I found this channel about a week ago and I really appreciate Metatron not caring if he bumps a few shoulders when trying to state the truth. Usually when people try to make the same arguments Metatron does, they tend to do it from a very emotional point of view. They let their biases in and it ultimately does more damage than good. But Metatron tries his best to leave his biases at home and deliver the truth and its context in the truest way he knows.

@DealwithitHand

3 ай бұрын

I think his more popular videos like the Biblical Accurate Angels video is a good gateway video to get skeptics or stubborns to listen out of interest. He should make more that trend like that one.

@BrottenGuy

3 ай бұрын

Ehhhh…I don’t think he’s as careful as you would believe.

@lukascermak4011

3 ай бұрын

​@BrottenGuy what do you mean by that?

@mattjack3983

3 ай бұрын

​@BrottenGuy Yeah, what exactly do you mean when you say he's not "as careful" as the OP commenter may believe? Asking out ot genuine curiosity..not trying to be confrontational at all here..

@ElderSnake90

3 ай бұрын

There's always someone saying he's not unbiased but never seem to give specifics. I think they are just contrarian for the sake of it.

This is another issue of seeing history and antiquity through modern eyes. Our words and concepts don't always align. We can find parallels and commonalities, but we won't ever know for sure if they interpreted that person/event/etc in the exact same way. Even within my lifetime the concept & definition of "Marriage" has changed repeatedly. What it entails, why it is done, how and where it is done.

@SergioLeonardoCornejo

3 ай бұрын

One thing I found amusing Early in the video is that the two examples of acceptable passive behavior were low T level context. That is young males and elderly males. So it's ok to be passive if low t? Just kidding.

@zzodysseuszz

3 ай бұрын

@@SergioLeonardoCornejomore effeminate the man the easier it is to pass off as not gay. But still very socially strenuous at best

@LaurelinTheOther

3 ай бұрын

agreed. just as anthropologists use cultural relativity to understand cultural phenomena from a certain culturally-based perspective, looking at history should also use a kind of "cultural relativity" or "historic relativity" as well. because, like you stated, culture's are both continuous and changing through time and space. viewing the past with modern lenses is no different than judging another culture based on your own customs.

@reidycruise

3 ай бұрын

Nah I just hate the group thing not the individual but that’s not how wars are won

@HappyBeezerStudios

3 ай бұрын

@@LaurelinTheOtherYup, we don't have to think at it with today's cultural and societal views, we have to look at what the people of the day thought about it.

Forcing a man to be castrated specifically because he looks like your dead _wife_ and you want to marry him, I think that's starting to get into some technicalities that make it a poor example to use by either side wishing to push an agenda.

@twincast2005

3 ай бұрын

True, but it is one of the most high profile ones, so it would be bad history to ignore it, regardless of how deranged Nero was.

@dragonsman4733

3 ай бұрын

​@@SashaTheDog Well we must remember that people are different, so I highly doubt there aren't some nutters in the community who think this was okay

@SashaTheDog

3 ай бұрын

​@@dragonsman4733im in a discord group full of the most far left queers ever. None celebrate Nero

@palarious

3 ай бұрын

Well, the dude who did it was nuts by all accounts and that was pretty par for the course for him.

@Mutterschwein

3 ай бұрын

Again, there's also the possibility that Nero's political opponents who wrote about it was just trying to make him seem as deranged as they could lol

This is probably the most neutral take I have ever seen on this subject. There's evidence it did happen, but to say it was common or accepted would be a lie. I really appreciate that you approach subjects like this in every video I've seen from you. The historical sources are the centre and interpretations that are made and can be made are second. There's no way to say who's correct until we go back in time to see for ourselves.

@metatronyt

3 ай бұрын

Thank you, I appreciate your comment since neutrality was indeed my main goal with this video.

@user-wj1kg8qo3p

2 ай бұрын

It certainly doesn't seem uncommon. Then I suppouse it depends if you want see them or not see them at all.

@peterfraser9070

22 күн бұрын

but to say it was common or accepted would be a lie./There's no way to say who's correct until we go back in time to see for ourselves.": And you just admitted you don't know it wasn't common and accepted so how can you say it's a "lie"?

I really enjoy the videos you make that tackle modern day controversial topics from a historical context, Metatron. Keep up the great work!

@SolProxy

3 ай бұрын

But are they really controversial?

@vainpride1351

3 ай бұрын

@@SolProxy true, I should’ve put it like this, “so called, ‘Modern Day Controversial Topics’.”

@johnnygreenface4195

3 ай бұрын

​@attekontu among particular weirdos, yes. 💀 many of them under this video

@SolProxy

3 ай бұрын

@@johnnygreenface4195 I haven't seen many, must have gotten buried under all the positivity. Not sure if I even want to go looking since it might harm my brain.

@jonfeuerborn5859

3 ай бұрын

@@SolProxy Yes.

I always appreciate your unbiased takes!

@metatronyt

3 ай бұрын

I appreciate your comment

@nowayjosedaniel

3 ай бұрын

His takes are absolutely biased. No one can deny this. What a dumb argument.

@joemungus6063

3 ай бұрын

@@peacewarrecords you get what he means, no agenda is being pushed and only historical documents are being used.

@oskarskalski2982

3 ай бұрын

​@@peacewarrecordsand he made it clear in one video that it is impossible to not be biased in any way. Although he also stated that he tried to minimise the bias as much as he can.

@carboneagle

3 ай бұрын

​@@peacewarrecordsdon't be pedantic. It's clear the op isn't referring to (the unattainable) perfect lack of bias, but generally unbiased. If someone cleans your floor do you scream "it's not clean! There's surely a speck of dirt on it somewhere!"?

~10:20 Something to note regarding Nero's first slave "husband", the name "Δορυφορος" instead of "Πυθαγορας" may be because it is a nickname or descriptor. Metaphorically, the word means "satellite" or "follower" but literally/originally it meant "spear-carrier". ...well, someone was carrying someone's "spear" for sure... ~15:20 Given everything I know about "Αδελφοποιηση" from historical records, anecdotal evidence (even fairly recent such), and common sense... yeah, I'd say it's pretty safe to assume that while some probably used it to hide homosexual relationships, that wasn't the original/official purpose.

@WinstonSmithGPT

3 ай бұрын

You know what daughter means, right?

@rorschach775

3 ай бұрын

The tongue in cheek type behaviors always make me wonder how well these governments were able to actually enforce the laws. Did anyone actually care or is it like riding a bike without a helmet?

@LogistiQbunnik

Ай бұрын

@@rorschach775I would harbour a guess that many laws were like that yeah, just as they are today. Often people would ignore them, or just "not notice" or care about something, or only hint at it.

