Rome

[MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS]

Removed.

[MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS]

And again.

[caiusbeerquitius]

A lot of your questions are answered ín the exhibition texts to the exhibition 100000 Years of Sex , which took place in 10-2005 to 05-2006.

In Antike Welt there was two or three years ago an article about SadoMasochism in Ancient Rome, but I don´t remember in which issue - Seems to have been quite popular.
You might also get an insight by reading texts like Petronius, or the Golden Ass by Apuleius.
Then there is this:
Naturalia non Turpia

And, finally, a bibliography for Sex in Antiquity by Prof. Dr. Wilfried Stroh:
www.klassphil.uni-muenchen.de/~stroh/erotik_bib.htm

[M. Demetrius]

I wonder if they should be answered here. Maybe that's just me. Remember, we have minors on board, and some of these topics are right on the edge of legality when it comes to them.

[MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS]

Thanks Christian, I'll give them a read,

David, sent you a PM.

[M. Demetrius]

Read and replied, Yuri.

David

[MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS]

Hmm, not a very popular subject by the looks of it. Militaria it is then :wink:

[richsc]

For me, it's difficult to separate social conventions if you don't include sex to help understand how things worked. No Roman is ever shown in statues or paintings or mosaics to have a pony tail: that was the sign of a slave (according to "Roman Sex"). Makes me think of that praetorian in Gladiator who was going to execute Maximus who had a pony tail.

[Tiberius Clodius Corvinus]

Hmm, not a very popular subject by the looks of it. Militaria it is then :wink:

... only not popular to answer :oops: ... :lol:

... but anyway, I think sexuality wasn't really different from culture to culture or from ancient to now. What people do and what is socially sanctioned (i.e. considered "normal") in a particular civilisation are always two shoes. So its almost impossible to tell from texts and artefacts that people really did. Its argued by some psychologists that the more sexuality is depicted in a society the less actually happens.

[MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS]

For me, it's difficult to separate social conventions if you don't include sex to help understand how things worked. No Roman is ever shown in statues or paintings or mosaics to have a pony tail: that was the sign of a slave (according to "Roman Sex"). Makes me think of that praetorian in Gladiator who was going to execute Maximus who had a pony tail.

Sorry, so having a pony tail back then equated to being a slave? And I thought it was common ammong Germanic tribes and such. Maybe in later time it became more acceptable as there was a greater inflix of german people into the empire?

[MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS]

Hmm, not a very popular subject by the looks of it. Militaria it is then :wink:

... only not popular to answer :oops: ... :lol:

... but anyway, I think sexuality wasn't really different from culture to culture or from ancient to now. What people do and what is socially sanctioned (i.e. considered "normal") in a particular civilisation are always two shoes. So its almost impossible to tell from texts and artefacts that people really did. Its argued by some psychologists that the more sexuality is depicted in a society the less actually happens.

Hehe predictable. The reverse psychology approach is quite sensible also, but I don't know, seeing as things are TODAY I don't think that is a very coherent argument lol.

[caiusbeerquitius]

Hmm, not a very popular subject by the looks of it. Militaria it is then

Not as such, but if you look at the literature list I posted above, you´ll see that there has already a lot been written / said, and ít´ll be difficult to say a lot beyond that.

[richsc]

so having a pony tail back then equated to being a slave?

A handhold, if you get the picture. A sign of a submissive role. Romans were all into being top dog socially.

[MARCVS PETRONIVS MAIVS]

Hmm, not a very popular subject by the looks of it. Militaria it is then

Not as such, but if you look at the literature list I posted above, you´ll see that there has already a lot been written / said, and ít´ll be difficult to say a lot beyond that.

True, but it still mees to me an ''under-discussed'' topic. Roman army strength and sizes in AD300/400 has also been written a lot about, and discussions about that always seem to flare up I guess its just the nature of it...

Also, sadly I cannot read German, and two if not all of those links were in German...

so having a pony tail back then equated to being a slave?

A handhold, if you get the picture. A sign of a submissive role. Romans were all into being top dog socially.

Ahh off course, I get it now.