Greek Sexuality PDF

November 18, 2024 Greek Sexuality Cont. Sexual imagery was common in classical Athens, oftentimes with a different focus than we might expect. The herm, for example, was a sexual image of the community’s masculinity and strength. Depictions of female sexuality are quite different. The ancient Gree...

November 18, 2024 Greek Sexuality Cont. Sexual imagery was common in classical Athens, oftentimes with a different focus than we might expect. The herm, for example, was a sexual image of the community’s masculinity and strength. Depictions of female sexuality are quite different. The ancient Greeks were generally much more comfortable with depictions of male nudity than female nudity. Maenads and Satyrs The satyr is often an expression of exuberant male sexuality. We see scenes of sexual fantasy in painted pottery. On one particular Kylix vase we see a Maenad, identified by her staff, laurel crown, and leopard skin cloak, fighting off a satyr, who is identified by his bulbous forehead, pointy ears, prominent erection, and horsey tail. His horsey tail clarifies that this is an Athenian depiction of a satyr. Outside of Athens Satyrs were typically depicted with more goat-like features. Satyrs were often depicted with prominent erections in comic or ribald scenes. This is a narrow focus on an exuberant kind of masculinity. These depictions were quite prevalent on pottery. Curiously, satyrs are, at times, depicted as quite wise. Selenus is one such satyr, noted for wisdom. Plato also used to highlight how Socrates kind of looked like a satyr. We have other ithyphallic (‘having an exaggerated erection’) depictions. Some have composite animals, such as a bird with a large penis for a head, or other suggestive scenes, such as a garden of phalluses being watered by a woman. Heterosexuality The ‘heterosexual and homosexual divide’ is how ancient sexuality has been discussed in the past, but this is a modern designation and is likely a misleading way of engaging with ancient homosexuality. The Greeks certainly had a binary understanding of gender. However, there is little to suggest such a rigid definition of sexual orientation was present in antiquity, and these rigid definitions don’t really appear until the modern era. In thinking about sexuality, there is a certain emphasis on power hierarchies. Dover saw this emphasis in the ancient evidence as well. In depictions of ancient sexuality, there is an emphasis on the dominant sexual partner (typically male) and the passive sexual partner (typically female). Dover argues that erotic vase paintings give us an idea of what the Greeks thought about sex, and in these paintings, there seems to be an interest in illustrating domination. The ancient Greek discussion is also preoccupied with dynamics of domination. Most of the women depicted in vase painting are some form of ancient sex worker. Depictions of sex carry a clear demonstration of dominant-subordinate behaviour. Depictions of marriage are quite different. Achilles and Penthesilea vase (By Exekias, currently in the British Museum): This vase depicts a scene from the mythic cycles following the Iliad, in which the Amazonian Queen Penthesilea is slain by Achilles, who, as he plunges his spear into her chest, falls in love with her. The Anakalypteria (‘unveiling’): A scene from the Elgin marbles (Parthenon) shows the unveiling of Hera after her marriage to Zeus, and thus, showing the meeting of heaven and earth. The strong, level gaze between a wedded couple is a recurrent trope in Greek art. We see a similar gaze in a 5th century BCE relief of Eurydice and Orpheus (from Naples), who are accompanied by Hermes. Roman poets tell us that Orpheus, when rescuing Eurydice from the underworld, failed in his task at the last second and dooming her to eternal death. We suspect that earlier Greek versions of the myth tell us that Orpheus was, in fact, successful in rescuing Eurydice, which this relief most likely depicts. Male Homosexuality Frustratingly, we lack any really solid evidence from the early period about female homosexuality, aside from the poet Sappho, whose reception is vague. With the overwhelmingly male character of our evidence, it seems that ancient Greek men largely just did not seem to be interested in female homosexuality. When we talk about homosexuality in 5th century BCE Athens, which some authors refer as simply ‘homosexuality,’ we are more precisely referring to pederasty: sexual relations between mature men and immature boys. This is obviously a controversial and difficult area of scholarship. Greek homosexuality remains controversial. As the dialogues of Plato show (cf. Symposium), homoerotic behaviour was conspicuous among the Athenian elite. In Plato’s Symposium, Athenian elite men convene to discuss love, and mentions of women are scant in the text. Where did the institution of pederasty come from? (This is a very particular kind of relationship). Was this a phenomenon of the emerging polis? Dover makes this argument. Was it an inheritance from Indo-European society? Bremmer insists this relationship dates back to before the Greeks. Greek