Medieval Sex: For Procreation Only?

The Middle Ages are notorious as a time of ignorance, religious fervour and the repression of healthy human urges in the name of a higher purpose. So, it was basically straight people fumbling around in the dark whose only purpose was to produce a new tithe-paying generation, right? Well, perhaps in the minds of the voluntarily celibate members of religious orders that might have been the ideal, but in the real world of medieval society views were far more nuanced, even if there were those who disapproved of any open display of sexuality. The aim of this brief essay will be to take a tour around medieval Europe and analyse the evidence for sexual attitudes and activities amongst the different social classes. However, before beginning it is necessary to set some parameters.

The first thing to define is timescale. The Middle Ages are generally considered to cover the period spanning the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 476 CE (AD in 'old' time) to the year 1500 CE. This dating is arbitrary, and fails to consider the varying speed of social change in different regions, and the supposed rebirth of learning during the early Renaissance in Italy and Flanders (from, roughly, the late 14th Century CE). The Middle Ages are further divided into Early, High, and Late, a period of dating that respectively covers c. 500 CE to 1100 CE, 1100 CE to 1300/1350 CE, and 1350 CE to 1500 CE.

Without wanting to get into any tedious discussions about dating, it is necessary to describe these periods a little more. The Early Middle Ages can be considered to cover the low point following the fall of Rome, and it is often defined as the Dark Ages (though that name is falling into disuse). The High Middle Ages covers a period in which there was a flowering of high culture and scientific enquiry, in part due to increased contacts with other cultures. The High Middle Ages it is often seen as the 'classic' period of the Middle Ages, that of knights and castles, chivalry and romance. The High Middle Ages ended in famine and plague, and the Late Middle Ages which followed was a grimmer reaction to the disasters that had racked Europe, though the Late Middle Ages also saw the beginnings of the Renaissance and led to the world we inhabit today.

This essay will mostly focus on the High Middle Ages, with some discussion of the Late Middle Ages. The Early Middle Ages will largely be overlooked, in part due to a lack of evidence, but also to allow a greater focus on the latter period of pageantry and the literature that blossomed from the 12th Century. The four centuries (1100 -- 1500 CE) under examination should be enough to provide some pretty clear indications as to the state of thinking surrounding sex, however it must be noted before we begin that information regarding actual sexual practices is somewhat thin.

So much for time, but what of location. This essay will confine itself to Christian Europe, looking outside that region only when considering influences which altered the culture of Europe. Within Europe itself there were few differences based on nationality, and those that did exist were rather superficial. Rather, there were international classes -- royalty and nobility, churchmen, and the knightly class. These classes, who were joined by a growing merchant class, shared values and married (when they weren't celibate) across borders, all feeling superior to the lumpen mass of people who formed the lowest class, the peasantry, who also shared similar outlooks and values, despite rarely moving more than a day's walk from their birthplace.

It feels tediously repetitive to state, given the social world of my previous essays on historical sexual attitudes (Rome, the Vikings and Ancient Greece), but the medieval world was highly patriarchal. It was not, however, quite as patriarchal as the ancient world -- or at least, not patriarchal in the same way. Certainly, women still had to defer to men and marriages, at least amongst the elite, were mostly arranged. There were social conventions women could be shamed for stepping outside, and whilst men were also subject to similar conventions, they had a little more latitude. And there were issues around property ownership and inheritance that almost always favoured men.

However, from the High Middle Ages onwards we do start to hear women's voices, and we do start to see women with a certain amount of agency. Literature, too, accepted a certain amount of female agency, with men happily operating in those confines, whilst some women even found themselves able to be authors. There were even women rulers in some territories, though they were usually acting as regents. Woman also defended castles on behalf of their husbands, and there was, of course, St Joan of Arc.

But despite this, by and large men defined women's lives, and one institution defined women's lives above all others: the Church. Whilst the nobility and the knightly class, and increasingly the merchant class, were international social groups, the Church was an international organisation , with international rules, and whilst international it was also extremely local, present in every castle, street and hamlet, poking its nose into the affairs of kings and commoners alike.

