It has long been a commonly held belief among classicists that traditional Romans frowned upon male homosexuality and associated it with the influence of Greek culture. There have always been exceptions to this belief, but when Paul Veyne published the following remarks in his 1978 article ‘La famille et l'amour sous le hautempire romain’, his views were quite heterodox: Il est faux que l'amour ‘grec’ soit, à Rome, d'origine grecque: comme plus d'une société méditerranéenne de nos jours encore, Rome n'a (...) jamais opposé l'amour des femmes à celui des garçons: elle a opposé l'activité à la passivité; être actif, c'est être un mâle, quel que soit le sexe du partenaire passif. (shrink)

This article argues we can better interpret key aspects of Plato's Phaedo, including Socrates' cryptic final words, if we read the dialogue against the background of Greek manumission. I first discuss modes of manumission in ancient Greece, showing that the frequent participation of healing gods (Apollo, Asklepios, and Sarapis) reveals a conception of manumission as “healing.” I next examine Plato's use of manumission and slavery as metaphors, arguing that Plato uses the language of slavery in two main ways: like real (...) slavery, metaphorical slavery could be good, if it reflected a natural hierarchy, or bad, if it entailed an inversion thereof. Accordingly, metaphorical manumission from good and bad “slavery” are shown to be bad and good, respectively. Finally, I reread Plato's Phaedo, showing that Socrates, a willing “slave” of the gods, seeks the “manumission”/healing of his soul. It is in exchange for his complete “manumission,” attainable only through the death of his body, that Socrates offers a cock to the healing/manumission god Asklepios. (shrink)