Talk:Pederasty in ancient Greece/Archive 1

message: Here is just some evidence:
In Plato’s laws the anonymous Athenian states “in the matter of love we may be able to enforce one of two things-either that no one shall venture to touch any person of the freeborn or noble class except his wedded wife, or sow the unconsecrated and bastard seed among harlots, or in barren and unnatural lusts; or at elast we may abolish altogether the connection of men with men; and as to women, if any man has to do with any but those who come into his house duly married by sacred rites, whether they be bought or acquired in any other way, and he offends publicly in the face of all mankind, we shall be right in enacting that he be deprived of civic honors and privileges, and be deemed to be, as he truly is, a stranger.” (laws 841)
What this basically means is that no man shall touch a woman except his wedded wife and that love between males should be prohibited.
Megistess responds “I, for my part stranger, would gladly recieve this law.”
The Athenian would shortly later say “We had got about as far as the establishment of the common tabels, which in most places would be difficult, BUT IN CRETE NO ONE WOULD THINK OF INDRODUCING ANY OTHER CUSTOM.” Meaning that the Cretans would adopt the law.
Here are more quotes:
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 [Lycurgus] 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 connection as
an abomination; and thus he caused mentors to abstain from boys no less than parents abstain from sexual intercourse with their children and brothers :and sisters with each other. (Lacedaemonian Constitution, II. 13.)
Regarding the myth of Ganymede and Zeus, the myth is compared to
“[as in] Homer pictures us Achilles looking upon Patroclus not as the object of his passion but as a comrade, and in this spirit signally avenging his death. So we have songs telling also how Orestes, Pylades, Theseus, Peirithous, and many other illustrious demi-gods wrought glorious deeds of valor side by side, not because they shared a common bed but because of mutual admiration and respect.”(Symposium, VIII. 30 - 32.)
Affectionate regard for boys of good character was permissible, but embracing them
was held to be disgraceful, on the ground that the affection was for the body and not
for the mind. Any man against whom complaint was made of any disgraceful embracing
was deprived of all civic rights for life. (Ancient Customs of the Spartans, 7. 237 - c.)
Robert Flaceliere writes
"[I]t appears extremely likely that homosexuality of any kind was confined to the prosperous and aristocratic levels of ancient society. The masses of peasants and artisans were probably scarcely affected by habits of this kind, which seem to have been associated with a sort of snobbery. The available texts deal mainly with the leisured nobility of Athens. But they may give the impression that pederasty was practiced by the entire nation. The subject, however, of the comedy by Aristophanes entitled Lysistrata suggests that homosexuality was hardly rampant among the people at large. It would be an error to think so.
(Robert Flaceliere’s Love in Ancient Greece pg 49-50)
He also writes "The permanent popularity of courtesans [hetairai] in ancient Greece is surely the best proof that homosexuals were either not consistently so or not particularly numerous. We have already suggested that inversion was never very prevalent except in one class of society and over quite a limited period." (pg 140)
"Whether such matters are to be regarded jestingly or seriously, I think that the pleasure is to be deemed natural which arises out of the intercourse between men and women; but that the intercourse of men with men, or of women with women, is contrary to nature, and that the bold attempt was originally due to unbridled lust." (Plato's Laws 636)
"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."
(Contra Timarchus 12.)
Also, there is a rediculous claim in the article that the Cretans practiced pederasty as a population control. Funny. I didn't know they were overpopulated. That definitely needs to be taken out. Also read the laws at the top of this page. You all are biased and have your own agendas.Cretanpride 02:09, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disputed Material. Evidence that suggests pederasty was not common 

message: I really have nothing to contribute other than this article sure puts a spin on the Monty Python philosopher song lyrics "Aristotle, Aristotle was a bugger for the bottle". 64.173.240.130 18:07, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  on a lighter note 

