Menu
Home Explore People Places Arts History Plants & Animals Science Life & Culture Technology
On this page
Achilles and Patroclus
Relationship in Classical Greece

The relationship between Achilles and Patroclus is central to the stories of the Trojan War, especially in Homer’s Iliad. While Homer never explicitly defines their bond as romantic, later Greek literature often portrayed them as lovers, a view supported by authors like Aeschylus and Plato. Conversely, Xenophon argued in his Symposium that their relationship was purely platonic. Debates about their connection have continued through the Classical period, Medieval scholarship, and modern queer studies. Some suggest latent homosexuality, while others find no definitive textual evidence, highlighting ongoing disagreements about its true nature.

Related Image Collections Add Image
Profiles
1 Image
We don't have any YouTube videos related to Achilles and Patroclus yet.
We don't have any PDF documents related to Achilles and Patroclus yet.
We don't have any Books related to Achilles and Patroclus yet.
We don't have any archived web articles related to Achilles and Patroclus yet.

In the Iliad

Synopsis

Achilles and Patroclus quarter together in a tent near their Greek allies fleet of ships. King Agamemnon realizes that Achilles, due to his heroic reputation, needs to enter the fight, but Achilles, having been disrespected by Agamemnon, refuses. Agamemnon sends an envoy to change his mind. In Book IX (lines 225 to 241) the diplomats, Odysseus and Ajax, hear Achilles playing the lyre and singing all alone with Patroclus. They both spring to their feet in surprise as the guests enter. After much talk, the embassy fails to convince Achilles to fight.

After more fighting, Nestor arrives back to the Greek allies base with a wounded soldier. Achilles sends Patroclus out to speak with him. In Book XI (lines 786 to 804) Nestor reminds Patroclus that his father had long ago taught him that, although Achilles was nobler, he (Patroclus) was still Achilles' elder, and therefore he should counsel and guide Achilles wisely so that perhaps he would finally enter the fight against the Trojans, but if not, then he himself (Patroclus) should don Achilles' armor to deceive the Trojans into thinking that Achilles had joined the fight, which should scare them away from their base and back to their own walls.

Later on, the Trojans continue their advance on the Greek allies' base and breach the defensive wall guarding their ships. Patroclus eventually dons Achilles' armor and scares the Trojans back as planned, and Patroclus also kills Sarpedon, a son of Zeus, but then Hector kills Patroclus. News of Patroclus' death reaches Achilles through Nestor's son Antilochus, which throws Achilles into deep grief. The earlier steadfast and unbreakable Achilles agonizes, touching Patroclus' dead body, smearing himself with ash and fasting. He laments Patroclus' death using language very similar to the grief of Hector's wife. He also requests that when he dies, his bones be mixed with Patroclus' in a vase.12

The rage that follows from Patroclus' death becomes the prime motivation for Achilles to return to the battlefield. He returns to battle with the sole aim of avenging Patroclus' death by killing Hector, despite a warning that doing so would cost him his life. Achilles even engages in battle with the river god Scamander in his efforts to reach Hector. After defeating Hector, Achilles drags his corpse by the heels behind his chariot.

Textual analysis

Achilles' strongest interpersonal bond is with Patroclus. As Gregory Nagy points out:

For Achilles [...] in his own ascending scale of affection as dramatized by the entire composition of the Iliad, the highest place must belong to Patroklos [...] In fact Patroklos is for Achilles the πολὺ φίλτατος [...] ἑταῖρος — the 'hetaîros who is the most phílos by far' (XVII 411, 655).13

Hetaîros meant 'companion' or 'comrade'; in Homer it is usually used of soldiers under the same commander. While its feminine form (hetaîra) would be used for courtesans, a hetaîros was still a form of soldier in Hellenistic and Byzantine times. In ancient texts, philos (often translated 'most beloved') denoted a general type of love, used for love between family, between friends, a desire or enjoyment of an activity, as well as between lovers.

Achilles' attachment to Patroclus is an archetypal male bond that occurs elsewhere in Greek culture: the mythical Damon and Pythias, the legendary Orestes and Pylades, and the historical Harmodius and Aristogeiton are pairs of comrades who gladly face danger and death for and beside each other.14

In the Oxford Classical Dictionary, David M. Halperin writes:

Homer, to be sure, does not portray Achilles and Patroclus as lovers (although some Classical Athenians thought he implied as much (Aeschylus fragments 135, 136 Radt; Plato Symposium 179e–180b; Aeschines Against Timarchus 133, 141–50)), but he also did little to rule out such an interpretation.15

Classical views in antiquity

Since the 5th century BC, Greek writing has dealt with the nature of the relationship between Achilles and Patroclus. The majority of extant works from this period portray the pair as lovers, whether the works are retelling their myth or interpreting their portrayal as written in the Iliad. Because the Iliad never explicitly states the nature of the pair's relationship, there was long-standing debate over textual interpretation, even though there are limited extant works which argue that they were not lovers. Writers who argued most forcefully that the relationship involves sex and same-sex love include Aeschylus, Plato, and Aeschines. Xenophon is the most notable source to refute this portrayal, claiming that the relationship is not erotic.1617

In Athens, the relationship was often viewed as being both sexual and pederastic.18 The Greek custom of paiderasteia between members of the same sex, typically men, was a political, intellectual, and sometimes sexual relationship.19 Its ideal structure consisted of an older erastes (lover, protector), and a younger eromenos (the beloved). The age difference between partners and their respective roles (either active or passive) was considered to be a key feature.20 Writers that assumed a pederastic relationship between Achilles and Patroclus, such as Plato and Aeschylus, were then faced with a problem of deciding who must be more active and play the role of the erastes.21 When classical writers labeled their roles, they mostly characterized Achilles as the erastes and Patroclus as the eromenos, although Plato notably flips this characterization. The pair didn't neatly fit into expected pederasty roles, and pederasty may not have been a common institution at the time the Iliad was written, making this a subject of debate.22