I don't consider Gilgamesh and Enkidu to be romantically involved with each other. Sex was not a taboo subject and Shamhat is described as bedding Enkidu, but there's no description of any physical intimacy between Gilgamesh and Enkidu. They were really intensely close, and Gilgamesh was willing to literally go to the ends of the world to save Enkidu, but the text does not explicitly describe a homosexual relationship. Edit: People are arguing about whether Shamhat slept with Enkidu for some reason. I posted the quote below and I'll post it again here: "That is he, Shamhat! Release your clenched arms, expose your sex so he can take in your voluptuousness. Do not be restrained--take his energy! When he sees you he will draw near to you. Spread out your robe so he can lie upon you, and perform for this primitive the task of womankind! His animals, who grew up in his wilderness, will become alien to him, and his lust will groan over you."

@indieWellie

3 ай бұрын

it says more about the people presupposing or projecting homoeroticism than it does about the people/figures they refer to.

@michelguevara151

3 ай бұрын

agreed, I have studied gilgamesh for over 40 years and there is no homosexual indication at all, gilgamesh loves enki because he is his physical match, he looks like a 'wild' version of him and is just as strong, it was the fight that neither could win that makes them close. I'd be close to a dude I couldn't best in a fight too, if I were a demigod, which gilgamesh is, three parents and all!

@jameshart2622

3 ай бұрын

I was wondering about that. To put it mildly, Wikipedia authors as a group would not _hesitate_ to be explicit about the text saying they became lovers. No, not at all. Yet when I read the article recently, it just...said what the original comment said. They became brothers. What a terrible mess we have made of our culture and knowledge. It's never not been a mess, I guess, but still.

@farkasmactavish

3 ай бұрын

​@@jameshart2622Why is homosexuality a "mess" to you?

@jameshart2622

3 ай бұрын

@@farkasmactavish It's our understanding of history and human behavior and sexuality that's a mess. Good troll bait though.

Once again, thank you for this well-researched, thoughtful video. It can be astonishingly difficult to find sources that aren't biased in one direction or another (even subtly), *and* that have such a high level of academic rigor. Thank you for taking on these topics, and doing it with such grace.

@metatronyt

3 ай бұрын

My very pleasure

Babe wake up, Metatron just posted

@reidycruise

3 ай бұрын

I was crazy once x

@johnqpublic2718

3 ай бұрын

If by "babe" you're referring to a body pillow.

@JamesClark-uj1oh

3 ай бұрын

@@johnqpublic2718 Both, both is good.

@rockstar450

3 ай бұрын

​@johnqpublic2718 my body pillow is a social construct - in fact the Ancient Greeks had entire cities dedicated to gender queer citizens and their straw dummy lovers

@TheCoon1975

3 ай бұрын

Cringe

Could you do a part two to this video and talk about the Persians, German and Celtic tribes, Chinese, Arabs under Islam, and both Dacian and Thracian tribes?

@waseemaqrab8872

3 ай бұрын

Arabs were and will not be gay

@visperad541

3 ай бұрын

I think celtic mythology has references to homosexuality in a nonchalant way, but I'm not sure. I too would like a video like this.

@jbrennan381

3 ай бұрын

I think it would hard to get good info on the Celts simply because they followed a pretty strict oral tradition.

@BlueEyedMomof378

3 ай бұрын

You don't need to look at Arab's under Islam in history to know exactly where they stand on homosexuality. If you ask any Muslim if Islam has charged, they'll tell you the Quran hasn't changed at all since it's writing. Therefore, it's easy to deduce that Islam, which is political in it's very nature, was extremely against homosexuality. They're still throwing gays off buildings in 2024 for God sake. I sincerely doubt much has changed. The rest though? I'd love to see him do a deep dive in any of them that have written texts. As someone else mentioned Celts were a very oral history centered people. Then again, that doesn't necessarily mean there's no reference in artwork.

@xandrecarnes9888

3 ай бұрын

The Persians aren't gay in Zoroastrianism it a sin things are holy book label it as a form of demon worship.

I was making a comic about some ancient Greece HYPOTHETICAL lgbt figures and some readers were kinda shocked that homosexuality wasn't well accepted back then like i represented, which made me understand that there's a huge misconception about homosexuality in ancient times, specially Greece... many think it was well received and there was gay marriage lol

@OklahomaBoomer

3 ай бұрын

Just because it happened doesn’t it was “widespread” or that it was accepted at all.

@KRIMZONMEKANISM

3 ай бұрын

can you give us a link? :)

@Husky92223

3 ай бұрын

@@OklahomaBoomer RIGHT??? There were even specific rules about straight relationships to be accepted, imagine homosexual ones

@secretname2670

3 ай бұрын

@@OklahomaBoomer 💀💀 imagine 100 years from now on everyone will think that we as a society were all pedophiles because of all the accusations happening on social media 💀💀

@badder9525

3 ай бұрын

@@secretname2670 So thankful the far distant future will not have practical evidences of our online perversions omg ahahah

I have followed this channel for a couple of years now. Always excellent history based content! Thank you so much!!!

I once again have to do a mini rant as I did on the supposed "trans-emperor" (yeah, I'm the very same guy) . To start with, I'm a married homosexual man, to another man. What confuses me is the "need" to insert modern phenomena such as me being able to marry into times and places centuries if not millennia ago . My critic is that we need to understand that "love" and "marriage" combined is a fairly new concept that wasn't really considered a necessity until the romantic period , and even back then it was probably seen more as a plus but not necessarily. I see no need to justify my modern luxury by history, what matters to me and my husband is that I can do this within my life. And no offense, but behaviors of the very top of the societies back then is hardly a good example. After all that would be as useful as to defend a marriage between a child and a fully adult because historically it was done by the nobility . I would appreciate if historians would have a more sober approach and less politicizing agenda regarding these subjects. So thank you so much, Metatron, for actually doing a great job in this. I'm so sick and tired of my life,love and sexuality being used as a weapon from activists and academics to legitimize something that doesn't need legitimizing from history but only from the people that I care getting it from. Namely my family, friends and the law in the country I'm living in. We need more actual research and less wishful thinking. Thank you so much Metatron for the pleasure that is unbiased and factual information about history.

@metatronyt

3 ай бұрын

Absolutely! Thank you for watching and commenting I appreciate your open mind.

@nattravn8445

3 ай бұрын

@@metatronyt as I appreciate yours!

@kellharris2491

3 ай бұрын

It's not exactly true that marriage for love is a new concept. Or even a rare concept. Although arranged was common so was people liking each other and getting permission by family to marry. We make all of history and societal norms the absolute when they never were.Frankly marriage as recorded by the church is more new then anything. Common law was more common and there was many common law relations throughout history as well.

