The myth of homosexuality in Ancient Greece or Hellas

[Orphic_Hymn]

Of course homosexuality existed in Hellas, just as it has existed, and will continue to exist, everywhere and at all times in human history. However, while it did exist, it was never legally sanctioned, thought to be a cultural norm, or engaged in, without risk of serious punishment, including exile and death.

It was Walter Pater (1870's a poet and tutor) he and his band that just out of a weird coincidence were all homosexuals, originally began this fiasco of a theory in Oxford.
We find them introducing a totally new "theory", in which Platonic love has nothing to do with "phyche" but is totally based on phisical attraction.

Later we find a list of wanna-be "historians" of Hellinic sexuality, see: Michel Foucault, John Boswell, John Winkler and David Halperin that were or are all homosexuals striving to make some connection between homos and Hellinism. The reason, of course, is simple. The Hellines have always been viewed as a model of civilisation. So what better way to justify their "sick nature" than by connecting it to the greatness of the Hellinic civilization and by doing so, legitimise same-sex?


While today with the words 'heterosexual' and 'homosexual' (note that both terms including lesbianism were coined after Pater and Co's fiasco of a theory) we simply denote the sexual preference of an individual. The ancient Hellines on the other hand, while never had absolutely no form of definition for 'heterosexuals'.. used the term 'kinaidos'.. in order to describe 'homosexuals' and their preference..

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 written, '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 the very word's meaning is 'he who provokes shame'... we see to speak of acceptance when they claimed that homosexuals 'provoke shame' is rediculous, but since assumptions are of no value, let's look into the issue...

Now, one of the basic arguments promoted by these self proclaimed 'historians' of ancient Hellinic sexuality is found in the texts. They use the terms "erastes- eromenos' in their fiasco by giving the translation of 'lover and the 'passive member' of the 'relationship'..

If we were to spend a min. to read what the texts tell us, we'd see that this translation is obviously flawed (I'd say intentionally)...

Plato, Euthydemus 282b
“there is no disgrace, Cleinias, or reprobation in making this a reason for serving and being a slave to either one's lover or any man, and being ready to perform any service that is honorable in one's eagerness to become wise.�

Plato’s Symposium,184b

“it is our rule that, just as in the case of the lovers it was counted no flattery or scandal for them to be willingly and utterly enslaved to their favorites, so there is left one sort of voluntary thraldom which is not scandalous; I mean, in the cause of virtue.
It is our settled tradition that when a man freely devotes his service to another in the belief that his friend will make him better in point of wisdom, it may be, or in any of the other parts of virtue, this willing bondage also is no sort of baseness or flattery. Let us compare the two rules�


Xenophon Symposium 8.8
[8]“Now, I have always felt an admiration for your character, but at the present time I feel a much keener one, for I see that you are in love with a person who is not marked by dainty elegance nor wanton effeminacy, but shows to the world physical strength and stamina, virile courage and sobriety. Setting one's heart on such traits gives an insight into the lover's character.�


Xenophon Symposium
[26] Furthermore, the favourite who realizes that he who lavishes physical charms will be the lover's sovereign will in all likelihood be loose in his general conduct; but the one who feels that he cannot keep his lover faithful without nobility of character will more probably give heed to virtue. [27] But the greatest blessing that befalls the man who yearns to render his favourite a good friend is the necessity of himself making virtue his habitual practice. For one cannot produce goodness in his companion while his own conduct is evil, nor can he himself exhibit shamelessness and incontinence and at the same time render his beloved self-controlled and reverent"

Plato’s Republic 403b
“may not come nigh, nor may lover and beloved who rightly love and are loved have anything to do with it?� “No, by heaven, Socrates,� he said, “it must not come nigh them.� “Thus, then, as it seems, you will lay down the law in the city that we are founding, that the lover may kiss and pass the time with and touch the beloved as a father would a son, for honorable ends, if he persuade him.�

All of these texts give a meaning of obtaining knowledge and virtue, none of them refer to anything sexual .


It has been argued that artifacts have many homosexual scenes depicted. If we are to look at vase art, we also come to interesting conclusions.