message: :And who posted the note, asserting that pederasty was punishable by death? --Wetman 02:20, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That is a vague and misleading formulation, since Plato in the Laws was condemning anal intercourse with boys (please quote source for Aristotle). That is not inconsistent with his support for chaste pederasty in Phaedrus and the Symposium. It is also demonstrably false, since what is currently understood by "homosexuality" and what Plato wrote about are two very different things. Haiduc 09:58, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I checked the article and noticed that some important material on opposition was removed when breaking out the article on Philosophy of Greek pederasty. I have restored the part about Plato's Laws. If you have other material that you feel needs to be quoted here please discuss. Haiduc 10:13, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I think in the West we are brought up in Judaeo-Christian belief system which is somewhat narrow minded when it comes to the subject of love.  People fail to realize that words such as "Phila Delphia" once existed, which referred to loving someone as a brother or brotherly love.  Is it not possible that the Sacred Band of Thebes were some of the closest of friends, who became so close through their living, fighting and suffering together that they saw and loved one another as Brothers?  Where one soldier of the band would sacrifice his own life to save his Friends', so close was their bond?  Or are we supposed to mindlessly believe that they were all penetrating one another? I think the perversion of modern Western thinking has changed the actual meaning of what the Sacred Band really was and the purpose it served.  --Xenophonos 02:25, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Quite so. Yet most people now fall in line and obediently believe that male love in Greece was about "penetration" and about "dominance." It clearly was first and foremost about love. But, what kind of love? One based on the dogmatic denial of eros, or one honoring eros and also the bounds of moderation, as Philip Macedon implies? Carnal relations were often condemned or avoided, but that did not diminish the erotic nature of the relationship. It may have heightened it. The Thebans were subject to Greek ideals, not Judaeo-Christian ones. Haiduc 12:19, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anonymous complaints 

message: "Greek pederasty went through a series of changes over the millennium from its entry into the historical record and its final demise as an official institution. In some areas, such as Athens, the construction of the relationship seems to have gone from greater modesty in the early days to a freer physicality and lack of restraint in classical times, followed by a return to a more spiritual form in the early fifth century. Its formal end resembled its beginning, in that it came by official decree – that of emperor Justinian, who also put an end to other institutions that sustained ancient culture, such as Plato's Academy and the Olympic Games."
Does anyone know where i can find more information regarding the evolution of greek pederasty?  This paragraph is all there is in the article.  Thanks.  (66.189.104.220 15:42, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is little specific material out there, rather there are different presentations at different times, from Homer (Telemachos & Pisistratos in the Oddysey, not properly addressed yet in the literature) to pseudo-Lucian's Erotes, eleven or twelve hundred years later. Read Percy and Sergent. Haiduc 23:34, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Evolution of pederasty 

message: The article asserts that the Sacred Band of Thebes at the Battle of Chaeronea consisted of 150 warriors "each assisted by his beloved charioteer". Surely war chariots had been obsolete in Greece for at least three hundred years before Chaeronea (338 BC). Nor does any description of the battle mention chariots. My impression of the Sacred Band is that they fought as hoplites, with erastes and eromenos fighting side-by-side. If they used chariots, and if the eromenoi were charioteers, this remarkable fact ought to be supported by a citation.  Agemegos 03:42, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charioteers at Chaeronea 

message: In the section 'Regional characteristics - Athens', it is asserted that Solon is the founder of the 'pederastic tradition' in Athens. This is unsubstantiated. Elsewhere at Wiki, the assertion is sometimes wrongly supported by citing Aeschines. This needs to be cleared up.Lucretius (talk) 09:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Solon 

message: The section on modern scholarship implies that no mention was made of homosexual relationships of classical times in history books until the twentieth century, which is untrue. Edward Gibbon makes quite unequivocal (if euphemistic) reference to it on a number of occasions, in both footnotes to and the main text of Decline and Fall. It would be more accurate to say that references to homosexuality were suppressed in the nineteenth century. Tolken (talk) 13:20, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Technicaly the term Homosexuality did not exist untill the 19th century so depending on what's being discussed here, it may be well to remember the differences between homosexuality and the practice same-sex in ancient times.--Amadscientist (talk) 22:17, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Correct. This is explained by Hubbard on page 1 of his book for instance . Pcap ping 23:18, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mentions of Homosexuality in Modern History 

message: Due to the controversial nature of this article and an editor that had enthusiastically over edited the article with a clear pederastic agenda I feel justified in removing any reference that cannot be verified in a conventional manner. Non English sources should be verified for accuracy and for slant in the original article claim. Journals and papers should be excluded if they are not searchable or retrievable to verify.
All references that take the claim into speculation by the editor should be removed as POV and OR. If the claim the article makes is not fully supported in a clear manner it should go. I hope I am not sounding to harsh and I will, of course respect consensus should it be decided that others feel otherwise.--Amadscientist (talk) 00:27, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That does seem a bit harsh. I would encourage more thoughtful editing instead assuming bad faith unilaterally. Exceptional claims require exceptional sourcing so that may be the best place to start. You might ask Moni3 as she had expressed a willingness to overhaul one of these related articles, I don't recall which. But she may have suggestions on the logical way forward.  -- Banjeboi 17:23, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

text: I'm concerned by the heavy use of ancient sources in the article, which gives the impression of original research, or at least that the article is an essay rather than an entry in an encyclopaedia. Nev1 (talk) 17:49, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I had the same thought but you've expressed it better.  -- Banjeboi 18:05, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

