Closing the Circle
Some time ago I posted on a contrast between China and the West - the role of eunuchs. I suggested that Chinese emperors and leading bureaucrats were interested in protecting the government from pillage, even by those employed by the government. That they feared "family values" were a threat to an employee thinking first of doing what was best for his employee, the government, the empire. I recall seeing an old movie about a British government employee in one of its colonies in Africa. He hires a young Black African. Next week, the lad brings in a relative, asking the Brit to also hire this cousin. And the following wee another relative. It was a comedy, but I suspect there was considerable nepotism in large empires.
I suggest that the way the Chinese empire sought to cut out such "family values," was by cutting off the balls of the employee. He would work for government, and not have any children to pester him for more favors and would be more distant to relatives. It is interesting that perhaps the most important Admiral in the Chinese navy, Admiral He, was a eunuch. He led a fleet of some 30,000 sailors who sailed from China to East Africa with stops along the way. This in the 1430s, before Portugal and Spain sent out their expeditions. The first one of Columbus with 3 ships and about 100 sailors. Eunuchs were an important part of Chinese government until the early 1900s and the last emperor.
In addition to work as bureaucrats, eunuchs were also employed to guard the harems. The number of women could vary, but some emperors had a different woman for each night of the year. To prevent full males from getting to them, eunuchs had that job.
Harems were not limited to China. With the expansion of Islam, and into nations at the cross roads of trade between the Orient and distant Europe and wherever. True, a wealthy Muslim might have 4 wives, but if he were wealthy, he might want greater variety, so harems, though not as large as an emperors. The East Africa slave trade had developed, and some of the strong men would be castrated to guard the harems of the Middle East, strong even after surgery.
My premise, one reason European kings had not harems was Christianity permitted them only one wife. Now, of course, with wealth and power, they could have more women, but a large harem would bring condemnation. Better a few extra girl friends on the side, small enough number to keep an eye on them keeping them behind bars. So Europe did not need eunuchs for harems.
But what about "family values" encouraging bureaucrats to steal from the nation? Were not eunuchs the best way to solve that problem? Perhaps, but NOT in Europe. Why? With the fall of the Roman Empire there were various nations in Europe, and most were Christian, working with the church. The church provided the most literate people who could help the government. The best were probably priests. Better yet, they would have no children of their own, no overly close relatives, they could devote their lives to the church and its ally, the Christian nation.
CLOSING THE CIRCLE
With the victory of Constantine over the Pagans in a civil war, Christianity was on the road to becoming the official religion of the empire. One major change, Google AI gave 2 answers for the first anti-homosexual laws of the new regime: Constantine in 320, or Constantine II, somewhat later. I do not know precisely how they defined it, or even if it was defined in the new laws. However, the punishment for homosexuality was death. This was an enormous change, for the Greco-Roman world was generally quite tolerant on the issue of homos. Even the statues of gods and goddesses were often naked, to make the appeal to humans in various ways. The Christians were, however, out to change things. In the 500s, Emperor Justinian sought to collect and organize Roman law so it could be used and passed on to new Christian countries. There was a slight change, homosexuals were to be tortured before being executed. Justinian ordered the building of the beautiful Hagia Sophia in the then Roman capital of Constantinople. (It is still a terrific building, changed into a mosque in the 1400s. into a museum after WWI, and a mosque again under Turkey's Pres. Erdogan.)
The Roman Empire, once Christian, stopped subsidies to pagan temples. No one learnt to write or read Egyptian hieroglyphics, and for nigh 2 millennia, no one could tell what was written. Justinian's code made it clear, Jews and pagans were 2nd class citizens. Homos to be killed. Now if you were a young guy growing up, and you are suddenly aware that you are homo, what are you to do? To earn a living? To not be denounced? ? There was one profession where you did not have to marry a woman - indeed, they did not want you to do so. You would learn to read, be around other men, be respected. I suspect the death penalty for homos, in reality made many of them slaves inside the church as priests. Some probably advanced quite high in the organization. I certainly would not be surprised to hear about gay popes along the way. On the other hand, I do not mean to imply that all priests were or are gay. In 1,800 years, the percentage of gay priests might vary greatly, also depending on place, and bureaucratic leadership at the time. I did see one survey suggesting about 33% were gay in parts of 20th century America. But take surveys with a grain of salt.
