If sodomy/homosexuality was 'unmentionable' in the Middle Ages, how can we write its history?

Authors Avatar

If sodomy/homosexuality was ‘unmentionable’ in the Middle Ages, how can we write its history?

        The study of gender, specifically homosexuality, is a relatively new invention. Tied up in the rise of feminism and the documentation of females in history, as a tributary of this, is the study of homosexuality through the ages. This essay is therefore part of an ongoing field of relatively new study.

John Boswell, in my opinion clearly describes the difficulty of the study in such an “unexplored” area. Indeed, writers are often forced down “wrong paths” as well as “dead ends”. However the comfort lies in the knowledge that we have “opened trails” and “posted landmarks” so others can “reach destinations beyond his furthest advance”. 

        In order to answer this question, one needs to ascertain, clearly, what this question is demanding. Within this essay I am going to clearly define “homosexuality” and “sodomy” within the boundaries of the Middle Ages. Whether, it was “unmentionable” and to what extent this contributes to our ability to record its history. Of the evidence available to us, we must also deem its effectiveness, in enabling us to accurately access homosexuality in the Middle Ages.

        In this essay, I am going to argue, that, through the study of primary sources relating to the existence of homosexuality, we can, indeed, write its history.  However the evidence available to us is handicapped, by the fact that it is often written with the intention of pursuing, and even persecuting homosexuals.

 Of the secondary evidence available to us through the study largely of gender, again, caution is important. Often, the writing must be seen as promoting a particular point of view.

It is my belief that this essay will highlight three key issues. Firstly, the study of homosexuality in the middle ages is vital for the understanding of the evolution of gay culture.

Secondly, that what we term as homosexual in the Middle Ages varies enormously with today’s concepts of being gay. Indeed that the idea of being a homosexual is not applicable.

The third issue is that the study of any minority group with a history of repression and misunderstanding is difficult. However, as historians, the greatest disservice we can provide is to show the same intolerance and bigotry, which characterises their previous treatment. So, however “difficult” the study is, we have a duty to tell its story.

        In dealing with the subject of our question one must be clear in our terms. Clearly in both cannon law and theology, all forms of homoerotic relations were “indiscriminately labelled as sodomy” indeed the action was viewed as the most serious of crimes, punishable only by death. So, to be succinct in my writing, I shall refer to all acts of homosexuality, as sodomy.

        Here though, I must affirm that sodomy in the Middle Ages was also used to imply a number of different actions. These actions were grouped under crimes against nature, which were defined with varying degree of seriousness. With this clear however, evidence can be analysed for its implications and whether it relates explicitly to homosexuality.

        One’s starting point for attempting to write the history of homosexuality given its status as “unmentionable” in the middle ages, is best seen in relation to the Church. Michael Goodich argues, that, there is very little evidence pre eleventh century of condemnation of same sex relations. Through the eleventh and twelfth centuries “polemical lines were laid down” by the thirteenth centuries “secular law was mobilized in a war against heresy and sexual unconformity”. However, the will to “prosecute homosexuals……did not become evident until the fourteenth century”. 

        The church, up to the middle ages, had, in fact, been tackling other issues, which had been hindering its growth. Theologians however began to “associate heresy with sodomy”. The rejection of marriage, by heretical sects, Goodich argues, was proof enough for the Church of homosexuality existing. The Church began to insert measures to halt the rise of sodomy. At the council of Nablus in 1120 in response to the belief that Jerusalem was losing its morality, twenty-five laws were passed aimed at stemming the flow. For the “first time in medieval law the punishment for sodomy is burning”. Clearly we can see that the line in the church against homosexuals is hardening. They show us the “moral standards the compilers wanted to set”.Through the next century, the Church constantly maintained its position, that sodomy was a sin against nature. Indeed it was incorporated into the Decretals issued by Pope Gregory IX, which “remained the final legal word of the Church on the subject until the end of the Middle Ages”. 

Join now!

Though clearly the Church was against the sin against nature, it was curiously coy in what it deemed constituted this sin. So homosexuality became even more of a whispering charge. While people were left to interpret for themselves what was meant, so often it was implied what was meant, though not explicitly mentioned.

While the sin against nature is unclear so is what constituted sodomy. St. Antonius (1381-1451) clearly states sodomy as “a man with man, a women with a women.” While Saint Bernadine of Sienna writes one assumes inspired by Thomas Aquinas that sodomy was any act ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Here's what a teacher thought of this essay

Avatar

This essay is well written, makes a good argument and considers the nuances of the subject matter well. It is occasionally too colloquially written, and could be improved by using more formal language. 5 stars.