Un mariage gay… dans la Rome la Renaissance ?

Contents:

• WHY THE ROMANS ARE IMPORTANT THE DEBATE ABOUT GAY MARRIAGE
• GAY MARRIAGE AND HOMOSEXUALY WERE PART OF MORAL LANDSPE ANCIENT ROME
• UN MARIAGE GAY… DANS LA ROME LA RENAISSANCE ?
• VOTRE MARIAGE GAY
• INSI RENAISSANCE-ERA ROME’S GAY MARRIAGE2 BECOME 1GAY MARRIAGE DIDN’T ONLY EMERGE RECENT YEARS AS A KEY ISSUE. ITS HISTORY DAT BACK TO THE LATE 16TH CENTURY.THE CONVERSATNUPDATED APR. 11, 2017 4:07PM EDT / PUBLISHED FEB. 09, 2017 1:00AM EST ART COLLECTN / ALAMY STOCK PHOTOBY GARY FERGON, DOUGLAS HUNTLY GORDON DISTGUISHED PROFSOR OF FRENCH, UNIVERSY OF VIRGIAIN THE LATE 16TH CENTURY, THE FAMO FRENCH SAYIST MICHEL MONTAIGNE WROTE ABOUT TWO MARRIAG BETWEEN PEOPLE OF THE SAME SEX. THE FIRST VOLVED WOMEN EASTERN FRANCE, THE SEND A GROUP OF MEN ROME. AT THE TIME, SAME-SEX MARRIAG WERE NOT REGNIZED BY RELIG OR CIVIL LAW, AND SODOMY—A TERM THAT CLUD A WI RANGE OF SEXUAL ACTS—WAS A CRIME. AS A RULT, WHEN THOSE VOLVED WERE DISVERED THEY WERE UALLY BROUGHT TO TRIAL AND PUNISHED, SOMETIM BY ATH.THE EPISOS, ALONG WH MANY OTHERS, REVEAL THAT EVEN RENAISSANCE EUROPE, MARRIAGE WAS A HIGHLY NTTED ISSUE.MARRIAGE BETWEEN TWO MEN OR TWO WOMEN MIGHT SEEM LIKE A NCEPT THAT HAS EMERGED ONLY RECENT S. FOR CENTURI, HOWEVER, SAME-SEX UPL HAVE APPROPRIATED MARRIAGE THEIR OWN WAYS. I VTIGATE A PARTICULARLY NOTABLE EXAMPLE OF THIS—THE SEND OF THE TWO S REUNTED BY MONTAIGNE— MY RECENT BOOK SAME-SEX MARRIAGE RENAISSANCE ROME: SEXUALY, INTY AND COMMUNY EARLY MORN EUROPE. AN EVOLVG STUTNTHROUGHOUT THE MIDDLE AG, MARRIAGE VOLVED NOT ONLY TWO DIVIDUALS BUT ALSO THEIR RELATIV, LOL MUNI, AND SECULAR AND RELIG THORI. EACH OF THE HAD DIFFERENT—SOMETIM NFLICTG—IAS, PRRI, AND GOALS.FROM THE 12TH CENTURY ON, THE CATHOLIC CHURCH NSIRED MATRIMONY A SACRAMENT THAT REQUIRED ONLY THE EE NSENT OF THE SPO, THE FORM OF AN EXCHANGE OF VOWS. AS A SOCIAL STUTN, HOWEVER, MARRIAGE WAS UALLY BASED ON A LEGAL NTRACT FOR THE TRANSFER OF PROPERTY (THE BRI’S DOWRY), WHICH WAS SIGNED ONT OF A NOTARY.THE 16TH CENTURY WAS A WATERSHED PERD THAT SAW SWEEPG CHANG AND THE TRODUCTN OF STRGENT NEW REQUIREMENTS SIGNED TO PREVENT CLANSTE (OR SECRET) UNNS THAT HEADS OF FAI OPPOSED. IN UNTRI NVERTED TO ONE OF THE NEW REFORMED OR PROTTANT FAHS, MARRIAGE CEASED TO BE A SACRAMENT, AND LAWS WERE PASSED STRENGTHENG PARENTS’ NTROL OVER THEIR PENNT CHILDREN.IN RPONSE TO PRSURE OM SECULAR ERNMENTS, THE CATHOLIC CHURCH ALSO MODIFIED S POSN NSIRABLY 1563, WHEN THE COUNCIL OF TRENT