To anyone saying that the concept of being "gay" didn't exist in the ancient world... well, yeah.. but more to the point, the concept of being "straight" didn't exist, either.
I really have never understood why this is so difficult for people. Same sex attraction has always existed. Everything points towards sexual orientations also being a constant in our species. How people act on that is separate matter, managed by culture. Similarly, how people understand and talk about the genders they are attracted to is managed by culture. Not complicated.
Like the old joke about the Italian and the Greek arguing in a bar over whose ancient civilization was superior: Greek - "Yeah, well we Greeks invented sex." Italian - "Ah, but we Romans invented doing it with women."
Gayness and bisexuality didn't exist before about 1972, conveniently (but totally coincidentally) around the same time conservatives in the USA had to give up trying to reinstate segregation because it was too unpopular. Lucky for them, LGBT+ stuff and ab*rtion suddenly sprang into existence, so they had something else to wage culture wars about.
@@John_Malka-tits I would suggest reading: 1. Dan O’Shannon's "What Are You Laughing At? A Comprehensive Guide to the Comedic Event" 2. Eric Idle's "The Road to Mars" 3. Todd McGowan's "Only a Joke Can Save Us: A Theory of Comedy" These books are great examples to help you identify a joke when you encounter one in the wild and understand why it is found funny. O'Shannon and McGowan both offer books that are a bit more dry. I assumed from your comment that this may take some effort to ease you into, so these are more clinical and clearly define parameters, timing, word play, etc. Eric Idle, from Monty Python fame, delivered this delightfully fun and funny book dealing with the same overall questions of "what is comedy" and "what is a joke." Instead of the more dry and straight forward presentation of the other two books, although they are also both funny. "The Road to Mars" is a novel set in space with a robot trying to figure out if it can be funny and understand the nature of comedy. The robot is the ship mate of two stand up comedians flying around from space port to space port putting on shows. Superbly entertaining, witty, and laugh out loud funny it is a fantastic read that should help you once you've read through it. As for my reading and your suggestion, I have never read "Foucalt" that you mentioned. I have read some Foucault though, but was disappointed. I found my self feeling that way because I had heard that Foucault was a large proponent of Penal Reform, which I was quite interested in. I was thoroughly shocked after reading his book, "The History of Sexuality," where he didn't remark on making changes to or improving the phallus whatsoever. Some champion of Penal Reform he was!
@@Dorian_sapiens any media literate can read Foucalt and appreciate what he has to say. Media illiterate folks may read it, and try to justify pederasty. He was literally a philosophical ground-breaker and demystifies littterally this whole video
In short, today's understanding sexual identities didn't exist in ancient world. Men could have male lovers. Taking the passive role was a sign of submissiveness to your superior because ancient world is very patriarchal. Most women didn't had much say or freedom as usual. Everyone was expected to marry and have children regardless.
Indeed. Also, I have to add that the figure of Alexander the Great has been interpreted, reinterpreted and deconstructed in thousands ways because of how he went any known convention on earth. A short pretty boy with cunning IQ but also EQ and lots of sensibilities and contradictions? Not suitable for the traditional power play fantasy that people expect
And also, that Alexander the Great is a figure that has inspired a lot of "interpretations" because is a fountain of contradictions that defied any labels in general. A short pretty boy with high EQ as well as IQ was able to conquer the world before 30? No way!
Yeah, but looking back on it we have a word for men sleeping with men. It's called homosexuality. I understand your argument, but by that logic you could argue "ancient world didn't have today's understanding of molecules, so we can't say they drank H2O" We have words for things.
No it was not lol, many were actually lynched for such actions. Acceptable for a select few parts of the rolling elites? In few cases - yes. For regular people? No lol.
I’m a Christian myself and even I can read the political image PR going on in these protests. They associate historical figures with representing their current status and seek to block images they don’t like and approve of. The trouble is, history just doesn’t work that way. Excellent presentation as always and hope you feel better soon. You did not sound weird in anyway.
@@Pluto-cw2kh they also tend to later claim that their neighboring countries are not real because they never existed throughout most of the history, a 30-minute lecture on 1200+ years of history attached. Some people need to learn the difference between history and current political and cultural status.
Do the Christian communities realize that he wasnt Christian, but more Greek in terms of belief system? Lol like...its not like theyre claiming Jesus was gay...
As a Christian, we 100% know that because we actively talk about the differences between Roman/Greek vs. Christian culture when we listen to sermons talking about the Bible. It's your own ignorance of Ancient Greek cultures to assume that other non-Christian cultures could also be against homosexuality.
@@runkelpokk9 Oh yeah we're so ignorant of the "times before Christianity" that half of our Bible that we study religiously (the Old Testament) talks all about the 1500 years before Jesus Christ came.
Ancient Greek society, classical age. Naked athletics, only naked men in sculptured art, naked male Olympic athletes., naked men in gyms. Doesn't sound gay at all...LOL C'mon. My favorite graffiti on an ancient Greek stadium tunnel wall - obviously it would be directed at other men, as only men would be taking that tunnel to the arena area "Look up Moschos in Philippi, he's cute." 😁
@@fwwaller I think you're thinking of Roman baths. "Gymnasium: the name comes from the Ancient Greek term gymnós, meaning "naked" or "nude". Only adult male citizens were allowed to use the gymnasia."
@@angelikaskoroszyn8495 The actual phrasing is so much funnier, but unfortunately not TH-cam friendly- starting with "goodbye wondrous femininity!" cracks me up every time I think of it, because it's so over the top.
Yes, the book to read on this topic is Lover's Legends by Andrew Calimach. It explains that part of the reason why stories of same sex attraction in myth and history are unknown to some scholars, and why any ancient Greek sources that criticize or condemn homoeroticism have seem to had thier importance exaggerated beyond what is warranted, and this is because, unless they are reading actual ancient Greek original sources, modern translations of these ancient Greek documents have deliberately omitted and censored such things for hundreds of years as a matter of taste and morality. Lovers Legends restores the homosexual content to these myths and histories.
I dont understand the whole debate anyway. Speaking from just the viewpoint of filmmaking, the Alexander film from the 2000s already made him verrrrryyyyy in love with his friend/general/advisor. He died in his arms... I thought it's common knowledge that he was at least bi
@@phillipp5538 No he didn't him and Aristotle was a pederastic relationship which were not suppose to be sexual at all no more than any mentorship or tutorage.
It's always so funny to see how people forget about Hephaestion. It's probably because they were taught the mythical history wrong. Hephaestion was his eromenos, his lover. They were the same age, too, so it wasn't pederasty.
@@bennogb5069 Yes there is, if you read Arrian's discourses of Epictitus and Anabasis of Alexander, Hephaestion is described as Alexander's Eromenos. There is also an explicit reference to their sexual relationship, and its found in the Cynic Epistles, where Diogenes berates Alexander for being too held fast by Hephaestion's thighs
@@angel7661 Except a huge percentage of the sources are from Roman historians, but that doesn't mean they are less reliable. The Romans were heavily inspired by the Greeks and the Greeks lived under Roman rule for a very long time, so I'm sure these Roman historians would've had great access to Greek documents.
@@TheKnowledgeMan101 Except a majority of primary sources never used the word Eromenos to describe Hesphaestion and Alexander despite Arrian using the word Eromenos to describe other relationship with the same work. Not to mention the Cynic Epistes is believe to be made in Rome not come from Diogenes and it is debated if Alexander actually met Diogenes. That is why it is speculative. We can uses Roman sources however they aren't best and no primary greek source we recovered claim they were Eromenos. Aristotle quote about the two of them sharing the same souls actually comes fom his view on friendship. Could he and Bi/Pan maybe but historian also believe Alexander was trying to control his Vices (ie sex, wine) to remain seen as a god king What is a friend? A single soul dwelling in two bodies.” -Aristotle
There’s no explicit evidence that Achilles and Petroclus were gay from the originally Homeric sources. …personally though, I think the whole setup is more than a bit gay. ..probably why later writers made them so.
@@basicallyno1722 Homosexuality was not common. Pederasty might have been, but the only mentions in literature of adult male homosexual relations are in the context of when it's used as an insult (such as Spartan letters.)
@@faust8218 did you not watch the video? The modern construct of homosexuality is so alien to the ancient world that to apply such a label would be inaccurate. Also the video offers serval examples of references to mlm relationships outside of the spartan letters.
7:14 I think it should be emphasised on this particular point that the acceptability of being active an the taboo of being passive was for citizens and free non-citizens, while passivity in sexual relationships with men was permitted for slaves for instance.
Thank you for the video. Netflix has riled up a lot of people with their depictions of ancient life recently. Hopefully, people who watched the Cleopatra and Alexander programs were inspired to do some reading of their own on about these fascinating figures and not dissuaded by any superficial controversy.
Cleopatra was deservedly controversial because of how much it radically deviated from historical fact. Alexander is causing undue controversy because it is adhering to historical record about Alexander's sexuality. The two are completely opposite in that regard.
@@andrewbecker1013only that there is no documentation in both topics about the things they claim. Cleopatra, funnily enough, was actually descendant from one of Alexander's generals, Ptolomey, and therefore, would look very........Greek?. The only claim that she was black was that there was a so called black pharaoh dynasty coming from Nubia (nowadays Sudan)and, ok, fair enough, they were black but more akin to Beyonce than to, say, a tribe in Masai Mara. And it's true that we don't know for sure who her maternal grandmother was but if she were even a little darker than Megan Markle, Roman sources would have told us. Concerning Mega Alex, well, there is no documentation who he really liked, but for sure he had kids with multiple women, which renders this point mute
@@MatildeVallespinCasas Well, I don't know why people say "gay" when it's much more likely that he was bisexual. There is no little reason to believe this. In a letter from Diogenes of Sinope he said that Alexander the great was "controlled by the thighs of Hephaestion". The Cynic philosophers added that Alexander was only defeated once in his life and that it was by the thighs of Hephaestion. So one of two, either Hephaestion tried to literally suffocate him with his thighs or we are adults and we understand what they were referring to. Seems like it was pretty obvious...
@@MatildeVallespinCasasIt's much more likely that he was bisexual, but the love of his life was Hephaestion. There is no little reason to believe this. In a letter from Diogenes of Sinope he said that Alexander the great was "controlled by the thighs of Hephaestion". The Cynic philosophers added that Alexander was only defeated once in his life and that it was by the thighs of Hephaestion. So one of two, either Hephaestion tried to literally suffocate him with his thighs or we are adults and we understand what they were referring to. Seems like it was pretty obvious... Not to add all the pain that Alexander went through when Hephaestion died. Hephaestion death is considered one of the events that led to Alexander's physical and emotional decline as he began to drink uncontrollably. He dies about 8 months later. Quite a thing, if you ask me.
I believe you brought up several salient points. The Greeks and Romans were--more complicated than we moderns can credit. It takes a bold scholar to buck today's trends of "Mrs. Grundy is kink-shaming again..." I further believe that the outcry against the Netflix programs is part of our own modern generations of reluctance to recognize that people have been people since the beginning of our time on this world, and things back in antiquity were just as complex and nuanced as they are today. Humans are curious animals. We're complicated and simple at the same time. Wise and stupid at the same time. Most of what we think of as "forbidden" or "unacceptable" is more a product of our present-day cultural references than some inviolate, immutable natural law. There are a few things we can all agree on as being forbidden and unacceptable; murder, theft, rape... And probably the first two can be argued that there are moral exceptions for the commission thereof; war, starvation... But the third? I can't see any moral exclusion for forcing sexual advances on someone without their informed consent, no. Is that a cultural bias on my part? Possibly. How would I know? I'm a product of my culture. Breaking laws against non-harmful activities was part of my heritage. But there is, at least in my mind, a difference between making moonshine, driving over the posted speed limit, or passing the ritual herb to something like non-consensual sex. That's my culture. I hope this post made sense. My apologies if I just made myself look stupid.
