Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Constantine XI
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Homosexuailty in Rome? Posted: 25-Oct-2005 at 09:17 |
Well there is some evidence that Alexander possessed a more than friendly affection for Hephaistion:
But during this time it chanced that Hephaestion had a fever; and since, young man and soldier that he was, he could not submit to a strict regimen, as soon as Glaucus,
his physician, had gone off to the theatre, he sat down to breakfast,
ate a boiled fowl, drank a huge cooler of wine, fell sick, and in a
little while died. [2] Alexander's grief at this loss knew no bounds.1
He immediately ordered that the manes and tails of all horses and mules
should be shorn in token of mourning and took away the battlements of
the cities round about; he also crucified the wretched physician, and
put a stop to the sound of flutes and every kind of music in the camp
for a long time, until an oracular response from Ammon came bidding him honour Hephaestion as a hero and sacrifice to him. [3] Moreover,
making war a solace for his grief; he went forth to hunt and track down
men, as it were, and overwhelmed the nation of the Cossaeans,
slaughtering them all from the youth upwards. This was called an
offering to the shade of Hephaestion.
This has come down to us from Plutarch:
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Pe rseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0243&layout=&loc=72.1
True, it doesn't actually say Alex had raging sex with the guy, but the
death of a friend isn't the sort of thing which drives one to genocidal
excesses. One would expect that if they were simply companions, the
mourning would be alot less over-the-top. It takes the loss of someone
much more intimate to drive a person to such wanton acts of lamentation.
|
|
Alkiviades
Baron
Joined: 01-Sep-2005
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 469
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Oct-2005 at 09:24 |
Originally posted by Constantine XI
True, it doesn't actually say Alex had raging sex with the guy, but the death of a friend isn't the sort of thing which drives one to genocidal excesses. One would expect that if they were simply companions, the mourning would be alot less over-the-top. It takes the loss of someone much more intimate to drive a person to such wanton acts of lamentation.
|
Hardly proof for anything. Alex didn't have any real brothers and grew up with Hephestion as an extremly close friend from childhood on. Could be the mourning of a dear brother, no? People have done similar peculiar things upon grief of their father, mother, brother, sister... doesn't have to be a sexual relationship.
It's just guesswork, we'll never know if those two actually had an affair and - frankly - I wouldn't give a rats arse if they had or not.
|
|
Phallanx
Chieftain
Joined: 07-Feb-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1283
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Oct-2005 at 10:19 |
Tad bit too... I couldn't be more actually
Well yes Aristophanes does mention "lakkoproktos" once, he uses the
term "euruproktos" some 8-10 times and "kunaidos some 15 more...
Aristophanes actually manages to ridicule homosexuals in every occasion he mentions
them, even when talking about the God Dionysus in "Frogs". The
words "lakkoproktos", "euruproktos" and "kunaidos", are all used by
Aristophanes to actually insult and ridicule homos..
Unless someone is ready to conceder that being called "hollow-assed", "wide-assed" and "shameless" is some kind of compliment.
I will agree, as you correctly pointed out, that it's a play meant to
entertain.. so, concerning Aristophanes, Euripides or any other comedy
and drama
creator, it is completely wrong and inappropriate to use theatric plays
as historical sources.
A play is just a play, it servers the need of learning together with
entertainment. The most accurate sources are the myths themselves. It
is equivalent to being a historian of the 41st century and attempting to study
history of our times bases upon comedy shows.
Further proof in support of your "strying from normality" would be the myth of Laios.
Oidipus was the son of Laios, Laios was the first "kunaidos" according to Hellinic mythology/history.
Laios had abducted and raped Chrysippos, for this Pelops cursed him to
be killed by his own son.
So we find that the first ever recorded
"pederast" was cursed and due to this curse, his whole family line was
wiped out thanks to his "unatural activity".
We find that Oidipus married his mother (without knowing it) she kills
herself and he blinds himself.
