A few years ago, really when I was just getting into the Paganism scene, there was an obsession with Sol Invictus, The Unconquerable Sun. I don’t really know how serious this was, honestly, it seems like it was an aesthetic choice for some people. But to pass it off as “wholesome reddit Dark Souls reference” is really selling it short. This was the cult of choice for the late Roman elite, effectively shadowing the traditional Imperial cult in its significance (not that these two things were in contradiction). Many people have misconceptions about Sol Invictus, that it is a different god than the so-called “Sol Indiges”, and that is connected to the cult of Elagabal promoted by Elagabalus, one of the most infamous emperors in Roman history. There is not much evidence for this other than the fact that both Elagabalus and Aurelian moved focus of Roman religion towards a Sol-like deity. Aurelian, however, had personal motivations for elevating Sol to primacy. From the Historia Augusta, Aurelianus I.IV:
“As to his mother, Callicrates of Tyre, by far the most learned writer of the Greeks, says that she was a priestess of the temple of his own Sun-god […] Furthermore, it is said, the priestess made swaddling-clothes for her son from a purple cloak, which the emperor of the time had dedicated to the Sun-god.”
It is possible that Aurelian himself generated this story to legitimize his cult, the Historia Augusta is not a very reliable source, but given that it cites a historian who lived during the reign of Aurelian I find no reason to assume that it is false. Another reason I am skeptical of the “eastern origins” of Sol Invictus is the disconnect between Elagabalus and Aurelian. Aurelian ascends to the throne almost half a century after Elagabalus dies, after which the cult of Elagabal is largely returned to Syria. Also, Aurelian came from humble origins in Illyria, he was not acquainted with older Imperial families. If anything, it is far more likely that Sol Invictus is actually related to the Illyrian Sun Cult given the Dalmatian origins of Aurelian.
I’ve been told I should add more Boob Breaks in my posts, and I love my subscribers so I will listen to their calls!
The nature of solar deities among the Indo-Europeans can often be rather confusing. It is generally agreed that the Sun is the daughter of the Sky Father in the earliest Indo-European traditions, but among the Greeks and Indo-Iranians, this is switched. There develops a masculine sun-god in the form of Helios-Apollo, Mithras, and Surya. Armenians and Anatolians were also sun-god worshippers, but the Armenian pantheon is heavily influenced by Mesopotamian, Urartian, and Zoroastrian religion, and I’ll get into the Anatolians later. This could be evidence of the “Graeco-Aryan Connection”, or it could be a result of the sunnier climate in these areas. However, the Sun even when characterized as a feminine deity (the son of Dyeus) was also seen as an element of Dyeus, who comprises the entire daylit sky. The Zoroastrians call the sun the “Eye of Ohrmuzd”, the Greeks saw it as the “Eye of Zeus”. In Beowulf, the Sun is referred to as the Lamp of Heaven, and Gaelic literature refers to the Sun as the “eye of the great God” ('sùil Dè mhòir'). The Luwian Sky-Father, Tiwaz, is also the Sun God. Because the Anatolians branched off earliest, this may suggest that once upon a time the sky and Sun deities were undifferentiated.
Helios is obviously associated heavily with Apollo, but he is also strongly associated with Zeus, either as something of a “second Zeus” or as an expression of Zeus himself (and vice versa). As early as the 5th century BC and onwards, Zeus is occasionally characterized as a Sun-god. If I remember correctly, Iamblichus and some other Neoplatonists basically view Helios and Zeus as interchangeable. Julian the Apostate, in his Hymn to King Helios, provides probably the best source on the nature of Sol Invictus. Julian, being both the Emperor of Rome and the student of Sallust, is particularly qualified above pretty much everyone else in history to comment on this.
The text is not that long, maybe consider reading it yourself, but here are three proper insights from it which I think you should all know. Firstly, Julian seeks to syncretize the Cult of Mithras with the Cult of Helios (Sol Invictus). Firstly, Julian sees Helios and Zeus as equivalent:
“then let us call to witness the priests of Cyprus who set up common altars to Helios and Zeus; but even before them let us summon as witness Apollo, who sits in council with our god. For this god declares: "Zeus, Hades, Helios Serapis, three gods in one godhead!" Let us then assume that, among the intellectual gods, Helios and Zeus have a joint or rather a single sovereignty.”
