Abstract
The modern notions of “homosexuality” and “heterosexuality” as kinds of permanent sexual orientation and/or identity were apparently unknown in Greek and Roman antiquity. The word “homosexuality” in the title of this appendix is thus merely shorthand for the phenomenon of same-sex relations of an erotic and/or sexual nature. This chapter analyses two ancient scientific explanations for (passive) male homosexual behaviour. The Aristotelian Problems describes the desire for passive sexual role in males as an anatomical/physiological abnormality, while the medical author Caelius Aurelianus regards homosexuality as a non-medical mental problem.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
On ancient homosexuality in general, see Dover (1978), Williams (1999), Halperin (1990), Winkler (1990), and Foucault (1984). For primary textual sources, see Hubbard (2003). Boswell (1987) is also important but controversial.
- 2.
“Active” and “passive” roughly refer to the roles of the one who penetrates and the one who is being penetrated in the sexual act.
- 3.
The appearance of body and facial hair were usually believed to mark the end of a boy’s appeal to adult males, but individual tastes varied. Some Stoics even recommended ending a pederastic affair only after the “boy” had reached the age of twenty-eight, this apparently being a suitable age for gaining independence from the educator-lover; cf. Zeno, SVF I, 247.
- 4.
Our knowledge of female-female homosexuality in antiquity is meagre. In the fantasies of male authors, at least, the division of sexual roles in female homosexual intercourse was an indispensable; cf., e.g., Lucian, Dialogi meretricii 5, in which the woman assuming the role of erastēs claims that, despite her feminine appearance, her gnōmē and epithymia are those of a man. In general, the notion of “active” women was of less interest to Greeks and Romans than that of “passive” men. In Greek literature, the word tribas, denoting an active (and often lascivious) woman occurs almost exclusively in late astrological texts in which this orientation is regarded as an innate quality and a counterpart of male effeminacy.
- 5.
Caelius Aurelianus probably wrote in the fifth century AD, but his writing was based on Soranus’ work, probably written in the first century AD. Aurelianus mentions Soranus explicitly in the chapter on homosexuality as being of the same opinion as he was. It seems that attitudes towards all forms of homosexual behaviour became less tolerant towards the end of antiquity, although, in my opinion, there is nothing distinctly unclassical in the attitudes conveyed in Aurelianus’ text.
- 6.
Aristotle’s choice of words ή (sc. hēdonē/hexis?) τῶν ἀφροδισίων τοῖς ἄρρεσιν (VII. 5, 1148b29) could refer to all sexual acts between two males, but the context suggests that this is not meant: men deriving pleasure from such acts are compared with women (who are naturally passive), and their behaviour is attributed to sexual abuse experienced in childhood; cf. also Winkler (1990, 69). The Nicomachean Ethics makes a few references to erotic (not necessarily sexual) relations between adult males and young boys (e.g., VIII. 3, 1156a31–b6; VIII. 4, 1157a6–12; IX. 1, 1164a2–8). Even though such relationships do not represent the highest form of friendship, Aristotle sees nothing unnatural or morally reprehensible in the erotic attraction upon which they are based.
- 7.
The text is somewhat problematic, as the word symbainousi at 1148b30 appears to refer to several of the unnatural pleasures enumerated. We can hardly assume, however, that Aristotle is claiming that childhood abuse would make someone eat charcoal or earth as an adult.
- 8.
The verb aphrodisiazein (“to have sex”) is used here in the active voice for the active role and in the passive voice for the passive role. “At the same time” (hama) need not refer to literal simultaneity (cf., however, Strato’s epigram AP 11, 225), and is more likely to refer to the presence of both kinds of desire at the same time of life.
- 9.
Dover (1978, 169n26) assumes that the verb aphrodisiazein is used here in the middle voice. Such an interpretation does not seem plausible, however, given the way the verb is used previously in the text. It is, of course, possible that this section of the Problems was put together from originally separate parts.
- 10.
As is done in Hubbard (2003, 463–465). The text is a difficult one, and the English translations offered in Hubbard (by L. Dean-Jones) and in Drabkin (1950) differ considerably.
- 11.
Halperin (1990, 22) interprets this as meaning “not of organic origin”.
- 12.
For a vivid description of effeminate men’s supposed obsession with their appearance, see Juvenal, Satire 2.
- 13.
On Acute Diseases 3, 175–187. As the symptoms of satyriasis described also include various physical afflictions of the genital area, such as itching, all kinds of skin and venereal disorders could probably be diagnosed as satyriasis.
- 14.
Aurelianus implies that physical means were tried, however, and that some physicians even believed the condition to be treatable by making the patient succumb to his desire to be penetrated. The text is unclear in that Aurelianus seems to be speaking at the same time of both curing the perversion and of gaining sexual satisfaction.
- 15.
In L. Dean-Jones’s interpretation, however, the expression means that the passive homosexuals are capable of feeling sexual pleasure similarly to normal people, i.e., they can gain satisfaction by playing the active role.
- 16.
The six verses of Parmenides that Aurelianus cites (in his own Latin translation) could, however, describe the procreation of a hermaphrodite rather than of an effeminate person; this is the interpretation of H. Diels (in DK B 18). For a similar, but more detailed account, cf. Hippocrates, On Regimen 1, 28.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ahonen, M. (2014). Appendix A: Aristotle and Caelius Aurelianus on Homosexuality. In: Mental Disorders in Ancient Philosophy. Studies in the History of Philosophy of Mind, vol 13. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-03431-7_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-03431-7_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-03430-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-03431-7
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)