Ive always heard that homosexuality was accepted in ancient times as long as the man in question was the dominant one (The "top" in modern slang), but if the man was the submissive one (the "bottom" in modern slang) then ancient heterosexual men saw them as inferior, or weak.
Idk man, I always spend the rough modern equivalent of a billion USD on my friend's funerals and order every man, woman, and child to cut their hair in mourning for him.
@@okenogamer OK, not fully detailed about Alexander's life but perhaps that other friend was also with benefits and he honored Cyrus as a great king like himself.
That was very in depth, I appreciate it! Personally, I feel that actions always speak louder than words and the many sources we have talking about Alexander's grief for Hephastion speaks of a very deep connection between the two. Whether we'd categorize that as romantic or sexual nowadays doesn't really matter.
Great video. I read someone's PhD paper on Hephaestion back in 2005 when the movie "Alexander" came out. The author made a good case for bisexuality expressed between Alexander and Hephaestion.
I don't know that you can even term it bisexuality. That's a modern construct that people are trying to apply to an ancient culture, with different norms and beliefs.
1:05 What?! Um, of course homosexuality was a thing in ancient times. That clergyman should read his Bible; the Apostle Paul and others commented on the fact
*When we talk about homosexuality, we are talking about same-sex attraction which this concept was viewed different from long ago. At least in Ancient Greece, man on man sex are tolerated (although being submissive/bottom is a taboo. So only the women, slaves and unfortunately young boys would be submissive), women on women are quite murky (possibly problematic since taking an active role is seen as going against nature) as we don't have much or at least don't have a proper women's perspective on it and man-man ROMANTIC relationship was also somewhat murky as there are no certainty that they accept homosexual relationship (although if they believe women can only be submissive and man must be active, then I would guess it isn't that acceptable as it would mean one of the partner has to be submissive.)
?? Alexander the Great definitely had sexual relations with women, but the supposed male sexual relations are more speculative. The ancient world did not have a modern sexual binary as such, so it's completely valid to question the notion that Alexander was "gay".
He is best characterized as bisexual disaster probably?! He did engage in gay stuff i think pretty comfortable i think?!, whenever hephistion, thats the speculative but wsnt he pretty didnt care not to engage with , he probably was bisexual. But the erasure of hephisteion, they probably were vey close romantic enough that it posed a percieved threat to do his duties to his wife, he can be bi and that be, his life partner .If ther ewas gossip and erasure even, it has to be the one he prefered the most likely
@@Raphsophomes Did you read the comment I'm replying to? They're basically saying that it's abvious that Alexander was "gay." It's very common today to see similar modern impositions on history, specifically the thing about "Greeks being gay." It's a radical oversimplification at best, and a straight up lie about history at worst, no different than 19th century nationalist rewritings. I don't necessarily disagree with anything in the actual video.
@@Raphsophomeshe had children with women, one of them called Heracles, by the way. So, either he did a great effort to overcome his supposed lack of attraction or......I don't know
As a student in ancient greek and latin, who have studied some of the texts you are refering to, I put my suport behind your claims. (If it matters to anyone)
There’s literal no evidence of Alexander having any gay relations or homosexual desires, all source come over 300 years later with no supporting evidence. Here is a list of the two sources that historians use to depict Alexander as homosexual in comparison to Alexander reign of time and theirs. Alexander the Great was born in 356 BC and died in 323 BC, here are all the secondary sources: Plutarch, a Greek biographer and essayist who lived in the 1st and 2nd centuries AD Quintus Curtius Rufus: This Roman historian, who lived in the 1st century AD Yep this is all, the reason for modern historians believing Alexander is gay is because two sources that come over 350 years. Plutarch talks about how Alexander was extremely saddened by Hephaestions death and due to this “historians” think Alexander was gay 😂. Now let’s analyze the Quintus source, so basically Quintus completely fabricates an instance where Alexander is discovered in bed with a Persian eunuch Bagoas. Quintus gives no sources for this it’s complete made up.
I have some kind of unrelated thoughts as they’re not specific to this case. But I wanted to put them out there anyway. With all the talk about homosexuality and everything deviating the norm or being unnatural, I always have to think: Even if something’s not common, has not been occurring for a long time or is present in more ways than some people think, it’s not right to say it is inherently wrong. Just because something does not occur often or is viewed as wrong, maybe even unnatural, it does not mean that something is actually wrong. Of course, some people will not follow that thought and still act like it is wrong, which is why I think it is important to establish a way of thinking that is generally appreciative of things in existence, instead of condemning things that appear or actually are different from what one usually experiences. Something quite fitting just popped into my mind: “Different denotes neither good nor bad, but it certainly means different.” It’s astonishing how many people have difficulties arranging their perception based on that principle. Especially the ones who are against properties in people which are not harmful in any way.
it's only not right in some people's minds, those who have been brought up to believe a certain way. Don't forget this was all pre-Christianity, and there was no puritan thinking. Therein lies the problem. A lot of today's society was brought up to think one way and ancient societies another way. You can't equate the modern concept of homosexuality with the mostly platonic relationships of ancient worlds.
@@warpedweft9004even pre abrahamic religions there would have been a lot of differences in what was acceptable and unacceptable in many areas of human life in different ci ilisations and at different times.
this thing of people being upset that behaviors of people in the past exhibiting things unremarkable to them at the time but seen as "pushing" offensive (to the ones complaining) got me wondering about the other side of the coin...do modern depictions of admired people avoid showing them saying things that would be considered racist and sexist in ways they probably didn't even notice but would be unacceptable (hopefully) today 🙂(i doubt we'd have to go as far back as slave owning times or even the ancient world for an accurate movie to face this...probably just great grandparents time would be fine 😀
Hello, Lady of the Library. This was a really interesting video. As a student in archeology, you have pointed out things that we have seen in license classes (symposium, many RB ceramic painting, etc). The topic of sexuality in Ancient Greece/Macedonia is still a great debate because of our modern view of the Ancient world. If I could suggest a really interesting subject it is the Amazon Prime series of ROMULUS, made by Amazon Prime. It is a fiction that does its own version of the foundation myth of Rome. Only that the characters are made more "barbaric" so to speak (Viking runes on the title, pelts, tattoos, shamanic rituals, etc). This could lead you to a subject of "barbarisation" (as my teachers called it) of European cultures pre-antiquity or pre-roman. Hope to see more videos from you in the future!
Viking runes that developed from the Greek alphabet a thousand years after the supposed founding of Rome? Oh dear. Did they include the Etruscans as civilised neighbours with clean clothes and advanced technology?
ol alex was as camp as a row of tents when he wanted to be i thought it was a well known historical fact The Great liked men and women every thing ive ever herd about him alludes to it
I got my start in research doing research into the social factors of HIV transmission in the early ‘90s. This ancient pattern of a hierarchy of “active” vs “passive” was very much still around and considered part of how homosexuality worked in Southern European cultures, among others, including the pre-Civil Rights Era American South. This was very much on the “down low”. The men who were “active” wouldn’t agree to being homosexual at all. I have no idea if that’s still true and have long ago switched fields, but I wouldn’t be surprised if that still exists in places that may well deny on the surface that there’s any homosexuality going on.
I don’t remember the source(s), but I have heard of a similar culture in prisons. I really don’t want to look up the topic, so sorry I can’t provide more information.
Hello Cinzia... I am a great fan of your work. Just a small correction Harmodius and Aristogeiton assassinated the tyrant Hipparchus, but not his brother Hippias. Hippias, actually, executed the pair for the murder.
So as usual history is complicated and it is impossible to truly understand it because whether we like it or not we view it through our modern understanding. Great video as usual and I hope you do a follow up on the female side of things.
There are certain parts of the historical record that are more difficult to research. I'm afraid this often includes women's history. There's enough material to work with when it comes to women and same-gender love between women in Ancient Greece. However, it was a very patriarchal culture so there's quite a bit of detail and nuance that we will probably always lack. Sapho is the obvious starting point.
Good luck with finding female Perspective in ancient Times because they are either sex workers,witches ,scemers or loyal mothers Most women in ancient Times we're straight Up property of the father and were living breathing treaties to make alliances between Clans.
The historical record shows Alexander, like most Greeks* of his period, was bisexual. (* Yes, I know that he was Macedonian, but he considered himself Hellene.)
@@annalieff-saxby568 Some(!) Ancient Athenians didn't consider Lesbians and Epirotes as Greeks either given their non -Attic Greek speech(Aeolic and Northwestern Greek, respectively). So, non argument.
@@agiospipas Epirotes yes, but Lesbos was part of the Delian League and then the Athenian Empire and they were as much Hellenes as Athenians or Milesians. Dialects did not disqualify. Attic-speaking Athenians may have looked down on Doric-speaking Spartans et al. and vice-versa, but they were all considered Hellenes. Macedonians, on the other hand, were considered by many of the Peloponnesian and Central Greek states to be different and they objected to their inclusion in the Olympics and other Hellenic festivals.
I have seen it suggested that Macedonian attitudes towards male same-sex sexual behaviour may have differed from the Athenian attitudes and that relationships between two adult men or two similarly aged adolescents may have been more accepted among Macedonians. I'm not so sure that the Hellenistic successor kingdoms looked down on same-sex sexual relations to the degree that they would have felt a need to censor such a relationship between Alexander and Hephaistion since they were all formed by members of the Macedonian elite. In the 3rd century BCE, the Ptolemaic court poet Poseidippos wrote a poem (GP Asclep. 37) about how he (or at least the lyrical I employed in the poem) had no feelings for women but an unquenchable desire for men (though whether these were his own personal feelings or it was written from the perspective of a character, I don't know). The fact that he was able to write and publish this while being a poet at the royal court (and the fact that he says men and not boys) implies that, at least in 3rd century BCE Alexandria, attitudes towards adult male same-sex sexual desire were quite relaxed. (Which also correlates with other stories that paint a picture of Alexandria in the 3rd century BCE as a place that wasn't too concerned with conservative social mores, such as the accounts of the physician Herophilos being allowed by the Ptolemaic kings to dissect human cadavers which was forbidden elsewhere in the ancient world or the fact that there seem to have been female actors in Alexandria, at least in New Comedy productions, when acting in classical Greek culture had always been a strictly male profession.) I believe there are also some ancient sources that do refer to Hephaistion as Alexander's eromenos? (But I think they're from a couple centuries later and I can't remember whom they're by. It seems most ancient sources which are considered credible do not directly spell it out.) I've also encountered a theory that Alexander may have been sexually and romantically attracted to Hephaistion without Hephaistion actually reciprocating those feelings (which could help explain why most ancient sources don't explicitly refer to them as lovers).
