamia. The accounts of his troops entering the opulent deserted palaces of the Great King, the relatively easy initial victories and defeat of the enemy army, the resulting constant hit-and-run warfare, the atrocities and cruelty of the enemy, the treacherous civilians, the miserable intense heat, the lack of support from home, the grumbling of the troops themselves, even the burning naphtha pools- you realise that all of this has happened before. Even Julian sees that it had happened over and over before his own time. It is proof of Aurelius' eternal cycles.

Before reading Julian, my only experience with Gore Vidal was his book Creation. Although that book was interesting, it ultimately failed to satisfy me, and so I delayed reading Julian for some time, despite my fascination with the topic of Roman history.

Julian is a much better book. The mood of the Empire, so late in its day, is neatly captured, with it's encumbered bureacracy, rigid ceremony, political strife, and growing religious fervor. Into this strangely recognizable world enters Julian, a second-born son with an interest in philosophy and the old religious rites, and a latent flair for leadership. Vidal evokes Julian's ambitions and fascinations concerning the "old gods" and the "new cult" of Christianity. Julian champions the former on the road to the throne, scorning the Galilean's followers while maneuvering in a world where the new religion was politically charged and dangerously assertive. The book centers on this debate, but digresses into more immediate problems such as the problem of imperial succession and barbarian incursions into the Empire. Julian is forced into the role of secular leader and military commander, where he displays repressed talents in war and at court. Although his ultimate ambitions are cut tragically short, Julian is consistently portrayed as a gifted leader with sympathetic goals. He is a hero of a world that was passing away, and his valiant attempt to bring the Golden Age of pagan Rome back is a vain yet noble struggle in the face of a changing world.

Vidal's personal touch is the commentary written "in the margins" by two philosophers, comparing their own experiences to Julian's first-person testimony. Their vanity, sarcasm, and selfish reflections on the apostate emperor lend levity and humanity to the novel, as well as filling in several controversial gaps that history leaves to us. Vidal's conjectures in these places are convincing and a little bone-chilling, and deftly expressed in the remarks between these two men.

Overall, I was pleasantly surprised with Julian and recommend it to anyone curious about the later Roman Empire and one of its most fascinating -- and most often misunderstood -- characters.

Gore Vidal is, perhaps, best know for his historical fiction. Books like 1876, Burr, Washington DC, and Empire bring history to life through the use of fictional characters. Julian, on the other hand, is narrarited via letters between two of Julian's contempories and is based on these letters and Julian's own (if somewhat skewed) autobiography. There are so many angles to Julian's life. The restoration of Hellenism and reining-in of Christianity is perhaps the best known, but Julian's devotion to restoring the empire by re-establishing Rome's influence in the northern reaches of Gaul and his ideas of public education are also important. Regardless of one's views on Christianity (or even the Roman Empire) Vidal's novel will gather your interest quickly and keep you reading to discover the fate of Julian. Vidal paints the portrait of a hero, scholar, and master tactition, that the reader can not help but cheer along. I read this book because I am very interested in the rise of Christianity and the environment that made the rise of such an inprobable religion possible. Vidal, somewhat a skeptic himself, does a remarkable job on this front. He elicits the thoughts and beliefs of the people of the time -- not just Julian and the court, but scholars, businessmen, and city leaders. I would certainly recommend this book to anyone who has an interest in early Christianity -- scholarly or not.

From the earliest pages, Vidal serves up a novel which makes the value and tragedy of history all the more poignant. And it is more history then fiction. Much of Vidal's book is based directly on the philosophical writings of Libanius as well as the extant writings of Julian himself. The social and political life of the Fourth Century Roman Empire comes alive in this wonderful book. Vidal does for this century what Robert Graves did for the First Century in "I Claudius". To say that "Julian" is a Classic is no pun. Julian as an historical figure has stood out far more than many of his contemporaries who ruled much longer. His attempt to alter the course of history he is both remembered and reviled though not often completely understood. Vidal in his inimitable way, has cut through the rememberance and revulsion to paint a wholly human portrait of this continually fascinating figure.

Historical fiction does not get any better than this, and I'm
a tough audience. It is far and away one of my favorite books, and I only wish I could have the experience of reading it again for the first time. As far as I'm concerned this is Gore Vidal's finest work. Julian, the orphaned nephew of Constantine, raised in seclusion as a devout Christian, now a young nerdy philosophy student, is suddenly elevated to Ceaser and thrust into Gaul to quell the revolting German tribes with inadequate troops and commanders who have been instructed to
ignore him. Neither his cousin, the Emperor Constantius, or even Julian himself, realize that this unlikely prince is the greatest military genius since Alexander.

Vidal does a very credible job of describing Julian's early life and the conflicts and intrigues within his family and the imperial court. Julian comes across as a very real, complex, and even likable human character, as do the uniquely vivid secondary characters. Vidal is at his ironic and sometimes hilarious best in his discriptions of the conflicts in the early Christian church, and the correspondence and comments about Julian's diary between two philosophers who knew him are brilliant. Julian's unlikely conversion to Paganism is very vivid and believable. After all he DID try to restore the worship of the old gods, so he obviously felt pretty strongly about it. One is left feeling a sad "what if...." at his death, and cannot help but feel that history would be very different had he lived.

It's a case of not knowing where to start in recommending it. This is definately the alternate view of history, one the Christian church has been at pains to obliterate for centuries.

This is Vidal's take on Julian the Apostle, in a fictional memoire, who tried to stamp Christianity out of Rome. It is very fun and as far as I can tell, a very accurate reconstruction of the time. What is most interesting is Vidal's take on it, that is, that Christianity would turn out to be the worst thing that ever happened to Western Civilisation and this was the last opportunity to snuff it - rather than as the inevitable positive outcome. That took guts to write, in particular in the 1960s when it was published. His take is simply wonderfully jaundiced.

This is also a good place to learn about Rome and what was going on at the twilight of the Empire, with its power struggles, multiple religions, and decadence. It is all very amusing in Vidal's hands.

Warmly recommended.

A novel about a Roman emperor whose rule was brief, Julian known as the Apostate was the nephew of Constantine. When he became the emperor he tried to bring back worship of the "old gods" and oust Christianity, a religion not favorably portrayed, though neither are the old ways of oracle and sacrifice. Three different views of the same historical events are presented by having three different narrators - Julian himself, and Libanius and Priscus both philosophers who knew him. The philosophers are carrying on a correspondence regarding Julian's autobiography sometime after his death at age 32.

Well written and researched, this book invites fascinating "what if.......?" speculation; just imagine if he had reigned longer and been successful what a totally different place Europe would have been.