Thanks for making a video about this topic🙏🏻continue to spread your wings Metatron⭐️

Another brilliant video, Thankyou. I hope your mum is doing well and isnt having too hard a time with treatment ❤🙏

Rafa prayers for you're mother . And thank you for being unbiased on topics.

Very informative, brother. Thank you for keeping it real with us.

Thanks for the new video , Metatron ! 😊 👍🏻👍🏻

Thank you for bringing history to the masses ! ❤🌏

Love this channel. Thanks Metatron, really encouraging my like for ancient cultures

Once again, you've provided well-researched information. I would like to request that you provide text on the screen for names and technical labels. While I'm trying to improve my aural abilities in the spoken languages and extrapolate the textual spelling for written communication, it would be helpful to see the words spelled out while I listen. Thank you for considering.

So refreshing to see a balanced and honest exposition on a topic, this is my first time watching your content and I'll be sure to check out more.

Hi there Metatron , from Australia. I've started to read and enjoy your various historical and academic presentations. Thank you for all the detailed and thorough work you put into this.

Thank you so much Metatron, that was a great presentation!

Wendigoon, Stephanie Soo and you are truly the people that I listen to to get over my night shifts easily, this is such an interesting conversation starter, thank you!

It is wonderful to have a presentation that is both scholarly and accessible to a lay person. So many presentations on the web lack references or rely on scholars who sit on the fringe. Metatron clearly acknowledges when a scholar is in the minority and speaks, not from his own thoughts or beliefs but from ancient texts where again, he makes it clear that they are open to interpretation. Excellent work.

@metatronyt

3 ай бұрын

Thank you sir

@MattieK09

3 ай бұрын

Metatron “if you have bros, you’re gay” No bias

@metatronyt

3 ай бұрын

@@MattieK09 when did I say that?

@metatronyt

3 ай бұрын

You are clearly very misinformed. Watch my video on homosexuality in ancient Greece and see who you are talking about. I just say what the data says.

As both historian and gay man I was, I admit, a bit hesitant. Would I want to know? What would knowing either way do to me. Yet, you have navigated the evidence and theories admirably. Thanks.

@nickkorkodylas5005

3 ай бұрын

As a historian and a gay man may I ask your educated opinion on this? if Achilles and Patroclus were a gay couple then why did the previous avenge the later's death by dragging Hector (stated as Troy's most handsome man) with a chariot instead of anally raping him to death?

@sirbig8292

3 ай бұрын

Just see it as how much humanity has evolved.

@SarastistheSerpent

3 ай бұрын

@@nickkorkodylas5005Achilles and Patroclus were only interpreted as a gay couple by Plato. There’s nothing in the actual Iliad that depicts them as lovers. If you want an example of a Greek demigod who had male lovers look no further than Heracles. He had DOZENS of male _and_ female lovers and they are very explicitly depicted. Heracles was known to get around lol, and was adored romantically/sexually by both men and women.

@Rynewulf

2 ай бұрын

@@SarastistheSerpentare the expanded Trojan War epics post Homer usually credited with coupling Achilles and Patroclus? Theres a bunch of ancient commentary from ones from the Classical and Hellenistic age, so even if the original author/authors didnt perceive them as a gay couple even the ancients put them up as a likely set of lads within just a few centuries

@Der.Soldat

4 күн бұрын

​​​​​@@nickkorkodylas5005 as someone else said, Plato did see them that way but not everyone else did. However, contemporary accounts from ancient Greece can be found which agree with his interpretation. Some speak of a dynamic between the two characters remeniscent of the eromenos/erastes (again, something Plato liked to talk about). I suppose it's up to the reader's interpretation. For gay relationships in Greek mythology widely recognised at the time, look no further than Apollo and Hyacinth, or Phaeton and Cygnus.

The fact that you go off facts alone is why I come back to your channel. I have the upmost respect for that and for you, sir ❤

@metatronyt

3 ай бұрын

Thank you, I appreciate

Your factual reporting is an affront to my preconceptions /s thanks for the science

Thank you for all you do to educate me.Hope all is well with you and your family.

Nice summary dive into the topic... it would also to know of a broader picture, e.g. Japan, China, India. Thank you for your work.

Finally a video that doesn’t start by « this video is brought to you by » ! You did a very interesting video and approach the topic with an open mind. You mention Plato, what’s interesting is that in his book _Laws_ he explicitly advocates to *prohibit* homosexual relationships for both sexes, as he describes them as counter-natural.

@_aullik

3 ай бұрын

I don't have a problem with sponsored videos. YTers need an income too. My problem is with "Part of this video is sponsored" which is clearly BS.

@cyrusfreeman9972

3 ай бұрын

RAID SHADOW LEGENDS!!!!

@_aullik

3 ай бұрын

@@cyrusfreeman9972 ok, thats shady Advertisement. Fuck that.

@DavidChoiniere

3 ай бұрын

KZreadrs reserve an income but perhaps some overdo their sponsors

@_aullik

3 ай бұрын

@@DavidChoiniere Agree. I think some do it incorrectly with some real shady BS (like raid). As for too much im not sure. I think one per video is a fair amount.

I just found your channel earlier today. I watch many channels for the purpose of research and useful information. Some I will save on a Playlist... and some I will not. However, It is not too often that I subscribe to any particular channel, nor do I typically comment. I wanted to let you know that after watching 5 of your presentations and also scimming over your Playlist of videos, I did, indeed, subscribe to your channel and I look forward to obtaining much research and information from you with an open mind. Well done my dear, Sir... Well Done! With gratitude and well wishes to you and your family, Max Armstrong

Yes, perfect video. I was looking for a reference regarding this topic. Fine work, sir and Godspeed 🙏

@metatronyt

3 ай бұрын

Glad it was helpful!

I remember my Grandmother saying to me, "I don't care what they tell you in school, Gilgamesh was Gay!"

@johnwallis2100

3 ай бұрын

This comment should be pinned. This is the most conclusive evidence we have on the matter.

@user-ho9ui6wc2d

Ай бұрын

She’s right

About the adelphopoiesis, while it is possible that is was used as a disguise for homosexual marriage, I dont like how 2 men having a close relationship is always pointed as being sexual in nature.

@crose1466

3 ай бұрын

Oh, Achilles cried when his best friend died? Guess he's gay then. Yeah, the same culture that shames straight men for not being emotional and caring for their friends is the same one calling them gay for doing it.