CREED THAT A WEDDG MT HENCEFORTH BE PERFORMED A PARISH CHURCH, BY AN THORIZED PRIT, THE PRENCE OF WNS, AND FOLLOWG THE PROCLAMATN OF “BANNS” (THE PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE CEREMONY).CHANG LEGISLATN DID NOT ALWAYS TRANSLATE IMMEDIATELY TO CHANG PRACTICE, HOWEVER. SUATNS OF DOUBT OR DISPUTE WERE MON AND EQUENTLY END UP URT.ON THE MARGS OF THE PAPAL CYTHIS IS THE VOLATILE BACKGROUND AGAST WHICH THE MARRIAG BETWEEN MEN ROME WERE SET.AFTER PIECG TOGETHER RMATN OM SEVERAL SOURC—DIPLOMATIC DISPATCH, NEWSLETTERS, AGMENTS OF A TRIAL TRANSCRIPT, AND BRIEF WILLS—A MUCH FULLER, IF PLETE, PICTURE OF WHAT TOOK PLACE EMERG.ON A SUNDAY AFTERNOON JULY 1578, A SIZABLE GROUP OF MEN GATHERED AT SAT JOHN AT THE LAT GATE, A BETIFUL BUT REMOTE CHURCH ON THE OUTER EDGE OF ROME. MANY OF THEM WERE IENDS WHO HAD MET THERE ON PREV OCSNS. THEY WERE MOSTLY POOR IMMIGRANTS OM SPA AND PORTUGAL BUT CLUD SEVERAL PRITS AND IARS. THEY ATE AND DRANK AN ATMOSPHERE THAT WAS FTIVE, YET STRANGELY SUBDUED. IT TURNED SUDNLY TO NFN AND FEAR WH THE ARRIVAL OF THE POLICE, WHO ARRTED 11 OF THOSE PRENT. THE RT FLED.THE ROMAN THORI HAD BEEN TIPPED OFF ABOUT THE GROUP’S PLANS TO CELEBRATE A MARRIAGE, PERHAPS NOT FOR THE FIRST TIME, BETWEEN TWO OF S MEMBERS. IN THE END, THE WEDDG BETWEEN GASPARO AND GSEFFE HADN’T TAKEN PLACE: THE LATTER—REPORTEDLY ILL—FAILED TO APPEAR. BUT GASPARO WAS AMONG THOSE TAKEN PRISONER, AND, FOLLOWG A TRIAL THAT LASTED THREE WEEKS, EXECUTED.THE EXACT NATURE AND PURPOSE OF THE TEND CEREMONY REMA UNCERTA. SOME SOURC SCRIBE A MARRIAGE CELEBRATED AFTER MASS. OTHERS REFER TO THE GIVG OF RGS, A HERM WHO OFFICIATED, OR ADOLCENTS TAKG PART UNR NSTRAT OR EVEN DISGUISED AS WOMEN.WHAT WE KNOW FOR SURE IS THAT THE AFTERNOON WAS TO CULMATE, LIKE MOST WEDDGS AT THE TIME, A CELEBRATORY FEAST AND THE NSUMMATN OF THE UNN—THAT IS, THE UPLE (AND, THIS STANCE, PERHAPS OTHERS) HAVG SEX.LIKE HBAND AND WIFE?ALTHOUGH THE SAME WAS NOT TE OF ALL THE GROUP’S MEMBERS, GASPARO AND GSEFFE NFORMED TO TABLISHED GENR NORMS WHEN HAVG TERURSE: ACRDG TO EVINCE OM THE TRIAL, THE LATTER TOOK A “MALE” (PERATIVE) ROLE, THE FORMER A “FEMALE” (RECEPTIVE) ONE.IN OTHER RPECTS, HOWEVER, THEIR RELATNSHIP DIDN’T REMBLE THAT OF TRADNAL SPO. MOST IMPORTANTLY, GSEFFE WAS A IAR, PREVENTED OM MARRYG THE EY OF THE CHURCH. GSEFFE’S ATTACHMENT TO A NVENT ALSO MEANS THAT ’S UNLIKELY THE PAIR PLANNED ON LIVG TOGETHER. THIS DISTGUISH THEM NOT ONLY OM MEN AND WOMEN WHO MARRIED BUT ALSO OM THE FEMALE MARRIED UPL