HOME | DD
Develv — Sad Bagoas
#ancient #bagoas #beautifulman #beauty #boy #eunuch #persia #persianboy #eromenos #alexanderthegreat #androgynous #flowers #paleskin
Published: 2015-03-11 16:36:33 +0000 UTC; Views: 5809; Favourites: 72; Downloads: 24
Redirect to original
Description
It saddens me that many writers strike out such an important person as Bagoas from the biography of Alexander. They write about Roxana, Tais, Barsine (those did not exist), because they are women, and het relationship. But no one writes about Bagoas. Why? Because he is a eunuch? Or because he was gay? Or because the authors is homophobic?Only Mary Renault was to give it a due attention to what he really deserves. Only in the "Persian boy" fully revealed the depth of love relationships between Alexander and Bagoas. Moreover, all the important ancient historians argue ardent love Alexander to Bagoas, and that Bagoas was very important for the king Alexander.
Art by Deva.
Related content
Comments: 32
Wait wasn't Roxana historical?
Seriously how heteronormative can this shit people be???????
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes, historically she existed, but people exaggerate her role.
Unfortunately, this is how the popular stuff roll, they MUST be heteronormative so people will like it, read it, watch it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
So sad...... Gay love is love too!!!!!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
How did you do the petal affect? They look soft and delicate, like silk. But it sounds like just a very sad book...but complicated.
Maybe things would had been different had Alexander chose not to marry Roxana, he had plenty of people telling him not too...in fact both times his marriage choices were opposed.
But I pity the Persian ladies because it must had been hard, they were used to having a fairly good amount of freedom but yet they got sucked into the Greek world which took that away...
If only he made some good choices.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
It's a secret :3
And I feel sorry for Persian eunuchs and gays. They need more support and understanding of society than women, because most still consider them outcasts.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Poor boy, so underrated. Is he crying for the hummiliation and the death of his family?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No because of people's misunderstanding and intolerance.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Interesting, didn't know either.
About that endless homophobic discussion... it's a bit disturbing that there is always that accusation of homophobia about those who do not include homosexual relationships in their stories.
I call two wonderful homosexual people my friends and I am so happy that I met them. Yet, I am a totally straight heterosexual woman and I for example do not write about homosexual relationships. It is simply not my cup of tea. I also do not read novels about homosexual guys unless a good friends asks me to beta-read for her. It is simply not my cup of tea. I am now a homophobic person? I think not.
It's not everyone's taste as so many other things are not everyone's taste 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
There is a difference between 'not writing' and 'ignoring', in the first case there is just no interest in something, while in the second case there is particular despise of a certain existing individual.
I also don't draw women, but some fellows dare to call me a misogynist just because I'm not interested in female gender in art. But when it comes to real historical heterosexuality I do not ignore all the wives and sisters because what's true is true, Alexander was married and I ain't gonna ignore, that because I need justice.
They write about every woman of Alexander fictional or not fictional but they do, and they even exaggerate that. While when according to history it is attested that Alexander dearly loved Bagoas and had a huge sexual passion for this boy, he kissed him in front of everyone and caressed and demanded everyone to respect this friend and lover of him. However, most of writers turn him into a 'slave-prostitute' which Alexander used as a 'sex-toy' and would never care if his warriors dare to insult Bagoas or even kick him. Imagine if Bagoas was a woman, would that be respectful to address and treat him like that? Of course not. Nobody would do that.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
What I find sad is that people invent or change sexual relationships, just because they do not like the truth or live in the illusion that character XYZ would change his/her sexual orientation just for their sake... as if that is something one can really change O.o
They do it to both orientations - no matter if hetero or homosexual. They even do it to those characters who had no relationship at all.
That's why I always find it interesting to know the facts and true original idea about a character - no matter if that person existed or has been invented.
That truth has a far higher value to me than "making up" my own fancy with the characters of someone else (or the real persons). But that is just me.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
well done
Interesting, didn´t know about this figure
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thanks!
You didn't know because nobody has spoke or write about him.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
yes, it appears to be...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
That's why I want to study byzantine studies and write a book about Alexander and Bagoas, because in my opinion it's depressing not to mention homosexuality, although the Greek history, and even the gods, are well known for it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
the hair strands looks amazingly done!! and those flower petals detail~awesome job
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I think it's simply because he didn't play a big role in the building of the Hellenistic empire the way Alexander's wives did and we know little about him. He is written of in Curtius but only because he felt it necessary to do so. It's unfair to convict them of being homophobic: for one, the ancients had no concept of homosexuality as an orientation, and secondly, Alexander the Great is known to have preferred men to women and historians have written about him extensively. Mary Renault did not "reveal" anything, we have no idea what Bagoas felt for Alexander, that book is historical fiction.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
In all fairness Roxana, Stateira and Barsine were all foreign women who were instrumental in the creation of his empire via marriage. Plus with Barsine being the wife of one of his greatest rivals, Memnon of Rhodes. I know that Manfredi reserves a lot of place in his work, "The Sands of Ammon," for the Alexander-Barsine relationship...and yes well, they really didn't have a perception of sexual orientations, you're right about that. I think it's also the writer's preference really and whether Bagoas can be important in the narrative that they have planned to do. Now, how much of Alexander's life does Renault's book series take up? His entire life, or his time in Persia with Bagoas?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
It's told through Bagoas, so in the begin Alexander is alluded to as a distant political force and then through the lens of being Bagoas' lover. Renault adds a lot to Bagoas' story that we simply have no way of verifying. I think it's fine to be inspired by this beautiful and mysterious historical figure as I am and as Renault was, I just think it's wrong to blame historians for not talking about him in detail.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hmm...I think therein stands the answer...it is the writer's preference indeed. From what I can tell from this description, "The Persian Boy" is about Alexander and Bagoas when they were in each other's lives as opposed to writing about the king's whole life as I've read from Manfredi's work. Seems Renault is much more detailed than Manfredi too. The latter doesn't always spend too much time describing all of the characters in such great detail to us to be honest, other than a few like Philip, Olympias, Hephaestian, Ptolemy, Aristotle and some others...I think Diogenes and Demosthenes are shown in passing in his books. The most interesting detail concerns the two Alexanders, Alexander of Macedon and Alexander of Epirus.