The 4 children born by this unwanted
marriage are also doomed, the brothers Eteocles and Polynices fall in
battle killed by eachothers hand. Antigone is sentensed to death and
Ismene asks for the same fate as her sister. Justice is served for what their sick grandfather (Laios) had done.
When we know of such customs being passed down from generation to
generation and plays written pertaining this exact myth. It is hard to
believe that they would go against these traditions..
*What are the peculiar conclusions ?
Constantine XI
This is actually the exact same basis of the theory about
Achilles and Patroclos being a homo couple.. Achilles mourning after
Patroclos' death..
So whoever is in the damned position of losing a very close friend,
someone he's gone through thick and thin and his reaction is similar to
the two mentioned is a homosexual...
I guess I qualify then
Edited by Phallanx
|
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.
|
|
Constantine XI
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Oct-2005 at 16:50 |
A huge outpouring of grief is understandable, but actually sacrificing
an entire nation which had surrendered to Alexander peacefully? This
type of devotion and post-death religious dedication bears alot of
resemblance to how Hadrian mourned his favourite Antinous, and we must
ask ourselves why such especial mourning was reserved for Hephaistion.
We find Alexander showing far less grief at the death of his other
companions, clearly Hephaistion must have done something to have
received such favoured attention........
And no, I don't really care either.
Edited by Constantine XI
|
|
Phallanx
Chieftain
Joined: 07-Feb-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1283
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Oct-2005 at 18:32 |
Well not really sure to which nation you are refering to.. would it be
his "campaign" against the Kossaioi but they weren't sacrificed but
simply subdued..
The mourning after Hephaistion's death is actually nothing compared to
his reaction after the murder of Cleitus, where as Plutarch tells us,
if it wasn't for his body-guards he would have driven the exact same
spear he used to kill Cleitus through his throat..
Speculations aren't proof
|
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.
|
|
HistoryGuy
Pretorian
Joined: 08-Sep-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 193
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Oct-2005 at 20:48 |
I read that most Roman men were bisexual, meanwhile most women were fully straight.... It is weird. I am bisexual myself, but I find it as the opposite today...
|
هیچ مردی تا به حال به شما درباره خدا گفته.
|
|
Rome
Samurai
Joined: 29-Jun-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 129
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Oct-2005 at 23:13 |
disgusting!
|
|
Constantine XI
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 29-Oct-2005 at 09:56 |
Originally posted by Rome
disgusting! |
14 out of 15 supreme rulers of Western Civilization seemed not to mind it.
|
|
Nomed
Immortal Guard
Joined: 31-Oct-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 31-Oct-2005 at 01:44 |
I'm going to admit first that I haven't read this whole thread and second that this is my first post
Anyway, relationships in general in archaic societes typically were very different from what we understand today.
Many common things that we would consider homosexual today were normal
and agreed upon then, such as men grooming eachother or holding
hands.
Take a look at Sparta, in my opinion the greastest greek city state. A
society that is still considered by many stagnant, I call stable.
Besides the heliots, equality was most widespread in Sparta for both
men and women. It was also common that strongest bonds were made
between men and men and women and women. Men were men's lovers
but not in the same sense as we use today. This way when you go
into battle you will not only act more organized, but fight harder to
save your friend/lover/brother. It was seen as weak to hold
strong relationships in this way with someone of the opposite sex, or
at least that's what I understand.
|
|
Nomed
Immortal Guard
Joined: 31-Oct-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 31-Oct-2005 at 01:46 |
BTW, Alexander sucks. He was a stupid kid who just stole daddy's plans and throne.
|
|
Phallanx
Chieftain
Joined: 07-Feb-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1283
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 31-Oct-2005 at 05:56 |
Normal... depends on how ones defines normal and of course each persons perception of the laws..
While today with the words 'heterosexual' and 'homosexual' we simply
denote the sexual preference of an individual, the ancient Hellines
used only a term similar to 'homosexual' that was 'kinaidos'.. while
there was absolutely no definition for 'heterosexuals'..
