Was ATG in love with Hephaistion?

[watermelon]

I've heard many different things on this subject. Was he really in love with Hephaistion?

[marcus]

It depends on what you mean by "in love with". He certainly *loved* Hephaistion, his best friend/soul mate. It is very possible/probable that they had a physical relationship when they were in their teens. It is equally possible, although less probable (and people will be arguing over it for decades to come, I'm sure) that they continued to have a physical sexual relationship beyond - but they retained a closeness that Alexander appears not to have shared with anyone else.All the bestMarcus

[jona]

Another complication is that "love" in Antiquity had completely different connotations. 'Falling in love' was not considered positive. For example, when Alexander's father Philip, in spite of his age, "fell in love" with a relative of Attalus, the ancient reader knew that disaster was about to strike, and indeed, his last wedding became disaster. In his description of Alexander's encounter with Roxane, QCR immediately explains that the king had become corrupted. So much for 'falling in love', that evil illness.'Love' itself, of course, carried more positive connotations, but most Greek men (Macedonians probably but not certainly included) thought that they needed (a) wives for legitimate children and becoming old together, (b) men and *hetaerae* (well-educated lady companions) for friendship and conversation, and (c) boys and slave girls for sex. (a) + (b) + (c) were called 'love', but it is easy to see that it is different from the attitudes prevalent in modern western society.Jona

[marcus]

Very true, Jona. In fact, particularly considering what you say, it was more likely that a man was going to 'love' another man (or youth) than he was to 'love' any woman, or sometimes his children.A very complicated matter!All the bestMarcus

[Linda]

I am sure it was quite simple to them. Relationships between men were considered to be of more value than those with women, as women were not as valued as men. Erotic love could be good or bad, depending on how the person acted in that situation. It was open to more tempations, as the passions were engaged, but I don't think it was per se considered to be a bad thing. It produced children after all.However, as for Alexander being "in love" with Hephaestion - he certainly showed all the signs of being so - in that he favoured him in a way which is inexplicable apart from a great personal attachment, grieved greatly when he died, spoke of him as being as dear as his own self. There was no moderation in his love for Hephaestion, and in that sort of situation, we would say someone was "in love" - whether with a person or a football club...In addition, Arrian refers to Hephaestion as Alexander's eromenos, identifying a romantic attachment. But we don't really know for sure if they thought of themselves as lovers, or were lovers. No Valentines left behind.

[marcus]

Yes, simple for them - I meant complicated for us (with our modern ways of looking at things).As for the excessive grieving, favours, etc. I agree - they all point to a very strong emotional attachment.In fact, I can't think of any way in which Alexander could be said *not* to have 'loved' Hephaistion. All the bestMarcus

[Linda]

JonaIs this based on the dramatic quote by (Aristophanes?) - can't find at the moment - paraphrasing as "wives for children, mistresses for our daily refreshment, and flute girls for a bit of slap and tickle?" No mention of slave boys. Sorry to keep banging on about this (no pun intended) but implying that men in those days would sleep with boys as easily as women is not really true. Bisexuality was not considered immoral, but the predominant themes of most of the plays about daily life are heterosexual, which implies to me that is what the majority of the population identified with. As opposed to philosophy. The book Courtesans and Fishcakes is good on this, I think.

[Linda]

Can I add an addendum "a *particular* man would sleep with boys or women" - rather than men as a "species".. To try to make the post clearer - although I usually end up offending someone inadvertently..Linda

[marcus]

Hi Linda,I'm no great authority, and it's years since I read "Courtesans and Fishcakes" ... but I wonder whether that preponderance of references to male/female rather than male/male relationships stems from the fact that, by the time 'men' reached a certain age, they were rather expected to have left their youthful love affairs with boys behind them. To continue with such things after a certain age was considered rather gauche.I might be wrong about this, because it's been something I've always 'understood to be the case', rather than being something I've known for a fact.All the bestMarcus

[Linda]

Perhaps. That certainly is one model. The source of the model I have always found elusive, so maybe I have to carry on reading. Someone will probably give me the exact quote in about 30 secs. :)Linda

[ruthaki]

Do you not 'love' your very best friend? This is 'agape', an unconditional (not sexual) love.
If you loved in a sexual way the person was your 'eromenos' and this was basically a sexual playmate, not someone you would hold in deep confidance as Alexander did Hephaestion. This is what makes me crazy when people try to put today's morals on yesterdays beliefs and customs.

[Linda]

It isn't really morality, Ruth, is it? Not about what is right and wrong. It is how people are described and categorised. Sometimes, people are described inaccurately, because there is no clear term for them in society. Arrian does, almost certainly, call Hephaestion Alexander's eromenos. So maybe he was both - a lover and a friend.