Greek love reconsidered

By: C.C.

Book review - Transl. of review in OK magazine 75, October 2000

Earlier on in 2000, the Wallace Hamilton Press and NAMBLA published a smart booklet, Greek Love Reconsidered. In four essays, four American scholars consider various aspects of the classical Greek pederastic tradition. The section titles in this review are not the titles of the essays.

The Platonic interpretation versus the abuse interpretation: two unrealistic extremes

Thomas K. Hubbard, Professor of Classics at the University of Texas, Austin, discusses two opposite interpretations of Greek pederasty. In nineteenth-century England, boy love was romanticized by intellectuals, and held to be the zenith of spiritual love and noble, affectionate pedagogy (lesbian love was romanticized in a similar way). The Platonic ideal tended to cover up the physical aspects to boy love, which isn't surprising in times when the subject matter has to be approached very cautiously and when sublimation is a survival technique. At the other side of the spectrum is a scholarly tendency today to explain the Greek relations between men and boys as a form of exploitation that was characterized by inequality in age and status, where the boy underwent the man's advances passively and without experiencing pleasure. According to Hubbard, the influence of classicist Kenneth Dover "has largely been responsible for the dogma that homosexual behavior was generally acceptable among the Greeks as long as adult male citizens retained the dominant role of active pursuer (eratês), and was scorned only with reference to the effeminized status of the passive, usually young beloved (erômenos), whom Dover sees as comparable to the 'violated' and disgraced maiden in modern times." Hubbard states that the homosexual activist and classicist David Halperlin has used this interpretation for part political reasons: he would have intended to show that homosexuals have absolutely nothing to do with this 'exploitation' of youngsters by older men. Hubbard notes that scholars have turned away from the classical paradigm of intergenerational relationships, which before (to Oscar Wilde, among others) served as an inspiration for resistance to the rigid condemnation based on age, status or gender.

A politically inspired negative view of pederasty already developed among the classical Greeks themselves. "Greek social attitudes were just as capable of change from one generation to the next as 20^th century attitudes toward homosexuality." With increasing democracy in Athens, pederasty, which according to contemporary poetry was the aristocratic romantic norm, was denounced together with the aristocratic elite. Politicians specializing in demagogy (just like today) accused each other of committing pederasty (today, of oral sex), and declared that the phenomenon was incompatible with the division of roles between men ans women. It was unacceptable for men to display an 'effeminate' mentality. When the Athenian politician Aeschines from the fourth century BCE was revealed to have pederastic tendencies, this classical closeted pederast defended himself by painting the Platonic, purely spiritual picture which was wholly unrelated to the lasciviousness and desire for gain he imputed to his opponents. Hubbard compares this historical development to the recent condemnation of boy love by homosexuals who sought to be accepted through the glorification of homogeneous relationships (characterized by 'equality' in, for instance, age). Well, what do you do if you want to avoid being accused of 'recruiting children'? You resolutely condemn, at least to the outside world, all sexual relations and contacts with young people.

The story of the vases

H.A. Shapiro, W.H. Collins Vickers Professor of Archeology and Chair of Classics at the Johns Hopkins University, discusses the Athenian vase paintings that record pederastic scenes. A returning motive shows the eratês, the lover or suitor, tickling the chin as well as the genitals of the erômenos, the beloved.

Shapiro describes the picture of a young male who stretches his arms out to an even younger boy. The young person is identified by the inscription as Euphronios, a well-known vase painter (whom this painting is not attributed to), and the boy is called 'Leagros kalos'; handsome Leagros, who also was an historical figure; to know, an aristocrat. The name of the seemingly universally adored Leagros appears in about eighty vase inscriptions, augmented by the term 'kalos'. Euphronios has himself made Leagros the subject of vases as well, for instance, in a playful scene with naked (female) prostitutes. At an elderly age, Euphronios "potted a fine cup decorated by a younger artist [...] and carrying an inscription in praise of Glaukon, the son of Leagros".

With the rise of Athenian democracy, the family became a central institution and explicit pederasty disappeared from the arts together with heterosexual 'pornography'. Shapiro: "In the years after 500 BCE, when erotica of all kinds blossomed on Attic vases as never before, pederastic scenes, though rapidly overtaken by the heterosexual in popularity and numbers, nevertheless display a varied mix of old and new motifs. It is perhaps fitting that one of the very latest, before the sudden disappearance of the motif ca. 465 [BCE], is also one of the most startling to modern eyes: a bearded man with hairy chest and powerfully erect penis fondling the crotch of a small, barely pubescent boy who, far from intimidated by this lavish display of potency, slips one arm affectionately around the man's neck and enjoys the attention". The booklet contains sixteen (!) images of vase paintings.

