What do you think?
Rate this book
Forbidden Desire in Early Modern Europe: Male-Male Sexual Relations, 1400-1750
A landmark study of the history of male-male sex in early modern Europe, including the European colonies and the Ottoman world.
Until quite recently, the history of male-male sexual relations was a taboo topic. But when historians eventually explored the archives of Florence, Venice and elsewhere, they brought to light an extraordinary world of early modern sexual activity, extending from city streets and gardens to taverns, monasteries and Mediterranean galleys. Typically, the sodomites (as they were called) were adult men seeking sex with teenage boys. This was something intriguingly different from modern the boys ceased to be desired when they became fully masculine. And the desire for them was seen as natural; no special sexual orientation was assumed.
The rich evidence from Southern Europe in the Renaissance period was not matched in the Northern lands; historians struggled to apply this new knowledge to countries such as England or its North American colonies. And when good Northern evidence did appear, from after 1700, it presented a very different picture. So the theory was formed - and it has dominated most standard accounts until now - that the 'emergence of modern homosexuality' happened suddenly, but inexplicably, at the beginning of the eighteenth century.
Noel Malcolm's masterly study solves this and many other problems, by doing something which no previous scholar has giving a truly pan-European account of the whole phenomenon of male-male sexual relations in the early modern period. It includes the Ottoman Empire, as well as the European colonies in the Americas and Asia; it describes the religious and legal norms, both Christian and Muslim; it discusses the literary representations in both Western Europe and the Ottoman world; and it presents a mass of individual human stories, from New England to North Africa, from Scandinavia to Peru. Original, critical, lucidly written and deeply researched, this work will change the way we think about the history of homosexuality in early modern Europe.
Until quite recently, the history of male-male sexual relations was a taboo topic. But when historians eventually explored the archives of Florence, Venice and elsewhere, they brought to light an extraordinary world of early modern sexual activity, extending from city streets and gardens to taverns, monasteries and Mediterranean galleys. Typically, the sodomites (as they were called) were adult men seeking sex with teenage boys. This was something intriguingly different from modern the boys ceased to be desired when they became fully masculine. And the desire for them was seen as natural; no special sexual orientation was assumed.
The rich evidence from Southern Europe in the Renaissance period was not matched in the Northern lands; historians struggled to apply this new knowledge to countries such as England or its North American colonies. And when good Northern evidence did appear, from after 1700, it presented a very different picture. So the theory was formed - and it has dominated most standard accounts until now - that the 'emergence of modern homosexuality' happened suddenly, but inexplicably, at the beginning of the eighteenth century.
Noel Malcolm's masterly study solves this and many other problems, by doing something which no previous scholar has giving a truly pan-European account of the whole phenomenon of male-male sexual relations in the early modern period. It includes the Ottoman Empire, as well as the European colonies in the Americas and Asia; it describes the religious and legal norms, both Christian and Muslim; it discusses the literary representations in both Western Europe and the Ottoman world; and it presents a mass of individual human stories, from New England to North Africa, from Scandinavia to Peru. Original, critical, lucidly written and deeply researched, this work will change the way we think about the history of homosexuality in early modern Europe.
608 pages, Hardcover
Published April 25, 2024
26 people are currently reading
270 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
June 7, 2025
Today I read The Guardian’s review of this book and encountered this gem:
Original article is here:
https://www.theguardian.com/books/202...
Real Rating: 4.25* of five
The Publisher Says: A landmark study of the history of male-male sex in early modern Europe, including the European colonies and the Ottoman world.
Until quite recently, the history of male-male sexual relations was a taboo topic. But when historians eventually explored the archives of Florence, Venice and elsewhere, they brought to light an extraordinary world of early modern sexual activity, extending from city streets and gardens to taverns, monasteries and Mediterranean galleys. Typically, the sodomites (as they were called) were adult men seeking sex with teenage boys. This was something intriguingly different from modern the boys ceased to be desired when they became fully masculine. And the desire for them was seen as natural; no special sexual orientation was assumed.
The rich evidence from Southern Europe in the Renaissance period was not matched in the Northern lands; historians struggled to apply this new knowledge to countries such as England or its North American colonies. And when good Northern evidence did appear, from after 1700, it presented a very different picture. So the theory was formed—and it has dominated most standard accounts until now—that the 'emergence of modern homosexuality' happened suddenly, but inexplicably, at the beginning of the eighteenth century.
Noel Malcolm's masterly study solves this and many other problems, by doing something which no previous scholar has giving a truly pan-European account of the whole phenomenon of male-male sexual relations in the early modern period. It includes the Ottoman Empire, as well as the European colonies in the Americas and Asia; it describes the religious and legal norms, both Christian and Muslim; it discusses the literary representations in both Western Europe and the Ottoman world; and it presents a mass of individual human stories, from New England to North Africa, from Scandinavia to Peru. Original, critical, lucidly written and deeply researched, this work will change the way we think about the history of homosexuality in early modern Europe.
