h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: Sodomy and Homosexuality in Medieval Europe - A7033510
Author: Elentari - U202814

Before anybody says it, yes, it does need some kind of concluding sentence. Any suggestions?

This looks fantastic

Only got time for a quick skim at present, but I'll come back for more!

Footnote 2 - except for the Greek Orthodox bits in the east?

Also, lesbianism - there is the fact this isn't explicitly proscribed anywhere in the Bible, isn't even mentioned in fact.

Cheers Trin, glad you like it!

I'll get on to those points!

Interesting historical article, I enjoyed reading it, well done.

Spotted a typo: (assuming that they were found guilty and hat the punishment was death by burning) hat should be that.

Maybe you could conclude with a comparison to modern day attitudes, that in some cases haven't changed e.g. female sodomy is still a criminal act, even between married, consenting couples.

Changes made, except that I haven't gone into modern attitudea and laws, it's a bit outside the scope of the entry.

Very well written and interesting. I remember reading once that the perjorative term 'faggot' refers to the practice of burning male homosexuals at the stake. Nice

Thanks! Interesting - I've never heard that but it makes sense.

"multitude of sins"

Not sure I like this - it assumes that a) homosexuality is a sin and b) we're religious enough to think that sins are bad things.

I'm not saying that you should remove it, but perhaps some sort of explanation for that and the other comment about sins, even if the explanation is 'at the time it was thought of as' etc perhaps move the section about the church up?

I think you need to move footnote three into the entry - if we need to read a footnote to understand what you mean then it shouldn't be a footnote. Unless I'm the only one who didn't recognise that word!

"There seems to have been generally less concern over lesbianism than male homosexuality, perhaps because it may have been perceived to be less common or because the authors of the works were men and so were naturally both more aware of and more troubled by male homosexuality."

This seems to be because without a penis, it's not really considered to be 'sex'. I've mentioned this in my sex entry. It's just a theory (not mine, although my experiences mean I agree with it).

Forgot to say I like this entry!

Interesting and well written Entry Elentari

Just a couple of minor points:

In the third paragraph you have "because" twice.

Paragraph above Header 'Legal attitudes to homosexuality and sodomy'
>"Religious figures of more importance may also have been gay"

Seems a bit odd to use the word gay here, where as homosexual is used throughout the rest of the Entry.

Emmily

You both make good points, I'll get on to them tomorrow.

<>

In what country, WA? I've never heard that.

Excellent entry, Elentari.

You must say how Edward was executed. Apparently a common punishment at the time.

You could mention Victoria's reaction to lesbianism - though of course much later - in that she refused to believe such a thing exsisted - and insisted that all reference was removed from the English Law.

Maybe because I only know about them from the victors, but it seems the manichean-style heretics of the Cathars & Albeginsians really believed all flesh was evil and thus reproducing was evil. Variations on non-reproductive sex, both homo- and het- were part of their beliefs.

The attitude of the church was perhaps not as monolithic as you present, because there is a history of rites that are quite likely to be interpreted as same-sex unions within the Catholic church during the times you report. There are times when the church was open about it, and times when it was more prosecutorial, as you can see if you look up Cathari or Albigensian in the Catholic Encyclopedia. (it's a wiki)

"In what country, WA? I've never heard that."

It was illegal here (UK) until recently - but is now apparently allowed, although I can't find the bit of legislation that supposedly fixed this.

It is still apparently against the law in some states in America, and for instance, Jamacia - although I found a website that says that the law on anal sex is only enforced in general between men, rather than men and women.

MacKay - I'm sure I read that there isn't really any proof that that is how Edward died - only one chronicler mentioned it, I think (though I may be wrong).

As I said, I'll get on to these pointws later, thanks for reviewing, everybody!

Perhaps that form of death remains the most famous, though, because it's in Marlowe's play. (Or it could be that the public just loves a good sensational story, like with Catherine the Great).

Very interesting article.
Many people believed that only the 'reciever' is the homosexual, when talking about male acts. This I believe was how the ancient Greeks viewed it, and is still viewed in certain parts of the world. Did the medieval church consider one or both partners homosexual?

Interesting point, I've got no idea. I don't think they really liked to go into that much detail!

All changes made, hopefully to everyone's satisfaction, except the comment made by Sea Change, which I will investigate further in the next few days.