WE KNOW ABOUT OM THE PERD, WHO—LIKE THE WOMEN SCRIBED BY MONTAIGNE—OFTEN DID TABLISH A MON HOEHOLD, WH ONE CROSS-DRSG AND LIVG AS A MAN.IN LIGHT OF THE GROUP’S GENERALLY PROMISCUO BEHAVR, SEEMS EQUALLY UNLIKELY THAT GASPARO AND GSEFFE TEND TO EMBARK ON A SEXUALLY EXCLIVE RELATNSHIP AND TH THAT THEY BELIEVED THE SACRAMENT WOULD REMOVE THE SFULNS THAT THE CHURCH ATTACHED TO ALL EXTRAMARAL SEX.FALLY, THE PURPOSE OF THE FEAST FOLLOWG THE PLANNED WEDDG WAS NOT PERSONAL OR RELIG BUT MUNAL. DPE THE FACT THAT GREATLY CREASED THE CHANC THAT THE MEN WOULD BE UGHT, WAS CLEARLY IMPORTANT TO THEM AS A WAY TO EXPRS AND BUILD A SENSE OF MUNY. THE SOCIALLY MARGALIZED IENDS AT THE LAT GATE HAD, FACT, VELOPED SEVERAL OF THE CHARACTERISTICS OF A SEXUAL SUBCULTURE, LIKE THOSE THAT WOULD LATER BE FOUND LARGE EUROPEAN CI THE 18TH CENTURY. IN A NUMBER OF WAYS, THEY ANTICIPATED THE WORKS OF “MOLLI” LONDON AND PARIS’ “GENS LA MANCHETTE” (“MEN OF THE CUFF”), WH THEIR REGULAR MEETG PLAC, SOCIAL ACTIVI, AND A SHARED SLANG.THE EVINCE, THEN, POTS TO A HANDFUL OF MOTIVATNS BEHD THE ROMAN WEDDGS. SCE THE IENDS TOOK THE CEREMONY SERLY ENOUGH TO PUT THEMSELV AT NSIRABLE RISK, VERY LIKELY SERVED TO REGNIZE AND SANCTN GASPARO AND GSEFFE’S RELATNSHIP, CLAIMG THAT SUCH A UNN SHOULD BE POSSIBLE. AT THE SAME TIME, MAY ALSO HAVE HAD A PLAYFUL ELEMENT, PARODYG AND SUBTLY CRICIZG ELEMENTS OF A TRADNAL WEDDG.AN ARGUMENT FOR MARRIAGE EQUALY?IN ONE SENSE, THE NTEXT FOR EXTENDG MARRIAGE RIGHTS TO SAME-SEX UPL TODAY IS VERY DIFFERENT OM THE 16TH CENTURY, WHEN MOST MARRIAG WEREN’T BASED PRIMARILY ON LOVE AND DIDN’T TABLISH LEGAL EQUALY BETWEEN THE SPO.IT WAS AFTER THE CHANG EFFECTED BY THE WOMEN’S RIGHTS MOVEMENT THE SEND HALF OF THE 20TH CENTURY TO MAKE THE STUTN MORE EQUABLE THAT GAY AND LBIAN ACTIVISTS ADOPTED MARRIAGE EQUALY AS THEIR MAJOR GOAL.NEVERTHELS, THE STORI OM THE 16TH CENTURY SHOW THAT MARRIAGE HAS NEVER BEEN A UNIVERSAL AND FIXED PHENOMENON. IT HAS A NTTED HISTORY, ONE THAT BOTH EXCLUS AND CLUS SAME-SEX UPL, WHO HAVE CLAIMED MARRIAGE ON THEIR OWN TERMS.WHEN VIEWED THROUGH THIS LENS, THE CEREMONY PLANNED THAT SUMMER AFTERNOON ROME OVERTURNS THE NARRATIVE THAT RECENT POLIL VICTORI WERE ONLY THE CULMATN OF A MORN, 20TH-CENTURY MPAIGN. THE IENDS WHO MET AT THE LAT GATE OFFER A STRIKG EXAMPLE OF HOW SAME-SEX UPL HAVE LONG CLAIMED THE RIGHT TO MARRY AND, AT THE SAME TIME, CHALLENGED SOME OF MARRIAGE’S TRADNAL NORMS.THIS STORY WAS ORIGALLY PUBLISHED ON THE CONVERSATN. READ HERE. THE CONVERSATN