I RECEIVED A DRC FROM THE PUBLISHER VIA EDELWEISS+. THANK YOU.
My Review: Deeply researched, plentifully sourced and attributed...and as that would lead you to understand, it's an academic work. It isn't a browsing book, it's a studying book. I took over a year to read it. I wanted to do it justice, to focus on its theses, so I took my time.
I ended up surprised at some of Malcolm's conclusions, as one would hope to be the case in a scholarly work. His firm opinion that English buggery was simply not as common as the Mediterranean practice was specifically stated to include James I of England. He contends that the social conventions of male friendship then prevailing adequately explain His Majesty's somewhat fervent correspondence with his favorites. This is carefully hedged by explaining that, absent proof, it's reasonable to accept that we simply do not know with certainty what occurred at this distance in time.
How useful is it to go looking for ancestors of modern queer identities in the past? Where there are records, they are almost always legal ones, of prosecutions for offenses. Can that in any useful way be extrapolated to indicate broader trends of sexual activity? Is sexual activity actually a useful measure of a person's emotional inner life? What do we mean by "queer" or "gay" or "bisexual?" I know of my own personal knowledge men who have sex with other men exclusively, who reject any "queer" identity.
It's the identity, you'll note, that's being rejected. Malcolm contends that it's "the Mediterranean model" of pederastic sodomy that was absent in northern climes, not men having sex with other men. It's a contention that I think bears very serious consideration. If many men in the Mediterranean committed sodomy as their legitimate access to sexual release, given how late (compared to more northerly climes) they married, are they in any meaningful way "queer?" Or just horny, and unwilling to risk syphilis (fatal then) by using a female sex worker?
A book that treats its topic with bracing and refreshing unwillingness to bow to fashion while still refusing to stray far from its evidentiary base is a rare thing indeed. One that is carefully analytical of the terms used in the past and their intersection, or lack of intersection, with modern understandings of identity, is rare and precious.
Not a casual read but a profoundly informative and essential one for gay men, or those who wish to comprehend history's limits in identity politics.
“In case you wonder why Christian Europe was so tightly clenched against intrusion, Malcolm mentions an abstruse psychological hang-up known as “xenohomophobia”: men who opted for a passive role in sex were considered treacherous because their preference signalled “religious and military penetrability”. Perhaps the mad metaphor can be stretched to explain Trump’s border wall, designed as a protective plug for one of America’s orifices.
Original article is here:
https://www.theguardian.com/books/202...
Real Rating: 4.25* of five
The Publisher Says: A landmark study of the history of male-male sex in early modern Europe, including the European colonies and the Ottoman world.
Until quite recently, the history of male-male sexual relations was a taboo topic. But when historians eventually explored the archives of Florence, Venice and elsewhere, they brought to light an extraordinary world of early modern sexual activity, extending from city streets and gardens to taverns, monasteries and Mediterranean galleys. Typically, the sodomites (as they were called) were adult men seeking sex with teenage boys. This was something intriguingly different from modern the boys ceased to be desired when they became fully masculine. And the desire for them was seen as natural; no special sexual orientation was assumed.
The rich evidence from Southern Europe in the Renaissance period was not matched in the Northern lands; historians struggled to apply this new knowledge to countries such as England or its North American colonies. And when good Northern evidence did appear, from after 1700, it presented a very different picture. So the theory was formed—and it has dominated most standard accounts until now—that the 'emergence of modern homosexuality' happened suddenly, but inexplicably, at the beginning of the eighteenth century.
Noel Malcolm's masterly study solves this and many other problems, by doing something which no previous scholar has giving a truly pan-European account of the whole phenomenon of male-male sexual relations in the early modern period. It includes the Ottoman Empire, as well as the European colonies in the Americas and Asia; it describes the religious and legal norms, both Christian and Muslim; it discusses the literary representations in both Western Europe and the Ottoman world; and it presents a mass of individual human stories, from New England to North Africa, from Scandinavia to Peru. Original, critical, lucidly written and deeply researched, this work will change the way we think about the history of homosexuality in early modern Europe.
I RECEIVED A DRC FROM THE PUBLISHER VIA EDELWEISS+. THANK YOU.
My Review: Deeply researched, plentifully sourced and attributed...and as that would lead you to understand, it's an academic work. It isn't a browsing book, it's a studying book. I took over a year to read it. I wanted to do it justice, to focus on its theses, so I took my time.
I ended up surprised at some of Malcolm's conclusions, as one would hope to be the case in a scholarly work. His firm opinion that English buggery was simply not as common as the Mediterranean practice was specifically stated to include James I of England. He contends that the social conventions of male friendship then prevailing adequately explain His Majesty's somewhat fervent correspondence with his favorites. This is carefully hedged by explaining that, absent proof, it's reasonable to accept that we simply do not know with certainty what occurred at this distance in time.