Why this is of some interest/significance.. as I said while the terms
today simply define one's sexual preference, the term 'kinaidos'
actually shows us what they believed.. as Epicletus has said 'the beginning of knowledge comes from the analysis of names'... so we have :
'kinaidos' =
he who kinei thn aido from
kineo= to move , to meddle with things
sacred and
aidos = the personification of a conscience, of shame
So in reality it is ' he who provokes shame'... we see to speak of acceptance when they claimed that homosexuals 'provoke shame' is rediculous..
Now what you mention about 'lovers' fighting side by side is the
intentional mianipulation of the texts presented along with a number of
others to construct this myth..
A simple example would be the Symposium of Plato, where we find all
self proclaimed wanna-be historians attempting to connect the "sacred
band of Thebes" to the text..
In all sites I've seen this presented as an argument they all use this "translation":
"(an army should be made up of lovers and their loves)"
When you take a look at the original text you find:
"(genesthai e stratopedon eraston te kai paidikon)"
So, we find the alleged lover theory but NO eromenos = (the "passive" lover according to the stupid theory they support)
but we find (paidikon) that means (a child, boyish, still in use today
in modern Hellinic see "paidi") a very common word in Hellinic texts.
The strategic innovation of Gorgidas, was to change the form of Thebean
battle tactics. Untill then the young (students)=(strength) were the
front line and the older (tutor)= (knowledge) were in the rear.
He mixed them, combining the strength of the young with the knoledge of the old thus, creating an unbeatable army.
To top this off, just read what Philip said, when he saw them lying dead after the battle at Chaeronea.
'Perish miserably they who think that these men did or suffered aught disgraceful!'"
--
Anyway, while there are very limited if not non-existant text that
support they myth of homosexuality being some kind of norm in Sparta,
we have more than a few texts that support the exact opposite :
Xenophon, Constitution of the Lacedaemonians
2.13
[13] The customs instituted by Lycurgus were opposed to all of these. If someone, being himself an honest man, admired
a boy's soul and tried to make of him an ideal friend without reproach
and to associate with him, he approved, and believed in the excellence
of this kind of training. But
if it was clear that the attraction lay in the boy's outward beauty, he
banned the connexion as an abomination; and thus he caused lovers to
abstain from boys no less than parents abstain from sexual intercourse
with their children and brothers and sisters with each other.
Xenophon, Symposium (The Banquet)
8.70
But the men of Lacedaemon, holding that " if a man but lay his hand upon the body and for lustful purpose, he shall thereby forfeit claim to what is beautiful and noble"--do, in the spirit of their creed, contrive to mould and fashion their "beloved ones" to such height of virtue,[71]
that should these find themselves drawn up with foreigners, albeit no
longer side by side with their own lovers,[72] conscience will make
desertion of their present friends impossible. Self-respect constrains them: since the goddess whom the men of Lacedaemon worship is not "Shamelessness," but "Reverence.
Plutarchs Lives Lycurgus
XVII 4
Their lovers and favorers, too, had a share in the young boys honor or disgrace; and there goes a story that one of them was fined by the magistrates, because the lad whom he loved cried out effeminately as he was fighting.
Plutarchs Lives Lycurgus
XIV. 4
Nor was there any thing shameful in this nakedness of the young women;
modesty attended them, and all wantonness was excluded. It taught them
simplicity and a care for good health, and gave them some taste of
higher feelings, admitted as they thus were to the field of noble
action and glory. Hence it was natural for them to think and speak as
Gorgo, for example, the wife of Leonidas, is said to have done, when
some foreign lady, as it would seem, told her that the women of Lacedæmon were the only women of the world who could rule men; With good reason, she said, for we are the only women who bring forth men.
Claudius Ailianus 'History' III.12
Spartan 'love' had nothing to do with shamefulness, if there ever was any such a suspicion since they would have brought shame upon Sparta. The result would be the exile of both of the loss of their lives..
Maximus of Tyre "Declamations' 20.e
'Any male Sparta that admires a Lakonian youth, admires him only as we would a very beautiful statue. For bodily pleasures of this type are brought upon them by Hubris and are forbidden..