In his book, K.J Dover (considered as one of the authorities on ancient Hellinic sexuality. LOL) presents a total of 600 vases.
What is very interesting is the fact that only 20-25 (I am really generous here) can be concidered to depict something sexual. The rest of them 575!!! have nothing to do with the topic in question. Yet he manages to connect them with some actually ridiculous assumptions. example:
In artifact E373 the young man depicted has a tiny penis but a normal scrotum, in E368 his scrotum is enormous,
In another vase he mentions that "the hoop and walking stick carry their own symbolism" (what is the symbolism ?????)
What about this well known artifact that depicts Achilles mending Patroclus' wound... he uses the same 'penis argument' once again..


It is also interesting to note that the exact theory that both Dover and Reinsberg have introduced, is that, during these alleged homosexual acts, actual penetration NEVER did take place!! because the ancient Hellines believed that it was disgracefull.
Simple proof of this are the vase paintings found after the Persian defeat, where we find the Hellines coming up to the bent over Pesian fully aroused. Clearly depicting domination.

So the question that must be answered is: what kind of homo paradise was Hellas when we never did have any kind of penetration?


If we were to look at Aeschynes' Against Timarchus, we find a list of laws..

Of course many conveniently argue that the text and laws refer only to prostitution.. but we find Aeschynes using the law of "grafi etairisios"..

"etairisios" from "etairos"= comrade, companion. we also find the well known "hetaires", what we concider today, thanks to all this mistranslation as whores, but the word clearly gives a different meaning, so they should actually be concidered companions or I think the more apropriate meaning would be something similar to mistress.

If the argument was only about his selling his body (as a whore does) then the law should have used the term "pornh" from "pernimi"= "to sell" and has the meaning of whore, prostitute.

The very FACT that in 1.29 Aeschynes uses the words
"H peporneumenos,physin, H etairikos =
"either prostituted or has became a "comrade/companion" (in short, his *****)

Prove that the laws mentioned apply to both male prostitutes and homosexuals..

Some of the laws mentioned :

a) The teachers of the boys shall open the school-rooms not earlier than sunrise,and they shall close them before sunset. No person who is older than the boys shall be permitted to enter the room while they are there, unless he be a son of the teacher, a brother, or a daughter's husband. If any one enter in violation of this prohibition, he shall be punished with death. The superintendents of the gymnasia shall under no conditions allow any one who has reached the age of manhood to enter the contests of Hermes together with the boys. A gymnasiarch who does permit this and fails to keep such a person out of the gymnasium, shall be liable to the penalties prescribed for the seduction of free-born youth. Every choregus who is appointed by the people shall be more than forty years of age.


b) If any Athenian shall outrage a free-born child, the parent or guardian of the child shall prosecute him before the Thesmothetae, and shall demand a specific penalty. If the court condemn the accused to death, he shall be delivered to the constables and be put to death the same day. If he be con- demned to pay a fine, and be unable to pay the fine immediately, he must pay within eleven days after the trial, and he shall remain in prison until payment is made. The same action shall hold against those who abuse the persons of slaves.

c) If any Athenian shall have prostituted his person, he shall 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. If any man who has been convicted of prostitution act contrary to these prohibitions, he shall be put to death.

Aeschines then summoned the jury to remember their (Athenian) ancestors, who were "stern ... toward all shameful conduct," and considered the purity of their children and fellow citizens to be "precious." He goes on to give an example regarding the way the Lacedaemonians (Spartans) felt about such matters. He justifies his praising the Spartans by quoting an old Athenian saying which teaches that it is "well to imitate virtue even in a foreigner."


There are many more quotes, texts and proof of an intentional manipulation of the words/terms in order to present something that although did exist was never considered a norm..


To be continued....

[admin]

Beautiful post Orphic... your posts are amazing references and idea and all....

[goldblood]

this is a good post i always knew that homosexuals must have been behind trying to push a homo ancient paradise..
im sure the amount of homosexuals was probably the same in society as a percentage.

[Orphic_Hymn]

As mentioned above the terms 'homosexual-ity', 'heteroseuxal-ity' were coined after W. Pater and Co presented their theroy. The story for the term 'lesbian-ism' is not that different.