Wow. Thank you for telling me about Harmodius and Aristogeiton: _Harmodius and Aristogeiton (both died 514 BC) were two lovers in Classical Athens who became known as the Tyrannicides._ ... _Both Thucydides (d. 400 BC) and Herodotus (d. 425 BC) describe the two as lovers, their love affair was styled as moderate (sophron) and legitimate (dikaios). Further confirming the status of the two as paragons of pederastic ethics, a domain forbidden to slaves, a law was passed prohibiting slaves from being named after the two heroes._ _The story continued to be cited as an admirable example of heroism and devotion for many years. In 346 BC, for example, the politician Timarchus was prosecuted (for political reasons) on the grounds that he had prostituted himself as a youth. The orator who defended him, Demosthenes, cited Harmodius and Aristogeiton, as well as Achilles and Patroclus, as examples of the beneficial effects of same-sex relationships. Aeschines (d. 314 BC) offers them as an example of dikaios erōs, "just love", and as proof of the boons such love brings to lovers - who were both improved by love beyond all praise - as well as to the city._ This information flies in the face of that TH-camr (forgot his name but he cosplays as medieval guys) who claimed that ancient Greeks looked down upon all homosexuality, that they did not view Achilles and Patroclus as lovers, etc. I felt that the TH-camr was only laying out one side of the story and I even picked up some misrepresentations he made myself. Thanks so much for this more balanced, nuanced and enlightening video.
whatever we want to call Alexander's sexuality today aside, the fact this show caused such a 'ruckus' is the most disturbing thing to take home. one could be excused to think we didn't make any progress at all since the 1980s. why would the thought of ancient Alexander having intimate relations with Hephaestion and others bother any Greek minister today?
Actually there are some sources of which we can suppose that Alexander and Hephaestion did have a romantic sexual relationship 1. Arrian writes in his Discourses of Epictitus that he remembers how Alexander ordered that the Temples of Asclepius be set on fire when his "eromenos" died. And in the Anabasis of Alexander, Arrian names this Eromenos as being referenced to Hephaestion. 2. In the Cynic Epistles, Diogenes berates Alexander for being held fast by Hephaestion's thighs. Also the interpretation of Alexander's lack of desire for sex and how his parents demanded he have sex with Callixeina is incorrect. If you read it carefully, their worry of his lack of sexual desire was in relation to his excessive drinking of alcohol. Aristotle pushed this idea that the semen of people who drink too much becomes watery and thus not be able to have sexual libido. So their worry of him becoming a "gynnis" was divided in two. 1. Is that they were afraid he was becoming asexual and they needed him to give them an heir. 2. They were afraid that he was becoming an eromenos, or basically the passive side, and so they begged him to have sex with Callixina because they wanted him to become an Erastes or the dominant side
I mean, I grew up going to strict Christian and Catholic schools and I still knew that Alexander didn’t quite fit into our modern concept of “straight.”
Very much like your scholarly approach. And your wordsmithing around Aristotle's thoughts on bottoming was very entertaining. I am not shy about these topics, except in the classroom - and so i can relate to your verbal ceasura.
An excellent essay, basically a term paper in video form. Amazing, thank you for the many citations of scholars and primary sources! (That this series is grossly inaccurate in terms of historic depiction is true, but not because of Hephaistion. The costumes are atrocious. Still, that we are at this point where one little scene (it's really rather short and after that their relationship isn't very intimate at all) can cause such a shitstorm is worrying...
let me clear some things out all the misunderstanding comes from this two words 1. εραστής 2. ερωμένος two epithets that in modern greek means the same thing which translates simply to (lover) but ancient greek is still studied and examined untill this day. In ancient texts these two words are used almost always in the same sentences but why use the same word with the same meaning to desribe smth? This is what it actually meant it's original meaning «Εραστής και Ερώμενος» = Teacher and Student in the military and schools in ancient Greece: The misunderstood meaning of two words, a concept that has changed today. This is not the only words that has a different meaning in modern greek many many words have changed it's original meaning one more example is today it translates simply as market/emporium. Ancient meaning is a place where people speak.
From what I understand as long as you weren't the bottom it was usually kosher for some guy on guy action, but the bottoms were commonly slandered and looked down upon.
True. Also colored by nationalism quite a bit. No disrespect to the Greeks, of course. (Who could dislike modern Greece?). They do need to move beyond nationalist politics soon, however.
@@Billpro25 the imaginary missing glory is the problem... 24h propaganda in the media from a corrupt right wing government is not helping... And the systemic left for some reason is trying to copy the democrats in USA because they are so successful over there... So yea...
Byrne Fone in his _Homophobia. A History_ traces homosexuality as a concept all the way to antiquity, when people would explicitly categorise men (and even women) based on the orientation of their attraction. He shows that a lack of a term like "homosexual" did not prevent them from having a mental concept for it. So the idea that a person can be exclusively attracted to members of their own sex is not a modern one, in spite of all the smoke and mirrors of queer theory.
As a greek i thank you for this video! It has always been so funny to me to hear very masculine "manly men" (aka toxically masculine🤫) say that their idol is Alexander the great and that there is no way he was queer because he was a great ruler.
Yep, it is hilarious! I once made a joke with my best friend (guy married with other guy), that he was extremely masculine, because he didn't even marry a woman. I am bewildered why people make such a problem about two people having consensual relationships.
Alexander wasn't a Great Ruler he was a Great Warlord who never ruled a day in his life and kicked the bucket the moment he realised he was supposed to get around to doing so.
We're Alexander and Hephaestion gay? No more or less than their peers. If they followed the customs of their times and class, they very likely shared some degree of physical intimacy in their adolescence. This, as with their peers, would have ceased upon adulthood. It wouldn't have continued not nessisarily because of their genders but due to their different status. As king, Alexander as the younger of the two, as most historians believe, could never be seen as submissive in any way. A physical component may have continued in private, but it was unlikely as the risk would have been too high. The more important question is did they love one another and did their love have an impact on history. Most historians agree, most definitely, yes. In fact, theirs was one of the great love stories of antiquity. Whether it was expressed physically is practically irrelevant.
These discussions are strange, because some people seem to look back to Greeks and Romans for queer representation, but often the form male on male interactions we find in these histories are between adult males and boys that were considered ...boys. While I do think it's important to not erase this reality of these societies I don't think it's smart or moral to look to them or use them as representation
@@donny1960 It's as if you didn't read what I wrote. My first sentence IS saying that gay is also a modern concept. And I said term, not word, which includes the entire concept.
@@eximusic I read exactly what you wrote. Term. Word. They are interchangeable. The concept of Gayness seems to be modern too. The arguments are that homosexual behavior in Ancient Greek times is not the same as homosexual behavior now. No matter what word or term we use. That concept seems contrived to fit the political landscape of today.
I always took Alexander as the type who liked who he liked and anyone who didn't agree with him could argue with the sharp end of his sword. Pun intended.
Jupiter rising. Mercury and Ares in conjunction. Though, seriously, the water-carrier Aquarius was seen by the Greeks as Ganymede, a pretty male lover of Zeus taken to Olympus to serve the gods. . . with water.
I thought it was common knowledge that Alexander the Great had male lovers. I was really surprised to hear that it's "controversial." Also, men can have sexual relationships that don't necessarily involve them being a passive or dominant partner. Just saying.
Love the explanation! Curious in watching the show if it looks more like common expectations regarding male-male relations or if it accurately depicts the relevant historical nuisances and common perceptions of the time. One question: how did the myth related to all humans being initially created as having two sets of arms and legs before being separated into male/female interact with Ancient Greek relations?
@@naurahdeatrisyagitany8365 They're not the same though. One is Aristophanes' mythic tale from the Symposium which is not the final word on love presented in the work while Atlantis is a (pseudo-)historical Epic he tells two versions of but doesn't get paired with an alternate tale on the same topic. Atlantis is based off of the Myths of Phaeton and Deucalion which in turn have Babylonian origins while Aristophanes' tale is probably based on a Phoenician story related to the second and third chapters of Genesis since it fits with Caananite/Israelite gender views (only modified to naturalise homosexuality in a very non-Israelite manner). Neither are just invented from the imagination and without parrelels in previous culture and mythology. Plato writes in dialogues using fictionalised characters positions like 'we can just invent better myths' and 'poets are liars who must be kicked out of the ideal state' are found in Plato's writings but its much harder to say what Plato actually agreed with.
If Alexander liked guys, good for him. Why do people care - given that his love life isnt the reason why he's been remembered for 2,500 years? The only thing I can think of: there are a lot of paranoid, insecure "straight" types who can't bear the idea that a guy attracted to other men could possibly have ever done anything noteworthy.
Funny how when normal people respond to overt attempts to rewrite history we are called paranoid and insecure, but when you're caught making shit up over and over it's just crickets.
Back then no one felt the to stick a label on sex. However, It was quite natural for males on longterm campaign’s for men to hookup. It was expected General’s & Military warrior’s as well. No stigma was associated with this behavior.
In ancient Greece older men took boys into their households and had a sexual relationship with them ,in ancient Greece men would be considered bisexual by today's standards . For those who doesn't know what bisexual means it means that they were attracted to both men and women in equal measure .
@@tatumfanclub8295 and? In Alexander the Great's day, there was no nation of "Greece" as we think of a nation today, nor was there any orthodox church. The Hellenic states were a loose association of city-states, each with its own laws and democracy, which changed according to who was leading that city-state at the time. Half the time, if a tyrant was leading it, there was no democracy. Alexander the Great existed centuries before Christ. He was from Macedonia. If you're going to claim ownership of something based on today's national boundaries, then you can't claim him as Greek. To say the orthodox church belongs to Greece is a generalisation. It may have started in the Greek-speaking parts of the Roman Empire, but Greece does not own the orthodox church, only the Greek orthodox church.
@@warpedweft9004 Alexander was from the Greek Province of Macedonia, not the FYR of North Macedonia which is named after the ROMAN province of Macedonia which was the successor to the Antigonid Kingdom of Macedonia which was founded after Alexander's death.
I think we learned this in 10th grade that they don't really have concept of homosexuality before so that's why great male rulers before have male lovers/consorts
2:54 THANK YOU goodness people keep using extremely modern western notions, the sad part is it prevents them from truly understanding different mindsets and worldviews, whether it be ancient history or even non-western context
Something occurred to me. Did the active vs passive distinction hold for Alexander and Hephaestion? I was under the impression that they considered each other as also friends and equals. Or was Alexander always active because he was of royal status?
I think an important aspect has been left out of the conversation - namely a degree of male-to-male intimacy we would call a bromance these days, i.e. physical and emotional affinity between two males of approximately similar ages and status without going "all in", pun intended.
If one considers the great depths, one might even say paroxysms, of grief that Alexander is reported to have descended into following Hephaestion's early death, I think there is further evidence of their very strongly-felt loving relationship--one which surpassed mere friendship. When Bagoas was presented to Alexander in order to curry favor with him, Alexander is said to have rejected the gift in high dudgeon because he resented the implication that he would want this former lover of Darius (even though Bagaos was described as very beautiful). Alexander seemed to be very offended, but I wonder if he did not protesteth too much. In any case, I do not think the rejection is proof that Alexander would have been ashamed of his sexual attraction of other males. The issue of the degree of acceptance of what we call homosexuality by "Greeks" is so very complicated and huge a topic that one could not possibly deal with it thoroughly in 23.41 minutes. As you mentioned, there seems to be evidence of different attitudes in different city-states (contrast Sparta and Thebes with Athens for instance) and also as you indicated there seems to have been differences in attitudes based on social classes as there have been in modern societies. Finally, I think we moderns may put too much emphasis on the erastes-eromenos construct. Alexander and Hephaestion were approximately the same age. That flies in the face of the older man-younger man or experienced male "teaching" the inexperienced young man. Since vase paintings indicate that the sexual contact between two males could be intercrural rather than anal intercourse (as K. J. Dover noted in his book on Greek Homosexualty). Two young men like Alexander and Hephaestion could be sexual together in a more equal sense rather than in a dominant vs. submissive sense even though one was a prince and the other, a courtier. Also there is evidence of considerable resentment of the close relationship between Alexander and Hephaestion on the part of other Macedonian commanders who did not consider Hephaestion's position as merited by his military brilliance.