@ibrahimihsan2090

3 ай бұрын

That isn't the point. The point was that some could exploit that to disguise sexual relations. There are cases of this. Yes, strong bonds between men that have nothing to do with sex are normal but some people did use that as an excuse for sexual relations.

@topsuperseven7910

3 ай бұрын

@@ibrahimihsan2090 He starts by telling you that it's possible someone can use that to disguise sexual relations and you reply "Ya but you missed the point, it's possible it could be used to disguise sexual relations!". are you okay? in the head?

@ibrahimihsan2090

3 ай бұрын

@@topsuperseven7910 I was replying to his dislike of portraying same sex close friendships in a sexual manner which I 100% agreed with. I just pointed that sadly some men and women didn't really have such ties for friendship reasons.

@topsuperseven7910

3 ай бұрын

i don't like it either and we're living in a strange time when everyone needs to suspect homosexuality has to be at play anywhere best friends are found. They read this into nearly any historical documentation.

Very interesting video. Thank you for laying it all out in an easy to understand way.

Very thoughtful and interesting survey. Thanks.

I had assumed there was no mention of same sex marriages in the ancient world as I assumed marriage was seen as primarily for procreative purposes. I am fascinated to see I was mistaken. I am curious about ancient Asian cultures and Native American cultures as well. Thank you for you (and your team's) research on this topic.

@faketheo3432

3 ай бұрын

Same here. I assumed marriage in acient times mostly existed for political, economical and social standing reasons.

@tiglishnobody8750

3 ай бұрын

There are more than procreation as marriage is also mean for bond or alliance and it depend on what people as some people have not formal marriage at all

@areume2

3 ай бұрын

In Japan, there were same-sex relationships and it wasn’t until Christianity where it was considered so taboo.

@mitacestalia7532

3 ай бұрын

I think in China older dynasty, there's no same sex marriage because well, like you say, the purpose of marriage is to create heir and that's the reason they build harem. However, some Emperors had male lover. It's basically like saying: "Hey, we don't mind you take a male lover, just make sure you have heir and still do your job."

@faketheo3432

3 ай бұрын

@@areume2 interesting, but the focus here is on marriage. a contractual unity between individuals and families by law

The point you make about medieval times makes sense. I live in Japan and my friend was “adopted” by his older boyfriend so he could receive part of his estate when he dies. Not uncommon here where same sex marriage is still not legal. Plus ca change…

Thanks for the heads up!

Thank you ive been waiting on this video

Hilariously enough, I was just doing some research on this! Thanks for the perfect timing Metatron 😂

@metatronyt

3 ай бұрын

Anytime

@jarskil8862

3 ай бұрын

May I ask what for is the research? College/uni stuff or for sake of curiosity? (:

@Aquila476

3 ай бұрын

@jarskil8862 not for College or Uni, though im studying history at college and would love to do Classics at Uni! I was just curious about the topic since people nowadays love to portray the ancient world as LGBT friendly - even though it likely wasn't lol.

@RationalistMH

2 ай бұрын

@@Aquila476 or perhaps the real agenda here is you projecting you homophobia onto the past as a means with which to justify your present beliefs? Cause for every pro gay activist there’s also the anti gay activist. Just something to keep in mind.

Good video brother. I hope you and your family are feeling better. We’re rooting for you! 🙏🙌

@metatronyt

3 ай бұрын

I appreciate that

I appreciate you sharing your knowledge with us Metatron. Thank you for keeping it real 🙏🏼

@metatronyt

3 ай бұрын

I appreciate that thanks

There you go again @Metatron. Avoiding the controversial topics, as usual. Keep up the good work, Raphael. I've learned a great deal about history in general from your channel.

@oskarskalski2982

3 ай бұрын

Your comment is a bit weird for me. How is he avoiding controversial topic?

@Drako9823

3 ай бұрын

@oskarskalski2982 It is sarcasm

@hansdevriesvonmengden3639

3 ай бұрын

@@oskarskalski2982 I assume he meant to write the opposite

It’s a good start to a new week when my second favorite Sicilian posts a new video debunking modern discourse on ancient history 👍🏾

@WarriorMondenkind

3 ай бұрын

Who is your first favorite?

@dailyqwikbytes

3 ай бұрын

@@WarriorMondenkind Vito (Andolini)Corleone I'd wager...

@JaelaOrdo

3 ай бұрын

@@WarriorMondenkindmy husband

@holzlastname1976

3 ай бұрын

I was going to ask the same thing❤

@Nyctophora

3 ай бұрын

The best answer :) @@JaelaOrdo

Thanks for the video and I hope your family is doing well.

Go friend! Keep up the good work.

Love your channel and it’s always nice hearing things stated as a fact and that’s all. Thank you for everything you do!

Grandissimo Raffaello. Sempre impeccabile. Un abbraccio.

One needs to tread carefully when interpreting original texts. The cultural context is often impossible to understand given the availability of coexistent sources and the passage of millennia. Additionally, we have a tendency to flippantly interpolate vastly different cultural norms by referencing say, classical Greek sources, with Akkadian to extrapolate cultural perspectives on whatever the given subject may be. Context is everything and often hard to understand with few sources.

@krono5el

3 ай бұрын

unless people still speak that same exact language : P

@SRBOMBONICA86

3 ай бұрын

​@@krono5elno one speaks those languages

@AntediluvianRomance

4 сағат бұрын

​@@krono5el And even that wouldn't always help as we see on more or less contemporary material.

Not even a minute in and I think I came. What a way to start a video lol. Excited to watch the rest.

@boaz08

3 ай бұрын

@@eduardmedrea1930 Lmao. Who isn't 😂

I really enjoy your source-based and unbiased presentation. I absolutely respect your work

Metatron thank you for producing another brilliant video lecture on the subject.

@metatronyt

3 ай бұрын

My pleasure

Interesting rabbit holes of information here. Same-sex relationships have definitely been a taboo in terms of looking back at history - especially the ancient world. Although I have my own views on this subject matter (as I'm sure most people do, in some way or another), I appreciate your dedication to presenting everything as bias-free as possible, as well as being up front about the reliability (or potential lack thereof) of your sources used. Keep up the great work!

@SarastistheSerpent

3 ай бұрын

I would actually say same sex relationships were much more taboo in the premodern world than the ancient world, at least in the west. It was much much more socially acceptable to be in a same sex relationship in ancient Egypt or Persia than in Italy during the Renaissance for example. The former was not considered taboo or of any real interest or significance, where the latter was a crime that could get you in a lot of trouble.