How useful is it to go looking for ancestors of modern queer identities in the past? Where there are records, they are almost always legal ones, of prosecutions for offenses. Can that in any useful way be extrapolated to indicate broader trends of sexual activity? Is sexual activity actually a useful measure of a person's emotional inner life? What do we mean by "queer" or "gay" or "bisexual?" I know of my own personal knowledge men who have sex with other men exclusively, who reject any "queer" identity.
It's the identity, you'll note, that's being rejected. Malcolm contends that it's "the Mediterranean model" of pederastic sodomy that was absent in northern climes, not men having sex with other men. It's a contention that I think bears very serious consideration. If many men in the Mediterranean committed sodomy as their legitimate access to sexual release, given how late (compared to more northerly climes) they married, are they in any meaningful way "queer?" Or just horny, and unwilling to risk syphilis (fatal then) by using a female sex worker?
A book that treats its topic with bracing and refreshing unwillingness to bow to fashion while still refusing to stray far from its evidentiary base is a rare thing indeed. One that is carefully analytical of the terms used in the past and their intersection, or lack of intersection, with modern understandings of identity, is rare and precious.
Not a casual read but a profoundly informative and essential one for gay men, or those who wish to comprehend history's limits in identity politics.
May 26, 2024
How was "homosexuality" viewed originally in the Muslim world? It seems to be one of those things on which authors cannot agree. Much depends on what sources are looked at. One authorial view is that "homosexuality" did not exist. The term was not known, of course. Imposing the term simply causes confusion. Homosexuality was not condemned -- penetration was. And the active role was acceptable whereas the passive role was illegal. Penetration was male, aggressive, and weaponised. Therefore ok. Another authorial view, based on literature, takes a much softer approach to the whole matter and hardly faces the conflict between sodomy and Islam. Malcolm's book is a rather odd affair. It quietly offers itself as a correction to Edward Said. For him, Orientalism was a matter of the gaze: Western eyes turned the Orient into a world of depravity. Europe projected its own sins onto a different culture, to create a fascinating and despised Other. Malcolm takes a contrary view, arguing that there is enough evidence by Muslim writers to justify the accusation of sexual excess. Said's view is a simplification. Malcom's contra-thesis is valid and intelligently explained. Less valid, however, is the view that Malcolm presents of "forbidden desire."
The book starts off in a human way. It describes the love between two men. There is a sense that they were in love, had an emotional connection, and were punished for a bond they shared. After this, however, the book turns to factual evidence. And where do all the statistics come from? Legal trials. Quickly, the reader is lost in a mass of numbers that have nothing much to say about "forbidden desire" at all. At the centre of the debate is literature for this records feelings. Malcolm, however, seems to have little interest in what people actually wrote. Bizarrely, the chapter on literature is confined to Europe. Abu Nuwas, the great poet of wine and lover of boys, is relegated to a section on Islamic jurisprudence! Though Malcom is keen to take evidence from within Islam to demonstrate its depravity, he is less keen to take the same literary evidence to flesh out the emotions of "forbidden desire." Ultimately, I found this a pedantic and dull book with flashes of insight.
The book starts off in a human way. It describes the love between two men. There is a sense that they were in love, had an emotional connection, and were punished for a bond they shared. After this, however, the book turns to factual evidence. And where do all the statistics come from? Legal trials. Quickly, the reader is lost in a mass of numbers that have nothing much to say about "forbidden desire" at all. At the centre of the debate is literature for this records feelings. Malcolm, however, seems to have little interest in what people actually wrote. Bizarrely, the chapter on literature is confined to Europe. Abu Nuwas, the great poet of wine and lover of boys, is relegated to a section on Islamic jurisprudence! Though Malcom is keen to take evidence from within Islam to demonstrate its depravity, he is less keen to take the same literary evidence to flesh out the emotions of "forbidden desire." Ultimately, I found this a pedantic and dull book with flashes of insight.
December 2, 2025
---- Update ----
4 stars might appear quite generous when it comes to my reading experience, but too critical concerning the authors scholarly achievement.
In the beginning the author states that he wants to avoid the term homosexual(ity) as it reflects a modern understanding of persons with a certain identity based on their sexual behavior. Then he presents a lot of empirical material from the Ottoman Empire and early modern Italy (in particular Venice, Florence and Lucca) which bears witness to the frequency of male-male sexual contacts, which where, however, always concomitant with an age difference, which included that the younger one played the passive part. He refers as well to the Iberian peninsula and Southern France where similar patterns could be found, but less frequently. He then discusses that this pattern existed although male-male sexual activities were condemned theologically, and in principle punishable, even with the death penalty when it comes to sexual acts including penetration. In practice, however, condemnations were rare and theologians and lawyers formulated conditions for harsh punishments, which mitigated the legal practice considerably. Malcolm emphasizes the - well known fact - that both the legal and theological condemnation were directed against "somomic" acts, not against personal identities. As opposed to that he demonstrates in his analyis of poetry and fiction from the period that people were well aware that some men were not at all interested in sex with women.