Pederasty is the wrong window with which to view this. They were of the same age, and rather came out of the tradition of shieldmate lovers, as in Sparta, and most famously, Thebes. But on the other hand, we have to remember that Alexander and Hephaeston were not Greek, but Macedonian.
Maybe you actually should look in to those ceramics and how the vast majority being claimed as representing homosexuality are actually not that. A very few represent actual homosexual acts
Not even 1% of all the ceramics found depict such homosexual activities . Not even 1% . Yet somehow they are everywhere on the internet and shoved up to our faces constantly , almost suspiciously ...
Greek person here. Great video! It may seem incredible, but everyone knows and accepts that men used to have open homosexual relations in ancient Greece, except modern Greeks themselves. 😅 For context, in government currently is a very right-wing party (verging on the far-right) and the minister that made that comment is probably the worst minister for culture that Greece has ever had, as she shows zero regard for all things cultural (just look up how they concreted the Acropolis). As for Dimitris Natsios, well, he is the leader of one of three (!) far-right parties in parliament right now, so nothing better could be expected of him I suppose.
I love how anyone at least a little versed in ancient history considers Ancient Greece to be extremely gay civilization but not the actual Greeks themselves. Hilarious😂
my guy did not ship patrochilles and fantasised about running naked and oiled with hephestion just to be called straight. if im not misremembering/ tripping i think i read somewhere that he used to keep a copy of the illiad with him, and used to compare himself and his bf with patrochilles.
I dont think its that contractory, if now we have both acceptance and it mostly accepted and stuff, while all that anti gay stuff, its realistic that it was praxis and happened, while being also shamed. Honestly all the complaining just confirms, it happened and people generally accepted it. Just some people had "moral concerns" I say that to whats known with current moral panics tha are reactive to a mostly accepted thing, but , i dont think media and people wer that different then. oh god, the patroklus thing is, how can historians deny that they probably being gay partner icons, how can that be denied??
I read the title as Netflix makes Alexander the great Gary and I was equally as interested in watching the it as I was when I finally found it it was gay and not Gary
At least 35 years ago, I remember the History Channel, before they began producing a load of cobblers as "science", talking about Alexander having male lovers. Dmitrius is talking out of his hindquarters.
As a gay Classicist who for a couple of years considered converting to Eastern Orthodoxy, hearing a Greek bishop get bent out of shape basically because "they made Alexander the Great woke" is _surreal ..._
Did around that time and place it was common in that time and space for a male teen/ man relationship? Like a mentor kinda thing ? Like in spartan women would cut there hair to make it more comfortable for there husbands in the bed room - but I could be off base
No, Netflix did not make Alexander gay. His relationship with Hephaestion is historical fact and when Hephaestion died Alexander lost his mind temporarily. The monuments and buildings that Alexander had erected in memory of Hephaestion were numerous and extraordinary.
@@richardharris8867 because literally no ancient authors say they were anything more than friends and the basis for your entire argument is “Alexander was sad when his friend died so they were gay”
@@BiteTheHook Sad doesn't begin to do justice to his temporary madness. Why are you so determined to ignore his true relationship with Hephaestion? Why is it problem?
"Gay" is a modern word with a modern concept. The Greeks regarded it as male love, an elevated kind of love very unlike that of a male-female relationship. Probably we'd all understand that, if we hadn't adopted the beliefs of the Iron-Age guys who wrote the Old Testament - condemning any behaviour that slowed population growth. Probably made sense in that context. It was a matter of survival. But condemning male-male love made no sense to the Greeks. And it makes no sense now.
Between 1998 and 2005, studies were generally divided. Some scholars argued that Alexander’s emotional bond with Hephaestion, often compared to Achilles and Patroclus, might suggest a romantic or sexual relationship, but there is no direct, indisputable evidence from ancient texts to confirm this. For instance, while the intense grief Alexander displayed upon Hephaestion’s death points to a deep connection, ancient sources never explicitly describe the relationship as sexual (as they do with other pairs from Greek myth like Achilles and Patroclus). These narratives often focused on strong male friendships without clear distinctions between platonic and romantic love, as modern definitions might require . On the other hand, Alexander also had multiple wives and mistresses, which complicates any definitive claims about his sexuality. It was not uncommon in his culture for men to have relationships with both men and women. Thus, some scholars conclude that Alexander’s relationships were shaped more by the norms of his time than by a fixed sexual identity . In summary, while it’s possible Alexander had same-sex relationships, labeling him with modern sexual categories like “gay” is difficult due to the different context of his era.
Between 2013 and 2024, many scholars and media sources have continued to explore whether Alexander the Great was gay or bisexual. Historical evidence shows that Alexander had close relationships with men, particularly Hephaestion, his lifelong companion, and Bagoas, a Persian eunuch. These relationships are well-documented, though whether they were purely platonic or romantic remains debated. Some modern portrayals, such as the 2024 Netflix documentary Alexander: The Making of a God, depict Alexander as having romantic relationships with men, but this has sparked controversy, as some argue that ancient sources do not explicitly support this interpretation . Historians emphasize that terms like “gay” or “bisexual” did not exist in ancient Greece, and relationships between men were often viewed differently than in modern times. Alexander also married women, including Roxana and Stateira, and fathered a son, which complicates applying modern labels to his sexuality . Overall, while it’s likely that Alexander engaged in both heterosexual and homosexual relationships, the context of his time and the lack of explicit documentation makes it hard to categorize his sexual orientation definitively.
You missed mine, which is specially about Alexander and Hephaistion: "An Atypical Affair? Alexander the Great, Hephaistion, and the Nature of Their Relationship," The Ancient History Bulletin 13.3 (1999) 81-96.
Way late to the party and no one will see this comment but the essay on homosexuality in antiquity at the end of Sarah Ruden translation of Petronius’s Satyricon is a quick read & very informative
The only scholarly and thoughtful video on TH-cam I found to be made upon the so called 'Netflix scandal' which historically examines the plausibility of Alexander's sexuality. All the rest of the videos I found were just rubbish based on video makers' inner homophobia. So thanks a lot for this video! ❤🏳️🌈
Damn to think that having male friends means I must be having sexual relationships with them, I've had many male friends some I look at as a brother from another mother known them for very long times and not once have we ever had sex. I think you are looking at this through your own twisted lens.
![ร้อยพ่อพันแม่ - WanMai [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/XY2pNYASEbg/mqdefault.jpg)
To anyone saying that the concept of being "gay" didn't exist in the ancient world... well, yeah.. but more to the point, the concept of being "straight" didn't exist, either.
Homosexuality was invented 4 years before heterosexuality
I really have never understood why this is so difficult for people.
Same sex attraction has always existed. Everything points towards sexual orientations also being a constant in our species.
How people act on that is separate matter, managed by culture.
Similarly, how people understand and talk about the genders they are attracted to is managed by culture.
Not complicated.
Well said
Like the old joke about the Italian and the Greek arguing in a bar over whose ancient civilization was superior:
Greek - "Yeah, well we Greeks invented sex."
Italian - "Ah, but we Romans invented doing it with women."
Gayness and bisexuality didn't exist before about 1972, conveniently (but totally coincidentally) around the same time conservatives in the USA had to give up trying to reinstate segregation because it was too unpopular. Lucky for them, LGBT+ stuff and ab*rtion suddenly sprang into existence, so they had something else to wage culture wars about.
The bonds of brothers in arms penetrates, just, so deeply.
😂😂😂
Ha ha, good one!
LMFAO
It was probably intercurial.
Never happened 😅
Alexander wasn't gay, he was just Macedonian-curious.
Read Foucalt, no one was "gay" before the 1800s
@@John_Malka-tits I would suggest reading:
1. Dan O’Shannon's "What Are You Laughing At? A Comprehensive Guide to the Comedic Event"
2. Eric Idle's "The Road to Mars"
3. Todd McGowan's "Only a Joke Can Save Us: A Theory of Comedy"
These books are great examples to help you identify a joke when you encounter one in the wild and understand why it is found funny. O'Shannon and McGowan both offer books that are a bit more dry. I assumed from your comment that this may take some effort to ease you into, so these are more clinical and clearly define parameters, timing, word play, etc.
Eric Idle, from Monty Python fame, delivered this delightfully fun and funny book dealing with the same overall questions of "what is comedy" and "what is a joke." Instead of the more dry and straight forward presentation of the other two books, although they are also both funny.
"The Road to Mars" is a novel set in space with a robot trying to figure out if it can be funny and understand the nature of comedy. The robot is the ship mate of two stand up comedians flying around from space port to space port putting on shows. Superbly entertaining, witty, and laugh out loud funny it is a fantastic read that should help you once you've read through it.
As for my reading and your suggestion, I have never read "Foucalt" that you mentioned.
I have read some Foucault though, but was disappointed. I found my self feeling that way because I had heard that Foucault was a large proponent of Penal Reform, which I was quite interested in. I was thoroughly shocked after reading his book, "The History of Sexuality," where he didn't remark on making changes to or improving the phallus whatsoever. Some champion of Penal Reform he was!
@@John_Malka-tits No one should read Foucault, ever, for any reason. This sounds like a case in point.
@@Dorian_sapiensthe fact that you say this shows how much you dislike freedom.
@@Dorian_sapiens any media literate can read Foucalt and appreciate what he has to say.
Media illiterate folks may read it, and try to justify pederasty.
He was literally a philosophical ground-breaker and demystifies littterally this whole video
In short, today's understanding sexual identities didn't exist in ancient world. Men could have male lovers. Taking the passive role was a sign of submissiveness to your superior because ancient world is very patriarchal. Most women didn't had much say or freedom as usual. Everyone was expected to marry and have children regardless.
Yes, a lot of westerners do not seem to understand this.
Indeed. Also, I have to add that the figure of Alexander the Great has been interpreted, reinterpreted and deconstructed in thousands ways because of how he went any known convention on earth. A short pretty boy with cunning IQ but also EQ and lots of sensibilities and contradictions? Not suitable for the traditional power play fantasy that people expect
And also, that Alexander the Great is a figure that has inspired a lot of "interpretations" because is a fountain of contradictions that defied any labels in general. A short pretty boy with high EQ as well as IQ was able to conquer the world before 30? No way!
Yeah, but looking back on it we have a word for men sleeping with men. It's called homosexuality.
I understand your argument, but by that logic you could argue "ancient world didn't have today's understanding of molecules, so we can't say they drank H2O" We have words for things.
@@HotDogTimeMachine385Alexander wouldn’t consider himself a “gay” man that’s tyething
And here I thought we always knew that Alexander was at least bi and that was culturally acceptable.
I know right
No it was not lol, many were actually lynched for such actions. Acceptable for a select few parts of the rolling elites? In few cases - yes. For regular people? No lol.
@@RKB-2001source that people were lynched for the object of desire’s gender rather than for physical passivity or hubris.
@@RKB-2001 ??? Are you sure. Weren't the Greeks really gay? I'm pretty sure male homosexuality was expected in their culture
Culturally acceptable is fine, if that's your thing, but we never knew that lol. There is zero documentation or proof. It is just speculation.
