AdiAppendices Appendix A A Problem in Greek Ethics1 By John Addington Symonds

I. Introduction: method of treating the subject. II. Homer had no knowledge of paiderastia—Achilles—Treatment of Homer by the later Greeks. III. The Romance of Achilles and Patroclus. IV. The heroic ideal of masculine love. V. Vulgar paiderastia—How introduced into Hellas—Crete—Laius—The myth of Ganymede. VI. Discrimination of two loves, heroic and vulgar—The mixed sort is the paiderastia defined as Greek love in this essay. VII. The intensity of paiderastia as an emotion, and its quality. VIII. Myths of paiderastia. IX. Semi-legendary tales of love—Harmodius and Aristogeiton. X. Dorian Customs—Sparta and Crete—Conditions of Dorian life—Moral quality of Dorian love—Its final degeneracy—Speculations on the early Dorian [ethos]—Bœotian customs—The sacred band—Alexander the Great—Customs of Elis and Megara—— [wantonness]—Ionia. XI. Paiderastia in poetry of the lyric age—Theognis and Kurnus—Solon— Ibycus, the male Sappho—Anacreon and Smerdies—Drinking songs— Pindar and Theoxenos—Pindar’s lofty conception of adolescent beauty. XII. Pai derastia upon the Attic stage—Myrmidones of Æschylus—Achilles’ lovers, and Niobe of Sophocles—The Chrysippus of Euripides—Stories about Sophocles—Illustrious Greek paiderasts.

1 The following treatise on Greek Love was not composed for the present volume. I wrote it in the year 1873, when my mind was occupied with my Studies of Greek Poets. I printed ten copies of it privately in 1883. It was only when I read the Terminal Essay appended by Sir Richard Burton to his translation of the Arabian Nights [privately printed, London] in 1886, that I became aware of M.H.E. Meier’s article on Pederastie ([Johann] Ersch and [Johann] Graber’s Allgemeine Encyclopædie der Wissen und Künste, Leipzig, Brockhaus, 1837, vol 9, pp. 149–88). My treatise, therefore, is a wholly inde- pendent production. This makes Meier’s agreement (in Section 7 of his article) with the theory I have set forth in Section X, regarding the North Hellenic origin of Greek Love, and its Dorian character, the more remarkable. That two students, working sep- arately upon the same mass of material, should have arrived at similar conclusions upon this point strongly confirms the probability of the hypothesis.

227 228 Sexual Inversion

XIII. Recapitulation of points—Quotation from the speech of Pausanias on love in Plato’s Symposium—Observations on this speech— Position of women at Athens—Attic notion of marriage as a duty— The institution of [pedagogues]—Life of a Greek boy— Aristophanes’ Clouds—Lucian’s Amores—The Palæstra—The Lysis— The Charmides—Autolycus in Xenophon’s Symposium—Speech of Critobulus on beauty and love—Importance of gymnasia in relation to paiderastia—Statues of Eras—Cicero’s opinion—Laws concerning the gymnasia—Graffiti on walls—Love-poems and panegyrics— Presents to boys—Shops and mauvais lieux—Paiderastic [companionship]—Brothels—Phædon and Agathocles—Street brawls about boys—Lysias in Simonem. XIV. Distinctions drawn by Attic law and custom—— [good strumpets]—Presents and money—Atimia of freemen who had sold their bodies—The definition of [hiring (for sex)]—— [beloved], [strumpet],[sic. read: common prostitute] distinguished—Æschines against Timarchus— General conclusion as to Attic feeling about honourable paiderastia. XV. Platonic doctrine on Greek love—The asceticism of the Laws— Socrates—His position defined by Maximus Tyrius—His science of erotics—The theory of the Phædrus: erotic [mania]—The mysticism of the Symposium: love of beauty—Points of contact between Platonic paiderastia and chivalrous love: [mania] and Joie: Dante’s Vita Nuova—Platonist and Petrarchist—Gibbon on the “thin device” of the Athenian philosophers—Testimony of Lucian, Plutarch, Cicero. XVI. Greek liberty and Greek love extinguished at Chæronea—The Idyllists—Lucian’s Amores—Greek poets never really gross— [muse of boyhood]—Philostratus’ [epistoles]— Greek Fathers on paiderastia. XVII. The deep root struck by paiderastia in Greece—Climate— Gymnastics—Syssitia—Military life—Position of Women: inferior culture; absence from places of resort—Greek leisure. XVIII. Relation of paiderastia to the fine arts—Greek sculpture wholly and healthily human—Ideals of female deities—Paiderastia did not degrade the imagination of the race—Psychological analysis underlying Greek mythology—The psychology of love—Greek mythology fixed before Homer—Opportunities enjoyed by artists for studying women— Anecdotes about artists—The æsthetic temperament of the Greeks, unbiassed by morality and religion, encouraged paiderastia—— [bloom of youth]—Physical and moral qualities admired by a Greek— Greek ethics were æsthetic— [modest self-restraint]—Greek religion was æsthetic—No notion of Jehovah—Zeus and Ganymede. A Problem in Greek Ethics 229

XIX. Homosexuality among Greek women—Never attained to the same dignity as paiderastia. XX. Greek love did not exist at Rome—Christianity—Chivalry—The modus vivendi of the modern world.

I

For the student of sexual inversion, ancient Greece offers a wide field for observation and reflection. Its importance has hitherto been underrated by medical and legal writers on the subject, who do not seem to be aware that here alone in history have we the example of a great and highly-developed race not only tolerating homosexual passions, but deeming them of spiritual value, and attempting to utilise them for the benefit of society. Here, also, through the copious stores of literature at our disposal, we can arrive at something definite regarding the various forms assumed by these passions, when allowed free scope for development in the midst of a refined and intellectual civilisation. What the Greeks called paiderastia, or boy-love, was a phenomenon of one of the most brilliant periods of human culture, in one of the most highly organised and noble active nations. It is the fea- ture by which Greek social life is most sharply distinguished from that of any other people approaching the Hellenes in moral or mental distinction. To trace the history of so remarkable a custom in their several communi- ties, and to ascertain, so far as this is possible, the ethical feeling of the Greeks upon this subject, must be of service to the scientific psychologist. It enables him to approach the subject from another point of view than that usually adopted by modern jurists, psychiatrists, writers on forensic medicine.

II

The first fact which the student has to notice is that in the Homeric poems a modern reader finds no trace of this passion. It is true that Achilles, the hero of the Iliad, is distinguished by his friendship for Patroclus no less emphatically than Odysseus, the hero of the Odyssey, by lifelong attachment to Penelope, and Hector by love for Andromache. But in the delineation of the friendship of Achilles and Patroclus there is nothing which indicates the passionate relation of the lover and the beloved, as they were afterwards recognised in Greek society. This is the more remarkable because the love of Achilles for Patroclus added, in a later age of Greek history, an almost reli- gious sanction to the martial form of paiderastia. In like manner the friend- ship of Idomeneus for Meriones, and that of Achilles, after the death of Patroclus, for Antilochus, were treated by the later Greeks as paiderastic. Yet, inasmuch as Homer gives no warrant for this interpretation of the tales in question, we are justified in concluding that homosexual relations were not 230 Sexual Inversion prominent in the so-called heroic age of Greece. Had it formed a distinct feature of the society depicted in the Homeric poems, there is no reason to suppose that their author would have abstained from delineating it. We shall see that Pindar, Æschylus and Sophocles, the poets of an age when paiderastia was prevalent, spoke unreservedly upon the subject. Impartial study of the Iliad leads us to the belief that the Greeks of the historic period interpreted the friendship of Achilles and Patroclus in accord- ance with subsequently developed customs. The Homeric poems were the Bible of the Greeks, and formed the staple of their education; nor did they scruple to wrest the sense of the original, reading, like modern Bibliolaters, the sentiments and passions of a later age into the text. Of this process a good example is afforded by Æschines in the oration against Timarchus. While discussing this very question of the love of Achilles, he says: “he, indeed, conceals their love, and does not give its proper name to the affection between them, judging that the extremity of their fondness would be intelligible to instructed men among his audience.” As an instance, the orator proceeds to quote the passage in which Achilles laments that he will not be able to fulfil his promise to Menœtius by bringing Patroclus home to Opus. He is here clearly introducing the sentiments of an Athenian hoplite who had taken the boy he loved to Syracuse and seen him slain there. Homer stood in a double relation to the historical Greeks. On the one hand, he determined their development by the influence of his ideal characters. On the other, he underwent from them interpretations which varied with the spirit of each successive century. He created the national temperament, but received in turn the influx of new thoughts and emotions occurring in the course of its expansion. It is, therefore, highly important, on the threshold of this inquiry, to determine the nature of that Achilleian friendship to which the panegyrists and apologists of the custom make such frequent reference.

III

The ideal of character in Homer was what the Greeks called heroic; what we should call chivalrous. Young men studied the Iliad as our ancestors studied the Arthurian romances, finding there a pattern of conduct raised almost too high above the realities of common life for imitation, yet stimulative of enthusiasm and exciting to the fancy. Foremost among the paragons of heroic virtue stood Achilles, the splendour of whose achievements in the Trojan war was only equalled by the pathos of his friendship. The love for slain Patroclus broke his mood of sullen anger, and converted his brooding sense of wrong into a lively thirst for vengeance. Hector, the slayer of Patroclus, had to be slain by Achilles, the comrade of Patroclus. No one can read the Iliad without observing that its action virtually turns upon the conquest which the passion of friendship gains over the passion of resentment in the breast of the chief actor. This the Greek students of Homer were not A Problem in Greek Ethics 231 slow to see; and they not unnaturally selected the friendship of Achilles for their ideal of manly love. It was a powerful and masculine emotion, in which effeminacy had no part, and which by no means excluded the ordinary sexual feelings. Companionship in battle and the chase, in public and in private affairs of life, was the communion proposed by Achilleian friends— not luxury or the delights which feminine attractions offered. The tie was both more spiritual and more energetic than that which bound man to woman. Such was the type of comradeship delineated by Homer; and such, in spite of the modifications suggested by later poets, was the conception retained by the Greeks of this heroic friendship. Even Æschines, in the place above quoted, lays stress upon the mutual loyalty of Achilles and Patroclus as the strongest bond of their affection: “regarding, I suppose, their loyalty and mutual goodwill as the most touching feature of their love”.2

IV

Thus the tale of Achilles and Patroclus sanctioned among the Greeks a form of masculine love, which, though afterwards connected with paiderastia properly so called, we are justified in describing as heroic, and in regarding as one of the highest products of their emotional life. It will be seen, when we come to deal with the historical manifestations of this passion, that the heroic love which took its name from Homer’s Achilles existed as an ideal rather than an actual reality. This, however, is equally the case with Christianity and chivalry. The facts of feudal history fell below the high conception which hovered like a dream above the knights and ladies of the Middle Ages; nor has the spirit of the Gospel been realised, in fact, by the most Christian nations. Still we are not on that account debarred from speaking of both chivalry and Christianity as potent and effective forces.

V

Homer, then, knew nothing of paiderastia, though the Iliad contained the first and noblest legend of heroic friendship. Very early, however, in Greek history boy-love, as a form of sensual passion, became a national institu- tion. This is proved abundantly by mythological traditions of great antiq- uity, by legendary tales connected with the founding of Greek cities, and by the primitive customs of the Dorian tribes. The question remains how paid- erastia originated among the Greeks, and whether it was introduced or indigenous. The Greeks themselves speculated on this subject, but they arrived at no one definite conclusion. Herodotus asserts that the Persians learned the

2 Compare the fine rhetorical passage in Maximus Tyrius, Dissertations, xxiv, 8 (ed. Didot, Paris, 1842). 232 Sexual Inversion habit, in its vicious form, from the Greeks;3 but, even supposing this assertion to be correct, we are not justified in assuming the same of all barbarians who were neighbours of the Greeks; since we know from the Jewish records and from Assyrian inscriptions that the Oriental nations were addicted to this as well as other species of sensuality. Moreover, it might with some strain on language be maintained that Herodotus, in the passage above referred to, did not allude to boy-love in general, but to the peculiarly Hellenic form of it which I shall afterwards attempt to characterise. A prevalent opinion among the Greeks ascribed the origin of paiderastia to Crete; and it was here that the legend of Zeus and Ganymede was local- ised.4 “The Cretans,” says Plato, “are always accused of having invented the story of Ganymede and Zeus, which is designed to justify themselves in the enjoyment of such pleasures by the practice of the god whom they believe to have been their lawgiver”.5 In another passage,6 Plato speaks of the custom that prevailed before the time of Laius in terms which show his detestation of a vice that had gone far toward corrupting Greek society. This sentence indicates the second theory of the later Greeks upon this topic. They thought that Laius, the father of Œdipus, was the first to practise lawless lust in this form, by the rape committed on Chrysippus, the son of Pelops.7 To this crime of Laius the Scholiast to the Seven Against Thebes attributes all the evils which afterwards befell the royal house of Thebes, and Euripides made it the subject of a tragedy. In another but less prevalent Saga the introduction of paiderastia is ascribed to Orpheus. It is clear from these conflicting theories that the Greeks themselves had no trustworthy tradition on the subject. Nothing, therefore, but speculative conjecture is left for the modern investigator. If we need in such a matter to seek further than the primal instincts of human nature, we may suggest that, like the orgiastic rites of the later Hellenic cults, paiderastia in its crud- est form was transmitted to the Greeks from the East. Its prevalence in Crete, which, together with Cyprus, formed one of the principal links between Phœnicia and Hellas proper, favours this view. Paiderastia would, on this hypothesis, like the worship of the Paphian and Corinthian Aphrodite, have

3 Heredotus, Histories, i, 135. 4 Numerous localities, however, claimed this distinction. See Athenæus, Deipnosophists, xiii, 601. Chalkis in Eubœa, as well as Crete, could show the sacred spot where the mystical assumption of Ganymede was reported to have happened. 5 Plato, Laws, trans. Jowett, i, 636 Cp. Timæus, quoted by Athenæus, Deipnosophists p.602. Servius, ad Aen., x, 325, says that boy-love spread from Crete to Sparta, and thence through Hellas, and Strabo mentions its prevalence among the Cretans (x, 483). Plato (Republic, v, 452) speaks of the Cretans as introducing naked athletic sports. 6 Plato, Laws, viii, 863. 7 See Athenæus, Deipnosophists, xiii, 602, Plutarch, in the Life of Pelopidas (trans. Clough, vol. ii, .p. 219), argues against this view. A Problem in Greek Ethics 233 to be regarded as in part an Oriental importation.8 Yet, if we adopt any such solution of the problem, we must not forget that in this, as in all similar cases, whatever the Greeks received from adjacent nations, they distin- guished with the qualities of their own personality. Paiderastia in Hellas assumed Hellenic characteristics, and cannot be confounded with any merely Asiatic form of luxury. In the tenth section of this Essay I shall return to the problem, and advance my own conjecture as to the part played by the Dorians in the development of paiderastia into a custom. It is enough for the present to remark that, however introduced, the vice of boy-love, as distinguished from heroic friendship, received religious sanc- tion at an early period. The legend of the rape of Ganymede was invented, according to the passage recently quoted from Plato, by the Cretans with the express purpose of investing their pleasures with a show of piety. This local- isation of the religious sanction of paiderastia in Crete confirms the hypoth- esis of Oriental influence; for one of the notable features of Græco-Asiatic worship was the consecration of sensuality in the Phallus cult, the temple slaves, (or bayadères) of Aphrodite, and the eunuchs of the Phrygian mother. Homer tells the tale of Ganymede with the utmost simplicity. The boy was so beautiful that Zeus suffered him not to dwell on earth, but translated him to heaven, and appointed him the cupbearer of the immortals. The sensual desire which made the king of gods and men prefer Ganymede to Leda, Io, Danaë, and all the maidens whom he loved and left on earth, is an addition to the Homeric version of the myth. In course of time the tale of Ganymede, according to the Cretan reading, became the nucleus around which the paiderastic associations of the Greek race gathered, just as that of Achilles formed the main point in their tradition of heroic friendship. To the Romans and the modern nations the name of Ganymede, debased to Catamitus, supplied a term of reproach, which sufficiently indicates the nature of the love of which he became eventually the eponym.

VI

Resuming the results of the last four sections, we find two separate forms of masculine passion clearly marked in early Hellas—a noble and a base, a spiritual and a sensual. To the distinction between them the Greek conscience was acutely sensitive; and this distinction, in theory at least, subsisted throughout their history. They worshipped Eros, as they wor- shipped Aphrodite, under the twofold titles of Ouranios (celestial) and Pandemos (vulgar, or volvivaga); and, while they regarded the one love with the highest approval, as the source of courage and greatness of soul, they never publicly approved the other. It is true, as will appear in the sequel

8 See Julius Rosenbaum, Lustseuche im Alterthume, [Venereal Disease in Antiquity], Halle, J.F. Lippert, 1839, p. 118. 234 Sexual Inversion of this essay, that boy-love in its grossest form was tolerated in historic Hellas with an indulgence which it never found in any Christian country, while heroic comradeship remained an ideal hard to realise, and scarcely possible beyond the limits of the strictest Dorian sect. Yet the language of philoso- phers, historians, poets and orators is unmistakable. All testify alike to the discrimination between vulgar and heroic love in the Greek mind. I purpose to devote a separate section of this inquiry to the investigation of these ethi- cal distinctions. For the present, a quotation from one of the most eloquent of the later rhetoricians will sufficiently set forth the contrast, which the Greek race never wholly forgot:9 “The one love is mad for pleasure; the other loves beauty. The one is an invol- untary sickness: the other is a sought enthusiasm. The one tends to the good of the beloved; the other to the ruin of both. The one is virtuous; the other incontinent in all its acts. The one has its end in friendship; the other in hate. The one is freely given; the other is bought and sold. The one brings praise; the other blame. The one is Greek; the other is barbarous. The one is virile; the other effeminate. The one is firm and constant; the other light and variable. The man who loves the one love is a friend of God, a friend of law, fulfilled of modesty, and free of speech. He dares to court his friend in day- light and rejoices in his love. He wrestles with him in the playground and runs with him in the race, goes afield with him to the hunt, and in battle fights for glory at his side. In his misfortune he suffers, and at his death he dies with him. He needs no gloom of night, no desert place, for this society. The other lover is a foe to heaven, for he is out of tune and criminal; a foe to law, for he transgresses the law. Cowardly, despairing, shameless, haunting the dusk, lurking in desert places and secret dens, he would fain be never seen consorting with his friend, but shuns the light of day, and follows after night and darkness. which the shepherd hates, but the thief loves.” And again, in the same dissertation, Maximus Tyrius speaks to like purpose, clothing his precepts in imagery: “You see a fair body in bloom and full of promise of fruit. Spoil not, defile not, touch not the blossom. Praise it, as some wayfarer may praise a plant— even so by Phœbus’ altar have I seen a young palm shooting toward the sun. Refrain from Zeus’ and Phœbus’ tree; wait for the fruit-season, and thou shalt love more righteously.” With the baser form of paiderastia I shall have little to do in this essay. Vice of this kind does not vary to any great extent, whether we observe it in Athens or in Rome, in Florence of the sixteenth or in Paris of the nineteenth century;10 nor in Hellas was it more noticeable than elsewhere, except for its

9 Maximus Tyrius, Disserations, ix. 10 See J.C.L. Sismondi, Histoire des republiquea italiennes du moyen age, 16 volumes, Paris, Treuttel & Würz, 1817–18, vol ii, p. 324; Symonds, Renaissance in Italy, Age of the A Problem in Greek Ethics 235 comparative publicity. The nobler type of masculine love developed by the Greeks is, on the contrary, almost unique11 in the history of the human race. It is that which more than anything else distinguishes the Greeks from the barbarians of their own time, from the Romans, and from modern men in all that appertains to the emotions. The immediate subject of the ensuing inquiry will, therefore, be that mixed form of paiderastia upon which the Greeks prided themselves, which had for its heroic ideal the friendship of Achilles and Patroclus, but which in historic times exhibited a sensuality unknown to Homer.12 In treating of this unique product of their civilisation I shall use the term Greek Love, understanding thereby a passionate and enthusiastic attachment subsisting between man and youth, recognised by society and protected by opinion, which, though it was not free from sensu- ality, did not degenerate into mere licentiousness.

VII

Before reviewing the authors who deal with this subject in detail, or discuss- ing the customs of the several Greek states, it will be well to illustrate in general the nature of this love, and to collect the principal legends and historic tales which set it forth. Greek love was, in its origin and essence, military. Fire and valour, rather than tenderness or tears, were the external outcomes of this passion; nor had effeminacyy, a place in its vocabulary. At the same time it was exceedingly absorbing. “Half my life,” says the lover, “lives in thine image, and the rest is lost. When thou art kind, I spend the day like a god; when thy face is turned aside, it is very dark with me.”13 Plato, in his celebrated description of a lover’s soul, writes: “Wherever she thinks that site will behold the beautiful one, thither in her desire she runs. And when she has seen him, and bathed herself with the waters of desire, her constraint is loosened and she is refreshed, and has no more pangs and pains; and this is the sweetest of all pleasures at the time, and is the reason why the soul of the lover will never forsake his beautiful one, whom he esteems above all; he has forgotten mother and brethren and companions, and he thinks nothing of the neglect and loss of his property. The rules and proprieties of life, on which he formerly prided himself, he

Despots, p. 435; Tardieu, Attentats aux Mœurs, Les Ordures de Paris, Paris, Baillière, 1887; Sir Richard Burton’s Terminal Essay to the “Arabian Nights”; Felix Carlier, Les Deux Prostitutions, Paris, Dentu, 1887. 11I say almost, because something of the same sort appeared in Persia at the time of Saadi. 12 Plato, in the Phædrus, the Symposium, and the Laws, is decisive on the mixed nature of paiderastia. 13Theocritus, [Of Boys], probably an Æolic poem of much older date. 236 Sexual Inversion now despises, and is ready to sleep like a servant, wherever he is allowed, as near as he can to his beautiful one, who is not only the object of his wor- ship, but the only physician who can heal him in his extreme agony.”14 These passages show how real and vital was the passion of Greek love. It would be difficult to find more intense expressions of affection in modern literature. The effect produced upon the lover by the presence of his beloved was similar to that inspiration which the knight of romance received from his lady. “I know not,” says Phædrus, in the Symposium of Plato, “any greater blessing to a young man beginning life than a virtuous lover, or to the lover than a beloved youth. For the principle which ought to be the guide of men who would nobly live—that principle, I say, neither kindred, nor honour, nor wealth, nor any other motive is able to implant so well as love. Of what am I speaking? Of the sense of honour and dishonour, without which neither states nor individuals ever do any good or great work. And I say that a lover who is detected in doing any dishonourable act, or submitting, through cowardice, when any dishonour is done to him by another, will be more pained at being detected by his beloved than at being seen by his father, or by his companions, or by any one else. The beloved, too, when he is seen in any disgraceful situation, has the same feeling about his lover. And if there were only some way of contriving that a state or an army should be made up of lovers and their loves, they would be the very best governors of their own city, abstaining from all dishonour: and emulating one another in honour; and when fighting at one another’s side, although a mere handful, they would overcome the world. For what lover would not choose rather to be seen by all man-kind than by his beloved, either when abandoning his post, or throwing away his arms? He would be ready to die a thousand deaths rather than endure this. Or who would desert his beloved or fail him in the hour of danger? The veriest coward would become an inspired hero, equal to the bravest, at such a time; love would inspire him. That courage which, as Homer says, the god breathes into the soul of heroes, love of his own nature inspires into the lover.”15 With the whole of this quotation we might compare what Plutarch in the Life of Pelopidas relates about the composition of the Sacred Band;16 while the following anecdote from the Anabasis of Xenophon may serve to illustrate the theory that regiments should consist of lovers.17 Episthenes of Olynthus, one of Xenophon’s hoplites, saved a beautiful boy from the slaughter com- manded by Seuthes in a Thracian village. The king could not understand

14 Plato, Phædrus, trans. Jowett, p. 252. 15 Plato, Symposium, trans. Jowett, p.178. 16 Arthur Hugh Clough, A Revision of John Dryden’s Translation of Plutarch’s ‘Lives’, London, Sampson Low, 1859, 5 volumes, vol ii., p. 218. 17 Xenophon, Anabasis, vii, 4, 7. A Problem in Greek Ethics 237 why his orders had not been obeyed, till Xenophon excused his hoplite by explaining that Episthenes was “a passionate boy-lover”, and that he had “once formed a corps of none but beautiful men”. Then Seuthes asked Episthenes if he was willing to die instead of the boy, and he answered, stretching out his neck, “‘Strike,’ he says, if the boy says ‘Yes, and will be pleased with it’.” 18 At the end of the affair, which is told by Xenophon with a quiet humour that brings a little scene of Greek military life vividly before us, Seuthes gave the boy his liberty, and the soldier walked away with him. In order further to illustrate the hardy nature of Greek love, I may allude to the speech of Pausanias in the Symposium of Plato. The fruits of love, he says, are courage in the face of danger, intolerance of despotism, the virtues of the generous and haughty soul. “In Ionia,” he adds, “and other places, and generally in countries which are subject to the barbarians, the custom is held to be dishonourable; loves of youths share the evil repute of philosophy and gymnastics because they are inimical to tyranny, for the interests of rulers require that their subjects should be poor in spirit, and that there should be no strong bond of friend- ship or society among them, which love, above all other motives, is likely to inspire, as our Athenian tyrants learned by experience.” 19

VIII

Among the myths to which Greek lovers referred with pride, besides that of Achilles, were the legends of Theseus and Peirithous, of Orestes and Pylades, of Talos and Rhadamanthus, of Damon and Pythias. Nearly all the Greek gods, except, I think, oddly enough, Ares, were famous for their love. Poseidon, according to Pindar, loved Pelops; Zeus, besides Ganymede, was said to have carried off Chrysippus. Apollo loved Hyacinth, and numbered among his favourites Branchos and Claros. Pan loved Cyparissus, and the spirit of the evening star loved Hymenæus. Hypnos, the God of slumber, loved Endymion, and sent him to sleep with open eyes, in order that he might always gaze upon their beauty (Athenæus, xiii, 564). The myths of Phœbus, Pan, and Hesperus, it may be said in passing, are paiderastic paral- lels to the tales of Adonis and Daphine. They do not represent the specific quality of national Greek love at all in the same way as the legends of Achilles, Theseus, Py1ades, and Pythias. We find in them merely a beautiful and romantic play of the mythopœic fancy, after paiderastia had taken hold on the imagination of the race. The case is different with Herakles, the patron, eponym, and ancestor of Dorian Hellas. He was a boy-lover of the

18We may compare a passage from the Symposium ascribed to Xenophon: viii, 32: “That a soul whose bloom is visible alike in beauty of external form, free and unfet- tered, and an inner disposition, bashful, generous; a spirit”. 19 Plato, Symposium, trans. Jowett, p. 182. 238 Sexual Inversion true heroic type. In the innumerable amours ascribed to him we always discern the note of martial comradeship. His passion for Iolaus was so famous that lovers swore their oaths upon the Theban’s tomb;20 while the story of his loss of Hylas supplied Greek poets with one of their most charm- ing subjects. From the idyll of Theocritus called Hylas we learn some details about the relation between lover and beloved, according to the heroic ideal: “Nay, but the son of Amphitryon, that heart of bronze, be that abode the wild lion’s onset, loved a lad, beautiful Hylas—Hylas of the braided locks, and he taught him all things as a father teaches his child, all whereby him- self became a mighty man and renowned in minstrelsy. Never was he apart from Hylas, . . . and all this that the lad might be fashioned to his mind, and might drive a straight furrow, and come to the true measure of man.”21

IX

Passing from myth to semi-legendary history, we find frequent mention made of lovers in connection with the great achievements of the earliest age of Hellas. What Pausanias and Phædrus are reported to have said in the Symposium of Plato, is fully borne out by the records of the numerous tyran- nicides and self-devoted patriots who helped to establish the liberties of the Greek cities. When Epimenides of Crete required a human victim in his purification of Athens from the ȝȨıȠı [abomination] of the Megacleidæ, two lovers, Cratinus and Aristodemus, offered themselves as a voluntary sacrifice for the city.22 The youth died to propitiate the gods; the lover refused to live without him. Chariton and Melanippus, who attempted to assassinate Phalaris of Agrigentum, were lovers.23 So were Diocles and Philolaus, natives of Corinth, who removed to Thebes, and after giving laws to their adopted city, died and were buried in one grave.24 Not less celebrated was another Diocles, the Athenian exile, who fell near Megara in battle, fighting for the boy he loved.25 His tomb was honoured with the rites and sacrifices specially reserved for heroes. A similar story is told of the Thessalian horseman Cleomachus.26 This soldier rode into a battle which was being

20 Plutarch, Eroticus, xvii, 40, Jacob Reiske (ed.), Leipzig, Weidmann, 1774–82, p. 761. 21 Theocritus, Hylas, trans. Andrew Lang, London, McMillan, 1880, p. 63. 22 See Athenæus, Deipnosophistae, xiii, 602 for details. 23 See Athenæus, Deipnosophistae, xiii, 602 who reports an oracle in praise of these lovers. 24 Aristotle, Politics, ii, 9. 25 See Theocritus, [Aites], and the Scholia. 26 See Plutarch’s Eroticus 760, 42, where the story is reported on the faith of Aristotle. A Problem in Greek Ethics 239 fought between the people of Eretria and Chalkis, inflamed with such enthusiasm for the youth he loved, that he broke the foemen’s ranks and won the victory for the Chalkidians. After the fight was over Cleomachus was found among the slain, but his corpse was nobly buried; and from that time forward love was honoured by the men of Chalkis.27 These stories might be paralleled from actual Greek history. Plutarch, commenting upon the courage of the sacred band of Thebans, tells of a man “who, when his enemy was going to kill him, earnestly requested him to run him through the breast, that his lover might not blush to see him wounded in the back.” 28 In order to illustrate the haughty temper of Greek lovers, the same author, in his Erotic Dialogue, records the names of Antileon of Metapontum, who braved a tyrant in the cause of a boy he loved;29 of Crateas, who punished Archelaus with death for an insult offered to him; of Pytholaus, who treated Alexander of Pheræ in like manner; and of another youth who killed the Ambracian tyrant Periander for a similar affront.30 To these tales we might add another told by Plutarch in his Life of Demetrius Poliorketes. This man insulted a boy called Damocles, who, finding no other way to save his hon- our, jumped into a cauldron of boiling water and was killed upon the spot.31 A curious legend belonging to semi-mythical romance related by Pausanias,32 deserves a place here, since it proves to what extent the popular imagination was impregnated by notions of Greek love. The city of Thespia was at one time infested by a dragon, and young men were offered to appease its fury every year. They all died unnamed and unremembered except one, Cleostratus. To clothe this youth, his lover, Menestratus, forged a brazen coat of mail, thick set with hooks turned upwards. The dragon swallowed Cleostratus and killed him, but died by reason of the hooks. Thus love was the salvation of the city and the source of immortality to the two friends. It would not be difficult to multiply romances of this kind; the rhetoricians and moralists of later Greece abound in them.33 But the most famous of all remains to be recorded. This is the story of Harmodius and Aristogeiton, who freed Athens from the tyrant Hipparchus. There is not a speech, a poem, an essay, a panegyrical oration in praise of either Athenian liberty or Greek love

27 They became [madly given to the love of men] and [to side with the Chalcideans] was synonymous with [to side with the Laconians.] 28 Plutarch, Life of Pelopidas, trans. Clough, A Revision of John Dryden’s Translation of Plutarch’s ‘Lives’, vol. ii., p. 218. 29 Plutarch, Eroticus, xvi. p. 760, 21. 30Plutarch, Eroticus, xxiii, p. 768, 53. Compare Maximus Tyrius, Dissertation, xxiv, I. See, too, the chapter on Tyrannicide in Aristotle’s Politics, viii (v), 10. 31 Plutarch, Life of Demetrius Poliorketes, Clough’s translation, vol. v., p. 118. 32 Hellenics, book. ix, cap. xxvi. 33Suidas, under the heading of [Of Boys], tells of two lovers who both died in battle, fighting each to save the other. 240 Sexual Inversion which does not tell the tale of this heroic friendship. Herodotus and Thucydides treat the event as matter of serious history. Plato refers to it as the beginning of freedom for the Athenians. The drinking-song in honour of these lovers is one of the most precious fragments of popular Greek poetry which we pos- sess. As in the cases of Lucretia and Virginia, so here a tyrant’s intemperance was the occasion, if not the cause, of a great nation’s rising. Harmodius and Aristogeiton were reverenced as martyrs and saviours of their country. Their names gave consecration to the love which made them bold against the des- pot, and they became at Athens eponyms of ‘paiderastia.’34

X

A considerable majority of the legends which have been related in the pre- ceding section are Dorian, and the Dorians gave the earliest and most marked encouragement to Greek love. Nowhere else, indeed, except among the Dorians, who were an essentially military race, living like an army of occupation in the countries they had seized, herding together in barracks and at public messes, and submitting to martial drill and discipline, do we meet with paiderastia developed as an institution. In Crete and Lacedæmon it became a potent instrument of education. What I have to say, in the first instance, on this matter is derived almost entirely from C.O. Müller’s Dorians,35 to which work I refer my readers for the authorities cited in illus- tration of each detail. Plato says that the law of Lycurgus in respect to love was [significantly varying],36 by which he means that it allowed the custom under certain restrictions. It would appear that the lover was called inspirer at Sparta, while the youth beloved was named hearerr. These local phrases sufficiently indicate the relation which subsisted between the pair. The lover taught, the hearer learned; and so from man to man was handed down the tradition of heroism, the peculiar tone and temper of the state to which, in particular among the Greeks, the Dorians clung with obstinate pertinacity. Xenophon distinctly states that love was maintained among the Spartans with a view to education: and when we consider the customs of the state, by which boys were separated early from their homes and the influences of the family were almost wholly wanting, it is not dif- ficult to understand the importance of the paiderastic institution. The Lacedæmonian lover might represent his friend in the Assembly. He was answerable for his good conduct, and stood before him as a pattern of man- liness, courage, and prudence. Of the nature of his teaching we may form

34 See, for example, Æschinus against Timarchus, 59. 35 C.O. Müller, The History and Antiquities of the Doric Race [Geschichte hellenische Stämme und Städte], trans. Henry Tufnell and G.C. Lewis, London, J. Murray, 1830, vol, ii. pp. 300–13. 36 Plato, Symposium, 182A. A Problem in Greek Ethics 241 some notion from the precepts addressed by the Megarian Theognis to the youth Kurnus. In battle the lovers fought side by side;37 and it is worthy of notice that before entering into an engagement the Spartans sacrificed to Eros. It was reckoned a disgrace if a youth found no man to be his lover. Consequently we find that the most illustrious Spartans are mentioned by their biographers in connection with their comrades. Agesilaus heard Lysander; Archidamus, his son, loved Cleonymus; Cleomenes III was the hearer of Xenares and the inspirer of Panteus. The affection of Pausanias, on the other hand, for the boy Argilus, who betrayed him, according to the account of Thucydides,38 must not be reckoned among these nobler loves. In order to regulate the moral conduct of both parties, Lycurgus made it felony, punishable with death or exile, for the lover to desire the person of a boy in lust; and, on the other hand, it was accounted exceedingly dis- graceful for the younger to meet the advances of the elder with a view to gain. Honest affection and manly self-respect were exacted on both sides; the bond of union implied no more of sensuality than subsists between a father and a son, a brother and a brother. At the same time great license of intercourse was permitted. Cicero, writing long after the great age of Greece, but relying probably upon sources to which we have no access, asserts that “The Lacedemonians, while they permit all things except outrage in the love of youths, certainly distinguish the forbidden by a thin wall of parti- tion from the sanctioned, for they allow embraces and a common couch to lovers”. 39 In Crete the paiderastic institutions were even more elaborate than at Sparta. The lover was called [lover], and the beloved one [sic. Symonds meant : beloved]. When a man wished to attach to himself a youth in the recognised bonds of friendship, he took him away from his home, with a pretence of force, but not without the connivance, in most cases, of his friends.40 For two months the pair lived together among the hills, hunting and fishing. Then the [lover] gave gifts to the youth, and suffered him to return to his relatives. If the belovedd had received insults or ill-treatment during the probationary weeks, he now could get redress at law. If he was satisfied with the conduct of his would-be comrade, he changed his title from [beloved] to comrade and bystander in the ranks of battle and life, returned to the [lover] and lived thenceforward in close bonds of public intimacy with him. The primitive simplicity and regularity of these customs make it appear strange to modern minds; nor is it easy to understand how they should ever

37 Hence the name [comrade]. 38Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, i, 132. 39Cicero, De Republicum, iv, 4, Symonds’s translation. 40 I need hardly point out the parallel between this custom and the marriage cus- toms of half-civilised communities. 242 Sexual Inversion have been wholly free from blame. Yet we must remember the influences which prevalent opinion and ancient tradition both contribute toward preserving a delicate sense of honour under circumstances of apparent difficulty. The careful reading of one Life by Plutarch, that, for instance, of Cleomenes or that of Agis, will have more effect in presenting the realities of Dorian existence to our imagination than any amount of speculative disquisition. Moreover, a Dorian was exposed to almost absolute publicity. He had no chance of hiding from his fellow-citizens the secrets of his pri- vate life. It was not, therefore, till the social and political complexion of the whole nation became corrupt that the institutions just described encour- aged profligacy.41 That the Spartans and the Cretans degenerated from their primitive ideal is manifest from the severe critiques of the philosophers. Plato, while passing a deliberate censure on the Cretans for the introduction of paiderastia into Greece,42 remarks that syssitia, or meals in common, and gymnasia are favourable to the perversion of the passions. Aristotle, in a similar argument,43 points out that the Dorian habits had a direct tendency to check the population by encouraging the love of boys and by separating women from the society of men. An obscure passage quoted from Hagnon by Athenæus might also be cited to prove that the Greeks at large had formed no high opinion of Spartan manners.44 But the most convincing testimony is to be found in the Greek language: “to do like the Laconians, to have connec- tion in Laconian way, to do like the Cretans”, tell their own tale, especially when we compare these phrases with “to do like the Corinthians, the Lesbians, the Siphnians, the Phœnicians”, and other verbs formed to indicate the vices localised in separate districts. Up to this point, I have been content to follow the notices of Dorian insti- tutions which are scattered up and down the later Greek authors, and which have been collected by C.O. Müller. I have not attempted to draw definite conclusions, or to speculate upon the influence which the Dorian section of the Hellenic family may have exercised in developing paiderastia. To do so now will be legitimate, always remembering that what we actually know about the Dorians is confined to the historic period, and that the tradition respecting their early customs is derived from second-hand authorities. It has frequently occurred to my mind that the mixed type of paiderastia which I have named Greek Love took its origin in Doris. Homer, who knew