text: I intend to go to the library tomorrow and compare the ancient sources with what is written in the article. If there are unsubstantiated claims associated with the references, I will remove them. The local library has few of the modern sources cited, so I'll concentrate on the ancient stuff. Nev1 (talk) 19:37, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: For the sake of consistency, quotes from the article will be taken from this version, dated 15th March 2010, before I began editing. One example is already given in the above section. I will present first what I have removed from the article, the reference given, what the ancient source cited actually says, and the reason for the removal of content.
* "Pederasty was constructed in various ways. In some areas, such as Boeotia, the two were formally joined together and lived as a couple. In other areas, such as Elis, the youth were persuaded by means of gifts, and in a few, such as Ionia, such relations were forbidden altogether." Plato, Symposium, 182A. Relevant bits: "Even in the passion for boys you may note the way of those who are under the single incitement of this Love: they love boys only when they begin to acquire some mind – a growth associated with that of down on their chins… For in Elis and Boeotia and where there is no skill in speech they have simply and ordinance that it is seemly to gratify lovers, and no one whether young or old will call it shameful, in order, I suppose, to save themselves the trouble of trying what speech can do to persuade the youths; for they have no ability for speaking. But in Ionia and many other regions where they live under foreign sway, it is counted a disgrace." There is nothing in the source about gifts, being formally joined, and it is not stated that Ionia is in the minority. While the information was based on fact, it seems to have been stretched beyond what the source said to the point of requiring another source.
* "According to popular sentiment, and as expressed in Pausanias' speech in Plato's Symposium, pederastic couples were also said to be fundamental to democracy and feared by tyrants, because the bond between the friends was stronger than that of obedience to a despotic ruler." Clifford Hindley, "Debate: Law, Society and Homosexuality in Classical Athens" in Past and Present, No. 133 (Nov., 1991), p.167N4; Plato, Symposium, 182c. From Hindley: "Plato no doubt reflects popular sentiment when he makes Pausanias suggest that pederastic love was hateful to dictators and favourable to democracy". From Plato: "Foreigners hold this thing, and all training in philosophy and sports, to be disgraceful, because of their despotic government; since, I presume, it is not to the interest of their princes to have lofty notions engendered in their subjects, or any strong friendships and communions; all of which Love is pre-eminently apt to create. It is a lesson that our despots learnt by experience; for Aristogeiton's love and Harmodius's friendship grew to be so steadfast that it wreaked their power." Ostensibly, there doesn't seem much wrong here, however again the sources have been stretched beyond what they said; Hindley suggests that pederastic love was favourable to democracy, not fundamental.
* "However, once Ionia was annexed by the Persiavs, the practice was outlawed. This was regarded as reflecting moral weakness. On one hand it revealed the rulers' greed for power — thus their suppression of customs likely to lead to strong friendships and inquisitive minds, the product of love. On the other, it revealed the cowardice of the subjects." Plato, Symposium, 182c-d. Source doesn't appear to mention the above event.
* "Socrates, as represented in Plato's writings, appears to have favored chaste pederastic relationships, marked by a balance between desire and self-control. By setting aside the sexual consummation of the relationship, Socrates essentialized the friendship and love between the partners. He pointedly criticized purely physical infatuations, for example by mocking Critias' lust for Euthydemus by comparing his behavior towards the boy to that of "a piglet scratching itself against a rock"." Xenophon, Memorabilia 1.2.29-30. "…when he found that Critias loved Euthydemus and wanted to lead him astray, he tried to retrain him by saying that it was mean and unbecoming in a gentleman to sue like a beggar to the object of his affection… As Critias paid no heed whatever to this protest, Socrates, it is said, exclaimed in the presence of Euthydemus and many others, "Critias seems to have the feelings of a pig: he can no more keep away from Euthydemus than pigs can help rubbing themselves against stones."" The source does not make the claim that Socrates favoured "chaste pederastic relationships", and to make such a claim is original research. There's also nothing about Socrates "essentialized the friendship and love between the partners".
* " Socrates frequented boy brothels, from which he bought and freed his future friend and student, Phaedo". Plato, Charmides 155c-e. The source refers to the subsequent sentence, and says absolutely nothing about Socrates going to brothels of any sort, or of Phaedo.
* The content of the preceding edit is too long to reproduce here, but it was removed for a variety of reasons: the first two bullet points seem tangential to pederasty; the third and fourth bullet points are unsourced; and the final point is original research. That leaves points five and six, which are odd tidbits of information in what was essentially a trivia section.
* "Other writers, often under the guise of "debates" between lovers of boys and lovers of women, have recorded other arguments used for and against pederasty. Some, like the charge that the practice was "unnatural" and not to be found among "the lions and the bears," applied to all relationships between men and youths. Others' charges do not involve traditional pederasty, but practices devised for the sexual satisfaction of the strong at the expense of the weak. Chief among these is denouncement of the castration of captive slave boys. As Lucian has it, "Effrontery and tyrannical violence have gone as far as to mutilate nature with a sacrilegious steel, finding, by ripping from males their very manhood, a way to prolong their use." Pseudo-Lucian, Erotes. In this instance, the reference refers only to the quote. The source does not make the same points as made in the article.
* "One of the first cities after Sparta to be associated with the custom of athletic nudity, Megara was home to the runner Orsippus who was famed as the first to run the footrace naked at the Olympic games and "first of all Greeks to be crowned victor naked"." W. Sweet, Sport and Recreation in Ancient Greece, 1987; p.125; Pausanias, 1.44.1. Although the reference to the Sweet book is to the section on nudity in Greek athletics, there is no mention of Sparta or pederasty. Also, the text in the article did not make a link with pederasty so seems irrelevant. Pausanias is given in Sweet, but again only mentions nudity, not pederasty.
::Hi Nev1 - I think you've done a great job reviewing this article! However I don't agree with all your decisions. I re-instated the Megara stuff because it included mention of Theognis and Theocritus, both of whom are relevant to the issue of pederasty. Megara's pederast connection with Sparta is unreferenced but it looks fairly uncontroversial to me and probably came from Haiduc's general reading. I hope this is OK with you. If not, please feel free to delete again! Amphitryoniades (talk) 02:06, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just done a bit of quick researching and the Spartan model of institutionalized pederasty, as an influence on Megara, is supported by William Percy's book Pederasty and Pedagogy in Ancient Greece, Illinois Press (1996) page 123 here, The same book deals with Theognis and Theocritus - pages 130-133. Amphitryoniades (talk) 02:36, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

