Why I do not want to write about Old-Polish male-bedders : a contribution to the "Archeology" of gay studies in Poland

Why I Do Not Want to Write about Old-Polish Male-bedders: A Contribution to the ‘Archeology”

of Gay Studies in Poland

Honi soit qui m al y pense

F em inist researchers tracin g the signs o f creativity an d activity o fw o m en in p ast centuries often m etap h o rically refer to th e ir p redecessors as m o th ers, g ra n d m o th e rs, an d g reat­

g ra n d m o th e rs. W an tin g to w rite a b o u t h o m o sex u ality in h isto rical Poland, 1 e n co u n te r fro m th e sta rt a te rm in o lo g ical dilem m a. W h a t w o u ld 1 call th e p o te n tia l heroes o f m y article, th o se “O ld Polish gays,” m y “ancestors"? A fter all, th e y can n o t b e fathers to m e for th e v ery use o f th is te rm w o u ld legitim ize pa tria rc h a l discourse. Anyway, m o re often th a n n o t th ey have p ro b ab ly left no offspring. P erhaps 1 sh ould provocatively address th e m as aunts an d uncles?

1n Christianity, Social Tolerance, and H om osexuality: Gay People in Western Europe fr o m the Beginning o f the Christian Era to the Fourteenth C entury,^ John Bosw ell w rites a b o u t th e com plex p ro b le m o f term inology, arguing, how ever, for th e use o f th e term s

“lesbian” an d “gay” even in reference to p ast epochs. Yet 1 w ill n o t follow th a t sugges­

tio n , because, especially in P oland, th o se are usually affirm ative term s an d one o f the definitions o f a gay m an describes h im as a h o m o sex u al w h o accepts a n d affirm s his psychosexual identity. So 1 c a n n o t w rite a b o u t lesbians an d gays w h en referrin g to th e tim es o f oppression an d repression. O ld Polish d id offer an asso rtm e n t o f different term s describ in g hom osexuality, b u t since th e ir use w o u ld legitim ize th e oppression, 1 w ill

1 John BosweU, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality: Gay People in Western 0 ^ Europe fro m the Beginning o f the Christian Era to the Fourteenth Century, University o f

“ Chicago Press, 2005.

sp eak o f ho m o sex u als2 o r h o m o sex u al perso n s w ith o u t even attem p tin g to dem ystify th e O ld Polish sam cołożnik [a m ale species w ho beds w ith o th e r m ales, a “m ale -b e d d e r”]

to parallel th e E nglish “q u eer” o r th e G erm an Schwul. For e m an c ip ato ry reasons 1 w ill also use th e Polish te rm hom oseksualność [“h o m o sex u ality ”] an d n o t hom oseksualizm [“hom osexualism ,” a te rm th a t does exist in the Polish vocabulary], because after all no one speaks o f seksualizm an d heteroseksuzlizm b u t a b o u t heteroseksualność an d seksualność.

So w h a t term s w ere used in th e olden days? H istorical texts use sam cołożnicy [m ale- b ed d ers] (in th e tra n sla tio n o f th e N ew Testam ent by L eopolita, also in G dacjusz);

plugaw cy [filthy ones]; (psotliw i) sodom czycy [(m ischievous) so d o m ites], sodom ici, sodomiści; gom orczykow ie [“g o m o rrh a n s”]; m ężołożnicy [those w ho b e d w ith m en ];

gam raci nieczyści [unclean lovers]; niewieściuchowie [effem inates]. H om osexuality itself is called paziolubstw o [page-loving]; m ężczyńskapsota [m ale m ischief]; turecki niew styd [T urkish sham elessness]; m ężczyzn y z m ężczyzną brzydliwe bawienie się [hideous play o f m an w ith m an ]; p a sku d n y w schodni narów [filthy E astern vice]; sodom ia [sodom y];

grzech sodom ski [the sin o f sodom y]; psota sodom ska [the m isch ief o f sodom y], th o u g h it is difficult to tell w h at th e last term s m ean , as so d o m y w as th e te rm used also in reference to anal in terco u rse w ith w o m en an d in terco u rse w ith anim als - O ld Polish “bestiality.”

A ccounts ab o u t hom osexual persons in Poland up u ntil th e 19th cen tu ry unfortunately refer alm o st exclusively to m en , th u s co n firm in g th e fact o f th e double invisibility o f lesbians b o th as w o m en an d as representatives o f a m inority. Z bigniew K uchow icz draw s an a b su rd conclusion: “Lesbian love d id n o t find any adherents.”3 M ost likely w o m en w ere, as th ey are today, less visible an d m o re discreet, less noticeable th a n m en. O n e o f th e very few references is m ad e to E lżbieta P etrosolinów na, th e sister-senior in a C alvin­

ist c o m m u n ity in C h m ieln ik , w ho w as accused o f lesbian contacts an d d e m a n d e d to be b u rn e d at th e stake in an a ttem p t to lead to th e closing o f th e P ro testan t church.4 O n th e o th e r h a n d , th e old press n o t only addressed such p ractices am o n g m en an d w o m en in Turkey, th u s giving th e O tto m a n enem y b a d PR, b u t also p ro p o sed d e a th penalties for Polish “m aid en s jo in e d in th e S o d o m ite fashion.” W h y w o u ld th ere be d em an d s for penalties if such cases d id n o t exist?

The “list” o f O ld Polish accounts o f h o m o sex u ality m e n tio n e d in th is article com es fro m th e w orks related to O ld Polish custom s an d erotic form s 1 fo u n d available; 1 did n o t u n d e rta k e m y ow n archival research in th is field, a n d anyw ay such a ta sk w ould req u ire a w hole research team . 1 d raw p rim arily on th e w o rk b y Z bigniew K uchow icz

The term s “hom osexuality” and “hom osexual” date back to the 19th century and since they are burdened w ith a variety o f moral, medical, and psychological connotations characteristic o f the epoch, they do seem to be anachronistic.

Zbigniew Kuchowicz, Obyczaje staropolskie X V I I - X V I I I wieku, W ydawnictw o Łódzkie, Ł ódź, 1975, 302.

A ttacks on Petrosolinów na can also be explained by the fact th a t she belonged to the com m unity o f elders and therefore usurped a “m ale” position on the society. Patriarchal culture usually ignores the issue o f social otherness and departure from the norm s by w om en w ho have no power, b u t stigmatizes and punishes severely all such divergence in the case o f the m en in power.