WHY THE ROMANS ARE IMPORTANT THE DEBATE ABOUT GAY MARRIAGE

À partir ce moment-là, l activist gays et lbiens ont fa du mariage pour to l’un lrs objectifs prcipx. It was after the chang effected by the women’s rights movement the send half of the 20th century to make the stutn more equable that gay and lbian activists adopted marriage equaly as their major goal. Rape and regulatnHomosexualy the legnsLbian loveThe time of ChristianyDurg the time of the Republic, Roman cizens had the right (libertas) to protect their bodi om physil ercn, cludg both rporal punishment and sexual vlence.

Roman cup showg a homosexual sex was socially acceptable for a ee-born Roman to have sex wh a woman or a man assumg a domant role. Generally speakg, civilian life, homosexualy was rather rare and treated reluctantly (as evinced by referenc source texts, which noted outrageo, characteristic and equent thgs), and such relatns were tolerated, as I mentned if the Roman cizen was an active party ( otherwise, Roman blood was ntamated. Homosexualy among men was tolerated and accepted but was fely not the if any high-rankg ee-born Roman allowed himself to be passive durg terurse, he risked mockery.

GAY MARRIAGE AND HOMOSEXUALY WERE PART OF MORAL LANDSPE ANCIENT ROME

However, Caligula, wh the nsistent characteristic of the mentally ill, although he himself is strongly bisexual, orred all homosexuals to be sent to hard labour Sardia one day.

Roman dictator Luci Sulla was not ee om homosexualy, too, he always took wh him, for every war and expedn, a host of his young lover. Dpe the fact that the Romans viewed marriage as a heterosexual relatnship for procreatn, the early Empire, some homosexual upl managed to get married the pany of iends. Homosexualy the legnsA Roman soldier, like every ee and self-rpectg Roman, was socially obligated to disciple, also matters of sexualy.

In the Roman ary of the Republic perd, any maniftatns of homosexualy were severely extermated.

UN MARIAGE GAY… DANS LA ROME LA RENAISSANCE ?

In return, the soldiers uld enjoy prostut of both sex, slav, prisoners and homosexual sex. The aspect of homosexualy nnot be led out wh certaty among the legnari, who spent a great al of time their pany. It was also emphasized that lbians were distguished by larger time of ChristianyThe suatn of homosexuals ancient Rome began to change at the begng of the 3rd century CE when Emperor Philip the Arab banned male prostutn.

VOTRE MARIAGE GAY

In this century, further steps were taken to end homosexualy, cludg an absolute ban on gay marriage. Wh the adoptn of Christiany as the official relign of the state, homosexualy has bee a socially unacceptable element for good. In 326 CE, Constante the Great troduced the ath penalty for homosexual acts, leadg to persecutn and the disappearance of sexual eedom.

Contug legislative measur attemptg to ban gay marriage show that this issue, so cril our last natnal electn, remas a ntroversial topic.