People in other parts of Europe associated "sodomy" to a large degree with the Ottoman Empire and Italy. In his analysis of the evidence from Northwestern Europe Malcolm highlights that evidence - primarily from legal documents - for male-male sexual activity is much rarer in North-Western than in Mediterranean Europe. Earlier this has been ascribed to the harsh punishment, but as Malcolm shows, courts were reluctant to apply the death penalty.
Following earlier research Malcolm then highlights that around 1700 a decisive shift seems to have occurred in particular in London, but also in Paris and Amsterdam*. Male interested in male-male sex began to meet in special locations and adopted a specific behavior/ rituals. An age difference and the division between the active and the passive part played no role at all. Something like a "gay" identity and subculture seem to appear. They were, however, on the margin of society.
First after all this has been presented, Malcolm begins to make his arguments. The evidence for male-male sexual relations to be merely considered as acts appears to be overwhelming as opposed to the - primarily fiction and poetry based - evidence for men exclusively interested in sex with men. It has been argued (by Foucault and followers) that the emergence of something resembling a gay identity around 1700 resulted in the imposition and adaptation of identities derived from the enlightenment tendency to categorize everything. As opposed to that Malcolm argued that men exclusively interested in male-male sex always existed. On both sides of a divide that did not along the Islam/Christianity but along the Mediterranean/ Northwest European** divide this had very different consequences. In the south, these men simply disappeared in the common practice to have sex with younger males.
This divide can according to Malcolm not be explained with attitudes to male-male sex. Instead it reflects the consequences of marriage patterns. Whereas women North of the divide married in their early-mid twenties, men in their mid-late twenties, girls were married off in late puberty South of the divide, while man often first married in their thirties.*** Hence the lack of available female sex partners for many men created a market for the described form of male-male contacts in which men only interested in men could easily mingle. But Malcolm also emphasizes that this seems to be the primary factor, not the only one. The cultural glorification of the beautiful young male, facilitated the continuation of this practice by married men.
Had Malcolm stated in the beginning of his book, which research problem he addresses it would have been much easier for the reader to see a red thread in the mass of material he presents from right from the start. Because he did not do so, the first 236 pages are often a rather tenacious to read, although many of the examples he presents are quite interesting and surprising.
I have focused of the main line of the book. It contains also a longer digression on colonial societies and a shorter one on Russia. Malcolm plausibly justifies leaving out female-female sex as this would have to be studied under different premises, and short digressions would be pure tokenism.
*Surprise, surprise. Well, Berlin, Zürich and Copenhagen were rather provincial towns back then.
** Remarkably the Protestant/ Catholic divide appears to have been hardly relevant.
*** [Update 01.12.2025] I ask myself whether the failed arranged marriage of 30 old Paris with Julia Capulet might be evidence for the awareness of this different pattern in Elizabethan England.
4 stars might appear quite generous when it comes to my reading experience, but too critical concerning the authors scholarly achievement.
In the beginning the author states that he wants to avoid the term homosexual(ity) as it reflects a modern understanding of persons with a certain identity based on their sexual behavior. Then he presents a lot of empirical material from the Ottoman Empire and early modern Italy (in particular Venice, Florence and Lucca) which bears witness to the frequency of male-male sexual contacts, which where, however, always concomitant with an age difference, which included that the younger one played the passive part. He refers as well to the Iberian peninsula and Southern France where similar patterns could be found, but less frequently. He then discusses that this pattern existed although male-male sexual activities were condemned theologically, and in principle punishable, even with the death penalty when it comes to sexual acts including penetration. In practice, however, condemnations were rare and theologians and lawyers formulated conditions for harsh punishments, which mitigated the legal practice considerably. Malcolm emphasizes the - well known fact - that both the legal and theological condemnation were directed against "somomic" acts, not against personal identities. As opposed to that he demonstrates in his analyis of poetry and fiction from the period that people were well aware that some men were not at all interested in sex with women.
People in other parts of Europe associated "sodomy" to a large degree with the Ottoman Empire and Italy. In his analysis of the evidence from Northwestern Europe Malcolm highlights that evidence - primarily from legal documents - for male-male sexual activity is much rarer in North-Western than in Mediterranean Europe. Earlier this has been ascribed to the harsh punishment, but as Malcolm shows, courts were reluctant to apply the death penalty.
Following earlier research Malcolm then highlights that around 1700 a decisive shift seems to have occurred in particular in London, but also in Paris and Amsterdam*. Male interested in male-male sex began to meet in special locations and adopted a specific behavior/ rituals. An age difference and the division between the active and the passive part played no role at all. Something like a "gay" identity and subculture seem to appear. They were, however, on the margin of society.