Wow, when I sent in the idea not so long ago, I did not expect you to get to it so quickly, but thank you for the amazing video (as always)!
Thanks for the idea!
@@CinziaDuBois Very eloquently done, too!
I’m a Christian myself and even I can read the political image PR going on in these protests. They associate historical figures with representing their current status and seek to block images they don’t like and approve of. The trouble is, history just doesn’t work that way. Excellent presentation as always and hope you feel better soon. You did not sound weird in anyway.
Honestly I think a lot of those same people are the ones who try to idealize the past, they don't like things that disprove their opinions.
Alexander the Great was not and will never be a Christian figure in history, so I don't understand why any Christians care.
@@Pluto-cw2kh they also tend to later claim that their neighboring countries are not real because they never existed throughout most of the history, a 30-minute lecture on 1200+ years of history attached.
Some people need to learn the difference between history and current political and cultural status.
Those complaining are likely the same people that believe CRT is being taught in grade schools as opposed to just plain history class.
Do the Christian communities realize that he wasnt Christian, but more Greek in terms of belief system? Lol like...its not like theyre claiming Jesus was gay...
they dont understand there was a time before christianity
@@runkelpokk9I think Greeks know there was a time before they gave the world orthodoxy since they can be some of the most nationalist people ever
As a Christian, we 100% know that because we actively talk about the differences between Roman/Greek vs. Christian culture when we listen to sermons talking about the Bible. It's your own ignorance of Ancient Greek cultures to assume that other non-Christian cultures could also be against homosexuality.
@@runkelpokk9 Oh yeah we're so ignorant of the "times before Christianity" that half of our Bible that we study religiously (the Old Testament) talks all about the 1500 years before Jesus Christ came.
😂💯👏🏻
Ancient Greek society, classical age. Naked athletics, only naked men in sculptured art, naked male Olympic athletes., naked men in gyms. Doesn't sound gay at all...LOL C'mon. My favorite graffiti on an ancient Greek stadium tunnel wall - obviously it would be directed at other men, as only men would be taking that tunnel to the arena area "Look up Moschos in Philippi, he's cute." 😁
I have another one. If I remember correctly it went "I give up on women. For now I will only pleasure men"
There were naked women in those gyms too
@@fwwaller I think you're thinking of Roman baths.
"Gymnasium: the name comes from the Ancient Greek term gymnós, meaning "naked" or "nude". Only adult male citizens were allowed to use the gymnasia."
@@angelikaskoroszyn8495 Wasn’t it one of the graffiti discovered in Pompeii?
@@angelikaskoroszyn8495 The actual phrasing is so much funnier, but unfortunately not TH-cam friendly- starting with "goodbye wondrous femininity!" cracks me up every time I think of it, because it's so over the top.
The comments on this one are going to be an absolute dumpster fire. 😂 Wonderful video as always, Cinzia.
Compared to my second channel, the comments will be tame
Yes, the book to read on this topic is Lover's Legends by Andrew Calimach. It explains that part of the reason why stories of same sex attraction in myth and history are unknown to some scholars, and why any ancient Greek sources that criticize or condemn homoeroticism have seem to had thier importance exaggerated beyond what is warranted, and this is because, unless they are reading actual ancient Greek original sources, modern translations of these ancient Greek documents have deliberately omitted and censored such things for hundreds of years as a matter of taste and morality. Lovers Legends restores the homosexual content to these myths and histories.
exactly and I'm tired of the censcorship when it comes to gay people like me so I'm glad they didn't do it this time!
Isnt this debunked by Socrates constantly lusting after boys? His dialogues are by far the most famous and widely read ancient texts.
I dont understand the whole debate anyway. Speaking from just the viewpoint of filmmaking, the Alexander film from the 2000s already made him verrrrryyyyy in love with his friend/general/advisor. He died in his arms... I thought it's common knowledge that he was at least bi
Oliver Stone's Alexander was just as hated by the Greek right for that very reason.
It was/is. He also cut some scenes of open homosexual behavior
Its common misconception, not knowledge lol. Alexander violently rejected pederastic relationships offered to him.
@@phillipp5538 No he didn't him and Aristotle was a pederastic relationship which were not suppose to be sexual at all no more than any mentorship or tutorage.
@@phillipp5538 And your knowledge is based on what?
It's always so funny to see how people forget about Hephaestion. It's probably because they were taught the mythical history wrong. Hephaestion was his eromenos, his lover. They were the same age, too, so it wasn't pederasty.
No, there is no mention of that at all in historical texts
@@bennogb5069 Yes there is, if you read Arrian's discourses of Epictitus and Anabasis of Alexander, Hephaestion is described as Alexander's Eromenos.
There is also an explicit reference to their sexual relationship, and its found in the Cynic Epistles, where Diogenes berates Alexander for being too held fast by Hephaestion's thighs
Except those are believed to be Roman in origin none of the primary sources name them as eromes
@@angel7661 Except a huge percentage of the sources are from Roman historians, but that doesn't mean they are less reliable. The Romans were heavily inspired by the Greeks and the Greeks lived under Roman rule for a very long time, so I'm sure these Roman historians would've had great access to Greek documents.
@@TheKnowledgeMan101 Except a majority of primary sources never used the word Eromenos to describe Hesphaestion and Alexander despite Arrian using the word Eromenos to describe other relationship with the same work. Not to mention the Cynic Epistes is believe to be made in Rome not come from Diogenes and it is debated if Alexander actually met Diogenes. That is why it is speculative. We can uses Roman sources however they aren't best and no primary greek source we recovered claim they were Eromenos.
Aristotle quote about the two of them sharing the same souls actually comes fom his view on friendship. Could he and Bi/Pan maybe but historian also believe Alexander was trying to control his Vices (ie sex, wine) to remain seen as a god king
What is a friend? A single soul dwelling in two bodies.” -Aristotle
Modern Greeks: Homosexuality didn't exist in Ancient Greece!
Sappho, Achilles, Petroclus, Heracles, Iolaus, and Apollo: Excuse us?!
There’s no explicit evidence that Achilles and Petroclus were gay from the originally Homeric sources.
…personally though, I think the whole setup is more than a bit gay. ..probably why later writers made them so.
Also homosexuality and male worship seemed to be pretty common in Ancient Greece 😂 so it’s funny to hear anyone say that!
Where is evidence
Alexander was gay
oh wait there is none
@@basicallyno1722 Homosexuality was not common. Pederasty might have been, but the only mentions in literature of adult male homosexual relations are in the context of when it's used as an insult (such as Spartan letters.)
@@faust8218 did you not watch the video? The modern construct of homosexuality is so alien to the ancient world that to apply such a label would be inaccurate. Also the video offers serval examples of references to mlm relationships outside of the spartan letters.
7:14 I think it should be emphasised on this particular point that the acceptability of being active an the taboo of being passive was for citizens and free non-citizens, while passivity in sexual relationships with men was permitted for slaves for instance.
Read Foucalt, no one was "gay" before the 1800s
I thought that was the Roman attitude, not the Greek.
"Permitted"
@@RobespierreThePoofwhich was copied from other cultures, including the Greeks
Thank you for the video. Netflix has riled up a lot of people with their depictions of ancient life recently. Hopefully, people who watched the Cleopatra and Alexander programs were inspired to do some reading of their own on about these fascinating figures and not dissuaded by any superficial controversy.
They did Cleopatra dirty.
Cleopatra was deservedly controversial because of how much it radically deviated from historical fact. Alexander is causing undue controversy because it is adhering to historical record about Alexander's sexuality. The two are completely opposite in that regard.
@@andrewbecker1013only that there is no documentation in both topics about the things they claim. Cleopatra, funnily enough, was actually descendant from one of Alexander's generals, Ptolomey, and therefore, would look very........Greek?. The only claim that she was black was that there was a so called black pharaoh dynasty coming from Nubia (nowadays Sudan)and, ok, fair enough, they were black but more akin to Beyonce than to, say, a tribe in Masai Mara. And it's true that we don't know for sure who her maternal grandmother was but if she were even a little darker than Megan Markle, Roman sources would have told us. Concerning Mega Alex, well, there is no documentation who he really liked, but for sure he had kids with multiple women, which renders this point mute
@@MatildeVallespinCasas Well, I don't know why people say "gay" when it's much more likely that he was bisexual. There is no little reason to believe this. In a letter from Diogenes of Sinope he said that Alexander the great was "controlled by the thighs of Hephaestion". The Cynic philosophers added that Alexander was only defeated once in his life and that it was by the thighs of Hephaestion. So one of two, either Hephaestion tried to literally suffocate him with his thighs or we are adults and we understand what they were referring to. Seems like it was pretty obvious...
@@MatildeVallespinCasasIt's much more likely that he was bisexual, but the love of his life was Hephaestion. There is no little reason to believe this. In a letter from Diogenes of Sinope he said that Alexander the great was "controlled by the thighs of Hephaestion". The Cynic philosophers added that Alexander was only defeated once in his life and that it was by the thighs of Hephaestion. So one of two, either Hephaestion tried to literally suffocate him with his thighs or we are adults and we understand what they were referring to. Seems like it was pretty obvious... Not to add all the pain that Alexander went through when Hephaestion died. Hephaestion death is considered one of the events that led to Alexander's physical and emotional decline as he began to drink uncontrollably. He dies about 8 months later. Quite a thing, if you ask me.
I believe you brought up several salient points. The Greeks and Romans were--more complicated than we moderns can credit. It takes a bold scholar to buck today's trends of "Mrs. Grundy is kink-shaming again..." I further believe that the outcry against the Netflix programs is part of our own modern generations of reluctance to recognize that people have been people since the beginning of our time on this world, and things back in antiquity were just as complex and nuanced as they are today. Humans are curious animals. We're complicated and simple at the same time. Wise and stupid at the same time. Most of what we think of as "forbidden" or "unacceptable" is more a product of our present-day cultural references than some inviolate, immutable natural law. There are a few things we can all agree on as being forbidden and unacceptable; murder, theft, rape... And probably the first two can be argued that there are moral exceptions for the commission thereof; war, starvation... But the third? I can't see any moral exclusion for forcing sexual advances on someone without their informed consent, no. Is that a cultural bias on my part? Possibly. How would I know? I'm a product of my culture. Breaking laws against non-harmful activities was part of my heritage. But there is, at least in my mind, a difference between making moonshine, driving over the posted speed limit, or passing the ritual herb to something like non-consensual sex. That's my culture. I hope this post made sense. My apologies if I just made myself look stupid.
well, Christianity ruined things for all--as usual
Ive always heard that homosexuality was accepted in ancient times as long as the man in question was the dominant one (The "top" in modern slang), but if the man was the submissive one (the "bottom" in modern slang) then ancient heterosexual men saw them as inferior, or weak.
Alexander built a monument to the guy when he died. Hmmmm....
exactly totally not at least bisexual at all and they weren't lovers and I'm straight too like him. lol
Idk man, I always spend the rough modern equivalent of a billion USD on my friend's funerals and order every man, woman, and child to cut their hair in mourning for him.
You do realise that he built a monument for another childhood friend of his , built monument for cyrus as well
@@okenogamer OK, not fully detailed about Alexander's life but perhaps that other friend was also with benefits and he honored Cyrus as a great king like himself.
You must be pretty predatory if you cannot have friends that you love to that degree.
That was very in depth, I appreciate it! Personally, I feel that actions always speak louder than words and the many sources we have talking about Alexander's grief for Hephastion speaks of a very deep connection between the two. Whether we'd categorize that as romantic or sexual nowadays doesn't really matter.