INSI RENAISSANCE-ERA ROME’S GAY MARRIAGE2 BECOME 1GAY MARRIAGE DIDN’T ONLY EMERGE RECENT YEARS AS A KEY ISSUE. ITS HISTORY DAT BACK TO THE LATE 16TH CENTURY.THE CONVERSATNUPDATED APR. 11, 2017 4:07PM EDT / PUBLISHED FEB. 09, 2017 1:00AM EST ART COLLECTN / ALAMY STOCK PHOTOBY GARY FERGON, DOUGLAS HUNTLY GORDON DISTGUISHED PROFSOR OF FRENCH, UNIVERSY OF VIRGIAIN THE LATE 16TH CENTURY, THE FAMO FRENCH SAYIST MICHEL MONTAIGNE WROTE ABOUT TWO MARRIAG BETWEEN PEOPLE OF THE SAME SEX. THE FIRST VOLVED WOMEN EASTERN FRANCE, THE SEND A GROUP OF MEN ROME. AT THE TIME, SAME-SEX MARRIAG WERE NOT REGNIZED BY RELIG OR CIVIL LAW, AND SODOMY—A TERM THAT CLUD A WI RANGE OF SEXUAL ACTS—WAS A CRIME. AS A RULT, WHEN THOSE VOLVED WERE DISVERED THEY WERE UALLY BROUGHT TO TRIAL AND PUNISHED, SOMETIM BY ATH.THE EPISOS, ALONG WH MANY OTHERS, REVEAL THAT EVEN RENAISSANCE EUROPE, MARRIAGE WAS A HIGHLY NTTED ISSUE.MARRIAGE BETWEEN TWO MEN OR TWO WOMEN MIGHT SEEM LIKE A NCEPT THAT HAS EMERGED ONLY RECENT S. FOR CENTURI, HOWEVER, SAME-SEX UPL HAVE APPROPRIATED MARRIAGE THEIR OWN WAYS. I VTIGATE A PARTICULARLY NOTABLE EXAMPLE OF THIS—THE SEND OF THE TWO S REUNTED BY MONTAIGNE— MY RECENT BOOK SAME-SEX MARRIAGE RENAISSANCE ROME: SEXUALY, INTY AND COMMUNY EARLY MORN EUROPE. AN EVOLVG STUTNTHROUGHOUT THE MIDDLE AG, MARRIAGE VOLVED NOT ONLY TWO DIVIDUALS BUT ALSO THEIR RELATIV, LOL MUNI, AND SECULAR AND RELIG THORI. EACH OF THE HAD DIFFERENT—SOMETIM NFLICTG—IAS, PRRI, AND GOALS.FROM THE 12TH CENTURY ON, THE CATHOLIC CHURCH NSIRED MATRIMONY A SACRAMENT THAT REQUIRED ONLY THE EE NSENT OF THE SPO, THE FORM OF AN EXCHANGE OF VOWS. AS A SOCIAL STUTN, HOWEVER, MARRIAGE WAS UALLY BASED ON A LEGAL NTRACT FOR THE TRANSFER OF PROPERTY (THE BRI’S DOWRY), WHICH WAS SIGNED ONT OF A NOTARY.THE 16TH CENTURY WAS A WATERSHED PERD THAT SAW SWEEPG CHANG AND THE TRODUCTN OF STRGENT NEW REQUIREMENTS SIGNED TO PREVENT CLANSTE (OR SECRET) UNNS THAT HEADS OF FAI OPPOSED. IN UNTRI NVERTED TO ONE OF THE NEW REFORMED OR PROTTANT FAHS, MARRIAGE CEASED TO BE A SACRAMENT, AND LAWS WERE PASSED STRENGTHENG PARENTS’ NTROL OVER THEIR PENNT CHILDREN.IN RPONSE TO PRSURE OM SECULAR ERNMENTS, THE CATHOLIC CHURCH ALSO MODIFIED S POSN NSIRABLY 1563, WHEN THE COUNCIL OF TRENT CREED THAT A WEDDG MT HENCEFORTH BE PERFORMED A PARISH CHURCH, BY AN THORIZED PRIT, THE PRENCE OF WNS, AND FOLLOWG THE PROCLAMATN OF “BANNS” (THE PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE CEREMONY).CHANG LEGISLATN DID NOT ALWAYS TRANSLATE IMMEDIATELY TO CHANG PRACTICE, HOWEVER. SUATNS OF DOUBT OR DISPUTE WERE MON AND EQUENTLY END UP URT.ON THE MARGS OF THE PAPAL CYTHIS IS THE VOLATILE BACKGROUND AGAST WHICH THE MARRIAG BETWEEN MEN ROME WERE SET.AFTER PIECG TOGETHER RMATN OM SEVERAL SOURC—DIPLOMATIC DISPATCH, NEWSLETTERS, AGMENTS OF A TRIAL TRANSCRIPT, AND BRIEF