41 The general opinion of the Greeks with regard to the best type of Dorian love is well expressed by Maximus Tyrius, Dissertions, xxvi, 8: “It is esteemed a disgrace to a Cretan youth to have no lover. It is a disgrace for a Cretan youth to tamper with the boy he loves. 0 custom, beautifully blent of self-restraint and passion! The man of Sparta loves the lad of Lacedæmon. but loves him only as one loves a fair statue: and many love one, and one loves many.” 42 Plato, Laws, i, 636. 43 Aristotle, Politics, ii, 7,4. 44 Athenæus, Deipnosophists, xiii, 602, E. A Problem in Greek Ethics 243 nothing about the passion as it afterwards existed, drew a striking picture of masculine affection in Achilles. And Homer, I may add, was not a native of northern Greece. Whoever he was, or whoever they were, the poet, or the poets, we call Homer belonged to the south-east of the Ægean. Homer, then, may have been ignorant of paiderastia. Yet friendship occupies the first place in his hero’s heart, while only the second is reserved for sexual emo- tion. Now Achilles came from Phthia, itself a portion of that mountain region to which Doris belonged.45 Is it unnatural to conjecture that the Dorians, in their migration to Lacedæmon and Crete, the recognised head- quarters of the custom, carried a tradition of heroic paiderastia along with them? Is it unreasonable to surmise that here, if anywhere in Hellas, the custom existed from prehistoric times? If so, the circumstances of their invasion would have fostered the transformation of this tradition into a tribal institution. They went forth, a band of warriors and pirates, to cross the sea in boats, and to fight their way along the hills and plains of Southern Greece. The dominions they had conquered with their swords they occu- pied like soldiers. The camp became their country, and for a long period of time they literally lived upon the bivouac. Instead of a city-state with its manifold complexities of social life, they were reduced to the narrow limits and the simple conditions of a roving horde. Without sufficiency of women, without the sanctities of established domestic life, inspired by the memory of Achilles, and venerating their ancestor Herakles, the Dorian warriors had special opportunity for elevating comradeship to the rank of an enthusi- asm. The incidents of emigration into a distant country—perils of the sea, passages of rivers and mountains, assaults of fortresses and cities, landings on a hostile shore, night vigils by the side of blazing beacons, foragings for food, picquet services in the front of watchful foes—involved adventures capable of shedding the lustre of romance on friendship. These circum- stances, by bringing the virtues of sympathy with the weak, tenderness for the beautiful, protection for the young, together with corresponding quali- ties of gratitude, self-devotion and admiring attachment, into play, may have tended to cement unions between man and man no less firm than that of marriage. On such connections a wise captain would have relied for giv- ing strength to his battalion, and for keeping alive the flame of enterprise and daring. Fighting and foraging in company, sharing the same wayside board and heath-strewn bed, rallying to the comrade’s voice in onset, rely- ing on the comrade’s shield when fallen, these men learned the meanings of the words [lover] and [comrade]. To be loved was hon- ourable, for it implied being worthy to be died for. To love was glorious, since it pledged the lover to self-sacrifice in case of need. In these conditions the paiderastic passion may have well combined manly virtue with carnal

45 It is not unimportant to note in this connection that paiderastia of no ignoble type still prevails among the Albanian mountaineers. 244 Sexual Inversion appetite, adding such romantic sentiment as some stern men reserve within their hearts for women.46 A motto might be chosen for a lover of this early Dorian type from the Æolic poem ascribed to Theocritus: “And made me tender from the iron man I used to be.”47 In course of time, when the Dorians had settled down upon their con- quered territories, and when the passions which had shown their more heroic aspect during a period of warfare came, in a period of idleness, to call for methods of restraint, then the discrimination between honourable and base forms of love, to which Plato pointed as a feature of the Dorian institu- tions, took place. It is also more than merely probable that in Crete, where these institutions were the most precisely regulated, the Dorian immigrants came into contact with Phœnician vices, the repression of which required the adoption of a strict code.48 In this way paiderastia, considered as a mixed custom, partly martial, partly luxurious, recognised by public opinion and controlled by law, obtained among the Dorian Tribes, and spread from them throughout the states of Hellas. Relics of numerous semi-savage habit—thefts of food, ravishment as a prelude to marriage, and so forth—indicate in like manner the survival among the Dorians of primitive tribal institutions. It will be seen that the conclusion to which I have been drawn by the foregoing considerations is that the mixed form of paiderastia called by me in this essay Greek love owed its peculiar quality, what Plato called its “intricacy of its laws and customs,” to two diverse strains of circumstances harmonised in the Greek tem- perament. Its military and enthusiastic elements were derived from the primitive conditions of the Dorians during their immigration into Southern Greece. Its refinements of sensuality and sanctified impurity are referable to contact with Phœnician civilisation. The specific form it assumed among the Dorians of the historic period, equally removed from military freedom and from Oriental luxury, can be ascribed to the operation of that organising, moulding and assimilating spirit which we recognise as Hellenic. The position thus stated is, unfortunately, speculative rather than demon- strable; and in order to establish the reasonableness of the speculation, it would be natural at this point to introduce some account of paiderastia as it exists in various savage tribes, if their customs could be seen to illustrate the Doric phase of Greek love. This, however, is not the case. Study of Mr.Herbert Spencer’s Tables, and of [Adolphe] Bastian’s Der Mensch in der Geschichte,49

46 The forgoing attempt to reconstruct a possible environment for the Dorian form of paiderastia is, of course, wholly imaginative. Yet it receives certain support from what we know about the manners of the Albanian mountaineers and the nomadic Tartar tribes. Aristotle remarks upon the paiderastic customs of the Ke1ts, who in his times were immigrant. 47 So H.L. Ahrens reads it; another reading is . 48 See above, Section V. 49 Adolphe Bastian Der Mensch in der Geschichte [Man in Historyy], Leipzig, Wigand, 1860, 3 vols, vol. iii, pp. 304–23. A Problem in Greek Ethics 245 together with the facts collected by travellers among the North American Indians, and the mass of curious information supplied by Rosenbaum in his Geschichte der Lust-seuche im Alterthume makes it clear to my mind that the unisexual vices of barbarians follow, not the type of Greek paiderastia, but that of the Scythian disease of effeminacyy, described by Herodotus and Hippocrates as something essentially foreign and non-Hellenic. In all these cases, whether we regard the Scythian impotent effeminates, the North American Bardashes, the Tsecats of Madagascar, the Cordaches of the Canadian Indians, and similar classes among Californian Indians, natives of Venezuela, and so forth—the characteristic point is that effeminate males renounce their sex, assume female clothes, and live either in promiscuous concubinage with the men of the tribe or else in marriage with chosen per- sons. This abandonment of the masculine attributes and habits, this assump- tion of feminine duties and costume, would have been abhorrent to the Doric custom. Precisely similar effeminacies were recognised as pathologi- cal by Herodotus, to whom Greek paiderastia was familiar. The distinctive feature of Dorian comradeship was that it remained on both sides masculine, tolerating no sort of softness. For similar reasons, what we know about the prevalence of sodomy among the primitive peoples of Mexico, Peru and Yucatan, and almost all half-savage nations,50 throws little light upon the subject of the present inquiry. Nor do we gain anything of importance from the semi-religious practices of Japanese Bonzes or Egyptian priests. Such facts, taken in connection with abundant modern experience of what are called unnatural vices, only prove the universality of unisexual indulgence in all parts of the world and under all conditions of society. Considerable psychological interest attaches to the study of these sexual aberrations. It is also true that we detect in them the germ or raw material of a custom which the Dorians moralised or developed after a specific fash- ion; but nowhere do we find an analogue to their peculiar institutions. It was just that effort to moralise and adapt to social use a practice which has elsewhere been excluded in the course of civil growth, or has been allowed to linger half-acknowledged as a remnant of more primitive conditions, or has reappeared in the corruption of society; it was just this effort to elevate paiderastia according to the æsthetic standard of Greek ethics which consti- tuted its distinctive quality in Hellas. We are obliged, in fact, to separate this, the true Hellenic manifestation of the paiderastic passion, from the effeminacies, brutalities and gross sensualities which can be noticed alike in imperfectly civilised and in luxuriously corrupt communities. Before leaving this part of the subject, I must repeat that what I have suggested regarding the intervention of the Dorians in creating the type of

50 It appears from the reports of travellers that this form of passion is not common among those African tribes who have not been corrupted by Mussulmans [sicc] or Europeans. 246 Sexual Inversion

Greek love is a pure speculation. If it has any value, that is due to the fixed and regulated forms which paiderastic institutions displayed at a very early date in Crete and Sparta, and also to the remnants of savage customs embedded in them. It depends to a certain extent also upon the absence of paiderastia in Homer. But on this point something still remains to be said. Our Attic authorities certainly regarded the Homeric poems as canonical books, decisive for the culture of the first stage of Hellenic history. Yet it is clear that Homer refined Greek mythology, while many of the cruder ele- ments of that mythology survived from pre-Homeric times in local cults and popular religious observances. We know, moreover, that a body of non-Homeric writings, commonly called the cyclic poems, existed by the side of Homer, some of the material of which is preserved to us by drama- tists, lyrists, historians, antiquaries and anecdotists. It is not impossible that this so-called cyclical literature contained paiderastic elements, which were eliminated, like the grosser forms of myths in the Homeric poems.51 If this be conceded, we might be lead to conjecture that paiderastia was a remnant of ancient savage habits, ignored by Homer, but preserved by tra- dition in the race. Given the habit, the Greeks were certainly capable of carrying it on without shame. We ought to resist the temptation to seek a high and noble origin for all Greek institutions. But there remains the fact that, however they acquired the habit, whether from North Dorian cus- toms antecedent to Homer or from conditions of experience subsequent to the Homeric age, the Greeks gave it a dignity and an emotional superiority which is absent in the annals of barbarian institutions. Instead of abandon- ing it as part of the obsolete lumber of their prehistoric origins, they chose to elaborate it into the region of romance and ideality. And this they did in spite of Homer’s ignorance of the passion, or of his deliberate reticence. Whatever view, therefore, we may take about Homer’s silence, and about the possibility of paiderastia occurring in lost poems of the cyclic type, or, lastly, about its probable survival in the people from an age of savagery, we are bound to regard its systematical development among the Dorians as a fact of paramount significance. In that passage of the Symposium52 where Plato notices the Spartan law of love as [significantly varying], he speaks with disapprobation of the Bœotians, who were not restrained by custom and opinion within the same strict limits. Yet it should here be noted that the military aspect of Greek love in the historic period was nowhere more distinguished than at Thebes. Epaminondas was a notable boy-lover; and the names of his beloved, Asopichus and Cephisodorus, are mentioned by Plutarch.53 They

51 It may be plausibly argued that Æschylus drew the object of his Myrmidones from some such non-Homeric epic. See below, Section XII. 52 Plato, Symposium, 182 A. Cp. Plato, Laws. i. 636. 53 Plutarch, Eroticus, xvii, p. 761, 34. A Problem in Greek Ethics 247 died, and were buried with him at Mantinea. The paiderastic legend of Herakles and Iolaus was localised in Bœotia; and the lovers, Diocles and Philolaus, who gave laws to Thebes, directly encouraged those masculine attachments which had their origin in the Palæstra.54 The practical out- come of these national institutions in the chief town of Bœotia was the formation of the so-called Sacred Band, or Band of Lovers, upon whom Pelopidas relied in his most perilous operations. Plutarch relates that they were enrolled, in the first instance, by Gorgidas, the rank and file of the regiment being composed of young men bound together by affection. Report goes that they were never beaten till the battle of Chæronea. At the end of that day, fatal to the liberties of Hellas, Philip of Macedon went forth to view the slain; and when he “came to that place where the three hun- dred that fought his phalanx lay dead together, he wondered, and under- standing that it was the band of lovers, he shed tears, and said, ‘Perish any man who suspects that these men either did or suffered anything that was base’.”55 As at all the other turning-points of Greek history, so at this, too, there is something dramatic and eventful. Thebes was the last stronghold of Greek freedom; the Sacred Band contained the pith and flower of her army; these lovers had fallen to a man, like the Spartans of Leonidas at Thermopylæ, pierced by the lances of the Macedonian phalanx; then, when the day was over and the dead were silent, Philip, the victor in that fight, shed tears when he beheld their serried ranks, pronouncing himself there- with the fittest epitaph which could have been inscribed upon their stelë by a Hellene.56 At Chæronea, Greek liberty, Greek heroism, and Greek love, properly so- called, expired. It is not unworthy of notice that the son of the conqueror, young Alexander, endeavoured to revive the tradition of Achilleian friend- ship. This lad, born in the decay of Greek liberty, took conscious pleasure in enacting the part of a Homeric hero on the altered stage of Hellas and of Asia, with somewhat tawdry histrionic pomp.57 Homer was his invariable companion upon his marches; in the Troad he paid special honour to the tomb of Achilles, running naked races round the barrow in honour of the hero, and expressing the envy which he felt for one who had so true a friend and so renowned a poet to record his deeds. The historians of his life relate that, while he was indifferent to women,58 he was madly given to the love of

54 See Plutarch, Pelopidas, trans. Clough. vol. II, p. 219. 55 Clough, as quoted above, p. 219. 56 [This battle became a homosexual icon. George Ives (1867–1950), who gave his case history to Ellis, added the date of the Battle of Chæronea (338BC) to disguise the dates of letters pertaining to the homosexual rights organisation, the ‘Order of Chæronea’—so that 1897 would be written as C2235.] 57 The connection of the royal family of Macedon by descent with the Æacidæ, and the early settlement of the Dorians in Macedonia, are noticeable. 58 Cf. Athenæus, Deipnosophists, x, 435. 248 Sexual Inversion males. This the story of his sorrow for Hephaistion sufficiently confirms. A kind of spiritual atavism moved the Macedonian conqueror to assume on the vast Bactrian plain the outward trappings of Achilles Agonistes.59 Returning from this digression upon Alexander’s almost hysterical archaism, it should next be noticed that Plato includes the people of Elis in the censure which he passes upon the Bœotians. He accuses the Eleans of adopting customs which permitted youths to gratify their lovers without further distinction of age, or quality, or opportunity. In like manner Maximus Tyrius distinguishes between the customs of Crete and Elis: “While I find the laws of the Cretans excel- lent, I must condemn those of Elis for their license.”60 Elis,61 like Megara, instituted a contest for beauty among youths: and it is significant that the Megarians were not uncommonly accused of wanton lustt, by Greek writers. Both the Eleans and the Megarians may therefore reasonably be considered to have exceeded the Greek standard of taste in the amount of sensual indulgence which they openly acknowledged. In Ionia and other regions of Hellas exposed to Oriental influ- ences, Plato says that paiderastia was accounted a disgrace.62 At the same time he couples with paiderastia in this place both addiction to gymnastic exercisee and addiction to philosophical studies, pointing out that despotism was always hostile to high thoughts and haughty customs. The meaning of the passage, therefore, seems to be that the true type of Greek love had no chance of unfolding itself freely on the shores of Asia Minor. Of paiderastic effeminacyy there is here no question, else Plato would probably have made Pausanias use other language.

XI

Before proceeding to discuss the conditions under which paiderastia existed in Athens, it may be well to pause and to consider the tone adopted with regard to it by some of the earlier Greek poets. Much that is interesting on the subject of the true Hellenic Erôs can be gathered from Theognis, Solon, Pindar, Æschylus, and Sophocles; while the lyrics of Anacreon, Alcreus, Ibycus, and others of the same period illustrate the wanton and illiberal pas- sion, which tended to corrode and undermine the nobler feeling. It is well-known that Theognis and his friend Kurnus were members of the aristocracy of Megara. After Megara had thrown off the yoke of Corinth in the

59Hadrian in Rome, at a later period, revived the Greek tradition, with even more of caricature. His military ardour, patronage of art, and love for Antinous seem to hang together. 60 Maximus Tyrius, Dissertations, xxvi, 8. 61 See Athenæus, Deipnosophists, xiii, 609, F. The prize was armour and the wreath of myrtle. 62Plato, Symposium, 182 B. In the Laws, however, he [Plato] mentions the Barbarians as corrupting Greek morality in this respect. We have here a further proof that it was the noble type of love which the Barbarians discouraged. For μ [effeminacy] they had no dislike. A Problem in Greek Ethics 249 early part of the sixth century, the city first submitted to the democratic des- potism of Theagenes, and then for many years engaged in civil war-fare. The large number of the elegies of Theognis are specially intended to instruct Kurnus how he ought to act as an illustrious party-leader of the nobles in their contest with the people ( [cowards]). They consist, therefore, of political and social precepts, and for our present purpose are only important as illus- trating the educational authority assumed by a Dorian [lover] over his friend. The personal elegies intermingled with these poems on conduct reveal the very heart of a Greek lover at his early period. Here is one on loyalty: “Love me not with words alone, while your mind and thoughts are otherwise. If you really care for me and the heart within you is loyal. But love me with a pure and honest soul, or openly disown and hate me; let the breach between us be avowed. He who hath a single tongue and a double mind is a bad comrade, Kurnus, better as a foe than a friend.” 63 The bitter-sweet of love is well described in the following couplets: “Harsh and sweet, alluring and repellent, until it be crowned with completion, is love for young men. If one brings it to perfection, then it is sweet; but if a man pursues and does not love, then it is of all things the most painful.””64 The same strain is repeated in the lines which begin: “a boy’s love is fair to keep, fair to lay aside.”65 At one time Theognis tells his friend that he has the changeable temper of a hawk, the skittishness of a pampered colt.66 At another he remarks that boys are more constant than women in their affec- tion.67 His passion rises to its noblest height in a poem which deserves to rank with some of Shakespeare’s sonnets, and which, like them, has fulfilled its own promise of immortality.68 In order to appreciate the value of the fame conferred on Kurnus by Theognis and celebrated in such lofty strains, we must remember that these elegies were sung at banquets. “The fair young men,” of whom the poet speaks, boy-lovers themselves, chanted the praise of Kurnus to the sound of flutes, while the cups went round or the lyre was passed from hand to hand of merrymaking guests. A subject to which Theognis more than once refers is calumny: “Often will the folk speak vain things against thee in my ears, and against me in thine. Pay thou no heed to them.””69

63 Theodor Bergk, Poetæ Lyrici Graeci, Leipzig, Reichenbach, 1853, vol. ii., p. 490 line 87 of Theognis. 64 Bergk, Poetæ Lyrici Graeci, vol. ii., p. 490 line 1353 of Theognis. 65 Bergk., Poetæ Lyrici Graeci, vol. ii., line 1369 of Theognis. 66Bergk., Poetæ Lyrici Graeci, vol. ii., lines 1259–1270 of Theognis. 67 Bergk., Poetæ Lyrici Graeci, vol. ii., line 1267 of Theognis. 68 Bergk., Poetæ Lyrici Graeci, vol. ii, lines 237–254 of Theognis; translated by Symonds in Vagabunduli Libellus, London, Kegan, Paul and Trench, 1884, p. 167. 69 Bergk., Poetæ Lyrici Graeci, vol. ii., line 1239 of Theognis. 250 Sexual Inversion

Again, he frequently reminds the boy he loves, whether it be Kurnus or some other, that the bloom of youth is passing, and that this is a reason for showing kindness.70 This argument is urged with what appears like coarse- ness in the following couplet: “0 boy, so long as thy chin remains smooth, never will I cease from fawning, no, not if it is doomed for me to die.71 A couplet, which is also attributed to Solon, shows that paiderastia at this time in Greece was associated with manly sports and pleasures:

“Blest is the man who loves brave steeds of war, Fair boys, and hounds, and stranger guests from far.”72

Nor must the following be omitted:

“Blest is the man who loves, and after play, Whereby his limbs are supple made and strong, Retiring to his home, ‘twixt sleep and song, Sports with a fair boy on his breast all day.”

The following couplet is attributed to him by Plutarch, nor does there seem any reason to doubt its genuineness. The text seems to be corrupt, but the meaning is pretty clear: “In the charming season of the flower-time of youth thou shalt love boys, yearning for their thighs and honeyed mouth.”73 Solon, it may be remembered, thought it wise to regulate the conditions under which the love of free youths might be tolerated. The general impression produced by a careful reading of Theognis is that he entertained a genuine passion for Kurnus, and that he was anxious to train the young man’s mind in what he judged the noblest principles. Love, at the same time, except in its more sensual moments, he describes as bitter-sweet and subject to anxiety. That perturbation of the emotions which is inseparable from any of the deeper forms of personal attachment, and which the neces- sary conditions of boy-love exasperated, was irksome to the Greek. It is not a little curious to observe how all the poets of the despotic age resent and fret against the force of their own feeling, differing herein from the singers of chiv- alry, who idealised the very pains of passion. Of Ibycus, who was celebrated among the ancients as the lyrist of paiderastia,74 very little has been preserved to us, but that little is sufficient

70 Bergk., Poetæ Lyrici Graeci, vol. ii, line 1304 of Theognis. 71 Bergk., Poetæ Lyrici Graeci, vol. ii., line 1253 of Theognis. 72 Bergk., Poetæ Lyrici Graeci, vol. ii., line 1327 of Theognis. 73 Eroticus, cap. V., p. 725, 21. See Bergk., Poetæ Lyrici Graeci, vol. ii., p. 430. 74 See Cicero, Tusculan Disputations, iv. 33. A Problem in Greek Ethics 251 to indicate the fervid and voluptuous style of his art. His imagery resembles that of Anacreon. The onset of love, for instance, in one fragment is com- pared to the down-swooping of a Thracian whirlwind; in another the poet trembles at the approach of Erôs like an old race-horse who is dragged forth to prove his speed once more. Of the genuine Anacreon we possess more numerous and longer frag- ments, and the names of his favourites, Cleobulus, Smerdies, Leucaspis, are famous. The general tone of his love-poems is relaxed and Oriental, and his language abounds in phrases indicative of sensuality. The following may be selected: “Cleobulus I love, for Cleobulus I am mad, Cleobulus I watch and worship with my eyes.”75 Again— “0 boy, with the maiden’s eyes, I seek and follow thee, but thou heedest not, nor knowest that thou art my soul’s charioteer.”76 In another place he speaks of: “Love, the virginal, gleaming and radiant with desire.”77 , to pass the time of youth with friends, is a word which Anacreon may be said to have made current in Greek. It occurs twice in his fragments,78 and exactly expresses the luxurious enjoyment of youthful grace and beauty which appear to have been his ideal of love. We are very far here from the Achilleian friendship of the Iliad. Yet occasionally Anacreon uses images of great force to describe the attack of passion, as when he says that love has smitten him with a huge axe and plunged him in a wintry torrent.79 It must be remembered that both Anacreon and Ibycus were court poets, singing in the palaces of Polycrates and Hippias. The youths they cele- brated were probably but little better than the exoleti of a Roman Emperor.80 This cannot be said exactly of Alcæus, whose love for black-eyed Lycus was remembered by Cicero and Horace. So little, however, is left of his erotic poems that no definite opinion can be formed about them. The authority of later Greek authors justifies our placing him upon the list of those who helped to soften and emasculate the character of Greek love by their poems.81

75Bersk., Poetæ Lyrici Graeci, vol. iii, p. 1,013. 76 Bersk., Poetæ Lyrici Graeci, vol. iii, p. 1,013. 77 Bergk., Poetæ Lyrici Graeci, vol. iii, p. 1,045. 78 Bergk., Poetæ Lyrici Graeci, vol. iii, p. 1,109, 1,023: fr. 24, 46. 79 Bergk., Poetæ Lyrici Graeci, vol. iii, p. 1,023: fr. 48. 80 Maximus Tyrius, Dissertations, xxvi, says that Smendies was a Thracian, given for his great beauty, by his Greek captors to Polycrates. 81 See what Agathon says in the Thesmophoriazuse of Aristophanes. 252 Sexual Inversion

Two Athenian drinking-songs preserved by Athenæus,82 which seem to bear the stamp of the lyric age, may here be quoted. They serve to illustrate the kind of feeling to which expression was given in public by friends and boy-lovers: “Would I were a lovely heap of ivory, and that lovely boys carried me into the Dionysian chorus.” This is marked by a very delicate though naïf fancy. The next is no less emi- nent for its sustained, impassioned, simple, rhythmic feeling: “Drink with me, be young with me, love with me, wear crowns with me, with me when I am mad be mad, with me when I am temperate be sober.” 83 The greatest poet of the lyric age, the lyrist par excellence, Pindar, adds much to our conception of Greek love at this period. Not only is the poem to Theoxenos, whom he loved, and in whose arms he is said to have died in the theatre at Argos, one of the most splendid achievements of his art;84 but its choice of phrase, and the curious parallel which it draws between the free love of boys and the servile love of women, help us to comprehend the serious intensity of this passion. “the flashing rays of his forehead” and “is storm-tossed with desire,” and “the young-limbed bloom of boys,” are phrases which it is impossible adequately to translate. So, too, are the images by which the heart of him who does not feel the beauty of Theoxenos is said to have been forged with cold fire out of adamant, while the poet himself is compared to wax wasting under the sun’s rays. In Pindar, passing from Ibycus and Anacreon, we ascend at once into a purer and more healthful atmosphere, fraught, indeed, with passion and pregnant with storm, but no longer simply sensual. Taken as a whole, the Odes of Pindar, composed for the most part in the honour of young men and boys, both beautiful and strong, are the work of a great moralist as well as a great artist. He never fails to teach by precept and example; he does not, as Ibycus is reported to have done, adorn his verse with legends of Ganymede and Tithonus, for the sake of insinuating compliments. Yet no one shared in fuller measure the Greek admiration for health and grace and vigour of limb. This is obvious in the many radiant pictures of masculine perfection he has drawn, as well as in the images by which he loves to bring the beauty-bloom of youth to mind. The true Hellenic spirit may be better studied in Pindar than in any other poet of his age; and after we have weighed his high morality, sound counsel, and reverence for all things good, together with the passion he avows, we shall have done something toward comprehending the inner nature of Greek love.

82 Athenæus, Deipnosophists, xv, 695. 83Bergk., Poetæ Lyrici Graeci, vol. iii, p. 1,293. 84 Bergk., Poetæ Lyrici Graeci, vol i., p. 317. A Problem in Greek Ethics 253

XII

The treatment of paiderastia upon the Attic stage requires separate consideration. Nothing proves the popular acceptance and national approval of Greek love more forcibly to modern minds than the fact that tragedians like Æschylus and Sophocles made it the subject of their dramas. From a notice in Athemeus it appears that Stesichorus, who first gave dramatic form to lyric poetry, composed interludes upon paiderastic subjects.85 But of these it is impossible to speak, since their very titles have been lost. What imme- diately follows, in the narrative of Athenaeus, will serve as text for what I have to say upon this topic: “And Aeschylus, that mighty poet, and Sophocles brought masculine loves into the theatre through their tragedies. Wherefore some are wont to call tragedy a paiderast; and the spectators welcome such.” Nothing, unfortunately, remains of the plays which justified this language but a few fragments cited by Aristophanes, Plutarch, Lucian, and Athenaeus. To examine these will be the business of this section. The tragedy of the Myrmidones, which formed part of a trilogy by Æschylus upon the legend of Achilles, must have been popular at Athens, for Aristophanes quotes it no less than four times - twice in the Frogs, once in the Birds, and once in the Ecclesizusæ. We can reconstruct its general plan from the lines which have come down to us on the authority of the writers above mentioned.86 The play opened with an anapæstic speech of the chorus, com- posed of the clansmen of Achilles, who upbraided him for staying idle in his tent while the Achaians suffered at the hands of Hector. Achilles replied with the metaphor of the eagle stricken by an arrow winged from one of his own feathers. Then the embassy of Phœnix arrived, and Patroclus was sent forth to battle. Achilles, meanwhile, engaged in a game of dice; and while he was thus employed Antilochus entered with the news of the death of Patroclus. The next fragment brings the whole scene vividly before our eyes. “Wail for me, Antilochus, rather than for the dead man - for me, Achilles, who still lives.” After this, the corpse of Patroclus was brought upon the stage, and the son of Peleus poured forth a lamentation over his friend. The Threnos of Achilles on this occasion was very celebrated among the ancients. One passage of unmeasured passion, which described the love which subsisted between the two heroes, has been quoted with varieties of reading by Lucian, Plutarch, and Athenæus.87 Lucian says: “Achilles, bewailing the death of Patroclus with unhusbanded passion, broke forth into the truth in self-abandonment to woe.” Athenæus gives the text as follows: “Hadst thou no reverence for the unsullied

85 Athenæus, Deipnosophists, xiii, 601, A. 86 See the fragments of the Myrmidones in the Poeta Scenici Graci. My interpretation of them is, of course, conjectural. 87 Lucian, Amores; Plutarch, Eroticus; Athenæus, Deipnosophists, xiii, 602, E. 254 Sexual Inversion holiness of thighs. 0 thou ungrateful for the showers of kisses given.” What we have here chiefly to notice, is the change which the tale of Achilles had undergone since Homer.88 Homer represented Patroclus as older in years than the son of Peleus, but inferior to him in station; nor did he hint which of the friends was the [lover] of the other. That view of their com- radeship had not occurred to him. Æschylus makes Achilles the lover; and for this distortion of the Homeric legend he was severely criticised by Plato.89 At the same time, as the two lines quoted from the Threnos prove, he treated their affection from the point of view of post-Homeric paiderastia. Sophocles also wrote a play upon the legend of Achilles, which bears for its title Achilles’ Loves. Very little is left of this drama; but Hesychius has preserved one phrase which illustrates the Greek notion that love was an effluence from the beloved person through the eyes into the lover’s soul,90 while Stobæus quotes the beautiful simile by which love is compared to a piece of ice held in the hand by children.91 Another play of Sophocles, the Niobe, is alluded to by Plutarch and by Athenæus for the paiderastia which it contained. Plutarch’s words are these: “When the children of Niobe, in Sophocles, are being pierced and dying, one of them cries out, appealing to no other rescuer or ally than his lover: Ho! comrade, up and aid me!”92 Finally, Athenæus quotes a single line from the Colchian Women of Sophocles, which alludes to Ganymede, and runs as follows: “Inflaming with his thighs the royalty of Zeus.”93 Whether Euripides treated paiderastia directly in any of his plays is not quite certain, though the title Chrysippus and one fragment preserved from that tragedy—“Nature constrains me though I have sound judgment”—justify us in believing that he made the crime of Laius his subject. It may be added that a passage in Cicero confirms this belief.94 The title of another tragedy, Peirithous, seems in like manner to point at friendship; while a beautiful quotation from the Dictys sufficiently indicates the high moral tone assumed by Euripides in treating of Greek love. It runs as follows: “He was my friend; and never may love lead me to folly, nor to Kupris. There is, in truth, another kind of love—love for the soul, righteous, temperate, and good. Surely men ought to have made this law, that only the temperate and chaste should love, and send Kupris, daughter of Zeus,

88 Possibly Æschylus drew his fable from a non-Homeric source, but if so, it is curious that Plato should only refer to Homer. 89 Symposium, 180 A., ... [ugly slander, etc.]. Xenophon, Symph, 8, 31, points out that in Homer Achilles avenged the death of Patroclus, not as his lover, but as his comrade in arms. 90 Cf. Eurid., Hippol., 1, 525; Plato, Phædrus, p. 255; Maximus Tyrius, Dissertations, xxv, 2. 91 See Poetæ Scenici, Fragments of Sophocles. 92 Plutarch, Eroticus, p. 760, E. 93 Athenæus, Deipnosophists, p. 602, E. 94 Cicero, Tusculan Disputations, iv., 33. A Problem in Greek Ethics 255 a-b egging.” The philosophic ideal of comradeship is here vitalised by the dra- matic vigour of the poet; nor has the Hellenic conception of pure affection for “a soul, just, upright, temperate and good,” been elsewhere more pithily expressed. The Euripidean conception of friendship, it may further be observed, is nobly personified in Pylades, who plays a generous and self-devoted part in the three tragedies of Electra, Orestes, and Iphigenia in Tauris. Having collected these notices of tragedies which dealt with boy-love, it may be well to add a word upon comedies in the same relation. We hear of a Paidika by Sophron, a Malthakoi by the older Cratinus, a Baptæe by Empolis, in which Alcibiades and his society were satirised. Paiderastes is the title of plays by Diphilus and Antiphanes; Ganymedes of plays of Alkaeus Antiphanes and Eubulus. What has been quoted from Æschylus and Sophocles sufficiently establishes the fact that paiderastia was publicly received with approbation on the tragic stage. This should make us cautious in rejecting the stories which are told about the love adventures of Sophocles.95 Athenæus calls him a lover of lads, nor is it strange if, in the age of Pericles, and while he was producing the Achilles’ Loves he should have shared the tastes of which his race approved. At this point it may be as well to mention a few illustrious names, which to the student of Greek art and literature are indissolubly connected with paiderastia. Parmenides, whose life, like that of Pythagoras, was accounted peculiarly holy, loved his pupil Zeno,96 Pheidias loved Pantarkes, a youth of Elis, and carved his portrait in the figure of a victorious athlete at the foot of the Olympian Zeus.97 Euripides is said to have loved the adult Agathon. Lysias, Demosthenes, and Æschines, orators whose conduct was open to the most searching censure of malicious criticism, did not scruple to avow their love. Socrates described his philosophy as the science of erotics. Plato defined the highest form of human existence to be “philosophy together with paideras- tia,” and composed the celebrated epigrams on Aster and on Agathon. This list might be indefinitely lengthened.

XIII

Before proceeding to collect some notes upon the state of paiderastia at Athens, I will recapitulate the points which I have already attempted to establish. In the first place, paiderastia was unknown to Homer.98 Secondly,

95 See Athenæus, Deipnosophists, xiii. pp. 604, 605, for two very outspoken stories about Sophocles at Chios and apparently at Athens. In 582 he mentions one of the boys beloved by Sophoc1es, a certain Demophon. 96Plato, Parmenides, 127 A. 97 Pausanias, Description of Greece, v, ii, and see Meier, ‘Pederastie,’ p. 159, note 93. 98 This, by the way, is a strong argument against the theory that the Iliad was a post-Herodotean poem. A poet in the age of Pisistratus or Pericles would not have omitted paiderastia from his view of life, and could not have told the myth of 256 Sexual Inversion soon after the heroic age, two forms of paiderastia appeared in Greece—the one chivalrous and martial, which received a formal organisation in the Dorian states; the other sensual and lustful, which, though localised to some extent at Crete, pervaded the Greek cities like a vice. Of the distinction between these two loves the Greek conscience was well aware, though they came in course of time to be confounded. Thirdly, I traced the character of Greek love, using that term to indicate masculine affection of a permanent and enthusiastic temper, without further ethical qualification, in early Greek history and in the institutions of Dorians. In the fourth place, I showed what kind of treatment it received at the hands of the elegiac, lyric, and tragic poets. It now remains to draw some picture of the social life of the Athenians in so far as paiderastia is concerned, and to prove how Plato was justified in describing Attic customs on this point as qualified by important restriction and distinction. I do not know a better way of opening this inquiry, which must by its nature be fragmentary and disconnected, than by transcribing what Plato puts into the mouth of Pausanias in the Symposium.99 After observ- ing that the paiderastic customs of Elis and Bœotia involved no perplex- ity, inasmuch as all concessions to the god of love were tolerated, and that such customs did not exist in any despotic states, he proceeds to Athens. “There is yet a more excellent way of legislating about them, which is our own way; but this, as I was saying, is rather perplexing. For observe that open loves are held to be more honourable than secret ones, and that the love of the noblest and highest, even if their persons are less beautiful than others is especially honourable. Consider, too, how great is the encourage- ment which all the world gives to the lover; neither is he supposed to be doing anything dishonourable; but if he succeeds he is praised, and if he fails he is blamed. And in the pursuit of his love the custom of mankind allows him to do many strange things, which philosophy would bitterly censure if they were done from any motive of interest or wish for office or power. He may pray and entreat, and supplicate and swear, and be a servant of servants, and lie on a mat at the door; in any other case friends and enemies would be equally ready to prevent him, but now there is no friend who will be ashamed of him and admonish him, and no enemy will charge him with meanness or flattery; the actions of a lover have a grace which

Ganymede as Homer tells it. It is doubtful whether he could have preserved the pure outlines of the story of Patroclus. 99Plato, Symposium, trans. Jowett, p. 182. Mr. Jowett censures this speech as sophis- tic and confused in view. It is precisely on this account that it is valuable. The confusion indicates the obscure conscience of the Athenians. The sophistry is the result of a half-acknolwedged false position. A Problem in Greek Ethics 257 ennobles them, and custom has decided that they are highly commendable, and that there is no loss of character in them; and, what is strangest of all, he only may swear or forswear himself (this is what the world says), and the gods will forgive his transgression, for there is no such thing as a lover’s oath. Such is the entire liberty which gods and men have allowed the lover, according to the custom which prevails in our part of the world. From this point of view a man fairly argues that in Athens to love and to be loved is held to be a very honourable thing. But when there is another regime, and parents forbid their sons to talk with their lovers, and place them under a tutor’s care, and their companions and equals cast in their teeth anything of this sort which they may observe, and their elders refuse to silence the reprovers, and do not rebuke them, anyone who reflects on all this will, on the contrary, think that we hold these practices to be most disgraceful. But the truth, as I imagine, and as I said at first, is, that whether such practices are honourable or whether they are dishonourable is not a simple question: they are honourable to him who follows them honourably, dishonourable to him who follows them dishonourably. There is dishonour in yielding to the evil, or in an evil manner; but there is honour in yielding to the good, or in an honourable manner. Evil is the vulgar lover who loves the body rather than the soul, and who is inconstant because he is a lover of the inconstant, and, therefore, when the bloom of youth, which he was desiring, is over, takes wing and flies away, in spite of all his wards and promises; whereas the love of the noble mind, which is one with the unchanging, is life-long.” Pausanias then proceeds, at considerable length, to describe how the custom of Athens required deliberate choice and trial of character as a condition of honourable love; how it repudiated hasty and ephemeral attachments and engagements formed with the object of money-making or political aggran- disement; how love on both sides was bound to be disinterested, and what accession both of dignity and beauty the passion of friends obtained from the pursuit of philosophy and from the rendering of mutual services upon the path of virtuous conduct. This sufficiently indicates, in general terms, the moral atmosphere in which Greek love flourished at Athens. In an earlier part of his speech Pausanias, after dwelling upon the distinction between the two kinds of Aphrodite, heavenly and vulgar, describes the latter in a way which proves that the love of boys was held to be ethically superior to that of women.100 “The Love who is the offspring of the common Aphrodite is essentially com- mon, and has no discrimination, being such as the meaner sort of men feel, and is apt to be of women as well as of youths, and is of the body rather than the soul; the most foolish beings are the objects of this love, which desires

100Plato, Symposium, trans. Jowett, p. 181. 258 Sexual Inversion only to gain an end, but never thinks of accomplishing the end nobly, and therefore does good and evil quite indiscriminately. The goddess who is his mother is far younger than the other, and she was born of the union of the male and female, and partakes of both.” Then he turns to the Uranian love. “The offspring of the heavenly Aphrodite is derived from a mother in whose birth the female has no part. She is from the male only; this is that love which is of youths, and the goddess being older, has nothing of wantonness. Those who are inspired by this love turn to the male, and delight in him who is the most valiant and intelligent nature; any one may recognise the pure enthusiasts in the very character of their attach- ments; for they love not boys, but intelligent beings whose reason is beginning to be developed, much about the time at which their beards begin to grow. And in choosing them as their companions they mean to be faithful to them, and pass their whole life in company with them, not to take them in their inexperience, and deceive them, and play the fool with them, or run away from one to another of them. But the love of young boys should be f orbidden by law, because their future is uncertain; they may turn out good or bad, either in body or soul, and much noble enthusiasm may be thrown away upon them; in this matter the good are a law to themselves, and the coarser sort of lovers ought to be restrained by force, as we restrain or attempt to restrain them from fixing their affection of women of free birth.” These long quotations from a work accessible to every reader may require apology. My excuse for giving them must be that they express in pure Athenian diction a true Athenian view of this matter. The most salient characteristics of the whole speech are, first, the definition of a code of honour, distinguishing the nobler from the baser forms of paiderastia; secondly, the decided preference of male over female love; thirdly, the belief in the possibility of permanent affection between paiderastic friends; and, fourthly, the passing allusion to rules of domestic surveil- lance under which Athenian boys were placed. To the first of these points I shall have to return on another occasion. With regard to the second, it is sufficient for the present purpose to remember that free Athenian women were comparatively uneducated and uninteresting, and that the hetairai had proverbially bad manners. While men transacted business and enjoyed life in public, their wives and daughters stayed in the seclu- sion of the household, conversing to a great extent with slaves, and igno- rant of nearly all that happened in the world around them. They were treated throughout their lives as minors by the law, nor could they dis- pose by will of more than the worth of a bushel of barley. It followed that marriages at Athens were usually matches of arrangement between the fathers of the bride and the bridegroom, and that the motives which A Problem in Greek Ethics 259 induced a man to marry were less the desire for companionship than the natural wish for children and a sense of duty to the country.101 Demosthenes, in his speech against Neaera, declares: “We have courte- sans for our pleasures, concubines for the requirements of the body, and wives for the procreation of lawful issue.”102 If he had been speaking at a drinking-party, instead of before a jury, he might have added, “and young men for intellectual companions”. The fourth point which I have noted above requires more illustration, since its bearing on the general condition of Athenian society is impor- tant. Owing to the prevalence of paiderastia, a boy was exposed in Athens to dangers which are comparatively unknown in our great cities, and which rendered special supervision necessary. It was the custom for fathers, when they did not themselves accompany their sons,103 to com- mit them to the care of slaves chosen usually among the oldest and most trustworthy. The duty of the attendant guardian was not to instruct the boy, but to preserve him from the addresses of importunate lovers or from such assaults as Peisthetaerus in the Birds of Aristophanes describes,104 He followed his charge to the school and the gymnasium, and was responsi- ble for bringing him home at the right hour. Thus at the end of the Lysis we read: “Suddenly we were interrupted by the tutors of Lysis and Menexenus, who came upon as like an evil apparition with their brothers and bade them go home, as it was getting late. At first, we and the bystanders drove them off: but afterward, as they would not mind and only went on shouting in their barbarous dialect, and got angry and kept calling the boys—they appeared to us to have been drinking rather too much at the Hermæa, which made them difficult to manage—we fairly gave way and broke up the company.”105 In this way the daily conduct of Athenian boys of birth and good condition was subject ed to observation; and it is not improbable that the charm which invested such lads as Plato portrayed in his Charmides and Lysis was partly due to the self-respect and self-restraint generated by the peculiar conditions under which they passed their life.