Great video. I read someone's PhD paper on Hephaestion back in 2005 when the movie "Alexander" came out. The author made a good case for bisexuality expressed between Alexander and Hephaestion.
Read Foucalt, no one was "gay" before the 1800s.
People were just allowed to be freaks before "sexuality" was a medical category
I don't know that you can even term it bisexuality. That's a modern construct that people are trying to apply to an ancient culture, with different norms and beliefs.
@@warpedweft9004 True, that's our term. But in ancient times, it was natural for boys/men to get together and also get married to women.
@@benjalucian1515 but it was also natural for them to discard a wife or marry her off to someone else against the woman's will.
@@warpedweft9004 No argument there.
1:05 What?! Um, of course homosexuality was a thing in ancient times. That clergyman should read his Bible; the Apostle Paul and others commented on the fact
*When we talk about homosexuality, we are talking about same-sex attraction which this concept was viewed different from long ago. At least in Ancient Greece, man on man sex are tolerated (although being submissive/bottom is a taboo. So only the women, slaves and unfortunately young boys would be submissive), women on women are quite murky (possibly problematic since taking an active role is seen as going against nature) as we don't have much or at least don't have a proper women's perspective on it and man-man ROMANTIC relationship was also somewhat murky as there are no certainty that they accept homosexual relationship (although if they believe women can only be submissive and man must be active, then I would guess it isn't that acceptable as it would mean one of the partner has to be submissive.)
That's like one of the most disputed and hard to translate lines in Paul lol.
Fascinating deep dive yet again ! I would love a video of Sappho and/or sapphic love in history/mythology in the future !
I laughed so hard at this title because of the audacity to suppose that anyone can MAKE Alexander the Great gay. Boy bye. 💅🏽
??
Alexander the Great definitely had sexual relations with women, but the supposed male sexual relations are more speculative. The ancient world did not have a modern sexual binary as such, so it's completely valid to question the notion that Alexander was "gay".
@@faust8218But its weird to emphasize. Bc theres very little documentation on him having relationships whatsoever.
He is best characterized as bisexual disaster probably?! He did engage in gay stuff i think pretty comfortable i think?!, whenever hephistion, thats the speculative but wsnt he pretty didnt care not to engage with , he probably was bisexual.
But the erasure of hephisteion, they probably were vey close romantic enough that it posed a percieved threat to do his duties to his wife, he can be bi and that be, his life partner .If ther ewas gossip and erasure even, it has to be the one he prefered the most likely
@@Raphsophomes Did you read the comment I'm replying to? They're basically saying that it's abvious that Alexander was "gay." It's very common today to see similar modern impositions on history, specifically the thing about "Greeks being gay." It's a radical oversimplification at best, and a straight up lie about history at worst, no different than 19th century nationalist rewritings.
I don't necessarily disagree with anything in the actual video.
@@Raphsophomeshe had children with women, one of them called Heracles, by the way. So, either he did a great effort to overcome his supposed lack of attraction or......I don't know
As a student in ancient greek and latin, who have studied some of the texts you are refering to, I put my suport behind your claims. (If it matters to anyone)
There’s literal no evidence of Alexander having any gay relations or homosexual desires, all source come over 300 years later with no supporting evidence. Here is a list of the two sources that historians use to depict Alexander as homosexual in comparison to Alexander reign of time and theirs.
Alexander the Great was born in 356 BC and died in 323 BC, here are all the secondary sources:
Plutarch, a Greek biographer and essayist who lived in the 1st and 2nd centuries AD
Quintus Curtius Rufus: This Roman historian, who lived in the 1st century AD
Yep this is all, the reason for modern historians believing Alexander is gay is because two sources that come over 350 years. Plutarch talks about how Alexander was extremely saddened by Hephaestions death and due to this “historians” think Alexander was gay 😂. Now let’s analyze the Quintus source, so basically Quintus completely fabricates an instance where Alexander is discovered in bed with a Persian eunuch Bagoas. Quintus gives no sources for this it’s complete made up.
People don't care that it's made up, they just want their personal views to be supported.
I have some kind of unrelated thoughts as they’re not specific to this case. But I wanted to put them out there anyway. With all the talk about homosexuality and everything deviating the norm or being unnatural, I always have to think: Even if something’s not common, has not been occurring for a long time or is present in more ways than some people think, it’s not right to say it is inherently wrong. Just because something does not occur often or is viewed as wrong, maybe even unnatural, it does not mean that something is actually wrong. Of course, some people will not follow that thought and still act like it is wrong, which is why I think it is important to establish a way of thinking that is generally appreciative of things in existence, instead of condemning things that appear or actually are different from what one usually experiences. Something quite fitting just popped into my mind: “Different denotes neither good nor bad, but it certainly means different.” It’s astonishing how many people have difficulties arranging their perception based on that principle. Especially the ones who are against properties in people which are not harmful in any way.
it's only not right in some people's minds, those who have been brought up to believe a certain way. Don't forget this was all pre-Christianity, and there was no puritan thinking. Therein lies the problem. A lot of today's society was brought up to think one way and ancient societies another way. You can't equate the modern concept of homosexuality with the mostly platonic relationships of ancient worlds.
@@warpedweft9004even pre abrahamic religions there would have been a lot of differences in what was acceptable and unacceptable in many areas of human life in different ci ilisations and at different times.
this thing of people being upset that behaviors of people in the past exhibiting things unremarkable to them at the time but seen as "pushing" offensive (to the ones complaining) got me wondering about the other side of the coin...do modern depictions of admired people avoid showing them saying things that would be considered racist and sexist in ways they probably didn't even notice but would be unacceptable (hopefully) today 🙂(i doubt we'd have to go as far back as slave owning times or even the ancient world for an accurate movie to face this...probably just great grandparents time would be fine 😀
Hello, Lady of the Library. This was a really interesting video. As a student in archeology, you have pointed out things that we have seen in license classes (symposium, many RB ceramic painting, etc). The topic of sexuality in Ancient Greece/Macedonia is still a great debate because of our modern view of the Ancient world.
If I could suggest a really interesting subject it is the Amazon Prime series of ROMULUS, made by Amazon Prime. It is a fiction that does its own version of the foundation myth of Rome. Only that the characters are made more "barbaric" so to speak (Viking runes on the title, pelts, tattoos, shamanic rituals, etc). This could lead you to a subject of "barbarisation" (as my teachers called it) of European cultures pre-antiquity or pre-roman.
Hope to see more videos from you in the future!
Viking runes that developed from the Greek alphabet a thousand years after the supposed founding of Rome? Oh dear. Did they include the Etruscans as civilised neighbours with clean clothes and advanced technology?
@@pattheplanter I don't remember much. Mostly pelts and some cave people that are supposed to be the first romans
ol alex was as camp as a row of tents when he wanted to be
i thought it was a well known historical fact The Great liked men and women
every thing ive ever herd about him alludes to it
I got my start in research doing research into the social factors of HIV transmission in the early ‘90s. This ancient pattern of a hierarchy of “active” vs “passive” was very much still around and considered part of how homosexuality worked in Southern European cultures, among others, including the pre-Civil Rights Era American South. This was very much on the “down low”. The men who were “active” wouldn’t agree to being homosexual at all.
I have no idea if that’s still true and have long ago switched fields, but I wouldn’t be surprised if that still exists in places that may well deny on the surface that there’s any homosexuality going on.
I don’t remember the source(s), but I have heard of a similar culture in prisons. I really don’t want to look up the topic, so sorry I can’t provide more information.
Hello Cinzia... I am a great fan of your work. Just a small correction Harmodius and Aristogeiton assassinated the tyrant Hipparchus, but not his brother Hippias. Hippias, actually, executed the pair for the murder.
Oh god, what a stupid error on my behalf; thank you for pointing that out.
So as usual history is complicated and it is impossible to truly understand it because whether we like it or not we view it through our modern understanding. Great video as usual and I hope you do a follow up on the female side of things.
Well history is not 'complicated' in Netflix eyes because being Gay is the most important part of Alexander's story.
There are certain parts of the historical record that are more difficult to research. I'm afraid this often includes women's history.
There's enough material to work with when it comes to women and same-gender love between women in Ancient Greece. However, it was a very patriarchal culture so there's quite a bit of detail and nuance that we will probably always lack.
Sapho is the obvious starting point.
Good luck with finding female Perspective in ancient Times because they are either sex workers,witches ,scemers or loyal mothers Most women in ancient Times we're straight Up property of the father and were living breathing treaties to make alliances between Clans.
The historical record shows Alexander, like most Greeks* of his period, was bisexual.
(* Yes, I know that he was Macedonian, but he considered himself Hellene.)
Ancient Macedonians were Ancient Greeks.
@agiospipas The Ancient Athenians didn't think that. Read some of Demosthenes' "Phillipics".
@@annalieff-saxby568 Some(!) Ancient Athenians didn't consider Lesbians and Epirotes as Greeks either given their non -Attic Greek speech(Aeolic and Northwestern Greek, respectively). So, non argument.
@@agiospipas Epirotes yes, but Lesbos was part of the Delian League and then the Athenian Empire and they were as much Hellenes as Athenians or Milesians. Dialects did not disqualify. Attic-speaking Athenians may have looked down on Doric-speaking Spartans et al. and vice-versa, but they were all considered Hellenes. Macedonians, on the other hand, were considered by many of the Peloponnesian and Central Greek states to be different and they objected to their inclusion in the Olympics and other Hellenic festivals.
I have seen it suggested that Macedonian attitudes towards male same-sex sexual behaviour may have differed from the Athenian attitudes and that relationships between two adult men or two similarly aged adolescents may have been more accepted among Macedonians. I'm not so sure that the Hellenistic successor kingdoms looked down on same-sex sexual relations to the degree that they would have felt a need to censor such a relationship between Alexander and Hephaistion since they were all formed by members of the Macedonian elite. In the 3rd century BCE, the Ptolemaic court poet Poseidippos wrote a poem (GP Asclep. 37) about how he (or at least the lyrical I employed in the poem) had no feelings for women but an unquenchable desire for men (though whether these were his own personal feelings or it was written from the perspective of a character, I don't know). The fact that he was able to write and publish this while being a poet at the royal court (and the fact that he says men and not boys) implies that, at least in 3rd century BCE Alexandria, attitudes towards adult male same-sex sexual desire were quite relaxed. (Which also correlates with other stories that paint a picture of Alexandria in the 3rd century BCE as a place that wasn't too concerned with conservative social mores, such as the accounts of the physician Herophilos being allowed by the Ptolemaic kings to dissect human cadavers which was forbidden elsewhere in the ancient world or the fact that there seem to have been female actors in Alexandria, at least in New Comedy productions, when acting in classical Greek culture had always been a strictly male profession.) I believe there are also some ancient sources that do refer to Hephaistion as Alexander's eromenos? (But I think they're from a couple centuries later and I can't remember whom they're by. It seems most ancient sources which are considered credible do not directly spell it out.) I've also encountered a theory that Alexander may have been sexually and romantically attracted to Hephaistion without Hephaistion actually reciprocating those feelings (which could help explain why most ancient sources don't explicitly refer to them as lovers).
Wow. Thank you for telling me about Harmodius and Aristogeiton:
_Harmodius and Aristogeiton (both died 514 BC) were two lovers in Classical Athens who became known as the Tyrannicides._
...