Connected to the great poet Sappho, this specific 'circle' had managed to give the meaning of homosexuality to 'Sapphic' which as originally used to describe the poetry form/style presented by her and copied by many later Hellinic and Roman poets..
Sappho's poems aren't actually described as erotic (not in the conventional form) but as describing a form of "terror", she never describes the feelings as we usually see with terms of joy, happiness..etc.. but as a torment. She never describes the joyfull feeling seen in others but an emptyness, pain and misery left from emense passion...

Again we find that only after the 1890's is the homosexual theory connected to Sappho and her poems.. Due to a little mix up because of the double-meaning given to the term 'Sapphic'. We find that they came up with the term "lesbian". Since then the island of Lesbos has become a "symbol" for all female homosexuals in every language of the world. All this because of the existance of Sappho.

The major problem for all of these self-proclaimed historians/researchers, is that we only have 1 whole poem by her, saved by Dionysos of Hallicarnasos.. while the rest are mere fragments that hardly allow us to understand the topic, let alone see homosexual emotions..
There are more than enough texts that mention Sappho and provide information of her life. We find Ovid, Athenaios and Suidas among others, speaking openly of her great love with Phaon.
We know for a fact that she was a mother and wife that wrote "epithalamia"= "wedding songs" that spoke, not of lesbian affairs but of the beauty of young girls that were about to become wifes and mothers themselves.

Among these self proclaimed specialists of Hellinic sexuality we fall upon yet another reknown homosexual named Yves Battistini. He wrote a book about Sappho where he quotes a part of a poem written by Anacreondos where we find him translating:

"προς δ'αλλον τινα χασκει" and in latin font "pros d'allon tina haskei"

which when correctly translated gives the meaning of:
"towards someone else she giggles"

but this wanna-be translated it as:
" but the item of her passion is something else, a girl"

Anyone can clearly see the well orchestrated plan promoted by homosexuals for the reason given above..

[Orphic_Hymn]

Many have made similar claims about the Thebeans forming the so-called sacred band that allegedly was formed by some 150 homosexual couples..

Interesting that when we look at the original text of Plato's Symposium and 'Phaedrus' that many have connected to the myth surrounding the composition of the band, we find the traslated texts to mention :

"an army should be made up of lovers and their loves"

When we 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 ancient Hellinic texts.

What all these pseudo-scholars avoid to notice is the strategic innovation of Gorgidas. Which 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.


If we were to look into the local Thebean myths, we find that the first seen "strying from normality" would be Laios, Laios, known to most because of his son Oidipus.
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 eachother's 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 the Thebeans or any other Hellinic city would go against these traditions..

To top this off, all we need to do is 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!'"
-----------

A similar notion pertaining to the life of the Spartans has also been developed, once again all needed to be done is read what has been left to us in the Hellinic anthology..


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.


Plutarch’s Lives Lycurgus
XVII 4

Their lovers and favorers, too, had a share in the young boy’s 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.



Plutarch’s 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..

[nsminc]

And if someone were to refute these claims of homosexuality he would be vilified for being anti-gay and what not.
Curious that this myth of homosexuality was started by a bunch of gay pseudohistorians.

[pankration]

Historians with an agenda often rewrite the past. The question of Alexander's homosexuality and of course the references to Ancient Greece's supposed embracing of it are not proven by either empirical or anecdotal research. What we have, as you see above, are mere interpretations by historians who are less interested in the truth than they are in creating a falsehood that they deem beneficial to their self-interests.
Did homosexuality exist? Of course it did as it has and does everywhere. Was Alexander homosexual? There is no proof. No contemporary of his ever indicated that he was and even his biographers of later centuries do not state that he is. Except for Hephaestion, a childhood friend and confidante, there is not even mention of him being particularly close to anyone else. In fact, I consider Alexander a man so driven, so focused on his journey, that at worst he may have been asexual--or very discreet.
Did older Greek men take young male lovers? Some did but it was not a publicized, orgiastic free-for-all that many would have you believe. Even Pausanius' rape (Philip's assassin) was perceived as a gross violation of one's body and the reaction was strong on all sides. Greece was not a culture that tolerated abuse of children, women and even slaves. It happened and sometimes with dire consequences but to be told that the Ancient Greeks were a society of sexual deviants is insulting and historically inaccurate.