(O byczaje staropolskie, th e chapter “Życie alkow iane,” an d Człowiek polskiego baroku, the ch ap ter “C zarny erotyzm ”), a n d b y Janusz T azbir (“D ew iacje obyczajowe”).5 A lready th e q u o te d titles b e tra y th e attitu d e o f th e a u th o rs to th e subject o f hom osexuality, w h ic h is usually referred to in th e ir w o rk as a deviation, p erv ersio n , degen eratio n , pathology, an d p e d e ra sty (it is w o rth p o in tin g o u t th a t th e last te rm has an exceptionally pejorative an d offensive m e a n in g in co n te m p o ra ry Polish), w hile th e alm o st sim ultaneously describ ed p h e n o m e n o n o f th e h arem s o f girls a n d w hores k ep t b y th e m agnates does n o t inspire such pejorative associations in th e a u th o rs, o r does n o t in sp ire pejorative associations at all. W h a t is m o re, h o m o sex u ality is often m e n tio n e d to g eth er w ith bestiality, sadism , m asochism , incest, pedophilia, group sex, exhibitionism , transvestism , an d m asturbation, categories w h ich are clearly k ep t separate b y co n te m p o ra ry sexology. N o w o n d e r th a t in K uchow icz’s M iłość staropolska^ [Love in O ld Poland] p u b lish ed in 1982 hom o sex u ality is m e n tio n e d in one sentence only. O n e n e e d n o t search th ro u g h Staropolska m iłość [Old Polish Love] by A lojzy Sajkow ski (1981) either. If even to d ay th e m ajo rity o f th e Polish society denies lesbians an d gays th e rig h t to love, h ow could th e situation be different 25 years ago in relation to “m a le-b ed d ers”?

In old P o lan d th e accu satio n o f h o m o se x u a l ten d en c ies (real o r im ag in ed ) w as a w e a p o n ag ain st id eo lo g ical a n d p o litic a l enem ies, n o t n ecessarily live ones. The chronicler D ługosz suggested th e “page-loving” ten d en cy o f W ładysław W arneńczyk (the p u n is h m e n t for it w as to be th e lost b attle o f W arna),7 a n d Bolesław Śmiały. Later, sim ilar co m m en ts w ere m ad e ab o u t W ładysław IV W aza, M ichał K orybut W iśniow iecki, an d P rin ce Jakub Sobieski, w ho “loved m e n to d e a th .” P am phlets m o ck ed Sobieski claim ing th a t his fo rtu n e w ill b e “in h e rite d by boys, by Wolscy, K ochanow scy, an d W yhow scy.”

H e n ry k W aleza w as also too effem inate for Polish tastes an d enjoyed th e sam e type o f c o m m e n ta ry (he h ad pierced ears, w ore p erfu m e, d ressed elaborately, a n d w as su r­

ro u n d e d b y a crow d o f sw eethearts w ith p a in te d faces - m ignons, w h o m “h e did n o t spare ab o m in ab le Italian p ractices”8).

łN

Zbigniew Kuchowicz, Obyczaje staropolskie^; and, by the same author, Człowiek polskiego baroku, W ydawnictw o Łódzkie, Ł ódź, 1992; Janusz Tazbir, “Dewiacje

obyczajowe” in his Studia nad kulturą staropolską, Selected Works, vol. 4, ed. S. Grzybowski , Universitas, Cracow, 2001. To preserve the clarity o f argum ent in my article I do n o t provide references to O ld Polish texts and documents; the reader may find the bibliographical data in the abovem entioned works. A ll quotations, unless m arked otherw ise, are from the above works.

Zbigniew Kuchowicz, Miłość Staropolska, Wzory— uczuciowość-— obyczaje erotyczne X V I- -X V I I I wieku, W ydawnictw o Łódzkie, Ł ódź, 1982.

Echoes o f this report can be heard in N iem cew icz’s Śpiewy historyczne: “N ie dał się zdrożnym chuciom powodow ać,/ Lecz, wziąwszy silną dłonią rządu w odze,/ U m iał panow ać” [H e did n ot allow the unclean desires to control h im ,/ But, ruling w ith a strong h a n d ,/ H e knew how to govern. ”]

S. Grzybowski, Henryk Walezy, Z akład N arodowy im. Ossolińskich, Wrocław, 1980, 9.

Tazbir, Henryk Walezy, in: Poczet królów i książąt polskich, ed. A. G arlicki, Czytelnik, Warszawa, 1978, 348-9.

C atholic jo u rn alists a ttrib u te d a w eakness for m en to C alvin, an d P ro testan ts at­

trib u te d th e sam e to Popes: to John X lll (“he w as a d irty epicure, adulterer, fornicator, a n d so d o m ite”), to A lex an d er V l (“h e w as a fo rn icato r an d a profligate a n d lecherous sodom ite, a n d a b ro th e r to th e devils”), an d also to Pius V a n d Julius Ill. M onks and p riests w ere referred to as “so d o m ites a n d g o m o rrh ite s.” For Stanisław O rzechow ski, ro m a n iza re m e a n t th e sam e as gom orrhizare et sodom izare. C a te c h ism b o o k s an d h a n d b o o k s for priests advised th e m to ask ab o u t relations w ith m en d u rin g confession (it is in terestin g why, if, as claim ed by th e jo u rn alists o f th o se tim es an d rep eated after th e m b y to d ay ’s h isto rian s, th is te n d e n c y w as to b e all b u t absent in Poland?). Also, the p ro te sta n t clergym en w arn ed : “so d o m y is a filthy d is g ra c e ^ w h ic h angels flee, on seeing w h ic h devils close th e ir eyes, an d w h ic h m en w ith m en breed.”

A C alvinist a u th o r o f serm o n s, Paw eł G ilow ski, w rote, how ever, th a t “som e rich lan d o w n ers k eep y o u n g boys for th a t p u rp o se,” an d W acław P otocki re p o rte d w ith outrage in O gród fraszek:

Przypatrz się, jako grzeszą mężczyźni szkaradzie, Zazdroszczą n a oborze bykom, koniom w stadzie;

Wymyślają potrawy, proszki, m ocne soki, Mało im białej płci, paskudzą otroki,

Przeciw naturze rozum przywodząc, aż zgroza.

[Look how m en sin hideously,/ They envy bulls in the b arn and horses in the herd;/ They devise dishes, powders, strong juices,/ the fairer sex is n ot enough for them , they defile the servants,/ Fearfully bending reason against nature.]

Also, representatives o f o th er religions, p articularly lslam , have b een accused o f “sodom y.”

R eports h a d it th a t th e T urkish Sultan, “th e stu d e n t o f th e M u h am m ed s an d successor to th e throne,” a p a rt fro m 300 concubines h a d th e sam e n u m b e r o f “lovely boys for th e p u rp o s e o f th e sam e ugly carnality.” The d escrip tio n o f The Turkish M onarchy by Paul R icaut, a m e m b e r o f th e B ritish P arliam ent, p u b lish ed in Polish in 1678, claim ed th a t

“Plato’s science o f love fo u n d its place an d follow ers in T urkish schools,” an d criticized th e p ractice o f “th e cu rsed a n d filthy ad d ictio n to so d o m ite profanity.” Liber generationis plebeanorum by W alerian N ek an d Trepka, k n o w n later as Liber C ham orum , or th e b o o k o f b o o rs, w h ich constitutes an extensive register o f fake n o b ility an d a collection o f O ld Polish gossip, also records th a t o n e P io tr K rzysztoporski h a d relations w ith his servant

“in posticum , th e T urkish way, a n d gave h im th e V enus’s curse.”