BTW, Alexander sucks. He was a stupid kid who just stole daddy's plans and throne |
Totally different topic but it would be interesting to hear your arguments (in the correct one)
|
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.
|
|
Yiannis
Sultan
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2329
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 31-Oct-2005 at 06:12 |
On the "kinaidos" issue. In my my mind the ancient Greeks described in this way, only those homosexuals who were "feminine".
If you were a respectable citizen and took part in the city's life (not an "idiotis"), then no-one would dream of telling you how to behave in your personal life or in a symposium. As simple as that!
Of course if you broke the law and started "diaftheirein" your neigbors kids, then things could go "very" wrong for you, especially if he was rich enough not to accept a bribe for his silence. (Just a few thoughts of mine)
|
The basis of a democratic state is liberty. Aristotle, Politics
Those that can give up essential liberty to obtain a temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin
|
|
Phallanx
Chieftain
Joined: 07-Feb-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1283
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 31-Oct-2005 at 08:13 |
According to the law 'grafh etairisios' seen
in Aescynes' Against Timarchus we know that whoever had gone public
with his sexual preference was :
Not be permitted to become one of the nine archons, nor to discharge
the office of priest, nor to act as an advocate for the state, nor
shall he hold any office
whatsoever, at home or abroad, whether filled by lot or by election; he
shall not be sent as a herald; he shall not take part in debate, nor be
present at the public sacrifices; when the citizens are wearing
garlands, he shall wear none; and he shall not enter within the limits
of the place that has been purified for the assembling of the people.
Any man who has been convicted of defying these prohibitions pertaining
to sexual conduct shall be put to death (19-20)
As I've said the text has been mistranslated and believed to only speak of prostitutes when he clearly says :
1.29
"H peporneumenos,phusin, H etairikos:=
"either prostituted or has became a "comrade/companion/mistress"
So the law obviously is refering to both prostitutes and homosexuals..
As for 'Kinaidos' the Suda online tells us :
i
Translation:
Licentious, soft. And in the Epigrams: "as of a great kinaidos."[1]
Greek Original:
i: , . : .
Kinaida
Translation:
Also kinaidia ["perversion, deviance"]. Shamelessness.
[Note] that Chelidon was called the kinaidos of Cleopatra.[1]
Greek Original:
Kinaida: kai Kinaidia: hê anaischuntia. hoti ho tês Kleopatras kinaidos Chelidôn ekaleito.
Notes:
For kinaidos - Latin cinaedus - and its cognates see also kappa 1635.
It has been termed "etymologically mysterious" (K.J. Dover, Greek
Homosexuality [London 1978] p.17) and its exact meaning, if any, is
still a matter of debate amongst scholars. J. Davidson, Courtesans and
Fishcakes (London 1997), argues strongly for relating this and associated terms to sexual appetites of any kind which focus on the anus;
N. Fisher (Aeschines, Against Timarchos, translated with introduction
and commentary: Oxford 2001) 45ff and passim seeks to re-establish
orthodox phallic associations.
Edited by Phallanx
|
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.
|
|
Alkiviades
Baron
Joined: 01-Sep-2005
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 469
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 31-Oct-2005 at 08:36 |
You've really dwelled on that stuff Phalanx... this is rather interesting, seeing that you loathe homosexuals as much as you do. Going to direct a very good friend of mine, who is homosexual, to read your posts. He's also quite a scholar and maybe he'll share some insight with you... dunno how you'll take it, of course
|
|
Phallanx
Chieftain
Joined: 07-Feb-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1283
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 31-Oct-2005 at 08:59 |
Well my personal feelings/beliefs are beyond the topic, my interest in
this topic, as in all others pertaining to Hellas is simply based on my
deep interest in ancient Hellas and how some versions of history are
presented..
Ancient Hellas, that has been intentionally used by clearly
manipulating texts to prove that someting was a norm, that this sexual
preference was accepted, when in reality the whole situation is quite
different..