text: Thanks for your hard work in removing all that original research clearly intended to promote a certain POV. If the AfD does not delete the article, I favor further drastic pruning. Nonsense such as  should just be removed (it's nonsense because it's under the heading "Philosophical discourses" rather than "List of anything that can be found that is vaguely related to pederasty"). Johnuniq (talk) 23:01, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the article still needs much more revision. A controversial topic like this should never be developed from primary sources. It should be a summary of conventional arguments made by one of two major secondary sources, with other support added where appropriate. My suggestion is first identify the appropriate secondary sources for this article and then start from there. This is not my kind of research and I hope somebody else will do that. Otherwise, I'm in favour of cutting this article back to a stub. Amphitryoniades (talk) 00:49, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I totally agree. As you know, the reason secondary sources are required is that people can find extracts from written works (primary sources) to support any POV. In a quick scan of the article, I cannot see justification even for the caption in the lead image ("Pederastic courtship scene..."). Is there a secondary source supporting the "up-and-down" gesture waffle, or any evidence that pederasty is involved? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnuniq (talk • contribs) 01:31, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a footnote that lists 2 secondary sources. The second, "Dover supra n. 55; p. 94ff." is puzzling, because this is the first note in the article, so there's no supra, but since so much stuff has been taken out of this article, maybe there was something supra before. Anyway, even without the secondary sources, it should be clear that this image has something to do with ancient Greek pederasty; it's a black figure vase, with two male figures, one bearded (adult), one beardless (youth), and the man is fondling the youth's genitalia. Being skeptical is fine, but it's not productive to take it to an extreme. --Akhilleus (talk) 02:01, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

text: The footnote cites an article by Beazley that's not online, but there's a more recent article by Alan Shapiro ("Courtship Scenes in Attic Vase-Painting," American Journal of Archaeology 85 (1991)) that cites Beazley on pp. 133-34: "One of the finest of all courtship scenes, on an amphora in Würzburg attributed to the Phrynos Painter, includes all the essential features of group alpha. The pair stand opposite each other, the erastes, or lover, on the left, his beloved, the eromenos on the right. The erastes stands with knees bent and arms in what Beazley dubbed the "up and down" position: with his left hand he chucks the boy's chin, a kind of diversionary tactic while the lowered right hand zeroes in on its target." --Akhilleus (talk) 02:10, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the info. I agree that the picture appears to represent a man with a youth, but wanted to be confident that the cited reference supports the caption (and your reply provides the confidence that it is verifiable). Johnuniq (talk) 04:18, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Dover pp. 94-96 discusses this type of scene, so the footnote (aside from the anomalous supra) looks fine to me. --Akhilleus (talk) 15:13, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

text: There are actually two 'up-and-down' pictures in this article. My suggestion for a second caption is: Hey, once is never enough for those who like this kind of thing! Yes, scepticism is proper. Amphitryoniades (talk) 08:27, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Explanation of removal of content