Slightly m o re is k n o w n a b o u t th e private lives o f th e m agnates. A ccording to th e chronicler M arcin M atuszew icz, Prince Janusz A leksander Sanguszko o f D ubno, a L ithu­

an ian n o b lem an , “k ep t m e n for am o ro u s p u rp o s e s” (his wife, th e b eau tifu l K onstancja D enhoff, a heiress to a g reat fo rtu n e, re tu rn e d to h e r p aren ts “w ith o u t receiving any m a rita l p ro o f fro m h e r h u sb a n d except for one go o d m o rn in g at daw n an d one good n ig h t in th e evening”), an d d o n a te d th e to w n o f K oźm in an d seventeen villages to his lover, K arol Szydłowski. ln th e w ords o f F ather Kitowicz,

The object of his passions was some spirited youth, upon w hom he bestow ed alm ost all of his treasures: the youth ruled his heart, stripped him o f his riches, his jewels an d all else the youth

fou n d to his liking. N othing w ould stop this favorite from such plunder except for the fear th at his luck m ay e n d for it is b uilt on shaky foundations. But although he fell out o f favor, he left w ith all the bounty. So anyone w ho found him self thus favored swiftly u sed his luck for as long as the favor was w ith him. M any of those favorites becam e recognized citizens and m en o f m eans. O nly one Kazimierz Chyliński m et the opposite fate: stripped of all his gains an d shackled, he was sent to the G dańsk prison w here he d id his penance for twelve years.”9 The ab d u ctio n an d im p riso n m e n t o f C hyliński was in fact th e d o in g o f th e prince’s father, w ho th u s fruitlessly attem p ted to p ersu ad e his son to re tu rn to his w ife an d “h arness his profligacy.” The y o u n g p rin ce, locked up in a ro o m an d th re a te n e d w ith a w hipping, h a d to give his fath er “co m m a n d in w ritin g over th e D u b n o g arriso n a n d over th e w hole estate” a n d th e n th e latter “invited C hyliński a n d d id w ith h im w h a t is stated above.”

A fter th is in cid en t, u n til his fa th e r’s death , Sanguszko

did not have an open and costly favorite as he d id before he was threatened, only secret ones.

But after his father’s death he had them again, keeping them as he d id the earlier ones, because his taste blinded him; with the exception o f the tribunal w hom he did n ot show his favorite, left in D ubno.10

O n e m ay infer, th erefore, th a t Sanguszko h a d n o tro u b le flau n tin g his lovers, even w hen h o ld in g public positions. Also Jerzy M arcin L ubom irski “h ad an eye for a little C o s s a c k s p aid h im well, even m ad e h im rich; finally fo u n d a w ay to raise h im to th e n o b le status, for th ere was n o th in g one couldn’t b u y fro m Poniatow ski.”

There are m u c h few er re p o rts c o n cern in g th e low er classes. A n exceptional case is describ ed by Jan K racik a n d M ichał R ożek in Hultaje, złoczyńcy, wszetecznice w daw nym Krakowie:

In 1561 Wojciech from Poznań w ho for ten years “wore w om an’s clothes” faced the court in Kazimierz. He h ad m arried Sebastian Słodownik in Cracow and lived w ith him for two years in Poznań. There he allowed Sebastian to be with a wom an and lived with a wom an himself. W hen he returned to Cracow, he got m arried in Kazimierz again, this tim e with W awrzyniec Włoszek.

In public opinion he was considered a wom an. For crim es against nature he was b u rn ed .11 A lready th is sh o rt d escrip tio n d em o n strates h o w difficult an d useless it w o u ld be to as­

sign W ojciech fro m P oznań to m o d e rn categories: h o m osexual, bisexual, transsexual, transvestite? A nd w h a t is o n e to th in k a b o u t Sebastian S ło d o w n ik an d W aw rzyniec W ło szek w ho agreed to these, after all sacram en tal, unions?

In a re c e n tly p u b lish e d b o o k b y M ałg o rzata Pilaszek, Procesy o czary w Polsce w wiekach X V I-X V III, I also fo u n d an in terestin g passage:

10

J. Kitowicz, Pamiętniki czyli Historia Polska, ed. and introduction P. M atuszewska, com m entary Z. Lew inów na, P IW , Warsaw, 2005, 63-4.

Ibid., 64-5.

Jan Kracik, M ichał Rożek, Hultaje, złoczyńcy, wszetecznice w dawnym Krakowie.

O marginesie społecznym X V I - V X I I I w., W ydawnictw o Literackie, Kraków-W rocław, 1986, 173.

1t is n ot often th at co u rt books described m agic related to hom osexual love. Such practices were undertaken by one Lenkowa, w ho washed the young Stanisław Skrzypczak three tim es in herbs m aking his m aster, Mikołaj Turkowiecki, fall deeply in love with him. Turkowiecki’s life w ith his wife then fell ap art an d he b egun to hate his m other-in-law . H e dem anded therefore th at the m agic be w ithdraw n, so that he could live w ithout the boy again (1608).12

M agdeburg Law w as m erciless to h o m o sex u al persons:

1f anyone is fou n d to have business against nature with an anim al, o r m an w ith m an, those are to be sentenced to death and according to custom b u rn ed w ith fire, w ithout any compassion, for it is an ignom inious and disgraceful sin an d is to be punished.

The basis for d iscrim in atin g against h o m o sex u ality w as obviously p ro v id ed b y th e Bible, especially th e d escrip tio n o f th e d e stru c tio n o f S o d o m (as a m a tte r o f fact lin k ed to th e p h e n o m e n o n o f h o m o sex u ality only in late Judaism , in th e w ritin g s o f Philo). C o n ­ te m p o ra ry exegetes, how ever, entirely d e p a rt fro m such an in te rp re ta tio n .13 Those w ho called u p o n th e a u th o rity o f th e S crip tu re entirely ig n o red th e w ords o f D avid w hich p erh ap s co n tain a reference to love betw een m en an d w h ich are often p a ra p h ra se d in m edieval h o m o e ro tic p o etry :

1 am distressed for thee, m y brother Jonathan:

very pleasant hast th o u been unto me:

thy love to m e was wonderful, passing the love o f women.

(2 Samuel 1, 26)14

W e can find th is m u c h (or th is little) in fo rm atio n on O ld Polish “deviations” in available scholarship. K uchow icz notices ad d itio n ally th a t accounts o f O ld Polish hom o sex u ality

“sh ould n o t be d em o n ized ” b ecause “one gets th e sense th a t th is p erv ersio n w as tru ly ra re a n d in sp ire d a u th en tic, w ith tim e grow ing, av ersio n .”15 H e su b seq u en tly refers to F ather K itow icz w ho w rites w ith disgust a b o u t th e custom s o f th e C ossacks fro m Z ap o rish ian Sich, th u s d raw in g on th e S arm atian tra d itio n o f ju x tap o sin g Poland w ith th e w ild E ast an d th e c o rru p t W est. Finally, as a c o n firm a tio n o f his hypotheses, K ucho­

w icz refers to th e 18*^ c e n tu ry op in io n o f a G erm an doctor, K ausch: “As far as p ed erasty is co n cern ed , w h ich is so p o p u la r w ith P oland’s n eig h b o rs, one has to say to th e credit o f Poles th a t it is quite u n k n o w n h ere a n d alm o st as strongly despised as in E n g la n d .”16

M ałgorzata Pilaszek, Procesy o czary w Polsce w wiekach X V I-X V III, Universitas, Cracow, 2008, 411.

