Hand-Holdg Skeletons Were Both Men… And No, They Were Not Gay Lovers | Ancient Origs

Contents:

• IS THAT SKELETON GAY? THE PROBLEM WH PROJECTG MORN IAS ONTO THE PAST
• ANCIENT HANDHOLDG SKELETONS ARE MEN BUT ITALY WON’T SAY GAY
• HAND-HOLDG SKELETONS WERE BOTH MEN… AND NO, THEY WERE NOT GAY LOVERS
• AUGT 2001 GAY SKELETONS FOUND IN TANIC LIFE RG

IS THAT SKELETON GAY? THE PROBLEM WH PROJECTG MORN IAS ONTO THE PAST

This week reprents two bookends to my foray to scholarly public outreach: new reports of "gay lovers" om Pompeii sts and the six year anniversary of the hubbub over the "gay veman" skeleton. Cue the media verage of "gay lovers" (Telegraph) and "the two mains were men" (Daily Mail), whout cril asssment of any of the load terms.

As classicist David Meadows tells me, "They weren't 'gay' when they were thought to be women. While the archaeologists volved the new study make clear the Telegraph piece that the nature of the relatnship is impossible to terme, the media's jumpg to a ncln about sexual attractn and applyg the morn label "gay" -- which is que anachronistic terms of ancient Roman culture -- reveals much more about our morn culture's obssn wh this topic than tells about the Romans. A siar issue exactly six years ago was a talyst for my start media cricism of barchaeologil fds: the "gay veman" or "transgenr veman.

And people generally choose to engage sexual terurse wh: someone of the oppose sex (heterosexualy or "straight"), the same sex (homosexualy or "gay"), both sex (bisexualy), or no one (asexualy). If this burial reprents a transgenred dividual (as well uld), that don't necsarily mean the person had a "different sexual orientatn" and certaly don't mean that he would have nsired himself (or that his culture would have nsired him) "homosexual.

ANCIENT HANDHOLDG SKELETONS ARE MEN BUT ITALY WON’T SAY GAY

From the "gay veman" to the "Hasanlu Lovers" to the "gay lovers" om Pompeii, is clear that both the media and the public are terted the ia that people of the past were jt as diverse genr inti, genr exprsns, and sexual attractn as we are today. “In late-ancient tim is unlikely that homosexual love uld be regnized so clearly by the people who prepared the burial, ” he told The Daily Beast by email. ”Homosexualy was well documented Roman tim.

HAND-HOLDG SKELETONS WERE BOTH MEN… AND NO, THEY WERE NOT GAY LOVERS

"Late Antique social attus and Christian relig rtrictns lead to the rejectn of any hypothis of liberate maniftatn of homosexual relatnship, " the study thors wre. When this evince was first revealed the 1980s, reporters flocked to report that the Hasanlu Lovers were gay.

Furthermore, “gay” and “straight” as discreet inti and orientatns are a product of morn society, not labels that n be applied to people the distant past. And while some news sourc are jumpg to the ncln they were gay lovers, many thk they were eher s, brothers, or tws.

Openly Gay Lovers In Ancient Italy? That said, many media outlets are followg the all too predictable narrative that the pair were homosexual but The Daily Mail says “ is unlikely” that the nature of their relatnship would be regnized so clearly by the people who prepared the burial. In realy, is not jt “unlikely” that the pair were homosexual, but nearly impossible, if we nsir that 5th century Italy laws forba gay sex.

AUGT 2001 GAY SKELETONS FOUND IN TANIC LIFE RG

In 6th century Italy, the Christian emperor Jtian I (AD 527–565) even regard homosexuals as al to environmental problems such as “fam, earthquak, and ptilenc”. Acceptg that the pair were “not” gay, how did the team of scientific rearchers nclu what the relatnship of the pair of hand holdg mal was? "Far more likely is that he was a man wh a different sexual orientatn, homosexual or transsexual, " she add.