From Achilles Taitus to the Justinian Code, an exploration of the changes in sexual mores in the Roman world of Late Antiquity.

The author uses Achilles Taitus' Clitophon and Leucippe as the spring board from which to discuss the sexual mores of the Roman world before the diffuse spread of Christianity. He explores the wide variety of literature on the subject and sets forth the general Roman perspectives on such things. He demonstrates the penetrator/penetrated framework of Roman sexual understanding and the role of shame in that framework. Same sex behavior is discussed in comparison and contrast to the post-Victorian heterosexual/homosexual framework now en vogue. This description of Roman sexuality is the most thorough I have found.

The author then explores Christian understanding of sexuality first as rooted in Jewish heritage, but then in its more revolutionary forms. The author speaks of the elevation of chastity and virginity even beyond anything the Apostle Paul imposed, and even the emphasis on free will, which he suggests is in large part on account of the sexual ethos of Christians. This free will emphasis will remain even in Augustine in terms of sexual behavior even if Augustine will eventually walk free will back somewhat in his argument with the Pelagians and the development of the original sin transmitted through procreation doctrine. With Augustine the author is able to show the full shift from the shame framework of the Romans to the sin framework of the Christians and the ascendancy of the latter, then encoded into the Justinian Code.

This work, for good reason, should be the gold standard for understanding how the spread of Christianity led to profound shift in sexual mores in the Roman world of Late Antiquity. Highly recommended. ( )

Wonderful book on the shift in sexual mores from the Late Classical era to the early Christian Middle Ages. Of necessity, the focus is on the eastern Mediterranean. What is most excellent about the text is the clarity of Harper's thought and his use of narrative in preference to invective to illuminate the changing morality. ( )

I cannot really add anything to Peter Brown's review in the New York Review of Books, Dec 19,2013 (http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2013/dec/19/rome-sex-freedom/) and Kristina Sessa's review in the Bryn Mawr Classical Review 2014.01.52(http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2014/2014-01-52.html), so I'll just add a few personal highlights.

What was shameful to an aristocratic Roman became sinful under Christianity. As Pascal Quignard points out in Sex and Terror(http://www.librarything.com/work/1062367/book/107834499), Christians invented Christian morality about as much as Christians invented the Latin language. The discontinuity lies in the vehemence of the condemnation and rejection especially the complete rejection of sexuality - which they later had to begrudgingly backtrack from when it became clear that Jesus' prophecy that he would return in their lifetime wasn't fulfilled. According to Augustine, before the fall, having an erection was no different than raising your finger. It involved no passion or sexual desire. It was only after the fall that evil erotic feelings (concupiscence) entered the picture. Celibacy would forever remain the ideal however.

Another was pointing out that Justyn Martyr invented the concept of free-will ( or at least was the first philosopher to unambiguously use the term). Most think that Augustine invented it but it was actually Justyn. See Chapter Two, 'The Will and the World in Early Christian Sexuality'. Of course, Christianity requires free-will because without it, there was no point to Jesus' supposed sacrificial death. It would also make god evil. If you have no free-will, it makes no sense to punish a person for their deeds. For Augustine, this was a theological nicety because he believed that all were predestined to heaven or hell, so our behavior was ultimately irrelevant to our eternal destiny. It's only required to leave god blameless...I' ve never understood this logic, but then again, I'm not a Christian.

The author highlights the absolute condemnation of same-sex relationships by the early Christians. For example, the good Christian Emperor Theodocius I (who declared Christianity the only tolerated religion) rounded up all the male prostitutes in Rome and had them burned alive while he forced the populace to watch. Of course the heterosexual prostitutes weren't touched and the brothels stayed open.

In the Roman world, sex and love were two distinct things, which may or may not go together. Christianity certainly accepted this distinction but completely eliminated sex from the equation. We're only now shaking off this anti-human, anti-world legacy and fully accept same-sex relationships, non-procreative sex and sex outside of marriage as positive behaviors that are healthy and good.

If you are interested in this topic, it's worth a read. ( )

As of the time of this writing, only 21 out of the millions of members on LT have this book in their library. It's such a shame that more won't learn how the filth ridden anti-pleasure, anti-sex mentality entered the western world. Read how the peace loving Christian's rounded up all the male prostitutes in Rome in 390 and forced the population to watch them be burned alive...apparently their excremental god doesn't love gay men. The author dispels any notion that early Christians were not anti-gay.

I tried to discuss this book on one of the discussion groups here on LT, but none of them had actually read it nor had it in their libraries. All I got was some pious pontification about how my exegesis of biblical passages was erroneous even though they were based on world renowned scholars' views. Apparently, only fundy spittle drooling Christians understand the 'true' meaning of the bible because they have a personal relationship with a character in a book. The human mind has this wonderful ability to empathize with fictional characters...that is why we like reading novels....but please...I am not mentally ill enough to confuse fiction with reality and believe that a dead Jewish terrorist came back to life after three days and I can have a 'personal' relationship with him...read Festinger's When Prophecy Fails to learn why this happened.

Read the Bryn Mawr Classical Review 2014.01.52 at http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2014/2014-01-52.html for more information on this book. ( )