First after all this has been presented, Malcolm begins to make his arguments. The evidence for male-male sexual relations to be merely considered as acts appears to be overwhelming as opposed to the - primarily fiction and poetry based - evidence for men exclusively interested in sex with men. It has been argued (by Foucault and followers) that the emergence of something resembling a gay identity around 1700 resulted in the imposition and adaptation of identities derived from the enlightenment tendency to categorize everything. As opposed to that Malcolm argued that men exclusively interested in male-male sex always existed. On both sides of a divide that did not along the Islam/Christianity but along the Mediterranean/ Northwest European** divide this had very different consequences. In the south, these men simply disappeared in the common practice to have sex with younger males.
This divide can according to Malcolm not be explained with attitudes to male-male sex. Instead it reflects the consequences of marriage patterns. Whereas women North of the divide married in their early-mid twenties, men in their mid-late twenties, girls were married off in late puberty South of the divide, while man often first married in their thirties.*** Hence the lack of available female sex partners for many men created a market for the described form of male-male contacts in which men only interested in men could easily mingle. But Malcolm also emphasizes that this seems to be the primary factor, not the only one. The cultural glorification of the beautiful young male, facilitated the continuation of this practice by married men.
Had Malcolm stated in the beginning of his book, which research problem he addresses it would have been much easier for the reader to see a red thread in the mass of material he presents from right from the start. Because he did not do so, the first 236 pages are often a rather tenacious to read, although many of the examples he presents are quite interesting and surprising.
I have focused of the main line of the book. It contains also a longer digression on colonial societies and a shorter one on Russia. Malcolm plausibly justifies leaving out female-female sex as this would have to be studied under different premises, and short digressions would be pure tokenism.
*Surprise, surprise. Well, Berlin, Zürich and Copenhagen were rather provincial towns back then.
** Remarkably the Protestant/ Catholic divide appears to have been hardly relevant.
*** [Update 01.12.2025] I ask myself whether the failed arranged marriage of 30 old Paris with Julia Capulet might be evidence for the awareness of this different pattern in Elizabethan England.
Read
February 20, 2024Regular users of social media may be aware that the peach emoji is used to indicate not only the fruit in question but also the buttocks. This metaphor is not new. It was used in the middle of the 16th century by Francesco Berni, a Florentine poet, who assured his readers that the fruit was ‘good at the front and perfect from behind’. While drawing such modern parallels is tempting, it also presents dangers for the historian. This is particularly true for the history of sex between men, where so many sources derive either from the prosecution of illegal acts, or from literary texts that were by necessity often coded.
One of the most thought-provoking books I have read in some time, Forbidden Desires is an ambitious comparative study of sex between men in the Mediterranean and northern Europe. Its argument unfolds in a very readable narrative: this is a rare academic book for which I must tell you that my review contains spoilers. From the starting point of a scandalous case of sodomy in the household of the senior Venetian official in 16th-century Constantinople, Noel Malcolm first compares patterns of sex between men in the eastern and western Mediterranean, before asking whether these also prevailed in northern Europe.
The Mediterranean half of the story is relatively straightforward. Synthesising a large body of research based on legal codes, court cases (both secular and ecclesiastical) and literary sources, Malcolm paints a convincing picture of a broad Mediterranean pattern of sex between men. In both the Ottoman Empire and the western Mediterranean (strictly speaking Iberia and Italy, because the study does not take in the south of France, nor the Maghreb), this consisted of illegal but nonetheless relatively common sexual relations between men under 30 and ‘beardless youths’. Those whose sex lives sat outside this pederastic model faced much harsher condemnation, both legally and socially (the ‘inveterate sodomite’, for example, who kept having sex with men after his marriage, or the older man who took the passive role in sex). This pattern has its variations: there was a more open literary culture around love for boys in the Ottoman texts than in the Italian, while Italy (especially Florence) seems to have had a wider sodomitical culture than Iberia. Malcolm has little time for scholars who dismiss European travellers’ accounts of Ottoman sexual practices as only Orientalist fantasies, pointing out that the Ottoman sources provide ample confirmation of a real-life phenomenon.
Read the rest of the review at HistoryToday.com.
Catherine Fletcher is Professor of History at Manchester Metropolitan University.
One of the most thought-provoking books I have read in some time, Forbidden Desires is an ambitious comparative study of sex between men in the Mediterranean and northern Europe. Its argument unfolds in a very readable narrative: this is a rare academic book for which I must tell you that my review contains spoilers. From the starting point of a scandalous case of sodomy in the household of the senior Venetian official in 16th-century Constantinople, Noel Malcolm first compares patterns of sex between men in the eastern and western Mediterranean, before asking whether these also prevailed in northern Europe.
