Perry on Masterson, 'Man to Man: Desire, Homosociality, and Authority in Late-Roman Manhood'

H-Law Perry on Masterson, 'Man to Man: Desire, Homosociality, and Authority in Late-Roman Manhood'

Review published on Saturday, April 25, 2015

Mark Masterson. Man to Man: Desire, Homosociality, and Authority in Late-Roman Manhood. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 2014. 272 pp. $62.95 (cloth), ISBN 978-0-8142-1268-4; $62.95 (e-book), ISBN 978-0-8142-7352-4; $14.95 (cd), ISBN 978-0-8142-9372-0.

Reviewed by Matthew Perry (John Jay College, CUNY)Published on H-Law (April, 2015) Commissioned by Michael J. Pfeifer

Desire, Homosociality, and Authority in Late-Roman Manhood

Mark Masterson’s Man to Man: Desire, Homosociality, and Authority in Late-Roman Manhood is a bold and thought-provoking look at constructions of masculinity in the fourth-century CE Roman world, and the various ways in which representations of same-sex desire and pleasure played a role. The foundation of Masterson’s analysis is the concept of “homosociality,” which encompasses the social connections between men, including, but not limited to, sexual relations.[1] “Displacing the anachronistic and not to be crossed frontier separating homosexuality from heterosexuality, homosociality proposes a terrain that includes a range of intertwining/overlapping social relationships: hostility, cooperation, friendship, and erotic relations” (p. 11). Masterson believes that this is a useful framework for elite male society in the late Roman world. Even more importantly, he finds that, within this homosocial milieu, men frequently used the discourse of same-sex attractiveness and desire to express admiration, portray friendship, and demonstrate personal authority.

What makes this a particularly intriguing topic of study is not only legal prohibitions regulating sexual acts between men but also perspicuous opinions throughout late ancient sources that label same-sex desire as unmanly. The most striking example is an imperial ruling condemning men who allow themselves to be sexually penetrated (who are described as using their male body in a womanly fashion) to be executed by means of public burning. Masterson believes that modern scholars have too often accepted these laws and attitudes as definitive, and thus have failed to recognize the significance of the discourse of same-sex desire within homosocial elite society.

It is important to note that this is not a book about the regulation of sexual activity in the late ancient world, or about Roman law and society more broadly. After briefly outlining the legal framework, Masterson focuses on the power of ostensibly transgressive discourse. The focus of his study is how authors used expressions of same-sex attraction and longing, which alluded to behavior deemed both distasteful and criminal, as a means to express friendship, admiration, and respect.

To explore the relationship between same-sex desire and masculine authority, Masterson engages in close readings of a diverse set of late-ancient writings, where he uncovers a variety of overt and covert references. His analysis of the underlying assumptions and meanings of this discourse relies heavily on intertextuality, which in turn rests on a necessary foundation of paideia. Paideia refers to

Citation: H-Net Reviews. Perry on Masterson, 'Man to Man: Desire, Homosociality, and Authority in Late-Roman Manhood'. H-Law. 04-29-2015. https://networks.h-net.org/node/16794/reviews/68367/perry-masterson-man-man-desire-homosociality-and-authority-late-roman Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. 1 H-Law the years-long training in literature, rhetoric, and philosophy that was at the center of elite intellectual and political culture. Given the thoroughness and pervasiveness of this education, authors could quote, reference, or allude to an earlier canonical work with the realistic assumption that readers would make the connection. Reading between the texts in such a way creates another level of meaning, and many modern scholars have stressed the value of studying the intertextuality of Roman sources. This is the methodological footing upon which Masterson builds his study.

The book consists of an extensive introduction and three chapters, each of which focuses principally on one late antique text. The introduction begins by establishing the significance ofpaideia , intertextuality, and homosociality in the late Roman world through the use of two elite case studies: Nummius Aemilianus Dexter and Paulinus of Nola. Masterson then proceeds to outline the seemingly paradoxical relationship between male same-sex desire and masculine authority that underlies his study. Despite the fact that Roman law increasingly condemned and punished men who allowed themselves to be sexually penetrated, elite authors often used the trope of sexual attractiveness to illustrate a man’s worthiness (auctoritas or axiōma).