(no one is arguing it never existed, just that it was neither a norm nor widely accepted)
As long as I don't see manipulation of texts and we 'play' based on
originals and not some wanna-be's presented translations, I honestly
would find it quite interesting..
|
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.
|
|
Nomed
Immortal Guard
Joined: 31-Oct-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 31-Oct-2005 at 13:27 |
I don't think you understood my post of maybe it was just because I
represented it quickly and inadequately. I more or less agree
with the way you are looking at it Phallanx, but I was using the terms
of homosexual today and not back then. I just wanted to point out
that male/male and female/female bonds OF FRIENDSHIP at the time were
expressed very differently, which caused a lot of scholars who looked
back on these texts to declare that they were all homosexual.
|
|
Matt
Immortal Guard
Joined: 28-Dec-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Dec-2007 at 13:41 |
Originally posted by Cornellia
The ancients (including Rome) had a different viewpoint regarding homosexuality. It only became a slur IF you were the passive member in the relationship. |
Can you please direct me to sources about this? I'm a beginner, but when I read e.g. Tacitus or Suetonius they both show disdain towards homosexuality. On the other hand, if it's not allowed to be the passive partner in Rome, all homosex relationships (as we see them today) must be considered bad???
|
|
Constantine XI
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Dec-2007 at 15:54 |
Originally posted by Matt
Originally posted by Cornellia
The ancients (including Rome) had a different
viewpoint regarding homosexuality. It only became a slur IF you
were the passive member in the relationship. |
Can
you please direct me to sources about this? I'm a beginner, but when I
read e.g. Tacitus or Suetonius they both show disdain towards
homosexuality.
On the other hand, if it's not allowed to be
the passive partner in Rome, all homosex relationships (as we see them
today) must be considered bad???
|
Hi Matt,
I have read Suetonius and I don't recall him mentioning homosexuality
in a negative light at all. I got through about half of Tacitus and
couldnt find anything in there in the form of negativity towards it.
Could you provide a passage from one of the author's which you think
shows this?
It was not that you were not allowed to be the passive partner, but
that if you were a man of high office and standing that you were not
meant to be passive. So a master was not meant to be passive with his
slave, but the opposite was quite acceptable. An equite was not meant
to be passive with a pleb, but the opposite was quite acceptable. The
older male was not meant to be passive with a younger male of the same
social ranking, etc.
|
|
Matt
Immortal Guard
Joined: 28-Dec-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Jan-2008 at 19:51 |
Originally posted by Constantine XI
Could you provide a passage from one of the author's which you think
shows this?
|
Ok, from Suetonius;
Augustus
68. In early youth he incurred the reproach of sundry shameless acts.
Sextus Pompey taunted him with effeminacy; Mark Antony with having
earned adoption by his uncle through unnatural relations; (...)
71. Of these charges or slanders (whichever we may call them) he easily
refuted that for unnatural vice by the purity of his life at the time
and afterwards;(...)
Claudius
33. He was immoderate in his passion for women, but wholly free from unnatural vice.
Otho
2. Having through her wormed his way into Nero's good graces, he easily
held the first place among the emperor's friends because of the
similarity of their characters; but according to some, also through
immoral relations.
Vitellius
3. He spent his boyhood and early youth at Capreae among the wantons of
Tiberius, being branded for all time with the nickname Spintria (...)
Titus
7. (...) he was also suspected of riotous living, since he protracted his
revels until the middle of the night with the most prodigal of his
friends; likewise of unchastity because of his troops of catamites and
eunuchs (...)
Some of his most beloved paramours, although they were such skilful
dancers that they later became stage favourites, he not only ceased to
cherish any longer, but even to witness their public performances.
|
|
Constantine XI
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 06-Jan-2008 at 04:49 |
Thankyou for that Matt.
I have both texts at home but currently my home computer is dead and my internet has been cut, I am only able to get on the net sporadically. I will endeavour to address the passages you quoted when my connection is re-established.
|
|