The Mediterranean half of the story is relatively straightforward. Synthesising a large body of research based on legal codes, court cases (both secular and ecclesiastical) and literary sources, Malcolm paints a convincing picture of a broad Mediterranean pattern of sex between men. In both the Ottoman Empire and the western Mediterranean (strictly speaking Iberia and Italy, because the study does not take in the south of France, nor the Maghreb), this consisted of illegal but nonetheless relatively common sexual relations between men under 30 and ‘beardless youths’. Those whose sex lives sat outside this pederastic model faced much harsher condemnation, both legally and socially (the ‘inveterate sodomite’, for example, who kept having sex with men after his marriage, or the older man who took the passive role in sex). This pattern has its variations: there was a more open literary culture around love for boys in the Ottoman texts than in the Italian, while Italy (especially Florence) seems to have had a wider sodomitical culture than Iberia. Malcolm has little time for scholars who dismiss European travellers’ accounts of Ottoman sexual practices as only Orientalist fantasies, pointing out that the Ottoman sources provide ample confirmation of a real-life phenomenon.
Read the rest of the review at HistoryToday.com.
Catherine Fletcher is Professor of History at Manchester Metropolitan University.
April 7, 2024
This extremely well researched book promises a bit more than it delivers. The scrupulous case work names names and dates and punishments but tends to dwell for too long (in my humble opinion) on the sinful aspect of sodomy. Enlighteningly the author does hint at the frequency this sexual act took place between men and women, for a variety of reasons. But all in all its occurence and large social acceptance by ancient and indigenous societies is no longer a news byte. Two final chapters touched on the transition from endemic buggery to the concept of homosexuality on a larger palette. Yet this was paid too little schrift considering the bulk size of the book.
Mark di Frangia
Mark di Frangia
November 5, 2024
The archetypal curate's egg, Noel Malcolm's Forbidden Desire is good in parts. On the plus side, the book brings together a wealth of primary and detailed research on the experiences of men who had sex with other men across Europe in the 1400-1750 early modern period. A clear picture emerges of cultural influences and trends that led to quite different experiences in southern and northern Europe. We learn of the theological basis for social attitudes and legal proceedings (including the judicial murder of those who fell foul of the law), and of the changing tactics of the churches, police, judiciary and other public authorities in a diverse range of jurisdictions across the period. Malcolm identifies clear trends that unify the Muslim and Christian worlds in southern Europe, but which diverge sharply from the practice in northern Europe - though the evidence base is clearly much more slender for most of the period in the north. The horizon usefully and interestingly stretches into some of these states' colonial possessions.
So far, so good. But the excellence of the coverage and the presentation of the research and the current state of knowledge is not matched by the structure and overall approach of the book. Malcolm is at pains to highlight that he has come to this field as an outsider, and makes a reasonable case for the advantages that a fresh pair of eyes can bring to the evidence. Even so, the book launches in to its exhaustive (and occasionally exhausting) coverage of the wealth of available evidence without setting out any methodology or approach, so that the reader is left without a clear sense of direction. Beyond the intrinsic interest of the material, what is its point or purpose? The author's position slowly and fitfully comes to light, as he supports or - more typically - rejects the work of other scholars through the chapters. The value of the book would have been greatly enhanced had Malcolm set out the nature of his project at the outset.
The one thing that is clear from the very start is Malcolm's rejection of the term 'homosexual' which he regards as inappropriate or inaccurate for discussing early modern men. His suggested terms 'same sexual' and 'other sexual' may have some merit, but these do not make an appearance for another 400 pages, well into the conclusion. Instead, virtually the entire work deals with 'sodomites' and 'sodomy'. Passive partners are, for the most part, sodomised by sodomisers in this book. The effect of this is to emphasise the sexual act rather than any emotions, desires or identities which might be tied up with it. And this, it emerges by the conclusion, is rather deliberate, since Malcolm is not prepared in most of the many cases he considers to concede that there was very much to male-male sex beyond the act, and he spends rather little time considering why men may have had sex together beyond some suggestions that this was incentivised by certain societal factors. For this reader, the constant repetition of the term 'sodomy' and its derivatives felt unnecessarily negative in tone. I have no idea whether the author is homophobic in outlook or not, but his readers could be forgiven for suspecting him of it, and there are other uses of language, whether deliberate or plain clumsy, which tend to support this view. Clearly no fan of Foucault's theories, Malcolm pointedly rejects Foucault's comment that the term sodomy has had such a broad range of usages as to be virtually meaningless, but through the book, Malcolm repeatedly demonstrates that the term was in fact used highly variably to denote almost anything than regular (vaginal) intercourse between a married male-female couple.
Malcolm is surely right to argue that in the early modern period we cannot really speak of gay or homosexual identities as they exist in the modern world. He casts scorn, however, on the argument made by others that these emerged around 1700, po,ints to continuities before and after this date, and presumes (surely correctly) that male-male sexual practices must have been fairly widespread before that date. He also takes a well deserved swipe at literary scholars who have over interpreted certain works and read into them late 20th and early 21st century tropes, often on the basis of little more than the word play these same critics have themselves imposed on the original texts.