Aeschylus

Aeschylus makes the relationship between Achilles and Patroclus the center of his lost tragedy The Myrmidons (5th century BC), explicitly casting the relationship as homoerotic, pederastic, and sexual.23 Aeschylus assigned Achilles the role of erastes or protector (since he had avenged his lover's death, even though the gods told him it would cost him his own life), and assigned Patroclus the role of eromenos. Achilles publicly laments Patroclus' death, addressing the corpse and criticizing him for letting himself be killed. In a surviving fragment of the play, Achilles speaks of "the reverent company" of Patroclus' thighs and how Patroclus was "ungrateful for many kisses."2425

Pindar

Pindar's comparison of the adolescent boxer Hagesidamus and his trainer Ilas to Patroclus and Achilles in Olympian 10.16–21 (476 BC) as well as the comparison of Hagesidamus to Zeus' lover Ganymede in Olympian 10.99–105 suggest that student and trainer had a romantic relationship, especially after Aeschylus' depiction of Achilles and Patroclus as lovers in his play Myrmidons.26

Plato

In Plato's Symposium, written c. 385 BC, the speaker Phaedrus holds up Achilles and Patroclus as an example of divinely approved lovers. Phaedrus argues that Aeschylus erred in claiming Achilles was the erastes because Achilles was more beautiful and youthful than Patroclus (characteristics of the eromenos) as well as more noble and skilled in battle (characteristics of the erastes).2728 Instead, Phaedrus suggests that Achilles is the eromenos whose reverence of his erastes, Patroclus, was so great that he would be willing to die to avenge him.29

The poet Bion of Smyrna later referenced Plato's view, and an opposing argument from Xenophon. In his poem, Bion agreed with Plato that the relationship was one of lovers and not just friends.30

Xenophon

Plato's contemporary, Xenophon, in his own Symposium, had Socrates argue that Achilles and Patroclus were merely chaste and devoted comrades in the Iliad.31 Specifically, according to Socrates: "Homer pictures us Achilles looking upon Patroclus not as the object of his passion but as a comrade, and in this spirit signally avenging his death".32 Xenophon cites other examples of legendary comrades, such as Orestes and Pylades, who were renowned for their joint achievements rather than any erotic relationship.33 Notably, in Xenophon's Symposium, the host Kallias and the young pankration victor Autolycos are called erastes and eromenos.

This interpretation of the Iliad relationship as non-sexual influenced later authors. It is referenced in works from Dio Chrysostom, Lucian, Plutarch, Themistius, and Libanius.34

Aeschines

Aeschines, at his trial in 345 BC, placed an emphasis on the importance of paiderasteia to the Greeks, and argues that though Homer does not state it explicitly, educated people should be able to read between the lines: "Although (Homer) speaks in many places of Patroclus and Achilles, he hides their love and avoids giving a name to their friendship, thinking that the exceeding greatness of their affection is manifest to such of his hearers as are educated men."35 Aeschines presented the relationship as pederastic, noble, and loving, and cites the Iliad in his speech.3637 Aeschines describes Achilles as the erastes in the relationship.38

Most ancient writers (among the most influential Plutarch, Theocritus, Martial, Meleager, and Lucian) followed the thinking laid out by Aeschines.3940 The poets Bion of Smyrna and Strato also characterized the relationship as pederastic, with Achilles as the erastes.41

Aristarchus of Samothrace

Attempts to edit Homer's text were undertaken by Aristarchus of Samothrace in Alexandria around 200 BC. Aristarchus believed that Homer did not intend for Achilles and Patroclus to be lovers. However, Aristarchus thought one passage of the Iliad implied Achilles was in love with Patroclus.42 Aristarchus disavowed these lines, arguing that it was an edited section from someone who wanted Achilles and Patroclus to be lovers.43 In the text, Achilles wishes that every Greek and Trojan except himself and Patroclus would die, so that the two can sack Troy together.44 Aristarchus thought this was too intense and believed Homer's Achilles was too sympathetic to wish for all the Greeks and Trojans to die this way.45

Pseudo-Apollodorus

According to Pseudo-Apollodorus, Patroclus was the son of Menoetius and Polymele. After Patroclus killed a young boy in anger, Menoetius gave him to Peleus, the father of Achilles. As such, Patroclus can be seen as a brother-like figure to Achilles.46

Other interpretations from antiquity

Statius in the Achilleid states that Achilles and Patroclus were either within the same age group, or acted as if they were. This signifies that he did not assign a strict pederastic role to either of them based on their ages.4748 Statius described a "great love" between the pair since their youth, using language that is left ambiguous as to whether it is homoerotic or platonic.49

The poet Theocritus characterizes the relationship as sexual in one of his poems. This poem can be read as implying the relationship is more egalitarian than traditional pederasty roles allow.50

Chariton of Aphrodisias and Apollonius Rhodius viewed the Iliad's version of the relationship between Achilles and Patroclus as homoerotic, according to modern classicists Gabriel Laguna-Mariscal and Manuel Sanz-Morales. This is because the ancient writers allude to Homeric passages about the relationship when they are writing of love within erotic contexts in their own works.51

When Alexander the Great and his confidant Hephaestion passed through the city of Troy on their Asian campaign, Alexander honoured the sacred tomb of Achilles and Patroclus in front of the entire army, and this was taken as a clear declaration of their own relationship. The joint tomb and Alexander's action demonstrates the perceived significance of the Achilles–Patroclus relationship at that time (around 334 BC).5253