A discussion o f homosexuality in O ld and N ew Testam ent, w ith suggestions for further reading, may be found in John BosweU, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Hom osexuality^., 95-159; in R.P. W oods OP, On Love that Dared not Speak Its Name, M ontgom ery H ide, 1970; D aniel A. H elm iniak, What the Bible Really Says about Homosexuality, 2000.

[The author quotes the passage in several o th er translations into Polish, trans.]

Z. Kuchowicz, Człowiek polskiego baroku, 320.

Ibid.

13

14

15

A n o th e r traveler re p o rte d th a t in P oland “sodom y, w h ic h in th e n e ig h b o rin g states is quite freq u en tly p racticed , th e y do n o t k n o w an d find repulsive, w h ic h is praisew o rth y .”

O n e can h ard ly resist th e feeling th a t echoes o f O ld Polish “sexual xen o p h o b ia” can be h eard also in to d ay ’s texts by rig h t-w in g jo u rn alists.

These are strange theses co n sid erin g th e fact th a t h o m o sex u al o rien tatio n is calcu­

lated to p e rta in to 2-7 p e rc e n t o f h u m a n p o p u la tio n a n d this n u m b e r does n o t change, irrespective th e place, ep o ch , a n d existing social n o rm s. 2-7 p e rc e n t o f h o m o sex u al people: to realize w h at th a t n u m b e r entails it is w o rth realizing th a t in O ld P oland th e n o b ility is estim ated at 10 p e r c e n t^ 1 n th e years 1566-1620 th e trib u n a l o f th e 1nquisi- tio n in B arcelona, Valencia, an d Saragossa passed ju d g m e n t on 371 p erso n s suspected o f h o m o sex u al contacts; 53 w ere b u rn e d at th e stake.17 1n The N eth erlan d s in th e years 1730-1732, at th e tu rn o f th e E n lig h te n m e n t era, n u m ero u s, w idely b ra n c h e d o u t “as­

sociations” o f h o m o sex u al p erso n s w ere discovered, w h o socialized together, visited each other, an d engaged in lively c o rresp o n d en ce.18 O n e sh ould n o t, how ever, apply c o n te m p o ra ry stan d ard s to The N eth erlan d s o f th o se tim es, w h ich w ere p re d o m in an tly C alvinist. 300 m e n w here sen ten ced to jail an d a ro u n d 70 to to rtu re s an d death. B ut if such m e n w ere to be fo u n d in The N eth erlan d s, m o s t likely th ere w ere som e also in P oland, even if less visible, less self-aw are, a n d less w ell-organized and, paradoxically, m u c h luckier because o f all o f th e above. M ost likely th e in freq u en cy o f th e o ccu rren ce o f h o m o sex u ality in P oland m ean s on ly th a t it h ad b een rarely m e n tio n e d in sources.

The im age of hom osexual persons p ro d u ced by th e research on O ld Poland custom s is obviously v ery dark, w ith sources in c o u rt registers, serm ons an d slanderous pam phlets, lam en tatio n s o f m oralists, an d police files. 1t is an im age o f crim inals, m o ra l degenerates, an d sinners. 1t could n o t b e o therw ise, b u t to speculate on th e basis o f th ese sources a b o u t th e accu racy a n d com prehensiveness o f th a t im age w o u ld be like - an d 1 am u s­

in g th e parallel fully aw are o f its im plications - d e te rm in in g th e shape o f m ale-fem ale relations in O ld P oland on th e basis o f several re p o rts a b o u t “m eretricio u s w hores,” an d in fo rm a tio n th a t “th e V enus’s curse w as b ro u g h t to P oland by one w o m an fro m R om e w ho freq u en ted th e c h u rch fair.”

There are m an y th in g s th a t 1 can only infer, b u t th o se fantasies are hard ly optim istic.

Thus 1 im agine, o r re c o n s tru c t (aw are full w ell th a t w h a t 1 am p ro d u c in g is “literatu re”) th e stories o f boys forced by th reats an d w hip p in g s into m arriage; o f m o ck ed village freaks; o f b itte r old b achelors over th e glass o f spirits an d , even m o re, th e h u sb an d s evading th e ir m a rita l duties a n d frigid wives; fam ily q uarrels an d w o m en ’s tears. 1 see u n ru ly girl-tom boys in sistin g on rid in g th e h o rse th e m an ’s way; eyes h id d e n b e h in d th e fan, w h ich do n o t lo o k at voivodes a n d pantlers; n u n s, w ho lo n g an d passionately contem plate th e im age o f som e fem ale saint. A n d also tears stream in g dow n his cheeks w h en th e stu d y in th e Jesuit o r P iarist sem in ar cam e to an en d an d it w as tim e to p a rt

łN

See eg. D. Łukaszewicz, “Niemieckiepsy” i “polskie św inie” oraz inne eseje z historii kultury, Ureus, Gdynia, 1997, 205.

See eg. S. Schama, The Embarrasment ofRiches: A n Interpretation o f Dutch Culture in the Golden Age, Collins, L ondon, 1987, 601-6.

18

w ith H IM . The studies o f h o m o sex u ality o f p a st epochs discuss “h o m o sex u al beh av io rs”

or, even w orse, “acts o f sodomy,”19 th u s d ep riv in g th o se w ho d e m o n strate “h o m o sex u al beh av io rs” o f all individuality. W h a t is consistently forgotten (o r consciously denied) is th a t h o m o sex u ality is n o t ju s t sexual desire b u t also (an d p erh ap s above all) p sy ch o ­ logical a n d em o tio n al attach m en t. I fantasize ab o u t b e in g able to lo o k at th e ir fate fro m a different perspective. For I do n o t believe th a t because th e y lived in a different epoch a n d h ad a different (u n)aw areness o f th e ir sexual identity, th ey could n o t fall in love a n d love, how ever sen tim en tal th a t m ay so u n d . I absolutely do n o t w a n t to p ro ject m y p erception o f c o n tem p o rary gays an d lesbians onto historical d ata o r apply th e ahistorical category o f “sexual o rien tatio n ” to h isto rical figures, I on ly w ish to re tu rn to th e ir “acts”

a n d behaviors th e rig h t to love w h ic h tra d itio n a l Polish scientific discourse ignores or calls a deviation or perv ersio n .

O f course, such “acts” an d “sodom ite practices” did occur, as th ey do to d ay (according to K insey’s re p o rt, alm o st 40 p e rc e n t o f m en a n d 20 p e rc e n t o f w o m en h a d h o m o sex u al experiences in th e ir a d u lt lives), acco rd in g to th e ru le th a t peo p le som etim es derive satisfaction fro m in terco u rse itself w ith o u t necessarily co n sid erin g th e sex o f th e partner.

I can h ard ly agree w ith th e thesis p ro p o sed by F oucault th a t only in th e 19*^ c e n tu ry th e h o m o sex u al acquired an id e n tity an d th a t “h o m o sex u ality appears as one o f th e form s o f sexuality w h en it w as tra n sp o se d fro m th e p ractice o f so d o m y on to a k in d o f in te rio r androgyny, a h e rm a p h ro d itis m o f th e soul. The so d o m ite h a d b een a te m p o ra ry ab er­

ratio n ; th e h o m o sex u al w as n o w a species.”20 For w h at F oucault has in m in d is a social id en tity an d a separate m edical classification o f th e h o m osexual21 an d n o t a psychological a n d em o tio n al character.

B ut even in th e p a st doubtlessly th ere existed ind iv id u als aw are o f th e ir difference, th eir oddity, th eir alternative psychosexual orientation, w ho w ere n o t indifferent to w h o m th e y “copulate” w ith. P erhaps th ey did n o t always have th e language to n a m e th a t d if­

ference, b u t surely th ey h ad in tu itio n w h ich led th e m to fo rb id d en an d secluded places w here th ey could m e e t “th e ir own,” an d w h ic h also explained th e faster h e a rtb e a t an d th eir difference in spirit. W anting to define them selves, th ey could only refer to the Biblical D avid, to Plato, to H ad rian an d A n tin o u s, to th e G anym ede m y th an d to o th e r “d a m n e d

R. Shephard, “Sexual R um ours in English Politics: the Case o f Elizabeth I and James I,” in: Desire and Discipline: Sex a nd Sexuality in the Pre-Modern West, ed. J. Murray, K. Eisenblichler, University o f Toronto Press, Toronto-Buffalo, 1996.

Foucault, M ichel, History o f Sexuality: Volume I, trans. R obert Hurley, NY: Pantheon, 1978, 43.

“[T ]he condition o f the buttocks, a relaxed sphincter, an anus shaped like a funnel or adapted to accomm odate an object the shape and size o f a penis - those were the unm istakable signs belonging to the recently identified species. Similarly ‘a tw isted m outh’ along w ith ‘very short teeth and thick, curled, deform ed lips’ indicated familiarity w ith the practice o f fellatio. In short, the pederast was a new kind o f m onster, an anim al.’” in: History o f Private Life, Volume IV: From the Fires o f Revolution to the Great

War, ed. M ichelle Perrot, trans. A rth u r G oldham m er, Belknap Press o f H arvard University Press, 1994, 640.

L n

21

G reeks” (very m u c h p re se n t in old h o m o e ro tic literature), pro v id ed , o f course, th a t th ey h a d a p ro p e r education. They could also w rite ab o u t shepherds, a b o u t fra te rn ity on th e battlefield (h o m o so cial relations are often a repressed rep resen tatio n o f hom osexuality), o r im itate h etero sex u al m odels (as m a n y co n te m p o ra ry gays do).

1n Figuring Sex between M en fr o m Shakespeare to Rochester, Paul H a m m o n d de­

scribes for exam ple th e sto ry o f tw o 17th c e n tu ry scholars, Sir John F in ch an d Sir Thom as B aines, inseparable since th e y sh ared a ro o m at C h ris t’s C ollege in C am bridge, accepted an d co n sid ered a couple by th e ir fam ilies (w hich is d o c u m e n te d b y th e su rv iv in g cor­

resp o n d en ce), a n d also m em o rialized b y a co m m o n statue (w hich alludes to graveyard sculptures o f m a rrie d couples), w h ere H e n ry M ore has w ritten: “C or erat u n u m , unaq.

anim a” (“th ey w ere o f one h e a rt an d one soul”). 22 1n 1681, F in ch w ro te to Baines:

‘Tis now thirty-six years since 1 began the happinesse o f a u n in terru p ted friendship w hich the w orld never did equal, no r 1 believe will ever parallel . . . O f the twenty-six years wee spent together since we first left E ngland wee never bin separated two m oneths from each other unless it were in the exercising some act o f kindnesse.23

B ut let us re tu rn to O ld Poland. 1f no one w o u ld d ream o f using term s such as “h e t­

erosexual b eh av io r” o r “p ro o f o f acts o f copulation” in reference to Listy do M arysieńki [King Jan Sobieski’s letters to his beloved], or to Z ygm unt A ugust follow ing B arbara’s coffin on foot fro m C racow to V ilnius,24 w hy sh ould 1 apply a different m easu re and d o u b t th e h e a rts o f tw o y o u n g lords gone h u n tin g a n d rid in g to g e th e r stirru p by stirru p ; o r th e em b racin g harvesters, w ho have d ro p p e d th e ir scythes an d lain u n d e r a tree; or m aid en ly letters h id d e n in a chest’s draw er in th e alcove; o r kissed rib b o n s fro m “h e r”

braid ; or th e secret exchange o f glances at th e tav ern w h ich leads to a h asty kiss aro u n d th e c o r n e r ^ 1 w ould like to k n o w m o re a b o u t Janusz A leksander Sanguszko an d K arol Szydłow ski w ho “possessed his h e a rt”; ab o u t C hyliński jailed in th e G d ań sk p riso n (and w h e th e r Sanguszko suffered after his loss); a b o u t Jerzy M arcin L ubom irski an d his little C ossack for w h o m he p u rch ased n o b ility fro m th e k i n g ^

These im ag in ed stories o f m in e p ro b ab ly usually e n d ed badly, for th ey h a d to en d badly. W h a t is m o re, 1 w ill p robably n ev er read a b o u t th em . For th e ir p ro tag o n ists had n e ith e r th e m eans n o r th e language to express th e ir feelings; th ey could n o t w rite ab o u t th e ir love as d id L udw ika B iebrzyńska, to rn b y th e equally fo rb id d en , for incestuous, passion: “1 c a n n o t destro y m y love, n o r do 1 w a n t to. O h, he know s h o w to sp eak to m y h eart, h o w to m aster it an d te a r it away fro m ev ery th in g else!”25 They could n o t p ro test like th e girl sen t by h e r m o th e r to th e m on astery :

22 Paul H am m ond, Figuring Sex between M en fro m Shakespeare to Rochester, O xford University Press, 2002, 29-32.

23 Ibid.

24 N um erous and m oving examples o f O ld Polish feelings and passions, o f mesalliances inspired by love - obviously heterosexual - may be found in Z. Kuchowicz’s Staropolska

«O Miłość (chapter “Rola serca i charakteru”).

“ 25 This is how she described her feelings to her own nephew. Ibid., 269.

W nidę na chór, spojrzę na dół, ujrzę miłego, A dajże m i, m ocny Boże, skoczyć do niego.

[l’ll climb the choir, look down, see m y beloved, O h let me, strong God, jum p to join h im .”]26

R epressed, excluded, th ey w ere n o t on ly dep riv ed o f th e rig h t to love, b u t also o f the m ean s a n d language to speak a b o u t it.