And yet: Malcolm's view of male-male sex in the early modern period allows very little agency to the actors in their own time. In his discussion of southern Europe it appears to have been pretty much just the done thing for an older man to take a boy as a sexual object, and to move on from this by about the age of 30. Were the younger men simply victims or did they have their own agency at any point? The small minority of men who continued to pursue male-male sex into adulthood, or who broke taboos by preferring the passive role even after they grew their beards, are - for most of the book - simply dismissed as atypical and not really worth consideration (except when it suits Malcolm to pay them attention as part of dismissing the idea that something changed around the year 1700).
While we should not apply contemporary cultural norms and expectations onto the quite different societies of the past, Malcolm has - presumably deliberately - ignored other branches of scientific research which might shed light on his topic. I think there is no question that the exclusively or predominantly homosexually inclined part of the male population in any society is by definition fairly small. Estimates vary, but may be in the region of around 3%. This is the part of the population which, when it appears in Malcolm's data, is generally written off as too small and atypical to be worthy of much comment. After all, the very term 'homosexual' is not one with which Malcolm has much truck because it covers so many subgroups. Malcolm seems entirely unaware of the way that the term LGBTQA (and other extensions) in modern scholarship quite explicitly seek to articulate this variation within the homosexual population, even while this term (and others, like queer) are still useful broader categories. While homosexual (there, I've said it) activity may be repressed or liberated by social norms, the biological incidence of homosexuality that leads to desires and instincts might be expected to be more constant across populations and generations. Malcolm's data seems to suggest nothing else, but he has drawn on no work about human biology to help explain his sources. Interestingly, much of the material which does interest Malcolm concerns those men who sometimes had sex with other men, but who may also have had sex with women, and with men who experimented. One might consider that this is the early modern equivalent of the larger number of men in our own society who might identify, or act, as bisexuals; and that there are almost certainly continuities with men who identify as heterosexual and who may be in stable heterosexual relationships but who sometimes have sex with men. Malcolm seems uneasy with the idea that early modern men who had sex with men may have wanted to do any more than penetrate - and yet those men who invested great emotion in their younger favourites and who repeatedly had sex with them must surely have had some desire for male-male sex which amounted to more than mechanical sodomy. This notion of agency, any sense of desire, anything beyond the satisfaction of a sexual need (or duty) on the part of the active partner is either unexplored or written off as untypical and therefore uninteresting.
I think we can be certain that men who are not inclined to sex with other men will in practice not have sex with other men, unless they are subjected to rape. Given the amount of male-male sex which is evidenced in this book, there was clearly rather more going on than Malcolm is prepared to consider or able to explain. His reluctance to engage in wider scholarship about the nature of homosexuality, combined with his aversion to applying modern tropes to the early modern period in which he is in other fields an expert, mean that this lengthy book remains an incomplete study.
So far, so good. But the excellence of the coverage and the presentation of the research and the current state of knowledge is not matched by the structure and overall approach of the book. Malcolm is at pains to highlight that he has come to this field as an outsider, and makes a reasonable case for the advantages that a fresh pair of eyes can bring to the evidence. Even so, the book launches in to its exhaustive (and occasionally exhausting) coverage of the wealth of available evidence without setting out any methodology or approach, so that the reader is left without a clear sense of direction. Beyond the intrinsic interest of the material, what is its point or purpose? The author's position slowly and fitfully comes to light, as he supports or - more typically - rejects the work of other scholars through the chapters. The value of the book would have been greatly enhanced had Malcolm set out the nature of his project at the outset.
The one thing that is clear from the very start is Malcolm's rejection of the term 'homosexual' which he regards as inappropriate or inaccurate for discussing early modern men. His suggested terms 'same sexual' and 'other sexual' may have some merit, but these do not make an appearance for another 400 pages, well into the conclusion. Instead, virtually the entire work deals with 'sodomites' and 'sodomy'. Passive partners are, for the most part, sodomised by sodomisers in this book. The effect of this is to emphasise the sexual act rather than any emotions, desires or identities which might be tied up with it. And this, it emerges by the conclusion, is rather deliberate, since Malcolm is not prepared in most of the many cases he considers to concede that there was very much to male-male sex beyond the act, and he spends rather little time considering why men may have had sex together beyond some suggestions that this was incentivised by certain societal factors. For this reader, the constant repetition of the term 'sodomy' and its derivatives felt unnecessarily negative in tone. I have no idea whether the author is homophobic in outlook or not, but his readers could be forgiven for suspecting him of it, and there are other uses of language, whether deliberate or plain clumsy, which tend to support this view. Clearly no fan of Foucault's theories, Malcolm pointedly rejects Foucault's comment that the term sodomy has had such a broad range of usages as to be virtually meaningless, but through the book, Malcolm repeatedly demonstrates that the term was in fact used highly variably to denote almost anything than regular (vaginal) intercourse between a married male-female couple.