He is in fact an archaeologist too and that is quite visible in his narrative.
As for the lack of writing on the eunuch, perhaps there were indeed historical records of him and they got destroyed over the centuries or lost. You can never tell if Curtius was the only person who wrote about him.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
That's true, Bagoas is written about in the middle ages, but there really is no way of confirming what they say (they usually say he's a woman, Christianity and all that). But would you agree that it's not due to homophobia that Bagoas isn't written about extensively?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Homophobia looks like a big part of the deal. It's been that way ever since Christianity referred to it as a sin
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
But then why would they mention Hephaestion and Alexander's relationship unabashedly? This as far more to do with the relevance of him in the geopolitical sphere than homophobia. Remember too that we have no idea what Bagoas' sexual orientation was, he was a slave and simply served his masters' requests.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Firstly, all mention of Alexander and Hephaestion as friendly, but not sexual. There is no evidence that they had an intimate relationship. And so, this is an excellent ground for the homophobes who can easily reject the sexual/love Alexander and Hephaestion part. With Bagoas harder, he is not a friend or warrior of Alexander, he is a beautiful young man, previously lover of Darius, and therefore, it is a direct proof for homosexual relations Alexander and Bagoas.
Bagoas was not a slave, he was a Persian and a free. It is wrong stereotype that he was a slave. Alexander hated slavery and sex slaves. Remember the story of Plutarch, where Alexander disgusted rejects the offered boys for sex, and even yelled at friends.
Do not underestimate homophobia, it is very strong in people, and they are willing to do anything to distort the facts. They ignore homosexuality, or at least show it but only negatively.
Sorry for my bad english, I don't have time for write.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The sources from the time are ambiguous about the relationship between Hephaestion and Alexander and the people of the time would have had absolutely no problem with two men in a sexual relationship (in fact it would have been exulted in Hellenistic cultures). Bagoas was given to Alexander by Nabarzanes, that is the definition of a slave. Whether or not he felt that he raped Bagoas is irrelevant.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I meant the contemporary authors who wrote romantic stories about Alexander. They never mention Bagoas, who actually was an important figure in the life of Alexander. He played a more important role than any woman of Alexander, Roxana, Stateira or Barsine. Therefore, I have not left any other reason to regard them as homophobes and liars. They do not want to see the truth and introduce others astray.
As for the ancient authors, that Bagoas about a lot of references, not only Quintus Curtius wrote about it, too, Athenaeus, Arrian, Plutarch, Dicaearchus, Claudius Aelianus, and many others. They argue that Bagoas was the biggest passion of Alexander, while Hephaestion was his close friend, like brother. Women for Alexander was not something important, they were merely a political tool, as well, Roxanne is the only woman with whom he had a relationship, and then only for the sake of his son and heir. Ancient authors say that Alexander was surprisingly chaste towards women, and despised the sensual pleasures to such an extent that Olympia was afraid that Alexander will have no heirs.
With Bagoas the king had other relationships, he truly loved him and respected him. Bagoas not a slave and not a sex toy, he was intelligent and influential, he had a major influence on the policies of Alexander, to the extent that it is Bagoas decided whom to execute, and whom mercy. Is Roxanne or Stateira can show off so much power and king's confidence? No. But why modern writers choose exactly them as "love of life" of Alexander, what is really wrong. Because they have a modern look at the ancient era, where a woman was seen as a woman in labor, and the man as an object of love and romantic feelings.
At the expense of Mary Renault, she wrote a trilogy about Alexander, plus historical biography about him. She carefully describes the whole life of Alexander, not only his love with Bagoas. The Persian boy is the second book of the trilogy. In "funerary games" Bagoas also featured.
At the expense of Manfredi it greatly distorts the biography of Alexander, I would not want to criticize him, but other historians believe that the books Manfredi implausible and historically inaccurate. Whereas Mary Renault is very much true.
In the scientific and historical book by Professor Pierre Briant "Darius in the Shadow of Alexander " a lot of attention is paid to Bagoas, his relationship with Alexander and Darius. In many scientific books Bagoas is important, but in art in novels he is disregard. And it depresses me.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Plutarch...I forgot about his description is his "Lives". I have to agree with the fact that Alexander's women were just for the sake of political conquests via marriage or a few relationships with them. A few of Manfredi's characters are fictional indeed-he has written a great deal on the artist Apollonius and Alexander's mistress Campaspe/Pancaspe who some think is merely a symbol of a royal lover and not a person on the whole-but I should probably reserve judgments for Renault until I've read her work too.
She's more a writer in her skill while Manfredi's more the archaeologist and classicist. I can easily tell that from his narrative style-I have many of his books. They have their pros and their cons-and I think you've directed me towards a whole new reading list now. All I need to do is see if the books are available here! I can quite see how it depresses you. I for one am quite interested in the 10th AD Century Chola occupation era in Sri Lanka, while our main historical chronicle the Mahavamsa puts so much emphasis on the 1st Century BC king Dutugemunu that it really irks me to no end! Probably why I'm writing a story set in that time (1025 AD)
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
This is incredibly beautiful. Graceful, lovely Bagoas!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1