I keep sending my girl your vids now we both love your content 🎉 also i hope you and your family are doing better wish you the best

After only recently discovering this channel, this is only the third video I have watched. However, I appreciate the factual approach taken in the video, strictly focusing on facts and all etc, and applaud thorough research. It is truly gold. It's like a public service at it's best.

Another excellent video. Very difficult to find accurate information on this kind of topic these days as modern historians and scientists are more concerned with not offending the LGBT+ community than facts.

@NickSBailey

3 ай бұрын

I don't think LGBQT+ people are going to play down the hardship they've faced much more likely to have religious institutions complain about the idea of evidence for historical gay marriage

@pedroivantaveraferreira3037

3 ай бұрын

Not just that but the opposite too, surrendering to modern Christian values. Two centuries of research are heavily stained by modern morality. I'm bi myself. I advocate for this, plain truth. I loved to say "Greeks invented democracy and philosophy and they were mostly bi, so y'all should learn with them and be more like me". Then I learned that things weren't as simple and the fact that there's no good romantic homo relationships between two gods prove the point. I still use this argument but only among fruitless crowds

@MarkHobbes

3 ай бұрын

Believe it or not, but scientists were being "cancelled" just because they were researching some controversial "topics" about homosexuality, e.g. why there is a gay lisp (voice)? Some just get too triggered when science is trying to decipher stuff about homosexuality. It's like being homophobic for doing it so. 😅

Excellent unbiased video, just stating the facts. Keep it up.

@metatronyt

3 ай бұрын

I will thanks

This was a very interesting look at this topic, I had no idea about the Hitite's views on this subject previously. Glad to see it discussed in such a mature and informative manner!

@metatronyt

3 ай бұрын

Goad to hear the video was helpful

i am about to watch this and i am glad you are doing this as you are the only one i trust for historically accurate info

@metatronyt

3 ай бұрын

Thank you for your trust

I think one thing worth noting out of the many references regarding these ancient marriage laws is that they were specifically regarding men. It's important to keep in mind while studying these ancient societies that they're male-centric, where even places that had laws allowing women to divorce, they still did not fall into any sort of framework that we would understand marriage to be. Marriage was about the furtherance of a family line, and in all of the places discussed, those lines were explicitly passed down via male heirs. So even though some of these societies may have permitted male-male relationships, or at least not frowned on them to the point of publicly stoning them for it, they would not have had the same leniency for female-female relationships. So our current understanding of homosexual relationships and marriage just still don't fit into the mindset of someone from 2000 years ago. And that's fine! Understandings of human biology have advanced a lot just in the last 100 years, as well as legal frameworks for people to pass inheritance to those outside of their blood children. But it's still important to understand where we came from, honestly and without deception.

@kellharris2491

3 ай бұрын

The thing is female and female relationships were almost never had as taboo as male relationships. A woman couldn't get another woman pregnant. So her 'value' didn't decrease. She wasn't a threat to a husbands reputation as a man. Female and female relationships were more invisible not because they didn't happen it was because they didn't matter in the larger state of affairs.

@Jiub_SN

3 ай бұрын

@@kellharris2491yep, this and the fact that, frankly, women weren't very significant due to men always playing significant roles. When I say this I mean things like familial lines are through men etc. if you daughter is scissoring but your son is married it isn't as big of a deal as the other way around

I fine it a bit odd, personally, how common it has become for people to define themselves and others based only on sexuality or physical appearance. The impression I get from this video is that, at least in the case discussed here, there were cases where it came to the front of discussions here and there, but was otherwise of less importance than things like profession or community role/impact. (Not trying to discount discrimination, just considering the comparative level of out societal import)

@cmay7429

3 ай бұрын

I've read, in ancient Japanese culture, individual relationships were perceived as homo or heterosexual, but individuals were not (though I'm sure some certainly had proclivities). Honestly, that seems pretty sensible to me, especially in cultures where political marriages and children were so important.

@fattiger6957

3 ай бұрын

The practice of sexual preference being an integral part of one's identity is very much a modern idea. Even in a culture where it was socially acceptable like the Classical world or pre-modern Japan, a man who preferred other men would not have called himself gay. The concept wouldn't have even made sense to him. He would say he enjoyed the act, but would have probably had a wife and sired children because it was socially expected of him and a duty to his family. In essence, sexuality would have been something people do rather than who they are.

@davidsenra2495

3 ай бұрын

@fattiger But to be honest to the LGBTQ+ crowd, they were labeled, blamed and persecuted long before they themselves actually adopted a label. And I feel they did it out of self preservation (pretty much any persecuted crowd will try to band together as a form of self-support).

@asdasdwrwe32-bh3gw

3 ай бұрын

@@fattiger6957 Were there any monogamous societies were this distinction was meaningful?

@bavariancarenthusiast2722

3 ай бұрын

@@asdasdwrwe32-bh3gw no - you just did it and there was no reason to talk about in public

Thank you. It is always a pleasure(and a mental stimulus) to watch your content. intersting to consider "marriage"" as an economic arrangerment.

Fascinating historical analysis. Thank you for sharing this.

@metatronyt

3 ай бұрын

Only if the facts pointed that way. But they didn't and I have a moral obligation to always say what I believe to be the correct interpretation of history.

@ericthompson3982

3 ай бұрын

@@metatronyt Well, I appreciate your acknowledgement that the records are incomplete and may not be conclusive. It's a very responsible way to examine the history, and I have tremendous respect for that. That said, those were records of which I had not previously been aware, and genuinely was educated by. Particularly the Hittite accounts, I was not aware of. That fascinated me.

There is also the economic pressure against gay marriage. No children are produced where as in traditional marriage there usually are. This gives rise to dowry/bride price and inheritance customs. Put simply there is no alliance of families in gay marriage, so there is no money to be made. I can also surmise that the slave mentioned is more free than a libertus for this reason as society had different expectations for slaves, given their low social status. Gay marriage may have been considered as just something slaves did. I think it also should be mentioned that in most cultures access to women is far more regulated and restricted than any male/male institution. Daughters are for marriage to a member of a family to whom economic alliance is desired. Absent this a lot of men will find sex elsewhere.

I really enjoyed hearing you talk about truthful LGBT history, rather than just debunking common misconceptions. It's important that reputable popular academics such as yourself both uplift unknown facts and tear down popular falsehoods, because only doing one leads to a biased presentation of history.

@GyroGarrison

3 ай бұрын

He should keep to what he's passionate about. It should come from the heart and that is what we love.

I respect the honesty and the hard work.

@metatronyt

3 ай бұрын

Thanks 🙏🏻

This was excellent work. I hope mom is doing better, or at least that treatment is going well and she is in good spirits.