101 See the curious passages in Plato, Symposium, trans. Jowett, p. 192; Plutarch, Erot. p. 751; and Lucian, Amores, c. 38. 102 Quoted by Athenæus, Deipnosophists, iii, 573 B. 103 As Lycon chaperorned Autolycus at the feast of Call1uias—Xenophon, Symposium. Boys incurred immediate suspicion if they went out alone to p arties. See a fragment from the Sappho of Ephippus in Athenæus, Deipnosophists, xiii. p. 572 C. 104 Aristophanes, The Birds, line 137.—The joke here is that the father in Utopia suggests of his own accord, what in Athens he carefully guarded against. 105 Plato, Lysis, trans. Jowett, p. 223. 260 Sexual Inversion

Of the way in which a Greek boy spent his day, we gain some notion from two passages in Aristophanes and Lucian. The Dikaios Logos106 tells that, “in his days, when justice flourished and self-control was held in honour, a boy’s voice was never heard. He walked in order with his comrades of the same quarter, lightly clad even in winter, down to the school of the harp- player. There he learned old-fashioned hymns to the gods, and patriotic songs. While he sat, he took care to cover his person decently; and when he rose, he never forgot to rub out the marks which he might have left upon the dust lest any man should view them after he was gone. At meals he ate what was put before him and refrained from idle chattering. Walking through the streets, he never tried to catch a passer’s eye or to attract a lover. He avoided the shops, the baths,107 the Agora, the houses of Hetairai.108 He reverenced old age and formed within his soul the image of modesty. In the gymnasium he indulged in fair and noble exercise, or ran races with his comrades among the olive-trees of the Academy.” The Adikos Logos replies by pleading that this temperate sort of life is quite old-fashioned; boys had better learn to use their tongues and bully. In the last resort he uses a clinching argumentum ad juvenum: , [sic, read: ] ’ [sic, read: ], ’ , , , , , .109 [Now, my boy, just think of all the things that self-restraint requires—boys and women, drunken games and tasty delicacies, drink and riotous laughter.] Were it not for the beautiful and highly finished portraits in Plato, to which I have already alluded, the description of Aristophanes might be thought a mere ideal; and, indeed, it is probable that the actual life of the average Athenian boy lay mid-way between the courses prescribed by the Dikaios and the Adikos Logos. Meanwhile, since Euripides, together with the whole school of studious and philosophic speculators, are aimed at in the speeches of the Adikos Logos, it will be fair to adduce a companion picture of the young Greek edu- cated on the athletic system, as these men had learned to know him. I quote from the Autolyous a satyric drama of Euripides: “There are a myriad bad things in Hellas, but nothing is worse than the athletes. To begin with, they do not know how to live like gentlemen, nor

106 Aristophanes, The Clouds, 948 and on. I have abridged the original, doing vio- lence to one of the most beautiful pieces of Greek poetry. 107 Aristophanes returns to this point below, line 1036, where he says that youths chatter all day in the hot baths and leave the wrestling-grounds empty. 108 There was a good reason for shunning each. The Agora was the meeting-place of idle gossips, the centre of chaff and scandal. The shops were, as we shall see, the resort of bad characters and panders. 109 Aristophanes, The Clouds, Line 1071. A Problem in Greek Ethics 261 could they if they did; for how can a man, the slave of his jaws and his belly, increase the fortune left him by his father? Poverty and ill-luck find them equally incompetent. Having acquired no habits of good living, they are badly off when they come to roughing it. In youth they shine like statues stuck about the town, and take their walks abroad; but when old age draws nigh, you find them as threadbare as an old coat. Suppose a man has wrestled well, or runs fast, or has hurled a quoit, or given a black eye in fine style, has he done the state a service by the crowns he won? Do soldiers fight with quoits in hand, or without the press of shields can kicks expel the foeman from the gate? Nobody is fool enough to do these things with steel before his face. Keep, then, your laurels for the wise and good, for him who rules a city well, the just and tem- perate, who by his speeches wards off ill, allaying wars and civil strife. These are the things for cities, yea, and for all Greece to boast of.” Lucian represents, of course, a late period of Attic life. But his picture of the perfect boy completes, and in some points supplements, that of Aristophanes. Callicratidas, in the Dialogue of Love, has just drawn an unpleasing picture of a woman, surrounded in a fusty boudoir with her rouge-pots and cosmet- ics, perfumes, paints, combs, looking-glasses, hair dyes, and curling irons. Then he turns to praise boys. “How different is a boy! In the morning he rises from his chaste couch, washes the sleep from his eyes with cold water, puts on his chlamys,110 and takes his way to the school of the musician or the gymnast. His tutors and guardians attend him, and his eyes are bent upon the ground. He spends the morning in studying the poets and philosophers, in riding, or in military drill. Then he betakes himself to the wrestling-ground, and hardens his body with noontide heat and sweat and dust. The bath follows and a modest meal. After this he returns for awhile to study the lives of heroes and great men. After a frugal supper sleep at last is shed upon his eyelids.”111 Such is Lucian’s sketch of the day spent by a young Greek at the famous University of Athens. Much is, undoubtedly, omitted; but enough is said to indicate the simple occupations to which an Athenian youth, capable of inspiring an enthusiastic affection, was addicted. Then follows a burst of rhetoric, which reveals, when we compare it with the dislike expressed for women, the deeply-seated virile nature of Greek love. “Truly he is worthy to be loved. Who would not love Hermes in the palæstra, or Phœbus at the lyre, or Castor on the racing-ground? Who would not wish to sit face to face with such a youth, to hear him talk, to share his toils, to walk with him, to nurse him in sickness, to attend him on the sea, to suffer chains and darkness with him if need be? He who hated him should be my foe, and whoso loved him should be loved by me. At his death I would die; one grave should cover us both; one cruel hand cut short our lives!”

110Worn up to the age of about eighteen. 111Callicratidas, Dialogue of Love, chapters 44, 45, 46. The quotation is only an abstract of the original. 262 Sexual Inversion

In the sequel of the dialogue Lucian makes it clear that he intends these raptures of Callicratidas to be taken in great measure for romantic boasting. Yet the fact remains that, till the last, Greek paiderastia among the better sort of men (the ) implied no effeminacy. Community of interest in sport, in exercise, and in open-air life rendered it attractive.112

“If Son of Eudiades, Euphorion, After the boxing-match, in which he beat, With wreaths I crowned, and set fine silk upon His forehead and soft blossoms honey-sweet; Then thrice I kissed him all beblooded there; His mouth I kissed, his eyes, his every bruise; More fragrant far than frankincense, I swear, Was the fierce chrism that from his brows did ooze.”

“I do not care for curls or tresses Displayed in wily wildernesses; I do not prize the arts that dye A painted cheek with hues that fly: Give me a boy whose face and hand Are rough with dust or circus-sand, Whose ruddy flesh exhales the scent Of health without embellishment: Sweet to my sense is such a youth, Whose charms have all the charm of truth: Leave paints and perfumes, rouge, and curls, To lazy, lewd Corinthian girls.”

The palæstra was the place at Athens where lovers enjoyed the greatest free- dom. In the Phædrus Plato observes that the attachment of the lover for a boyy grew by meetings and personal contact in the gymnasiums and other social resorts,113 and in the Symposium he mentions gymnastic exercises with phi- losophy, and paiderastia as the three pursuits of freemen most obnoxious to despots. Æschines, again, describing the manners of boy-lovers in language familiar to his audience, uses these phrases: “having grown up in gymnasiums, and games”, and “the man having been a noisy haunter of gymnasiums, and

112Compare with the passages just quoted two epigrams from the [Muse of Boyhood, by Strato of Sardis] (Greek Anthologyy, sect. 12): No. 123 from a lover to a lad who has conquered in a boxing-match: No. 192 where Strato says he prefers the dust and oil of the wrestling-ground to the curls and perfumes of a woman’s room. 113Plato, Phædrus, trans. Jowett, p. 255 B. A Problem in Greek Ethics 263 having been the lover of multitudes”. Aristophanes also in the Wasps114 employs similar language: “and not seeking to go revelling around in exercising grounds” I may compare Lucian, Amores, chapter two, “you care for gymnasiums and their sleek oiled combatants”, which is said to a notorious boy-lover. Boys and men met together with considerable liberty in the porches, peristyles, and other adjuncts to an Attic wrestling-ground; and it was here, too, that soph- ists and philosophers established themselves with the certainty of attracting a large and eager audience for their discussions. It is true that an ancient law forbade the presence of adults in the wrestling-grounds of boys; but this law appears to have become almost wholly obsolete in the days of Plato. Socrates, for example, in the Charmides, goes down immediately, after his arrival from the camp at Potidæa into the palæstra of Taureas to hear the news of the day, and the very first question which he asks his friends is whether a new beauty has appeared among the youths.115 So again in the Lysis, Hippothales invites Socrates to enter the private palæstra of Miccus, where boys and men were exercising together on the feast-day of Hermes.116 “The building,” he remarks, “is a newly erected pa1æstra, and the entertainment is general1y conversation, to which you are welcome”. The scene which immediately follows is well known to Greek students as one of the most beautiful and vivid pictures of Athenian life. One group of youths are sacrificing to Hermes; another are casting dice in a corner of the dressing-room. Lysis himself is “standing among the other boys and youths, having a crown upon his head, like a fair vision, and not less worthy of praise for his goodness than for his beauty”. The modesty of Lysis is shown by the shyness which prevents his joining Socrates’ party until he has obtained the company of some of his young friends. Then a circle of boys and men is formed in a corner of the court, and a conversation upon friend- ship begins. Hippothales, the lover of Lysis, keeps at a decorous distance in the background. Not less graceful as a picture is the opening of the Charmides. In answer to a question of Socrates, the frequenters of the palæstra tell him to expect the coming of young Charmides. He will then see the most beautiful boy in Athens at the time: “for those who are just entering are the advanced guard of the great beauty of the day, and he is likely to be not far off”. There is a noise and bustle at the door, and while the Socratic party continues talking Charmides enters. The effect produced is over-powering:117 “You know, my friend, that I cannot measure anything, and of the beautiful I am simply such a measure as a white line is of chalk: for almost all young

114 Aristophanes, Wasps, line 1025. 115 Plato, Charmides, trans. Jowett,p. 153. 116 Plato, Lysis, trans. Jowett, p. 206. This seems, however, to imply that on the other occasions they were separated. 117 Plato, Charmides, trans. Jowett, p. 154. 264 Sexual Inversion persons appear to be beautiful in my eyes. But at that moment when I saw him coming in, I confess that I was quite astonished at his beauty and his stature; all the world seemed to be enamoured of him; amazement and confusion reigned when he entered; and a troop of lovers followed him. That grown-up men like ourselves should have been affected in this way was not surprising, but I observed that there was the same feeling among the boys; all of them, down to the very least child, turned and looked at him, as if he had been a statue.” Charmides, like Lysis, is persuaded to sit down by Socrates, who opens a discussion upon the appropriate question of modest temperance and self- restraint.118 “He came as he was bidden, and sat down between Critias and me. Great amusement was occasioned by everyone pushing with might and main at his neighbour in order to make a place for him next to them, until at the two ends of the row one had to get up, and the other was rolled over sideways. Now I, my friend, was beginning to feel awkward; my former bold belief in my powers of conversing with him had vanished. And when Critias told him that I was the person who had the cure, he looked at me in such an indescribable man- ner, and was going to ask a question; and then all the people in the palæstra crowded about us, and, O rare! I caught a sight of the inwards of his garment, and took the flame. Then I could no longer contain myself. I thought how well Cydias understood the nature of love when, in speaking of a fair youth, he warns someone ‘not to bring the fawn in the sight of the lion to be devoured by him’ for I felt that I had been overcome by a sort of wild-beast appetite.” The whole tenor of the dialogue makes it clear that, in spite of the admira- tion he excited, the honour paid him by a public character like Socrates, and the troops of lovers and of friends surrounding him, yet Charmides was unspoiled. His docility, modesty, simplicity, and healthiness of soul are at least as remarkable as the beauty for which he was so famous. A similar impression is produced upon our minds by Autolycus in the Symposium of Xenophon.119 Callias, his acknowledged lover,120 had invited him to a banquet after a victory which he had gained in the pancration; and many other guests, including the Socratic party, were asked to meet him. Autolycus came, attended by his father; and as soon as the tables were covered and the seats had been arranged, a kind of divine awe fell upon the company. The grown-up men were dazzled by the beauty and the modest bearing of the boy, just as when a bright light is brought into a

118 Plato, Charmides, trans. Jowett, p. 155. 119 Xenophon, Symposium, i, 8. 120Xenophon, Symposium, viii, 17: , ... [And that you, Callius, do love Autolycus, this whole city knows, etc.] This is said before a boy, and in his hearing. A Problem in Greek Ethics 265 darkened room. Everybody gazed at him, and all were silent, sitting in uncomfortable attitudes of expectation and astonishment. The dinner party would have passed off very tamely if Phillipus, a professional diner- out and jester, had not opportunely made his appearance. Autolycus mean- while never uttered a word, but lay beside his father like a breathing statue. Later on in the evening he was obliged to answer a question. He opened his lips with blushes, and all he said was “Not I, by gad”.121 Still, even this cre- ated a great sensation in the company. Everybody, says Xenophon, was charmed to hear his voice and turned their eyes upon him. It should be remarked that the conversation at this party fell almost entirely upon mat- ters of love. Critobulus, for example, who was very beautiful and rejoiced in having many lovers, gave a full account of his own feelings for Cleinias. “You all tell me,” he argued, “that I am beautiful, and I cannot but believe you; but if I am, and if you feel what I feel when I look on Cleinias, I think that beauty is better worth having than all Persia. I would choose to be blind to everybody else if I could only see Cleinias, and I hate the night because it robs me of his sight. I would rather be the slave of Cleinias than live without him; I would rather toil and suffer danger for his sake than live alone at ease and in safety. I would go through fire with him, as you would with me. In my soul I carry an image of him better made than any sculptor could fashion.”122 What makes this speech the more singular is that Critobulus was a newly married man. But to return from this digression to the palæstra. The Greeks were con- scious that gymnastic exercises tended to encourage and confirm the habit of paiderastia. “The cities which have most to do with gymnastics,” is the phrase which Plato uses to describe the states where Greek love flourished.123 Herodotus says the barbarians borrowed gymnastics together with paideras- tia from the Hellenes; and we hear that Polycrates of Samos caused the gym- nasia to be destroyed when he wished to discountenance the love which lent the warmth of personal enthusiasm to political associations.124 It was common to erect statues of love in the wrestling-grounds; and there, says Plutarch,125 the god’s wings grew so wide that no man could restrain his flight. Readers of the idyllic poets will remember that it was a statue of Love which fell from its pedestal in the swimming-bath upon the cruel boy who had insulted the body of his self-slain friend.126 Charmus, the lover of

121 Xenophon, Symposium, iii, 12. 122 Xenophon, Symposium, iv, 10, et seq. The English is an abridgment. 123 Plato, Laws, i. 636 C. 124 Athenæus, Deipnosophists, xiii, 602 D. 125 Plutarch, Eroticus. [No reference given.] 126 [lover] or [passionately loving], line 60, ascribed to Theocritus, but not genuine. 266 Sexual Inversion

Hippias, erected an image of Erôs in the Academy at Athens which bore this epigram: “Love, god of many evils and various devices, Charmus set up this altar to thee upon the shady boundaries of the gymnasium.”127 Erôs, in fact, was as much at home in the gymnasia of Athens as Aphrodite in the temples of Corinth; he was the patron of paiderastia, as she of female love. Thus Meleager writes: “The Cyprian queen, a woman, hurls the fire that maddens men for females; but Erôs himself sways the love of males for males.”128 Plutarch, again, in the Erotic dialogue, alludes to Erôs, where Aphrodite is not; Erôs apart from Aphrodite. These facts relating to the gymnasia justi- fied Cicero in saying “Mihi quidem hæc in Græcorum gymnasiis nata con- suetudo videtur: in quibus isti liberi et concessi sunt amores.” He adds, with a true Roman’s antipathy to Greek æsthetics and their flimsy screen for sen- suality, “Bene ergo Ennius, flagitii principium est nudare inter cives corpora.”129 “To me, indeed, it seems that this custom was generated in the gymnasiums of the Greeks, for there those loves are freely indulged and sanctioned. Ennius therefore very properly observed that the beginning of vice is the habit of stripping the body among citizens.”130 The Attic gymnasia and schools were regulated by strict laws. We have already seen that adults were not supposed to enter the palæstra; and the penalty for the infringement of this rule by the gymnasiarch was death. In the same way schools had to be shut at sunset and not opened again before daybreak; nor was a grown-up man allowed to frequent them. The public chorus-teachers of boys were obliged to be above the age of forty.131 Slaves who presumed to make advances to a free boy were subject to the severest penalties; in like manner they were prohibited from gymnastic exercises. Æschines, from whom we learn these facts, draws the correct conclusion that gymnastics and Greek love were intended to be the special privilege of free- men. Still, in spite of all restrictions, the palæstra was the centre of Athenian profligacy, the place in which not only honourable attachments were formed, but disgraceful bargains also were concluded;132 and it is not improbable that men like Taureas and Miccus, who opened such places of amusement as a private speculation, may have played the part of go-betweens and panders.

127 Athenæus, Deipnosophists, xiii, 609 D. 128 Strato of Sardis, [Muse of Boyhood], 86. 129 Compare the Atys of Catullus: “Ego mulier, ego adolescens, ego ephebus, ego puer, ego gymnasi fui flos, ego eram decus olei.” 130 [Symonds’s translation.] 131 See the law on these points in Æsch. adv. Timarchum. 132 Thus Aristophanes quoted above, [seeking to go revelling in exercise grounds]. A Problem in Greek Ethics 267

Their walls and the plane-trees which grew along their open courts were inscribed by lovers with the names of boys who had attracted them. To scrawl up “fair is Dinomeneus, fair is the boy,” was a common custom, as we learn from Aristophanes and from this anonymous epigram in the Anthology: “I said and once again I said, ‘fair, fair’; but still will go on repeating how fascinat- ing with his eyes is Dositheus. Not upon an oak, nor on a pine-tree, nor yet upon a wall, will I inscribe this word; but love is smouldering in my heart of hearts.”133 Another attention of the same kind from a lover to a boy was to have a vase or drinking-cup of baked clay made, with a portrait of the youth depicted on its surface, attended by winged genii of health and love. The word “Fair”, was inscribed beneath, and symbols of games were added—a hoop or a fighting-cock.134 Nor must I here omit the custom which induced lovers of a literary turn to praise their friends in prose or verse. Hippothales, in the Lysis of Plato, is ridiculed by his friends for recording the great deeds of the boy’s ancestors, and deafening his ears with odes and sonnets. A diatribe on love, written by Lysias with a view to winning Phædrus, forms the starting- point of the dialogue between that youth and Socrates.135 We have, besides, a curious panegyrical oration (called [erotic logos]), falsely ascribed to Demosthenes, in honour of a youth, Epicrates, from which some information may be gathered concerning the topics usually developed in these compositions. Presents were of course a common way of trying to win favour. It was reckoned shameful for boys to take money from their lovers, but fashion permitted them to accept gifts of quails and fighting-cocks, pheasants, horses, dogs, and clothes.136 There existed, therefore, at Athens frequent temptations for boys of wanton disposition, or for those who needed money to indulge expensive tastes. The speech of Æschines, from which I have already frequently quoted, affords a lively picture of the Greek rake’s progress, in which Timarchus is described as having sold his person in order to gratify his gluttony and lust and love of gaming. The whole of this pas- sage, it may be observed in passing, reads like a description of Florentine manners in a sermon of Savonarola.

133 Aristoph., Ach., 144, and [Mousa Paidiké], 130. 134 See Sir William Hamilton’s Vases [probably P.F. Hughes, Collection of Etruscan, Greek, and Roman Antiquities from the Cabinet of William Hamilton, four volumes, Naples, Morell, 1766–77.] 135 Lysias, according to Suidas, was the author of five Erotic epist1es addressed to young men. 136 See Aristophanes, Plutus, 153–159; Birds, 704–707. Cp. Strato of Sardis, [Muse of Boyhood], 44, 239, 237. The boys made extraordinary demands upon their lovers’ generosity. The curious tale told about Alcibiades points in this direction. In Crete they did the like but also set their lovers to execute difficult tasks, as Eurystheus imposed the twelve labours on Herakles. 268 Sexual Inversion

The shops of the barbers, surgeons, perfumers, and flower-sellers had an evil notoriety, and lads who frequented these resorts rendered themselves liable to suspicion. Thus Æschines accuses Timarchus of having exposed himself for hire in a surgeon’s shop at the Peirsæus; while one of Straton’s most beautiful epigrams137 describes an assignation which he made with a boy who had attracted his attention in a garland-weaver’s stall. In a frag- ment from the [Pyraunos] of Alexis a young man declares that he found thirty professors of the “voluptuous life of pleasure,” in the Cerameicus during a search of three days; while Cratinus and Theopompus might be quoted to prove the ill fame of the monument to Cimon and the hill of Lycabettus.138 The last step in the downward descent was when a youth abandoned the roof of his parents or guardians and accepted the hospitality of a lover.139 If he did this, he was lost. In connection with this portion of the subject it may be well to state that the Athenian law recognised contracts made between a man and boy, even if the latter were of free birth, whereby the one agreed to render up his per- son for a certain period and purpose, and the other to pay a fixed sum of money.140 The phrase “a boy who has been a prostitute,” occurs quite natu- rally in Aristophanes;141 nor was it thought disreputable for men to engage in these liaisons. Disgrace only attached to the free youth who gained a living by prostitution; and he was liable, as we shall see, at law to loss of civil rights. Public brothels for males were kept in Athens, from which the state derived a portion of its revenue. It was in one of these bad places that Socrates first saw Phædo.142 This unfortunate youth was a native of Elis. Taken prisoner in war, he was sold in the public market to a slave-dealer, who then acquired the right by Attic law to prostitute his person, and engross his earnings for his own pocket. A friend of Socrates, perhaps Cebes, bought him from his master, and he became one of the chief members of the Socratic circle. His name is given to the Platonic dialogue on immortality, and he lived to found what is called the Eleo-Socratic School. No reader of Plato forgets how the sage, on the eve of his death, stroked the beautiful long hair of Phædo,143

137 Strato of Sardis, [Muse of Boyhood], 8: cp. A fragment of Crates, Poete Comici, Didot, p. 83. 138 Comici Graci, Didot, pp. 562, 31, 308. 139It is curious to compare the passage in the second Philippic about the youth of Mark Antony with the story told by Plutarch about Alcibiades, who left the custody of his guardians for the house of Democrates. 140 See both Lysias against Simon and Æschines against Timarchus. 141 Aristophanes, Peace, line 11; compare the word [boy-concubine] in Plato, Comici Graci, p. 261. 142 Diogenes, Laert., ii, 105. 143 Plato, Phædo, trans. Jowett, p. 89. A Problem in Greek Ethics 269 and prophesied that he would soon have to cut it short in mourning for his teacher. Agathocles, the tyrant of Syracuse, is said to have spent his youth in broth- els of this sort—by inclination, however, if the reports of his biographers be not calumnious. From what has been collected on this topic, it will be understood that boys in Athens not unfrequently caused quarrels and street-brawls, and that cases for recovery of damages or breach of contract were brought before the Attic law-courts. The Peiræus was especially noted for such scenes of violence. The oration of Lysias against Simon is a notable exam- ple of the pleadings in a cause of this description.144 Simon the defendant and Lysias the plaintiff (or some one for whom Lysias had composed the speech) were both of them attached to Theodotus, a boy from Platæa. Theodotus was living with the plaintiff; but the defendant asserted that the boy had signed an agreement to consort with him for the considera- tion of three hundred drachmæ, and, relying on this contract, he had attempted more than once to carry off the boy by force. Violent alterca- tions, stone-throwings, house-breakings, and encounters of various kinds having ensued, the plaintiff brought an action for assault and battery against Simon. A modern reader is struck with the fact that he is not at all ashamed of his own relation toward Theodotus. It may be noted that the details of this action throw light upon the historic brawl at Corinth in which a boy was killed, and which led to the foundation of Syracuse by Archias the Bacchiad.145

XIV

We have seen in the foregoing section that paiderastia at Athens was closely associated with liberty, manly sports, severe studies, enthusiasm, self- sacrifice, self-control, and deeds of daring, by those who cared for those things. It has also been made abundantly manifest that no serious moral shame attached to persons who used boys like women, but that effeminate youths of free birth were stigmatised for their indecent profligacy. It remains still to ascertain the more delicate distinctions which were drawn by Attic law and custom in this matter, though what has been already quoted from Pausanias in the Symposium of Plato may be taken fairly to express the code of honour among gentlemen.

144 Oratores Attici, ed. William Stephen Dobson, London, Dove, 1828, vol. ii, p. 223. 145 See Herodotus. Maximus Tyrius, tells the story (Dissertations, xxiv, I) in detail. The boy’s name was Actæon, wherefore he may be compared, he says, to that other Actæon who was torn to death by his own dogs. 270 Sexual Inversion

In the Plutus146 Aristophanes is careful to divide “boys with lovers,” into “the good,” and the “the strumpets.”147 This distinction will serve as basis for the following remarks. A very definite line was drawn by the Athenians between boys who accepted the addresses of their lovers because they liked them or because they were ambitious of comradeship with men of spirit, and those who sold their bodies for money. Minute inquiry was never insti- tuted into the conduct of the former class; else Alcibiades could not have made his famous declaration about Socrates,148 nor would Plato in the Phædrus have regarded an occasional breach of chastity, under the compul- sion of violent passion, as a venial error.149 The latter, on the other hand, besides being visited with universal censure, were disqualified by law from exercising the privileges of the franchise, from undertaking embassies, from frequenting the Agora, and from taking part in public festivals, under the penalty of death, Æschines, from whom we learn the wording of this stat- ute, adds: “This law he passed with regard to youths who sin with facility and readiness against their own bodies.”150 He then proceeds to define the true nature of prostitution, prohibited by law to citizens of Athens. It is this: “Anyone who acts in this way towards a single man, provided he do it with pay- ment, seems to me to be liable to the reproach in question.”151 The whole discus- sion turns upon the word [payment]. The orator is cautious to meet the argument that a written contract was necessary in order to construct a case of [companionship] at law.152 In the statute, he observes, there is no mention of “contract” or “deed in writing.” The offence has been suf- ficiently established “when in any way whatever payment has been made.” In order to illustrate the feeling of the Athenians with regard to making profit out of paiderastic relations, I may perhaps be permitted to interrupt the analysis of Æschines by referring to Xenophon’s character (Anab. ii, 6, 21) of the Strategus Menon. The whole tenor of his judgment is extremely unfavourable toward this man, who invariably pursued selfish and mean aims, debasing virtuous qualities like ambition and industry in the mere pursuit of wealth and power. He was, in fact, devoid of chivalrous feeling, good taste, and honour. About his behaviour as a youth Xenophon writes: “With Ariæus, the barbarian, because this man was partial to handsome youths,

146 Aristophanes, Plutus, line 153. 147 Hesychius gives [fornicator] as one of the meanings of [exe- cutioner] (cp. the notissima fossa of Catullus), and Xenphon, in the Memorabilia (I 6, 13), defines such a person as one who . [To offer one’s beauty to all comers for money.] 148 Plato, Symposium, trans. Jowett, p. 217. 149 Plato, Phædrus, trans. Jowett, p. 256. 150 Page 17. My quotations are made from Dobson’s Oratores Attici, vol. xii, and the references are to his pages. 151 Dobson, Oratores Attici, p. 30. 152 Dobson, Oratores Attici, p. 67. A Problem in Greek Ethics 271 he became extremely intimate while he was still in the prime of adolescence; more- over, he had Tharypas for his beloved, he being beardless and Tharypas a man with a beard.” His crime seems to have been that he prostituted himself to the barbarian Ariæus in order to advance his interest, and, probably with the same view, flattered the effeminate vanity of an elder man by pretend- ing to love him out of the right time or season. Plutarch (Pyrrhus) mentions this Tharypas as the first to introduce Hellenic manners among the Molossi. When more than one lover was admitted, the guilt was aggravated: “It will then be manifest that he has not only acted the strumpet, but that he has been a common prostitute. For he who does this indifferently, and with money, and for money, seems to have incurred that designation.” Thus the question finally put to the Areopagus, in which court the case against Timarchus was tried, ran as follows, in the words of Æschines: “To which of these two classes will you reckon Timarchus—to those who have had a lover, or to those who have been prostitutes?”153 In his rhetorical exposition Æschines defines the true character of the virtuous [beloved]. Frankly admitting his own partiality for beautiful young men, he argues after this fashion: “I do not attach any blame to love. I do not take away the character of handsome lads. I do not deny that I have often loved, and had many quarrels and jealousies in this matter. But I establish this as an irrefutable fact, that, while the love of beautiful and temperate youths does honour to humanity and indicates a generous temper, the buying of the person of a free boy for debauchery is a mark of insolence and ill-breeding. To be loved is an honour: to sell yourself is a disgrace.”154 He then appeals to the law which forbade slaves to love, thereby implying that this was the privilege and pride of free men. He alludes to the heroic deed of Aristogeiton and to the great example of Achilles. Finally, he draws up a list of well-known and respected citizens whose loves were notorious, and compares them with a parallel list of persons infamous for their debauchery. What remains in the peroration to this invective traverses the same ground. Some phrases may be quoted which illustrate the popular feeling of the Athenians. Timarchus is stigmatised as “the man and male who in spite of this has debauched his body by womanly acts of lust,” and again as “one who against the law of nature has given himself to lewdness.”155 It is obvious here that Æschines, the self-avowed boy-lover, while seeking to crush his opponent by flinging effeminacy and unnatu- ral behaviour in his teeth, assumes at the same time that honourable paid- erastia implies no such disgrace. Again, he observes that it is as easy to recognise a pathic by his impudent behaviour as a gymnast by his muscles.

153 Dobson, Oratores Attici, p. 67. 154 Dobson, Oratores Attici, p. 59. 155 Dobson, Oratores Attici, p. 75. 272 Sexual Inversion

Lastly, he bids the judges force intemperate lovers to abstain from free youths and satisfy their lusts upon the persons of foreigners and aliens.156 The whole matter at this distance of time is obscure, nor can we hope to apprehend the full force of distinctions drawn by a Greek orator appealing to a Greek audience. We may, indeed, fairly presume that, as is always the case with popular ethics, considerable confusion existed in the minds of the Athenians themselves, and that even for them to formulate the whole of their social feelings on this topic consistently, would have been impos- sible. The main point, however, seems to be that at Athens it was held honourable to love free boys with decency; that the conduct of lovers between themselves, within the limits of recognised friendship, was not challenged; and that no particular shame attached to profligate persons so long as they refrained from tampering with the sons of citizens.157

XV

The sources from which our information has hitherto been drawn— speeches, poems, biographies, and the dramatic parts of dialogues—yield more real knowledge about the facts of Athenian paiderastia than can be found in the speculations of philosophers. In Aristotle, for instance, paid- erastia is almost conspicuous by its absence. It is true that he speculates upon the Cretan customs in the Politics, mentions the prevalence of boy- love among the Kelts [sicc], and incidentally notices the legends of Diodes and Cleomachus;158 but he never discusses the matter as fully as might have been expected from a philosopher whose speculations covered the whole field of Greek experience. The chapters on [philia: friendship] in the Ethics might indeed have been written by a modern moralist for modern readers, though it is possible that in his treatment of “friendship with pleasure for its object” and “friendship with advantage for its objectt,” Aristotle is aiming at the vicious sort of paiderastia. As regards his silence in the Politics, it is worth noticing that this treatise breaks off at the very point where we should naturally look for a scientific handling of the education of the passions, and, therefore, it is possible that we may have lost the weightiest utterance of Greek philosophy upon the matter of our enquiry. Though Aristotle contains but little to the purpose, the case is different with Plato; nor would it be possible to omit a detailed examination of the Platonic doctrine on the topic or to neglect the attempt he made to

156 Dobson, Oratores Attici, p. 78. 157 Dobson, Oratores Attici, p. 27. Æschines applogises to Misgolas, who was a man, he says, of good breeding, for being obliged to expose his early connection with Timarchus. Misgolas, however, is more than once mentioned by the comic poets with contempt as a notorious rake. 158 See Aristotle, Politics, ii, 7, 5; ii, 6, 5; ii, 9, 6. A Problem in Greek Ethics 273 analyse and purify a passion capable, according to his earlier philosophical speculations, of supplying the starting-point for spiritual progress. The first point to notice in the Platonic treatment of paiderastia is the difference between the ethical opinions expressed in the Phædrus, Symposium, Republic, Charmides, and Lysis, on the one hand, and those expounded in the Laws upon the other. The Laws, which are probably a genuine work of Plato’s old age, condemn that passion which in the Phædrus and Symposium he exalted as the greatest boon of human life and as the groundwork of the philosophical temperament; the ordinary social manifestations of which he described with sympathy in the Lysis and the Charmides; and which he viewed with more than toleration in the Republic. It is not my business to offer a solution of this contradiction; but I may observe that Socrates, who plays the part of protagonist in nearly all the other dialogues of Plato, and who, as we shall see, professed a special cult of love, is conspicuous by his absence in the Laws. It is therefore, not improbable that the philosophical idealisation of paiderastia, to which the name of Platonic love is usually given, should rather be described as Socratic. However that may be, I think it will be well to deal first with the doctrine put into the mouth of the Athenian stranger in the Laws, and then to pass on to the consideration of what Socrates is made to say upon the subject of Greek love in the earlier dialogues. The position assumed by Plato in the Laws (p. 636) is this: Syssitia and gymnasia are excellent institutions in their way, but they have a tendency to degrade natural love in man below the level of the beasts. Pleasure is only natural when it arises out of the intercourse between men and women, but the intercourse between men and men, or women and women, is contrary to nature.159 The bold attempt at overleaping Nature’s laws was due originally to unbridled lust. This position is developed in the eighth book (p. 836), where Plato directs his criticism, not only against what would now be termed the criminal intercourse between persons of the same sex, but also against incontinence in general. While framing a law of almost monastic rigour for the regulation of the sexual appetite, he remains an ancient Greek. He does not reach the point of view from which women are regarded as the proper objects of both

159 The advocates of paiderastia in Greece tried to refute the argument from ani- mals (Plato, Laws, trans. Jowett, p. 636 B; cp. Daphnis and Chloe, Book 4, what Daphnis says to Gnathon) by the following considerations: Man is not a lion or a bear. Social life among human beings is highly artificial; forms of intimacy unknown to the natural state are therefore to be regarded like clothing, cooking of food, houses, machinery, &c., as the invention and privilege of rational beings. See Lucian, Amores, 33, 34, 35, 36, for a full exposition of this argument. See also Strato of Sardis, [Muse of Boyhood]. The curious thing is that many animals are addicted to all sorts of so-called unnatural vices. 274 Sexual Inversion passion and friendship, as the fit companions of men in all relations of life; far less does he revert to his earlier speculations upon the enthusiasm gener- ated by a noble passion. The modern ideal of marriage and the chivalrous conception of womanhood as worthy to be worshipped are unlike [sic] unknown to him. Abstinence from the delights of love, continence except for the sole end of procreation, is the rule which he proposes to the world. There are three distinct things, Plato argues, which, owing to the inade- quacy of language to represent states of thought, have been confounded.160 These are friendship, desire, and a third mixed species. Friendship is further described as the virtuous affection of equals in taste, age and station. Desire is always founded on a sense of contrast, . While friendship is “gentle and mutual through life,” desire is “fierce and wild.”161 The true friend seeks to live chastely with the chaste object of his attachment, whose soul he loves. The lustful lover longs to enjoy the flower of his youth and cares only for the body. The third sort is mixed of these; and a lover of this com- posite kind is torn asunder by two impulses, “the one commanding him to enjoy the youth’s person’s, the other forbidding him to do so.”162 The description of the lover of the third species so exactly suits the paiderast of nobler qual- ity in Greece, as I conceive him to have actually existed, that I shall give a full quotation of this passage: “As to the mixed sort, which is made up of them both, there is, first of all, a difficulty in determining what he who is possessed by this third love desires; moreover, he is drawn different ways, and is in doubt between the two prin- ciples, the one exhorting him to enjoy the beauty of the youth, and the other forbidding him; for the one is a lover of the body and hungers after beauty like ripe fruit, and would fain satisfy himself without any regard to the character of the beloved; the other holds the desire of the body to be a