_Both Thucydides (d. 400 BC) and Herodotus (d. 425 BC) describe the two as lovers, their love affair was styled as moderate (sophron) and legitimate (dikaios). Further confirming the status of the two as paragons of pederastic ethics, a domain forbidden to slaves, a law was passed prohibiting slaves from being named after the two heroes._
_The story continued to be cited as an admirable example of heroism and devotion for many years. In 346 BC, for example, the politician Timarchus was prosecuted (for political reasons) on the grounds that he had prostituted himself as a youth. The orator who defended him, Demosthenes, cited Harmodius and Aristogeiton, as well as Achilles and Patroclus, as examples of the beneficial effects of same-sex relationships. Aeschines (d. 314 BC) offers them as an example of dikaios erōs, "just love", and as proof of the boons such love brings to lovers - who were both improved by love beyond all praise - as well as to the city._
This information flies in the face of that TH-camr (forgot his name but he cosplays as medieval guys) who claimed that ancient Greeks looked down upon all homosexuality, that they did not view Achilles and Patroclus as lovers, etc. I felt that the TH-camr was only laying out one side of the story and I even picked up some misrepresentations he made myself.
Thanks so much for this more balanced, nuanced and enlightening video.
whatever we want to call Alexander's sexuality today aside, the fact this show caused such a 'ruckus' is the most disturbing thing to take home. one could be excused to think we didn't make any progress at all since the 1980s. why would the thought of ancient Alexander having intimate relations with Hephaestion and others bother any Greek minister today?
Actually there are some sources of which we can suppose that Alexander and Hephaestion did have a romantic sexual relationship
1. Arrian writes in his Discourses of Epictitus that he remembers how Alexander ordered that the Temples of Asclepius be set on fire when his "eromenos" died. And in the Anabasis of Alexander, Arrian names this Eromenos as being referenced to Hephaestion.
2. In the Cynic Epistles, Diogenes berates Alexander for being held fast by Hephaestion's thighs.
Also the interpretation of Alexander's lack of desire for sex and how his parents demanded he have sex with Callixeina is incorrect. If you read it carefully, their worry of his lack of sexual desire was in relation to his excessive drinking of alcohol. Aristotle pushed this idea that the semen of people who drink too much becomes watery and thus not be able to have sexual libido. So their worry of him becoming a "gynnis" was divided in two. 1. Is that they were afraid he was becoming asexual and they needed him to give them an heir. 2. They were afraid that he was becoming an eromenos, or basically the passive side, and so they begged him to have sex with Callixina because they wanted him to become an Erastes or the dominant side
I mean, I grew up going to strict Christian and Catholic schools and I still knew that Alexander didn’t quite fit into our modern concept of “straight.”
Nice argument , plutarch should consider retire all his works bcz you nailed him 🤡🤡🤡
Another fascinating deep dive. A layered discussion, as always.
Very interesting and well researched, thank you.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Did someone say researched 😂😂😂 if you think that’s research your as dumb as the movie was
Very much like your scholarly approach.
And your wordsmithing around Aristotle's thoughts on bottoming was very entertaining. I am not shy about these topics, except in the classroom - and so i can relate to your verbal ceasura.
An excellent essay, basically a term paper in video form. Amazing, thank you for the many citations of scholars and primary sources! (That this series is grossly inaccurate in terms of historic depiction is true, but not because of Hephaistion. The costumes are atrocious. Still, that we are at this point where one little scene (it's really rather short and after that their relationship isn't very intimate at all) can cause such a shitstorm is worrying...
let me clear some things out all the misunderstanding comes from this two words
1. εραστής
2. ερωμένος
two epithets that in modern greek means the same thing which translates simply to (lover) but ancient greek is still studied and examined untill this day. In ancient texts these two words are used almost always in the same sentences but why use the same word with the same meaning to desribe smth?
This is what it actually meant it's original meaning «Εραστής και Ερώμενος» = Teacher and Student in the military and schools in ancient Greece: The misunderstood meaning of two words, a concept that has changed today.
This is not the only words that has a different meaning in modern greek many many words have changed it's original meaning one more example is today it translates simply as market/emporium. Ancient meaning is a place where people speak.
From what I understand as long as you weren't the bottom it was usually kosher for some guy on guy action, but the bottoms were commonly slandered and looked down upon.
Colored by the Christian Orthodox Church, modern greeks have their own perception of ancient history.
True. Also colored by nationalism quite a bit.
No disrespect to the Greeks, of course. (Who could dislike modern Greece?). They do need to move beyond nationalist politics soon, however.
@@RobespierreThePoof No worries. I am greek, I wholeheartedly agree. Alas, I don't think I'll live to see a more 'open-minded' so-to-say Greece.
Greeks dislike modern Greece...
@@devifoxe Ye-up. Can't blame them (much) though. Not much glory to be had nowadays.
@@Billpro25 the imaginary missing glory is the problem... 24h propaganda in the media from a corrupt right wing government is not helping... And the systemic left for some reason is trying to copy the democrats in USA because they are so successful over there...
So yea...
Byrne Fone in his _Homophobia. A History_ traces homosexuality as a concept all the way to antiquity, when people would explicitly categorise men (and even women) based on the orientation of their attraction. He shows that a lack of a term like "homosexual" did not prevent them from having a mental concept for it. So the idea that a person can be exclusively attracted to members of their own sex is not a modern one, in spite of all the smoke and mirrors of queer theory.
As a greek i thank you for this video! It has always been so funny to me to hear very masculine "manly men" (aka toxically masculine🤫) say that their idol is Alexander the great and that there is no way he was queer because he was a great ruler.
Yep, it is hilarious! I once made a joke with my best friend (guy married with other guy), that he was extremely masculine, because he didn't even marry a woman.
I am bewildered why people make such a problem about two people having consensual relationships.
Ditto with Frederick the Great
Alexander wasn't a Great Ruler he was a Great Warlord who never ruled a day in his life and kicked the bucket the moment he realised he was supposed to get around to doing so.
Alexander preferred men. History shows that clearly. It just is what it is.
Harem of 365 women one for each day of the year doesn't sound gay to me at all.
He liked both.
@@DustinDonald-cz9ot wasn't that Darius's Harem? It also had eunuchs that "played the part of the women".
We're Alexander and Hephaestion gay? No more or less than their peers. If they followed the customs of their times and class, they very likely shared some degree of physical intimacy in their adolescence. This, as with their peers, would have ceased upon adulthood. It wouldn't have continued not nessisarily because of their genders but due to their different status. As king, Alexander as the younger of the two, as most historians believe, could never be seen as submissive in any way. A physical component may have continued in private, but it was unlikely as the risk would have been too high. The more important question is did they love one another and did their love have an impact on history. Most historians agree, most definitely, yes. In fact, theirs was one of the great love stories of antiquity. Whether it was expressed physically is practically irrelevant.
These discussions are strange, because some people seem to look back to Greeks and Romans for queer representation, but often the form male on male interactions we find in these histories are between adult males and boys that were considered ...boys. While I do think it's important to not erase this reality of these societies I don't think it's smart or moral to look to them or use them as representation
My understanding of Greek culture of that day is that you could have a heterosexual marriage and homosexual affair. Gay is a modern term.
The debate is about the concept. NOT the word used.
@@donny1960 It's as if you didn't read what I wrote. My first sentence IS saying that gay is also a modern concept. And I said term, not word, which includes the entire concept.
@@eximusic I read exactly what you wrote. Term. Word. They are interchangeable. The concept of Gayness seems to be modern too. The arguments are that homosexual behavior in Ancient Greek times is not the same as homosexual behavior now. No matter what word or term we use. That concept seems contrived to fit the political landscape of today.
@@donny1960 1st - not all words are terms. 2nd - you seem to be making my original point.
I always took Alexander as the type who liked who he liked and anyone who didn't agree with him could argue with the sharp end of his sword. Pun intended.
I love when you say they believe it is based on the stars like
Ancient Greeks be like oh he is a Gemini he must be gay 🤣
Jupiter rising. Mercury and Ares in conjunction. Though, seriously, the water-carrier Aquarius was seen by the Greeks as Ganymede, a pretty male lover of Zeus taken to Olympus to serve the gods. . . with water.
I enjoy when the lady at the library tells me about history
It is not true he was queer
@@jammasterjay4298 - he cried out while weeping and throwing up
I thought it was common knowledge that Alexander the Great had male lovers. I was really surprised to hear that it's "controversial."
Also, men can have sexual relationships that don't necessarily involve them being a passive or dominant partner. Just saying.
Love the explanation! Curious in watching the show if it looks more like common expectations regarding male-male relations or if it accurately depicts the relevant historical nuisances and common perceptions of the time.
One question: how did the myth related to all humans being initially created as having two sets of arms and legs before being separated into male/female interact with Ancient Greek relations?
Plato invented that myth just like how he invented the myth of Atlantis. He's an advocate of inventing new myths to suit the society he lived in
@@naurahdeatrisyagitany8365 They're not the same though. One is Aristophanes' mythic tale from the Symposium which is not the final word on love presented in the work while Atlantis is a (pseudo-)historical Epic he tells two versions of but doesn't get paired with an alternate tale on the same topic.
Atlantis is based off of the Myths of Phaeton and Deucalion which in turn have Babylonian origins while Aristophanes' tale is probably based on a Phoenician story related to the second and third chapters of Genesis since it fits with Caananite/Israelite gender views (only modified to naturalise homosexuality in a very non-Israelite manner). Neither are just invented from the imagination and without parrelels in previous culture and mythology.
Plato writes in dialogues using fictionalised characters positions like 'we can just invent better myths' and 'poets are liars who must be kicked out of the ideal state' are found in Plato's writings but its much harder to say what Plato actually agreed with.
I think it's been common knowledge that he liked men for a very long time so this should not be news to anyone.
If Alexander liked guys, good for him. Why do people care - given that his love life isnt the reason why he's been remembered for 2,500 years? The only thing I can think of: there are a lot of paranoid, insecure "straight" types who can't bear the idea that a guy attracted to other men could possibly have ever done anything noteworthy.
Or 'gay types' trying to say that famous historical figures were gay as if that legitimises their personality politics.
@@janwilson9485 I don't think you actually know what does words mean
Guys keep Johnwalzer away from your kids lol, this comment is the only red flag you need.
@@phillipp5538 Now you and I both know you don't have kids or anyone/anything else of value in your life lol
Funny how when normal people respond to overt attempts to rewrite history we are called paranoid and insecure, but when you're caught making shit up over and over it's just crickets.
Back then no one felt the to stick a label on sex. However, It was quite natural for males on longterm campaign’s for men to hookup. It was expected General’s & Military warrior’s as well. No stigma was associated with this behavior.
In ancient Greece older men took boys into their households and had a sexual relationship with them ,in ancient Greece men would be considered bisexual by today's standards . For those who doesn't know what bisexual means it means that they were attracted to both men and women in equal measure .
3rd question to address: what business does the Orthodox church have commenting on gay stuff that happened 300+ years before Jesus even showed up
Because The Orthodox Church belongs to Greece
@@tatumfanclub8295 uh huh
@@tatumfanclub8295 and? In Alexander the Great's day, there was no nation of "Greece" as we think of a nation today, nor was there any orthodox church. The Hellenic states were a loose association of city-states, each with its own laws and democracy, which changed according to who was leading that city-state at the time. Half the time, if a tyrant was leading it, there was no democracy. Alexander the Great existed centuries before Christ. He was from Macedonia. If you're going to claim ownership of something based on today's national boundaries, then you can't claim him as Greek.