Later adaptations

During the Middle Ages, the classical tradition frequently portrayed Achilles as heterosexual and having an exemplary platonic friendship with Patroclus. Medieval Christian writers deliberately suppressed the homoerotic nuances of the figure.54

Medieval Era

An influential 12th century telling of the Trojan War, the French Roman de Troie, depicts Hector's explicit claim of a sexual relationship between Achilles and Patroclus. The author, Benoît de Saint-Maure, creates a scene where Achilles and Hector insult each other and trade challenges. After Achilles earnestly recounts his great pain at Patroclus' death, Hector encourages him to try for revenge via a duel: "for both the grief you feel for your companion from whom I've separated you, whom so often you have felt naked in your naked arms, and for other jousts vicious and shameful, of which the greater part are hateful to the gods." Hector's taunts portray a sexual relationship between Achilles and Patroclus and cast it as offensive. The encounter enrages and shames Achilles, who calls Hector to fight immediately.55 Later in the work, Achilles falls in love with a woman, Polyxena, on the anniversary of Patroclus' death. Scholars Alfred Adler and Tamara Faith O'Callaghan see the new relationship as a literary contrast to Achilles' earlier relationship with Patroclus, with the story portraying the later heterosexual love as deeper.5657 Guido delle Colonne's prominent 13th century Latin translation of the Roman de Troie, the Historiae Destructionis Troiae, removes Hector's claim that Achilles and Patroclus were lovers, but retains Achilles' deep grief for Patroclus.58 Guido's translation portrays the pair as in an ideal friendship.59

One 13th century Spanish retelling of the Iliad deliberately removes all erotic imagery between Achilles and Patroclus. This tale is a modified translation of the Ilias Latina, a late antiquity poem on the Trojan War, and is embedded inside a larger epic on Alexander the Great, the Libro de Alexandre. The Spanish poet modifies the Ilias Latina in several places, including in how Achilles grieves Patroclus.60 The poet removes references to Achilles lying on Patroclus' corpse, kissing him, and tearing off clothes. The author also heightens the grief and actions of the other Greeks to closer match Achilles', and adds a simile that Achilles grieves Patroclus "as if he were his father or his grandfather." Ian Michael argues the poet did this to make Achilles's actions respectable for a contemporary audience.6162

Renaissance Era

Hermaphroditus

Antonio Beccadelli's collection of erotic poetry, the Hermaphroditus, includes a poem describing intercourse between Achilles and Patroclus.63 The collection was popular but also sparked condemnation, and Pope Eugenius IV threatened to excommunicate anyone reading it.64

Shakespeare

William Shakespeare's play Troilus and Cressida portrays Achilles and Patroclus as lovers in the eyes of the Greeks.65 Achilles' decision to spend his days in his tent with Patroclus is seen by Odysseus (called Ulysses in the play) and many other Greeks as the chief reason for anxiety about Troy.66

Modern Era

Achilles in Vietnam

Jonathan Shay, whose book Achilles in Vietnam proposes readings of the Iliad that have been helpful and therapeutically useful for the healing of mental wounds in Vietnam veterans, pointed out that their familial relationship in the Iliad must not be overlooked: Patroclus is Achilles' cousin and his foster brother; symbolically, comrades in battle are "like brothers," making the Achilles/Patroclus model useful for thinking about the intensity of Vietnam veterans' feelings of loss when their comrades fell beside them. Shay places a strong emphasis on the relationships that soldiers who experience combat together forge, and points out that this kind of loss has in fact often led to "berserking" of soldiers stunned with grief and rage, in a way similar to the raging of Achilles in the Iliad. Shay points out that a frequent topos in veterans' grief for a companion is that companion's gentleness or innocence; similarly, while a warrior of great note, Patroclus is said in the Iliad by other soldiers and by Briseis the captive to have been gentle and kind.

Troy (2004)

The film Troy presented Patroclus as a younger relative of Achilles, without any romantic or sexual aspects.67 (In the Iliad, it is explicitly stated that Patroclus was the older and more responsible of the two.) The film presents the pair as cousins and is one of the main modern inspirations for reading the pair as close relatives. It justifies their bond as arising from kinship and guardianship rather than friendship. According to historian Cezary Kucewicz, this is a departure from previous interpretations of the pair as either close comrades or lovers. Achilles and Patroclus were related in original tellings via Aegina, a nymph, but not portrayed as relatives. In an uncommon variant of the myth attributed to the poet Hesiod, the pair are portrayed as direct cousins via their fathers, Menoetius and Peleus.68

The Song of Achilles

Madeline Miller's The Song of Achilles (2011) is a coming-of-age story told from Patroclus' point of view, showing the development of a loving and sexual relationship between Achilles and Patroclus.6970 Miller wrote that her portrayal of the pair as lovers was inspired by ancient Greek and Roman literature. She shared her analysis of the Iliad's portrayal of the relationship:

There is a lot of support for their relationship in the text of the Iliad itself, though Homer never makes it explicit. For me, the most compelling piece of evidence, aside from the depth of Achilles' grief, is how he grieves: Achilles refuses to burn Patroclus' body, insisting instead on keeping the corpse in his tent, where he constantly weeps and embraces it—despite the horrified reactions of those around him. That sense of physical devastation spoke deeply to me of a true and total intimacy between the two men.71

Later interpretations

Commentators from the Classical period interpreted the relationship through the lens of their own cultures, just as post-classical writers did. Middle Ages writers on the classical tradition often cast Achilles as heterosexual and having an exemplary platonic friendship with Patroclus. Medieval Christian writers deliberately suppressed the homoerotic nuances of the figure.72