Malcolm is surely right to argue that in the early modern period we cannot really speak of gay or homosexual identities as they exist in the modern world. He casts scorn, however, on the argument made by others that these emerged around 1700, po,ints to continuities before and after this date, and presumes (surely correctly) that male-male sexual practices must have been fairly widespread before that date. He also takes a well deserved swipe at literary scholars who have over interpreted certain works and read into them late 20th and early 21st century tropes, often on the basis of little more than the word play these same critics have themselves imposed on the original texts.
And yet: Malcolm's view of male-male sex in the early modern period allows very little agency to the actors in their own time. In his discussion of southern Europe it appears to have been pretty much just the done thing for an older man to take a boy as a sexual object, and to move on from this by about the age of 30. Were the younger men simply victims or did they have their own agency at any point? The small minority of men who continued to pursue male-male sex into adulthood, or who broke taboos by preferring the passive role even after they grew their beards, are - for most of the book - simply dismissed as atypical and not really worth consideration (except when it suits Malcolm to pay them attention as part of dismissing the idea that something changed around the year 1700).
While we should not apply contemporary cultural norms and expectations onto the quite different societies of the past, Malcolm has - presumably deliberately - ignored other branches of scientific research which might shed light on his topic. I think there is no question that the exclusively or predominantly homosexually inclined part of the male population in any society is by definition fairly small. Estimates vary, but may be in the region of around 3%. This is the part of the population which, when it appears in Malcolm's data, is generally written off as too small and atypical to be worthy of much comment. After all, the very term 'homosexual' is not one with which Malcolm has much truck because it covers so many subgroups. Malcolm seems entirely unaware of the way that the term LGBTQA (and other extensions) in modern scholarship quite explicitly seek to articulate this variation within the homosexual population, even while this term (and others, like queer) are still useful broader categories. While homosexual (there, I've said it) activity may be repressed or liberated by social norms, the biological incidence of homosexuality that leads to desires and instincts might be expected to be more constant across populations and generations. Malcolm's data seems to suggest nothing else, but he has drawn on no work about human biology to help explain his sources. Interestingly, much of the material which does interest Malcolm concerns those men who sometimes had sex with other men, but who may also have had sex with women, and with men who experimented. One might consider that this is the early modern equivalent of the larger number of men in our own society who might identify, or act, as bisexuals; and that there are almost certainly continuities with men who identify as heterosexual and who may be in stable heterosexual relationships but who sometimes have sex with men. Malcolm seems uneasy with the idea that early modern men who had sex with men may have wanted to do any more than penetrate - and yet those men who invested great emotion in their younger favourites and who repeatedly had sex with them must surely have had some desire for male-male sex which amounted to more than mechanical sodomy. This notion of agency, any sense of desire, anything beyond the satisfaction of a sexual need (or duty) on the part of the active partner is either unexplored or written off as untypical and therefore uninteresting.
I think we can be certain that men who are not inclined to sex with other men will in practice not have sex with other men, unless they are subjected to rape. Given the amount of male-male sex which is evidenced in this book, there was clearly rather more going on than Malcolm is prepared to consider or able to explain. His reluctance to engage in wider scholarship about the nature of homosexuality, combined with his aversion to applying modern tropes to the early modern period in which he is in other fields an expert, mean that this lengthy book remains an incomplete study.
February 4, 2025
Extremely comprehensive and well-researched book that sheds light on the early development of elements of modern gay identity. I appreciated the attention Malcolm gave to geographical and national differences and similarities, particularly his identification of a pan-Mediterranean paederastic culture in the early modern period encompassing both Christian and Muslim regions. Lots of weird and interesting little tidbits were thrown in throughout. For example, I was shocked to learn that the term 'cruising' dates back to the early 1700s and originally came from Dutch! Overall, this was a refreshingly facts-based corrective to all the sweeping generalizations people make in the 'essentialist vs. constructionist' debate about sexual identity.
The only con is that occasionally Malcolm gets a little axe-grind-y and overcorrects —as, for example, when he seems to suggest that there was nothing unusual in King James's relationships with his male favourites (an assertion most of King James's modern biographers would dispute). 4.5 stars rounded up to 5.
The only con is that occasionally Malcolm gets a little axe-grind-y and overcorrects —as, for example, when he seems to suggest that there was nothing unusual in King James's relationships with his male favourites (an assertion most of King James's modern biographers would dispute). 4.5 stars rounded up to 5.
June 22, 2024
It's not an informative book, it's a well researched history book about how the relationship between early modern Europe.
I'm not sure if I always agree with the author as I think it was a very complex situation but I learned a lot and found some parts intriguing and fascinating.
It's recommended it you are interested in social history and want to read a serious historical research
Many thanks to the publisher for this ARC, all opinions are mine
I'm not sure if I always agree with the author as I think it was a very complex situation but I learned a lot and found some parts intriguing and fascinating.
It's recommended it you are interested in social history and want to read a serious historical research
Many thanks to the publisher for this ARC, all opinions are mine
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews