In the 2020 documentary Disclosure, Yance Ford, a black, American, trans, filmmaker expanded on a quote by Marian Wright Edelman who said, “Children cannot be what they cannot see.” Mr. Ford expanded this and said,“ It’s not just about children. It’s about all of us. We cannot be a better society until we see that better society. I cannot be in the world until I see that I am in the world.”
This quote explains the core of what this research paper means for people like me, who’s history and identities have been erased, mutilated, and hyper-eroticised for commercial means. History holds some of the tools of how we as humans see, build and value ourselves and I, along with many other lgbtq+ people, have not been allowed this luxury. So this paper’s role is to take an in-depth look into marginalized lgbtq+ art in ancient history focusing on stone and ceramic objects.
Knowing the silent queerphobia rampant in the field of History, I knew I needed to take a different and more aware path of research – hypothesizing that maybe the controversial or elusive theories around art objects containing lgbtq+ imagery or purpose may have more truth to them than the field is willing to accept.
It should also be mentioned that our own understanding of what it means to be lgbtq+ in today’s world is not how we should look at these art objects. The roles and societal structures of lgbtq+ people have shifted and swayed from place to place, era to era. Whether with acceptance or persecution, it is however, undeniable that in some form we have always existed and the art is proof of that.
It is interesting to note as R.B. Parkinson did in his book A Little Gay History , that this strictly binary way of seeing people and relationships is inherently more modern European with the introduction of a more Christo-Judaic tone and documented history is reflective of that. In fact as he noted, many other cultures and time periods had much more obvious fluidity in self-expression, as seen for example in Ancient Egypt with varying body types and skin tones, or within different cultures Gods and Goddesses who often had both male and female attributes. It may be that ancient civilizations had a more relaxed or maybe even a more complex view of gender and sexuality than we are willing to credit them for.
While lgbtq+ art made more recently has been better documented and received by today’s society, Ancient Greco-Roman art is still one of only a few whose history surrounding lgbtq+ visibility is seen as mainstream and whose resources are readily available. This mainstream view of their history, however, is male dominated and whose homosexual relationship structure is still centered on the basis that they had wives and therefore a more heteronormative lifestyle by todays standards.
The ancient Greeks and Romans had a complicated relationship with understanding the nuances of what intercourse was and meant. Much of this was on the basis of theory or conceptual thought rather than by the physical act, although that wasn’t completely ignored. This can be seen most clearly with how they defined a girl's virginal status. A girl could be considered a virgin so long as no one saw or believed her to have had penetrative sex. This remained true, even if a girl gave birth unmarried, in an act of what was believed to be immaculate conception, as long as she properly hid her pregnancy. Therefore because we can infer that ancient greco-romans believed only in observed penial penetration as intercouse, we can also infer that the greco-romans did not consider two women engaging in same-sex sexual activities to be sex. As quoted in Homosexuality: A History written by Vern Bullough,
“This double standard may have existed so long because the males who have dominated the writing of history and the making of laws have assumed that women were nothing without men, and that no sex could take place without a penis being involved. It can, however, and does.”
Due to the misogyny during this time period, images of women, let alone in masturbatory scenes or same sex relationships are rare and modern day historians seem to struggle with how to approach these objects. This is seen for example in a painted ceramic cup dating back to 500 BCE from modern day central Italy, which depicts a cleansing scene between two women. Information and details about this particular object are hard to trace despite the fact it currently lives in the Tarquinia National Museum. However, whispers of this object are found mentioned in historical blogs and papers but without any clear citing of where this information came from.
Painted on the inside of this cup, we can see that one of the women is crouched, head tilted upwards to look into the face of her counterpart. Her hands are deliberately placed near the genitals of the woman of whom she is cleansing rather than in a more neutral position. While we may be able to discern this to be a potential case of a Lady and slave, the angle of the crouched woman’s back leg is positioned more casually rather than in a subservient kneeled position which may infer that these women are in fact equals. We could also try to discern this by looking at the way the figure's hairstyles are painted.
This particular object is named after it’s maker who is tagged as Apollodoros. Just like his painted cup, not much is known of this Athenian red-figure vase painter. His name was found on this cup as well one other, but he is attributed to many other objects by means of aliases and is even mentioned by philosophers such as Plato.
Due to the mystery of the artist, who may have given more insight on the purpose of this scene, there is a need to infer. In some cases, rather than take the obvious approach of this being a depiction of a same sex couple, its seem like the theories go out of their way to problematize that this is perhaps mother and daughter. In other instances, it has also been described to be two Hetairai, a specific social class of sexual companions or prostitutes. In fact, almost all the images of ceramics from this era depicting scenes between women are elusive and whose documentations are almost completely blank. This acknowledgement of images but lack of concrete documentation is like a metaphor for how society continually views same-sex female relationships.
Another example of this is the even more obscure case of figure 1.2 of a ceramic plate dating to 700 BCE depicting two women holding crowns wreaths–which were used typical symbols of gifts of love in scenes depicting a heterosexual couple – with the elder woman caressing the younger woman’s cheek. In fact the only object I was able to find proper documentation for in regards to same-sex female relationships in ancient Greece and Rome, was in a Roman 1st century CE, terracotta lamp showcasing two women engaged in oral sex owned by The British Museum.
This lamp measuring 7.8cm in diameter is press-molded clay. Due to this, historians believe this to have been a mass-produced product. As paraphrased by the British Museum,
“At the same time, the fact that this image was shown on a mass-produced object such as a lamp suggests that it was widely consumed, if only largely for male amusement and titilation; it also points to the recognition of lesbian sexual practices, however much from a likely male perspective (similar to modern pornography).”
There might be a correlation between the fact that this object was considered to be for male enjoyment and how complete the documentation of this object is. Objects suiting or that can be made to suit the necessary structures of modern society seem to have survived with more complete documentation and reverence compared to their less conforming peers.
This could be the case of a small stone carved sculpture dubbed the Ain Sakhri Figures dating back to 9,000 BCE. This small figurine measuring 10.2 cm high by 6.3 cm wide and only weighing 343 grams, was commonly perceived to be the earliest known imagery of a man and woman in coitus. However, as Parkinson argued in his book there is nothing about these figures that relays gender. There are no markings, no decorative additions to aid in the identifying of whether or not these two figures are indeed male and female. In fact, as shown in a drawing from an article written by Brian Boyd and Jill Cook it was the original historian, René Neuville, who studied this figure that only marked the genders by one figure being slightly higher than the other. This Natufian sculpture dates long before Judaism along with it’s monogamous and heterosexual teachings were established in that area. We, therefor, cannot assume that the individual who carved this sculpture adhered to the same heteronormative rules we ourselves live by and by doing so we have failed to properly detangle ourselves as unprejudiced book keepers of history in regards to this particular object.
In fact, much of the initial examination of this object is stained with preconceived and narrow views of the world, which were a typical of historians practicing in the time period the Ain Sakhri figurine was discovered. In a re-examination of this figurine that took place in an article in the 90’s, everything from the genders of this sculpture to it’s date creation was scrutinized.
A question we can ask ourselves moving forward would be, would this object have been marked important and properly documented as it has been as a heterosexual couple, had it been clear that these figures were a same-sex couple? The answer will forever be unclear, but we can look to the aforementioned state of documentation of ancient greco-roman art depicting same-sex female relationships as a potential guide to form an opinion.
Not all controversial discoveries were made pre-turn of the century. Archeologists are continuing to make significant discoveries surrounding potential lgbtq+ objects. In 2011, a discovery led by archeologist Kamila Remisova Vesinova and her team found the remains of a skeleton in what is now the Czech Republic. This skeleton made waves in the media being mislabeled as the “Gay Caveman”. This particular person lived around 5,000 years ago in 2,900-2,500 BCE in an era known as the Corded Ware Culture in Eastern Europe, therefore they couldn’t have been a caveman. This mislabeling devalues and instills suspicion or confusion around a discovery that is potentially monumental for the queer community.
Ultimately, there is huge controversy surrounding this skeleton within historical and archaeological circles, which makes it a bit challenging to discuss. Beyond a few problematic scholarly journals and news articles there is hardly any more information on this set of remains. The in depth analysis of these remains have yet to be published in any scientific articles and no further commentary in recent years have emerged. So who and why did this ancient human being make such an impact in 2011?
They are controversially believed to be the oldest found “male” but potentially transgender or gender-non conforming person found to date. These remains were buried in the single-grave practice typical of late Neolithic communities in the 3rd millennium BCE living in southern Scandinavia, Northern Germany, and the Low Countries. This practice consisted of burying their dead in a crouched fetal position under a burial mound with carefully sorted objects surrounding the individual being buried. These particular remains were buried in a somewhat unusual way within the boundaries of this practice which clue us in on the potential identity of this person.
As Kamila explained in a interview to the Telegraph,
"From history and ethnology, we know that people from this period took funeral rites very seriously, so it is highly unlikely that this positioning was a mistake, far more likely is that he was a man with a different sexual orientation, homosexual or transsexual."
So the way we can potentially begin to understand why this might be the case isn’t by the skeleton alone, although recent scientific studies have been attempting to use DNA analysis for ancient skeletons believed to be intersex. Kamila and her team believe that what we are looking at is in fact a queer individual by two important factors.
The first, with identifying the way that this skeleton was buried. As mentioned previously, archeologists can study the position of the remains with fair accuracy despite nuanced geographically found differences. This burial was carried out in a typical female burial by determining the position of the remains to be on their left side with their head facing East. The second way archeologists can determine gender identity and perhaps the most important way we can hypothesize the queerness of this individual is with the objects the remains were buried with.
Ceramic jugs were found present inside the grave. This diverges from the typical burials for men who were buried with weapons, tools such as hammers and several portions of food as well as their heads facing West typically on their right-side.
With none of those things found in the burial site for this person, and in fact with a clear resolution to the opposite, they were seemingly perfectly buried in a way reserved for women during this time period. It may be unaddressed queerphobia that is found to be the root cause behind why there isn’t more research done or available to study.
If it weren’t for the ceramics in the burial, we would have little to identify this person with. It is not often that the presence of ceramic objects aids to determine the potential gender identity of a person. The ceramics of the Corded Ware culture were highly advanced and tell the complicated stories of the women who were most often behind them. In an in depth research carried out by the University of Helsinki, they found that women were more mobile than their male counterparts and most likely learned pottery from their place of birth before taking what they’ve learned and applying it to their new home. What these researchers found were that these ancient women must have broken and ground the ceramics that they brought with them and incorporated it into the new claybody that was available. It isn’t clear why they would do this, although a romanticized theory is this was a way of preserving the older pottery made in their homeland and thus keeping the metaphorical connection.
Did this individual follow a more stereotypically female story? Did they travel away from their homeland and if so why? Did they themselves make pottery alongside their biologically female community members? By the way they were buried, if we believe that this was biological man buried as a woman or gender non conforming individual, this must mean that the community in which they passed away in respected and accepted them for who they deemed themselves to be whether a woman, a 3rd gendered individual or a homosexual.
We wouldn’t even have the ability to ask these questions about this person if it weren’t for the ceramic found in their grave left as burial gifts. Context when it comes to archeological discoveries is vital when trying to piece together a complete image of a person or a civilization. Unfortunately, due to the sensitive nature of lgbtq+ imagery found in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s, much of the important context needed was disrupted regardless of country due to what is now deemed to be bad practice..
Perhaps most upsetting is in the case of Moche pottery, in which a large removal of context by early discoverers took these Sex Pots without properly documenting them in their environment and quietly sold them into the wealthy art collections and black market. However, while a substantial number of these pots did manage to get unearthed by Raphael Larco Hoyle who was an amateur archeologist and collector who eventually founded the Museo Larco in Lima, Peru – this wasn’t enough to preserve any background to understand the hyper-eroticized vessels purposes. Moche pottery refers to the Ancient Peruvian culture dating back from 200 - 900 CE, and due to the lack of written history, historians rely on consequent discoveries to try and regain a better understanding of this civilization.
Early scholarly journals about Moche culture, denied the existence of any examples of male to female oral sex, pedophilia, lesbianism, or homosexuality. However, unsurprisingly, more recent scholarship proves this completely incorrect and while we aren’t discussing heterosexual relationships it is interesting to note that these Sex Pot show in no case of any evidence of forced or coercion by the male characters and relatedly no resistance by the female characters.
In 2018, a team of archeologists discovered the ruins of 2 large rooms that they believe to have been used by the Moche elites. These rooms are the most recent discovery around this elusive civilization and are believed to be ceremonial. The rooms themselves were brightly painted with marine scenery and help historians shed light on the context in which the pottery could have been used for by providing evidence that there were elaborate banquets and ritualistic sacrifices that took place, which provides further evidence that these pots may not have only been used for humor as potentially believed..
There’s still no evidence of the roles lgbtq individuals within this society played despite its clear imagery in the ceramics. It should be mentioned that maybe there weren't specifically lgbtq+ groups of individuals that existed separately from heterosexuals. These pots are still some of the most explicit scenes lgbtq+ representation in ancient history.
It is important to mention the lesser known pottery belonging to the Mimbres society. In fact, the Moche civilization weren’t the only Native Americans to depict lgbtq+ individuals on their pottery. It wasn’t until doing this research that I personally came across Mimbres pottery or its significance within lgbtq+ history. As seen in this bowl dating back to 950 - 1100 CE from Mimbres, New Mexico the traditional Mimbres ceramics consisted of black on white pottery. Although often shown separately the Mimbres society are still considered part of Mogollon culture, despite pretty nuanced differences in their ceramics.
They are also considered the first or earliest pottery makers of the region dating back to 200 CE. Classic examples Mimbers pottery (black on white) dates between 1000-1300 CE. During this period Mimbers began living aboveground, forgoing their pitthouses and as the population grew exponentially so did their ceramic making.
These highly decorated pieces were often used for ceremonial purposes and often in doing so they were destroyed, so finding a bowl such as this is really important. The scene on the bowl itself shows two men, defined by their hairstyles, in an act of courtship. One of the men is chasing the other. One could read into the male figure on the right inviting or accepting the advances of the man to the left with his hand seemingly reaching backward to the wooers erection as his curved back causing his legs to squat downwards in the direction of the erection.
Overall, in this scenes there seems to be a generalized acceptance surrounding homosexual courtship, beginning with the characters painted no differently than that those depicting heterosexual couples. There also a lack of any show of animosity or negative exaggeration that could indicated that men that engage in same-sex activities were seen negatively. Furthermore, upon coming across a ceremonial bowl depicting a sex education scene, it could be that there might have been the potential for these wares to have been used as instruction guides.
Over the millenia, the knowledge of the people who are behind these instrumentally important objects to lgbtq+ history are often if not always forgotten. This is where I want to end the compilation of lgbtq+ ceramic and stone objects and acknowledge the identity and story of We’Wha, a Native American, 2-spirit potter who lived in the mid and late 1800’s.
Depicted in figure.6, We'wha to the Zuñi tribe from western New Mexico area. We’Wha was acknowledged as a lhamana, someone assigned male at birth who takes on the social and ceremonial roles typically of Zuñi women. We’wha later friendship with anthropologist Matilda Cox Stevenson, meant really detailed scholarship on the Zuñi but of We’wha history as well.
Born in 1849, marked the end of Zuñi’s isolation from the impacts the colonia ravaged across Native American tribes nationwide. At the We’wha was born the Zuñi were still free to practice their religious customs and traditions, however, this would mark the first year their tribe would have contact with colonials. Originally, this was an advantageous meeting with the two groups fighting the Navajo and the Apache. Although this did weaken relations at this time, the colonials exposed the Zuñi to small-pox and both of We'wha parents passed away in 1853. They were taken in by their aunt.
Lhamanas could be recognized as early as 3 or 4 years old, which not coincidentally is the age in which modern medicine now recognizes that many children not only understand gender but identify and affirm their own. We’wha first began participating in male ceremonies at the age 12 before switching a few years later to which then their religious training was handed over to the female relatives. It was during this time period the We’wha learned the skills of Zuñi women skills which consisted of making corn meal, cooking, weaving as well as pottery.
However, when the “American” troops and the Zuñi won over the Navajo, and the Navajo were forced into reservations in 1864, some of the Zuñi moved into the abandoned land and began farming. During this time it’s believed that We’wha abided by “male” stereotypical work. It is not totally clear as to why We’wha decided to do so. Was this act forced or perhaps a preventive of safety in light of colonial views? We do not know, but in a series of happenstances We’wha began working for Mathilda Stevenson, who under the alias Tilly E. Stevenson was a American ethnologist, geologist and explorer. Stevenson hired We’wha under the requirement to make Zuñi religious pottery.
Stevenson refers to We'wha as "he" and at other times as "she", seeming to have made a choice to switch permanently to “she” sometime after 1904, writing in her diary,
"As the writer could never think of her faithful and devoted friend in any other light, she will continue to use the feminine gender when referring to We'wha".
Eventually We’wha returned to their community, when serious conflicts broke out between the colonial americans and the Zuñi. Eventually We’wha and 5 other lhamana people were arrested under the crime of witchcraft and were jailed for a month. Not much is known after this other than We’wha passing away at the age 47 due to heart failure while participating in a religious ceremony.
If one looks closely at the image of We’wha, one can see her holding a small handled object. I believe that this object is the terrace bowl (figure 6.2 and figure 6.3), that Dwight Lanmon attributed to be a We’wha creation. The pottery that We’wha, isn’t disguisable as an lgbtq+ object. Opposingly to the previously mentioned gender non-conforming skeleton, one would not be able to discern the lgbtq+ history behind the works. It is the documentation of We’wha that provides the understanding and the basis in which queerifies these ceramic objects.
Thus rounds the culmination of the both enthralling but frustrating obstacles that are thrown in the way of properly documenting lgbtq+ ceramic and stone art. It is not always what a researcher is looking for when sifting through mountains of historical objects. Are they looking for objects in context of graves or sites, in imagery on the surfaces or insides, or does this lgbtq+ history live within the artisans themselves? How can incoming historians and archaeologists begin to undo the damage done by their predecessors? As lgbtq+ lives continue to enter mainstream society, it will be curious to see how the documentation of objects and artists enter scholar journals and articles regardless of the “queer status”. Just like how the english language has shifted to accommodate Queer individuals, has also begun to spill over into non queer representative conversations; I hope that by insisting better visibility of lgbtq+ ancient art, will help yield a less partial testament of history.
Photo References
Figure 1. Sailko. Apollodorus. Photograph. Wikimedia. Tarquinia, July 11, 2017. Tarquinia national museum. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Apollodoros_(attr.),_kylix_attica_con_due_etere_alla_toeletta,_490-480_ac.jpg.
Figure 1.2. unknown. One Woman Courts Another. Photograph. Https://Www.laits.utexas.edu/. Thera, 0AD. Thera Archeological Museum. https://www.laits.utexas.edu/ancienthomosexuality/imageindex.php?cat_id=11&topic_id=159.
Figure 1.3Unknown. Lamp. Photograph. Https://Www.britishmuseum.org/. London, 2005. The British Museum. https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/G_2005-0921-1.
Figure 2. The Ain Sakhri Figures. Photograph. Https://Www.britishmuseum.org/. London. The British Museum. Accessed November 20, 2020. https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/H_1958-1007-1.
Figure 3.“Male” Skeleton with Jugs. Photograph. www.advocate.com. Pride Publishing, April 7, 2011. https://www.advocate.com/news/daily-news/2011/04/07/archaeologists-find-gay-caveman.
Figure 4. unknown. Homosexual Anal Penetration. Photograph. Sex Pots: Eroticism in Ceramics. New Brunswick, NY: Rutgers University Press, 2003. Museo Enrico Poli .
Figure 5. unknown. Homosexual Seduction Scene. Photograph. Sex Pots: Eroticism in Ceramics . New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2003.
Figure 6. Unknown. We'Wha. June 3, 2019. Photograph. Https://Www.historyheroblast.com/. https://www.historyheroblast.com/historyhero/wewha.
Figure 6.2.Unknown. Terraced Bowl. Photograph. Https://Www.si.edu/. Washington DC, 2014. The Nation Of Natural History . https://www.si.edu/object/nmnhanthropology_8458806.
Figure 6.3. Unknown. Terraced Bowl. Photograph. Https://Www.si.edu/. Washington DC, 2014. The Nation Of Natural History . https://www.si.edu/object/nmnhanthropology_8458806.
Bibliography
Barley, Nigel. Smashing Pots : Works of Clay from Africa Washington, D.C: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1994.
Boyd, Brian, and Jill Cook. “A Reconsideration of the ‘Ain Sakhri’ Figurine.” Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 59 (1993): 399–405.https://doi.org/10.1017/s0079497x0000387x.
Bullough, Vern L. HOMOSEXUALITY: a History (from Ancient Greece to Gay Liberation). New York, NY: New American Library, 1979.
Crompton, Louis. Homosexuality & Civilization Cambridge, Mass: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2003.
Espenshade, Christopher T. "Mimbres Pottery, Births, and Gender: A Reconsideration." American Antiquity 62, no. 4 (1997): 733-36. Accessed November 26, 2020. doi:10.2307/281893.
Fischer, Marina. “The Prostitute and Her Headdress: the Mitra, Sakkos and Kekryphalos in Attic Red-Figure Vase-Painting Ca. 550-450 BCE.” Https://Dspace.ucalgary.ca/, 2008. https://dspace.ucalgary.ca/bitstream/handle/1880/46383/Thesis_Fischer.pdf;jsessionid=32A43851CE63A12D6AD67A54BF7A19DD?sequence=1.
Frost, Stuart. “Museums and Sexuality.” Museum international 65, no. 1-4 (2013): 16–25.
Gibney, Glenn. “Female Homosexuality on Greek Vase Painting.” Cork: University College of Cork , n.d.
Geller, Pamela L. “The Fallacy of the Transgender Skeleton.” Bioarchaeology and Social Theory Bioarchaeologists Speak Out, 2018, 231–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93012-1_10.
Holmqvist, Elisabeth, Suvi Uotinen, and Vera Schoultz. “Skilled Female Potters Travelled around the Baltic Nearly 5000 Years Ago.” Https://Www.helsinki.fi/, March 13, 2018. https://www.helsinki.fi/en/news/language-culture/skilled-female-potters-travelled-around-the-baltic-nearly-5000-years-ago.
Lewis, Nell. “1,500-Year-Old Ruins Shed Light on Peru's Mysterious Moche People.” Https://Www.cnn.com/, 2018. https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/19/world/moche-archaeological-ruins-peru/index.html.
Mathieu, Paul. Sex Pots: Eroticism in Ceramics. London: Black, 2003.
Reed, Christopher. Art and Homosexuality : a History of Ideas New York: Oxford University Press, 2011.
Smith, Matt. “Making Things Perfectly Queer: Art's Use of Craft to Signify LGBT Identities,” 2015.
Stevenson, Matilda Coxe. Ethnobotany of the Zuni Indians. Washington: Govt. Print. Off., 1919.
Weismantel, Mary. “Moche Sex Pots: Reproduction and Temporality in Ancient South America.” American anthropologist 106, no. 3 (September 1, 2004): 495–505.
Wiley, Heather. “Sex Pots: 50 Shades of Moche.” Culture, society & praxis 11, no. 1 (April 1, 2019): COV5–.
“LIFE AFTER ART: Early Greek Exhibit Of Human Form Translates Well to Modern Gay Viewers”. Los Angeles: Here Publishing Inc, March 29, 1988
Whole. Your Queer Story: An LGBTQ+ Podcast1, no. 1, 42, 43, 63. Spotify, June 13, 2018.
Telegraph Reporter. “First Homosexual Caveman Found.” The Telegraph, 2011. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/8433527/First-homosexual-caveman-found.html.
,_kylix_attica_con_due_etere_alla_toeletta,_490-480_ac.jpg){kind=link}