And while this was happening in Christian Europe, something similar was occurring among the Muslims. Not immediately, but they too learnt how to "enslave' a homo community. Around the age of 14 young Christian boys had to show up for examination by their Muslim overlords. Over time, rules said the authorities could not take the only son of a family; the one they would take would have to be healthy, intelligent, handsome, etc. They were to be slaves of the sultan, called Janissaries, though this is usually the term for those selected into the Ottoman army. The others would be bureaucrats for the state, or perhaps boy friends of important men, or...They would be quickly broken in, taken on the back of a soldier's horse, given a new name, forced to become Muslim, beaten and probably forced by the man on the horse to do other things. They were told they could never marry or have a family. Many of these may never have been homo to begin with, just like some criminals in jails for long terms may also discover the joys of same sex (compared to no sex). Interestingly, The Janissary troops gained the reputation as the best soldiers of the Ottoman Empire.
History is full of ironies, and this is surely one. 2 religions that despise homos officially, basically enslaved them if the homos wanted to live. In both, the homos contributed to the growth of the organizations that enslaved them, and how many there were and how much contributed never permitted to surface. Yet, I would contend both Abrahamic religions have provided the rationale for hatred of homos and individual beatings and murders of homosexuals for centuries, - some called witches, demons, Sodomites, Fidel Castro preferred gusanos, or whatever, religions providing foundations for murder.
Another irony, neither the Christians nor Muslims invented the death penalty for male homo behavior. They simply took it from the Jews, Leviticus, states that a man who sleeps with another man as he would with a woman, then both those men are to be condemned to death.
The irony is when Christians and Muslims came to power, at times they were angry with Jews and wanted to kill them, so both Jews and homos were on the death lists of different eras suffering together. In 1933 it is well known that Hitler began a boycott of Jewish stores, with Storm Troopers outside painting stars of David on shop windows, and talking to potential customers not to go into such shops, instead by from Germans (meaning Jews could not be real Germans). The Nazis also moved quickly against homos, closing the famous ElDorado bar/club, stopping use of the mail by homo publications, raiding Dr. Magnus Hirschfeld's building (he was away in France at the time, the British writer, Christopher Isherwood, stayed on the premises, and his experiences led him to write Berlin Stories, which eventually was the film Caberet). Hirschfeld was a social scientist and activist for homo rights. He appeared in the 1919 film Anders als die Anderen (Different from the Others, asking for repeal of the homo criminalization statute #171. The Nazis tried to destroy every copy of that film.) In early 1933 the Nazis raided the Hirschfeld premises, gathered all his books, and research materials, and conducted one of the first major burning of the books for the movie capers to teach German movie-goers what was to happen to un-German books. Later they would also do the same to un-German people, like Jews and homos. Then German science proved a connection - Jewish women were more masculine than most women; and Jewish men more feminine. And who would bother to question the results of German science, except "frauds" like Albert Einstein.
My main point, I am convinced the Leviticus assertions are wrong, and dangerous. I think Levi took us all for a ride. Levi took us in the wrong direction. If there had been a democratic vote of the Gods of that era, say 2,700 years ago, most gods and goddesses would have found nothing wrong in homo love, and instead of calling for the death penalty, might have encourage the love. And it was practiced in their countries. Even Zeus carried a baby in his thigh. The Indian Kama Sutra depicted love scenes on walls in India, both hetero and homo. No condemnation by the gods. Some African tribes initiations of boys included homo acts. Amerindians had an institution, the berdache, a kind of same sex marriage. J don't think China had laws against homos until the Western influence of Mao. It was part of Japanese culture, including among the samurei. Homo love was found all over the world BECAUSE it is natural to humans. Perhaps not as natural as reproductive sex, but natural anyway. Of course, when covering near 3,000 years of human history, there would be changes. The British Empire imposed its Christian, anti-homo laws on colonies, even India in the age of Victoria. Happily, France had a revolution, and the horrific Justinian Code was revised freeing Jews, Protestants, and homos in France, where Napoleon's army conquered, and in French colonies. The French colonies did not impose Levi's laws. (It is possible things in the French colonies may have changed, as they did in the home country during the early 1940s under Martial Petain as his collaborationist government in Vichy sought to undo the reforms of the French Revolution in many areas. The horrible irony, jn early 1940s in Germany and other parts of Europe, Jews and homos wound up in the same camps, the concentration camps, and in the death camps. Tell your gods to repeal the Leviticus laws.