Though the hierarchy of the Church became increasingly corrupted towards the end of the period we are examining, resulting in the Borgias and their ilk, illegitimate children with courtesans, excessive spending on luxury, and etc, in the High Middle Ages churchmen did, by and large, walk the walk as well as talk the talk. There had been a renewal of values in the Church at the end of the Early Middle Ages, and the result of this was that sexual expectations went 'back to basics'. This wasn't always a negative, but it did mean that there was a tightening of attitudes towards any laxity or freedom of action -- though the richer you were, the better the chance the Church would discreetly ignore your misbehaviour provided, of course, you were a man. Thus, we have the example of King Henry I of England (reigned 1100 -- 1135 CE) fathering 20 or more illegitimate children as well as two legitimate ones.

But even if you were a woman, the Church might actually be a help to you. It was possible that your priest might intervene on your behalf to exert some moral pressure on a wayward husband (if he was an ordinary person, not an anointed sovereign) to urge him to return to the faithful path. There were even instances where the Church mediated a separation in such circumstances, though an actual divorce was almost always out of the question if the marriage had been consummated. But it is necessary not to get carried away - this was a man's world, and the double-standard remained firmly in place: a 'lewd' woman might be whipped through the streets, a man might get a talking-to and a few extra prayers.

There were other sides to the organisation, too. Church attitudes towards prostitution might come as something of a surprise, despite the biblical prominence of Mary Magdalene. Rather than being thunderously damned prostitution was often tolerated, and Church thinkers put forward what sound like surprisingly modern notions of its social benefits (except for the sex workers themselves). In some areas the Church went so far as to license brothels and regulate sex workers. For example, in Southwark, London (south of the river that divides the city and thus outside the confines of the City of London itself), the Bishop of Winchester held the land and licensed every fun activity the medieval mind could come up with. It was here, later, that the first English theatres sprang up, also conveniently outside the control of the City of London, which was a municipality that tended towards the socially conservative.

The sex workers who inhabited this suburb were regarded as a necessary evil, and archaeology has provided some interesting evidence of the presence of sex workers. The author is, at the moment of writing, looking at a copy of an early 15th Century hat, propped up at the corner of the desk, and sporting a copy of a 'brothel badge' found in Southwark pinned to the hat band. Brothel badges mirrored pilgrim badges: pilgrims would often prominently wear a pewter badge advertising the saint whose shrine they were on pilgrimage to. Thus a brothel badge, also worn prominently, would announce the particular brothel that a man was on 'pilgrimage' to -- in this case The Winged Phallus. One wonders if such badges were handed out at the beginning of stag nights...

Where the Church didn't regulate brothels and sex work, municipalities would step in, and this was a pattern repeated across Europe. There was persecution surrounding sex work, but generally the sex workers themselves weren't the target. Instead, pimps and procurers might find themselves the targets of crackdowns, and in English law this distinction continues through to the modern day -- prostitution as such is not illegal, however living off the earnings of a sex worker, or maintaining a brothel is. Crackdowns might sometimes extend to the sex workers, however this was usually when they strayed from designated areas where prostitution was allowed: many English towns and cities went through a phase of renaming a Gropecunt Lane into something more decorous (Grape Lane was a common change), the original medieval names indicating their previous use as a zone of street prostitution.

One further medieval practice of heterosexual sex outside marriage is often mentioned, that of the droit de seigneur , or jus primae noctis : the right of a feudal lord to sexual relations with a woman from his lands on her wedding night. This practice is a staple of modern historical fiction, however actual references to this supposed right are post-feudal: there is nothing contemporary that speaks of feudal lords having any such legal power, and either it is pure myth or a later invention used to gloss over the general sexual exploitation of subordinate women as and when a lord might please. That such sexual violence occurred is obvious: across the whole continent of Europe, during a period of four centuries, there must have been examples of such behaviour. What we do not have is evidence to suggest it was systemic or validated in law or common practice.