[Ptolemy]

Debunking the Myth of Homosexuality in Ancient Greece

A review of Adonis Georgiades' book

You've got to give Adonis Georgiades credit. Here he is, just a shade over 30, and he manages one of Hellas' most prestigious publishing houses, hosts a five-day a week TV show, runs a school which specializes in teaching the ancient language of his ancestors, and somehow still manages to find the time to lecture and write books on the subject nearest and dearest to his heart: the unrivalled and many-faceted glory of ancient Greece: A renaissance man in every sense of the word.

Naturally, a man like this is going to be more than just a little upset over the distortions and outright fabrications circulating in today's multicultural, postmodern world. A world where the unsuspecting and historically challenged are subjected to whatever deconstructed version of reality the purveyors of the kind of putrescent pap think most suits their worldview of "diversity" and "cultural equality." To such dissembling dimwits, Plato, Dr. Ruth, and Chief Seattle are intellectually, ethically, and philosophically equal! As a result, the unique contributions made by the Greeks in the millenniums-old struggle to lift mankind out of the slime of ignorance and superstition are trivialized, ignored, or put into an ersatz context which helps to promote the "isms" in fashion at the moment.

Thus, we discover that the Greeks hated and victimized their women, that they imposed their culture upon the poor, suffering peoples they conquered, that they were heartless slave-owners, that they stole their philosophy from the brown-skinned Egyptians, that they appropriated their alphabet from the Semitic Phoenicians, and that some of their most outstanding personalities -- and even some of their gods and goddesses -- were Black! Those of you who have cracked a respectable number of pre-postmodern books, or are frequent visitors to this site, know that such invidious absurdities are untrue, and can easily be proven to be untrue. The fact remains, however, that such is the blather being hustled these days, and a whole generation of innocent youth is being exposed to this poison: A poison purposely injected into their minds in order to create the stateless, colorless, genderless, faithless, inarticulate, boob-tube-mesmerized, consumer-drones the proponents of this Zyclon-B-of-the-intellect want to inhabit the "Global Village" they are hell-bent on creating.

Such fuzzy-minded huckstering is especially prominent among the professors in the Humanities departments of the colleges and universities of the Western World. The frenzy-to-conform exhibited by these homunculi -- whose shoes don't touch the floor when they are seated in their academic chairs -- is such that they are willing to sell their souls, betray their racial heritage (those who are White), and pollute the quality of their scholarship by playing an active role in the promulgation of this historical mythmaking. And it is here, in these departments, where the most infuriating lie of all -- that which posits the prevalence of homosexuality in ancient Greece -- was born. This myth, engendered in Academia, and "legitimized" by an alien and hostile element in America -- an element that controls the awesome mind-molding power of the media and Hollywood -- could not help but "have legs." And so it has come to pass that even an Al Sharpton -- a man with the intellect of a retarded Neanderthal -- could publicly refer to the ancient Greeks as "a bunch of fairies" in a speech given before an audience of his mentally challenged acolytes. "Mentally challenged" because instead of hissing and booing at such patronizingly obvious demagoguery, they cheered, clapped, whistled, and hooted with bug-eyed delight at hearing Whitey traduced and ridiculed by one of their own.




This is the myth that Adonis Georgiades so successfully and convincingly demolishes in his book Debunking the Myth of Homosexuality in Ancient Greece.