vase painting and poetry emphasise courtship. Dover has argued (with recent criticisms) that these scenes reflect the typical marital gaze, as opposed to more typical erotic scenes. Attic courtship-scenes We have pottery depicting elite Athenian men presenting prospective lovers with gifts. Gymnasium A Greek word meaning ‘naked-place,’ as exercise was conducted in the nude. Zeus and Ganymede How far back does the institution of pederasty go? Dover argues that there is no evidence for this in early epic or early poetry until the classical period. The mythological story of Zeus and Ganymede clearly suggests Zeus behaving in the fashion of a pederast. Are these depictions a reinterpretation of the myth in the manner of classical Athenian relations, or are they an older example of these relations in Greece? We also find the myth of Zeus and Ganymede in the Homeric Hymn to Aphrodite (202-217). Dover would argue that Ganymede is abducted here on purely aesthetic grounds. If Davidson is right, and we have to go beyond explicit depictions of sex and sexuality, one could certainly find this to be a prime example. 5th century BCE Greeks certainly thought this was erotic. They received the relationship between Achilles and Patroclus as similarly erotic. A trick with this is that epic as a genre was not one where the nitty-gritty of intercourse was typically depicted. November 20, 2024 Greek Sexuality cont. Was the ancient Greek dynamic of an older male sexual partner and a younger male sexual partner uncommon in the wider ancient world? Maybe. We have some evidence that homosexuality was legislated against by cultures across ancient West Asia (with Persia being an exception, according to Herodotus 1.135). This evidence is tricky though, as laws aren’t necessarily indicative of actual social practice. Rome also had strong laws against male homosexuality, but whether or not they were seriously enforced is different. Understanding Greek Homosexuality How do we understand Greek homosexuality? It’s a complex social phenomenon with no simple explanation. Scholars have developed two radically different approaches that are mutually exclusive. Greek homosexuality as a phenomenon of the polis Dover argues that homosexuality was a phenomenon of the polis. One of the strengths of Dover’s work is his meticulous attention to evidence, although he has his biases. He argues that there is no early evidence for overt homosexual behaviour, but he has been criticized for only looking for overt depictions of sex acts. Dover argues for the segregation of the sexes, particularly at the elite level, and the intense societal anxiety about the legitimacy of one’s heirs. Dover argues that in this heavily sexually segregated society the pursuit of boys by elite men becomes a kind of ‘courtship substitute,’ as women of their own social class are largely inaccessible. This argument makes homoeroticism a kind of ‘substitute for the real thing.’ This reflects Dover’s own personal conceptualization of homosexuality as inherently ‘abnormal.’ Homosexuality and Initiation Bremmer takes a radically different view: Bremmer argues that there is something initiatory about the practice as we see it and it is connected with puberty-initiation. Around the ancient world we see all kinds of ritualised behaviours surrounding the processes of maturation, and in particular puberty-initiation. A series of initiation procedures for young males was part of the inheritance of the Greeks in the prehistoric period. Where initiation procedures had lapsed in historical times (almost everywhere), the homosexual practices remained. The absence of overt homosexuality in early epic is the result of conventional reticence (Homer tends to elide all kinds of bodily processes and functions, there’s an argument that they’re just not a feature of epic). Bremmer uses cross-cultural evidence from the southwest Pacific, in Melanesia, New Guinea, and Australia. Bremmer also uses evidence from classical Sparta, which is tricky to work with, as our evidence for classical Sparta comes from a minor post-classical historian. Dr. Brown doesn’t find either of these arguments to be totally convincing. Dover makes excellent use of the evidence, and Bremmer makes compelling use of cross-cultural evidence, but both approaches have their limits and shortcomings as a total explanation. Sexuality is one of those areas that is tricky, as we tend to view it through our own perspectives. You really have to step away from modern notions of sexuality. It’s evident that the Greek male was much more open to various kinds of sexual experiences in a way that wouldn’t be neatly categorizable. The Symposium Symposion = ‘dining together’ The symposium is a highly stylized sort of drinking party. A feature of commensality, it is an important aspect of many societies, and an often complicated social phenomenon. It is also a place where we find an interesting exchange between the household, or the ‘inner-world,’ with the ‘outer world.’ In Homer we find the ‘warrior’s feast,’ a conspicuous feature of Homeric society. The symposion followed the act of eating the meal (deipnon), but it became the focal point of these events. Features of the symposion: The male participants wore garlands, reminiscent of Dionysus, who was in part the god of wine. Libations, offerings of wine poured on the ground, and prayers began and ended the proceedings. The symposiasts reclined on their left elbows (one or two to a couch), and from this practice evolved the shape of the room (andron). Standard size of the drinking group was 14-30. A range of vessels for mixing and serving wine. The Greeks drank a totally different kind of wine than we are used to, which necessitated watering down for enjoyment. A  symposium would elect a symposiarch as a leader, whose job was to determine the course of the gathering and control the amount of water which was used to dilute the wine. The presence of female entertainers. These were not women of the household, but sex workers, who we’ve seen depicted on quite a few vases now. The symposium ended with a procession through the streets (called a komos), which demonstrated the solidarity and power of the group. One komos after a particularly politically charged symposium led to a political revolution and the overturning of a local government. The word komos may also be the root for our word ‘comedy,’ which could mean ‘songs of the komos’ Symposium as an aristocratic institution The symposium was an aristocratic activity based on the warrior group. Compare this with the Spartan reclining syssition (‘shared mess’), which remained the basis of Spartan military organisation. Clearly this idea of dining and drinking together was at the root of the Spartan army. The symposium was the centre for the transmission of cultural values. The Megarian poet Theognis gives us a body of moralising poetry, telling us how one ought to behave. These were sympotic songs, reinforcing social values. It was also an occasion for homosexual bonding, political activity (the aristocratic hetaireia = private club), a place of pleasure (games, entertainment (dance and song, maybe even acrobats)). This was also an occasion for serious poetic performance; having a renowned poet sing at your banquet or symposium was a major signifier of status. Over time the symposium declined in importance, in the classical period and beyond, but remains somewhat significant as a social focus throughout antiquity. We see sympotic scenes depicted in art through the ancient world. Sympotic Literature Various forms of ‘lyric’ poetry. Plato began a tradition of works about the symposium with his dialogue ‘Symposium’, which is held as one of the great works of philosophy and literature. Another example is Athenaeus’ Deipnosophistai (‘Learned men at dinner’). An interesting Roman example is the Cena Trimalchionis from Petronius’ Satyricon (Your intrepid T.A’s have been translating the Cena this term, so if you’re interested in it at all feel free to shoot us an email or ask us about it; it’s a real hoot). November 20, 2024 Greek Myth Greek myth is a large assemblage of stories set in a largely imagined past concerning the doings of gods and heroes. It is an unusually vital strand of classical influence. Many cultures have comparable strains of storytelling traditions, but rarely have they been as influential and mainstream as the Greek myths, particularly in western European culture. Greek myth continues to influence modern storytelling, such as the science fiction genre (E.g., Dune, 2001: A Space Odyssey). Myths are often marvellous stories. Prominent families in the Greek world would trace their lineages back to mythical figures. Communities even had mythic stories that they saw as their collective past. The figures of myth also touched upon Greek reality. This can be seen on the grave marker of a deceased child from the British Museum, showing a Siren carrying off a child, as if to express the grief of the living family members. What is Myth? The term ‘myth’ was applied to a large number of tales before people began to consider conceptual issues. For us, a myth is fundamentally false, but the ancients didn’t really think of them that way. If we define what a myth is, is there a comprehensive definition? Is there something that unifies this broad array of stories? We talk about sagas, legends, folktales. Are these myths? Not everyone will agree on any one definition. Myth is a traditional tale Myth is a traditional tale. The word comes from the Greek word mythos and seems to be connected to a kind of ‘speech making’ and oral performance. Typically, stories and tales involve a sequence of actions. Dr. Brown argues that Greek myth, in its strictest sense, is a traditional tale, meaning a story that has been handed down from earlier generations forward. A tale becomes traditional not by being created, but by being told and retold and accepted over time. Sometimes we see pseudo- myths, myths made up in a moment to serve that specific moment and composed to look like other myths. One example is Plato’s tale of the lost city of Atlantis. Sagas, legends, and folktales can all be types of traditional tales. A traditional tale is: Not bound to any text o The stories themselves existed and were told before any texts were made, but may be found in texts. Not bound to any reality o It is not the product of any one historical moment. As it is retold in different contexts, the way it is told and presented changes. Various periods leave different marks on myths. The product of language o A traditional tale has to be told and retold. Pictorial representations of myth may give us a glimpse of a moment from myth, but it does not tell us this myth. When approaching myth, Dr. Brown sees myth as a kind of tool, which can be used to do all sorts of things. He draws a line in the sand in 399 BCE, the year of the death of Socrates. Before the death of Socrates, if the Greeks wanted to think about a problem, they would explore the issue through myth. After the death of Socrates, the Greeks would explore the issue through philosophy. There was a real change in Greek culture in the 4th century BCE, but Dr. Brown advises caution in drawing too distinct a line in the sand in this way. Scholars have tried to formulate comprehensive theories of myth which tie them together in a descriptive or functional way. They often try to say “Myth does x or y.” They shouldn’t do that. With a big theory, you tend to want things to fit ‘just so,’ and you begin to torture the evidence to make it fit in the ‘procrustean bed’ you’ve made. Here are 6 of these monolithic theories: 1. All myths are nature myths. All Myths explain meteorological or cosmological phenomena. For example, the Hero vs Monster represents light vs darkness in nature. This certainly works for some myths, but not all. For example, a 19th century scholar posits the Polyphemus, the cyclopic ogre from the Odyssey, represents the sun, which is a bizarre claim. 2. Myths are aetiological. From the Greek word aition (‘cause, reason’). Myth is seen as a kind of proto science, in which myths seek to explain some feature or aspect of the world. Ex. Why is the Hellespont (Black Sea) called the Hellespont? That’s where Helles fell off of her magical flying ram. Thus, it is an aetiological myth explaining the name of a geographical feature. But is that all myth does? Also no. 3. Myths are charters. Myths serve as charters for customs, institutions, and beliefs. This is similar to aetiological interpretations, but more practical. In a traditional society, every custom or institution tends to be validated or confirmed by a myth. Why is the king in charge? Well, a few generations ago his ancestor was handed a sword by a woman who lived in the lake. Are all myths charters? Also no. 4. Structuralism. Associated with French anthropologist Claude Lévi-Strauss. Strauss posited that myth is a kind of primitive computer, made up of binary opposites that seek mediation. This is an often complicated kind of theory, for which enthusiasts produce very complicated arguments involving charts and figures. Levi-Strauss was not a classicist, nor was he particularly interested in Greek myth, and his own analyses rarely touched on them, but followers of his have used his frameworks to analyse Greek myth. An example is the analysis of Apollo’s marriage to Cyrene (both a girl and a city) and the birth of Aristaeus. Cyrene didn’t like being relegated to the loom and preferred to hunt lions in the wild with her bare hands. Apollo sees Cyrene wrestling a lion barehanded and falls in love with her. Apollo marries Cyrene in Libya, where the colonial city of Cyrene was founded. The pair have a child named Aristaeus, who is a pastoral deity. Pindar tells us this mythic history of the city. Structuralists look at this myth and see binaries: Nature and Culture. Early Greek thought does tend to talk about things in terms of their opposites. There are present ideas of civilization and the wild as opposites. Apollo is civilization, while our young woman who wrestles lions barehanded represents the ‘wild.’ Their union results in a pastoral deity, which represents the midpoint, or synthesis, of  civilization and the wild. The biggest problem of structural analysis of myth is that you often have to bleach away the details. In this case Pindar clarifies that Cyrene’s wildness is in the service of the protection of her father’s flocks, so she herself has a pastoral function in the narrative, which a structuralist interpretation scrubs off. Nature + Culture = Something else, feels a little banal. 5. Psychological theories. Freud is very influential in the interpretations of literature. Freud discussed the myth of Oedipus in The Interpretation of Dreams (1900), where he details the “Oedipus complex.” This stems from the repression in early childhood of sexual feelings for the parent of the opposite sex, accompanied by the desire to suppress the parent of the same sex. Oedipus, in Sophocles’ play, was fated to murder his father and marry his mother. Freud sees this as a phase of our individual psychological development. However, do this or to make this make sense, you really have to strip down the myth and its particular details a lot and ignore the details. Freud saw folktales, myths, sagas, and even jokes and popular stories, as related to dreams in form and content. 6. To be continued….