I LOVE this channel because I CAN GET FACTS! Not politics with a dash of bias, BUT FACTS! Whether i like those facts or not is irrelevant. What's important is THEY ARE TRUE SOURCED FACTS! Thank you for your almost *UNHEARD OF* service.

@SarastistheSerpent

3 ай бұрын

Gay people are not “politics”. I wish people would stop politicizing other people’s identities. Identity politics kills.

Not quite related, but when you mentioned how certain things were considered back then, I realized I had just looked up when people started marrying for love, and when marriage started and found that marriage for love pick up steam a couple hundred years ago and the oldest marriage on record was 4454 years ago (2350 BC).

@Lukas-Trnka

3 ай бұрын

Marriage for love is actually a form of luxury. For 99 % of human existence, life was really difficult, and surviving next winter was uncertain (and in some places, it still is). Living alone wasn't a practical option. In times when people had to do most of things themselves, taking care of homestead was a two-person job. No wonder parents were heavily involved in choosing a spouse for their child. They wanted the best for their children’s future, while also being concerned about their own survival. With no pension system in place, having their son marry a girl who would inherit a field and have children capable of working on that field meant the parents wouldn't face starvation on some desolate road. As a society, we've overcome numerous obstacles to be really able to afford concepts like marriage for love. Interestingly, it didn't take long for people to completely forget the hardships. And so now, some look at history with an outrage that some things weren't always the norm.

Great video overall, seems well researched as always! One suggestion though, I had trouble keeping the names apart, sometimes I didn't know if you were talking about a writer or about someone written about. Especially during the Nero part, I got confused quickly because you said so many names relatively close together. Next time, could you maybe visualize the names or something? I admit, I don't have a great idea how to make it easier, I mainly wanted to give feedback ^^

Keep shining the Light brother. Peace be upon you and your family.

@metatronyt

3 ай бұрын

Thank you

As always, a very thorough deep dive. One thing I think that many people seem to not understand is the difference between love and lust. People may have a physical attraction to certain types of people, including men attracted to men and women attracted to women. But I believe it's a much more emotionally complicated feeling to be "in love" or have familial love towards another, which transcends all other physical considerations. I guess my point is "people can't help who they fall in love with". Not without serious involvement of social norms and consequences. In some areas, this is important, such as underage, but even that in the past was not even a consideration. It should be, don't get me wrong, but it's a modern morality. So even if legally there was not a "ceremony" or binding contract between people of the same sex, there was at many times in the past also not one in heterosexual couples. Once "marriage" was even conceived of, if you said you were husband and wife, you were husband and wife.

@lasagnasux4934

3 ай бұрын

Well, there's also the difference between love and infatuation, which is different from lust. Lust is sexual attraction, infatuation is a feeling of attraction that's romantic in nature, while love is a state of dedication to another.

@catserver8577

3 ай бұрын

@@lasagnasux4934 Agree.

@kellharris2491

3 ай бұрын

And I think a lot of people forget that it was also common in a tribe to basically blend a family. Instead of nuclear family they lived in blended families were there would be wife swapping between brothers or vice verse. Everyone raising the kids together everyone hoping to whoever without rules or laws. The whole one man and one woman wasn't always the way it was.

Nero married the most beautiful boy in Rome after castrating him, he also married a soldier. The Romans thought him mad.

@dragonsman4733

3 ай бұрын

Judging by how he burned Rome, he definitely was, and wasn't the first Roman emperor to be absolutely insane, such as Caligula

@donaldwesterhazy9333

3 ай бұрын

@@dragonsman4733 Nero's involvement, causing the fire, is disputed. The debate over Nero's actual responsibility for the fire remains a topic of historical discussion and interpretation.

@KarlKapo

3 ай бұрын

Nero was based

@Rynewulf

2 ай бұрын

And by definition if thats real, then yes Nero was a murdering maniac but prooving that gayness isnt some modern leftwing conspiracy like some people make it out to be is pretty much always step 1 when talking about the history of sexuality. Establishing it was even there at all, which is seemed to be otherwise it would never come up

interesting and well researched. Thanks!

@metatronyt

3 ай бұрын

Glad you enjoyed it

I admire your content

It would be great if you did a video on historical examples of women in the military and people's perceptions on it.

@KierstenA-ue8mo

3 ай бұрын

Yeah they shouldn't be there or cops or firemen. And I am one.

@stephenlight647

3 ай бұрын

Like every other possible combination of human experience, it happened, but it was extraordinarily rare and usually limited to leadership under a Queen. (Boudicca comes to mind as an example)

The way that we conceive of marriage is fairly new to all of humanity. We still have vestiges of the old rites...dowry payments, celibacy and virginity rules, procreative/consummation rules for annulments.etc etc etc. Formally and publicly joining for nothing more than love is a manifestation of a world with sufficient excess for marriages to NOT BE STEEPED IN THE ACQUISITION OF POWER, MONEY, LAND ETC. So, on the scale of the totality of known human history, Gay marriage is about as new as hetero marriage...assuming the only measured characteristics are compatibility and true affection.

@rickybobby5153

3 ай бұрын

Very well said

This video is amazing. Always get excited when I see a new video from Metatron. He is a very learned man and I love all of the subjects he teaches

@metatronyt

3 ай бұрын

I'm glad to hear, thank you.

Grazie, Nobiluomo. Molto apprezzato, come sempre d'altronde.

Hi Metatron, a question about Gilgamesh & Enkidu: There's an interpolation by N.K. Sandars, done over erudite translations, of the Gilgamesh epic, and I could not find any indication of a sentimental/erotic dimension of the relationship between Gilgamesh and Enkidu. Instead, the relationship appears (to my eyes) to be one of the most exquisite depictions of pure manly friendship. But in the video, you cite it giving a more homoerotic connotation. The question is: would you be so kind to give me precise references to back up your thesis?

@StarWarsomania

3 ай бұрын

Uh no, no he would not. Because none exist. But for some reason everyone appear to be pole-vaulting over this fact. :)

@Rynewulf

2 ай бұрын

@@StarWarsomaniain most translations they want to be wives to each other. Thats pretty clear cut not 'man only attracted to woman and only married woman' territory

I haven't read Gilgamesh in 20 years, but my recollection of the text doesn't imply sexual love between Gilgamesh and Enkidu. Indeed, Enkidu is first "domesticated" from his primal wild-man state when Gilgamesh brings a Temple Prostitute to him for a freebie. If there was something carnal between the two, it would have made more sense for Gilgamesh to dominate and sexually subdue Enkidu personally.

@Elba.Ginon93

3 ай бұрын

Agree, they were equals in might and we all know there has to be a fixed botom a bitch for the bull and neither of them were bitches, naybe because became super depressed when he died?

