Verus

A clarification: Meditations Book I verse 16 states, concerning things Marcus learned from his adoptive father, emperor Antoninus Pius (not his biological one): ..."and the efforts he made to suppress pederasty". This is not entirely clear from the context how this is intended, though I believe it's probably referring to political decision rather than personal life.

Otherwise, having read some of these works referenced by the posts on this thread, the points are fundamentally correct about homosexual behavior being generally more accepted, even at times encouraged, by the Greeks & Romans.

espumoso55

I think that homosexuality was something rather assumed in Greek and Roman society.

For me, it was Judaism which, hipocritally accepted that there were homosexual human beings and also accepted that they had to belong to their religious community, however, they could not speak out about it or to show this condition; moreover, they had to do their best to fight against their natural trend and accept this challenge. It had to be concealed or surpassed as a disease. This was what the Torah said in the Levitic book, so, understanding that primitive Christians inherited the Judaism and the Old Testament books, Christians and Church radicalized their stance regarding homosexuality. In other words, Christianity censored and discriminated homosexuality to a high degree but after Greeks and Romans. This is for me an important fact, because it implies a before/after point of cultural acceptance of homosexuality. I don't see that pre-Christian empires made any explicit rejection of homosexuality, even the mentorship of man-to-younger man including sexual affection was something very appreciated by Spartans.

In ancient Greece and Rome it was even a sympton of prosperity to have a young man as a lover, even children, what would lead us to another debate about pederasty. I say a young man, not a young woman because I have not certainty of the acceptance of lesbianism. Besides the known lovers of Julius Caesar or Alexander, there is an anecdote about Cato the Elder when he was censor. Cato decided to expel Lucius Quinctius Flamininus from the Senate. The reason? Extreme cruelty. When Flamininus was in Piacenza during the Macedonian wars his lover, a young man he loved (written this way by Plutarch) complained because he'd miss the gladiators combats that were held at Rome's Circus at the moment and he wanted to see blood. So, Flamininus, to make amends for his lover decided, at the end of a banquet, to kill by himself a Gallic nobleman he invited. The fact is that Cato did not accept Flamininus for the Senate, not due to his homosexuality, and Cato was a very conservative man, but due to the cruelty he showed. If the complain that led to this sacrifice would have come from a woman, I bet that Cato would have made the same decision. Theodor Mommsen also mentions this anecdote and gives the name of scortum to Flamininus' young man lover. So, there was a word to name the homosexual lover of the general. I have no reason to think that it was a contemptuous term.

As a conclusion, I believe that homosexuality was a sexual trend that, if not completely accepted, it was more tolerated by ancient Greece and Rome than in Christian era where, in my opinion, the real war against homosexuality started. By the way, I wonder whether did Romans accepted homosexuality the same way after they accepted Christianity.

wildcat

When I was in college a long, long time ago, my history professor held a forum where he discussed gays in the military. This was big news because of the "Don't Ask. Don't Tell" policy that was the top newstory at the moment. Anyway, he discussed the Greeks and the Romans armies and the attitudes of the people.

Basically, being gay or having a male lover was no big deal. One has to take in consideration the society they were living in and the attitudes they had towards women and even the idealized human form. In those times being gay was not a taboo subject like it is today.

I would go farther but I would repeat what has basically already been said.

Gile na Gile

According to Plato, Socrates himself was a self-confessed fudge-packer. It's in one of the Dialogues, and I remember the passage well as he was in the middle of teaching the elenchus to a group of students when he makes a casual comment about the 'wonderful firm buttocks' of a galley slave who had just passed by - it scarcely raised an eyebrow among his listeners (or to be precise, Plato's characters - whom we must assume inserted it to show that Socrates was a mere mortal 'like the rest of us'). I've read a lot of texts from the period, and it wasn't commonplace by any means, but references did appear from time to time that gave you the impression that it wasn't a big deal, and was cerrtainly socially sanctioned. Oysters and Snails were often on the menu, for the aristocracy at least it seems.

throughthepastdarkly

Checking my translation again I see it is, in fact, "putting a stop to the pursuit of boys"... and so in generalizing, showing just how prevalent it really was.

avon

Such a delight use of language Gile!!! [cringe]

Comet

Did you do a double take when you read that?? I know I did

Pedro

Pure Poetry.

JoeDoaks

Theban "sacred band" were tight (300 of many thousands does not equate to 'majority')
Otherwise 'gayness' was not prevelant.
If it were, then why have most fo the Greek and Roman plays and myths dealt with male/female love?

I don't buy into the male 'queerness' thing. I believe it is just historical 'cherry picking' to justify a belief system.

Cadell

What belief system does it justify?