Modern scholars have debated how the Iliad portrays the nature of Achilles' and Patroclus' relationship. Specific questions include whether the bond was homoerotic, included sexual intercourse, conformed to pederasty, and was a platonic friendship. Scholars have also debated whether some questions are even answerable, what types of evidence are appropriate, and what the norms and context of Homer's time would have been.73

Initial scholarship

Angelo Poliziano was the first post-classical scholar to review the homoerotic tradition of the relationship between Achilles and Patroclus, and perhaps the first modern scholar to examine ancient portrayals of same-sex love. In his Miscellania from 1489, he devotes an essay to reviewing ancient authors' opinions on the relationship. He documents implicitly and explicitly sexual characterizations of the relationship, as well as the debate over the partners' pederastic roles. Modern classicist Shane Butler characterizes Poliziano's conclusion as a "deliberate tease" that avoids using the text of the Iliad to determine that one pederastic interpretation is correct over the other, leaving the question of roles unresolved.74

John Addington Symonds, in his 1873-76 text Studies of the Greek Poets, argued that the love between Achilles and Patroclus was central to the plot of the Iliad.75 Symonds later described it as an idealized example of masculine love: “a powerful and masculine emotion, in which effeminacy had no part, and which by no means excluded the ordinary sexual feelings…the tie was both more spiritual and more energetic than that which bound man to woman.” In this essay, he also described their bond as a "heroic friendship," and rejected the interpretation that their relationship was pederastic.76

Saul Levin, in the 1949 article "Love and the Hero of the Iliad," states that their relationship was not pederastic, but that the relationship was more meaningful to Achilles than any love he could have for women, or his other familial relationships.77

W. M. Clarke, in the 1978 article "Achilles and Patroclus in Love," argues that the pair are in love, in a homoerotic, and likely sexual, relationship. He rejects the notion that they just had a close platonic friendship, and also says that the relationship does not align with pederasty. Clarke cites comparisons between their relationship and others in the Iliad, as well as how other characters describe the pair and how they describe each other. Clarke also uses comparative evidence from other literature and myths, especially on tropes of love, and dissects ancient commentary on the Iliad.78

Bernard Sergent, in his 1986 Homosexuality in Greek Myth, stated that their relationship was definitely homophilic but not pederastic, and their relationship involved "an intensity of emotions between two men in an expression that surpasses what our own culture tolerates." Sergent does not comment on whether the pair had sex.79 According to William A. Percy III, other scholars also believe that in Homer's Ionian culture there existed a homosexuality that had not taken on the form it later would in pederasty.80

2000s scholarship

David Halperin argues that that Achilles and Patroclus had a non-sexual platonic friendship.81 In works like One Hundred Years of Homosexuality, Halperin compares Achilles and Patroclus to the roughly contemporary traditions of Jonathan and David, and Gilgamesh and Enkidu.82 He argues that while a modern reader is inclined to interpret the portrayal of these intense same-sex male warrior friendships as being fundamentally homoerotic, it is important to consider the greater themes of these relationships:

The thematic insistence on mutuality and the merging of individual identities, although it may invoke in the minds of modern readers the formulas of heterosexual romantic love [...] in fact situates avowals of reciprocal love between male friends in an honorable, even glamorous tradition of heroic comradeship: precisely by banishing any hint of subordination on the part of one friend to the other, and thus any suggestion of hierarchy, the emphasis on the fusion of two souls into one actually distances such a love from erotic passion.83

According to Halperin, these distinctive friendships needed to be explained to audiences using the familiar language and imagery of marital and familial relationships.84 This can explain the overtones in Book 19 of the Iliad wherein Achilles mourns Patroclus (lines 315–337) in a similar manner used previously by Briseis (lines 287–300).85

Classicists Victor Davis Hanson and John Heath argue that modern authors who identify the pair as homosexual ingeniously reinvent the Homeric text at will.86

James Davidson, in the 2007 book The Greeks and Greek Love: a radical reappraisal of homosexuality in Ancient Greece, argues that the relationship between Achilles and Patroclus was homoerotic, and that the pair had a type of homosexual marriage.87

Robin Lane Fox has written that "There is certainly no evidence in the text of the Iliad that Achilles and Patroclus were lovers. [...] Those contemporary critics who see all literary instances of male affection for males as proof of "repressed homosexuality" have the same problem as other conspiracy theorists: their hypothesis is invulnerable to disproof; we have no way of knowing if they are wrong".88

Marco Fantuzzi, in the 2012 book Achilles in Love, argues that there was no homoerotic element to their relationship, and that they had a symbiotic bond, with Patroclus serving as Achilles' alter ego.89

Shane Butler, in the 2016 book Deep Classics: Rethinking Classical Reception, disagrees with Fantuzzi and argues that the pair had a true love that naturally defied labels and explicit roles like those of pederasty. Butler says the best answer to defining their relationship is that they occupy all of the options: friends, battlefield-comrades, and lovers.90

Celsiana Warwick argued in the 2019 article "We Two Alone: Conjugal Bonds and Homoerotic Subtext in the Iliad" that the relationship was homoerotic, taking the form of a conjugal bond rather than fitting into the norms of pederasty. Warwick argues that their bond, and that of Odysseus and Penelope, were presented by Homer as the ideal conjugal relationship, and that these ideals had subversive elements.91

See also

Notes

References

  1. Lane Fox, Robin (2011). The Tribal Imagination: Civilization and the Savage Mind. Harvard University Press. p. 223. ISBN 9780674060944. There is certainly no evidence in the text of the Iliad that Achilles and Patroclus were lovers. [...] Those contemporary critics who see all literary instances of male affection for males as proof of "repressed homosexuality" have the same problem as other conspiracy theorists: their hypothesis is invulnerable to disproof; we have no way of knowing if they are wrong. 9780674060944 ↩