160Maximus Tyrius, who, in the rhetorical analysis of love alluded to before (Dissertations, p. 172), has closely followed Plato, insists upon the confusion intro- duced by language: , , [People use one word to refer to love, meaning in this way both the divine and painful aspects of it. On the one hand, the more ‘cunning’ lovers tend to beau- tify the concept to stand for the divine alone; on the other hand, the more righteous ones are still unfaithful to the meaning of love by doubting the force of passion.] Dissertations, xxiv, 3. Again, (sc. ) , ... [Love is a name commonly representing dynam- ics of good and evil, etc.] Dissertations, xxvi, 4; and compare Disserations xxv, 4. 161 This is the development of the argument in the Phædrus where Socrates, impro- vising an improvement on the speech of Lysias, compares lovers to wolves and boys to lambs. See the passage in Maximus Tyrius, where Socrates is compared to a shep- herd, the Athenian lovers to butchers, and the boys to lambs upon the mountains. 162 This again is the development of the whole eloquent analysis of love, as it attacks the uninitiated and unphilosophic nature, in the Phædrus. A Problem in Greek Ethics 275 secondary matter, and, looking rather than loving with his soul, and desir- ing the soul of the other in a becoming manner, regards the satisfaction of the bodily love as wantonness: he reverences and respects temperance and courage and magnanimity and wisdom, and wishes to live chastely with the chaste object of his affection.”163 It is remarkable that Plato, in this analysis of the three sorts of love, keeps strictly within the bounds of paiderastia. He rejects desire and the mixed sort of love, reserving friendship and ordaining marriage for the satisfaction of the aphrodisiac instinct at a fitting age, but more particularly for the pro- creation of children. Wantonness of every description is to be made as much a sin as incest, both by law and also by the world’s opinion. If Olympian victors, with an earthly crown in view, learn to live chastely for the preser- vation of their strength while training, shall not men whose contest is for heavenly prizes keep their bodies undefiled, their spirits holy? Socrates, the mystagogue of amorous philosophy, is absent, as I have observed, from this discussion of the laws. I turn now to those earlier dia- logues in which he expounds the doctrine of Platonic, or, as I should prefer to call it, Socratic, love. We know from Xenophon, as well as Plato, that Socrates named his philosophy the Science of Love. The one thing on which I pride myself, he says, is knowledge of all matters that pertain to love. It furthermore appears that Socrates thought himself in a peculiar sense pre- destined to reform and to ennoble paiderastia. “Finding this passion at its height throughout the whole of Hellas, but most especially in Athens, and all places full of evil lovers and of youths seduced, he felt a pity for both parties. Not being a lawgiver like Solon, he could not stop the custom by statute, nor correct it by force, nor again dissuade men from it by his elo- quence. He did not, however, on that account abandon the lovers or the boys to their fate, but tried to suggest a remedy.”164 This passage, which I have paraphrased from Maximus Tyrius, sufficiently expresses the attitude assumed by Socrates in the Platonic dialogue. He sympathises with Greek lovers, and avows a fervent admiration for beauty in the persons of young men. At the same time he declares himself upon the side of temperate and generous affection, and strives to utilise the erotic enthusiasm as a motive power in the direction of philosophy. This was really nothing more or less than an attempt to educate the Athenians by appealing to their own higher instincts. We have seen that paiderastia in the prime of Hellenic culture, whatever sensual admixture it might have contained, was a masculine pas- sion. It was closely connected with the love of political in dependence, with

163 Plato, Laws, trans. Jowett, p. 837. 164 Maximus Tyrius, Dissertations, xxv, 1. The same author pertinently remarks that, though the teaching of Socrates on love might well have been considered peril- ous, it formed no part of the accusations of either Anytus or Aristophanes. Dissertations, xxiv, 5–7. 276 Sexual Inversion the contempt for Asiatic luxury, with the gymnastic sports, and with the intellectual interests which distinguished Hellenes from barbarians. Partly owing to the social habits of their cities, and partly to the peculiar notions which they entertained regarding the seclusion of free women in the home, all the higher elements of spiritual and mental activity, and the conditions under which a generous passion was conceivable, had become the exclusive privileges of men. It was not that women occupied a semi-servile station, as some students have imagined, or that within the sphere of the household they were not the respected and trusted helpmates of men. But circum- stances rendered it impossible for them to excite romantic and enthusiastic passion. The exaltation of the emotions was reserved for the male sex. Socrates, therefore, sought to direct and moralise a force already exist- ing. In the Phædrus he describes the passion of love between man and boy as a madness not different in quality from that which inspires poets; and, after painting that fervid picture of the lover, he declares that the true object of a noble life can only be attained by passionate friends, bound together in the chains of close yet temperate comradeship, seek- ing always to advance in knowledge, self-restraint, and intellectual illu- mination. The doctrine of the Symposium is not different, except that Socrates here takes a higher flight. The same love is treated as the method whereby the soul may begin her mystic journey to the region of essential beauty, truth, and goodness. It has frequently been remarked that Plato’s dialogues have to be read as poems even more than as philosophical trea- tises; and if this be true at all, it is particularly true of both the Phædrus and the Symposium. The lesson which both essays seem intended to incul- cate is this: love, like poetry and prophecy, is a divine gift, which diverts men from the common current of their lives; but in the right use of this gift lies the secret of all human excellence. The passion which grovels in the filth of sensual grossness may be transformed into a glorious enthu- siasm, a winged splendour, capable of soaring to the contemplation of eternal verities. How strange will it be, when once those heights of intel- lectual intuition have been scaled, to look down again to earth and view the [youth] in whom the soul first recognised the form of beauty!165 There is a deeply rooted mysticism, an impenetrable soofyism [sic], in the Socratic doctrine of Erôs. In the Phædrus, the Symposium, the Charmides, the Lysis, and the Republic, Plato dramatised the real Socrates, while he gave liberal scope to his own

165 This is a remark of Diotima’s. Maximus Tyrius (Dissertations, xxvi, 8) gives it a very rational interpretation. Nowhere else, he says, but in the human form, does the light of the divine beauty shine so clearr. This is the word of classic art, the word of the humanities, to use a phrase of the Renaissance. It finds an echo in many beautiful sonnets of Michaelangelo. A Problem in Greek Ethics 277 personal sympathy for paiderastia.166 In the Laws, if we accept this treatise as the work of his old age, he discarded the Socratic mask and wrote a kind of palinode, which indicates more moral growth than pure disapprobation of the paiderastic passion. I have already tried to show that the point of view in the Laws is still Greek; that their author has not passed beyond the sphere of Hellenic ethics. He has only become more ascetic in his rule of conduct as the years advanced, importing the rumores senum severiorum into his dis- course, and recognising the imperfection of that halting-point between the two logical extremes of Pagan license and monastic asceticism which in the fervour of his greener age he advocated. As a young man, Plato felt sympa- thy for love so long as it was paiderastic and not spent on women; he even condoned a lapse through warmth of feeling into self-indulgence. As an old man, he denounced carnal pleasure of all kinds, and sought to limit the amative instincts to the one sole end of procreation. It has so happened that Plato’s name is still connected with the ideal of passion purged from sensuality. Much might be written about the parallel between the mania of the Phædrus and the joy of medieval amorists. Nor would it be unprofitable to trace the points of contact between the love described by Dante in the Vita Nuova and the paiderastia exalted to the heavens by Plato.167 The spiritual passion for Beatrice which raised the Florentine poet above vile things, and led him by the philosophic paths of the Convito to the beatific vision of the Paradiso, bears no slight resemblance to the [eros] of the Symposium. Yet we know that Dante could not have studied Plato’s works; and the specific love which Plato praised he sternly stigmatised. The harmony between Greek and medieval mysticism in this matter of the emotions rests on something permanent in human nature, common alike to paiderastia and to chivalrous enthusiasm for woman. It would be well worth raising here the question whether there was not something special both in the Greek consciousness itself and also in the conditions under which it reached maturity, which justified the Socratic attempt to idealise paiderastia. Placed upon the borderland of barbarism, divided from the Asiatic races by an acute but narrow line of demarcation, the Greeks had arrived at the first free notion of the spirit in its disentangle- ment from matter and from symbolism. But this notion of the spirit was still æsthetic, rather than strictly ethical or rigorously scientific. In the Greek gods intelligence is perfected and character is well defined; but these gods are always concrete persons, with corporeal forms adapted to their spiritual essence. The interpenetration of spiritual and corporeal elements in a com- plete personality, the transfusion of intellectual and emotional faculties

166 See Bergk, Poetæ Lyrici Graeci, vol. ii, pp. 616–629, for a critique of the canon of the highly paiderastic epigrams which bear Plato’s name and for their text. 167 I select the Vita Nuova as the most eminent example of medieval erotic mysticism. 278 Sexual Inversion throughout a physical organism exactly suited to their adequate expression, marks Greek religion and Greek art. What the Greeks worshipped in their ritual, what they represented in their sculpture, was always personality— the spirit and the flesh in amity and mutual correspondence; the spirit burning through the flesh and moulding it to individual forms; the flesh providing a fit dwelling for the spirit which controlled and fashioned it. Only philosophers among the Greeks attempted to abstract the spirit as a self-sufficient, independent, conscious entity; and these philosophers were few, and what they wrote or spoke had little direct influence upon the peo- ple. This being the mental attitude of the Greek race, it followed as a neces- sity that their highest emotional aspirations, their purest personal service, should be devoted to clear and radiant incarnations of the spirit in a living person. They had never been taught to regard the body with a sense of shame, but rather to admire it as the temple of the spirit, and to accept its needs and instincts with natural acquiescence. Male beauty disengaged for them the passion it inspired from service of domestic, social, civic duties. The female form aroused desire, but it also suggested maternity and obliga- tions of the household. The male form was the most perfect image of the deity, self-contained, subject to no necessities of impregnation, determined in its action only by the laws of its own reason and its own volition. Quite a different order of ideas governed the ideal adopted by medieval chivalry. The spirit in its self-sufficingness, detached from the body, antago- nistic to the body, had been divinised by Christianity. Woman regarded as a virgin and at the same time a mother, the maiden-mother of God made man, had been exalted to the throne of heaven. The worship of woman became, by a natural and logical process, the core relative in actual human life for that worship of the incarnate Deity which was the essence of reli- gion. A remarkable point in medieval love is that the sensual appetites were, theoretically at least, excluded from the homage paid to woman. It was not the wife or the mistress, but the lady, who inspired the knight. Dante had children by Gemma, Petrarch had children by an unknown concubine, but it was the sainted Beatrice, it was the unattainable Laura, who received the homage of Dante and of Petrarch. In like manner the sensual appetites were, theoretically at least, excluded from Platonic paiderastia. It was the divine in human flesh—“the radiant sight of the beloved”, to quote from Plato; “the fairest and most intellectual of earthly bodies”, to borrow a phrase from Maximus Tyrius—it was this which stimulated the Greek lover, just as a similar incarnation of divinity inspired the chivalrous lover. Thus we might argue that the Platonic conception of paiderastia furnishes a close analogue to the chivalrous devotion to women, due regard being paid to the differences which existed between the plastic ideal of Greek religion and the romantic ideal of medieval Christianity. The one veiled adultery, the other sodomy. That in both cases the conception was rarely realised in actual life only completes the parallel. A Problem in Greek Ethics 279

To pursue this inquiry further is, however, alien to my task. It is enough to have indicated the psychological agreement in respect of purified affec- tion which underlay two such apparently antagonistic ideals of passion. Few modern writers, when they speak with admiration or contempt of Platonic love, reflect that in its origin this phrase denoted an absorbing passion for young men. The Platonist, as appears from numerous passages in the Platonic writings, would have despised the Petrarchist as a vulgar woman-lover. The Petrarchist would have loathed the Platonist as a moral Pariah. Yet Platonic love, in both its Attic and its medieval manifestations, was one and the same thing. The philosophical ideal of paiderastia in Greece which bore the names of Socrates and Plato met with little but contempt. Cicero, in a passage which has been echoed by Gibbon, remarked upon “the thin device of virtue and friendship which amused the philosophers of Athens.”168 Epicurus criticised the Stoic doctrine of paiderastia by sententiously observing that philoso- phers only differed from the common race of men in so far as they could better cloak their vice with sophistries. This severe remark seems justified by the opinions ascribed to Zeno by Plutarch, Sextus Empiricus, and Stobæus.169 But it may be doubted whether the real drift of the Stoic theory of love, founded on [sic, read : adiophora: unconcern] was under- stood. Lucian, in the Amores,170 makes Charicles, the advocate of love for women, deride the Socratic ideal as vain nonsense, while Theomnestus, the man of pleasure, to whom the dispute is finally referred, decides that the philosophers are either fools or humbugs.171 Daphnæus, in the erotic dia- logue of Plutarch, arrives at a similar conclusion; and, in an essay on educa- tion, the same author contends that no prudent father would allow the sages to enter into intimacy with his sons.172 The discredit incurred by philoso- phers in the later age of Greek culture is confirmed by more than one passage in Petronius and Juvenal, while Athenæus especially inveighs against philo- sophic lovers as acting against nature.173 The attempt of the Platonic Socrates to elevate without altering the morals of his race may therefore be said fairly to have failed. Like his republic, his love existed only in heaven.

168 Cicero and Gibbon, Tusculan Disputations, iv, 33; Decline and Fall, cap. xliv, note 192. 169 See Meier, ‘Pederastie,’ ch. 15. 170 Meier, ‘Pederastie,’ ch. 23. 171 Meier, ‘Pederastie,’ ch. 54. 172 Plutarch, Erotic Dialogue, p.4. 173 It is noticeable that in all ages men or learning have been obnovious to paiderastic passions. Dante says (Inferno, xv, 106) : “In somma sappi, che tutti fur cherchi, E letterati grandi e di gran fama, D’un medesmo peccato a1 mondo lerci.” Compare Ariosto, Satire, vii. 280 Sexual Inversion

XVI

Philip of Macedon, when he pronounced the panegyric of the Sacred Band at Chæronea, uttered the funeral oration of Greek love in its nobler forms. With the decay of military spirit and the loss of freedom, there was no sphere left for that type of comradeship which I attempted to describe in Section IV. The philosophical ideal, to which some cultivated Attic thinkers had aspired, remained unrealised, except, we may perhaps suppose, in iso- lated instances. Meanwhile paiderastia as a vice did not diminish. It only grew more wanton and voluptuous. Little, therefore, can be gained by tracing its historical development further, although it is not without inter- est to note the mode of feeling and the opinion of some later poets and rhetoricians. The idyllists are the only poets, if we except a few epigrammatists of the Anthology, who preserve a portion of the old heroic sentiment. No true stu- dent of Greek literature will have felt that he could strictly censure the paid- erastic passages of the Thalysia, Aïtes, Hylas, Paidika. They have the ring of genuine and respectable emotion. This may also be said about the two frag- ments of Bion which begin , [evening star, the lovers . . . ] and [blessed are the beloved . . . ]. The Duserôs, ascribed without due warrant to Theocritus, is in many respects a beautiful composi- tion, but it lacks the fresh and manly touches of the master’s style, and bears the stamp of an unwholesome rhetoric. Why, indeed, should we pity this suicide, and why should the statue of Love have fallen on the object of his admiration? Maximus Tyrius showed more sense when he contemptuously wrote about those men who killed themselves for love of a beautiful lad in Locri: “And in good sooth they deserved to die.”174 The dialogue entitled ‘ [Love], attributed to Lucian, deserves a paragraph. More than any other composition of the rhetorical age of Greek literature, it attempts a comprehensive treatment of erotic passion, and sums up the teaching of the doctors and the predilections of the vulgar in one treatise.175 Like many of Lucian’s compositions, it has what may be termed a retrospective and resumptive value. That is to say, it represents less the actual feeling of the author and his age than the result of his read- ing and reflection brought into harmony with his experience. The scene is laid at Cnidus, in the groves of Aphrodite. The temple and the garden and the statue of Praxiteles are described with a luxury of language which strikes the keynote of the dialogue. We have exchanged the company of Plato, Xenophon, or Æschines for that of a juvenalian Græculus, a delicate æsthetic voluptuary. Every epithet smells of musk and every phrase is a provocative. The interlocutors are Callicratides the Athenian and Charicles

174 Maximus Tyrius, Dissertations, xxvi, 9. 175 I am aware that the genuineness of this essay has been questioned. A Problem in Greek Ethics 281 the Rhodian. Callicratides kept an establishment of exoleti; when the down upon their chins had grown beyond the proper point: “when the beard is just sprouting, when youth is in the prime of charm,” they were drafted off to farms and country villages. Charicles maintained a harem of dancing-girls and flute-p layers. The one was “madly passionate for lads”; the other no less “mad for women”. Charicles undertook the cause of women, Callicratides that of boys. Charicles began: The love of women is sanctioned by antiquity; it is natural; it endures through life; it alone provides pleasure for both sexes. Boys grow bearded, rough, and past their prime. Women always excite pas- sion. Then Callicratides takes up his parable. Masculine love combines vir- tue with pleasure. While the love of women is a physical necessity, the love of boys is a product of high culture and an adjunct of philosophy. Paiderastia may be either vulgar or celestial; the second will be sought by men of lib- eral education and good manners. Then follow contrasted pictures of the lazy woman and the manly youth.176 The one provokes to sensuality, the other excites noble emulation in the ways of virile living. Lucian, summing up the arguments of the two pleaders, decides that Corinth must give way to Athens, adding “Marriage is open to all men, but the love of boys to philoso- phers onlyy.” This verdict is referred to Theomnestus, a Don Juan of both sexes. He replies that both boys and women are good for pleasure; the phil- osophical arguments of Callicratides are cant. This brief abstract of Lucian’s dialogue on love indicates the cynicism with which its author viewed the subject, using the whole literature and all the experience of the Greeks to support a thesis of pure hedonism. The syba- rites of Cairo or Constantinople at the present moment might employ the same arguments, except that they would omit the philosophic cant of Callicratides. There is nothing in extant Greek literature of a date anterior to the Christian era which is foul in the same sense as that in which the works of Roman poets (Catullus and Martial), Italian poets (Beccatelli and Baffo), and French poets (Scarron and Voltaire) are foul. Only purblind students will be unable to perceive the difference between the obscenity of the Latin races and that of Aristophanes. The difference, indeed, is wide and radical, and strongly marked. It is the difference between a race naturally gifted with a delicate, æsthetic sense of beauty, and one in whom that sense was always subject to the perturbation of gross instincts. But with the first century of the new age a change came over even the imagination of the Greeks. Though they never lost their distinction of style, that precious gift of lightness and good taste conferred upon them with their language, they borrowed some- thing of their conquerors’ vein. This makes itself felt in the Anthology. Straton and Rufinus suffered the contamination of the Roman genius, stronger in political organisation than that of Hellas, but coarser and less

176 See above. 282 Sexual Inversion spiritually tempered in morals and in art. Straton was a native of Sardis, who flourished in the second century. He compiled a book of paiderastic poems, consisting in a great measure of his own and Meleager’s compositions, which now forms the twelfth section of the Palatine Anthology. This book he dedi- cated, not to the Muse, but to Zeus; for Zeus was the boy-lover among deities:177 he bade it carry forth his message to fair youths throughout the world;178 and he claimed a special inspiration from heaven for singing of one sole subject, paiderastia.179 It may be said with truth that Straton under- stood the bent of his own genius. We trace a blunt earnestness of intention in his epigrams, a certainty of feeling and directness of artistic treatment, which show that he had only one object in view. Meleager has far higher qualities as a poet, and his feeling, as well as his style, is more exquisite. But he wavered between the love of boys and women, seeking in both the satis- faction of emotional yearnings which in the modern world would have marked him as a sentimentalist. The so-called , “Muse of Boyhood”, is a collection of two hundred and fifty-eight short poems, some of them of great artistic merit, in praise of boys and boy-love. The common places of these epigrams are Ganymede and Erôs:180 we hear but little of Aphrodite—her domain is the other section of the Anthology, called Erotika. A very small percentage of these compositions can be described as obscene:181 none are nasty in the style of Martial or Ausonius: some are exceedingly picturesque;182 a few are written in a strain of lofty or of lovely music;183 one or two are delicate and subtle in their humour.184 The whole collection sup- plies good means of judging how the Greeks of the decadence felt about this form of love. [effeminancyy] is the real condemnation of this poetry, rather than brutality or coarseness. A favourite topic is the superiority of boys over girls. This sometimes takes a gross form;185 but once or twice the treatment of the subject touches a real psychological distinction, as in the following epigram: “The love of women is not after my heart’s desire; but the fires of male desire have placed me under inextinguishable coals of burning. The heat there is mightier; for the more powerful is male than female, the keener is that desire.”186

177 Strato of Sardis, [Muse of Boyhood], i. 178 Strato of Sardis, [Muse of Boyhood], 208. 179 Strato of Sardis, [Muse of Boyhood], 258. 180 Strato of Sardis, [Muse of Boyhood], 70, 65, 69, 194, 220, 221, 67, 68, 78, and others. 181 Perhaps ten are of this sort. 182Strato of Sardis, [Muse of Boyhood], 8, 125 for example. 183Strato of Sardis, [Muse of Boyhood], 132, 256, 221. 184 Strato of Sardis, [Muse of Boyhood], 219. 185 Strato of Sardis, [Muse of Boyhood], 7. 186Strato of Sardis, [Muse of Boyhood], 17. Compare 86. A Problem in Greek Ethics 283

These four lines give the key to much of the Greek preference for paiderastia. The love of the male, when it has been apprehended and entertained, is more exciting, they thought, more absorbant of the whole nature, than the love of the female. It is, to use another kind of phraseology, more of a mania and more of a disease. With the Anthology we might compare the curious [love-letters] of Philostratus.187 They were in all probability rhetorical com- positions, not intended for particular persons; yet they indicate the kind of wooing to which youths were subjected in later Hellas.188 The discrepancy between the triviality of their subject-matter and the exquisiteness of their diction is striking. The second of these qualities has made them a mine for poets. Ben Jonson, for example, borrowed the loveliest of his lyrics from the following concetto: “I sent thee a crown of roses, not so much honouring thee, though this, too, was my meaning, but wishing to do some kindness to the roses that they might not witherr.”189 Take, again, the phrase, “Well, and love himself is naked, and the graces and the stars;” or this, “0 rose, that has a voice to speak with!”—or this metaphor for the footsteps of the beloved, “0 rhythms of most beloved feet, 0 kisses pressed upon the ground!” While the paiderastia of the Greeks was sinking into grossness, effemi- nacy, and æsthetic prettiness, the moral instincts of humanity began to assert themselves in earnest. It became part of the higher doctrine of the Roman Stoics to suppress this form of passion.190 The Christians, from St. Paul onwards, instituted an uncompromising crusade against it. Theirs was no mere speculative warfare, like that of the philosophers at Athens. They fought with all the forces of their manhood, with the sword of the Lord and with the excommunications of the Church, to suppress what seemed to them an unutterable scandal. Dio Chrysostom, Clemens Alexandrinus, and Athanasius are our best authorities for the vices which prevailed in Hellas during the Empire;191 the Roman law, moreover, proves that the civil governors aided the Church in its attempt to moralise the people on this point.

187 Philostratus, Love-Letters, edited by Carl Ludwig Kayser, Leipzig, Teubner, 1871, pp. 343–366. 188 It is worth comparing the letters of Philostratus with those of Alciphron, a con- temporary of Lucian. In the latter there is no hint of paiderastia. The life of parasites, grisettes, lorettes, and young men about town at Athens is set forth in imitation probably of the later comicly. Athens is shown to have been a Paris à la Murger. 189 [In “To Celia”, Jonson wrote: “I sent thee late a rosy wreath, Not so much honouring thee As giving it a hope that there It could not wither’d be”.] 190 See the introduction by Marcus Aurelius to his Meditations. 191 See quotations in Rosenbaum, Lustseuche im Alterthume, pp. 119–140. 284 Sexual Inversion

XVII

The transmutation of Hellas proper into part of the Roman Empire, and the intrusion of Stoicism and Christianity into the sphere of Hellenic thought and feeling, mark the end of the Greek age. It still remains, however, to consider the relation of this passion to the character of the race, and to determine its influence. In the fifth section of this essay I asserted that it is now impossible to ascertain whether the Greeks derived paiderastia from any of the surround- ing nations, and if so, from which. Homer’s silence makes it probable that the contact of Hellenic with Phœnician traders in the post-heroic period led to the adoption by the Greek race of a custom which they speedily assimi- lated and stamped with an Hellenic character. At the same time I suggested in the tenth section that paiderastia, in its more enthusiastic and martial form, may have been developed within the very sanctuary of Greek national existence by the Dorians, matured in the course of their migrations, and systematised after their settlement in Crete and Sparta. That the Greeks themselves regarded Crete as the classic ground of paiderastia favours either theory, and suggests a fusion of them both; for the geographical position of this island made it the meeting-place of Hellenes with the Asiatic races, while it was also one of the earliest Dorian acquisitions. When we come to ask why this passion struck roots so deep into the very heart and brain of the Greek nation, we must reject the favourite hypothesis of climate.192 Climate is, no doubt, powerful to a great extent in determin- ing the complexion of sexual morality; yet, as regards paiderastia we have abundant proof that nations of the North and of the South have, according to circumstances quite independent of climatic conditions, been both equally addicted and equally averse to this habit. The Etruscan,193 the Chinese, the ancient Keltic tribes, the Tartar hordes of Timour Khan, the Persians under Moslem rule—races sunk in the sloth of populous cities as well as the nomadic children of the Asian steppes, have all acquired a noto- riety at least equal to that of the Greeks. The only difference between these people and the Greeks in respect to paiderastia is that everything which the Greek genius touched acquired a portion of its distinction, so that what in semi-barbarous society may be ignored as vice, in Greece demands attention as a phase of the spiritual life of a world-historic nation. Like climate, ethnology must also be eliminated. It is only superficial philosophy of history which is satisfied with the nomenclature of Semitic, Aryan, and so forth; which imagines that something is gained for the explanation of a complex psychological problem when hereditary affinities

192 [i.e., Richard Burton’s ‘Sotadic Zone’, discussed in Chapter One of this text.] 193 See Athenæus, Deipnosophists, xii, 517, for an account of their grotesque sensuality. A Problem in Greek Ethics 285 have been demonstrated. The deeps of national personality are far more abysmal than this. Granting that climate and descent are elements of great importance, the religious and moral principles, the æsthetic apprehen- sions, and the customs which determine the character of a race leave always something still to be analysed. In dealing with Greek paiderastia, we are far more likely to reach a probable solution if we confine our atten- tion to the specific social conditions which fostered the growth of this passion in Greece, and to the general habit of mind which permitted its solution out of the common stuff of humanity, than if we dilate at ease upon the climate of the Ægean, or discuss the ethical complexion of the Hellenic stock. In other words, it was the Pagan view of human life and duty which gave scope to paiderastia, while certain special Greek customs aided its development. The Greeks themselves, quoted more than once above, have put us on the right track in this inquiry. However paiderastia began in Hellas, it was encouraged by gymnastics and syssitia. Youths and boys engaged together in athletic exercises, training their bodies to the highest point of physical attainment, growing critical about the points and proportions of the human form, lived of necessity in an atmosphere of mutual attention. Young men could not be insensible to the grace of boys in whom the bloom of beauty was unfolding. Boys could not fail to admire the strength and goodliness of men displayed in the comeliness of perfected development. Having exercised together in the wrestling-ground, the same young men and boys consorted at the common tables. Their talk fell naturally upon feats of strength and training; nor was it unnatural, in the absence of a powerful religious prohibition, that love should spring from such discourse and intercourse. The nakedness which Greek custom permitted in gymnastic games and some religious rites no doubt contributed to the erotic force of masculine passion; and the history of their feeling upon this point deserves notice. Plato, in the Republic (452), observes that “not long ago the Greeks were of the opinion, which is still generally received among the barbarians, that the sight of a naked man was ridiculous and unseemly”. He goes on to mention the Cretans and the Lacedæmonians as the institutors of naked games. To these conditions may be added dances in public, the ritual of gods like Erôs, ceremonial processions, and contests for the prize of beauty. The famous passage in the first book of Thucydides (chapter 4) illustrates the same point. While describing the primitive culture of the Hellenes he thinks it worth while to mention that the Spartans, who first stripped them- selves for running and wrestling, abandoned the girdle which it was usual to wear around the loins. He sees in this habit one of the strongest points of distinction between the Greeks and barbarians. Herodotus insists upon the 286 Sexual Inversion same point (book i, 10), which is further confirmed by the verse of Ennius: Flagitii, etc.194 The nakedness which Homer (Iliad, xxii, 66) and Tyrtæus (i, 21) describe as shameful and unseemly is that of an old man. Both poets seem to imply that a young man’s naked body is beautiful even in death. We have already seen that paiderastia as it existed in early Hellas was a martial institution, and that it never wholly lost its virile character. This suggests the consideration of another class of circumstances which were in the highest degree conducive to its free development. The Dorians, to begin with, lived like regiments of soldiers in barracks. The duty of training the younger men was thrown upon the elder; so that the close relations thus established in a race which did not positively discountenance the love of male for male rather tended actively to encourage it. Nor is it difficult to understand why the romantic emotions in such a society were more natu- rally aroused by male companions than by women. Matrimony was not a matter of elective affinity between two persons seeking to spend their lives agreeably and profitably in common, so much as an institution used by the state for raising vigorous recruits for the national army. All that is known about the Spartan marriage customs, taken together with Plato’s specula- tions about a community of wives, proves this conclusively. It followed that the relation of the sexes to each other was both more formal and more sim- ple than it is with us; the natural and the political purposes of cohabitation were less veiled by those personal and emotional considerations which play so large a part in modern life. There was less scope for the emergence of pas- sionate enthusiasm between men and women, while the full conditions of a spiritual attachment, solely determined by reciprocal inclination, were only to be found in comradeship. In the wrestling-ground, at the common tables, in the ceremonies of religion, at the Pan-Hellenic games, in the camp, in the hunting-field, on the benches of the council chamber, and beneath the porches of the Agora, men were all in all unto each other. Women mean- while kept the house at home, gave birth to babies, and reared children till such time as the state thought fit to undertake their training. It is, moreover, well known that the age at which boys were separated from their mothers was tender. Thenceforth they lived with persons of their own sex: their expanding feelings were confined within the sphere of masculine experi- ence until the age arrived when marriage had to be considered in the light of a duty to the commonwealth. How far this tended to influence the growth of sentiment and to determine its quality may be imagined. In the foregoing paragraph I have restricted my attention almost wholly to the Dorians: but what has just been said about the circumstance of their social life suggests a further consideration regarding paiderastia at large

194 Quoted above, from Cicero: “Bene ergo Ennius, flagitii principium est nudare inter cives corpora.” A Problem in Greek Ethics 287 among the Greeks, which takes rank with the weightiest of all. The peculiar status of Greek women is a subject surrounded with difficulty; yet no one can help feeling that the idealisation of masculine love, which formed so prominent a feature of Greek life in the historic period, was intimately con- nected with the failure of the race to give their proper sphere in society to women. The Greeks themselves were not directly conscious of this fact; nor can I remember any passage in which a Greek has suggested that boy-love flourished precisely upon the special ground which had been wrested from the right domain of the other sex. Far in advance of the barbarian tribes around them, they could not well discern the defects of their own civilisa- tion; nor was it to be expected that they should have anticipated that exalta- tion of the love of women into a semi-religious cult which was the later product of chivalrous Christianity. We, from the standpoint of a more fully organised society, detect their errors and pronounce that paiderastia was a necessary consequence of their unequal social culture; nor do we fail to notice that just as paiderastia was a post-Homeric intrusion into Greek life, so women, after the age of the Homeric poems, suffered a corresponding depression in the social scale. In the Iliad and the Odyssey, and in the trage- dies which deal with the heroic age, they play a part of importance for which the actual conditions of historic Hellas offered no opportunities. It was at Athens that the social disadvantages of women told with greatest force; and this perhaps may help to explain the philosophic idealisation of boy-love among the Athenians. To talk familiarly with free women on the deepest subjects, to treat them as intellectual companions, or to choose them as associates in undertakings of political moment, seems never to have entered the mind of an Athenian. Women were conspicuous by their absence from all places of resort—from the palæstra, the theatre, the Agora, the Pnyx, the law-court, the symposium; and it was here, and here alone, that the spiritual energies of the men expanded. Therefore, as the military ardour of the Dorians naturally associated itself with paiderastia, so the character- istic passion of the Athenians for culture took the same direction. The result in each case was a highly wrought psychical condition, which, however alien to our instincts, must be regarded as an exaltation of the race above its common human needs—as a manifestation of fervid, highly pitched emo- tional enthusiasm. It does not follow from the facts which I have just discussed that, either at Athens or at Sparta, women were excluded from an important position in the home, or that the family in Greece was not the sphere of female influ- ence more active than the extant fragments of Greek literature reveal to us. The women of Sophocles and Euripides, and the noble ladies described by Plutarch, warn us to be cautious in our conclusions on this topic. The fact, however, remains that in Greece, as in medieval Europe, the home was not regarded as the proper sphere for enthusiastic passion: both paiderastia and chivalry ignored the family, while the latter even set the matrimonial tie at 288 Sexual Inversion nought. It is therefore precisely at this point of the family, regarded as a comparatively undeveloped factor in the higher spiritual life of Greeks, that the two problems of paiderastia and the position of women in Greece intersect. In reviewing the external circumstances which favoured paiderastia, it may be added, as a minor cause, that the leisure in which the Greeks lived, supported by a crowd of slaves, and attending chiefly to their physical and mental culture, rendered them peculiarly liable to preoccupations of pas- sion and pleasure-seeking. In the early periods, when war was incessant, this abundance of spare time bore less corrupt fruit than during the stagna- tion into which the Greeks enslaved by Macedonia and Rome declined. So far, I have been occupied in the present section with the specific condi- tions of Greek society which may be regarded as determining the growth of paiderastia. With respect to the general habit of mind which caused the Greeks, in contradistinction to the Jews and Christians, to tolerate this form of feeling, it will be enough here to remark that Paganism could have noth- ing logically to say against it. The further consideration of this matter I shall reserve for the next division of my essay, contenting myself for the moment with the observation that Greek religion and the instincts of the Greek race offered no direct obstacle to the expansion of a habit which was strongly encouraged by the circumstances I have just enumerated.