Georgiades manages, in just over 200 easy-to-read and well-documented pages, to cite a multitude of ancient sources which shed the light of truth upon the question of just how homosexuals and homosexuality were regarded in the Hellas of the 9th to the 4th century B.C. His thesis is simple: "Of course homosexuality existed in Greece, just as it has existed, and will continue to exist, everywhere and at all times in human history. However, while it did exist, it was never legally sanctioned, thought to be a cultural norm, or engaged in without risk of serious punishment, including exile and death." A pitiful creature like Barney Frank, for instance, would have -- upon his particular "proclivity" being discovered -- been executed or sent into exile. After which, his living quarters would have been fumigated and ritually purified by a priest. Unless, of course, he had previously "gone public" with his homosexual lifestyle. In that case, though he would have been permitted to live, he would, under Athenian law (grafÃ* etairÃ*sios), 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 schines. "Contra Timarchus," as cited in Georgiades, p. 69).

[Ptolemy]

We learn as well that "Athens had the strictest laws pertaining to homosexuality of any democracy that has ever existed" (62). In non-democratic Sparta, as well as in democratic Crete and the rest of democratic Hellas, there were similar prohibitions with similar punishments as that meted out in Athens, and Georgiades gives us citations galore to prove his main thesis: "At no time, and in no place, was this practice considered normal behavior, or those engaged in it allowed to go unpunished" (passim). In order to remove any doubt whatsoever, he draws on such ancient luminaries as Aeschylus, Aristophanes, Diodorus Seculus, Euripides, Homer, Lysias, Plato, Plutarch and Xenophon, all of whom have left a written record as to what the prevailing norms were concerning this behavior. He also covers Greek vase painting, Mythology and Lesbianism, while not neglecting to reveal the truth about such much-maligned personalities from Hellas' glorious past as Achilles and Patroclus, Alcibiades and Socrates, Alexander the Great and Hephaestion, and the woman that the later Greeks regarded as "the greatest of the lyric poets," Sappho.



Greek vase painting has been a favorite source for the distorters of Greek culture and civilization. Georgiades points out that, of the tens of thousands of vases unearthed so far (the count for just the province of Attica, where Athens is located, is over 80,000), only 30 or so have an overtly homosexual theme; representing, in other words, just .01% of the total (127). When one compares this small percentage to what we see today on TV, in ads, books, magazines, the cinema, etc., one can just imagine what future generations will think of us. There is more, much more, but the purpose of this review is to stimulate the reader to order the book to see for himself just how Georgiades has managed to shed the light of truth on this important aspect of Greek history.



There is one more thing, however, that must be said. Georgiades has -- in a clear and easy-to-comprehend manner -- delineated the difference between what the ancients meant when they used the words "Erastis" and "Eromenos," and the way these words are translated and used in our time. This alone is worth the price of the book. Briefly, to the ancient Greeks, the term Erastis denoted a man who mentored, in a non-physical way, an Eromenos. The Eromenos was in all cases a beardless youth who looked up to and respected his mentor, and who had been commissioned by the boy's parents to take on the vital chore of preparing him to assume the roles of husband, father, soldier, and active citizen in the affairs of his community. Georgiades delves deeply into this relationship, and explains how and why these terms have come today to be confused with the "dominant" and "passive" partners in an homosexual union.



We can only be grateful that there are still young men around like Adonis Georgiades who want only to see that the truth is told about the country they love. This book is highly recommended, and though it has been published only in Greek to date, we sincerely hope to see an English language edition in the near future.


Adonis Georgiades, Debunking the Myth of Homosexuality in Ancient Greece (OmofilofilÃ*a StÃ*n Archéa Ellátha: O Mýthos Katareëi).

http://www.grecoreport.com/debunking...ent_greece.htm

[Ptolemy]

W.C. Lacey (1968), a brilliant Cambridge classical scholar wrote, in his comprehensive examination of family life of ancient Greece:


"We are sometimes told that the Greeks were fully bisexual, enjoying both homosexual and heterosexual intercourse, and that romantic love in Greece was associated with attachments to boys and not to girls. Whatever the truth of the latter statement, there can be no doubt that, while the Greeks had a deep admiration for the physical beauty of the young male, in Athens the practice of sodomy was strictly circumscribed by law.
Boys still at school were protected against sexual assaults by a law (said to go as far back as Dracon and Solon), and we hear of strict regulations about schools with this in mind; schoolboys always had a paidagogos escorting them; in art the paidagogos is always depicted as carrying a long and heavy stick; what was this for if not to protect their charges?"[62]