[jacobriis]

Talk about your cultural bubbles.

The historicity of "same sex unions" of Roman emperors (Nero, Elagabalus) is debated. These claims may have been recorded to discredit those emperors.

There was no legal recognition of same sex marriages or unions in ancient Rome.

[Retric]

I personally have some doubts about Elagabalus, the accounts sound like a hatchet job, it’s much closer in time to the actual ban. But, sometimes people are just nuts so we should expect some historical leaders to do some really strange things. The Nero account is both more neutral and the described wedding a public spectacle so it seems unlikely for someone to just make it up whole cloth. Though it’s also been debated extensively, we simply don’t have concrete proof either way.

In terms of legality of marriage in Rome, I mostly agree. Arguably male adoption of other adult men could be largely equivalent to heterosexual marriage as far as the state were concerned. Ie name change, social rank, and property as there’s no kids and no wife possibly leaving her father’s control depending on the type of marriage. To be clear it was often a political tool, but that doesn’t mean it was always a political tool. Just something to think about.