The other day I was engaged in a triangular discussion with two friends
online which started when one forwarded me
this article about the late Professor
John Boswell of Yale's
The Marriage of Likeness: Same-Sex Unions in Pre-Modern Europe published in 1994, the year in which he died.
I
have a copy of the Boswell book somewhere, though I have never got
around to reading
it fully. I recall that when it came out critics said it was very
interesting - but, and it is a very important "but" - that their main
point seemed to be that the unions he describes were matters of
"friendship" or "brotherhood", and
not "marriage" - i.e. non-sexual compacts.
Other examples of such pacts are recorded - Maurice Keen has a
fascinating article
on two early fifteenth century English knights agreeing a business
partnership (shares in
ransoms and prizes etc) as brothers-in arms rather on those lines. We
may well not make sufficient allowance for the existence and forms of
friendship and its impacty on medieval and early modern people simply
because today we have only partial evidence.
Equally historians with a contemporary agenda may find themselves
writing about what are in essence present issues in their work on the
past, or indeed go looking for evidence of what they want to believe
happened, not what did happen.
In particular in Boswell's book there does also appear to have been a misunderstanding of what are mainly Eastern Orthodox liturgies - a point made by modern Orthodox commentators.
There is a good demolition job of the Boswell thesis which can be read
here.
What is perhaps surprising is that eighteen years after its publication the Boswell book, despite very serious criticism of its argument and use of evidence, is still being cited by advocates of same-sex marriage as though its conclusions were unchallenged and incontrovertible.
3 comments:
Yes, Prof Boswell rip began the current fashion of reading all male friendships in history as at least potentially homosexual-- St Aelred, pray for us!-- and the sad fact is that a great number of academics don't really care about the truth of their hypotheses, just their susceptibility to publication.
Astonishing that one of Oxford's own - recently ennobled - saw fit to promote this guff on one of his social network profiles. So much for the rigours of academe.
Robin Darling Young (who is mentioned in the piece linked) did an excellent job of debunking Boswell in First Things some years back - see HERE.
Here is another solid repudiation (in charity) of John Boswell by a fine Catholic apologist, Jimmy Akin.
Click on his link.
Post a Comment