WILLS—A MUCH FULLER, IF PLETE, PICTURE OF WHAT TOOK PLACE EMERG.ON A SUNDAY AFTERNOON JULY 1578, A SIZABLE GROUP OF MEN GATHERED AT SAT JOHN AT THE LAT GATE, A BETIFUL BUT REMOTE CHURCH ON THE OUTER EDGE OF ROME. MANY OF THEM WERE IENDS WHO HAD MET THERE ON PREV OCSNS. THEY WERE MOSTLY POOR IMMIGRANTS OM SPA AND PORTUGAL BUT CLUD SEVERAL PRITS AND IARS. THEY ATE AND DRANK AN ATMOSPHERE THAT WAS FTIVE, YET STRANGELY SUBDUED. IT TURNED SUDNLY TO NFN AND FEAR WH THE ARRIVAL OF THE POLICE, WHO ARRTED 11 OF THOSE PRENT. THE RT FLED.THE ROMAN THORI HAD BEEN TIPPED OFF ABOUT THE GROUP’S PLANS TO CELEBRATE A MARRIAGE, PERHAPS NOT FOR THE FIRST TIME, BETWEEN TWO OF S MEMBERS. IN THE END, THE WEDDG BETWEEN GASPARO AND GSEFFE HADN’T TAKEN PLACE: THE LATTER—REPORTEDLY ILL—FAILED TO APPEAR. BUT GASPARO WAS AMONG THOSE TAKEN PRISONER, AND, FOLLOWG A TRIAL THAT LASTED THREE WEEKS, EXECUTED.THE EXACT NATURE AND PURPOSE OF THE TEND CEREMONY REMA UNCERTA. SOME SOURC SCRIBE A MARRIAGE CELEBRATED AFTER MASS. OTHERS REFER TO THE GIVG OF RGS, A HERM WHO OFFICIATED, OR ADOLCENTS TAKG PART UNR NSTRAT OR EVEN DISGUISED AS WOMEN.WHAT WE KNOW FOR SURE IS THAT THE AFTERNOON WAS TO CULMATE, LIKE MOST WEDDGS AT THE TIME, A CELEBRATORY FEAST AND THE NSUMMATN OF THE UNN—THAT IS, THE UPLE (AND, THIS STANCE, PERHAPS OTHERS) HAVG SEX.LIKE HBAND AND WIFE?ALTHOUGH THE SAME WAS NOT TE OF ALL THE GROUP’S MEMBERS, GASPARO AND GSEFFE NFORMED TO TABLISHED GENR NORMS WHEN HAVG TERURSE: ACRDG TO EVINCE OM THE TRIAL, THE LATTER TOOK A “MALE” (PERATIVE) ROLE, THE FORMER A “FEMALE” (RECEPTIVE) ONE.IN OTHER RPECTS, HOWEVER, THEIR RELATNSHIP DIDN’T REMBLE THAT OF TRADNAL SPO. MOST IMPORTANTLY, GSEFFE WAS A IAR, PREVENTED OM MARRYG THE EY OF THE CHURCH. GSEFFE’S ATTACHMENT TO A NVENT ALSO MEANS THAT ’S UNLIKELY THE PAIR PLANNED ON LIVG TOGETHER. THIS DISTGUISH THEM NOT ONLY OM MEN AND WOMEN WHO MARRIED BUT ALSO OM THE FEMALE MARRIED UPL WE KNOW ABOUT OM THE PERD, WHO—LIKE THE WOMEN SCRIBED BY MONTAIGNE—OFTEN DID TABLISH A MON HOEHOLD, WH ONE CROSS-DRSG AND LIVG AS A MAN.IN LIGHT OF THE GROUP’S GENERALLY PROMISCUO BEHAVR, SEEMS EQUALLY UNLIKELY THAT GASPARO AND GSEFFE TEND TO EMBARK ON A SEXUALLY EXCLIVE RELATNSHIP AND TH THAT THEY BELIEVED THE SACRAMENT WOULD REMOVE THE SFULNS THAT THE CHURCH ATTACHED TO ALL EXTRAMARAL SEX.FALLY, THE PURPOSE OF THE FEAST FOLLOWG THE PLANNED WEDDG WAS NOT PERSONAL OR RELIG BUT MUNAL. DPE THE FACT THAT GREATLY CREASED THE CHANC THAT THE MEN WOULD BE UGHT, WAS CLEARLY IMPORTANT TO THEM AS A WAY TO EXPRS AND BUILD A SENSE OF MUNY. THE SOCIALLY MARGALIZED IENDS AT THE LAT GATE HAD, FACT, VELOPED SEVERAL OF THE CHARACTERISTICS OF A SEXUAL SUBCULTURE, LIKE THOSE THAT WOULD LATER BE FOUND LARGE EUROPEAN CI THE 18TH CENTURY. IN A NUMBER OF WAYS, THEY ANTICIPATED THE WORKS OF “MOLLI” LONDON