  2. Martin, Thomas R (2012). Alexander the Great : the story of an ancient life. Cambridge University Press. pp. 99–100. ISBN 978-0521148443. The ancient sources do not report, however, what modern scholars have asserted: that Alexander and his very close friend Hephaestion were lovers. Achilles and his equally close friend Patroclus provided the legendary model for this friendship, but Homer in the Iliad never suggested that they had sex with each other. (That came from later authors.) 978-0521148443 ↩

  3. Fantuzzi, M. (2012). Achilles in Love: Intertextual Studies. OUP Oxford. pp. 227–233. ISBN 978-0-19-162611-1. 978-0-19-162611-1 ↩

  4. Morales, Manuel Sanz; Mariscal, Gabriel Laguna (2003). "The Relationship between Achilles and Patroclus according to Chariton of Aphrodisias". The Classical Quarterly. 53 (1): 292–295. doi:10.1093/cq/53.1.292. ISSN 0009-8388. JSTOR 3556498. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3556498 ↩

  5. Fantuzzi, M. (2012). Achilles in Love: Intertextual Studies. OUP Oxford. pp. 227–233. ISBN 978-0-19-162611-1. 978-0-19-162611-1 ↩

  6. Wood, Christopher (2021-01-18). Heroes Masked and Mythic: Echoes of Ancient Archetypes in Comic Book Characters. McFarland. ISBN 978-1-4766-8315-7. 978-1-4766-8315-7 ↩

  7. Fantuzzi, M. (2012). Achilles in Love: Intertextual Studies. OUP Oxford. pp. 227–233. ISBN 978-0-19-162611-1. 978-0-19-162611-1 ↩

  8. King, Katherine Callen (1987) Achilles: Paradigms of the War Hero from Homer to the Middle Ages, Berkeley. ↩

  9. Percy, William A. (1998). Pederasty and Pedagogy in Archaic Greece. Chicago: University of Illinois Press. pp. 39. ISBN 9780252067402 – via Google Books. 9780252067402 ↩

  10. Warwick, Celsiana (2019). "We Two Alone: Conjugal Bonds and Homoerotic Subtext in the Iliad". Helios. 46 (2): 115–139. Bibcode:2019Helio..46..115W. doi:10.1353/hel.2019.0007. ISSN 1935-0228. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/749465 ↩

  11. Lane Fox, Robin (2011). The Tribal Imagination: Civilization and the Savage Mind. Harvard University Press. p. 223. ISBN 9780674060944. There is certainly no evidence in the text of the Iliad that Achilles and Patroclus were lovers. [...] Those contemporary critics who see all literary instances of male affection for males as proof of "repressed homosexuality" have the same problem as other conspiracy theorists: their hypothesis is invulnerable to disproof; we have no way of knowing if they are wrong. 9780674060944 ↩

  12. Reading The Odyssey (Book XXIV), one discovers that Achilles' bones have indeed been placed in a vase with those of Patroclus, but also learns that Antilochus became closer than any other to Achilles following Patroclus' death, and that Antilochus' bones were also placed within the same vase, but separated from the bones of Achilles and Patroclus, which had been stirred together. /wiki/Odyssey ↩

  13. Gregory Nagy (1999) The Best of the Achaeans, second edition. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. p. 105 (online edition Archived 2020-07-26 at the Wayback Machine). ISBN 0-8018-6015-6. /wiki/Gregory_Nagy ↩

  14. Johansson, Warren (1990) Encyclopedia of Homosexuality, U.S. ↩

  15. Oxford Classical Dictionary, third edition. Simon Hornblower and Antony Spawforth, eds. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996. p. 721. ISBN 0-19-866172-X. /wiki/Oxford_Classical_Dictionary ↩

  16. Warwick, Celsiana (2019). "We Two Alone: Conjugal Bonds and Homoerotic Subtext in the Iliad". Helios. 46 (2): 115–139. Bibcode:2019Helio..46..115W. doi:10.1353/hel.2019.0007. ISSN 1935-0228. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/749465 ↩

  17. Morales, Manuel Sanz; Mariscal, Gabriel Laguna (2003). "The Relationship between Achilles and Patroclus according to Chariton of Aphrodisias". The Classical Quarterly. 53 (1): 292–295. doi:10.1093/cq/53.1.292. ISSN 0009-8388. JSTOR 3556498. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3556498 ↩

  18. Clarke, W. M. (1978). "Achilles and Patroclus in Love". Hermes. 106 (3): 381–396. JSTOR 4476069. /wiki/JSTOR_(identifier) ↩

  19. Holmen, Nicole (2010). "Examining Greek Pederastic Relationships". Inquiries Journal. 2 (2): 1. http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/articles/175/examining-greek-pederastic-relationships ↩

  20. Marguerite, Johnson; Ryan, Terry (2005). Sexuality in Greek and Roman Society and Literature: A Sourcebook. New York: Routledge. pp. 3. ISBN 9780415173315 – via Google Books. 9780415173315 ↩

  21. Percy, William A. (1998). Pederasty and Pedagogy in Archaic Greece. Chicago: University of Illinois Press. pp. 39. ISBN 9780252067402 – via Google Books. 9780252067402 ↩

  22. Warwick, Celsiana (2019). "We Two Alone: Conjugal Bonds and Homoerotic Subtext in the Iliad". Helios. 46 (2): 115–139. Bibcode:2019Helio..46..115W. doi:10.1353/hel.2019.0007. ISSN 1935-0228. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/749465 ↩

  23. Morales, Manuel Sanz; Mariscal, Gabriel Laguna (2003). "The Relationship between Achilles and Patroclus according to Chariton of Aphrodisias". The Classical Quarterly. 53 (1): 292–295. doi:10.1093/cq/53.1.292. ISSN 0009-8388. JSTOR 3556498. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3556498 ↩