@kellharris2491

3 ай бұрын

Not really. Getting your bro a girl for him to bang while you watch sounds hella gay to me. One thing about sex back then was there was a power dynamic in most cases. To be penetrated was to be seen as womanly and not Manly or equal. Enkidu was supposed to be his match in every way. So basically subduing sexually would not work. Yes they can wack off together. They can be each others life partner. But no anal on screen. I think sex wasn't really seen the same back then. In truth you don't need to really be straight or gay to have and enjoy sex. That may sound strange but sex isn't always just about attraction. Sometimes it's comfort. Or loneliness. Or just helping each other out. I think strictly defining someone as gay or straight or Bi doesn't always work. These same men would swear sacred Brotherhood and then share wives and promise to take care of each others families. They would go off on campaign fighting together. And when lonely 'comfort' each other. And they would come home to their shared wives. This was how many tribes worked having polyamorus households. It actually took some time before the connection of sex equals baby was truly understood. And even after raising babies was often done together by the tribe. Mothers would co-raise. So there was a lot of bed swapping in the ancient ancient world.

@humainhuskymaine3173

3 ай бұрын

Excerpt from Andrew George translation, current leading of Gilgamesh research : Akkadian : arāmšuma kīma aššatim ahabbub ēlšu Translation : "vou will love him like a wife, and will caress and embrace him" (Gilgamesh's mom interpreted his dream about Enkidu) Akkadian explanation : Ahabbub/habubu : "embrace/caress", which means explicitly sexual, the same word that used on Enkidu and Shamhat intercourse, possibly the source of arabian word habibi (darling/lover). Assatim/assatum : wife, quite firm marriage title This is one of (admittedly) few proofs that Epic of Gilgamesh has homoerotic subtext. Still quite explicit compared to other "homoerotic" example like Achilles and Patroclus. I'll provide more example if you're interested As for sexual subdue, the lack of desire to subdue between them except on their first fight what makes Helle think that their relationship is not the example of "ancient homosexuality". The Epic emphases on their equality more than "lovers dynamic". In the same vein, both wants to call each other with the exact same title so they refused to call each other with names and prefer "my friend" (ibri). Only on dream segment words like wife, embrace (sexual) were used and after Enkidu died the word bride, mourning woman, and love (meaning both platonic and erotic = ramu) were used

@Jiub_SN

3 ай бұрын

⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠@@humainhuskymaine3173embrace and caress are not commonly interpreted as meaning something sexual. Shamat and enkidu later explicitly have sex. The issue being calling enlist a wife more so then calling the act they would have together sex, wherein caressing and embracing are rarely used as descriptors for sex when laying with her for pleasure is more explicit. The issue arises with the enkidu wife thing, which is a debatable topic more so than the caressing thing. Their relationship is not homoerotic, the homosexual love is on the table, but it strongly depends on how you interpret assatim. Gilgamesh is dominating or Enkidu, so to describe a marriage like love rather than a blood brother love would make more sense in the context of their culture with Gilgamesh as the husband due to his domination of the relationship. And what a lot of people interpret as sexual interest today is in actuality more likely a warriors bond. Mythological speaking, these bonds are said to be among the strongest and some of that even carries over to modern fiction (and reality to an extent, though not as much in the rivals become brothers way). Honestly though, I'm no Gilgamesh expert, and I'd need to read a few scholarly reports on the matter to say for sure, but given I've never heard the explicit sexual attraction from you I don't think it's very likely that you or the man you're citing are accurate in your assumptions. As Metatron says, examine works of the past requires a greater cultural context to say what something means for certain, and I'm going off what I know about other cultures to make the assumptions I have, so I could be wrong basic lol

@humainhuskymaine3173

3 ай бұрын

@@Jiub_SN There is a word for non-sexual embrace, "iṣṣabtū" that was used when Gilgamesh comforted crying Enkidu by affectionately embraces him (non-sexual). The passage could easily used "iṣṣabtū" but they explicitly used ahabbub/habubu (same cuneiform). "Hababu" in particular has a distinct sexual meaning. Andrew George, the current leading of Gilgamesh translation, mentions "hababu" as a word for motion involving sensuous physical contact (in lovemaking and of a snake sliding over someone). The same word is translated to "making love" in relation to Enkidu and Shamhat, making them have a clear sexual term. Interpreting "wife" as Gilgamesh dominating Enkidu in power struggle is not possible because more than anything the Epic tried its most to emphasize that they both are "equal". The passage that followed after that sentence is "aššum uš[ta]mahharu ittika", meaning “... so that I shall make him your equal” (Ninsun's word to Gilgamesh). The word "itti" there means "be equal";"be stand";"compete". The Epic is so adamant about this to the point that Sophus Helle hypothesized that the reason why Gilgamesh and Enkidu didn't clearly describe their bond is because "the love between social equals was an unusual thing in cuneiform cultures. The love between men and women was an inherently unequal affair, because men held a higher social rank, and the love between two men typically involved an asymmetrical relation of power, with the penetrator being automatically superior to the penetrated. The love between Gilgamesh and Enkidu does not conform to that pattern because they are equal in every way" They have couple and more sexual connotations between them, but the Epic seems hesitant to describe them as "lovers" in traditional sense with its tradition power dynamic that follow. They "ramū" (love, means both erotic and platonic) each other, they noticed and appreciated each other's "kuzbu" (sexual charm), but more than anything they treat each other as equal in strength. I am not denying warrior bond between them, but I don't see why warrior bond and romantic/sexual bond can't coexist. After all the same passage that declared Enkidu as Gilgamesh's equal also explicitly and undeniably used "aššatim" which makes it very interesting because the word exceptionally means as title for marriage terms. If that word is used with "belum" (means lord), "aššatim" can also be interpreted as husband. Perhaps Gilgamesh's era itself doesn't have any specific word for their bond (it's important to mention that their bond is not a norm even in their era, so this is not my agenda to normalize same-sex relationships but just grated that people ignored what the Epic blatantly shows because of their own bias). I recommend you to read Andrew George's "Epic of Gilgamesh Penguin Critical Edition" (that has Akkadian language on the side of English translation) with Jeremy Black's "A Concise Dictionary of Akkadian" side by side so you can confirm both the Akkadian language and its translation word to word. I think that's the neutralest way to read the Epic of Gilgamesh without personal bias from translator.

Hey Metatron, hope you are doing well. Please I am interested that you cover other topics such as the military and armor ones, miss them dearely

Excellent video, really well-substantiated and balanced!