The only, quite im probable, trace, is th e strange legend about tw o Polish knights living on M adeira, one o f w h o m w as identified as W arn eń czy k w ho survived on th e battlefield a n d w ho, as D ługosz claim s, w as th e lover o f “m ale pleasures a n d disgraceful passions”

a n d w ho su pposedly sp en t th e n ig h t before b attle w ith his page. The sto ry could serve as m aterial for th e 19th c e n tu ry Polish histo rical w rite r A n to n i K rem er, b ro th e r o f A n to n ia D o m ań sk a, nee K rem er, a u th o r o f Paziow ie króla Z ygm unta, Krysia bezim ienna, and H istoria żółtej ciżem ki - if only he existed, like Shakespeare’s sister.

“The co m m o n featu re o f c o n te m p o ra ry g e n d e r an d gay studies seem s to b e disco v ­ e rin g in old texts th e c o n firm a tio n o f c o n te m p o ra ry sensibility, w h ic h so m etim es leads even to th e n e g a tio n (or, p e rh a p s, n eg lect) o f th e h is to ric a l c o n te x t o f th e se texts an d to fin d in g th e re answ ers to q u estio n s a b o u t c o n te m p o ra ry gay identity,”27 w rites P io tr U rb a ń sk i in “Z a k a z a n a przyjaźń,” an article w h ic h is in fact a p h ilo lo g ical critiq u e o f gender studies. The a u th o r m e n tio n s also th e w o rk o f B ruce R. S m ith , w h o se p o litical aim is “th e creation o f a gay c o m m u n ity in b o th a co n tem p o rary a n d a h isto rical sense.”28 l do n o t u n d e rs ta n d w h y l sh o u ld n o t do th a t, n o r search th r o u g h old w ritin g s for th e “p ro to -g a y tra d itio n ,” to use S tew art’s te rm ,29 th o s e m in u te a n d fa in t traces w h ic h b u ild a fragile b rid g e b etw e e n m y sen sib ility an d ex p erien ce an d th e exp erien ce o f th e

“O ld P olish h o m o s e x u a l p e rs o n s .” This is n o t even h isto ry , it is m o re o f an arc h e o l­

ogy, a p a tie n t seeking o f m y traces in th e layers o f c u ltu re as a re se a rc h e r d ig g in g in th e g ro u n d su d d e n ly n o tic e s a layer o f a d ifferen t co lo r a n d realizes th a t a w o o d e n p o le w as b u rie d th ere. lf old love p o e tr y is often tre a te d w ith o u t a seco n d th o u g h t as a re c o rd o f a u th e n tic ex p erien ce a n d feeling, w h y is it th a t w h e n th e so -called “m ale frie n d sh ip ” o ccasio n ally ap p ears in lite ra tu re , e x -c a th e d ra a rg u m e n ts ap p e a r fro m all sides th a t th e referen ce is n o m o re th a n an im ita tio n o f th e an cie n ts, a lite ra ry e m a n a ­ tio n , sp iritu a l frie n d sh ip , c o m m o n a lity o f souls, P lato n ic id ea, a co n v en tio n . C ritics discuss th e id e n tity o f L au ra, K asia, a n d A n u sia b u t reject a p rio ri th e subtle d isco u rse

Cz. H ernas, W kalinowym lesie, vol. 2, Antologia polskiej pieśni ludowej ze zbiorków polskich X V I I I w., P IW , Warszawa, 1965, 24.

P io tr Urbański, “’Zakazana przyjaźń’ w poezji nowołacińskiej,” in Ciało płeć literatura.

Prace ofiarowane profesorowi Germanowi R itzo w i w pięćdziesiątą rocznicę urodzin, W iedza Powszechna, Warsaw, 2001, 554-5.

Bruce R. Sm ith, Homosexual Desie in Shakespeare’s England: A Cultural Poetics, University o f Chicago Press, C hicago-L ondon, 1991, 27.

A. Stewart, Close Readers, H um anism and Sodomy in Early Modern England, Princeton University Press, P rinceton-N ew Jersey, 1997.

o f desire a p p e a rin g b etw een th e lines in th e letters a n d p o e tr y o f th e h u m a n ists: for exam ple, E rasm u s o f R o tte rd a m .30

H ere is a n o th e r exam ple, tak en fro m English literatu re, for lack o f Polish sources:

Place doeth n ot sunder, o r divide O u r hearts, b u t m akes them m ore wide.

O u r passions, w hich before d id lie in prison, N ow abroad doe file.

The breadth o f place Gives fancie space,

A nd sets our soules at liberty.

A nd all the W inde twixt us and Thee Is b u t a puffing Agonie

O f sighs a n d Blasts w hich doe expire From the vast d epth o f o u r Desire A nd this is W inde

O f such a kinde

As onely blows, n ot cooles the fire.31

These are lines fro m a p o e m b y N icholas O ld isw o rth (1611-1645) “To H is F riend bey o n d th e Sea,” dedicated to R ichard B acon, w ith w h o m th e a u th o r w e n t to school in W est­

m in ste r an d th e n separated: O ld isw o rth stu d ied in O xford an d Bacon in C am bridge, to th e n m ove to D o u ai an d die th ere at th e age o f 18. In th e w o rk of O ld isw o rth a dozen o r so p o em s are ded icated to Bacon: to u c h in g in th e ir aw kw ardness, d escrib in g longing, an d p raisin g th e b o d ily a n d sp iritu al qualities o f his friend. In th e preserved m an u scrip t, one page contains only th e title o f a p o e m th a t was n ever w ritten: “O n th e D e a th o f his D eare F rien d Mr. R ichard B aco n .” The rest o f th e page is em pty, as if th e a u th o r h o p e ­ lessly trie d a n d failed to address th e subject. As H a m m o n d observes, in th e lines q u o ted above, th e physical sep aratio n betw een m en is perceived as th e lib eratio n o f th e ir souls w h ich are th u s to achieve sp iritu al u n io n ; y et th e n he asks: “B ut is ‘sp iritu al’ th e rig h t w o rd ?”32 W ould th e w o rd “spirituality,” I ask, even cross o u r m in d s h a d th e addressee o f O ldisw orth’s p o e m w as, for exam ple, M iss E lisabeth Bacon?

W h a t is m o re, th e sp iritu al co m m u n io n , th e th e o ry o f em u latio n , an d “G reek m o d ­ els” are usually called u p o n to d iscred it a h o m o sex u al re a d in g w h en w e are d ealing w ith th e d escrip tio n o f a relatio n sh ip betw een an old er m an an d a yo u n g er one. A re th e - so fre q u e n t in p atriarch al cu ltu re - relationships betw een older m e n an d y o u n g er w om en any less h etero sex u al because o f th e age difference? In Plato w e even find a d istin ctio n betw een m e n d esirin g o th e r m en an d th o se d esirin g boys. A n d th e te rm “b o y ” m ay in fact b e m isleading. A co n te m p o ra ry gay m a n w ill n o t hesitate to use it in reference to his fifty-year-old p a rtn e r; Saint E lred u sed th e te rm to refer to his lover o f his ow n age (he

3 0 See for example M edieval L a tin Poems ofM ale Love and Friendship, trans. T Stehling,

G arland Pub., N ew York - L ondon, 1984.