  24. Michelakis, Pantelis (2007). Achilles in Greek Tragedy. Cambridge University Press. p. 51. ISBN 978-0-521-81843-8. 978-0-521-81843-8 ↩

  25. Aesch. Myrmidons fr. 135 Radt. ↩

  26. Hubbard, T (2005). "Pindar's Tenth Olympian and athlete-trainer pederasty". J Homosex. 49 (3–4): 137–71. doi:10.1300/j082v49n03_05. PMID 16338892. S2CID 27221686. /wiki/Doi_(identifier) ↩

  27. Percy, William Armstrong (2005) "Reconsiderations about Greek Homosexualities," in Same–Sex Desire and Love in Greco-Roman Antiquity and in the Classical Tradition of the West, Binghamton. p. 19. ISBN 9781560236047 /wiki/ISBN_(identifier) ↩

  28. Dover, Kenneth J. (1978). Greek Homosexuality. New York: Vintage Books. pp. 197–199. ISBN 978-0-394-74224-3. 978-0-394-74224-3 ↩

  29. Dover, Kenneth J. (1978). Greek Homosexuality. New York: Vintage Books. pp. 197–199. ISBN 978-0-394-74224-3. 978-0-394-74224-3 ↩

  30. Fantuzzi, M. (2012). Achilles in Love: Intertextual Studies. OUP Oxford. pp. 227–233. ISBN 978-0-19-162611-1. 978-0-19-162611-1 ↩

  31. Clarke, W. M. (1978). "Achilles and Patroclus in Love". Hermes. 106 (3): 381–396. JSTOR 4476069. /wiki/JSTOR_(identifier) ↩

  32. Xenophon, Symposium, 8.31 https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0212%3Atext%3DSym.%3Achapter%3D8%3Asection%3D31 ↩

  33. Dover, Kenneth J. (1978). Greek Homosexuality. New York: Vintage Books. pp. 197–199. ISBN 978-0-394-74224-3. 978-0-394-74224-3 ↩

  34. Laguna-Mariscal, Gabriel; Sanz-Morales, Manuel (2005). "Was the Relationship between Achilles and Patroclus Homoerotic? The View of Apollonius Rhodius". Hermes. 133 (1): 120–123. doi:10.25162/hermes-2005-0011. ISSN 0018-0777. JSTOR 4477639. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4477639 ↩

  35. Holmen 2010. - Holmen, Nicole (2010). "Examining Greek Pederastic Relationships". Inquiries Journal. 2 (2): 1. http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/articles/175/examining-greek-pederastic-relationships ↩

  36. Morales, Manuel Sanz; Mariscal, Gabriel Laguna (2003). "The Relationship between Achilles and Patroclus according to Chariton of Aphrodisias". The Classical Quarterly. 53 (1): 292–295. doi:10.1093/cq/53.1.292. ISSN 0009-8388. JSTOR 3556498. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3556498 ↩

  37. Aeschines. "Against Timarchus", Section 133 /wiki/Aeschines ↩

  38. Warwick, Celsiana (2019). "We Two Alone: Conjugal Bonds and Homoerotic Subtext in the Iliad". Helios. 46 (2): 115–139. Bibcode:2019Helio..46..115W. doi:10.1353/hel.2019.0007. ISSN 1935-0228. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/749465 ↩

  39. Morales, Manuel Sanz; Mariscal, Gabriel Laguna (2003). "The Relationship between Achilles and Patroclus according to Chariton of Aphrodisias". The Classical Quarterly. 53 (1): 292–295. doi:10.1093/cq/53.1.292. ISSN 0009-8388. JSTOR 3556498. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3556498 ↩

  40. Clarke 1978. - Clarke, W. M. (1978). "Achilles and Patroclus in Love". Hermes. 106 (3): 381–396. JSTOR 4476069. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4476069 ↩

  41. Warwick, Celsiana (2019). "We Two Alone: Conjugal Bonds and Homoerotic Subtext in the Iliad". Helios. 46 (2): 115–139. Bibcode:2019Helio..46..115W. doi:10.1353/hel.2019.0007. ISSN 1935-0228. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/749465 ↩

  42. Crompton, Louis (1993) Homosexuality and Civilization. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. p. 6. ISBN 9780674022331 /wiki/ISBN_(identifier) ↩

  43. Warwick, Celsiana (2019). "We Two Alone: Conjugal Bonds and Homoerotic Subtext in the Iliad". Helios. 46 (2): 115–139. Bibcode:2019Helio..46..115W. doi:10.1353/hel.2019.0007. ISSN 1935-0228. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/749465 ↩

  44. Homer, Iliad 16.97-100. https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Hom.+Il.+16.97&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0134 ↩

  45. Warwick, Celsiana (2019). "We Two Alone: Conjugal Bonds and Homoerotic Subtext in the Iliad". Helios. 46 (2): 115–139. Bibcode:2019Helio..46..115W. doi:10.1353/hel.2019.0007. ISSN 1935-0228. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/749465 ↩

  46. Wood, Christopher (2021). Heroes Masked and Mythic: Echoes of Ancient Archetypes in Comic Book Characters. McFarland. p. 44. ISBN 978-1-4766-8315-7. 978-1-4766-8315-7 ↩

  47. Butler, Shane (5 May 2016). Deep Classics: Rethinking Classical Reception. Bloomsbury Publishing. p. 29. ISBN 978-1-4742-6053-4. For good measure, Poliziano throws in a unique example of a compromise view, reporting that the Roman poet Statius, in his unfinished epic, the Achilleid, makes Achilles and Patroclus 'equals in age', though Poliziano curiously (and uncharacteristically) misparaphrases the relevant lines (which he then quotes), in which we are told that the two, as boys, simply acted the same age, though the latter 'fell far behind in strength'. 978-1-4742-6053-4 ↩