XVIII

Upon a topic of great difficulty, which is, however, inseparable from the subject matter of this inquiry, I shall not attempt to do more than to offer a few suggestions. This is the relation of paiderastia to Greek art. Whoever may have made a study of antique sculpture will not have failed to recog- nise its healthy human tone, its ethical rightness. There is no partiality for the beauty of the male sex, no endeavour to reserve for the masculine deities the nobler attributions of man’s intellectual and moral nature, no extrava- gant attempt to refine upon masculine qualities by the blending of femi- nine voluptuousness. Aphrodite and Artemis hold their place beside Erôs and Hermes. Ares is less distinguished by the genius lavished on him than Athene. Hera takes rank with Zeus, the Nymphs with the Fauns, the Muses with Apollo. Nor are even the minor statues, which belong to decorative rather than high art, noticeable for the attribution of sensual beauties to the form of boys. This, which is certainly true of the best age, is, with rare excep- tions, true of all the ages of Greek plastic art. No prurient effeminacy degraded, deformed, or unduly confounded the types of sex idealised in sculpture. The first reflection which must occur to even prejudiced observers is that paiderastia did not corrupt the Greek imagination to any serious extent. The license of Paganism found appropriate expression in female forms, but A Problem in Greek Ethics 289 hardly touched the male; nor would it, I think, be possible to demonstrate that obscene work of painting or of sculpture were provided for paiderastic sensualists similar to those pornographic objects which fill the reserved cabinet of the Neapolitan Museum. Thus, the testimony of Greek art might be used to confirm the asseveration of Greek literature, that among free men, at least, and gentle, this passion tended even to purify feelings which in their lust for women verged on profligacy. For one androgynous statue of Hermaphroditus or Dionysus there are at least a score of luxurious Aphrodites and voluptuous Bacchantes. Erôs himself, unless he is portrayed, according to the Roman type of Cupid, as a mischievous urchin, is a youth whose modesty is no less noticeable than his beauty. His features are not unfre- quently shadowed with melancholy, as appears in the so-called Genius of the Vatican, and in many statues which might pass for genii of silence or of sleep as well as love. It would be difficult to adduce a single wanton Erôs, a single image of this god provocative of sensual desires. There is not one before which we could say—The sculptor of that statue had sold his soul to paiderastic lust. Yet Erôs, it must be remembered, was the special patron of paiderastia. Greek art, like Greek mythology, embodied a finely graduated half- unconscious analysis of human nature. The mystery of procreation was indicated by phalli on the Hermæ. Unbridled appetite found incarnation in Priapus, who, moreover, was never a Greek god, but a Lampsacene adopted from the Asian coast by the Romans. The natural desires were symbolised in Aphrodite Praxis, Kallipugos, or Pandemos. The higher sexual enthusiasm assumed celestial form in Aphrodite Ouranios. Love itself appeared person- ified in the graceful Erôs of Praxiteles; and how sublimely Pheidias presented this god to the eyes of his worshippers can now only be guessed at from a mutilated fragment among the Elgin marbles. The wild and native instincts, wandering, untutored and untamed, which still connect man with the life of woods and beasts and April hours, received half-human shape in Pan and Silenus, the Satyrs and the Fauns. In this department of semi-bestial instincts we find one solitary instance bearing upon paiderastia. The group of a Satyr tempting a youth at Naples stands alone among numerous similar composi- tions which have female or hermaphroditic figures, and which symbolise the violent and comprehensive host of brutal appetite. Further distinctions between the several degrees of love were drawn by the Greek artists. Himeros, the desire that strikes the spirit through the eyes, and Pothos, the longing of souls in separation from the object of their passion, were carved together with Erôs by Scopas for Aphrodite’s temple at Megara. Throughout the whole of this series there is no form set aside for paiderastia, as might have been expected if the fancy of the Greeks had idealised a sensual Asiatic passion. Statues of Ganymede carried to heaven by the eagle are, indeed, common enough in Græco-Roman plastic art; yet even here there is nothing which indicates the preference for a specifically voluptuous type of male beauty. 290 Sexual Inversion

It should be noticed that the mythology of the Greeks was determined before paiderastia laid hold upon the race. Homer and Hesiod, says Herodotus, made the Hellenic theogony, and Homer and Hesiod knew only of the pas- sions and emotions which are common to all healthy semi-civilised human- ity. The artists, therefore, found in myths and poems subject-matter which imperatively demanded a no less careful study of the female than of the male form; nor were beautiful women wanting. Great cities placed their maidens at the disposition of sculptors and painters for the modelling of Aphrodite. The girls of Sparta in their dances suggested groups of Artemis and Oreads. The Hetairai of Corinth presented every detail of feminine per- fection freely to the gaze. Eyes accustomed to the “dazzling vision” of a naked athlete were no less sensitive to the virginal veiled grace of the Athenian Canephoroi. The temples of the female deities had their staffs of priestesses, and the oracles their inspired prophetesses. Remembering these facts, remembering also what we read about Æolian ladies who gained fame by poetry, there is every reason to understand how sculptors found it easy to idealise the female form. Nor need we imagine, because Greek literature abounds in references to paiderastia, and because this passion played an important part in Greek history, that therefore the majority of the race were not susceptible in a far higher degree to female charms. On the contrary, our best authorities speak of boy-love as a characteristic which distinguished warriors, gymnasts, poets, and philosophers from the common multitude. As far as regards artists, the anecdotes which are preserved about them turn chiefly upon their preference for women. For one tale concerning the Pantarkes of Pheidias, we have a score relating to the Campaspe of Apelles and the Phryne of Praxiteles. It may be judged superfluous to have proved that the female form was ide- alised in sculpture by the Hellenes at least as nobly as the male; nor need we seek elaborate reasons why paiderastia left no perceptible stain upon the art of a race distinguished before all things by the reserve of good taste. At the same time, there can be no reasonable doubt that the artistic temperament of the Greeks had something to do with its wide diffusion and many-sided development. Sensitive to every form of loveliness, and unrestrained by moral or religious prohibition, they could not fail to be enthusiastic for that corporeal beauty, unlike all other beauties of the human form, which marks male adolescence no less triumphantly than does the male soprano voice upon the point of breaking. The power of this corporeal loveliness to sway their imagination by its unique æsthetic charm is abundantly illustrated in the passages which I have quoted above from the Charmides of Plato and Xenophon’s Symposium. An expressive Greek phrase, “youths in their prime of adolescence, but not distinguished by a special beauty”, recognises the persuasive influence, separate from that of true beauty, which belongs to a certain period of masculine growth. The very evanescence of this “bloom of youth” made it in Greek eyes desirable, since nothing more clearly characterises the A Problem in Greek Ethics 291 poetic myths which adumbrate their special sensibility than the pathos of a blossom that must fade. When distinction of feature and symmetry of form were added to this charm of youthfulness, the Greeks admitted, as true art- ists are obliged to do, that the male body displays harmonies of proportion and melodies of outline more comprehensive, more indicative of strength expressed in terms of grace, than that of women.195 I guard myself against saying more seductive to the senses, more soft, more delicate, more undulat- ing. The superiority of male beauty does not consist in these attractions, but in the symmetrical development of all the qualities of the human frame, the complete organisation of the body as the supreme instrument of vital energy. In the bloom of adolescence the elements of feminine grace, suggested rather than expressed, are combined with virility to produce a perfection which is lacking to the mature and adult excellence of either sex. The Greek lover, if I am right in the idea which I have formed of him, sought less to stimulate desire by the contemplation of sensual charms than to attune his spirit with the spectacle of strength at rest in suavity. He admired the chastened lines, the figure slight but sinewy, the limbs well-knit and flexible, the small head set upon broad shoulders, the keen eyes, the austere reins, and the elastic movement of a youth made vigorous by exercise. Physical perfection of this kind suggested to his fancy all that he loved best in moral qualities. Hardihood, self-discipline, alertness of intelligence, health, temperance, indomitable spirit, energy, the joy of active life, plain living and high think- ing—these qualities the Greeks idealised, and of these “the lightning vision of the darling”, was the living incarnation. There is plenty in their literature to show that paiderastia obtained sanction from the belief that a soul of this sort would be found within the body of a young man rather than a woman. I need scarcely add that none but a race of artists could be lovers of this sort, just as none but a race of poets were adequate to apprehend the chivalrous enthusiasm for women as an object of worship. The morality of the Greeks, as I have tried elsewhere to prove, was æsthetic. They regarded humanity as a part of good and beautiful universe, nor did they shrink from any of their normal instincts. To find the law of human energy, the measure of man’s natural desires, the right moment for

195 The following passage may be extracted from a letter of Winckelmam (see [Walter] Pater’s Studies in the History of the Renaissance, London, McMillan and Co., 1873, p. 162): “As it is confessedly the beauty of man which is to be conceived under one general idea, so I have noticed that those who are observant of beauty only in women, and are moved little or not at all by the beauty of men, seldom have an impartial, vital, inborn instinct for beauty in art. To such persons the beauty of Greek art will ever seem wanting, because its supreme beauty is rather male than female.” To this I think we ought to add that while it is true that “the supreme beauty of Greek art is rather male than female,” this is due not so much to any passion of the Greeks for male beauty as to the fact that the male body exhibits higher organisation of the human form than the female. 292 Sexual Inversion indulgence and for self-restraint, the balance which results in health, the proper limit for each several function which secures the harmony of all, seemed to them the aim of ethics. Their personal code of conduct ended in “modest self-restraint”: not abstention, but selection and subordination ruled their practice. They were satisfied with controlling much that more ascetic natures unconditionally suppress. Consequently, to the Greeks there was nothing at first sight criminal in paiderastia. To forbid it as a hateful and unclean thing did not occur to them. Finding it within their hearts, they chose to regulate it, rather than to root it out. It was only after the inconven- iences and scandals to which paiderastia gave rise had been forced upon their notice, that they felt the visitings of conscience and wavered in their fearless attitude. In like manner the religion of the Greeks was æsthetic. They analysed the world of objects and the soul of man, unconsciously perhaps, but effectively, and called their generalisations by the names of gods and goddesses. That these were beautiful and filled with human energy was enough to arouse in them the sentiments of worship. The notion of a single Deity who ruled the human race by punishment and favour, hating certain acts while he toler- ated others—in other words, a God who idealised one part of man’s nature to the exclusion of the rest—had never passed into the sphere of Greek concep- tions. When, therefore, paiderastia became a fact of their consciousness, they reasoned thus: If man loves boys, God loves boys also. Homer and Hesiod forgot to tell us about Ganymede and Hyacinth and Hylas. Let these lads be added to the list of Danaë and Semele and Io. Homer told us that, because Ganymede was beautiful, Zeus made him the serving-boy of the immortals. We understand the meaning of that tale. Zeus loved him. The reason why he did not leave him here on earth like Danaë was that he could not beget sons upon his body and people the earth with heroes. Do not our wives stay at home and breed our children? “Our favourite youths” are always at our side.

XIX

Sexual inversion among Greek women offers more difficulties than we met with in the study of paiderastia. This is due, not to the absence of the phe- nomenon, but to the fact that feminine homosexual passions were never worked into the social system, never became educational and military agents. The Greeks accepted the fact that certain females are congenitally indifferent to the male sex, and appetitive of their own sex. This appears from the myth of Aristophanes in Plato’s Symposium, which expresses in comic form their theory of sexual differentiation. There were originally human beings of three sexes: men, the offspring of the sun; women, the offspring of the earth; her- maphrodites, the offspring of the moon. They were round with two faces, four hands, four feet, and two sets of reproductive organs apiece. In the case A Problem in Greek Ethics 293 of the third (hermaphroditic or lunar) sex, one set of reproductive organs was male, the other female. Zeus, on account of the insolence and vigour of these primitive human creatures, sliced them into halves. Since that time the halves of each sort have always striven to unite with their corresponding halves, and have found some satisfaction in carnal congress—males with males, females with females, and (in the case of the lunar or hermaphroditic creatures) males and females with one another. Philosophically, then, the homosexual passion of female for female, and of male for male, was placed upon exactly the same footing as the heterosexual passion of each sex for its opposite. Greek logic admitted the homosexual female to equal rights with the homosexual male, and both to the same natural freedom as heterosexual individuals of either species. Although this was the position assumed by philosophers, Lesbian pas- sion, as the Greeks called it, never obtained the same social sanction as boy-love. It is significant that Greek mythology offers no legends of the goddesses parallel to those which consecrated paiderastia among the male deities. Again, we have no recorded example, so far as I can remember, of noble friendships between women rising into political and historical prom- inence. There are no female analogies to Harmodius and Aristogeiton, Cratinus and Aristodemus. It is true that Sappho and the Lesbian poetesses gave this female passion an eminent place in Greek literature. But the Æolian women did not found a glorious tradition corresponding to that of the Dorian men. If homosexual love between females assumed the form of an institution at one moment in Æolia, this failed to strike roots deep into the subsoil of the nation. Later Greeks, while tolerating, regarded it rather as an eccentricity of nature, or a vice, than as an honourable and socially useful emotion. The condition of women in ancient Hellas sufficiently accounts for the result. There was no opportunity in the harem or the zenana of raising homosexual passion to the same moral and spiritual effi- ciency as it obtained in the camp, the palæstra, and the schools of the philosophers. Consequently, while the Greeks utilised and ennobled boy- love, they left Lesbian love to follow the same course of degeneracy as it pursues in modern times. In order to see how similar the type of Lesbian love in ancient Greece was to the form which it assumed in modern Europe, we have only to com- pare Lucian’s Dialogues with Parisian tales by Catulle Mendès or Guy de Maupassant. The woman who seduces the girl she loves, is, in the girl’s phrase, “over-masculine”, “androgynous”. The Megilla of Lucian insists upon being called Megillos. The girl is a weaker vessel, pliant, submissive to the virago’s sexual energy, selected from the class of meretricious ingenues. There is an important passage in the Amores of Lucian which proves that the Greeks felt an abhorrence of sexual inversion among women similar to 294 Sexual Inversion that which moderns feel for its manifestation among men. Charicles, who supports the cause of normal heterosexual passion, argues after this wise— “If you concede homosexual love to males, you must in justice grant the same to females; you will have to sanction carnal intercourse between them; monstrous instruments of lust will have to be permitted, in order that their sexual congress may be carried out; that obscene vocable, tribad, which so rarely offends our ears—I blush to utter it—will become rampant, and Philænis will spread androgynous orgies throughout our harems.” What these monstrous instruments of lust were ( [strap-on penis], [dildo]) may be gathered from the sixth mime of Herodas, where one of them is described in detail. Philænis may, perhaps, be the poetess of an obscene book on sensual refinements, to whom Athanæus alludes (Deipnosophistæ, viii, 335). It is also possible that Philænis had become the common designation of a Lesbian lover, a tribad. In the later periods of Greek literature, as I have elsewhere shown, certain fixed masks of Attic comedy (corresponding to the masks of the Italian Commedia dell’ Artee) cre- ated types of character under conventional names—so that, for example, Cerdo became a cobbler, Myrtale a common whore, and possibly Philænis a Lesbian invert. The upshot of this parenthetical investigation is to demonstrate that, while the love of males for males in Greece obtained moralisation, and reached the high position of a recognised social function, the love of female for female remained undeveloped and unhonoured, on the same level as both forms of homosexual passion in the modern European world are.

XX

Greece merged in Rome; but, though the Romans aped the arts and manners of the Greeks, they never truly caught the Hellenic spirit. Even Virgil only trod the court of the Gentiles of Greek culture. It was not, therefore, possible that any social custom so peculiar as paiderastia should flourish on Latin soil. Instead of Cleomenes and Epameinondas, we find at Rome Nero the bride of Sporus and Commodus the public prostitute. Alcibiades is replaced by the Mark Antony of Cicero’s Philippic. Corydon, with artificial notes, takes up the song of Ageanax. The melodies of Meleager are drowned in the harsh discords of Martial. Instead of love, lust was the deity of the boy-lover on the shores of Tiber. In the first century of the Roman Empire Christianity began its work of reformation. When we estimate the effect of Christianity, we must bear in mind that the early Christians found Paganism disorganised and humanity rushing to a precipice of ruin. Their first efforts were directed toward check- ing the sensuality of Corinth, Athens, Rome, the capitals of Syria and Egypt. Christian asceticism, in the corruption of the Pagan systems, led logically to A Problem in Greek Ethics 295 the cloister and the hermitage. The component elements of society had been disintegrated by the Greeks in their decadence, and by the Romans in their insolence of material prosperity. To the impassioned followers of Christ nothing was left but separation from nature, which had become incurable in its monstrosity of vices. But the convent was a virtual abandonment of social problems. From this policy of despair, this helplessness to cope with evil and this hopelessness of good on earth, emerged a new and nobler synthesis, the merit of which belongs in no small measure to the Teutonic converts to the Christian faith. The Middle Ages proclaimed through chivalry the truth, then for the first time fully apprehended, that woman is the mediating and ennobling element in human life. Not in escape into the cloister, not in the self-abandonment to vice, but in the fellow-service of free men and women must be found the solution of social problems. The mythology of Mary gave religious sanction to the chivalrous enthusiasm; and a cult of woman sprang into being to which, although it was romantic and visionary, we owe the spiritual basis of our domestic and civil life. The modus vivendi of the modern world was found. Appendix B Homosexuality among Tramps By Josiah Flyntt1

I have made a rather minute study of the tramp class in the United States, England and Germany, but I know it best in the States. I have lived with the tramps there for eight consecutive months, besides passing numerous shorter periods in their company, and my acquaintance with them is nearly of ten years’ standing. My purpose in going among them has been to learn about their life in particular and outcast life in general. This can only be done by becoming part and parcel of its manifestations. There are two kinds of tramps in the United States—out-of-works and ‘hoboes’. The out-of-works are not genuine vagabonds; they really want work and have no sympathy with the hoboes. The latter are the real tramps. They make a business of begging—a very good business too—and keep at it, as a rule, to the end of their days. Whisky and Wanderlust, or the love of wandering, are probably the main causes of their existence; but many of them are discouraged criminals, men who have tried their hand at crime and find that they lack criminal wit. They become tramps because they find that life ‘on the road’ comes the nearest to the life they hoped to lead. They have enough talent to do very well as beggars, better, generally speaking, than the men who have reached the road simply as drunkards; they know more about the tricks of the trade and are cleverer in thinking out schemes and stories. All genuine tramps in America are, however, pretty much the same, as far as manners and philosophy are concerned, and all are equally welcome at the ‘hang-out.’2 The class of society from which they are drawn is generally the very lowest of all, but there are some hoboes who have come from the very highest, and these latter are frequently as vicious and depraved as their less well-born brethren. Concerning sexual inversion among tramps, there is a great deal to be said, and I cannot attempt to tell all I have heard about it, but merely to give a general account of the matter. Every hobo in the United States knows what ‘unnatural intercourse’ means, talking about it freely, and,

1 [Josiah Flynt was Josiah Flynt Willard (1869–1907). He was the author of Tramping with Tramps (1900) and The World of Graftt (1901), and was instrumental in introduc- ing fingerprinting to the American Criminal Justice System.] 2 This is the home of the fraternity. Practically it is any corner where they can lay their heads; but, as a rule, it is either a lodging-house, a freight car, or a nest in the grass near the railway watering-tank.

296 Homosexuality Among Tramps 297 according to my finding, every tenth man practises it, and defends his conduct. Boys are the victims of this passion. The tramps gain possession of these boys in various ways. A common method is to stop for a while in some town, and gain acquaintance with the slum children. They tell these children all sorts of stories about life ‘on the road’, how they can ride on the railways for nothing, shoot Indians, and be ‘perfeshunnels’ (profes- sionals), and they choose some boy who specially pleases them. By smiles and flattering caresses they let him know that the stories are meant for him alone, and before long, if the boy is a suitable subject, he smiles back just as slily [sicc]. In time he learns to think that he is the favourite of the tramp, who will take him on his travels, and he begins to plan secret meetings with the man. The tramp, of course, continues to excite his imagination with stories and caresses, and some fine night there is one boy less in the town. On the road the lad is called a ‘prushun’, and his protector a ‘jocker’. The majority of prushuns are between ten and fifteen years of age, but I have known some under ten and a few over fifteen. Each is compelled by hobo law to let his jocker do with him as he will, and many, I fear, learn to enjoy his treatment of them. They are also expected to beg in every town they come to, any laziness on their part receiving very severe punishment. How the act of unnatural intercourse takes place is not entirely clear; the hoboes are not agreed. From what I have personally observed I should say that it is usually what they call ‘leg work’ (intercrural), but sometimes immissio penis in anum, the boy in either case lying on his stomach. I have heard terrible stories of the physical result to the boy of anal intercourse. One evening, near Cumberland, Pennsylvania, I was an unwilling witness of one of the worst scenes that can be imagined. In company with eight hoboes, I was in a freight car attached to a slowly moving train. A coloured boy succeeded in scrambling into the car, and when the train was well under way again he was tripped up and ‘seduced’ (to use the hobo euphemism) by each of the tramps. He made almost no resistance, and joked and laughed about the business as if he had expected it. This, indeed, I find to be the general feeling among the boys when they have been thoroughly initiated. At first they do not submit, and are inclined to run away or fight, but the men fondle and pet them, and after a while they do not seem to care. Some of them have told me that they get as much pleasure out of the affair as the jocker does. Even little fellows under ten have told me this, and I have known them to wilfully tempt their jockers to intercourse. What the pleas- ure consists in I cannot say. The youngsters themselves describe it as a delightful tickling sensation in the parts involved, and this is possibly all that it amounts to among the smallest lads. Those who have passed the age of puberty seem to be satisfied in pretty much the same way that the men are. Among the men the practice is decidedly one of passion. The majority of them prefer a prushun to a woman, and nothing is more severely judged 298 Sexual Inversion than rape. One often reads in the newspapers that a woman has been assaulted by a tramp, but the perverted tramp is never the guilty party. I believe, however, that there are a few hoboes who have taken to boys because women are so scarce ‘on the road’. For every woman in hoboland there are a hundred men. That this disproportion has something to do with the popularity of boys is made clear by the following case: In a gaol, where I was confined for a month during my life in vagabondage, I got acquainted with a tramp who had the reputation of being a ‘sod’ (sodomist) [sicc]. One day a woman came to the gaol to see her husband, who was awaiting trial. One of the prisoners said he had known her before she was married and had lived with her. The tramp was soon to be discharged and he inquired where the woman lived. On learning that she was still approachable, he looked her up immediately after his release, and succeeded in staying with her for nearly a month. He told me later that he enjoyed his life with her much more than his intercourse with boys. I asked him why he went with boys at all, and he replied, “Cause there ain’t women enough. If I can’t get them I’ve got to have the other.” It is in gaols that one sees the worst side of this perversion. In the day- time the prisoners are let out into a long hall, and can do much as they please; at night they are shut up, two and even four in a cell. If there are any boys in the crowd, they are made use of by all who care to have them. If they refuse to submit, they are gagged and held down. The sheriff seldom knows what goes on, and for the boys to say anything to him would be suicidal. There is a criminal ignorance all over the States concerning the life in these gaols, and things go on that would be impossible in any well- regulated prison. In one of these places I once witnessed the fiercest fight I have ever seen among hoboes; a boy was the cause of it. Two men said they loved him, and he seemed to return the affection of both with equal desire. A fight with razors was suggested to settle who should have him.3 The men prepared for action, while the crowd gathered round to watch. They slashed away for over half an hour, cutting each other terribly, and then their back- ers stopped them for fear of fatal results. The boy was given to the one who was hurt the least. Jealousy is one of the first things one notices in connection with this pas- sion. I have known men to withdraw entirely from the ‘hang-out’ life sim- ply to be sure that their prushuns were not touched by other tramps. Such attachments frequently last for years, and some boys remain with their first jockers until they are ‘emancipated’. Emancipation means freedom to ‘snare’ some other boy, and make him submit as the other had been obliged to submit when younger. As a rule, the prushun is freed when he is able to protect himself. If he can defend his

3 All hoboes carry razors, both for shaving and for defence. Strange to say, they succeed in smuggling them into gaols, as they are never searched thoroughly. Homosexuality Among Tramps 299

‘honour’ from all who come, he is accepted into the class of ‘old stagers’, and may do as he likes. This is the one reward held out to prushuns during their apprenticeship. They are told that some day they can have a boy and use him as they have been used. Thus hoboland is always sure of recruits. It is difficult to say how many tramps are sexually inverted. It is not even certainly known how many vagabonds there are in the country. I have stated in one of my papers on tramps that, counting the boys, there are between fifty and sixty thousand genuine hoboes in the United States. A vagabond in Texas who saw this statement wrote me that he considered my estimate too low. The newspapers have criticised it as too high, but they are unable to judge. If my figures are, as I believe, approximately correct, the sexually perverted tramps may be estimated at between five and six thou- sand; this includes men and boys. I have been told lately by tramps that the boys are less numerous than they were a few years ago. They say that it is now a risky business to be seen with a boy, and that it is more profitable, as far as begging is concerned, to go without them. Whether this means that the passion is less fierce than it used to be, or that the men find sexual satisfaction among themselves, I cannot say definitely. But from what I know of their disinclination to adopt the latter alternative, I am inclined to think that the passion may be dying out somewhat. I am sure that women are not more numerous ‘on the road’ than formerly, and that the change, if real, has not been caused by them. So much for my finding in the United States. In England, where I have also lived with tramps for some time, I have found very little contrary sexual feeling. In Germany also, excepting in prisons and workhouses, it seems very little known among vagabonds. There are a few Jewish wanderers (sometimes peddlers) who are said to have boys in their company, and I am told that they use them as the hoboes in the United States use their boys, but I cannot prove this from personal observation. In England I have met a number of male tramps who had no hesitation in declaring their preference for their own sex, and particularly for boys, but I am bound to say that I have seldom seen them with boys; as a rule they were quite alone, and they seem to live chiefly by themselves. It is a noteworthy fact that both in England and Germany there are a great many women ‘on the road,’ or, at all events, so near it that intercourse with them is easy and cheap. In Germany almost every town has its quarter of ‘Stadt-Schieze’4—women who sell their bodies for a very small sum. They seldom ask over thirty or forty pfennigs for a night, which is usually spent in the open air. In England it is practically the same thing. In all the large cities there are women who are glad to do business for three or four pence, and those ‘on the road’ for even less.

4 This word is of Hebrew origin, and means girl (mädchen). 300 Sexual Inversion

The general impression made on me by the sexually perverted men I have met in vagabondage is that they are abnormally masculine. In their intercourse with boys they always take the active part. The boys have in some cases seemed to me uncommonly feminine, but not as a rule. In the main they are very much like other lads, and I am unable to say whether their liking for the inverted relationship is inborn or acquired. That it is, however, a genuine liking, in altogether too many instances, I do not in the least doubt. As such, and all the more because it is such, it deserves to be more thoroughly investigated and more reasonably treated. AdCAppendix C Ulrichs’s Views By J. A. Symonds

It can hardly be said that inverted sexuality received serious and sympathetic treatment until a German jurist, named Karl Heinrich Ulrichs, began his long warfare against what he considered to be prejudice and ignorance upon a topic of the greatest moment to himself. A native of Hanover, and writing at first under the assumed name of Numa Numantius, he kept pouring out a series of polemical, analytical, theoretical, and apologetical pamphlets between the years 1864 and 1870. The most important of these works is a lengthy and comprehensive essay entitled Memnon: Die Gesehlesehtsnatur des mannliebenden Urnings. Eine Naturwissensschaftliche Darstellung, Schleiz, 1868.1 Memnon may be used as the text-book of its author’s theories; but it is also necessary to study earlier and later treatises—Inclusa, Formatrix, Vindex, Ara Spei, Gladius Furens, Incubus, Argonauticus, Prometheus, Araxes, Kritische Pfeile—in order to obtain a complete knowledge of his opinions, and to mas- ter the whole mass of information he has brought together. The object of Ulrichs in these miscellaneous writings is twofold. He seeks to establish a theory of sexual inversion upon the basis of natural science, proving that abnormal instincts are inborn and healthy in a considerable percentage of human beings; that they do not owe their origin to bad habits of any kind, to hereditary disease or to wilful depravity; that they are inca- pable in the majority of cases of being extirpated or converted into normal channels; and that the men subject to them are neither physically, intellec- tually, nor morally inferior to normally constituted individuals. Having demonstrated these points to his own satisfaction, and supported his views with a large induction of instances and a respectable show of erudition, he proceeds to argue that the present state of the law in many states of Europe is flagrantly unjust to a class of innocent persons, who may, indeed, be regarded as unfortunate and inconvenient, but who are guilty of nothing which deserves reprobation and punishment. In this second and polemical branch of his exposition, Ulrichs assumes, for his juristic starting-point, that each human being is born with natural rights, which legislation ought not to infringe but to protect. He does not attempt to confute the utilitarian theory of jurisprudence, which regards laws as regulations made by the majority in the supposed interests of society. Yet a large amount of his

1 [Many of Ulrichs’s works have been translated. There is also a useful webpage about his work: http://www.angelfire.com/fl3/celebration2000/]

301 302 Sexual Inversion reasoning is designed to invalidate utilitarian arguments in favour of repression, by showing that no social evil ensues in those countries which have placed abnormal sexuality upon the same footing as the normal, and that the toleration of inverted passion threatens no danger to the well-being of nations. After this prelude, an abstract of Ulrichs’s theory and his pleading may be given, deduced from the comparative study of his numerous essays. The right key to the solution of the problem is to be found in physiology, in that obscure department of natural science which deals with the evolu- tion of sex. The embryo, as we are now aware, contains an undetermined element of sex during the first months of pregnancy. This is gradually worked up into male and female organs of procreation, and these, when the age of puberty arrives, are generally accompanied by corresponding male and female appetites. That is to say, the man in an immense majority of cases desires the woman, and the woman desires the man. Nature, so to speak, aims at differentiating the undecided fœtus into a human being of one or the other sex, the propagation of the species being the main object of life. Still, as Aristotle puts it, and as we observe in many of her operations, “Nature wishes, but has not always the power.” Consequently, in respect of physical structure, there come to light imper- fect individuals, so-called hermaphrodites, whose sexual apparatus is so far undetermined, that many a real male has passed a portion of his life under a mistake, has worn female clothes, and has cohabited by preference with men. Likewise, in respect of spiritual nature, there appear males who, not- withstanding their marked masculine organisation, feel from the earliest childhood a sexual proclivity towards men, with a corresponding indiffer- ence for women. In some of these abnormal, but natural, beings, the appe- tite for men resembles the normal appetite for women: in others it resembles the normal appetite of women for men. That is to say, some prefer effemi- nate males, dressed in female clothes and addicted to female occupations. Others prefer powerful adults of an ultra-masculine stamp. A third class manifest their predilection for healthy young men in the bloom of adoles- cence, between nineteen and twenty. The attitude of such persons toward women also varies. In genuine cases of inborn sexual inversion a positive horror is felt when the woman has to be carnally known; and this horror is of the same sort as that which normal men experience when they think of cohabitation with a male. In others the disinclination does not amount to repugnance; but the abnormal man finds considerable difficulty in stimu- lating himself to the sexual act with females, and derives a very imperfect satisfaction from the same. A certain type of man, in the last place, seems to be indifferent, desiring men at one time and women at another. In order to gain clearness in his exposition, Ulrichs has invented names for these several species. The so-called hermaphrodite he dismisses with the German designation of Zwitter. Imperfect individuals of this type are not to Ulrichs’s View 303 be considered, because it is well known that the male and female organs are never developed in one and the same body. It is also, as we shall presently discover, an essential part of his theory to regard the problem of inversion psychologically. The normal man he calls Dioning, the abnormal man Urning. Among Urnings, those who prefer effeminate males are christened by the name of Mannling; those who prefer powerful and masculine adults receive the name of Weibling; the Urning who cares for adolescents is styled a Zwischen- Urning. Men who seem to be indifferently attracted by both sexes, he calls Uranodionings. A genuine Dioning, who, from lack of women, or under the influence of special circumstances, consorts with persons of his own sex, is denominated Uraniaster. A genuine Urning, who has put restraint upon his inborn impulse, who has forced himself to cohabit with women, or has per- haps contracted marriage, is said to be virilisirtt—a Virilised Uring. These outlandish names, though seemingly pedantic and superfluous, have their technical value, and are necessary to the proper understanding of Ulrichs’s system. He is dealing exclusively with individuals classified by common parlance as males without distinction. Ulrichs believes that he can establish a real natural division between men proper, whom he calls Dionings, and males of an anomalous sexual development, whom he calls Urnings. Having proceeded so far, he finds the necessity of d istinguishing three broad types of the Urning, and of making out the crosses between Urning and Dioning, of which he also finds three species. It will appear in the sequel that, whatever may be thought about his psychological hypoth- esis, the nomenclature he has adopted is useful in discussion, and corre- sponds to well-defined phenomena, of which we have abundant informa- tion. The following table will make his analysis sufficiently plain. The Human Male: (1) Man or Dioning—Uraniaster, when he has acquired the tastes of the Urning (2) Urning : Mannling : Weibling : Zwischen-Urning : Virilised Urning (3) Uranodioning (4) Hermaphrodite Broadly speaking, the male includes two main species: Dioning and Urning, men with normal and men with abnormal instincts. What, then, consti- tutes the distinction between them? How are we justified in regarding them as radically divergent? Ulrichs replies that the phenomenon of sexual inversion is to be explained by physiology, and particularly by the evolution of the embryo. The notion that human beings were originally hermaphroditic is both ancient and widespread. We find it in the Book of Genesis, unless, indeed, 304 Sexual Inversion there be confusion here between two separate theories of creation. God is said to have first made man in his image, male and female in one body, and to have bidden them multiply. Later on he created the woman out of part of this primitive man. The myth related by Aristophanes in Plato’s Symposium has a curious bearing upon Ulrichs’s speculations. There were originally human beings of three sexes: men, the children of the sun; women, the children of the earth; and hermaphrodites, the children of the moon. They were round, with two faces, four feet, and two sets of repro- ductive organs apiece. In the case of the third sex one set was male, the other female. Zeus, on account of their strength and insolence, sliced them into halves. Since that time the halves of each sort have always striven to unite with their corresponding halves, and have found some satisfaction in carnal congress, males with males, females with females, and males and females with each other. “They who are a section of the male follow the male, and while they are young, being slices of the original man, they hang about men and embrace them, and they are themselves the best of boys and youths, because they have the most manly nature. And when they reach manhood they are lovers of youth, and are not naturally inclined to marry or beget children, which they do, if at all, only in obedience to the law, but they are satisfied if they may be allowed to live with one another unwedded; and such a nature is prone to love and ready to return love, always embracing that which is akin to him” (Symposium, 191–2 Jowett’s translation)2. Then follows a glowing description of Greek love, the whole reminding us very closely of the confessions made by Urnings in modern times, and pre- served by medical or forensic writers on sexual inversion. Nature fails to complete her work regularly and in every instance. Having succeeded in differentiating a male with full-formed sexual organs from the undecided foetus, she does not always effect the proper differentiation of that portion of the psychical being in which resides the sexual appetite. There remains a female soul in a male body. Anima muliebris virili copore inclusa is the formula adopted by Ulrichs; and he quotes a passage from the Vestiges of Creation which suggests that the male is a more advanced product of sexual evolution than the female. The male instinct of sex is a more advanced product than the female instinct. Consequently, men appear whose body has been differentiated as masculine, but whose sexual instinct has not progressed beyond the feminine stage.3

2 [Benjamin Jowett, translation of Plato’s Symposium, in Plato’s Dialogues, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1871.] 3 It is right to observe that in the last of his publications upon sexual inversion, Ulrichs considerably departed from his hypothesis of anima muliebris virili copore inclusa. (Kritische Pfeile, Stuttgart, 1879. See p. 95.) He says that those who wish to study the phenomenon must begin with that sort of Urning whom he calls Weibling. Ulrichs’s View 305

Ulrichs’s own words ought to be cited upon this fundamental part of his hypothesis, since he does not adopt the opinion that the Urning is a Dioning arrested at a certain point of development: but rather that there is an element of uncertainty attending the simultaneous evolution of physical and psychical factors from the indeterminate ground-stuff. “Sex,” says he, “is only an affair of development. Up to a certain stage of embryonic existence all living mammals are hermaphroditic. A certain number of them advance to the condition of what I call man (Dioning), oth- ers to what I call woman (Dioningin), a third class become what I call Urning (including Urningin). It ensues therefrom [sicc] that between these three sexes there are no primary, but only secondary, differences. And yet true differ- ences constituting sexual species, exist in facts.”—Memnon, section 14. Man, woman, and Urning—the third being either a male or a female in whom we observe a real and inborn, not an acquired or a spurious, inver- sion of appetite—are consequently regarded by him as the three main divi- sions of humanity, viewed from the point of view of sex. The embryonic ground-stuff in the case of each was homologous; but, while the two former, man and woman, have been normally differentiated, the Urning’s sexual instinct, owing to some imperfection in the process of development, does not correspond to his or her sexual organs. The line of division between the sexes, even in adult life, is a subtle one; and the physical structure of men and women yields indubitable signs of their emergence from a common ground-stuff. Perfect men have rudimen- tary breasts. Perfect women carry a rudimentary penis in their clitoris. The raphé of the scrotum shows the aperture, common at first to masculine and

The Weibling is physically and spiritually complexioned after the female type; and in spite of male organs, is more of a woman than a man. From him, through several intermediate stages of the Zwischen-Urning we arrive at the Mannlingg, who is physi- cally and spiritually masculine in spite of his loving persons of his own sex. This process of sexual differentiation is further extended from the Mannling, through several intermediate stages, on to the normal man, who loves only women: A simi- lar scale can be observed in the ascent from females who love their own sex with masculine passion up to those who have no love except for men. He points out that such gradual transition is not observable between Weibling and woman, or between man and woman; and he insists that the transition, by its very nature, excludes the hypothesis of disease. According to him, the real solution of the problem is to be found in embryology [See Magnus Hirschfeld, Geschlechtsübergänge: Mischungen männlicher und weiblicher Geschlectscharaktere (Sexuelle Zwischenstufen), Leipzig, W. Malende, 1905, who agreed with this hypothsis]. What this argument amounts to is that we ought to regard all varieties and eccentricities of inborn sexual appe- tite as healthy deviations from what may be termed the normal standard. When we come to classify them, we discover a rhythm of subtly graduated differences extend- ing from the extremity of sexual inversion to the most positive type of ordinary sexual instinct. 306 Sexual Inversion feminine beings, but afterwards only retained in the female vulva, was closed up to form a male. Other anatomical details of the same sort might be adduced. That gradual development, which ends in normal differentia- tion, goes on very slowly. It is only at the age of puberty that a boy distin- guishes himself abruptly from a girl, by changing his voice and growing hair on parts of the body where it is not usually found in women. This being so, it is surely not surprising that the sexual appetite should sometimes fail to be normally determined, or, in other words, should be inverted. Ulrichs maintains that the body of an Urning is masculine, his soul femi- nine, so far as sex is concerned. Accordingly, though physically unfitted for coition with men, he is imperatively drawn towards them by a natural impulse. Opponents meet him with this objection: “Your position is unten- able. Body and soul constitute one inseparable entity.” So they do, replies Ulrichs; but the way in which these factors of the person are combined in human beings differs extremely, as I can prove by indisputable facts. The body of a male is visible to the eyes, is measurable and ponderable, is clearly marked in its specific organs. But what we call his soul—his passions, incli- nations, sensibilities, emotional characteristics, sexual desires—elude the observation of the senses. This second factor, like the first, existed in the undetermined stages of the fœtus. And when I find that the soul, this ele- ment of instinct and emotion and desire, existing in a male, has been directed in its sexual appetite from earliest boyhood toward persons of the male sex, I have the right to qualify it with the attribute of femininity. You assume that soul-sex is indissolubly connected and inevitably derived from body-sex. The facts contradict you, as I can prove by referring to the veracious autobiographies of Urnings, and to known phenomena regarding them. But Ulrichs seems to claim too much for the position he has won. He ignores the frequency of acquired habits. He shuts his eyes to the force of fashion and depravity. He reckons men like Horace and Ovid and Catullus, among the ancients, who were clearly indifferent in their tastes (as indiffer- ent as the modern Turks), to the account of the Uranodionings. In one word, he is so enthusiastic for his physiological theory that he overlooks all other aspects of the question. Let us turn, then, to the consideration of his arguments in favour of freeing Urnings from the terrible legal penalties to which they are at present subject, and, if this were possible, from the no less terrible social condemnation to which they are exposed by the repugnance they engen- der in the normally constituted majority. Dealing with these exceptions to the kindly race of men and women, these unfortunates who have no fam- ily ties knitted by bonds of mutual love, no children to expect, no reci- procity of passion to enjoy, mankind, says Ulrichs, has hitherto acted just in the same way as a herd of deer acts when it drives the sickly and the weakly out to die in solitude, burdened with contumely, and cut off from common sympathy. Ulrichs’s View 307

