That "homosexual" Achilles

[Jona Lendering]

It is a common error (see other thread) that Achilles and Patrocles were lovers. At least, it's not in the Iliad. Does anyone know how this error came into being? Is it mentioned in our sources? I can not remember having read it anywhere, but I haven't read everything of course. Anyone any thoughts?

[M. Demetrius]

Well...in the movie.... :roll: :oops:

[Epictetus]

Aeschylus in his play Achilleis, perhaps?

The hypothesis that the homosexual variant originated at some time later than the beginning of the sixth century, and could well have originated in the fifth, must be taken very seriously in the light of two other major inventions, of similar tendency, by fifth-century poets.

The first of those two is Aeschylus’s well-known treatment of Achilles and Patroklos. In Homer Patroklos is the older of the two (IL xi 786f) and there is no overt indication of homosexual eros in his relationship with Achilles. Aeschylus, wishing to make the relationship overtly homosexual, with Achilles as erastes and Patroklos as eromenos, reversed their ages in his Achilleis trilogy, a matter on which Pl. Smp. 180a remarks. Evidently Achilles’ extravagant grief for the death of Patroklos seemed to Aeschylus the grief of a lover for his beloved, and he simply changed the story to suit his purpose (not too radical a change compared with the scale of his inventiveness and rejection of tradition in Eumenides on the origins of the Areopagus).

Dynes, Homosexuality in the Ancient World

[Jona Lendering]

Aeschylus in his play Achilleis, perhaps?

Very plausible. Thanks. But does anyone know what's Pl. Smp. 180a?

[Praefectusclassis]

Plato, Symposium?

Very different was the reward of the true love of Achilles towards his lover Patroclus—his lover and not his love (the notion that Patroclus was the beloved one is a foolish error into which Aeschylus has fallen, for Achilles was surely the fairer of the two, fairer also than all the other heroes; and, as Homer informs us, he was still beardless, and younger far). And greatly as the gods honour the virtue of love, still the return of love on the part of the beloved to the lover is more admired and valued and rewarded by them, for the lover is more divine; because he is inspired by God. Now Achilles was quite aware, for he had been told by his mother, that he might avoid death and return home, and live to a good old age, if he abstained from slaying Hector. Nevertheless he gave his life to revenge his friend, and dared to die, not only in his defence, but after he was dead. Wherefore the gods honoured him even above Alcestis, and sent him to the Islands of the Blest.

http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/p/plato/p ... osium.html

[Jona Lendering]

Plato, Symposium?

Of course.

[PMBardunias]

This same twisted logic, that grief or risking one's life must be due to sexual activity, is still being used by modern authors to shore up a case for obligate sexuality between "inspirer" and "hearer" in the Spartan tradition. There is a famous tale of a fallen Spartan whose "lover" stood over his body and defended it suicidally. This story has been used to show they were sexually involved on the odd notion that only sexual bonds could inspire such sacrifice.

[geala]

You see the problem in your agumentation? The classical Greeks were seemingly very eager to add a homosexual flavour to the relation of Achilles and Patroklos, although absolutely nothing about it is in the Ilias. Why? Because it was a common topic and common behaviour of the time, I presume. Otherwise no one would have been convinced or pleased by it.
So you could also use the case as an argument not against but in favour of homosexual relations between Greek warriors in the classical time. Maybe the Spartans were no exception. Surely they were not the only ones and not on the peak. Elis, Boeotia, Kreta, Makedonia were also often named for this. The hundreds poleis of Kreta were mainly Doric societies, as were the Spartans.

[Paralus]

This same twisted logic, that grief or risking one's life must be due to sexual activity...

The word "twisted" is incorrectly used and over-strong. Whilst some may have made over much of the evidence and - more to the point - applied modern Christian overlays to ancient cultures that knew nothing of such mores, that evidence is clear. Homoerotic relationships existed in ancient Greece and were fostered amongst the warrior culture - particularly the elite. Philip's Macedonia applied as much of the Laconian ethos as it did Persian.

Sparta, as the pre-eminent Archaic and early classical military society, hardly bucked the trend. Indeed it likely was the trendsetter.

[M. Demetrius]

What you say is true, Paralus. It is always hard for us to separate ourselves from our modern viewpoint, partly because we don't sufficiently inform ourselves of the ancient viewpoint. While we may utterly disagree with some practice or morals of the ancients, they would certainly have a quite different view of our behavior, too, in more ways than we would find palatable.

To a rope, being twisted is a good thing. :wink:

[PMBardunias]

It is always hard for us to separate ourselves from our modern viewpoint, partly because we don't sufficiently inform ourselves of the ancient viewpoint.

I agree that there is great danger in assessing these relationships because of the cultural baggage we carry, but it works in the reverse as well. Many are quick to see homosexual coupling, as opposed to homoerotic bonding, a very different thing, precisely because homoeroticism is frowned upon in our culture. Better we stick with the ancient sources. Two of our best are very clear on the subject. Xenophon says that most greeks won't believe it, but the relationship between "lovers" at Sparta was ideally (i.e. officially) platonic. "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. (X.Lac Const. 2.4)" Most modern scholars turn this into Xenophon trying to cover up the true sexual relationships, but given his acceptance of them in other poleis and his discussion of Agiselaos' infatuation in Asia with a boy, I have yet to read a convincing arguement. Aristotle, no laconophile, goes on at length about just how non-homosexual the Spartans were. He laments it in fact, for if they were more homosexual like the Celtoi the virtual Gynocracy he decries would not have power. Lampito knew just what she was doing. :wink:


You notice I said above that in was "Officially platonic". That is because sex surely occurred in individual cases. There is no relationship on earth, including parental, where the opportunity has not been exploited by some for sex. I know of few commentators who have opined that altar boys exist to form homosexual bonds with priests (and through semen transfer become men!) yet we see that this develops frequently. The problem is not that they engaged in homosexual acts, it is that by relegating the Spartan espnelas to simply a man seeking sex we loose far too much of the institution and its meaning. I think just as they were expected to be discreet with their new brides, Spartans were expected to abstain from this type of sex. That they may not have on an individual basis is another matter entirely.

[Celtic505]

For me personally, the idea of Achilles and Patroclus being lovers makes the story better. Its more emotional or admirable that he seeks revenge for the death of his lover as opposed to very very close friend. Almost in a Sacred Band of Thebes kind of way.

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

And the question is,what about the Sacred Band of Thebes? Were they really 300 homosexuals?

[Jona Lendering]

300 homosexuals?

I think the Greeks themselves would have said that acts, not people, are homosexual.

[Giannis K. Hoplite]

I would agree. However I don't think that I've come across any ancient greek word that means homosexual. The modern greek one "????????????" could have been used in antiquity,but i doubt.