To say the orthodox church belongs to Greece is a generalisation. It may have started in the Greek-speaking parts of the Roman Empire, but Greece does not own the orthodox church, only the Greek orthodox church.
@@warpedweft9004 Alexander was from the Greek Province of Macedonia, not the FYR of North Macedonia which is named after the ROMAN province of Macedonia which was the successor to the Antigonid Kingdom of Macedonia which was founded after Alexander's death.
@@AC-dk4fp and?
Great vid. An example of explaining a rather subtle and complex concept with admirable clarity.
I think we learned this in 10th grade that they don't really have concept of homosexuality before so that's why great male rulers before have male lovers/consorts
2:54 THANK YOU goodness people keep using extremely modern western notions, the sad part is it prevents them from truly understanding different mindsets and worldviews, whether it be ancient history or even non-western context
Something occurred to me. Did the active vs passive distinction hold for Alexander and Hephaestion? I was under the impression that they considered each other as also friends and equals. Or was Alexander always active because he was of royal status?
I think an important aspect has been left out of the conversation - namely a degree of male-to-male intimacy we would call a bromance these days, i.e. physical and emotional affinity between two males of approximately similar ages and status without going "all in", pun intended.
According to records from the time, Alexander the
Great was what is now termed as bisexual
What records? No record from his time written on him survives
Does it matter? The guy was too busy conquering the known world.
Correct. This is a modern perversion because we get everything we need for free and have no real problems.
If one considers the great depths, one might even say paroxysms, of grief that Alexander is reported to have descended into following Hephaestion's early death, I think there is further evidence of their very strongly-felt loving relationship--one which surpassed mere friendship. When Bagoas was presented to Alexander in order to curry favor with him, Alexander is said to have rejected the gift in high dudgeon because he resented the implication that he would want this former lover of Darius (even though Bagaos was described as very beautiful). Alexander seemed to be very offended, but I wonder if he did not protesteth too much. In any case, I do not think the rejection is proof that Alexander would have been ashamed of his sexual attraction of other males. The issue of the degree of acceptance of what we call homosexuality by "Greeks" is so very complicated and huge a topic that one could not possibly deal with it thoroughly in 23.41 minutes. As you mentioned, there seems to be evidence of different attitudes in different city-states (contrast Sparta and Thebes with Athens for instance) and also as you indicated there seems to have been differences in attitudes based on social classes as there have been in modern societies. Finally, I think we moderns may put too much emphasis on the erastes-eromenos construct. Alexander and Hephaestion were approximately the same age. That flies in the face of the older man-younger man or experienced male "teaching" the inexperienced young man. Since vase paintings indicate that the sexual contact between two males could be intercrural rather than anal intercourse (as K. J. Dover noted in his book on Greek Homosexualty). Two young men like Alexander and Hephaestion could be sexual together in a more equal sense rather than in a dominant vs. submissive sense even though one was a prince and the other, a courtier. Also there is evidence of considerable resentment of the close relationship between Alexander and Hephaestion on the part of other Macedonian commanders who did not consider Hephaestion's position as merited by his military brilliance.
Pederasty is the wrong window with which to view this. They were of the same age, and rather came out of the tradition of shieldmate lovers, as in Sparta, and most famously, Thebes. But on the other hand, we have to remember that Alexander and Hephaeston were not Greek, but Macedonian.
Anyone upset by this is just clueless of sexuality in the ancient world
Nobody cares about that
but Alexander the Great was not gay
There is zero evidence of this
So stop the bs and Reddit fanfics
Hmmm....maybe those initial critics should look at some of the stuff depicted on the ceramics.
Maybe you actually should look in to those ceramics and how the vast majority being claimed as representing homosexuality are actually not that. A very few represent actual homosexual acts
Not even 1% of all the ceramics found depict such homosexual activities . Not even 1% . Yet somehow they are everywhere on the internet and shoved up to our faces constantly , almost suspiciously ...
To know Alexander’s proclivities, you don’t look up Alexander’s history
You look up Hephestian’s history.
Greek person here. Great video! It may seem incredible, but everyone knows and accepts that men used to have open homosexual relations in ancient Greece, except modern Greeks themselves. 😅 For context, in government currently is a very right-wing party (verging on the far-right) and the minister that made that comment is probably the worst minister for culture that Greece has ever had, as she shows zero regard for all things cultural (just look up how they concreted the Acropolis). As for Dimitris Natsios, well, he is the leader of one of three (!) far-right parties in parliament right now, so nothing better could be expected of him I suppose.
Ναι επίγειος παράδεισος κιναιδων ήταν λογικά . Λογικά δεν τους τιμωρούσαν με θανατο . Ραγια μην ξανασχολιασεις ποτέ σε ιστορικά πλαισια
I always love when the public is outraged by ideas that scholars have noted and/or discussed for years. History is woke.
But you ignore the wast majority of scholars who deny your idiotic ideas.
@@RKB-2001 please name some since you believe there are so many who disagree
@@mercistephens7325 pssst don't disturb his reddit-formed opinion with facts
Alexander is a great example of what can happen when you are unleashed
Ancient Greece: a paradise for gays (but only for male gays and not even entirely) and PDFiles
I love how anyone at least a little versed in ancient history considers Ancient Greece to be extremely gay civilization but not the actual Greeks themselves. Hilarious😂
my guy did not ship patrochilles and fantasised about running naked and oiled with hephestion just to be called straight. if im not misremembering/ tripping i think i read somewhere that he used to keep a copy of the illiad with him, and used to compare himself and his bf with patrochilles.
I dont think its that contractory, if now we have both acceptance and it mostly accepted and stuff, while all that anti gay stuff,
its realistic that it was praxis and happened, while being also shamed. Honestly all the complaining just confirms, it happened and people generally accepted it. Just some people had "moral concerns"
I say that to whats known with current moral panics tha are reactive to a mostly accepted thing, but , i dont think media and people wer that different then.
oh god, the patroklus thing is, how can historians deny that they probably being gay partner icons, how can that be denied??
But he did have a male concubine (don't knw the exact term) well we knw of one so.... 👀
I read the title as Netflix makes Alexander the great Gary and I was equally as interested in watching the it as I was when I finally found it it was gay and not Gary
It’s common knowledge or at least a universally believed myth he was bisexual, gonna save the video to confirm and deepen :)
At least 35 years ago, I remember the History Channel, before they began producing a load of cobblers as "science", talking about Alexander having male lovers. Dmitrius is talking out of his hindquarters.
Thank you so much for doing a video on this topic.
He was gay or bisexual at the very least, get over it !
Source : alexander 2004 🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡
Always love your historical videos on the ancient world. Great topic and well presented.
As a gay Classicist who for a couple of years considered converting to Eastern Orthodoxy, hearing a Greek bishop get bent out of shape basically because "they made Alexander the Great woke" is _surreal ..._
Really???
@@innervoicejargon hashtag there are dozens of us
Did around that time and place it was common in that time and space for a male teen/ man relationship? Like a mentor kinda thing ? Like in spartan women would cut there hair to make it more comfortable for there husbands in the bed room - but I could be off base
No, Netflix did not make Alexander gay. His relationship with Hephaestion is historical fact and when Hephaestion died Alexander lost his mind temporarily. The monuments and buildings that Alexander had erected in memory of Hephaestion were numerous and extraordinary.
Yeah their platonic relationship is very well attested
@@BiteTheHook No, the fact they were lovers is extremely well attested. Theirs was much more than a platonic friendship. Why deny it???
@@richardharris8867 because literally no ancient authors say they were anything more than friends and the basis for your entire argument is “Alexander was sad when his friend died so they were gay”
@@BiteTheHook Sad doesn't begin to do justice to his temporary madness. Why are you so determined to ignore his true relationship with Hephaestion? Why is it problem?
"Gay" is a modern word with a modern concept. The Greeks regarded it as male love, an elevated kind of love very unlike that of a male-female relationship. Probably we'd all understand that, if we hadn't adopted the beliefs of the Iron-Age guys who wrote the Old Testament - condemning any behaviour that slowed population growth. Probably made sense in that context. It was a matter of survival. But condemning male-male love made no sense to the Greeks. And it makes no sense now.
Between 1998 and 2005, studies were generally divided. Some scholars argued that Alexander’s emotional bond with Hephaestion, often compared to Achilles and Patroclus, might suggest a romantic or sexual relationship, but there is no direct, indisputable evidence from ancient texts to confirm this. For instance, while the intense grief Alexander displayed upon Hephaestion’s death points to a deep connection, ancient sources never explicitly describe the relationship as sexual (as they do with other pairs from Greek myth like Achilles and Patroclus). These narratives often focused on strong male friendships without clear distinctions between platonic and romantic love, as modern definitions might require .
On the other hand, Alexander also had multiple wives and mistresses, which complicates any definitive claims about his sexuality. It was not uncommon in his culture for men to have relationships with both men and women. Thus, some scholars conclude that Alexander’s relationships were shaped more by the norms of his time than by a fixed sexual identity .
In summary, while it’s possible Alexander had same-sex relationships, labeling him with modern sexual categories like “gay” is difficult due to the different context of his era.
Remember that people can bend history to their means.
I used chatgbt to quiry the web prior to all this LGBT stuff- to show how history is bent to people’s ideologies
Between 2013 and 2024, many scholars and media sources have continued to explore whether Alexander the Great was gay or bisexual. Historical evidence shows that Alexander had close relationships with men, particularly Hephaestion, his lifelong companion, and Bagoas, a Persian eunuch. These relationships are well-documented, though whether they were purely platonic or romantic remains debated. Some modern portrayals, such as the 2024 Netflix documentary Alexander: The Making of a God, depict Alexander as having romantic relationships with men, but this has sparked controversy, as some argue that ancient sources do not explicitly support this interpretation .
Historians emphasize that terms like “gay” or “bisexual” did not exist in ancient Greece, and relationships between men were often viewed differently than in modern times. Alexander also married women, including Roxana and Stateira, and fathered a son, which complicates applying modern labels to his sexuality . Overall, while it’s likely that Alexander engaged in both heterosexual and homosexual relationships, the context of his time and the lack of explicit documentation makes it hard to categorize his sexual orientation definitively.
Now see this
You missed mine, which is specially about Alexander and Hephaistion: "An Atypical Affair? Alexander the Great, Hephaistion, and the Nature of Their Relationship," The Ancient History Bulletin 13.3 (1999) 81-96.
Way late to the party and no one will see this comment but the essay on homosexuality in antiquity at the end of Sarah Ruden translation of Petronius’s Satyricon is a quick read & very informative
The only scholarly and thoughtful video on TH-cam I found to be made upon the so called 'Netflix scandal' which historically examines the plausibility of Alexander's sexuality. All the rest of the videos I found were just rubbish based on video makers' inner homophobia. So thanks a lot for this video! ❤🏳️🌈
...and they were roommates.
You think every single soldier IS gay?
@@laisphinto6372 some are so what?
There is a fun novel which explores Alexander's gayness. It is called 'The Persian Boy'. It is a fun read.
In history Alexander the Great was doing him, people are people. It's nice that people remember people and make media about the past.
……what!?
😅
Zero evidence
@@notturner8528
While I personally don't think it's any of our business, history is awesome.
Damn to think that having male friends means I must be having sexual relationships with them, I've had many male friends some I look at as a brother from another mother known them for very long times and not once have we ever had sex. I think you are looking at this through your own twisted lens.
Thanks for this neat video Cinzia!