From the point of view of morality and law, he argues, it does not signify whether we regard the sexual inversion of an Urning as morbid or as natural. He has become what he is, in the dawn and first emergence of emotional existence. You may contend that he derives perverted instincts from his ancestry, that he is the subject of a psychical disorder, that from his cradle he is predestined by atavism or disease to misery. I maintain that he is one of nature’s sports, a creature healthy and well organised, evolved in her superb indifference to aberrations from the normal type. We need not quarrel over our solutions of the problem. The fact that he is there, among us, and that he constitutes an ever present factor in our social sys- tem, has to be faced. How are we to deal with him? Has society the right to punish individuals sent into the world with homosexual instincts? Putting the question at its lowest point, admitting that these persons are the vic- tims of congenital morbidity, ought they to be treated as criminals? It is established that their appetites, being innate, are to them at least natural and undepraved: the common appetites, being excluded from their sexual scheme, are to them unnatural and abhorrent. Ought not such beings, instead of being hunted down and persecuted by the law, to be regarded with pitying solicitude as among the most unfortunate of human beings, doomed as they are to inextinguishable longings and life-long deprivation of that which is the chief prize of man’s existence on this planet, a recipro- cated love? As your laws at present stand, you include all cases of sexual inversion under the one denomination of crime. You make exceptions in some special instances, and treat the men involved as lunatics. But the Urning is neither criminal nor insane. He is only less fortunate than you are, through an accident of birth, which is at present obscure to our imperfect science of sexual determination. But here arises a difficulty, which cannot be ignored, since upon it is based the only valid excuse for the position taken up by society in dealing with this matter. Not all men and women possessed by abnormal sexual desires can claim that these are innate. It is certain that habits of sodomy are fre- quently acquired under conditions of exclusion from the company of per- sons of the other sex—as in public schools, barracks, prisons, convents, ships. In some cases they are deliberately adopted by natures tired of normal sexual pleasure. They may even become fashionable and epidemic. Lastly, it is prob- able that curiosity and imitation communicate them to otherwise normal individuals at a susceptible moment of development. Therefore, society has the right to say: Those who are the unfortunate subjects of inborn sexual inversion shall not be allowed to indulge their passions, lest the mischief should spread, and a vicious habit should contaminate our youth. From the utilitarian point of view, society is justified in protecting itself against a minority of exceptional beings whom it regards as pernicious to the general welfare. From any point of view, the majority is strong enough to coerce the inborn instincts, and to trample on the anguish of a few unfortunates. But, 308 Sexual Inversion asks Ulrichs, is this consistent with humanity, is it consistent with the august ideal of impartial equity? Are people, sound in body, vigorous in mind, wholesome in habit, capable of generous affections, good servants of the state, trustworthy in all the ordinary relations of life, to be condemned at law as criminals, because they cannot feel sexually as the majority feel, because they find some satisfaction for their inborn want in ways which the majority dislike? Seeking a solution of one difficulty stated in the foregoing paragraph, Ulrichs finds it in fact and history. His answer is that if society leaves nature to take her course, with the abnormal as with the normal subjects of sexual inclination, society will not suffer. In countries where legal penalties have been removed from inverted sexuality, where this is placed upon the same footing as the normal, no inconvenience has hitherto arisen. There has ensued no sudden and flagrant outburst of a depraved habit, no dissemina- tion of a spreading moral poison. On the other hand, in countries where these penalties exist and are enforced—in England, for example, and in the metropolis of England, London—inverted sexuality runs riot, despite of legal prohibitions, despite of threats of prison, dread of exposure, and the intolerable pest of organised chantage. In the eyes of Ulrichs, society is engaged in sitting on a safety-valve, which, if nature were allowed to operate unhindered, would do society no harm, but rather good. The majority, he thinks, are not going to become Urnings, for the simple reason that they have not the unhappy constitution of the Urning. Cease to persecute Urnings, accept them as inconsiderable, yet real, factors in the social commonwealth, leave them to themselves; and you will not be the worse for it, and will also not carry on your conscience the burden of intolerant vindictiveness. Substantiating this position, Ulrichs demonstrates that acquired habits of sexual inversion are almost invariably thrown off by normal natures. Your boys at public schools, he says, behave as though they were Urnings. In the lack of women, at the time when their passions are predominant, they yield themselves up together to mutual indulgences which would bring down your laws upon them with terrible effect as adults. You are aware of this. Yet you remain untroubled in your minds. And why? Because you feel convinced that they will return to their congenital instincts. When the school, the barrack, the prison, the ship has been abandoned, the male reverts to the female. This is the truth about Dionings. The large majority of men and women remain normal simply because they were made normal. They cannot find the satisfaction of their nature in those inverted practices to which they yielded for a time through want of normal outlet. Society risks little by the occasional caprice of the school, the barrack, the prison and the ship. Some genuine Urnings may indeed, discover their inborn inclination by means of the process to which you subject them. But you are quite right in supposing that a Dioning, though you have forced Ulrichs’s View 309 him to become for a time an Uraniaster, will never in the long run appear as an Urning. The extensive experience which English people possess regard- ing such matters, owing to the notorious condition of their public schools, goes to confirm Ulrichs’s position. Head-masters know how many Uraniasters they have dealt with, what excellent Dionings they become, and how comparatively rare, and yet how incorrigibly steadfast, are the genuine Urnings in their flock. The upshot of this matter is that we are continually forcing our young men into conditions under which, if sexual inversion were an acquired attribute, it would become stereotyped in their natures. Yet it does not do so. Provisionally, because they are shut off from girls, because they find no other outlet for their sex at the moment of its most imperious claims, they turn towards males, and treat their younger schoolfellows in ways which would consign an adult to penal servitude. They are Uraniasters by necessity and faute de mieux. But no sooner are they let loose upon the world than the majority revert to normal channels. They pick up women in the streets, and form connections, as the phrase goes. Some undoubtedly, in this fiery fur- nace through which they have been passed, discover their inborn sexual inversion. Then, when they cannot resist their proclivity, you condemn them as criminals in their later years! Is that Just? Would it not be better to revert from our civilisation to the manners of the savage man—to initiate youths into the mysteries of sex, and to give each, in his turn, the chance of developing a normal instinct by putting him during his time of puberty freely and frankly to the female? If you abhor Urnings, as you surely do, you are at least responsible for their mishap by the extraordinary way in which you bring them up. At all events, when they develop into the eccentric beings which they are, you are the last people in the world who have any right to punish them with legal penalties, social obloquy. Considering the present state of the law in most countries to be inequita- ble toward a respectable minority of citizens, Ulrichs proposes that Urnings should be placed upon the same footing as other men. That is to say, sexual relations between males and males should not be treated as criminal, unless they be attended with violence (as in the case of rape), or be carried on in such a way as to offend the public sense of decency (in places of general resort or in the public street), or, thirdly, be entertained between an adult and a boy under age (the protected age to be decided, as in the case of girls). What he demands is, that when an adult male, freely and of his own con- sent, complies with the proposals of an adult person of his own sex, and their intercourse takes place with due regard for public decency, neither party shall be liable to prosecution and punishment at law. [[Ellis:] He seems, however, to have gone further than Symonds here states, and to have advocated marriage between persons of the same sex.]. If so much were conceded by the majority of normal people to the abnormal minority, continues Ulrichs, an immense amount of misery and 310 Sexual Inversion furtive vice would be at once abolished. A defender of the present laws of Prussia, England, etc., might, indeed, reply: “This is opening a free way to the seduction and corruption of young men.” But young men are surely at least all capable of defending themselves against seduction and corruption as young women are. Nay, they are far more able, not merely because they are stronger, but because they are not usually weakened by an overpowering sexual instinct on which the seducer plays. Yet the seduction and corrup- tion of young women is tolerated, in spite of the attendant consequences of illegitimate childbirth, and all which that involves. This toleration of the seduction of women by men springs from the assumption that only the normal sexual appetite is natural. The seduction of man by a male passes for criminal, because the inverted sexual instinct is regarded as unnatural, depraved and wilfully perverse. On the hypothesis that individuals subject to perverted instincts can suppress them at pleasure or convert them into normal appetite, it is argued that they must be punished. But when the real facts come to be studied, it will be found: first, that these instincts are inborn in Urnings, and are, therefore, in their case natural; secondly, that the sup- pression of them is tantamount to life-long abstinence under the constant torture of sexual solicitation; thirdly, that the conversion of them into nor- mal channels is in a large percentage of cases totally impossible, in nearly all where it has been attempted is only partially successful, and where marriage ensues has generally ended in misery for both parties. Ulrichs, it will be noticed, does not distinguish between Urnings, in whom the inversion is admitted to be congenital, and Uraniasters, in whom it has been acquired or deliberately adopted. And it would be very difficult to frame laws which should take separate cognisance of these two classes. The code Napoléon legalises the position of both, theoretically, at any rate. The English code treats both as criminal, doing thereby, it must be admitted, marked injustice to recognised Urnings, who, at the worst, are morbid or insane, or sexually deformed, through no fault of their own. In the present state of things, adds Ulrichs, the men who yield their bodies to abnormal lovers do not do so merely out of compliance, sympa- thy, or the desire for reasonable reward. Too often they speculate upon the illegality of the connection, and have their main object in the extortion of money by threats of exposure. Thus, the very basest of all trades, that of chantage, is encouraged by the law. Alter the law, and, instead of increasing vice, you will diminish it; for a man who should then meet the advances of an Urning would do so out of compliance, or, as is the case with female prostitutes, upon the expectation of reasonable gain. The temptation to ply a disgraceful profession with the object of extorting money would be avoided. Moreover, as regards individuals alike abnormally constituted, voluntary and mutually satisfying relations, free from degrading risks, and possibly permanent, might be formed between responsible agents. Ulrichs’s View 311

One serious objection to recognising and tolerating sexual inversion has always been that it tends to check the population. This was a sound political and social argument in the time of Moses, when a small and militant tribe needed to multiply to the full extent of its procreative capacity. It is by no means so valid in our age, when the habitable portions of the globe are rapidly becoming overcrowded. Moreover, we must bear in mind that soci- ety, under the existing order, sanctions female prostitution, whereby men and women, the normally procreative, are sterilised to an indefinite extent. Logic, in these circumstances, renders it inequitable and ridiculous to deny a sterile exercise of sex to abnormal men and women, who are by instinct and congenital diathesis non-procreative. As the result of these considerations, Ulrichs concludes that there is no real ground for the persecution of Urnings, except such as may be found in the repugnance felt by the vast numerical majority for an insignificant minority. The majority encourages matrimony, condones seduction, sanc- tions prostitution, legalises divorce, in the interests of its own sexual p roclivities. It makes temporary or permanent unions illegal for the minor- ity whose inversion of instinct it abhors. And this persecution, in the popu- lar mind, at any rate, is justified, like many other inequitable acts of preju- dice or ignorance, by theological assumptions and the so-called mandates of revelation. In the next place, it is objected that inverted sexuality is demoralising to the manhood of a nation, that it degrades the dignity of man, and that it is incapable of moral elevation. With regard to the dignity of man, is there, asks Ulrichs, anything more degrading to humanity in sexual acts performed between male and male than in similar acts performed between male and female? Much of this talk about the dignity of man, says Ulrichs, proceeds from a vulgar misconception as to the nature of inverted sexual desire. People assume that Urnings seek their pleasure only or mainly in an act of unmentionable indecency. The exact opposite, he assures them, is the truth. The act in question is no commoner between men and men than it is between men and women. Ulrichs, upon this point, may be sus- pected, perhaps, as an untrustworthy witness. His testimony, however, is confirmed by Krafft-Ebing, who, as we have seen, has studied sexual inver- sion long and minutely from the point of view of psychical pathology. “As regards the nature of their sexual gratification”, he writes, “it must be established at the outset that the majority of them are contented with reciprocal embraces: the act commonly ascribed to them they generally abhor as much as normal men do; and, inasmuch as they always prefer adults, they are in no sense specially dangerous to boys”. This author pro- ceeds to draw a distinction between Urnings, in whom sexual inversion is congenital, and old debauchees or half-idiotic individuals, who are in the habit of misusing boys. The vulgar have confounded two different classes; and everybody who studies the psychology of Urnings is aware that this 312 Sexual Inversion involves a grave injustice to the latter. Without appealing to antiquity, the records of which confute this objection overwhelmingly, one might refer to the numerous passages in Ulrichs’s writings where he relates the fidelity, loyalty, self-sacrifice, and romantic enthusiasm which frequently accompan y such loves, and raise them above baseness. Appendix D Letter from Professor X

Professor X,1 in a letter to Symonds (who described him as “an American of eminence, who holds a scientific professorship in one of the first universi- ties of the world”), has carried to the furthest extent the theory of the sexual indifference of the genital impulse, and the consequently normal nature of homosexuality. He writes: “I have considered and enquired into this ques- tion for many years; and it has long been my settled conviction that no breach of morality is involved in homosexual love; that, like every other passion, it tends, when duly understood and controlled by spiritual feeling, to the physical and moral health of the individual and the race, and that it is only its brutal perversions which are immoral. I have known many per- sons more or less the subjects of this passion, and I have found them a par- ticularly high-minded, upright, refined, and (I must add) pure-minded class of men. In view of what everybody knows of the vile influence on society of the intersexual passion, as it actually exists in the world, making men and women sensual, low-minded, false, every way unprincipled and grossly self- ish, and this especially in those nations which self-righteously reject homo- sexual love, it seems a travesty of morality to invest the one with divine attributes and denounce the other as infamous and unnatural. “There is an error in the view that feminine love is that which is directed to a man, and masculine love that which is directed to a woman. That doctrine involves a begging of the whole question. It is a fatal concession to vulgar prejudice, and a contradiction to all you have so firmly adduced from Greek manners, and, indeed, I may say, to all the natural evolution of our race. Passion is in itself a blind thing. It is a furious pushing out, not with calcula- tion or comprehension of its object, but to anything which strikes the imag- ination as fitted to its need. It is not characterised or differentiated by the nature of its object, but by its own nature. Its instinct is to a certain form of action or submission. But how that instinct is determined is largely acciden- tal. Sexual passion is drawn by certain qualities which appeal to it. It may see them, or think that it sees them, in a man or a woman. But it is in either case the same person. The controlling influence is a certain spiritual attrac- tion, and that may lie in either. The two directions are equally natural to unperverted man, and the abnormal form of love is that which has lost the

1 [Professor X was James Mills Pierce, (1834–1906), Perkins Professor of Astronomy and Mathematics at Harvard University. For more information, see Hubert Kennedy, Six Articles on James Mills Pierce, Peremptory Publications ebook, 2003, available at http://home.att.net/~clairnorman/Peirce.pdf (accessed 18/4/06).]

313 314 Sexual Inversion power of excitability in either the one or the other of these directions. It is unisexual love (a love for one sexuality) which is a perversion. The normal men love both. “It is true enough that in primitive society all passion must have been wholly or mainly animal, and spiritual progress must have been conditioned on subduing it. But there is no reason why this subjugation should have consisted in extirpating, or trying to extirpate, one of the two main forms of sexual passion, and cultivating the other. The actual reasons were, I take it, two: (1) to reserve all sexual energy for the increase of the race; (2) to get the utmost merely fleshly pleasure out of the exercise of passion. Whether either of these reasons adds to the spiritual elevation of love may be doubted. Certainly not the second, which is now the moving influence in the matter. It is true enough that all passion needs to be unceasingly watched, because the worst evils for mankind lie hidden in its undisciplined indulgence. But this is quite as true of intersexual as of homosexual love. I clearly believe that the Greek morality on this subject was far higher than ours, and truer to the spiritual nature of man; that our civilisation suffers for want of the pure and noble sentiment which they thought so useful to the state; and that we ought to think and speak of homosexual love, not as ‘inverted’ or ‘abnormal,’ as a sort of colour-blindness of the genital sense, as a lamentable mark of inferior development, or as an unhappy fault, a ‘masculine body with a feminine soul,’ but as being in itself a natural, pure and sound passion, as worthy of the reverence of all fine natures as the honourable devotion of husband and wife, or the ardour of bride and groom.” I present this statement of Prof. X’s as representing the furthest point to which the defence of sexual inversion has gone, or, indeed, could go, unless anyone were bold enough to assert that homosexuality is the only normal impulse, and heterosexual love a perversion. But a broad view of the phe- nomena of sex among animals generally, or even in savage or barbarous races of man, does not tend to make out even a prima facie case in its favour. Appendix E Notes on the Concubinus BBy J. A. Symonds

There was a custom among the ancient Romans which has an interesting bearing on modern hypotheses regarding the nature of homosexual love. They allowed a young gentleman to consort freely with male slaves of his own age before the period of marriage. One of these was called his concu- binus, or bed-fellow; and it is clear, from allusions to the position occupied by this youth in the household, that he acted like a kind of harmless safety- valve for his master’s passions. Thus the Romans counted upon a young man’s liking for persons of his own sex. They did not fear lest the indulgence of this taste in early manhood should render him indifferent to the female, or incapable of marriage at the proper moment. Furthermore, they reck- oned that permitted friendships of the sort in question would keep the lad from the society of loose women, and from forming dangerous connec- tions with married wives. Something of the same kind existed, I believe, in the slave states of America, though I do not mean to imply that here the connection was as sexual as it appears to have been in Rome. The following passage from an Epithalamium of Catullus, explains the position of the concubinus.1 “Julia, the bride, is just about to appear; and the young people assembled to greet her are chanting the nuptial song. ‘Come forth, young bride,’ they cry. ‘Your smooth-lipped husband is not given to evil ways of pleasure following base, infamous amours, nor will he seek to sleep apart from your soft bosom.’ As she draws nearer, the long turns to that playful satire which was permit- ted by ancient usage on such occasions. ‘Lift, lads, oh, lift your torches! see the bridal veil of flame advancing. March, sing in measure as you step; Io Hymen Hymenæe, Io! Io Hymen Hymenæe, Io! Now’s not the time to keep your quips and wanton sallies in the leash; nor let the bedfellow begrudge the boys their nuts,2 the bedfellow who hears of his lord’s love abandoned. Fling nuts to the boys, you lazy bedfellow. Time enough you’ve played with nuts. ‘Tis now the hour to wait upon the god of bridals. Bedfellow, fling nuts. But yesterday the farm lads were too homely for you, bedfellow! Now the barber with his basin comes to shear your lip and chin. Wretched, oh wretched bedfellow, fling nuts. ‘Twill be said of you, fair bridegroom, dainty and perfumed, that you part but sadly from your smooth-cheeked slaves.

1 Carmen lxi, “In nuptias Juliæ et Manlii.” 2 Nuces, trifles, with a double sense of testicles.

315 316 Sexual Inversion

Nay, part with them. Io Hymen Hymenæe, Io! Io Hymen Hymenæe, Io! We know you practised nought with them but what is lawful.3 Yet these things are not lawful as before, now that you are wedded. Io Hymen Hymenæe, Io! Io Hymen Hymenæe, Io!” The explanation of the word concubinus given in our dictionaries is “one who practises sexual intercourse without wedlock, a catamite,” It is regarded as “a more honourable designation of the pellex.” What the use of the male pellex was, appears clearly from Martial’s epigram, addressed to a jealous wife (Lib. xii, 97). The hymenæal stanzas translated above from Catullus show the concubinus to have been a favourite lad selected from the other slaves for his master’s comrade and bedfellow. So long as his bloom lasted he could afford to look down upon the other slaves about the farm. But when his lord married and the barber came to shave his beard, he had to leave the sports of boyhood and the privileges of his exceptional station. The young gentleman, too, is supposed to quit his smooth companions with reluctance: when he took a wife, their familiarity ceased to be right and fitting. The nature of this famil- iarity, proper to celibacy, improper after marriage, seems unintelligible now. If anywhere, we have to seek for it in the exact meaning of the words quae licent sola cognita and ista non eadem licent. But here the irony and veiled allu- sion of fescennine verse leave a wide field for conjecture. It might, perhaps, be not unreasonable to suppose that only certain forms of intimacy were allowed by custom and the sense of honour: as Cicero records about the Spartans, omnia permittunt praetor stuprum. Yet, taking the passage in its entirety, and allowing for an innuendo in the phrase satis diu lusisti nucibus, we can hardly avoid the supposition that the concubinus and his master were suffered, up to the marriage of the latter, to do very much what they pleased together. Robinson Ellis is of opinion that quae licent meant “any connexion, however disreputable, which was not punishable by law.” If so, the mode of their inti- macy would have depended on their specific temperaments. The Romans, then, were not afraid of encouraging relations between their sons and slaves, of a sexual nature, limited only by undefined good taste and sense of honour. They did this, in spite of what is called the widespread cor- ruption of manners, which tolerated and flaunted every form of homosexuality and sadism. Yet it cannot be demonstrated that more Urnings (in the strict sense of that term as used by Ulrichs) were created by such practises than would have existed without them. More bachelors, from a horror feminæ and an irresistible attraction for males do not seem to have been produced. What really happened was that men married, and carried on amours with both sexes, according to their personal proclivities: there being a pretty equal division between both in the case of habitual libertines.

3 Licita. Roman law permitted even the stuprum of a slave. Appendix F Countess Sarolta V1

On the 4th November, 1889, the father-in-law of a certain Count Sandor V, gave information to the authorities that he had been cheated of 800 florins by false pretences, and further stated that in the spring of that year a fictitious marriage had taken place between his daughter and Count Sandor; also he alleged that Count Sandor was not a man at all, but a woman going about in man’s clothes, and really called Sarolta (Charlotte) Countess V. She was arrested. On her first examination she acknowledged that she was born on the 6th December 1866, and was really of the female sex, a Catholic, unmarried, and that she was engaged as a journalist and author under the name of Count Sandor V. From an autobiography written by this man-woman the following facts have been ascertained, and are confirmed by information from other sources. She belongs to an ancient, aristocratic and highly respectable Hungarian family which has always been remarkable for eccentricity. A sister of her maternal grand-mother was hysterical and somnambulistic, and on account of an imaginary paralysis kept her bed for seventeen years. Another great- aunt lay in bed for seven years on account of an imaginary fatal illness, but at the same time gave balls. A third had the idea that a console in her drawing-room was bewitched. If anyone placed anything on this console she became extremely excited, called out “Bewitched, bewitched,” and has- tened with the object into a room which she called the Black Chamber, the key of which she never allowed to go into anyone else’s hands. After the death of this lady a collection of shawls, ornaments, bank-notes, etc., was found in the Black Chamber. A fourth great-aunt for two years would not allow her room to be cleaned, and would not wash or comb herself; at the end of the two years she again made her appearance. All these ladies were, however, intellectual, cultivated and amiable. Sarolta’s mother was nervous, and could not bear the moonshine. Her father’s family were generally regarded as rather crack-brained. One line of the family occupied itself almost exclusively with spiritualism. Two blood relations on the father’s side shot themselves. The majority of the men are extraordinarily talented. The women are very homely and

1 [For more on Countess Sarolta Vay, see Geertje Mak, ‘Sandor/Sarolta Vay: From Passing Woman to Sexual Invert’, Journal of Women’s Historyy 16, 2004, pp. 54–77.]

317 318 Sexual Inversion commonplace people. Sarolta’s father occupied a high post, which, however, he had to give up on account of his eccentricity and spendthrift habits. It was a whim of the father’s to educate Sarolta as a boy, to teach her to ride, drive and hunt; he admired her energy as a man, and called her Sandor. On the other hand, he educated his two sons as girls and put them in woman’s clothing up to the age of fifteen. Sarolta-Sandor remained under the influence of her father until her twelfth year, when she went to her eccentric maternal grandmother at Dresden, and was by her, when this fictitious manliness became too obtrusive, sent to a boarding school and dressed as a girl. At the age of thirteen she went away with an English girl, with whom she formed a love relationship, and declared that she was a boy. Sarolta returned to her mother, who, however, could not make out how it was that her daughter had again become Sandor, wore boy’s clothes, and at least once every year played at love-relationships with persons of her own sex. At the same time she was receiving a careful education, learnt to speak, besides Hungarian and German, French, English, and to some extent Italian, made long journeys with her father in England and France, of course always as a young man; emancipated herself early, visited cafes and even places of doubtful reputation, and boasted that one day in a brothel she had a girl seated on each knee. Sarolta was often intoxicated; she was a passionate lover of manly sports and a very skilful fencer. She felt herself very attracted to actresses or other independent ladies, who were not always very young, and to whom she gave presents and boquets [sic]. She declares she has never felt any inclination to a man, and from year to year has felt growing dislike for men. “I preferred to go into the society of women in the company of plain insignificant men, so that I might not be left in the shade. If I observed that one of them aroused sympathy in the ladies I became jeal- ous. I p referred intellectual to physically beautiful women, but I could not stand those who were coarse or forward. I liked a woman’s passion to be revealed beneath a poetic veil; anything immodest in a woman was dis- gusting to me. I had an unspeakable dislike to female clothing and to eve- rything else of a female character, but only in myself, for I was an enthusi- astic lover of the fair sex.” For about ten years Sarolta has lived almost constantly as a man and away from her relatives. She has formed a number of liaisons with women, travelled with them, spent much money, got into debt. At the same time she displayed literary activity, and was a valued con- tributor to two high-class journals in Vienna, one of Semitic, the other of anti-Semitic tendency. Her passion for women was very variable. She never showed constancy in love. Only once a relationship lasted for three years. This was at Schloss Gyon. Sarolta here made acquaintance with Emma E., ten years’ older than herself. She fell in love with this lady, made a marriage contract with her, and lived with her three years as man and wife in Pesth. Countess Sarolta 319

A new love, which was to be fateful for Sarolta, caused her to dissolve her ‘marriage’ with E. The latter did not wish to leave her. It was only with difficulty that Sarolta bought her freedom from E., who, it appears, still considers herself a divorced woman, and calls herself Countess V. That Sarolta was also able to call out passion in other women appears from the fact that before the marriage with E. she had become tired of a certain Fräulein D., after having squandered much money with her, and Fräulein D. had threatened to shoot her if she did not remain true. In the summer of 1887, while staying at a watering-place, Sarolta became acquainted with the family of a respectable official. She at once fell in love with the daughter, Marie, and her love was returned. The latter’s mother and cousin tried to throw hindrances in the way of an engagement, but in vain. The two lovers carried on an ardent correspondence throughout the winter. When friend sought to dissuade Marie from marriage, saying that Sandor was not able to marry, she declared that if she could not marry she would be his maid-servant. In April 1888 Count Sandor came on a visit, when the lovers on several occasions slept together, and in May 1889 Sarolta reached the goal of her desires, and Marie, who in the meanwhile had given up the position she occupied as teacher, in the presence of a friend of her beloved Sandor, was married in a summer-house in Hungary by a pretended priest, a young man in a choir surplice. Sarolta had got up the marriage with her friend. The pair lived together very happily, Marie being quite ignorant of conjugal duties, and if it had not been for the information given by the father-in-law this apparent marriage might have lasted for an indefinite period. It is remarkable that during the tolerably long engagement Sarolta was able to deceive her bride’s family completely regarding her sex. Sarolta was a passionate smoker, and had a thoroughly masculine carriage and habits. Her letters were always addressed to Count Sandor, and she often observed that she would soon be called to military duties. Shortly before the ‘marriage’ she wrote two pamphlets, one on the land question in Hungary, the other on the autonomy of the Catholic Church. From the information given by the father-in-law, it appears that Sarolta (as she afterwards confessed) used to stuff handkerchiefs or gloves into her trousers’ pockets to produce the appearance of sexual organs. The father- in-law also once observed something like an erect member in his future son-in-law, who also let ran the remark that in riding he had to wear a suspensory bandage. As a matter of fact, Sarolta wore a bandage round her body to support an artificial organ. Marie’s family frequently observed Sandor during walks retire up to a tree, apparently for the purpose of urinat- ing like a man; in the privy she contrived to wet the back of the seat, and for this was scolded by the mother-in-law. Although Sarolta frequently shaved for appearance sake, the people at the hotel were convinced she was a woman because the chamber maid had found traces of menstrual blood on the washing (Sarolta explained this as due to piles), and once when Sarolta was 320 Sexual Inversion taking a bath the maid looked through the key-hole and convinced herself that Sarolta was a woman. Concerning Sarolta’s intellectual individuality a large number of manu- scripts give us information. The handwriting is firm and assured; it has a genuinely masculine character. The contents everywhere contain the same characteristics—wild, unrestrained passion, hatred and opposition to every- thing which opposes itself to hearts thirsting for love and its return, a poet- ical love in which there was no trace of anything ignoble, but enthusiasm for everything fair and lovely, together with an intelligent perception of sci- ence and the fine arts. Her writings betray unusually wide reading in the classics of all languages. Evidence has been called to show that her literary productions are not insignificant. The letters and writings concerning the relationship to Marie are psycho- logically interesting. Sarolta speaks of the bliss she had experienced at Marie’s side, and of the boundless desire she had to see the adored woman again, if only for a moment. After the outrage to which she had been subjected, she only wished now to exchange the cell for the grave. The bitterest pain was the consciousness that now Marie also must hate her. Hot tears, so many that she could drown herself in them, had she wept over her lost happiness. Whole pages were concerned with the apotheosis of this affection and with recollections of the days of early love and acquaintance. Sarolta mourns over her heart, which will not be dominated by reason. Then, again, she breaks out into mad passion, and declares she cannot live without Marie. “The tones of your dear, lovely voice, a voice which might even make me rise from my grave, have always been to me a promise of Paradise. Your mere presence was enough to soothe my physical and moral griefs. It was a mag- netic stream, a peculiar power which your being exercised over mine, and which I have never been quite able to define to myself. So I have to content myself with the everlastingly true definition: I love you because I love you. In the comfortless night I had only one star, the star of Marie’s love. The star is now gone out—there is now only the reflection of it, the sweet melan- choly recollection, which lightens up the terrible night of death with a pale glimmer of hope.” She breaks out again into this appeal:—

“Gentlemen, wise lawyers and medical pathologists, judge me! Every step that I took was led by love: each of my acts was caused by love. God put it into my heart. If he created me so, and not otherwise, am I guilty, or is it the everlasting and unfathomable way of fate? I have trusted in God that one day redemption would come, for my fault was only love itself, which is the principle and foundation of His laws—His very kingdom itself. O God! Thou merciful and all-powerful, Thou seest my torment, Thou knowest what I suffer. Bend to me and reach to me Thy helping hand now that all the world Countess Sarolta 321 has forsaken me. Only God is just. How beautifully Victor Hugo describes this in his Legends du Siècle!”

Although Sarolta knew that none of her writings reached her beloved, she was never weary of penning long outbursts of adoration of Marie’s person, full of the joy and pain of love, “in order to beg for one bright, gleaming tear wept on a still, bright summer’s evening, when the sea glows in the evening light like molten gold, and the bells, mingling in harmonious melancholy, proclaim rest and peace for this poor soul, for this poor heart—that to its last breath is beating for thee.” The first meeting between the doctors and Sarolta was in some degree embarrassing on both sides, for the first on account of Sarolta’s perhaps somewhat forced masculine airs, for her because she thought that she was about to receive the brand of moral insanity. She possesses an intelligent, not unbeautiful face, which, in spite of a certain delicacy of feature and smallness of all the parts, has a very decided masculine character. It was dif- ficult for the doctors to realise, in spite of the presence of female clothing, that they had a woman before them, intercourse with the man Sandor seem- ing much more natural. The accused also felt this. She became more free and communicative as soon as she was treated as a man. Notwithstanding the inclination towards the female sex, which she had shown from her earliest years, it was only in her thirteenth year, when she ran away with the red-haired English girl from the Dresden institute, that the first traces of the sexual instinct appeared, and manifested themselves in kisses, caresses, and contact accompanied by voluptuous emotions. Even at this time her dreams were exclusively concerned with female forms, and then and ever since in erotic dreams she always felt herself in the situation of a man. She knew nothing of solitary or mutual masturbation. This appeared to her very disgusting and unworthy of masculine dignity. She has never allowed anyone to touch her genital organs, partly for this reason, partly because it would have revealed her great secret. The menses first appeared at the age of seventeen, but were always slight in amount and without pain. Sarolta visibly detests the mention of menstrual phenomena, as repulsive to her masculine consciousness and feelings. She recognises the morbidity of her sexual inclinations, but does not wish to be different, because with these emotions she feels herself perfectly well and happy. The idea of sexual intercourse with men is disgusting to her, and she regards it as impossible. Her modesty goes so far that it is easier for her to sleep with men than with women. For this reason when she wishes to satisfy a need, or to change her linen, she begs her cell companion to turn to the window, so that she may not see her. When Sarolta by chance came in close contact with this cell companion, a woman belonging to the dregs of the people, she experienced voluptuous excitement at which she blushed. She tells unasked of the misery she felt on being placed in the cell in unaccustomed 322 Sexual Inversion female garments. Her only consolation was that she had at least been left her shirt. Smell plays a considerable part in her sexual life, and she mentioned that on the occasion of an absence of her Marie she sought out and smelled those parts of the sofa on which Marie’s head had been accustomed to lie, in order to inhale with delight the aroma left by the hair. The women who interested Sarolta were not exactly beautiful, or voluptuous, or very young. She always places the physical charms of a woman in the second rank. She feels herself drawn with a ‘magnetic’ attraction to women of about twenty-four to thirty. Her sexual satisfaction she finds exclusively in the body of her friend, never in her own body, usually in the form of masturbation of the beloved woman, or else of cunnilingus. Occasionally she uses a stocking stuffed with tow as a priapus. Sarolta made these confessions unwillingly, and with visible shame; in her writings also, there are never any signs of immodesty. She is religious, takes a lively interest in everything fair and noble, is very sensitive to the moral appreciation of other’s. She deeply regrets that she has made Marie unhappy in her passion. She regards her sexual instinct as perverse, and such love of one woman to another in normal people as morally objection- able. She is not only highly talented in literary respects, but possesses a remarkable memory. Her only weakness is capriciousness, and the impossi- bility of behaving sensibly about money. She is, however, conscious of this weakness, and begs that nothing more be said of it. Sarolta is 153 cm in height, the bony system is delicate; she is slender, and remarkably muscular in the chest and thighs.2 Her walk in woman’s cloth- ing is awkward; her movements are energetic, not unbeautiful, although with a certain masculine rigidity and lack of grace. She greets you with a hearty handshake. Her whole bearing is decided, stiff, somewhat self- conscious. Her expression is intelligent, her bearing rather grave. Feet and hands are strikingly small, like a child’s. The extensor side of the extremities is remarkably covered with hair, although there is not the slightest trace of a beard in spite of all efforts with the razor. The body is not at all of femi- nine build, and there is no waist. The pelvis is so slender and so little prom- inent that a line drawn from the armpit to the knee is straight; not drawn in at the waist nor projecting at the hips. The skull is slightly oxycephalic, and at least 1cm below the female average. The circumference of the skull amounts to 52[cm]; the posterior circumference is 24[cm]; starting from the ear. The parietal is 23[cm]; the frontal 28.5[cm]; long diameter 17[cm];

2 Her personal appearance, it may be said, was thus briefty summed up by an inter- viewer: “The Countess is of middle height, with a good chest, heavy shoulders, and well-developed arms and legs. She has short, curly dark hair, hazel eyes, a saucy nose, and a Cupid’s bow mouth. Although the lines of her face have been somewhat deep- ened and hardened by her fast life, she still looks like a handsome, dashing young fellow of twenty years’.” Countess Sarolta 323 greatest breadth 13[cm]; distance between auditory meatus 12[cm]; between malar processes 12.2[cm]. The upper jaw projects; position of teeth not quite normal; the right upper canine has never developed. The mouth is remark- ably small; the ears stand out; the lobule is adherent to the cheek. The hard palate is small and steep; the voice is rough and deep. The breasts are suffi- ciently developed, soft, without secretion. The mons veneris is covered by thick dark hair. The sexual organs are of completely feminine type, without any trace of hermaphroditic phenomena, but they have remained at the same infantile stage as those of a girl of ten. The labia majora meet almost completely; the labia minora are of cockscomb shape and project beyond the greater lips. The clitoris is small and very sensitive. The frænulum is delicate, the perinæum very small, the entrance to the vagina narrow, the mucous membrane normal. The hymen is absent, apparently from birth; there are no caruncullæ myrtiformes. The vagina is so narrow that the entrance of the membrum virile [sicc] would be impossible, or, at least, extremely painful. Coitus has certainly not taken place. The uterus was felt through the rectum about the size of a walnut, immovable and retroflected. The pelvis is small in all directions (dwarf pelvis), and is of decidedly mas- culine type. The distance between the anterior spinous processes is 22.5[cm] (instead of 26.3), between iliac crests, 26.5[cm] (instead of 29.3), trochanters 27.7[cm] (31); the external conjugate is 17.2[cm] (19–20), so the internal is probably 7.7[cm] (10.8). On account of the defective breadth of the pelvis, the thighs are not convergent, as is normally the case in women, but straight. This examination, in the opinion of the experts consulted, revealed in Sarolta a congenital morbid perversion of the sexual instinct, expressing itself even in anomalies of physical development, on a foundation of hered- itary degeneration; and they held that the incriminated actions of Sarolta were due to her morbid and irresistible sexual impulse. In so far her own expression is fully justified: “If God so created me, and not otherwise, is it my fault?” This view of the case was taken by the court. The “Countess in Men’s Clothes”, as the newspapers called her, returned to the capital of her own country, and again bore herself as “Count Sandor.” She had sown her wild oats, she said, and had suffered for it. Her only grief is the loss of the happiness she enjoyed with her ardently loved Marie, whom she dreams of every night. The latter, it may be added, retains her love for the Countess, whom she calls the grandest of women, and she longs to be her companion through life. AdGAppendix G A Note on Sexual Inversion Byy Dr. K.