Turning to homosexuality, we find much more repressive attitudes. Prior to the adoption of Christianity, the attitudes of Europeans towards homosexuality seem to have been far more laissez faire, provided a person was on top . The man on the bottom was viewed negatively, as the act of being penetrated was viewed as shameful and submissive (which is why women were regarded as inferior to men -- they were also penetrated, and thus they were submissive, a shameful state). Christianity changed that attitude into something far more hardline that lingers even to this day. From the Early Middle Ages onward male homosexuality was viewed in many places as a capital offence and a mortal sin, and there were cases of men being executed for engaging in homosexual acts, e.g. Giovanni di Giovanni and Richard Puller von Hohenburg.

Of course, this just meant that either gay men repressed their own sexual and emotional natures, or they went underground. However, there still are many examples of gay men from the period, and also those who were reputed to be gay as a means of political attack. Perhaps the most prominent of those accused or implied to be gay are two Kings of England, Richard I (the Lionheart) and Edward II. Richard (reigned 1189 -- 1199) supposedly had a love affair with King Philip Augustus of France, though the evidence is weak and partisan -- he is reported to have shared Philip's bed, but there are social reasons to suppose that no sexual acts took place: a bed was a very expensive piece of furniture, and to share one with a favoured guest would show their equal status (as would placing them on one's right-hand side at dinner).

Perhaps a clearer implication of Richard's preferences can be seen in his legendary relationship with the troubadour Blondel de Nesle -- the story goes that, when Richard was taken prisoner in on his way home from Crusade (he had really pissed off the Duke of Austria who then held him for ransom) Blondel, Richard's 'close friend', then went from castle to castle singing a song they both knew under the windows of towers until Richard heard him and sung the refrain. Thus, Richard was located. The story is not contemporary, however, and neither, probably, is the homosexual inference of their relationship.

One last piece of evidence for Richard's supposed homosexuality is that he produced no offspring with his wife Berengaria despite being married for nearly a decade. However, this evidence can easily be interpreted in different ways: maybe he was straight but simply didn't fancy her, or perhaps she was unable to have children. Richard certainly was able to father children as at least one illegitimate son, Philip of Cognac, is attributed to him. He was also recorded as having sexual relationships with women whilst on campaign, though there is also speculation that some confessions he made publicly referred to homosexual acts. In short, the jury is out, but he might just have been bisexual.

There is stronger evidence that King Edward II (reigned 1307 -- 1327) was gay -- he had what appears to be quite a submissive affair with a favourite, Piers Gaveston, and later may have had another submissive affair with Hugh Despenser. A last piece of evidence, albeit not quite contemporary, surrounds his murder with a red-hot iron being inserted into his arse due to his preference for being sodomised (and it would avoid leaving a mark). This probably didn't happen and suffocation would have done the job equally well, however that the story was circulated and seemingly believed suggests general knowledge of and belief in the Edward's sexual preferences, and ties in with what might be seen as a suitable death for such an 'offense'.

The repression of homosexuality was far more prevalent further down in society, and even with high profile supposedly gay men such as Leonardo da Vinci it was an 'offence' with the potential to be punished extremely harshly. An example of this can be seen in the belief that sodomy lay behind the outbreak of the Black Death (bubonic and pneumonic plague) in 1348/9. The Black Death killed up to half of the Eurasian population, a pandemic the like of which we haven't seen since. In an age of minimal science and maximum religious fervour, it is hardly a surprise to see 'moral' reasons advanced as the cause of the outbreak, with brutal executions such as that of Giovanni di Giovanni in Florence, and a particularly heavy judicial repression of gay men in Bruges.

Leonardo was the subject of anonymous accusations in Florence that he had a homosexual affair (along with three other men) with the artists' model and reputed male sex worker Jacopo Salterelli. The accusation was investigated, but went no further, even after it was repeated, due to it being anonymous. It may have also been discounted as one of Leonardo's fellow accused was a member of a very influential family in the city, and it is even possible that the accusation was levelled as a means of attacked that family (the Tornabuonis).