00 ³¹ Q u o ted after: H am m ond, Figuring Sex between M e n ^ ., 33.

“ 3 2 Ibid.

even referred to h im as “son”!); M arb o d , Bishop o f R ennes referred to h im se lf in this w ay in th e letter to his lover.33

O ld sources an d research b ased on those sources uses term s such as “hom osexual behaviors” an d “acts o f sodom y” dictated by th e official ideological attitude o f the epoch in w hich th ey were w ritten. W e w ould lo o k in vain for descriptions o f feelings, b u t th a t does n o t m ean th a t those feelings did n o t exist! In w estern Europe, th e feelings even fou n d fit­

tin g descriptions. To th e skeptics I dedicate the w ords fro m C hristopher Marlowe’s Edward I I (1594) - in the op en in g lines o f th e play G aveston is reading the letter fro m the king:

My father is deceased. Com e, Gaveston, A n d share the kingdom w ith thy dearest friend.’

Ah! w ords th at m ake m e surfeit w ith delight:

W hat greater bliss can hap to Gaveston Than live an d be the favourite of a king!

Sweet prince, I come! these, these thy am orous lines M ight have enforced m e to have swam from France, And, like L eander gasped upon the sand,

So th o u w ouldst smile, an d take m e in thine arm s.34

The on ly exam ple o f O ld Polish literatu re I k n o w describ in g a h o m o sex u al (perhaps?) experience is th e song b y A ndrzej K rzycki A d D antiscum de amore suo:

H eu m ihi, quam m iser est parili qui fervet amore Et tam en hic fru ctu sem per am oris eget, Sed m iseri sortem superat qui solus am abit Et sua spernuntur m unera, forma, preces.

Perditus, infelix h orum que m iserrim us ille est, Q ui tacet et tacito cogitur igne m ori.

U ltim a sors haec est nostri, Dantisce, furoris, Nam taceo et tacito cogor in igne m ori.35

[Woe to me, how w retched is the one w ho loves w ith equal love/ But lacks the fru it o f love/ Yet m ore w retched he w ho loves alone/ A nd spurned are his gifts, his pleas an d form ./ But lost, cursed and m ore w retched/ Is he w ho is silent an d dying in silent fire./ This last fate, Dantisce, is th at o f m y folly,/ For I am silent and dying in silent fire.]

H ere is h o w P io tr U rbański speculates a b o u t th e m e a n in g o f th e above lines:

C ould the reference to the fruitless (childless) - even if requited - love be related to the w eak­

ness for boys ascribed to the future prim ate? This confession is preceded by a passage w hich

See J. Boswell, Christianity, Sexual Tolerance, and H om osexuality^, 39-41. See Boswell for m ore examples and bibliographical data.

C hristopher M arlowe, E d w a rd II, CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform , 2009, 11.

Q u o ted after: I. Lew andowski, Antologia poezji łacińskiej w Polsce, Renesans,

W ydawnictw o Naukowe U A M , Poznań, 1996, 128. I am n ot referring to Krzycki’s other hom oerotic L atin poems because o f their uncertain authorship.

33

35

seems a paraphrase of the fam ous anacreontic verse devoted to the suffering due to unrequited love (l. 3-4), next there appears a m ention o f an even greater suffering, about love w hich has to rem ain hidden, unarticulated, w hich dare n ot speak its name.36

1 fo u n d tw o p o em s w h ich invite a q u eer/g ay read in g in “P łodny je s t św iat w ystępku.”

Antologia libertyńskiejpoezji erotycznej X V I II wieku. These are, how ever, o f a v ery differ­

e n t register. The first o f th e p o em s is an a n o n im o u s com plaint: “U skarżanie się w ydanej za m ą ż dam y a w sw oim żą d a n iu om ylonym , czyli D esperacja” [A C o m p lain t b y a Lady G iven Away in M arriage, o r D esp eratio n ]:

Ej, jakże się nie frasować, kiedym oszukana.

Dopiero widzę, co to w m ym m ężu za odm iana:

Nic nie umie, nic nie ruszy, leży jak przy gnoju.

A ż on widzę arm afrodyt. Baba w m ęskim stroju.

Parobeczek o d przęślicy. D arm o m nie nim zwiedli;

Dziurę dziurą chcą zatkać, nie kata-ż bo zjedli.

Poszłam ci ja po niewoli o d ojca za niego;

Będę krzyczeć, będę wołać niech m i co poradzą, Albo z dobrym m oderunkiem chłopca m i dodadzą.

[Ay, how am 1 not to fret, w hen 1’ve been deceived./ Only now 1 see that m y husband is different/

Doesn’t know anything, doesn’t do anything, lies next to m e as if next to a pile of m anure/ Then 1 see he’s a herm aphrodite. A lady in m an’s clothing./ A servant for the spinning wheel/ They w ant to stop a hole with a hole/ My father m ade m e m arry him against m y will/ 1 will scream, 1 will call, 1 will plead, maybe they will help m e/ O r give m e another boy who’s better endowed.]37 W as th is “h e rm a p h ro d ite ” an effem inate, im p o te n t m an o r w as he really a biological h erm ap h ro d ite? O r p erh ap s he w as n o t “endow ed” w ell e n o u g h to satisfy th e w o m an ’s appetite? O r is th is sim ply a ro u n d a b o u t w ay o f saying th a t th e m an p referred his ow n sex? Sim ilar do u b ts arise after re a d in g “T rafność spow iednika” [“The C on fesso r’s A pt G uess”] b y M arcin M olski (1752-1822). A y o u n g m a n confesses th a t he has sin n ed w ith a girl, b u t “lang u o ro u s w ith d rin k he can’t rem e m b e r fro m w h ich e n d .” The p rie st asks:

“Powiedz m i tylko, jeśli wielką rozkosz czułeś, G dy tym jadem piekielnym duszę twoję trułeś?”

“Pierwszy raz, ojcze, na m oje sumienie, Tak wielkie zmysłom czułem poruszenie.”

Tu karm elita właśnie jakby ożył,

“Ach, już wiem! - rzecze - z tyłuś ją chędożył.”

[“Tell m e only if you felt great delight,/ W hen you were poisoning your soul w ith that venom?”/

“1t is the first time, to m y conscience, father,/ th at 1 felt such rapture of m y senses.”/ At th at m o ­ m en t the Carmelite becam e very anim ated,/ “Oh, 1 know now, you h ad her from the back.”]38

38

P. Urbański, “Z akazana p r z y ja ź ń ^ ,” 559.

“Płodny jes t św iat występku. "Antologia libertyńskiej poezji erotycznej X V I I I wieku, ed. W. Nawrocki, W ydawnictw o W S P w Kielcach, P iotrków Trybunalski. 1996, 27.