  48. Ingleheart, Jennifer (4 September 2018). Masculine Plural: Queer Classics, Sex, and Education. Oxford University Press. p. 268. ISBN 978-0-19-255160-3. ... and that Patroclus is par studiis aeuique modis, 1.176. This latter phrase is difficult: it probably means something like 'equal in the pursuits and ways of youth', and Bainbrigge may have taken it as inspiration ... 978-0-19-255160-3 ↩

  49. Ingleheart, Jennifer (4 September 2018). Masculine Plural: Queer Classics, Sex, and Education. Oxford University Press. p. 268. ISBN 978-0-19-255160-3. ... and that Patroclus is par studiis aeuique modis, 1.176. This latter phrase is difficult: it probably means something like 'equal in the pursuits and ways of youth', and Bainbrigge may have taken it as inspiration ... 978-0-19-255160-3 ↩

  50. Warwick, Celsiana (2019). "We Two Alone: Conjugal Bonds and Homoerotic Subtext in the Iliad". Helios. 46 (2): 115–139. Bibcode:2019Helio..46..115W. doi:10.1353/hel.2019.0007. ISSN 1935-0228. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/749465 ↩

  51. Laguna-Mariscal, Gabriel; Sanz-Morales, Manuel (2005). "Was the Relationship between Achilles and Patroclus Homoerotic? The View of Apollonius Rhodius". Hermes. 133 (1): 120–123. doi:10.25162/hermes-2005-0011. ISSN 0018-0777. JSTOR 4477639. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4477639 ↩

  52. Plutarch (1973) Age of Alexander, Life of Alexander. p. 294, Penguin Classics edition /wiki/Plutarch ↩

  53. Arrian (1958). The Campaigns of Alexander. p. 67, Penguin Classics edition. /wiki/Arrian ↩

  54. King, Katherine Callen (1987) Achilles: Paradigms of the War Hero from Homer to the Middle Ages, Berkeley. ↩

  55. King, Katherine Callen (1991). Achilles: Paradigms of the War Hero from Homer to the Middle Ages. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. pp. 160–163, 301. ISBN 978-0-520-07407-1. 978-0-520-07407-1 ↩

  56. King, Katherine Callen (1991). Achilles: Paradigms of the War Hero from Homer to the Middle Ages. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. pp. 160–163, 301. ISBN 978-0-520-07407-1. 978-0-520-07407-1 ↩

  57. O'Callaghan, Tamara Faith (1995). Love Imagery in Benoit de Sainte-Maure's Roman de Troie, John Gower's Confessio Amantis, and Geoffrey Chaucer's Troilus and Criseyde (Doctoral dissertation). pp. 60-61. ↩

  58. King, Katherine Callen (1991). Achilles: Paradigms of the War Hero from Homer to the Middle Ages. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. pp. 160–163, 301. ISBN 978-0-520-07407-1. 978-0-520-07407-1 ↩

  59. Brown, William H. (1984). "A Separate Peace: Chaucer and the Troilus of Tradition". The Journal of English and Germanic Philology. 83 (4): 497–498. ISSN 0363-6941. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27709394 ↩

  60. King, Katherine Callen (1991). Achilles: Paradigms of the War Hero from Homer to the Middle Ages. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. pp. 150–156, 280. ISBN 978-0-520-07407-1. 978-0-520-07407-1 ↩

  61. King, Katherine Callen (1991). Achilles: Paradigms of the War Hero from Homer to the Middle Ages. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. pp. 150–156, 280. ISBN 978-0-520-07407-1. 978-0-520-07407-1 ↩

  62. Michael, Ian (1970). The Treatment of Classical Material in the Libro de Alexandre. Publications of the Faculty of Arts of the University of Manchester, n. 17. Manchester University Press. pp. 185–186. ISBN 978-0-7190-1247-1. 978-0-7190-1247-1 ↩

  63. Butler, Shane (2016). "Homer's Deep". In Butler, Shane (ed.). Deep classics: rethinking classical reception. London: Bloomsbury Academic, an imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc. pp. 23–30. ISBN 978-1-4742-6053-4. 978-1-4742-6053-4 ↩

  64. "The Hermaphrodite — Harvard University Press". Harvard University Press. Archived from the original on 2024-07-21. Retrieved 2025-05-01. http://web.archive.org/web/20240721172631/https://www.hup.harvard.edu/books/9780674047570 ↩

  65. Shakespeare, William (1982) [1609], "Troilus and Cressida", in Muir, Kenneth (ed.), The Oxford Shakespeare: Troilus and Cressida, Oxford University Press, pp. 47–48, doi:10.1093/oseo/instance.00027413, ISBN 9780198129035 9780198129035 ↩

  66. Shakespeare, William (1982) [1609], "Troilus and Cressida", in Muir, Kenneth (ed.), The Oxford Shakespeare: Troilus and Cressida, Oxford University Press, pp. 24–5, doi:10.1093/oseo/instance.00027413, ISBN 9780198129035 9780198129035 ↩

  67. Michael, Michael G. (2011). Of Muscles and Men: Essays on the Sword and Sandal Film. McFarland. p. 46. ISBN 978-0786489022. 978-0786489022 ↩

  68. Kucewicz, Cezary (2020-09-29). "Were Achilles and Patroclus cousins?". Bad Ancient. Retrieved 2025-05-01. https://www.badancient.com/claims/achilles-patroclus-cousins/ ↩

  69. Haynes, Natalie (September 29, 2011). "The Song of Achilles by Madeline Miller – review". The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2011/sep/29/song-of-achilles-miller-review ↩