Such accusations of sodomy were a convenient legislative means to attack people. The most famous example of this can be seen in the suppression of the Knights Templar, primarily in France, in 1307. This Order, which was the pre-eminent military order (knights who took monastic vows but retained their military purpose), had acquired great wealth over the two centuries of their existence. The King of France, Philip the Fair, desired the Templar wealth and with a compliant Papacy, launched the suppression of the Templars. There were two main charges levied against the Order and its members: heresy and sodomy. Neither charge stands up to examination -- the charges of heresy involved outright rejection of Christianity rather than holding 'off-brand' beliefs, and whilst there may have been some gay members of the Templars, the charges alleged systemic homosexual practices.

Nevertheless, those members who had been arrested by the French authorities were convicted. Heresy trials in the Middle Ages were Kafkaesque in the extreme, the madness extending to any lawyer foolish enough to represent an accused and thus share in the guilt of any accused person. The impeccable logic was as follows: God is perfect, thus God's creation must be perfect, thus a false accusation cannot exist as it would be unable to exist in God's perfect creation, therefore accusation is proof because it must be true, and defending an obvious heretic means one is also a heretic. Good luck to anyone seeking to argue against this 'logic'. The French Templars, many of whom were the senior officers of the Order, went to the stake in 1314.

The repression of gay men continued throughout the period we are examining, and towards the end of the Middle Ages there were, for example, actions in Rome and Venice against Giulio Pomponio Leto, who ran an academy dedicated to the study of humanist literature. He was temporarily imprisoned in Venice, though he was later acquitted in Rome. His academy was briefly supressed, though he was finally able to continue teaching and resurrect his academy. There were many other cases, almost always resulting in a fine, and having examined the logic of the medieval judicial process it is clear that it was almost always better to admit guilt and pay some money rather than fight a losing battle and suffer a harsher penalty, regardless of actual guilt.

A definition of sodomy will be helpful here. Sodomy, to the medieval mind did include, but was not limited to, anal sex. Sodomy was a blanket term covering all same sex acts, and might also include heterosexual sex acts which were not carried out for the purposes of procreation. This factor is at the heart of medieval attitudes towards homosexuality -- according to Christian theology the sole justifiable purpose for sex was for procreation. Sex for pleasure was a sin, and sexual acts which could not result in procreation were sinful. Indeed, some theologians argued that oral sex was, in fact, even worse than anal sex. This logic was, therefore, behind medieval attitudes towards Lesbianism.

However, many medieval people often found it difficult to comprehend Lesbianism, largely because they found it difficult to understand the concept of sex without penetration. Nevertheless, as the age drew on attitudes hardened, and penances were brought in for those confessing lesbian acts. These penances were less severe than those for men confessing homosexual acts, but were also mirrored in hardening secular punishments for Lesbianism.

As a side note, we must note the difference in the meaning of 'confessing' here. When confession attracts penances, the confession is either to a priest in the confessional, which was protected by sacrament and could not be repeated or used against the person confessing in any way. Confession to an accusation in an ecclesiastical court could also result in penances. However, ecclesiastical courts could not impose physical punishments, and would always involve the secular authorities when such a punishment was desired.

Confession in a secular court could attract a range of punishments up to and including death. In the case of homosexuality the penalties for first offences gradually grew harsher, from fines to, at the end of the Middle Ages, castration in France, and various forms of mutilation elsewhere. Second or third offences would result in death for both men and women.

However, there were few examples of women suffering the ultimate penalty for homosexuality. Perhaps the best-known case was that of Katherina Hetzeldorfa in Speyer, Germany. Katherina was convicted of penetrating women with a strap-on dildo whilst posing as a man, and was judicially drowned in the Rhine. An important factor in her conviction was her use of an implement to penetrate the other women, a factor that led to further executions in France that fall just outside the time period that this essay covers. Other high-profile accusations of Lesbianism included one against the aristocrat Anna Sforza, though the accusation attracted no punishment.