What I do know is that those from the classic Greek period, even 300 years removed, had a better handle on the language and cultural references in Homer (and other sources that may not have survived) than people reading translations of translations in the modern era.
This is not a case of a modern reader imparting our cultural norms anachronistically to historic or semi-mythological persons - as was the case with Lincoln and the supposition that he was gay because he slept in the same bed as a man (very common) and wrote that he loved him (also very common).
As such I was, “with” the author up till his poorly chosen example.
People from the classic Greek period and after had an almost universal understanding that Achilles and Patroclus were lovers.
But maybe modern scholars can read and understand classic Greek writing and sources better than Plato.
I don't accept it, but maybe you do.
People from the classic Greek period and after had an almost universal understanding that Achilles and Patroclus were lovers.
You forced me to do some research on this most distasteful of subjects and here's what I found. I realize this article is from Wikipedia, but what it says here makes sense:
Homosexuality in Ancient Greece -- Achilles and Patroclus
But maybe modern scholars can read and understand classic Greek writing and sources better than Plato.
Keep in mind that Plato himself was likely a catamite of Socrates and a pederast as well. Given what we know today about the mania of homosexuals for appropriating their lust onto past generations in search of commonality and approbation, why would it surprise you that Plato and others of his generation would do the same, particularly when it came to heroes like Achilles?