AND PARIS’ “GENS LA MANCHETTE” (“MEN OF THE CUFF”), WH THEIR REGULAR MEETG PLAC, SOCIAL ACTIVI, AND A SHARED SLANG.THE EVINCE, THEN, POTS TO A HANDFUL OF MOTIVATNS BEHD THE ROMAN WEDDGS. SCE THE IENDS TOOK THE CEREMONY SERLY ENOUGH TO PUT THEMSELV AT NSIRABLE RISK, VERY LIKELY SERVED TO REGNIZE AND SANCTN GASPARO AND GSEFFE’S RELATNSHIP, CLAIMG THAT SUCH A UNN SHOULD BE POSSIBLE. AT THE SAME TIME, MAY ALSO HAVE HAD A PLAYFUL ELEMENT, PARODYG AND SUBTLY CRICIZG ELEMENTS OF A TRADNAL WEDDG.AN ARGUMENT FOR MARRIAGE EQUALY?IN ONE SENSE, THE NTEXT FOR EXTENDG MARRIAGE RIGHTS TO SAME-SEX UPL TODAY IS VERY DIFFERENT OM THE 16TH CENTURY, WHEN MOST MARRIAG WEREN’T BASED PRIMARILY ON LOVE AND DIDN’T TABLISH LEGAL EQUALY BETWEEN THE SPO.IT WAS AFTER THE CHANG EFFECTED BY THE WOMEN’S RIGHTS MOVEMENT THE SEND HALF OF THE 20TH CENTURY TO MAKE THE STUTN MORE EQUABLE THAT GAY AND LBIAN ACTIVISTS ADOPTED MARRIAGE EQUALY AS THEIR MAJOR GOAL.NEVERTHELS, THE STORI OM THE 16TH CENTURY SHOW THAT MARRIAGE HAS NEVER BEEN A UNIVERSAL AND FIXED PHENOMENON. IT HAS A NTTED HISTORY, ONE THAT BOTH EXCLUS AND CLUS SAME-SEX UPL, WHO HAVE CLAIMED MARRIAGE ON THEIR OWN TERMS.WHEN VIEWED THROUGH THIS LENS, THE CEREMONY PLANNED THAT SUMMER AFTERNOON ROME OVERTURNS THE NARRATIVE THAT RECENT POLIL VICTORI WERE ONLY THE CULMATN OF A MORN, 20TH-CENTURY MPAIGN. THE IENDS WHO MET AT THE LAT GATE OFFER A STRIKG EXAMPLE OF HOW SAME-SEX UPL HAVE LONG CLAIMED THE RIGHT TO MARRY AND, AT THE SAME TIME, CHALLENGED SOME OF MARRIAGE’S TRADNAL NORMS.THIS STORY WAS ORIGALLY PUBLISHED ON THE CONVERSATN. READ HERE. THE CONVERSATN

Sce many of our polil stutns are rived om ancient Roman precents, a quick look at Roman laws regardg homosexualy serv to illtrate what may be drivg some of the current ntroversy surroundg gay unns the Uned the world of the ancient Greeks seems to have tolerated homosexualy (as seen the poems of Sappho and the dialogu of Plato), that of the Romans was more ut. Romans the perd of the Roman Republic and early empire tend to perceive the Greek acceptance of male homosexualy as ls than male and, th, lerally unvirtuo (Vir beg the Lat word for man).

”The earlit Roman law regardg homosexualy appears to have been the Lex Sntia that was passed by the Roman assembly at some pot the Roman Republic (perhaps the send century BC). Although the text of this law self has not survived, later Roman jurists of the send and third century AD scribe how outlawed the homosexual rape of young male Roman cizens. Consensual male or female homosexual unns apparently were not legislated agast.

Although there is scholarly bate, Roman lerature of the republic and early empire suggts that men who engaged nsensual liaisons were often mocked as unmanly, but nsensual homosexual sex self was not would change the later Roman Empire.