The noble kidnapping

In the third essay, David B. Dodd, Visiting Assistant Professor of Classics at the University of California in Los Angeles, discusses an ethnographic account by the Athenian historian Ephorus (fourth century BCE) about a ritualized form of pederasty on Crete. A partly staged abduction of the erômenos by the eratês led to two months of being together. A few days ahead of the abduction, the eratês informed the boy's friends of his plan to abduct the chosen boy. These friends would only allow the abduction to take place if they considered the eratês worthy and of sufficient social standing. After two months of feasting and hunting, the erômenos was showered with expensive gifts and was given the opportunity to publicly voice his opinion of the eratês. After having been together with the man, who was called philêtor (lover) by the Cretans, the boy was held in high regard. Possibly, the custom was a rite that marked the boy's initiation into adulthood. The man and the boy were both compelled to behave with dignity, and their behavior was evaluated by the community.

Several scholars tend to see in the Cretan ritual the most original (and the purest?) form of pederasty; an initiation practice with no record of how intimate the man and the boy actually got; a rite that only later developed into pedagogical and sexual relations between men and boys outside Crete. Dodd questions this interpretation and suggests that the rite was but one of the forms of pederasty that were practiced in classical times. He takes great pains to interpret Ephorus' very concise account; it seems that this is the only known account of the abduction ritual.

Pederasty versus tyranny

The fourth essay, by S. Sara Monoson, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Northwestern University in Illinois, relates and interprets the romanticized history of Aristogeiton and his younger lover Harmodius. According to the myth that took shape shortly after their demise, the institution of democracy in Athens was owed to these two men. In 527 BCE, Hippias became the absolute ruler (tyrant) of Athens. His brother had been turned down by Harmodius, and had revenged himself by discrediting Harmodius' sister. In turn, Harmodius and Aristogeiton planned to even the score by killing Hippias and his brother. They succeeded in murdering the latter, but they did not escape alive. The rule of Hippias became harsher. In 510 BCE, Hippias was deposed with the help of the Spartans, and soon the democratic reforms set in. A statue to the memory of Harmodius and Aristogeiton was given a prominent spot on the Athenian marketplace. King Xerxes of Persia occupied Athens for a brief period of time and had the statue removed, but after he was gone a still more impressive monument was built unto the dead lovers and put in the marketplace. The two were venerated in many ways. The statue, a Roman replica of which is in the Museo Archeologico Nazionale in Naples, shows a nude bearded man with a younger beardless nude man beside him. The essay does not reveal around which age Harmodius became Aristogeiton's partner.

Monoson sums up a number of reasons why the two were so suitable to be heroicized. They had died and thus there was no risk that their fame would pave their way to power, possibly as tyrants themselves. They were Athenian and this helped the Athenians to forget that Hippias had been deposed with Spartan aid. Aristocrats would have been sympathetic to the myth because Aristogeiton and Harmodius belonged to the upper crust. The myth's universal appeal would have stimulated solidarity in times of discord. Well, universal appeal... Our classical closeted pederast, the orator Aeschines, warned against the glorification of male love which was promoted by the history of Harmodius and Aristogeiton. Plato, on the other hand, wrote that love and friendship had caused the downfall of Athenian tyranny, and that tyrants (he pointed to the Persian empire) benefit from the condemnation of such relations, because they must make certain that the people do not develop too much self-respect and solidarity.

Aristotle and the historian Thucydides corrected the myth around Harmodius and Aristogeiton, emphasizing that purely personal motives had driven them to make an attempt on the lives of the tyrant and his brother. Exactly this assault would have caused Hippias' rule to become harsher.

Greek Love Reconsidered ends with twenty short, classical poems about boy love, translated into English by Thomas K. Hubbard. The following poem is by Strato (about 130 CE):

My neighbor's tender boy bothers me not a little.
Like one not uninitiated he laughs to show that he wants it.
He's not more than twelve years old. Now the sour grapes are unguarded;
When they ripen, there'll be watchmen and fences.

Greek Love Reconsidered * $5.95 outside the USA * Wallace Hamilton Press * 341 Lafayette Street # 175 * New York NY 10012

source: Book review 'Greek Love Reconsidered' by C.C.; OK Magazine, no. 75; October 2000