Summary: In Marie de France’s Lanval, was Lanval truly homosexual and alluded to in the following verses, and what were the punishments for homosexuality in the Middle Ages?
“That women are not what you prefer.”
But you have many small children,
with whom you take your alegrÃas” (lines 278-280).
In Marie de France’s Lanval, Lanval is accused of being homosexual by Queen Guinevere after Lanval refuses to accept Guinevere’s advances. Although Lanval explains to Guinevere that he has reserved for her fair lady and is loyal to her king, Guinevere seems to think Lanval is lying and accuses him of being homosexual. She then puts him on trial for rejecting her advances even though she had done it out of love and loyalty to the king. This paper will seek to investigate the medieval perspective on homosexuality and the common punishments that were meted out for being declared homosexual in medieval times and the social ramifications of being accused or found guilty.
First, in medieval times there was an ecumenical council that condemned homosexual couples. This council was established in 1179 and was called Lateren III (Blogged.the-protagonist.net). This council was attended by 302 bishops and presided over by Pope Alexander III. This council also dealt with other social stigmas such as heresy and sodomy. The church took accusations of homosexuality very seriously and those convicted could have been beheaded or burned at the stake. There were specific torture devices used on a convicted homosexual. One such device was called the Pear of Anguish. It was shaped like a pear and, when the handle was turned, the spoon-shaped lobes would open up causing great damage to the victim’s intestines when inserted into the anus. This apparatus was rarely washed, so the victim would surely succumb to infection if she managed to survive the damage to the intestine. This device was widely used as punishment for a large number of crimes, one of them being homosexuality.
Being found guilty of homosexuality in the Middle Ages by a person of noble status could lead to excommunication from the church and exile from the kingdom. Although it was not a death sentence, being exiled could be much worse than death. Being cut off from the land and one’s court could be a fate worse than death for the nobility. Exiles would be subject to loss of status, landholding, and any wealth that was accumulated through wills. This punishment of banishment leaves the accused alone and away from the environment and people familiar to him.
Next, it could be argued that the queen’s ego was so bruised that she had no choice but to accuse Lanval of homosexuality. Lanval was bound by secrecy not to reveal the name of his mistress for fear of losing his beloved’s hand. Guinevere was so offended by Lanval’s dismissal of her pass that she took him to court. Offending the nobility was often a death sentence in itself. Putting Lanval on trial was a way of exposing what he may have heard others say about his sexual behavior. The line “But you have many small children” (line 279) (from France) could not only hint at homosexuality, but also pedophilia. It is often overlooked that the reason Lanval is put on trial in the first place is because of the Queen’s undue advances. It was her wrongdoing and Lanval’s refusal to betray her love and the King that brought him to trial. The Queen was the one who threw herself at Lanval and it was Lanval who refused. This is never raised in open account; perhaps Lanval is so noble that he still wants to protect the Queen’s honor. However, this protection could well cost Lanval dearly, be it his life, his exile, or his love. Perhaps it is Lanval’s devotion to the king and his refusal to tarnish the royal family’s name and brand it with infidelity that causes Lanval to endure court proceedings.
Lastly, Lanval found himself in an awkward position by being forced by his lover to keep the secret. The only thing that could exonerate Lanval from charges of homosexuality is revealing his relationship with his beloved. Instead, he has to endure the stress of the trial at the hands of the Queen. It is only at the last moment that he is saved from the judgment of his beloved. His beloved could have come to the Queen’s court at any time and exonerated Lanval. Her testimony of his sordid times in his shop would have quickly dissolved any thoughts of homosexuality from anyone who had an audience with the King and Queen in court proceedings. Instead, she waits until the last moment to save Lanval; leaving him to deal with the accusations and the stress of court proceedings with no way to exonerate himself without breaking his oath to his mistress. This oath of secrecy does not help her case and Lanval’s refusal to give up the name of her lover because of her innocence shows her passion for her. The court of the King and Queen could see him as a homosexual who is making up lies about intimate heterosexual escapades to try and cover up the fact that he is really a homosexual. In the end, Lanval’s lover came to his aid and it seemed as if there was no stigma attached to him at the end of the poem. It’s a bit ironic that throughout this entire story, even at the end where he is exonerated, the Queen is not brought before her King and her husband to answer for her role in this whole ordeal.
In conclusion, homosexuality has prevailed since Roman and Greek antiquity. These acts were not punished as harshly in antiquity as they had been since the conversion to Christianity in the Middle Ages. The act of homosexuality was brought against Lanval by Queen Guinevere, although no first-hand evidence was brought against her, except for Lanval’s rejection of Guinevere’s advances. Rumors and a wounded ego lead Lanval to stand trial. Whether the trial was really based on the Queen’s thinking that Lanval was homosexual and therefore against God’s will is never openly discussed apart from the aforementioned quote and the beginning of this text. It is more reasonable to assume that the Queen was furious at her own vanity and lack of coping skills that made Lanval the target of homosexual accusations to cover up his own wrongdoing. This argument raises questions in the author of this article about how many people were sentenced to death, or exiled for vanity or inability to cope with rejection over the centuries.
Cited sources
From France, Marie, “Lanval”. The Norton Anthology. Ed. Stephen Greenblatt. Eighth edition. Flight. One. New York, NY: WW Norton and Company, 2006. 142-157. Print.
Homosexuality: The Queer Struggle for Equality. December 1, 2005. Blogger. November 2, 2010 < http://blogged.the-protagonist.net/2005/01/25/homosexuality-the-queer-fight-for-equality/ >.