Chapter 1 explores how the Emperor Julian used same-sex attractiveness to depict Marcus Aurelius’s connection to the transcendent in theCaesares . In this portrait, the author described Marcus Aurelius as possessing an irresistible/uncanny beauty (kallos amēchanon). Masterson contends that this description is intertextual with Plato’s Symposium and Charmides, both of which valorize male same-sex relations that are at odds with contemporary Roman values. Drawing on ancient analyses of mythic tales, he asserts that “the late-ancient defense of myths not only tolerates the disjunction between surface aspect (obscenity) and asserted values (sanctity) of the myths, but finds this disjunction a choice indicator of the transcendent” (p. 63). This is grounded in the belief that paradox and incongruity indicate value and profundity. Indeed, Julian himself expressed similar ideas in his work Against Heracleius. Masterson concludes that masculine worthiness grows through paradoxical association with same-sex desire and pleasure.

The second chapter continues the examination of late antique representations of the transcendent by analyzing the Vita Antonii (Life of Antony) by Athanasius. Here Masterson notes the virtual absence of any discussion—positive or negative—regarding same-sex desire in the work, which he believes that contemporary readers aware of the homosocial realities would have noticed. He asserts that “awareness of the reasonable assumption that homosocial environments, especially if sealed, will increase the incidence of same-sex desire and same-sex sexual behavior causes the surface of the vita to give way to reveal the presence of same-sex desire in a complex of physical symptoms,” which include his famous wrestling match with the devil (p. 92). From this it follows that Athanasius, instead of linking enigmatic mystery and the transcendent, separated the two, relegating mystery—and all that he regarded as immoral—to the earthly world. Masterson then provides a detailed analysis of the association of sexual desire and the material (and sinful) body appearing in other writings by Athanasius.

The final chapter considers the portraits of the Emperors Constantius and Julian in Ammianus Marcellinus’s Res Gestae (History). Once again, Masterson finds same-sex desire and attractiveness linked to masculine (and in this case imperial) authority via the idea of transcendence. Ammianus, like Athanasius, moralized transcendence, but here the key factor is the presence of civility—being respectful of the laws and the limits of one’s power. “Ammianus intimately connects the failure of

Citation: H-Net Reviews. Perry on Masterson, 'Man to Man: Desire, Homosociality, and Authority in Late-Roman Manhood'. H-Law. 04-29-2015. https://networks.h-net.org/node/16794/reviews/68367/perry-masterson-man-man-desire-homosociality-and-authority-late-roman Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. 2 H-Law civility in Constantius with physical manifestations that pull him down to earth and eventually lead to a reader’s perception of a desire in the emperor to be sexually penetrated” (p. 156). Masterson asserts that just as same-sex desire can be sublimated to communicate masculine majesty and greatness, it can be desublimated, leaving only unacceptable sexual craving.

All primary source material quoted in the book appears in English. In cases where Masterson believes the Latin or Greek to be useful, individual words and shorter phrases are included parenthetically in the translation whereas longer passages are placed in footnotes.

Man to Man is a creative and erudite study of masculinity in the late Roman world that is sure to provoke further contemplation and discussion among readers. This book will certainly be of interest not only to those scholars interested in the study of gender and sexuality but also to those interested more broadly in the intellectual culture of the late Roman world.

Note

[1]. The term “homosocial,” which was popularized by the gender and queer theorist Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick, was crafted as an analog to the term “homosexual.”

Printable Version: http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showpdf.php?id=42728

Citation: Matthew Perry. Review of Masterson, Mark,Man to Man: Desire, Homosociality, and Authority in Late-Roman Manhood. H-Law, H-Net Reviews. April, 2015.URL: http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=42728

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.