A number of cases of inversion in women have come under my observation. In some of these cases there is a hereditary neurasthenic or psychopathic tendency, but it must be borne in mind that there are few people in modern life, perhaps none, who could be pronounced absolutely free from such a Belastungg [taint]. The persons whom I have questioned acknowledge their feelings to be unusual, and perhaps morbid, but they unite in declaring them to be abso- lutely ineradicable. One invert thus describes the needs of her nature: “A desire for a deep spiritual communion with a friend who has the same tastes, aspirations, and interests. Embraces and endearment, and a perfect faith in the other’s purity of heart. These are the necessary conditions.” I may also quote the following passage from a letter written by a young inverted woman to her friend: “Remember, dear, I am not asking you to love me as I love you, neither do I wish to make you remarkable in any way. I shrink from everything of the kind as much as anyone. I am simply exer- cising my right in loving you as I do—with a love which I know has God’s sanction and blessing. The world has not learned friendship’s blessing yet, but I know, for I have learned it through my misfortune, that it is possible for human souls to be made strong and beautiful by the spiritualising effect of love, the kind of love that I have given you. During all the years that I have known you my one desire has been to make my influence over you tend upward. I love you for the strength and purity and beauty of your character, and my only reason for telling you about my peculiar nature is to make you understand, if possible, that my affection for you is earnest and sincere. I cannot bear to have you treat it lightly, or to be considered weak and sentimental. Be brave and honest with me. You have known me now for seven years; you know that this inversion does not affect my moral sense, yet you have not written to me since I told you of it, and I cannot understand your silence. It is so unlike you.” While the feeling, doubtless, has a sexual basis, it is in many cases not recognised, and the love, though intense, is purely spiritual in character, and is placed upon a high plane. Moreover, this moral attitude is not attained as the result of conscious effort on the part of these persons; it seems rather to be a natural tendency. This may be explained in several ways. There may be a congenitally feeble instinct, or it may be that the

324 A Note on Sexual Inversion 325 instinct, through having been gratified only in an emotional or spiritual way, has been entirely subordinated to the higher feelings.1 The cases which I have investigated have no unfavourable physical or mental symptoms. On the contrary, their health is as sound as their morals. They are, as a rule, persons of a highly wrought nervous organisation, and of unusual mental power. Inquiries of this character must be carried on with the utmost caution. There is an inevitable tendency to form conclusions before the subject is adequately mastered, and facts are almost invariably looked at from the standpoint of some theory which so colours and distorts them, that weak corroborative evidence is apt to be invested with undue strength and strong adverse evidence carelessly to be dismissed as weak. Most of the cases heretofore investigated are of persons belonging to the criminal or quasi-criminal classes, and conclusions drawn from these cases are necessarily tainted with this imperfection. Homosexual phenomena are in such instances difficult to disentangle from other phenomena—the stig- mata of criminality—which may be of great significance, or of little or no significance whatever, in the solution of the problem of homosexuality. Furthermore, the testimony of the homosexual, or of those who describe themselves as homosexual, is doubtless in many cases not entitled to full credence. Every person is impelled by a law of his nature to justify his con- duct in his own eyes, and in the eyes of others. This is of course, especially, true where any habit or feeling exists which is condemned by the prevailing opinion of mankind. Under this influence one who admits himself to be homosexual is apt, on the one hand, to magnify any evidence tending to show a congenital element which necessarily excludes the idea of personal responsibility, and, on the other hand, largely to ignore or to understate evidence of exactly opposite significance, which, perhaps, exists in equal abundance. While the results of our investigations up to the present time point unmis- takably to the effects of heredity, i.e., an inherited diathesis or a predisposi- tion to morbid feelings, it does not follow that the actual inversion of the sex instinct is congenital. The histories of some cases certainly tend to the conclusion that they are congenital and, on the other hand, we have strong reasons for believing that in a majority of cases the inversion is acquired. The sexual instinct is not an acquired instinct, but its modes of expression are acquired. The same instinct existing everywhere has been taught to be grati- fied in different ways. How widely instincts may be modified by education

1 In the Century Magazine, January, 1897, there is an interesting article entitled “The Ladies of Llangollen” [i.e., Lady Eleanor Butler and Sarah Ponsonby]. There is reason to believe that one or perhaps both of these women were inverted. The friend- ship of these women was probably of the character I have mentioned. It is certainly the only kind of friendship that would prove enduring. 326 Sexual Inversion and association may be seen by reading the chapters in Mr. Spencer’s Sociology relative to the various forms of marriage prevailing among different peoples. Although congenital cases doubtless exist, there are certain inherent difficulties in pronouncing any particular case to be congenital. Such cases we have strong reasons to believe are comparatively rare. The sexual instinct has been derived from untold millions of ancestors. It is abso- lutely necessary to the survival of the race. Upon such an instinct hered- ity operates with greatest force-natural selection always tending to make it invariable. Nor does the mere fact that we are unable to explain how the homosexual abnormality was acquired justify us in holding that it is congenital. We are, for instance, wholly unable to explain in individual instances the origin of those number forms and colour associations which Mr. Galton has shown to be common (see Inquiries into Human Faculty). Mr. Galton gives the statements of persons who invariably see the visual image of an object as soon as it is suggested. Others have colours associated with certain sounds or sights, and to some of these persons a series of numbers will appear always in the form of a geometrical figure. There can be little doubt that such mental peculiarities are acquired in childhood. Possibly these people while learning their letters or numbers formed the habit of placing them in the figures of the carpet or wall paper, and in this way or in some similar way this association of ideas was acquired. Thus it will be seen that we must not fail to recognise the immense importance of education—the association of ideas and other influences which operate so strongly upon the minds of the young in ways which are absolutely incomprehensible. One very significant fact is that in nearly every case of inversion reported, there is a premature development of the sex instinct. Feelings are experienced at the age of six, seven, or nine, which in normally constituted persons do not assert themselves until after the period of puberty or about that time. Such feelings are due in all probability to an imperfect nervous organisa- tion. This organisation is, doubtless, inherited, but it may not point in all cases to a neuropathic family history. With the development of the sex instinct, obscure feelings arise; there is a hunger of the soul, a reaching out for something which will satisfy it, in short, an instinct to love. When this longing is obscure and indefinite, as is the case with the first sexual feelings in mankind, it impetuously seizes and expends its force upon anything which promises in any way to appease its demands; the thing thus seized upon may be of a character tending to produce a perversion or perhaps an inversion of instinct. The imagination takes hold of the unnatural or perverting method of gratifi- cation, and invests it with all those feelings which properly belong to a A Note on Sexual Inversion 327 more natural method, and when this has occurred a number of times, a habit is formed, and a perversion or inversion of instinct has resulted. Of this perversion or inversion the person affected may be wholly ignorant. To him his condition is perfectly normal, and he can remember no time it did not seem normal. For this reason he is impelled to think of it as congenitally produced. That an instinct which has during the period of extreme plasticity been habitually gratified in some unnatural way may be rendered utterly incapa- ble thereafter of finding gratification in any other way is well illustrated by the following extract from Darwin’s Variations of Animals and Plants under Domestication, Vol. 2, p. 294— “An animal when once accustomed to an unnatural diet, which can gener- ally be effected only during youth, dislikes its proper food, as Spallanzani found to be the case with a pigeon which had long been fed on meat. The caterpillars of the Bombex hesperus feed in a state of nature on the leaves of the Cafe diable, but having been reared on the Ailanthus, they would not touch the Cafe diable, and actually died of hunger.” Perversions or inversions of the sexual instinct, it is obvious, are especially liable thus to be acquired among the highly civilised nations, where the custom prevails of keeping the young for as long as possible in a state of extreme ignorance in regard to everything pertaining to sexual relations, so that this instinct is left to drift about at the mercy of circumstances, and is consequently almost of necessity diverted from the normal channel. For the reasons stated above, and for other reasons not mentioned, it is clear to me that homosexual investigations are attended with great difficul- ties. In studying the cases which have fallen under my observation, I have tried to keep these difficulties always in view. My own cases have not been sufficiently numerous to justify broad conclusions, but they have thor- oughly convinced me that the current views with regard to homosexuality are grossly erroneous and cruelly unjust. One thing has been made perfectly clear: whether congenital or acquired, homosexuality is not in itself a mark of mental deficiency or of moral degradation. All feelings are capable of abuse, and the homosexual feelings, like the ordi- nary sexual feelings, have beyond question led to degraded practices; but I have had the fortune to have found a number of cases of inversion where the persons have been distinguished for unusual strength and purity of character, and for far more than the average intelligence and energy. To denounce such persons as degraded is the height of cruelty—a cruelty which must necessarily produce an acute sense of injustice and feeling of bitter resentment. In discussing this subject it is, perhaps, not wise to emphasise too strongly the view that these anomalies are congenital; for in some of these cases, 328 Sexual Inversion where there is simply a strong predisposition to inversion or a premature development of the emotions, it is not unlikely that with proper training good results might be obtained. Such tendencies in young children are manifestly morbid, and should be corrected; but all effort leading to this end must begin in childhood, while the feelings and imagination are in a state of plasticity. BblBibliograp hhy

Note: This bibliography combines the sources cited by Ellis and Symonds in Sexual Inversion with those referred to by me in the introduction and in the edited text. Notable omissions from this bibliography include standard sources (the Bible, Shakespeare’s plays, etc.) and the ancient sources on which Symonds based his Greek appendix (such as Herodotus, Histories), excepting specific modern editions of classi- cal texts (such as those by Clough or Jowett, which are listed in the bibliographyy under the editor’s name).

Manuscript sources

The British Libraryy Havelock Ellis Papers Freud Museum,, London Sigmund Freud correspondence with Havelock Ellis Harryy, Ransom Humanities Research Center, Universityy of Texas—Austin The British Sexological Society Papers Vincent Brome papers Havelock Ellis Papers George Ives Papers Universityy of Bristol John Addington Symonds Papers Universityy of Manchester Marc-Andre Raffalovich Papers Universityyyy of Sydney Norman Haire Papers

Theses

Chiara Beccalossi, ‘The Construction of Scientific Knowledge Regarding Female “Sexual Inversion”: Italian and British Psychiatry Compared c.1870–1920’, PhD thesis, Queen Mary University of London, forthcoming 2007.

Periodicals

Alienist and Neurologist British Medical Journal Journal of Mental Science The Lancet The Times

Webpages http://www.infopt.demon.co.uk/symfram1.htm http://www.angelfire.com/fl3/celebration2000/ http://home.att.net/~clairnorman/Peirce.pdf

329 330 Bibliography

Primary sources

Karl Abraham, ‘Ueber hysterische Traumzustände’, Jahrbuch für psychoanalytische Forshungg, Leipzig und Wien, Franz Deuticke, 1910. William Acton, Functions and Disorders of the Reproductive Organs, 4th ed., London, Churchill, 1865. William Acton, Prostitution, 2nd ed., London, Churchill, 1870. Anon., ‘Our Public Schools: their Methods and Morals’, New Revieww, July, 1893. Anon., ‘The Question of Indecent Literature’, Lancet, 1898, ii, pp. 1344–5. Anon., ‘Charge of Publishing and Selling Obscene Literature’, British Medical Journal, 5 November 1898, p. 1466. Anon., ‘The Writings of Mr Havelock Ellis’, editorial, Lancet, 1899, ii, pp. 170–71. Anon., ‘The Question of Indecent Literature’, editorial, Lancet, 1900, i, p.250. Anon., Review of Sexual Inversion, Alienist and Neurologistt, 19, 1898, pp. 185–6. Anon., ‘Obituary Notice [of Havelock Ellis]’, The Literary Guide, Sept. 1939, p.171. Percy L. Babington, Bibliography of the Writings of John Addington Symonds, London, John Castle, 1925. Honore de Balzac, Une Dernière Incarnation de Vautrin, Paris, Calmann-Levy 1847. Honore de Balzac, La Fille aux Yeux d’Or, Paris, 1835. H.H. Bancroft, Native Races of the Pacific States of North America, 5 vols, London, Longmans, Green, 1875–1876. Max Bartels, ‘Ueber abnormal Bebaarung beim Menschen’ Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, 13, 1881, p. 219. Adolphe Bastian Der Mensch in der Geschichte [Man in Historyy], 3 vols, Leipzig, Wigand, 1860. Adolphe Belot, Mademoiselle Giraud, ma Femme, Pairs, E. Dentu, 1870. Theodor Bergk, Poetæ Lyrici Graeci, Leipzig, Reichenbach, 1853. Hippolyte Bernheim, De la suggestion et de ses applications à la therapeutique, Paris, Doin, 1886. Annie Besant, Law of Population: Its Consequences, and its Bearing upon Human Conduct and Morals, London, Free Thought Publishing Company, 1887. Alfred Binet, ‘Le fétichisme dans l’amour de psychologie morbide’, Revue philosopique 24, 1887, pp. 143–67 & 252–74. C. Birnbacher, ‘Ein Fall von konträren Sexualempfindung vor dem Strafgericht’, Friedreichsblätter für gerichtliche Medizin 42, 1891. Eugene Bleuler, ‘Secondary Sensations’, in Hack Tuke (ed.), Dictionary of Psychological Medicine London, J & A Churchill, 1892. Iwan Bloch, Beiträge zur Aetiologie der Psychopathia Sexualis, 2 vols., Dresden, HR Dohrn, 1902–3. Iwan Bloch, The Sexual Life of Our Time, in its relations to modern civilization, 5th edi- tion, trans. Eden Paul, London, Rebman Ltd., 1908 [orig. 1906]. Jean-Jacques Bouchard, Les confessions: Voyage de Paris à Rome 1630, Paris-Lisieux, Bonneau, 1881. Horatio Brown, The Life and Letters of John Addington Symonds, London, Smith, Elder & Co., 1895. Stella Browne, ‘Studies in Feminine Inversion’, Journal of Sexology and Psychoanalysis, 1, 1923, pp. 51–58. Stella Browne, Review of Sexual Inversion, International Journal of Ethics, 27, 1916, pp. 114–15. Richard Francis Burton, Book of a Thousand Nights and a Nightt, 10, ‘Terminal Essay’, Benares, Printed by the Kamashastra Society for private subscribers only, 1885–1886. Bibliography 331

Felix Carlier, Les Deux Prostitutions, Paris, E. Dentu, 1889. Edward Carpenter, Homogenic Love, Manchester, Labour Press Society, 1894. Edward Carpenter, Love’s Coming of Age, Manchester, Labour Press Society, 1896. Johann Casper, ‘Ueber Nothzucht und Päderastie und deren Ermittelung Seitens des Gerichtesarztes’, Vierteljahrschrift für gerichtliche öffentliche Medizin, 1, 1852, pp. 21–78; reprinted in Joachim Hohmann (ed.), Der unterdrückte Sexus, Berlin, Achenbach, 1977, pp. 239–70 J.L. Casper, Handbook for the Practice of Forensic Medicine, Based Upon Personal Experience, 4 volumes, trans. G.W. Balfour, London, Sydenham Society, 1865. Bernal Diaz del Castillo, True History of the Conquest of New Spain, published posthumously in 1632. J.-M. Charcot and Valentin Magnan, “Inversion du sens génital,” Archives de Neurologie, 3, 1882, pp. 53–60 and 4, 1882, pp. 296–322. Julien Chevalier, L’Inversion de l’instinct sexuel au point du vue médico-légale, Paris, JB Baillière, 1885. Julien Chevalier, L’Inversion Sexuelle, Paris, Masson; Lyon, Storck, 1893. S.V. Clevenger, ‘Hunger: the Primitive Desire’, Science, 2, 15 January 1881, p. 14. S.V. Clevenger, Comparative Physiology and Psychology: A discussion of the evolution and relations of the mind and body of man and animals, Chicago, Jansen, McClurg & Co., 1885. Arthur Hugh Clough, A Revision of John Dryden’s Translation of Plutarch’s ‘Lives’’, 5 volumes, London, Sampson Low, 1859. Armand Marie Corre, Le Crime en Pays Creoles: Esquisse d’ethnographie criminelle, Paris, Masson, 1889. Arthur Costler, et al., Encyclopaedia of Sexual Knowledge, edited by Norman Haire, London, Encyclopaedic press, 1941. Martha F. Crow , ‘Will the Co-educated Co-educate their Children?’, Forum, July, 1894. Lucien Descave, Sous Offs, Paris, Tresse et Storck, 1890. Max Dessoir, ‘Zur Psychologie der Vita Sexualis’, Allgemeine Zeitschrift Psychiatrie, 1894, pp. 941–75. Denis Diderot, La Religieuse, Paris, Chez Buisson, 1796. William Stephen Dobson (ed.), Oratores Attici, London, Dove, 1828. Fyodor Dostoevsky, Prison Life in Siberia [i.e., Memoirs of the House of the Dead]], trans. H. Sutherland Edwards, London, J. & R. Maxwell, 1887. George Drysdale, Elements of Social Science, London, Edward Truelove, 1854. Georges Eekhoud, Le Cycle Partibulaire, Paris, Société du Mercure de France, 1896. Havelock Ellis, The Criminal, London, Walter Scott, 1890. Havelock Ellis, Man and Woman: a Study of Human Secondary Sexual Characters, London, Walter Scott, 1894. Havelock Ellis, ‘Sexual Inversion in Women’, Alienist and Neurologistt, 16, 1895, pp. 148–59. Havelock Ellis, ‘Sexual Inversion in Man’, Alienist and Neurologistt, 17, 1896, pp. 115–50. Havelock Ellis, ‘The Study of Sexual Inversion’, Medico-Legal Journal, 12, 1894, pp. 148–57. Havelock Ellis, ‘Die Theorie der conträren Sexualempfindung’, Seperatabdrück aus dem Centralblatt für Nervenheilkunde und Psychiatrie, February, 1896, pp. 1–7. Havelock Ellis, ‘Nota sulle facoltà artistiche degli invertiti’, Archivio delle psicopatie sessuali, 1, 1896, pp. 243–45. Havelock Ellis, ‘A Note on the Treatment of Sexual Inversion’, Alienist and Neurologistt, 17, 1896, pp. 257–64. 332 Bibliography

Havelock Ellis, ‘The Question of Indecent Literature (Letters to the Editor)’, Lancett, 1898, ii, p. 1409. Havelock Ellis, ‘A Note on the Bedborough Trial’, London, The University Press, 1898. Havelock Ellis, Sexual Inversion, 2nd ed., Philadelphia, F.A. Davis and Co., 1901. Havelock Ellis, Sexual Inversion, 3rd Philadelphia, F.A. Davis and Co., 1915. Havelock Ellis, Studies in the Psychology of Sex New York, 2 vols, 1936, [orig. 7 vols, 1896–1928]: Volume One, Pt 1, The Evolution of Modesty; The Phenomena of Sexual Periodicity; Auto-erotism [orig. The University Press, Leipzig, 1899, 2nd ed. in Studies in 1901, 3rd ed., revised and enlarged, 1915]. Pt 2, Analysis of the Sexual Impulse; Love and Pain; The Sexual Impulse in Women [orig. 1903, 2nd ed., revised and enlarged, 1913]. Pt 3, Sexual Selection in Man [orig. 1905]. Pt 4, Sexual Inversion [orig. 1897]. Volume Two, pt 1, Erotic Symbolism; The Mechanism of Detumescence; The Psychic State in Pregnancy [orig. 1906]. Pt 2, Eonism and Other Supplementary Studies [orig. 1928]. Pt 3, Sex in Relation to Society [orig. 1910]. Havelock Ellis, ‘Psycho-Analysis in Relation to Sex’, in Ellis, The Philosophy of Conflict & Other Essays in Wartime, London, Constable, 1919, pp. 206–07. Havelock Ellis, ‘The Individual and the Race’, in Little Essays of Love and Virtue, London, A. & C. Black, 1922, pp. 134–82. Havelock Ellis, Psychology of Sex, London, William Heinemann, 1933. Havelock Ellis, Foreword to the re-issue of Studies in the Psychology of Sex, New York, Random House, 1935. Havelock Ellis, My Life, London, Heineman, 1940. Havelock Ellis and Symonds, Die konträre Geschlechtsgefühl, trans. Hans Kurella, Leipzig, Bibliothek für Socialwissenschaft, 1896. Havelock Ellis and Eugene Talbot, ‘A Case of Developmental Degenerative Insanity, with Sexual Melancholia, Following Removal of the Testicles, Attempted Murder and Suicide’, Journal of Mental Science, 42, 1896, pp. 341–4. Charles Féré, ‘Note sur une Perversion Sexuelle’, Belgique Medicale, 1, 1897. Charles Féré, ‘La Descendance d’un Inverti’, Revue Génerale de Clinique et Therapie, 1896. Charles Féré, L’instinct sexuel, évolution et dissolution, Paris, Félix Alcan, 1899. Sandor Ferenczi, ‘Zur Nosologie der männliche Homosexualität (Homoërotik)’, Internationale Zeitschrift für Aerztliche Psychoanalyse, March, 1914, translated as ‘The Nosology of Male Homosexuality (Homoeroticism)’, in Sandor Ferenczi, First Contributions to Psychoanalysis, London, Hogarth Press, 1952. Theodor Simon Flatau, Nasen-, Rachen- und Kehlkopfkrankheiten: ein Lehrbuch für Studierende und Ärzte, Leipzig, Barth, 1895. Theodore Flournoy, Des Phenomènes de Synopsie, Geneva, Eggimann, 1893. Josiah Flynt [Josiah Flynt Willard], Tramping with Tramps, New York, Century Co., 1900. Josiah Flynt [Josiah Flynt Willard], The World of Graftt, New York, McClure, Phillips & Co., 1901. Auguste Forel, Hypnotism; or, Suggestion and psychotherapy: a study of the psychological, psycho-physiological and therapeutic aspects of hypnotism, translated by HW Armit, 5th ed., London, Rebman, 1906. Hieronymus Fraenkel,’Homo Mollis’, Medizinische Zeitung vom Verein für Heilkunde in Preußen, 22, 1853, pp. 102–03. Sigmund Freud Three Essays on Sexuality [1905], in On Sexualityy, ed. Angela Richardson, London, Penguin, 1977. Bibliography 333

Sigmund Freud, ‘The Dissolution of the Oedipal Complex [1926]’, in On Sexualityy, ed. Angela Richardson, London, Penguin, 1977, p. 313–22. Sigmund Freud Letters of Freud, selected by Ernest Freud, trans. T. and J. Stern, New York, Basic Books, 1975. Theophile Gautier, Mademoiselle de Maupin, Paris, 1835. Patrick Geddes and J.A. Thomson, The Evolution of Sex, London, Walter Scott, 1889. Eugene Gley, ‘Les aberrations de l’instinct sexuel’, Revue Philosophique de France, 9, 1884, pp. 66–92. H. Gock, ‘Beitrag zur Kenntniss der conträren Sexualempfindung’, Archiv für Psychiatrie und Nervenkrankheiten, 5, 1875, pp. 564–74. Ernest Godard, Égypte et Palestine, Observations Médicales et Scientifiques, Paris, Victor Masson et Fils, 1867. Wilhelm Griesinger, Mental Pathology and Therapeutics, 2nd ed., trans. C. Lockhart Robertson and James Rutherford, London, The New Sydenham Society, 1867. Wilhelm Griesinger, ‘Vortrag zur Eröffnung der psychiatrischen Clinik’, Archiv für Psychiatrie und Nervenkrankheiten, 1, 1868, pp. 363–54. Johann Georg von Hahn, Albanische Studien, Jena, Verlag von Friedrich Mauke, 1854. Norman Haire, Encyclopaedia of Sex Practice, 2nd ed., London, Encyclopaedic Press, 1951. Norman Haire, preface, to Bernhard Bauer, Woman (Wie bist du Weib?), London, Jonathan Cape, 1927. Augustin Hamon, La France Sociale et Politique, Paris, Sevine, 1891. Augustin Hamon, Psychologie du Militaire Professionel, Brussells, Charles Rozez, 1894. L. Harris-Liston, ‘Cases of Bearded Woman’, British Medical Journal, 2 June 1894. Magnus Hirschfeld, Geschlechtsübergänge: Mischungen männlicher und weiblicher Geschlectscharaktere (Sexuelle Zwischenstufen), Leipzig, W. Malende, 1905. Magnus Hirschfeld, Sexualpathologie: ein Lehrbuch für ärzte und Studierende, 3 volumes, Bonn, A. Marcus und E. Webers, 1918. Alfred Hoche, ‘Zur Frage der forensischen Beurtheilung sexueller Vergehen’, Neurologisches Centralblattt, 5, 1896, pp. 57–68. A.B. Holder, ‘The Bote: Description of a Peculiar Sexual Perversion Found Among North American Indians’, New York Medical Journal 50, 1889, pp. 623–25. Heinrich Johann von Holmberg, Ethnographische Skizzen über die Völker des russischen Amerika, 2 vols., Helsinki, H.C. Friis 1855, available as Holmberg’s Ethnographic Sketches, trans. F. Jaensch, ed. M. Falk, Fairbanks, University of Alaska Press, 1985. Heinrich Hössli, Eros, die Männerliebe der Griechen Band I, Glarus, 1836, Band II, St-Gallen, 1838, reprinted in Berlin by Bilbliothek Rosa Winkel, 1996. P.F. Hughes, Collection of Etruscan, Greek, and Roman Antiquities from the Cabinet of William Hamilton, four volumes, Naples, Morell, 1766–77. William James, Principles of Psychology, Boston, Henry Holt, 1890. Ludwig Jekels, ‘Einige Bemerkungen zur Trieblehre’, Internationale Zeitschrift für Aerztliche Psychoanalyse, 1, 1913, pp. 439–43. Benjamin Jowett (trans. and ed.), Plato’s Dialogues, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1871. K., Review of Sexual Inversion, Alienist and Neurologistt, 22, 1902, pp. 110–12. James Kiernan, ‘Insanity: Sexual Perversion’, Detroit Lancett, 7, 1884, p. 482. James Kiernan, Review of Benjamin Tarnowski, Aberrant Manifestations of the Sexual Instinctt, Neurological Revieww, 1, 1886, pp. 39–43. James Kiernan, ‘Sexual Perversion and the Whitechapel Murders’, Medical Standard, 4, 1888, pp. 556–70. 334 Bibliography

James Kiernan, ‘Psychological Aspects of the Sexual Appetite’, Alienist and Neurologistt, 14, 1891, pp. 188–218. James Kiernan, ‘Responsibility in Sexual Perversion’, Chicago Medical Recorderr, 1892, 3, pp. 185–210. James Kiernan, ‘Responsibility in Active Algophily’, Medicine, April 1903. Alfred Kinsey, et al., Sexual Behaviour in the Human Male, Philadelphia, W.B. Saunders, 1948. Alfred Kinsey, et al., Sexual Behaviour in the Human Female, Philadelphia, W.B. Saunders, 1969, [orig. 1953]. Adolphe Kocher, De la criminalité chez les Arabes au point de vue de la pratique médico- judiciaire en Algérie, Paris, J.B. Baillière et fils, 1884. Richard von Krafft-Ebing, ‘Ueber gewisse Anomalies des Geschlectstriebs und die klinisch-forensich Verwenthug derselben als eines wahrscheinlich functionellen Degenerationszeichens des centralen Nervensystems’, Archiv für Psychiatrie und Nervenkrankheinten, 7, 1877, pp. 291–312. Richard von Krafft-Ebing, Psychopathia Sexualis with Especial Reference to Antipathic Sexual Instinct: A Medico-Legal Study, trans. C.G. Chaddock, Philadelphia, F.A. Davis, 1892. Richard von Krafft-Ebing, Psychopathia Sexualis, 8th ed., Stuttgart, Enke, 1893. Richard von Krafft-Ebing, An Experimental Study in the Domain of Hypnotism, trans. C.G. Chaddock, Philadelphia, F.A. Davis & Co., 1893. Richard von Krafft-Ebing, ‘Zur Aetiologie der conträren Sexualempfindung’, Jahrbuch für Psychiatrie und Neurologie, 12, 1894, pp. 338–65. Hans Kurella, Preface to the German edition of Emile Laurent’s Die Zwitterbildungen [Les Bisexués], Leipzig, George Wigand, 1896. Alexandre Lacassagne, ‘De la Criminalité chez les Animaux’, Revue Scientifique, 1882. George H. Langsdorff, Voyages and Travels in Various Parts of the World, London, Henry Colburn, 1814. Henri Legludic, Notes et Observations de Médecine Legale: Attentats aux Mœurs, Paris, Masson, 1896. Urey Lisiansky, A Voyage Round the World: In the Years 1803, 4, 5, & 6; Performed by Order of His Imperial Majesty Alexander the First, Emperor of Russia, in the Ship Neva, by Urey Lisiansky, Captain in the Russian Navy, and Knight of the Orders of St. George and St. Vladimerr, London, Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme, & Brown, 1814. Lucy Ann Lobdell, Narrative of Lucy Ann Lobdell, the Female Hunter of Delaware and Sullivan Counties, New York, pp., 1855. Cesare Lombroso, ‘L’amore nei pazzi’, Archivio di Psichiatria, 2, 1881, pp. 1–32. Cesare Lombroso and Guglielmo Ferrero, La donna deliquente: La prostitute e la donna normale, Turin, Roux, 1893. Louis Lorion, Criminalité et médecine judiciaire en Cochinchine, Lyons, Storck, 1887. Frank Lydston, ‘A Lecture on Sexual Perversion, Satyriasis and Nymphomania’, in Addresses and Essays, 2nd ed., Louisville, Renz and Henry, 1892, pp. 243–64 (origi- nally in Philadelphia Medical and Surgical Reporterr, 7 September 1889). Arthur Macdonald, ‘Observation de Sexualité Pathologique Feminine’, Archives d’Anthropologie Criminelle, May, 1895. Valentin Magnan, ‘Des anomalies, des aberrations, et des perversions sexuelles’, Annales medico-psychologiques, 43, 1885, pp. 447–72. Paolo Mantegazza, Gli amori degli uomini: saggio di una etnologia dell’amore, Milan, pp., 1886. Bibliography 335

Paolo Mantegazza Fisiologia dell’amore, Milan, Libreria Brigola, 1873. A. Marro, I caratteri dei delinquenti, Torino, Bocca, 1887. C.F.P. von Martius, Beiträge zur Ethnographie und Sprachenkunde Amerikas, zumal Brasiliens, Leipzig, Fleischer, 1867. William Masters and Virginia Johnston, Human Sexual Response, Boston, Little, Brown & Co., 1966. William Masters and Virginia Johnston, Homosexuality in Perspective, Boston, Little, Brown & Co., 1979. M.H.E. Meier, ‘Pederastie’, in Johann Ersch and Johann Graber (eds.) Allgemeine Encyclopædie der Wissen und Künste, Leipzig, Brockhaus, 1837, vol 9, pp. 149–88. Henry Meige, ‘L’Infantilisme, le Feminisme, et les Hermaphrodites Antiques’, L’Anthropologie, 1895. Charles Mercier, Sanity and Insanityy, London, Walter Scott, 1890. Claude Francois Michéa, ‘Des Déviations de l’appétit vénérien’, Union Medicale, July, 1849, pp. 338–39. Middleton and Rowley, The Roaring Girl in Mermaid Series, Middleton’s Plays, vol. 2, London, Walter Scott, 1890. Albert Moll, Der Hypnotismus, Berlin, Kornfeld, 1889. Moll, Hypnotism, London, Walter Scott, 1890. Albert Moll, Die Conträre Sexualempfindung. Mit Benutzung amtlichen Materials, Berlin, Fischer, 1891. Albert Moll, Die conträre Sexualempfindungg, 2nd ed., Berlin, Fischer, 1894. Albert Moll, The Sexual Life of the Child, trans. Eden Paul, London, George Allen and Co., 1912, [orig. 1909]. A-T. Mondière, ‘Notes sur l’anthropologie, la démographie et la pathologie de la race annamite’, Mémoires de la Société d’Anthropologie de Paris, 1, 1873, p. 465. Michel Montaigne, Journal du voyage de Michel de Montaigne en Italie par la Suisse et l’Allemagne en 1580 et 1581; avec des notes par M. de Querlon., ed. Alessandro D’Ancona, Città di Castello, S. Lapi, 1889. Georges Morache, ‘Chine’, Dictionnaire Encyclopédique des Sciences Médicales, Paris, G. Masson, 1876. Paul Moreau de Tours, Aberations du Sens Génésique, Paris, Asselin et Houzeau, 1884. Paul Moreau de Tours, ‘On the Aberration of the Genesic Sense’, trans. Joseph Workman, Alienist and Neurologistt, 5, 1884, pp. 367–85. Karl Philipp Moritz, Magazin für Erfahrunsseelenkunde, 8, 1791, pp. 6–10. Alessandro Muccioli, ‘Degenerazione e criminalite nei colombi’, Archivio di psichia- tria, antropologia criminale, medicina legale e scienza affini, 14, 1893. C.O Müller, The History and Antiquities of the Doric Race, trans. Henry Tufnell and G.C. Lewis, London, J Murray, 1830. F.C. Müller, ‘Ein weiterer Fall von conträrer Sexualempfindung’, Friedrich’s Blätter für Gerichtliche Medizin, 4, 1891. Paul Näcke, ‘Kritisches zum Kapitel der normalen und pathologischen Sexualität’, Archiv für Psychiatrie und Nervenkrankheiten, 32, 1899, pp. 356–86. Paul Näcke, ‘Review of Ellis, Die Theorie der contraren Sexualempfindung, (Centralblatt für Nervenheilkunde, 1896)’, Neurologische Centralblattt, 5, 1896, p. 659. Paul Näcke, ‘Review of Ellis, Sexual Inversion in Men (Alienist and Neurologistt, 1895)’, Neurologische Centralblattt, 5, 1896, p. 858. J.A. Nicklin, ‘Marlowe’s Gaveston’, Free Revieww, December, 1895. Conolly Norman, ‘Sexual Perversion’, in Hack Tuke, (ed.), A Dictionary of Psychological Medicine, 2 vols, London, Churchill, 1892, p.1156. 336 Bibliography

Helen Marshall North, ‘The Ladies of Llangollen’, Century Magazine, 53, 1897, pp. 424–428. Giovanni Obici and Giovanni Marchesini, Le ‘amicize’ di collegio: richerche sulle prime manifestazioni dell’amore sessuale, Roma, Dante Aligheiri, 1898. A.J.B. Parent-Duchâtelet, De la prostitution dans la ville de Paris, Paris, J.B. Baillière, 1835–36. Edmund Parish, Hallucinations and Illusions, London, Walter Scott, 1897. [ ?] Parlagreco, Michelangelo Buonarotti, Naples, 1888. Walter Pater, Studies in the History of the Renaissance, London, McMillan and Co., 1873. Jean-Pierre-Guillaume Pauthier, Chine moderne, ou Description historique, géographique et littéraire de ce vaste empire, d’après des documents chinois. Première partie, géogra- phie, organisation politique et administrative de la Chine, langues, philosophie, Paris, Firmin Didot frères, 1853. Pasquale Penta, ‘L’Origine e la Patogenesi della Inversione Sessuale’, Archivio della Psicopatie Sessuali, 4–5, 1896, pp. 53–70. Philostratus, Love-Letters, Carl Ludwig Kayser (ed.), Leipzig, Teubner, 1871. Heinrich Ploss and Max Bartels, Das Weib in der Natur- und Völkerkunde, Leipzig, Theodor Grieben, 1895. Plutarch, Eroticus, Jacob Reiske (ed.), Leipzig, Weidmann, 1774–82. Marc-Andre Raffalovich, The Development of Homo-Sexualityy, Berlin, Fischer, 1895. Marc-Andre Raffalovich, ‘Uranism, Congenital Sexual Inversion: Observations and Recommendation’, trans. C. Judson Herrick, Journal of Comparative Neurologyy, 5, 1895, pp. 33–65. Marc-André Raffalovich, Uranism et Unisexualité, Lyon, Storck, 1896. Theophile Ribot, Psychology of the Emotions, London, Walter Scott, 1897. A. Ritti, ‘De l’attraction des sexes semblables (Perversion de l’Instinct Sexuel)’, Gazette Hebdomadaire de Médecine et de Chirurgie, 25, 1878, pp. 1–3. Julius Rosenbaum, Lustseuche im Alterthume, Halle, J.F. Lippert, 1839. R.S. Rutherford, ‘Crowing Hens’, Poultryy, 26 January 1896. Isador Sadger, ‘Zur Aetiology der konträren Sexualempfindung’, Medizinische Klinik, 2, 1909. Isador Sadger, Die Lehre von Geschlechtsverirrungen, Leipzig and Vienna, Franz Deuticke, 1921. Rafael Salillas, Villa Penal en Espania, Madrid, Imprenta de legislación 1888. Thomas Sanchez, Disputationes de sancti matrimonii sacramento, Madrid, 1605. Margaret Sanger, An Autobiographyy, New York, W.W. Norton, 1938. George Savage, ‘Case of Sexual Perversion in a Man’, Journal of Mental Science, 30, 1884, pp. 390–91. Ludwig von Scheffler, Michelangelo, Eine Renaissancestudie, Altenburg, Pierer-Stephan Geibel, 1892. Dr Schmincke, ‘Ein Fall von conträrer Sexualempfinding’, Archiv für Psychiatrie und Nervenkrankheiten, 3, 1872, pp. 225–26. Albert von Schrenck-Notzing, Die Suggestionstherapie bei krankhaften Erscheinungen des Geschlechtssinnes, mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der conträren Sexualempfindung, Stuttgart, Ferdinand Enke, 1892, translated as Therapeutic Suggestion in Psychopathia Sexualis (Pathological Manifestations of the Sexual Instinct) with Especial Reference to Contrary Sexual Instinctt, by Charles Gilbert Chaddock, Philadelphia, F.A .Davis & Co., 1895. Albert von Schrenck-Notzing, Beiträge zur Ætiologie der Conträrer Sexualempfindungg, Vienna, 1895. Bibliography 337

Paul Sérieux, Les Anomalies de L’Instinct Sexuel, Paris, Paril, 1888. Dr Servaes, ‘Zur Kenntnis von der conträrer Sexualempfindung’, Archiv für Psychiatrie und Nervenkrankheiten, 4, 1876, pp. 484–95. H.S. [Henry Sidgwick?], Review of Sexual Inversion and An Unknown People, International Journal of Ethics, 9, 1899, pp. 261–62. J.C.L. Sismondi, Histoire des republiquea italiennes du moyen age, 16 volumes, Paris, Treuttel & Würz, 1817–18. Edward Spitzka, in “Note in Regard to ‘Primitive Desires’,” Science, 2, June 25, 1881, p. 302. John Addington Symonds, Studies in the Italian Renaissance, 6 vols., London, Smith, Elder & Co., 1873–6. John Addington Symonds, A Problem in Greek Ethics, p.p., 1883. John Addington Symonds, Vagabunduli Libellus, London, Kegan, Paul and Trench, 1884. John Addington Symonds, A Problem in Modern Ethics, p.p., 1891. John Addington Symonds, Life of Michelangelo, London, J,C, Nimmo, 1893, John Addington Symonds Memoirs (ed. Phyllis Grosskurth, London, Random House, 1984, Eugene Talbot, Degeneracy: its causes, signs, and results, London, Walter Scott, 1898, Arrigo Tamassia, ‘Sull’inversione dell’istinto sessuale’, Rivista sperimentale di freniatria e di medicina legale 2, 1878, pp. 97–117. Auguste Tardieu, Attentats aux Mœurs, Les Ordures de Paris, Paris, Baillière, 1887. Veniamin Mikhailovich Tarnovskii, Izvrashchenie polovogo chuvstva: Sudebno- psikhiatricheskii ocherk: Dlia vrachei i iuristovv, St. Petersburg, 1885; Die krankhaften Erscheinungen des Geschlechtsinnes, Berlin, Hirschwald, 1886; Benjamin Tarnowski, The Sexual Instinct and its Morbid Manifestations from the Double Standpoint of Jurisprudence and Medicine, Trans. W.C. Costello and Alfred Allinson, Paris, Charles Carrington, 1898. Alfred Swaine Taylor, Principles and Practice of Medical Jurisprudence, London, Churchill, 1865. Theocritus, Hylas, trans. Andrew Lang, London, McMillan, 1880. C. Lloyd Tuckey, Psychotherapeutics, 1st ed., London, Baillière, Tindall and Cox, 1889. C. Lloyd Tuckey, Psychotherapeutics, 3rd ed., London, Baillière, Tindall and Cox, 1891. C. Lloyd Tuckey, Psychotherapeutics, 4th ed., London, Baillière, Tindall and Cox, 1900. Karl Heinrich Ulrichs, Kritische Pfeile, Stuttgart, 1879. Silvio Venturi, Le Degenerazioni Psico-Sessuali nella vita degli individui e nella storia delle società, Torino, Bocca, 1892. Edward Westermarck, History of Human Marriage, 1st ed., London, MacMillan, 1891. Carl Friedrich Otto Westphal, ‘Die Conträre Sexualempfindung: Symptom eines Neuropathischen (Psychopathischen) Zustandes’, Archiv für Psychiatrie und Nervenkrankheiten, 2, 1869–70, pp. 73–108. Carl Friedrich Otto Westphal, ‘Zur conträren Sexualempfinding’, Archiv für Psychiatrie und Nervenkrankheiten, 6, 1876, pp. 620–21. Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Grayy, London, Penguin, 1985 [orig. 1891]. Windeyer J, Ex Parte Collins, Sydney, 1888, reprinted as W.C. Windeyer, Is Limitation of the Family Immoral? A Judgement on Annie Besant’s ‘Law of Population’ deliv- ered in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, London, Freethought Publishing, 1889. Peter M. Wise, ‘Case of Sexual Perversion’, Alienist and Neurologistt, 4, 1883, pp. 87–91. 338 Bibliography

Emile Zola, Nana, Paris, G Charpentier, 1880. A. Zuccarelli, ‘Inversione congenita dell’istinto sessuale in una donna’, L’Anomala, February, 1889. A. Zuccarelli, Inversione congenita dell’istinto sessuale in due donne, Napoli, Stabilimento tip. Tocco e Co., 1888.