@metatronyt

3 ай бұрын

I appreciate your comment thanks

These non clickbait titles autoamatically feel way more professional again. Will watch asap 😁

@StarWarsomania

3 ай бұрын

Non…clickbait??

Positive vibes for your mom❤

Thanks! Very informative video

@metatronyt

3 ай бұрын

You're welcome and thanks for watching

Please make a faith channel if you can and want to about your own faith and experiences, the little bit you gave us before was so enriching!

Metatron is the reason why I can't stop thinking about ancient Rome

I would like to note that at least as far as the word "marriage" (matrimony) is concerned, its based on the root word "mater", implying motherhood. In that sense, that specific word is centered around the female's status as a mother or socially accepted role to be such.

@thekaxmax

3 ай бұрын

marriage doesn't include 'mother' in its etymology, so you can't conflate 'marriage' and 'matrimony'. Also, they are not entirely the same meaning.

@sckepticjesture

3 ай бұрын

@thekaxmax, just look for the word matrimony, it's just another word for saying marriage, or the state of being married

@thekaxmax

3 ай бұрын

@@sckepticjesture That's why I said what I did, I did exactly that. The words don't have the same meaning. The fact some people use them the same way doesn't mean the meaning and origins are the same. Marriage doesn't assume any gender--and yes, 'any' not 'either'. A poly marriage is a marriage.

@nowayjosedaniel

3 ай бұрын

You are wrong and you should know better bc tbis is the dumbest argument and transparently stupid logic...

@deuswulf6193

3 ай бұрын

@@thekaxmax You are wrong. Marriage was to imply a state of mātrem, of motherhood. The English language pulls heavily from root words which, when combined, clearly state its meaning. Marriage, matrimony...etc all signify that it is gendered around the condition a female specifically is in. Remember, words are often gendered, and in many languages this is more apparent. Assuming we were to make it about the male, for example, we could say its "Parriage", or Patrimony. A matriarchy is ruled by a female, were as a patriarchy is by male. This understanding of the language does not suddenly go away with words like Marriage and Matrimony. From etymology online, around 1300 "matrimoine, "the married state, the relation of husband and wife, wedlock; the sacrament of marriage," from Old French matremoine "matrimony, marriage" and directly from Latin mātrimōnium "wedlock, marriage" (in plural "wives"), from mātrem (nominative māter) "mother" (see mother (n.1)) + -mōnium, suffix signifying "action, state, condition."

Love that painting to your left❤

@jamesbodnarchuk3322

3 ай бұрын

Or your right my left?

Awesome post!

@metatronyt

3 ай бұрын

Thank you

I really liked how you handled this and learned a lot. My education on this was limited to - top good, bottom bad. I was surprised to hear that there were several legal codes that got close to a same sex legal union. As a queer guy I'm mostly just impressed by how detached and factual your presentation of the material is. I don't need to see myself in the heroes of history, nor do I need the past to be a gay utopia. If the past was great for queer people we wouldn't have so much work still ahead of us lol. There are no Alexander the Greats around so the world is decidedly less sexy, but this is still the safest time in history for us.

@metatronyt

3 ай бұрын

Glad to be of help.

@nickkorkodylas5005

3 ай бұрын

Y R Y GEH?

I wish we had more primary source documents on the subject. IIRC outside of The Metatron's areas of focus there might have been contractual same-sex marriages in Han Dynasty China and Classical Maya, but I don't have any source materials just me fallible memory right now.

@teresamerkel7161

3 ай бұрын

I am curious about these societies as well.

@mechadoggy

3 ай бұрын

“there might have been contractual same-sex marriages in Han Dynasty China” What?? No there weren’t. In all my years of researching my own culture’s history, I’ve never come across anything like what you describe.

Bahut bahut achcha videeohai❤😊

Wesley Hill discusses Adelphopoesis in his book Spiritual Friendship as well. Good book, very thought provoking

I am an amateur scholar of Ancient Egyptian history, and I have some insight that might be helpful: 1. The ancient Egyptians technically did not have marriage, at least not as an institution that is in any way equivalent to the modern western concept. Men and women did normally form monogamous bonds and lived in nuclear families, but these were not clearly defined either legally or religiously. There is no word in the Egyptian language for marriage, there is no word meaning “married spouse/husband/wife”, and there was no ritual or ceremony that joined two people in any form of sexual/romantic/economic union. The closest thing to marriage in ancient Egypt were “divorce laws”, which allocated a single household’s property to the various occupants if said occupants were no longer living together. There were also laws against adultery, but in the context of ancient Egyptian romantic/sexual relationships, this could more accurately be translated to laws against infidelity. 2. The ancient Egyptians did not have any stigma against homosexual sexual relationships as far as we know, at least between men. While they did consider the receptive role in a sexual relationship to be the inferior (ie. a man being penetrated by another man would be considered inferior to the man who was doing the penetrating), there’s little evidence indicating this was a serious social taboo, and there are artistic reliefs in the valley of the kings depicting Egyptian soldiers having penetrative sex with each other. The Egyptians were also prolific legalists, and routinely compiled lists of sexual crimes and social taboos that have been found in various religious/legal documents. Gay sex was never included in any of these lists of sexual taboos/crimes. Gay sex is also included in the Osiris myth, between Horus and Set. Depending on the version of the myth Set either rapes Horus, or Horus seduces Set and they sleep together consensually. 3. A same gender couple could absolutely take the place of an opposite gender couple in religious or legal ceremonies. We know this because Hatshepsut did this with her daughter. When Hatshepsut became Pharaoh, she promoted her daughter to the position of “great royal wife”, and they are depicted together in a number of religious reliefs performing religious rituals in the exact manner a male Pharaoh and his spouse would. This was purely ceremonial however, as Hatshepsut was not in any way romantically/sexually involved with her daughter. The actual gender of the person taking on a religious position/role within a ceremony didn’t actually matter, which is why Hatshepsut was able to portray herself as a male King in art, and her daughter as her “wife”. 4. The Siwa Berbers in western Egypt have a gay male marriage custom that is ancient and traceable back to the Iron Age at least. This gay marriage custom actually survived up until quite recently. Beginning in the mid 20th century, and due at least in part to pressure from clerics funded by Saudi Arabia, the Egyptian government has worked very hard to suppress the practice. 5. Though technically unrelated to gay marriage, the Egyptians had 3 legal sexes/genders: tai, sekhet and hemet. Tai are men, hemet are women, but the exact definition of the sekhet gender is not known. Egyptian artistic practices might imply that sekhet can be loosely equated with the Greek and later Gnostic concept of an androgyne, but there are records implying that there were people who were raised as boys during childhood but lived as women as adults and took religious roles as women, possibly akin to the Indian Hijra.