He cites Homer in this as well, pointing out that Zeus does not respond to Helios’s rage with paternal aggression, perhaps recognizing that they are equal in power. Secondly, Julian recognizes a triune and vertical deity of “Three Sols”. There is firstly, The One, the simple and perfect Godhead from which everything stems, secondly, Helios-Mithras, which he equates with the Intellect/Demiurge, and thirdly, there is the Sun, which is the physical object which allows for sense (through light) and which allows for physical life in this world. It makes some sense. The Sun is the source of our world (both insofar as it sustains its existence and in hindsight that our world literally materially descended from it), and it is the source of light which allows us to distinguish truth. It is also the natural clock, for the day and the seasons, and rises and sets in a sinusoidal way just as in our world order comes from chaos and vice versa. So it makes sense to consider this the physical embodiment of the One and the Intellect. This is not necessarily out of place for hymns, albeit. It is very common for hymns to ascribe transcendental powers to the deity they are targeted at. If you are familiar with the Vedas, you will know that many deities are regularly attested omnipotent characteristics in their respective hymns. I still don’t entirely understand Julian’s nature of the “Triple Helios”, but have seen attempts to do something similar with Zeus. I believe Plethon attempts to assign “True Zeus” to the Monad.
Thirdly, as you may have noticed, Julian is syncretizing Helios and Mithras. In my opinion, this is a bit of a decadent characteristic, the emphasis on Mithras rather than Apollo, but at the time it made sense due to the popularity of the Mithraic Cult (especially among the Military and Imperial circles). Julian himself was an initiate. The Mithraists were already, in some sense, worshipping a form of Helios with Iranic ornamentation, but by late antiquity the intellectual and religious center of the empire had unfortunately migrated to its easternmost borders. The actual Zoroastrian Mithra is already very Apollonian, though. He is the protector of truth, oaths, and cattle (Helios, by the way, is also strongly associated with Cattle). And of course, he is strongly associated with light and the Sun.
Combined, you can see that Sol Invictus serves as something of a foil to the Christian God. By associating the source and the intellect with one symbol of generative force, there is suddenly something to challenge Jehovah, who creates the world Ex Nihilo. Is it any wonder that Constantine, before becoming a Christian (and arguably for some time after) was a devotee of Sol Invictus?
Even after Constantine’s conversion, he would justify Christian policies using Sol Invictus, and symbolized Christ as a new Invictus. Here is a Constantinian decree from 321 AD, 9 years after Milvian Bridge. Two years before his vision concerning Milvian Bridge, in 310 AD, Constantine was said to have received a vision from Apollo.
Why Constantine continued to uphold Sol Invictus until the 320s is not clear. It is possible that it was only for appearances, but it is also possible that Constantine’s conversion to Christianity was much more gradual and careful than it is popularly remembered as by Christians (or at least Catholics and Orthodogs). Sometimes you have convert zeal, but there are times where the hesitant convert gives birth to the zealot son. Constantius II, despite being a schismatic who is now held in ill repute, was relentlessly anti-Pagan.
Things like the Cult of Mithras, or Sol Invictus are often brought up as “competitors” to Christianity, but the Roman Empire’s conversion to Christianity was much dirtier and more political than that. Rome had been in something of a cultural malaise since the late Republic, and on top of that it is difficult to have an ethnic religion when most urban parts of your empire have become a racial cloaca. The Roman religious strata was impoverished due to movement away from the central pantheon and towards foreign mystery cults and the like, if people were worshipping at all. The Cult of Mithras was entirely an esoteric thing and probably wouldn’t have gone anywhere, but with proper care and guidance perhaps Sol Invictus could have risen. But, Christianity hijacked the Roman government before people would have anticipated. Only around 10-20% of the empire was Christian at the time Constantine converted. However, Christians were exceedingly effective networkers and marketers. They were able to play local politics to their advantage and get a lot out of any elites and wealthy men who converted. They were highly charitable as well, even to pagans, so persecution of them could get negative responses. Reminds me of those urban political machines in the early 20th century handing out Turkeys to immigrants in return for their vote. Diocletian could have done much more to uplift Roman religion but seemed more concerned with persecuting the hardy Christian population, and then leaving his empire to go farm cabbages while it collapsed into civil war (seriously, why is he so popular?). Due to the importance of state organization for Roman religion, Constantine made a bad situation worse as his successors gradually cut off support for the Roman priesthood and eventually began to persecute it. Whether Julian could have done anything by the time he was in power is questionable, but a good half of the empire and maybe more was still Pagan so who knows? Not that it matters. Julian was killed in Mesopotamia by the Persians not long into his reign. If Paganism were ever to be revived in the west, perhaps Sol Invictus would be its rock, because it is easier to adopt from a monotheistic Christian background.
Oh yeah. And I’m pretty sure Solaire from Dark Souls is based off of the idea of Sol worship becoming the primary religion of the west in a world where Christianity fails or doesn’t exist.
Boob break thumbnail. Can’t read this one right now but I will certainly be cumming back. Thank you so fvcking mvch Liam Anderson
i stop reading for a week and you release 5 'stacks.. what the flip buddy!