Secondary sources

Andrew Abbott, The System of Professions, Chicago UP, 1988. Patricia Anderson, When Passion Reigned: Sex and the Victorians, New York, Basic Books, 1995. Bruce Bagemihl, Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversityy, London, Profile Books, 1999. Françoise Barret-Ducroq Love in the Time of Victoria, trans. J. Howe, London, Verso, 1991. Paula Bartely, Prostitution: Prevention and Reform in England, 1860–1914, London, Routledge, 1999. Chiara Beccalossi, ‘Havelock Ellis: Sexual Inverts as Independent Women’, in Mary McAuliffe and Sonja Tiernan (eds.), Tribades, Tommies and Transgressives: Lesbian Histories, Volume I, Cambridge, Scholars Press, forthcoming 2007. Germane Berrios, ‘British Psychotherapy Since the Early Twentieth Century’, in Berrios and Freeman, 150 Years of British Psychiatryy, London, Athlone, 1991. Samuel Binkley, ‘The Romantic Sexology of John Addington Symonds’, Journal of Homosexualityy, 40, 2000, pp. 79–103. Lawrence Birken, Consuming Desire, Ithaca, Cornell UP, 1988. Lucy Bland, Banishing the Beastt, London, Penguin, 1995. Lucy Bland and Laura Doan (eds.), Sexology in Culture, Chicago UP, 1998. Howard J. Booth, ‘Same-Sex Desire, Ethics, and Double-Mindedness: The Correspondence of Henry Graham Daykins, Henry Sidgwick, and John Addington Symonds’, Journal of European Studies, 32, 2002, pp. 283–301. Mikkel Borch-Jacobsen, Remembering Anna O.: A Century of Mystification, translated by Kirby Olson, with Xavier Callahan and the author, New York, Routledge, 1996. Sean Brady, Masculinity and Male Homosexuality in Britain, 1860–1913, London, Palgrave, 2005. Edward Brecher, The Sex Researchers, Boston, Little Brown, 1969. Joseph Bristow, ‘Symond’s History, Ellis’s Heredity: Sexual Inversion’, in Lucy Bland and Laura Doan, Sexology in Culture, Chicago UP, 1998. Vincent Brome, Havelock Ellis, Philosopher of Sex, London, R.K.P., 1979, pp. 93–5. Vern Bullough, ‘The Physician and Research into Human Sexual Behaviour in Nineteenth-Century Germany’, Bulletin for the History of Medicine, 63, 1989, 247–67. Vern Bullough, Science in the Bedroom, New York, Basic Books, 1994, p.76. Vern Bullough, and Martha Voight, ‘Homosexuality and its Confusion with the “Secret Sin” in Pre-Freudian America’, Journal of the History of Medicine, 28, 1973, pp. 143–55. W.F. Bynum, ‘Tuke’s Dictionaryy and Psychiatry at the Turn of the Century’, in Berrios and Freeman, 150 Years of British Psychiatryy, London, Athlone, 1991, pp. 163–179. Arthur Calder-Marshall, Havelock Ellis, London, G.P. Putnam & Sons, 1959. Georges Canguilhem, The Normal and Pathological, trans. Carolyn Fawcett, New York, Zone Books, 1991. Bibliography 339

L. Chester, D. Leitch and C. Simpson, The Cleveland Street Affairr, London, Weiden and Nicolson, 1977. Harry Cocks, Nameless Offences: Homosexual Desire in the Nineteenth Centuryy, London, I.B. Tauris, 2003. Peter Cominos, ‘Late Victorian Respectability and the Social System’, International Review of Social Historyy, 1963, pp. 18–48, 216–50. Hera Cook, The Long Sexual Revolution, Oxford UP, 2005. Matt Cook, London and the Culture of Homosexualityy, Cambridge UP, 2003. Alec Craig, Banned Books of England, London, George Allen and Unwin, 1937, for more details. Ivan Crozier, ‘William Acton and the history of sexuality: the professional and medical Contexts’, Journal of Victorian Culture, 5, 2000, pp. 1–27. Ivan Crozier, ‘Havelock E llis, Eonism, and t he Patients’ Discourse’, History of Psychiatryy, 11, 2000, pp. 125–54. Ivan Crozier, ‘Taking Prisoners: Havelock Ellis, Sigmund Freud, and the politics of constructing the homosexual, 1897–1951’, Social History of Medicine, 13, 2000, pp. 447–66. Ivan Crozier, ‘The Medical Construction of Homosexuality and its Relation to the Law in Nineteenth-Century England’, Medical Historyy, 45, 2001, pp. 61–82. Ivan Crozier, ‘“Rough winds do shake the darling buds of May”: a note on William Acton and the sexuality of the (male) child’, Journal of Family Historyy, 26, 2001, pp. 411–20. Ivan Crozier, ‘Becoming a sexologist: Norman Haire, the 1929 London World League for Sexual Reform Congress, and organising medical knowledge about sex in interwar England’, History of Science, 39, 2001, pp. 299–329. Ivan Crozier, ‘James Kiernan and the Responsible Pervert’, International Journal of Law and Psychiatryy, 25, 2002, pp. 331–50. Ivan Crozier, ‘“All the World’s a Stage”: Dora Russell, Norman Haire, and the London Congress of the World League for Sexual Reform, 1929’, Journal of the History of Sexualityy, 12, 2003, pp. 16–37. Ivan Crozier, ‘Philosophy in the English Boudoir: contextualising Havelock Ellis’s discourses about sexuality, with particular reference to his writing on algolagnia’, Journal of the History of Sexualityy, 13, 2004, pp. 275–305. Ivan Crozier, ‘“All the appearances were perfectly natural”: The anus of the sodomite in medical discourses, 1850–1900’, in Christopher Forth and Ivan Crozier (eds.), Body Parts, Lanham MD, Lexington Books, 2005. Ivan Crozier, ‘Making a space for medical expertise: constructing the boundaries between medicine and law in cases of sexual assault’, in Julie Early (ed.), Constructing Legal Narratives, forthcoming. Ivan Crozier, ‘Nineteenth-century British psychiatric writing about homosexuality Before Havelock Ellis: the missing story’, Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences, 2008. Ivan Crozier, ‘Havelock Ellis, Eugenicist’, presented at Eugenics, Sex and the State, CRASSH, Cambridge University, 19 January 2007, forthcoming in a special issue of Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science, collected proceedings, edited by Alison Sinclair, Martin Richards, and Emese Lafferton. Lawrence Danson, ‘Oscar Wilde, WH, and the Unspoken Name of Love’, ELH, 58, 1991, pp. 979–1000. Robert Darby, ‘Pathologizing Male Sexuality: Lallemand, Spermatorrhoea, and the Rise of Circumcision’, Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences, 60, 2005, pp. 283–319. 340 Bibliography

Arnold Davidson, The Emergence of Sexualityy, Cambridge MA, Harvard UP, 2000. Roger Davidson and Lesley Hall (eds.), Sex, Sin and Suffering: Venereal Disease and European Society Since 1870, London, Routledge, 2001. Adrian Desmond, The Politics of Evolution, Chicago UP, 1989. Ian Dowbigging, Inheriting Madness, Berkeley, California UP, 1991. Ian Dowbiggin, ‘Back to the Future: Valentin Magnan, French Psychiatry, and the Classification of mental Diseases, 1885–1925’, Social History of Medicine, 9, 1996, pp. 383–408. Linda Dowling, Hellenism and Homosexuality in Victorian Oxford, Ithaca, Cornell UP, 1994. Alice Dreger, Hermaphrodites and the Medical Invention of Sex, Cambridge MA, Harvard UP, 1998. Lisa Duggan, Sapphic Slashers: Sex, Violence, and American Modernityy, Durham NC, Duke UP, 2000. Andrea Dworkin, Pornography: Men Possessing Women, London, Women’s Press, 1981. Gary Edmond, ‘The Law-Set: The Legal-Scientific Production of Medical Propriety’, Science, Technology and Human Values, 26, 2001, pp. 191–226. Jim Endersby, ‘Darwin on Generation, Pangenesis, and Sexual Selection’, in J. Hodge and P. Radick (eds.), The Cambridge Companion to Darwin, Cambridge UP, 2003. Lillian Faderman, ‘The Morbification of Love between Women by 19th Century Sexologists’, Journal of Homosexualityy, 4, 1978, pp. 73–90. Lillian Faderman, Surpassing the Love of Men: Romantic Friendship and Love Between Women from the Renaissance to the Presentt, New York, Morrow, 1981. Frances Finnegan, Poverty and Prostitution, Cambridge UP, 1979. John Forrester, ‘Rape, Seduction and Psychoanalysis’, in Roy Porter and Sylvana Tomaselli (eds.), Rape, Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 1986, pp. 57–83. John Forrester, ‘If p Then What: Thinking in Cases’, History of the Human Sciences, 9, 1996, pp. 1–25. Michel Foucault, Archaeology of Knowledge, trans. Alan Sheridan, New York, Routledge, 1972. Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish, trans. Alan Sheridan, London, Penguin Books, 1991. Michel Foucault, The History of Sexuality, Volume 1: An Introduction, trans. Robert Hurley, London, Penguin Books, 1990. Peter Gay, The Bourgeois Experience, from Victoria to Freud: vol.1, Education of the Senses, Oxford UP, 1984. Tom Gieryn, ‘Boundary Work and the Demarcation of Science from Non-Science’, American Sociological Revieww, 48, 1983, pp. 781–95. Tom Gieryn, The Cultural Boundaries of Science, Chicago UP, 1999. Isaac Goldberg, Havelock Ellis: a biographical and critical surveyy, New York, Simon & Schuster, 1926. Carol Groneman, ‘Nymphomania: The Historical Construction of Female Sexuality’, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Societyy, 19, 1994, pp. 337–67. Phyllis Grosskurth, ‘Swinburne and Symonds: An Uneasy Literary Relationship’, The Review of English Studies, 14, 1963, pp. 257–68. Phyllis Grosskurth, The Woeful Victorian: A Biography of John Addington Symonds, New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1964. Phyllis Grosskurth, Havelock Ellis, New York, Alfred A. Knopf, 1980. Phyllis Grosskurth, ‘Bringing Symonds Out of the Closet: Some Recollections and Reflections’, in John Pemble (ed.), John Addington Symonds: Culture and the Demon Desire, London, MacMillan, 2000. Bibliography 341

Philipp Gutmann, ‘On the Way to Scientia Sexualis: “On the relation of the sexual system to the psyche in general and to cretinism in particular” (1826) by Joseph Häussler’, History of Psychiatryy, 17, 2006, pp. 45–53. Bruce Haley, The Healthy Body and Victorian Culture, Cambridge, MA, Harvard UP, 1978. Lesley Hall, ‘“Disinterested Enthusiasm for Sexual Misconduct”: The British Society for the Study of Sex Psychology, 1913–47’, Journal of Contemporary Historyy 30, 1995, pp. 665–86. Lesley Hall, ‘Feminist reconfigurations of heterosexuality in the 1920s’, in Lucy Bland and Laura Doan, Sexology in Culture, Chicago UP, 1998. Lesley Hall, Sex, Gender, and Social Change in Britain Since 1880, Basingstoke, MacMillan, 2000. Lesley Hall, ‘Hauling Down the Double Standard: Feminism, Social Purity and Sexual Science in Late Nineteenth-Century Britain’, Gender & Historyy, 16, 2004, 36–56. David Halperin, ‘How to Do the History of Homosexuality’, GLQ, 6, 2000, pp. 87–123. David Halperin, How to do the History of Homosexualityy, Chicago UP, 2002. Renate Hauser, ‘Krafft-Ebing’s Psychological Understanding of Sexual Behaviour’, in Roy Porter and Miklaus Teich, Sexual Science, Sexual Knowledge, Cambridge UP, 1994, pp. 210–227. Sarah J. Heidt, ‘“Let JAS’ words stand”: Publishing John Addington Symonds’s Desires’, Victorian Studies, 46, 2003, pp. 7–31. Gert Hekma, ‘A History of Sexology: Social and Historical Aspects of Sexuality’, in Jan Bremmer, From Sappho to De Sade: Moments in the History of Sexualityy, London, Routledge, 1989, pp. 173–193. Gert Hekma, ‘A Female Soul in a Male Body’, in Gilbert Herdt (ed), Third Sex, Third Gender: Beyond Sexual Dimorphism in Culture and Historyy, New York, Zone Books, 1994. R.D. Hinshelwood, ‘The Organization of Psychoanalysis in Britain’, Psychoanalysis and Historyy, 1, 1998, pp. 87–102. R.D. Hinshelwood, ‘Psychodynamic Psychiatry Before World War I’, in Berrios and Freeman, 150 Years of British Psychiatry, London, Athlone, 1991. Peter Holding, ‘Symonds and the Model of Ancient Greece’, in John Pemble (ed.), John Addington Symonds: Culture and the Demon Desire, Basingstoke, Macmillan Press, 2000. Matt Houlbrook, Queer London, Chicago UP, 2005. Jörg Hutter, ‘The Social Construction of Homosexuals in the Nineteenth Century: The Shift from the Sin to the Influence of Medicine on Criminalizing Sodomy in Germany’, Journal of Homosexualityy, 24, 1993, pp. 73–93. Montgomery Hyde, Oscar Wilde, London, Methuen, 1976. Montgomery Hyde, The Cleveland Street Scandal, London, W.H. Allen, 1976. Margaret Jackson, ‘Sexology and the Construction of Male Sexology’, in Coveny, Jackson, Jeffreys, Kay and Mahony, The Sexuality Papers: Male Sexuality and the Social Control of Women, London, RKP, 1984. Mike Jay and Michael Neve (eds.), 1900: A fin-de-siècle readerr, London, Penguin, 1999. Sheila Jeffreys, The Spinster and Her Enemies, Melbourne, Spinafex, 1997 [orig. 1985]. Sheila Jeffreys, Anti-Climax: a feminist perspective on the sexual revolution, London, Women’s Press, 1990. John Johnson, ‘Havelock Ellis and his “Studies in the Psychology of Sex”’, British Journal of Psychiatryy, 1979, pp. 522–27. 342 Bibliography

James Jones, Alfred C. Kinsey: A Public/Private Life, New York, W.W. Norton, 1997. Morris Kaplan, Sodom on the Thames, Ithaca, Cornell UP, 2005. Hubert Kennedy, Six Articles on James Mills Pierce, Peremptory Publications ebook, 2003, available at http://home.att.net/~clairnorman/Peirce.pdf. Wayne Koestenbaum, Double Talk, London and New York, Routledge, 1989. Martin Kusch, Psychological Knowledge, London, Routledge, 1998. Emese Lafferton, ‘Hypnosis and Hysteria as Ongoing Processes of Negotiation. Ilma’s Case from the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy’, Part I and II, History of Psychiatryy 13.3, 2002, pp. 177–197; 13.4, 2002, pp. 305–32. Thomas Laqueur, Solitary Sex: A Cultural History of Masturbation, NY, Zone Books, 2003. Geertje Mak, ‘Sandor/Sarolta Vay: From Passing Woman to Sexual Invert’, Journal of Women’s History 16, 2004, pp. 54–77. J.A. Mangan, ‘Social Darwinism and Upper-Class Education in Late Victorian and Edwardian England’, in Mangan and James Walvin, Manliness and Morality: Middle- Class Masculinity in Britain and America, 1800–1940, New York, St Martin’s Press, 1987, pp. 135–59. Michael Mason, The Making of Victorian Sexualityy, Oxford UP, 1994. Michael Mason, The Making of Victorian Sexual Attitudes, Oxford UP, 1994. Benoit Massin, ‘From Virchow to Fischer: Physical Anthropology and “Modern Race Theories” in Wilhelmine Germany (1890–1914)’, in G.W. Stocking (ed.), Volksgeist as Method and Ethic, Madison, Wisconsin UP, 1996, pp. 79–154. Angus McLaren, Birth Control in Nineteenth-Century England, London, Croom Helm, 1978. Angus McLaren, Twentieth-Century Sexualityy, Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 1999. Frank Mort, Dangerous Sexualities: Medico-Moral Politics in England since 1830, London, Routledge, 1987. Melissa Mowry, ‘Thieves, Bawds, and Counter-revolutionary Fantasies: The Life and Death of Mrs. Mary Frith’, Journal for Early Modern Cultural Studies 5, 2005, pp. 26–48. Lynda Nead, Myths of Sexualityy, Oxford UP, 1988. Michael Neve, ‘The influence of degenerationist categories in nineteenth-century psychiatry, with special reference to Great Britain’, in Yosio Kawakita et al. (eds.), The history of psychiatric diagnoses, Tokyo, Ishiyaku EuroAmerica, 1997. Chris Nottingham, The Pursuit of Serenity Havelock Ellis and the New Politics, Amsterdam UP, 1999. J.L. O’Leary and W.L. Moore, ‘Charles Gilbert Chaddock, his life and contributions’, Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences 8, 1953 pp. 301–17. Harry Oosterhuis, Step-Children of Nature, Chicago UP, 2000. Roberta Park, ‘Biological Thought, Athletics and the Formation of a Man of Character, 1830–1900’, in Mangan and James Walvin, Manliness and Morality: Middle-Class Masculinity in Britain and America, 1800–1940, New York, St Martin’s Press, 1987. John Pemble (ed.), John Addington Symonds: Culture and the Demon Desire, Basingstoke, Macmillan Press, 2000. Houston Peterson, Havelock Ellis: Philosopher of Love, London, George Allen & Unwin, 1928. Daniel Pick, Faces of Degeneration, Cambridge UP, 1989. Malcolm Pines, ‘The Development of the Psychodynamic Movement’, in Berrios and Freeman, 150 Years of British Psychiatryy, London, Athlone, 1991. Roy Porter and Lesley Hall, The Facts of Life, New Haven, Yale UP, 1995. Bibliography 343

Roy Porter and Marijke Geswijt-Hofstra, Cultures of Neurasthenia, Amsterdam, Rodopi, 2001. Donald Read, England, 1868–1914, London, Longmans, 1994. Matt T. Reed, ‘Historicizing Inversion: or, how to make a homosexual’, History of the Human Sciences, 14, 2001, pp. 1–29. Evelleen Richards, ‘Darwin and the Descent of Woman’, in Ian Langham and David Oldroyd (eds.), The Wider Domain of Evolutionary Thoughtt, Dordrecht, Reidel, 1983. Jeffrey Richards, ‘Passing the Love of Women: Manly Love and Victorian Society’, in Mangan and James Walvin, Manliness and Morality: Middle-Class Masculinity in Britain and America, 1800–1940, New York, St Martin’s Press, 1987, pp. 92–122. Leonora Ritter, ‘“Pure in Morocco at a Guinea, but Impure in Paper Pamphlet at Sixpence”: Paradigms of Pornography and the 1888 Collins Case in NSW’, Continuum: Journal of Media and Cultural Studies, 14, 2000, pp. 67–78. Stephen Robertson, ‘Signs, Marks and Private Parts: Doctors, Legal Discourses, and Evidence of Rape in the United States, 1823–1930’, Journal of the History of Sexualityy, 8, 1998, pp. 345–388. Paul Robinson, The Modernisation of Sex, New York, Harper and Row, 1976. Herbert M. Schueller and Robert L. Peters (eds.), The Letters of John Addington Symonds, 3 vols. Detroit, Wayne State UP, 1967–69. Bart Schultz, ‘Truth and It’s Consequences: The Friendship of Symonds and Henry Sidgwick’, in John Pemble (ed.), John Addington Symonds: Culture and the Demon Desire, Basingstoke, Macmillan Press, 2000. Elaine Showalter, The Female Malady: Women, Madness and English Culture, 1830–1980, New York, Pantheon Books, 1985. F.B. Smith, ‘Labouchère’s Amendment to the Criminal Law Amendment Act’, Historical Studies, 17, 1976, pp. 159–69. Roger Smith, Trial by Medicine: Insanity and Responsibility in Victorian Trials, Edinburgh UP, 1981. T. D’A. Smith, Love in Earnest: Some Notes on the Lives and Writings of English ‘Uranian’ Poets from 1889 to 1930, London, RKP, 1970, pp. 15–16. Siobhan B. Somerville, ‘Scientific racism and the invention of the homosexual body’, in Bland and Doan, Sexology in Culture. Mary Spongberg, Feminizing Venereal Disease, New York UP, 1997. James D. Steakley, ‘Sodomy in Enlightenment Prussia: From Execution to Suicide’, Journal of Homosexualityy 16, 1989, pp. 163–75. James Steakley, The Homosexual Emancipation Movement in Germanyy, New York, Arno Press, 1975. Carol Z. Stearns and Peter N. Stearns, ‘Victorian Sexuality: Can We Do It Better?’, Journal of Social Historyy, 19, 1985, pp. 625–634. George Stocking, Victorian Anthropologyy, New York, The Free Press, 1987. George Stocking, After Tylorr, Madison, Wisconsin UP, 1995. Michael Stolberg, ‘Self-Polution, Moral Reform, and the Venereal Trade: Notes on the Sources and Historical Context of Onania (1716)’, Journal of the History of Sexualityy, 9, 2000, pp. 37–61. Michael Stolberg, ‘An Unmanly Vice: Self-Pollution, Anxiety, and the body in the Eighteenth Century’, Social History of Medicine, 13, 2000, 1–21. Frank Sulloway, Freud: Biologist of the Mind, NY, Basic Books, 1979. Anne Summers, ‘The Correspondents of Havelock Ellis’, History Workshop Journal, Autumn 1991, pp. 166–83. 344 Bibliography

Simon Szreter, ‘Falling Fertility and Changing Sexualities in Europe since c.1850: a comparative survey of national demographic patterns’, in Franz Eder, Lesley Hall and Gert Hekma, Sexual Cultures in Europe: National Identities, Manchester UPP, 1999, pp. 159–95. Jennifer Terry, An American Obsession, Chicago UP, 1999. F.M. Turner, Between Science and Religion: the reaction to scientific naturalism in late Victorian England, New Haven, Yale UP, 1974. Charles Upchurch, ‘Forgetting the Unthinkable: Cross-dressers and British society in the case of the Queen vs Boulton and Others’, Gender and Historyy, 12, 2000, pp. 127–57. Judith Walkowitz, Prostitution and Victorian Society: Women, Class and the State, Cambridge UP, 1980. Judith Walkowitz, City of Dreadful Delightt, Chicago UP, 1992. Andy Warwick, ‘Exercising the Student Body: Mathematics and Athleticism in Victorian Cambridge’, in Christopher Lawrence and Steven Shapin (eds.), Science Incarnate: Historical Embodiments of Natural Knowledge, Chicago UP, 1998, pp. 288–326. Chris Waters, ‘Havelock Ellis, Sigmund Freud and the State: discourses of homosexuality in interwar Britain’, in Lucy Bland and Laura Doan (eds), Sexology in Culture, Chicago UP, 1998. Jeffrey Weeks, Coming Out: Homosexual Politics in Britain, from the Nineteenth Century to the Presentt, London, Quartet Press, 1977, p.63. Jeffrey Weeks, ‘Havelock Ellis and the Politics of Homosexuality’, in Rowbotham and Weeks, Socialism and the New Life, London, Pluto Press, 1977. Jeffrey Weeks, Against Nature, London, Rivers Oram Press, 1991. Jeffrey Weeks, Making Sexual Historyy, London, Polity Press, 2000. IdIndex

Achilles 229–231, 253–254 bisexuality (see also ‘psychosexual Æschines 270, 271 hermaphroditism’) 69, 190 Æschylus 253, 255 and development 202–203 Albanians, homosexuality amongst 99 Bloch Iwan 17, 49, 68 Alexander the Great 215 body, the 8 Alienist and Neurologistt 57 Bœotia 246–247 review of Sexual Inversion 63 Booth, Howard 81, 82 review of Sexual Inversion (1901) 66 Boté 101–102 Anacreon 251 Bradlaugh, Charles 5 anal eroticism 70 Brady, Sean, 8, 83 anal sex (see also ‘sodomy’ and Brazil, lesbianism in 162 ‘paiderastia’) 191 Brecher, Edward 77 Ancient Greece (see also ‘A Problem in Brinkley, Samuel 82–83 Greek Ethics’) 37, 40, 43, 50, 113, Bristowe, Joseph 84 214, 284–285 British Medical Journal, review of Sexual literature of 82, 229–295 Inversion 63 theatre of 253–255 review of Sexual Inversion 66 women in 286–287 Brome, Vincent 78 A Problem in Greek Ethics (by J.A. Brown, Horatio 52–54 Symonds) 227–295 banning of Sexual Inversion and, 56, Aristophanes 253, 259, 260, 263, 268, 60 270 Browne, Stella 67, 80 Aristotle 98, 272 Bullough, Vern 77 atavism 23 Burton, Richard 1, 37, 48 Athenæus 252, 254, 255, 279, 294 Athens, sexual customs of 256–259, Calder-Marshall, Arthur 78 262–263, 265–267, 270–272 Carpenter, Edward 1, 10, 11, 45–46, 47, women in 258–259 50, 54, 59, 94, 123 auto-erotism 26–27, 69 opinions of Sexual Inversion 55–56 Casanova, Jacques 163 Bali, lesbianism in 162 case histories 2, 11, 20, 38, 50, 52, 59 Bancroft, H.H. 17 in Sexual Inversion (male) 129–158 Bastian, Adolphe 244 in Sexual Inversion (female) 167–173 Beauty, of boys, concepts of in Ancient supplied by Frank Lydston 187–188 Greece 248 Casper, Johann 14, 18, 37, 116 Bedborough affair 60–65 Catholicism 90–91 Bedborough, George, see ‘Bedborough Catullus 281, 315–316 affair’ Chæronea, Sacred Band of 247, 180 Bengal, lesbianism in 162–163 Charcot, Jean-Martin, 22, 117 Bernheim, Hippolyte, 22 Chevalier, Julien 121, 197 Besant, Annie 5, 16 Chinese, homosexuality amongst 100 Binet, Alfred 22, 31, 200 Christianity, attitudes of towards Bion 280 homosexuality 216, 231, 278, 283, birth control 16 288, 294–295

345 346 Index

Cicero 241, 251, 278, 294 Ellis, Havelock and John Addington Clevenger, S.V. 23, 28 Symonds clitoris size (in lesbians) 194, 323 collaboration 34–53, 91–94 Còde Napoléon 217, 219 context 3, 12 co-education 211 law reform and 10–11, 51 Concubinus, Notes on the (by J.A. negotiating Sexual Inversion Symonds) 315–316 34–53 Contagious Diseases Act (1860) 13 publishing Sexual Inversion 1, 39, coprolagnia 33 44–45 Corre, Armand Marie 162 treatments of collaboration Crete, homosexuality in 233, by 83–84 241–244, 248, 272 writing Sexual Inversion 2 Crichton-Miller, Hugh 72 Eonism 32 cunnilingus (between lesbians) 176 Epaminondes 39, 215, 294 erogenous zones 27 Dakyns, Henry Graham 81 erotic symbolism 32–33 dancing 27 Eskimos, homosexuality amongst Danson, Lawrence 82 100 Dante 106, 278 ethnology 13, 16 Darwin, Charles 16, 28 eugenics 64, 213 degeneration 11, 22, 47 Euripides 254–255, 260–261, 287 Dessoir, Max 125 detumescence 30 Fadermann, Lillian 78–79 Dickinson, R.L. 74 fellatio 10 Die konträre Geschechtsgefühl, 56, 58, feminism 6 60–61 Féré, Charles 31, 214 Dorians, homosexuality amongst Ferenczi, Sandor 70 233–234, 240–246, 285–286 fetishism (and fetichism) 31, 32, 33, Drysdale, George 16 184, 200 Forel, Auguste 23 Elis, sexual customs of 248 forensic medicine 14–15 Ellis, Havelock 25 Forster, E.M. 9 anthropology and 17 Foucault, Michel 4, 12, 13, 76 attitude to Greek material 43 Freud, Sigmund (see also attitudes to historical and literary ‘psychoanalysis’) 68–69, 70 material 45 correspondence with Ellis 71–72 birth control and 16 friendship, Plato’s conception of conceptions of sexual 274 –275 deviance 31–34 conceptions of sexual impulse Galton, Francis 195 29–31 Ganymede 232–233 feminism and 6 Gibbon, Edward 279 opinions of psychoanalysis Gley, Eugene 202 68–72 Gock, H. 20 publishing Sexual Inversion 59 Godard, Ernst 162 reasons for studying sex 89 Goldberg, Isaac, 78 response to Lancet review of Sexual Griesinger, Wilhelm 19–20 Inversion 62–63 Grosskurth 78, 80–81 Studies in the Psychology of Sex Gymnasium, place for boy-love in and 25–34 Ancient Greece 260, 265–266 Index 347

Hahn, Johan Georg von 99 heredity of 182 Haire, Norman 73–74 infantilism and 194 Haley, Bruce 8 insanity and 182 Hall, Lesley 80 instinct, appearance of 183 Hammond, William A. 122 latent 127–128 Harmodius and Aristogeiton 239–240 law and 38, 51, 216–222 Hart, Bernard 72 legal reform and 10 health and exercise 7 love between homosexuals 214 Herodotus 231, 240, 265 love disappoints and 208 Heroic love 233–235 masturbation and 189 Hirschfeld, Magnus 67, 74 in men 124–158 historiography 75–84 moral attitudes (of Holder, A.B. 102, 162 homosexuals) 197–198 Holmberg, Heinrich Johan von 101 nervous breakdown associated Homer 229–231, 242–243, 247, 253, with 183 285 neurasthenia and 182, 195–196 homosexual instinct, and opposite sex 190 appearance of 183 penis size and 194 homosexuality 9, 32, 194 physical abnormality and 194 abnormality and 201–202, 204, physical under-development 206–207 and 195 homosexuals, moral attitudes of predisposition towards 184 197–198 preference for colour green in 197 acquired explanations of 21 prevalence of 96–97 acquired, rarity of 128 prevention of 210 alcoholism and 182 prison and 48–49 anal sex and 191 prostitution and 219, 270–271 in Ancient Greece 229–295, 315–316 puberty and 183, 201 in animals 97–98 public schools and 124, 126–127 artistic aptitude and 195 punishment and 216 attraction between 176–177 psychoanalysis and 67–72 and attraction to boys 192, 207 race and 48, 181 causes of 184–187 religious fanaticism and 216 Christianity and 216, 231, 278, 283, seduction into 207–208 288 sexology and 18–25, 115–123 classification of 128–129 sexual abstinence and 191, 214 congenital explanations of 21, sexual activity and 191 200–203, 206–207 social attitudes towards 214 culture and 51, 98–103, 244–245 as a “sport” 203 cure of 213 suggestion and 184–189, 201 degeneration and 206 theories of 115–123 as a disease 205 amongst tramps 296–300 eccentricity and 182 universality of 200–201 Ellis’s evaluation of 199–200 urban culture and 9 erotic dreams and 190–191 vanity and 196–197 eugenics and 213 in women, see ‘lesbianism’ fellatio and 191 Howard, William Lee 64 femininity and 192–193 Horace 251 general health of Hössli, Heinrich 116 homosexuals 182–183 Hyde Park 102 348 Index hygiene, mental 212 lesbianism 65, 159–180, 189 hygiene, physical 212 in Ancient Greece 292–293 Hylas 238 amongst Arabs 162 hyperaesthesia 184 in Bali 162 hypnotism 22–23, 51, 65, 211 in Bengal 162–163 in Brazil 162 Ibycus 250–251 case studies of 167–173 Iliadd 229–231, 287 clitoral development in 194, 323 Imperial Rome (see also appendix ‘Notes congenital 163–164 on the Concubinus’) 50, 281, 284, cunnilingus (between lesbians) 176 294–295 amongst dancers 164 homosexuality in 104–105, development of 163, 165 294–295, 315–316 and facial hair 175 incest 70 amongst female servants 164 infantilism 194 and feminism 177–178 insanity and homosexuality 182 genital development in Ives, George 10, 11 194, 323 increase of prevalence of 177 Jackson, Margaret 79 larynxes of lesbians 175 Jeffreys, Sheila 79 latent lesbianism 165 Jekels, Ludwig 70 and male clothing 173–174 Jones, James 74 amongst manual labourers 164 Jonson, Ben 283 marriage and 177 Journal of Mental Science 60–61 masculinity and 193 Jowett, Benjamin 9, 81 murder and 193 Juvenal 279 muscular development in 175 in New Zealand 162 K. 324–328 physical characteristics of 173 Kiernan, James 24, 28, 94, 122, 193 prevalence of 159–161, 177 Kinsey, Alfred 74–75 in prison 162 Kocher, Adolphe 162, 193 prostitution and 177–180 Koestenbaum, Wayne 83–84 in Provence 163 Krafft-Ebing, Richard von 21, 23, 24, psychic characteristics of 31, 37, 49, 51, 59, 118–120, 189, 200, 176–177 206, 311 amongst school girls 165–166 Kurella, Hans 58, 94 sex play and 163 sex toys and, in Ancient Greece 294 Labouchère, Henry, see ‘Law sexual expression of 176 Amendment Act (1885)’ Lombroso, Cesare, 11, 117 Lacassagne, Alexandre 118 Ellis’s opinion of 36, 39 Lancet, review of Sexual Inversion 61–62 London 9–10 review of other of Ellis’s Studies 67 Lucian 260–262, 263, 280–281, Langsdorff, Georg 100–101 293–294 Laqueur, Thomas 15 lust murder, 21 Law Amendment Act (1885) 10–11, 35, Lydston, Frank 24, 94, 122, 187–188 217–218 laws regarding homosexuality (in Magnan, Valentin 22, 117–118, 202 European countries) 217, 220 Mangan, J.A. 7 legal reform 220–222 Mantegazza, Paolo 48 Legludic, Henri 118 Marlowe, Christopher 34, 109 Index 349

Martial 281 passing women, see ‘lesbians and male masochism 33 clothing’; see also ‘Sarolta V.’ Mason, Michael 4 Pater, Walter 82 Masters, William and Virginia penis size 194 Johnson 75 perversions, see ‘sexual perversions’ masturbation 10, 15–16, 27, Peterson, Houston 78 49, 189 Petrarch 278 treatments for 15 Petronius 279 Maximus Tyrius 234, 248, 275, 278 Philostratus 283 medical jurisprudence 14 Pierce, James Mills 313–314 Megara, sexual customs of 248 Pindar 252 Michaelangelo 35, 50, 107 Plato (see also ‘Symposium of’) 8, 232, Moll, Albert 23, 25, 29–30, 31, 39, 40, 235–236, 240, 246, 248, 256, 259, 42, 47, 53, 120–121, 122, 123, 189, 260, 262, 267, 268–269, 270, 191, 193, 195, 200, 207, 212, 219, 272–279, 285, 304 220 Ploss, Hermann 17 Moreau (de Tours), Jacques-Joseph 37, Plutarch 236, 239, 242, 246, 250, 253, 123, 189 254, 271, 279 Morel, Benedict-Augustine 206 pre-sexological knowledge 13–17 Müller, C.O. 242 prison, homosexuality in 105 muscular Christianity 7 prosecutions 9 Muse of Boyhood 282–283 prostitution 5–6, 48 myths of paiderastia, see ‘paiderastia, lesbianism and 47, 177–180 myths of’ male 102, 219, 270–271 regulation of 13–14 Näcke, Paul, reviews of Sexual R.L. Stevenson and 47–48 Inversion 63–64 pseudo-sexual attraction 191–192 narcissism 32, 69 psychiatry, British 1, 64 necrophilia 21 psychiatry, Symonds’s opinion of, see nervous breakdown (and ‘Symonds’s opinion of psychiatry’ homosexuality) 183 psychoanalysis 65 neurasthenia and homosexuality 182 in Britain 72 Nordau, Max 11 psychosexual hermaphroditism 190 Norman, Connelly 189 puberty 183 Normans, homosexuality amongst public schools (see also ‘homosexuality 109 and’) 15, 124, 126–127, 210 Nottingham, Chris 78, 80 Raffalovich, Marc–André 67, 122–123, Odysseyy 229, 287 214 Oedipal Complex 69, 70 rape 14, 309 Ovid 8 religion 4 Oxford Platonism 9 Renaissance, homosexuality during Oxford Renaissance Movement 82 the 106 Rimbaud, Arthur 111–112 paedophilia, see ‘homosexuality and Ritti, A. 117 attraction to boys’ Rivers, W.H.R. 72 paiderastia in Ancient Greece, intensity Robinson, Paul 77 of feeling of 235–237 Rome, see ‘Imperial Rome’ myths of 237–238, 290–291 Rousseau, Jean–Jacques 207 Park, Roberta 7 Russia, homosexuality in 104 350 Index

S., H. (i.e., H.S.) see ‘Henry Sidgwick’ Sophocles 254, 255, 287 Sadger, Isador 69–70 sport 8 sadism 32, 33 Stevenson, R.L. 47 Sanchez, Thomas 90 Stopes, Marie 31 Sanger, Margaret 32 Strato of Sardis, see ‘Muse of Boyhood’ Sappho 293 suggestion (and homosexuality) Sarolta V. 317–323 184–189, 201 schools, see ‘public schools’ Swinburne, Algernon Charles 81 Schrenck-Notzing, Albert von 23, 41, Switzerland, homosexuality in 104 53, 58, 121, 184, 200, 211–212 Sydney, Australia 89 Schueller, Herbert, and Robert Peters, Symonds, J.A. (see also ‘A Problem in Letters of J.A. Symonds 81 Greek Ethics, Ulrichs’s View’, and Schultz, Bart 82 ‘Notes on the Concubinus’) 59 scientific naturalism 7 death of 52 sculpture, Greek 288–289 and masturbation 189 seduction 188, 207–208 opinion of psychiatry 20, 48 Serieux, Paul 118 treatment of, by historians 80–83 sex, and culture 28 Symonds, J.A. and Havelock Ellis, see and naturalness 27–28 ‘Havelock Ellis and J.A. Symonds’ as a psychological problem 12–25 Symons, Arthur 36, 37 and reproduction 5 Symposium (of Plato) 236–237, 238, sexological responses to Ellis’s 246, 256–259, 270, 276, 277, 304 works 73–75 sexology 1, 2, 12–25 Talbot, Eugene 94 emergence of 12 Tamassia, Arrigo 117 homosexuality and 18 Tardieu, Auguste 14, 37, 197 pre-sexological knowledge 13–17 Tarnowski, Benjamin 22, 37, 118 sexual aberration, markers of 21 Theognis and Kurnus 248–250 sexual impulse, Ellis’s conception Thucydides 240, 285 of 29–31 Tissot, Samuel 15 undifferentiated nature of 124–126 tramps, homosexuality amongst Sexual Inversion, changes to 2 105–106, 296–300 editions of 57–75 Tuckey, Lloyd 51 organisation of 42–43 Tuke, Hack 35, 39 reactions to 53–57 tumescence 30 second edition 60 1901 edition 65–67 Ulrichs, Karl Heinrich 1, 49, 116, 202, 1915 edition 67–72 301–312 sexual organs, fascination in 185 Ulrichs’s View (appendix by J.A. sexual perversions, congenital and Symonds) 301–312 acquired aetiology of 28–29 Undinism, see ‘urolagnia’ sexual precocity 183–184 urbanisation 5 Shakespeare, William 109 urination (see also ‘urolagnia’) Sidgwick, Henry (H.S.) 64, 81, 82 27, 189 Socrates 215, 263–264, 268, 275, 276 urolagnia 32, 33 Sodoma 108 sodomy 191 venereal disease 13–14, 16 and crime 10, 11 Venturi, Silvio 48 signs of 14 Verlaine, Paul 39, 111–112 Solon 250 Victorian sexual morality 3–7 Index 351

Virchow, Rudolph 205, 218 Winckelmann, Johan Joachim 108 Vulgar love 233–235 women, fallen 7 new 6–7, 177–178 Weeks, Jeffrey 77, 78 society and 6 Westermarck, Edward 17 Westphal, Carl Friedrich Otto 20, Xenophon 236, 240, 264–265, 115–116, 198 270, 275 Whitman, Walt, 34, 81, 110–111, 214 Wilde, Oscar, 11, 220 zoology 13