  70. Leidich, Sarah (2021-04-28). "From Muse to Material: The Defiance of Homeric Identity Through Creative Adaptation". Meliora: A Journal of Barnard English Theses. 1 (1). Retrieved 2022-03-21. https://journals.library.columbia.edu/index.php/meliora/article/view/7930/4214 ↩

  71. Kellogg, Carolyn (May 30, 2012). "First-time author Madeline Miller wins last-ever Orange Prize". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved May 30, 2012. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/jacketcopy/2012/05/first-time-author-madeline-miller-wins-last-ever-orange-prize.html ↩

  72. King, Katherine Callen (1987) Achilles: Paradigms of the War Hero from Homer to the Middle Ages, Berkeley. ↩

  73. Warwick, Celsiana (2019). "We Two Alone: Conjugal Bonds and Homoerotic Subtext in the Iliad". Helios. 46 (2): 115–139. Bibcode:2019Helio..46..115W. doi:10.1353/hel.2019.0007. ISSN 1935-0228. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/749465 ↩

  74. Butler, Shane (2016). "Homer's Deep". In Butler, Shane (ed.). Deep classics: rethinking classical reception. London: Bloomsbury Academic, an imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc. pp. 23–30. ISBN 978-1-4742-6053-4. 978-1-4742-6053-4 ↩

  75. Percy, William A. (1998). Pederasty and Pedagogy in Archaic Greece. Chicago: University of Illinois Press. pp. 39. ISBN 9780252067402 – via Google Books. 9780252067402 ↩

  76. Roalsvig, Emma (2019-03-24). "The Epic Love Story of Patroclus and Achilles". John Addington Symonds Project. Retrieved 2025-04-11. https://symondsproject.org/the-epic-love-story-of-patroclus-and-achilles/ ↩

  77. Levin, Saul (1949). "Love and the Hero of the Iliad". Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association. 80: 37–49. doi:10.2307/283510. ISSN 0065-9711. JSTOR 283510. https://www.jstor.org/stable/283510 ↩

  78. Clarke, W. M. (1978). "Achilles and Patroclus in Love". Hermes. 106 (3): 381–396. JSTOR 4476069. /wiki/JSTOR_(identifier) ↩

  79. Percy, William A. (1996). Pederasty and Pedagogy in Archaic Greece. University of Illinois Press. p. 40. ISBN 978-0-252-06740-2. 978-0-252-06740-2 ↩

  80. Percy, William Armstrong (2005). "Reconsiderations About Greek Homosexualities". Journal of Homosexuality. 49 (3–4): 13–61. doi:10.1300/j082v49n03_02. PMID 16338889. S2CID 20548741. /wiki/Doi_(identifier) ↩

  81. Percy, William A. (1996). Pederasty and Pedagogy in Archaic Greece. University of Illinois Press. p. 40. ISBN 978-0-252-06740-2. 978-0-252-06740-2 ↩

  82. Halperin, David M. (1990). One hundred years of homosexuality: and other essays on Greek love. New York: Routledge. pp. 76–85. ISBN 978-0-415-90096-6. 978-0-415-90096-6 ↩

  83. Halperin, David M. (2000). "How to do the history of male homosexuality" (PDF). GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies. 6: 87–124. doi:10.1215/10642684-6-1-87. S2CID 145019034. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2016-12-20. Retrieved 2016-12-09. https://web.archive.org/web/20161220080123/http://www-bcf.usc.edu/~bitel/documents/Halperin.pdf ↩

  84. Halperin, David M. (1990). One hundred years of homosexuality: and other essays on Greek love. New York: Routledge. pp. 76–85. ISBN 978-0-415-90096-6. 978-0-415-90096-6 ↩

  85. Clarke, W. M. (1978). "Achilles and Patroclus in Love". Hermes. 106 (3): 381–396. JSTOR 4476069. /wiki/JSTOR_(identifier) ↩

  86. Hanson, Victor Davis; Heath, John (2001). Who Killed Homer?: The Demise of Classical Education and the Recovery of Greek Wisdom. Encounter Books. pp. 137–138. ISBN 978-1-893554-26-9. 978-1-893554-26-9 ↩

  87. Brook, Eric C (2008-07-20). "Review of: The Greeks and Greek Love: A Radical Reappraisal of Homosexuality in Ancient Greece". Bryn Mawr Classical Review. ISSN 1055-7660. https://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2008/2008.07.20/ ↩

  88. Lane Fox, Robin (2011). The Tribal Imagination: Civilization and the Savage Mind. Harvard University Press. p. 223. ISBN 9780674060944. There is certainly no evidence in the text of the Iliad that Achilles and Patroclus were lovers. [...] Those contemporary critics who see all literary instances of male affection for males as proof of "repressed homosexuality" have the same problem as other conspiracy theorists: their hypothesis is invulnerable to disproof; we have no way of knowing if they are wrong. 9780674060944 ↩

  89. Acosta-Hughes, Benjamin (2013-09-11). "Review of: Achilles in Love. Intertextual Studies". Bryn Mawr Classical Review. ISSN 1055-7660. https://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2013/2013.09.11/ ↩

  90. Butler, Shane (2016). "Homer's Deep". In Butler, Shane (ed.). Deep classics: rethinking classical reception. London: Bloomsbury Academic, an imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc. pp. 23–30. ISBN 978-1-4742-6053-4. 978-1-4742-6053-4 ↩

  91. Warwick, Celsiana (2019). "We Two Alone: Conjugal Bonds and Homoerotic Subtext in the Iliad". Helios. 46 (2): 115–139. Bibcode:2019Helio..46..115W. doi:10.1353/hel.2019.0007. ISSN 1935-0228. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/749465 ↩