Were Gilgamesh and Enkido a couple? Were Achilles and Patroclus a couple? - Historum

**Satuf** · September 7th, 2011, 08:00 AM

The title really says it all.

Were they? Why or why not?

**Sargon of Akkad** · September 7th, 2011, 08:15 AM

I've not seen any reason to think that Gilgamesh and Enkidu were gay lovers. Its entirely possible that Achilles and Patroclus were, but I personally think that its more likely that they were meant to represent male bonding, rather than homosexual coupling, but that is probably just my modern heterosexual mindset.

**okamido** · September 7th, 2011, 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sargon of Akkad

but I personally think that its more likely that they were meant to represent male bonding,

I also have never read anything that thought this, outside of a "modern" interpretation. As to Achilles and Patroclus, the idea was never postulated that their's was anything but a friendship till much, much later in history.

I find it odd that these friendships in literature take this avenue of thought.

**gaius valerius** · September 7th, 2011, 09:27 AM

Well Greek culture had the specific older man-pubescent boy bonding which entailed sexual intercourse as an accepted part of mainstream culture. As for the thread: we-will-never-know-for-sure... if you can't accept that...

**okamido** · September 7th, 2011, 09:40 AM

That is a 5th century interpretation however. I discussed this in a thread that Nick had created once before. The terms used in the Iliad describe Achilles and Patroclus as "War Buddies", and nothing more. The concept of the sexual relationship sprung from, The Myrmidons, which was written while the "mentor-pupil" relationship was in full swing....if you get my drift.

There is not one single word in the Homeric epic that implies anything but deep seated friendship.

**gaius valerius** · September 7th, 2011, 10:24 AM

Deep seated

Srry, couldn't resist.

**Sargon of Akkad** · September 7th, 2011, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by okamido

That is a 5th century interpretation however. I discussed this in a thread that Nick had created once before. The terms used in the Iliad describe Achilles and Patroclus as "War Buddies", and nothing more. The concept of the sexual relationship sprung from, The Myrmidons, which was written while the "mentor-pupil" relationship was in full swing....if you get my drift.

There is not one single word in the Homeric epic that implies anything but deep seated friendship.

I agree. I was actually surprised when I read the Iliad and found it didn't describe them as being particularly gay at all.

Achilles and Agamemnon, though, now that's a pair who need to just f*** and get it over with...

**clement** · September 7th, 2011, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by okamido

I also have never read anything that thought this, outside of a "modern" interpretation. As to Achilles and Patroclus, the idea was never postulated that their's was anything but a friendship till much, much later in history.

I find it odd that these friendships in literature take this avenue of thought.

Well, I think that the Romans, whose vision of homosexuality was quite ambivalent (especially since such a relationship between Patroclus and Achilles would have meant that one of them was completely effeminate and unmanly for them), were already somewhat bothered by this friendship. Hence Statius had achilles raping Deidamia, since a predatory sexuality was considered manly by the romans.

**gaius valerius** · September 8th, 2011, 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by clement

Well, I think that the Romans, whose vision of homosexuality was quite ambivalent (especially since such a relationship between Patroclus and Achilles would have meant that one of them was completely effeminate and unmanly for them), were already somewhat bothered by this friendship. Hence Statius had achilles raping Deidamia, since a predatory sexuality was considered manly by the romans.

Not all Romans. As Rome became Hellenised the Greek concept of male intercourse became also accepted, just think of the arch-example Hadrianus and his boy lover. However that also didn't exclude there to be opponents (Cicero for example who questioned some of its manifestations), though this as well brings us to an already noted point: interpretation of later generations, even the Romans weren't free of that.

**clement** · September 8th, 2011, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gaius valerius

Not all Romans. As Rome became Hellenised the Greek concept of male intercourse became also accepted, just think of the arch-example Hadrianus and his boy lover. However that also didn't exclude there to be opponents (Cicero for example who questioned some of its manifestations), though this as well brings us to an already noted point: interpretation of later generations, even the Romans weren't free of that.

Well firstly, Hadrianus was an emperor so he was allowed many things in fact. And he was not the passive partner. Think of Caesar who was mocked for having possibly played this role with Nicomedes.The Romans had a completely opposite view of sexuality than the christians : for them, what was considered despicable was not to seek pleasure to the detriment of the other, but to give pleasure to the other (for a man of course) because it was a sign of weakness. Patroclus and Achilles were both heroes so a homosexual relationship was out of the question for the Romans. It was even more the case since I believe that Achilles was younger so according to the Greek view, he would have been the passive partner.

Not to mention that the Romans had an ambivalent view of sexuality as a whole : it was not necessarily bad, but it was not valued and it could become a sign of weakness if it showed a lack of self-control.