Ibid. 60.

A n inquisitive re a d e r could ask: w hy does th e confessor b eco m e so an im a te d all o f a sudden? A nd w h erefro m his know ledge o f th e pleasures d raw n fro m a n o n -m issio n a ry position? In th e sam e an th o lo g y references ap p ear to Sodom y, b u t th o se are an allusion to sin against a bro ad ly u n d e rs to o d Sixth C o m m a n d m e n t.39 If th e w o rld is “h eavy w ith sin” is th a t sin alm o st exclusively heterosexual? N eith er w ill w e find d escrip tio n s o f the m ale b o d y in O ld Polish literature. If m en are show n it is in th e role o f th e k n ig h t-h ero (virtus) o r - v ery often -p a r a d in g th e ir crudeness an d vulgarity: “Służyły w iernie, pó k i pański długi / kuś porzebow ał ich pilnej usługi” [They served loyally as long as th e m aster’s lo n g / cock n e e d e d th e ir u rg e n t service”]40; Trem becki, an exam ple o f E n lig h ten m en t, describes a “k n ig h t-fo rn ic a to r” w ho h ad “a curly h air up his ass.”41 I w ill spare th e R eader m o re drastic exam ples. For c o n tra st I w ill again q u o te O ld isw o rth w ritin g a b o u t Bacon:

Tell us, ô tell us, yee th at h ad the grace So pure an Angel daily to embrace, Tell us the Heav’nlynesse o f those Delights W herew ith hee fed your Heerings, & your Sights.42

O n e could q u o te h u n d re d s o f sim ilar exam ples fro m th e w estern cu ltu ral sphere, suffice it to reach for any o f a n u m b e r o f th em atic anthologies.43

H o w m a n y o f such texts, how ever, did n o t survive b ecause th e y w ere resolutely destroyed, an d even m o re so, h ow m an y w ere nev er w ritten because o f self-censorship?

H ow m an y o f those w ere disguised by th e authors them selves an d h ow m an y w ere falsified later? In th e English tran slatio n o f C ornelius N epos th e sentence: “L audi in C reta du citu r adulescentulis q u am p lu rim o s h abuisse am atores” (“O n C rete it is co n sid ered laudable for a y o u n g m a n to have m an y [male] lovers”) w as conveyed as: “O n C rete it is co n sid ­ ered laudable w h en y o u n g m en engage in m an y rom ances.” It is w o rth recalling th a t in th e literatu re o f th e M iddle Ages A lcibiades w as usually rep resen ted as S ocrates’ fem ale co m p an io n ; th e son o f M ichelangelo’s n e p h e w changed th e p ro n o u n ’s in M ichelangelo’s p oem s; an d even in th e 20*^ ce n tu ry H afez’s ghazals w ere tra n sc rib e d in a heterosexual fashion.44 O n e could q u o te m a n y such exam ples.

I w ould like to m en tio n a category w ith is entirely unscientific and subjective, b u t w hich has an en orm ous im pact on th e strategies o f hom osexual read in g o f old texts: namely, in tu itio n and in stin ct th a t I like to call a “textual gaydar.”45 I believe th a t a gay reader m ay

Ibid., 164, “Skarga na księży do J.W . księdza biskupa Sierakowskiego.

J.A .M orsztyn, Paszport kurwom z Zamościa. The poem is about the fate o f girls from the harem o fJa n “Sobiepan” Zamoyski after the dignitary’s wedding.

S. Trem becki, “O d a do Priapa,’” quoted after: Płodny jes t św iat w w ystęp ku ^, 69.

Q u o ted after: P H am m ond, Figuring Sex between M e n ^ , 34.

See for example: The Penguin Book o f Homosexual Verse, ed. S. C oote, A. Lane, L ondon, 1983.

See J. Boswell, Christianity, Sexual Tolerance, and H om osexuality^, 29-31.

The com bination o f the words “gay’” and “radar’” is used in the lesbian and gay com m unity to refer to the intuitive ability to identify lesbians and gays.

40

41

42

44

45

have th e ability to sense textual tensions and b e able to rem ove textual m asks, to reveal passages w ritten in invisible ink, to read betw een the lines,46 be sensitive to traces o f his own experience, th o u g h w ro n g decodings an d overinterpretation are a genuine risk here. I’m afraid th a t a heterosexual reader can n o t fully notice those details, subtleties, an d tensions;

he sim ply lacks the experience o f oppression an d th e experience o f hid in g his sexuality k n o w n so w ell by lesbians and gays, lacks th e sensitivity to sexual codes and secret signs h id d en in th e texts. U sually he also does n o t kn o w th a t m anifestations o f extrem e aggres­

sion tow ard hom osexuality often conceal the w riter’s ow n repressed and h id d en desires.

O bviously th is type o f in tu itio n c a n n o t serve as an in terp re tativ e tool,47 b u t it can be an im p o rta n t in d icatio n w h ere to search, w here to dig deeper, if n o t always. M any old texts play w ith th e reader, vacillating betw een explicit statem en t a n d m ere suggestion, engaging w ith in stab ility o f m ean in g s, all o f w h ic h strategies m ay serve as a safe w ay o f expressing h o m o sex u al desire. O n e can see it clearly in Shakespeare’s so n n e t XX:

Till Nature, as she w rought thee, fell a-doting, A nd by addition m e of thee defeated, By adding one thing to m y purpose nothing.

But since she prick’d thee out for wom en’s pleasure, M ine be thy love and thy love’s use their treasure.48

A pparently all is clear: th e “on e th in g ” a d d ed b y n a tu re is to th e speaker’s “p u rp o s e n o th ­ in g .” The in te rp re ta tio n becom es m o re com plicated, how ever, w h e n w e realize th a t in E lizabethan E nglish “n o th in g ” w as also a colloquial te rm for fem ale genitalia.49 In this sense th e “one th in g ad d e d ” w h ich n a tu re endow ed th e y o u n g m an w ith , or penis, w ould serve th e subject th e sam e p u rp o s e as fem ale organs (p ro d u cin g pleasure). Is th is a w in k to th e reader? A concept? The p ro b lem is th a t literary allusions a n d rh e to ric a l figures w ill in n o w ay tran slate into th e im age o f histo rical an d social reality. They w ill n o t tell us w h at th e n o n -lite ra ry m o tiv atio n b e h in d th e sonnets w as, n o r w h e th e r O ld isw o rth w as in love w ith B acon. G erm an Ritz’s rep eated ly voiced th e po stu late th a t w e stu d y the poetics o f h o m o sex u al texts an d th e co n stru c tio n o f th e ir au th o rs on th e basis o f th e w orks them selves,50 w ith th e om ission o f th e w riters’ bio g rap h ies a n d o f th e genesis o f

A w hole register o f camouflaged expressions o f homosexual desire is quoted by B. Sm ith in Homosexual D e sire^ M any examples are also quoted by P. H am m o n d in Figuring Sex between M e n ^ ., 5-61.

A n example o f a particularly controversial reading o f an O ld Polish text is the idea by M arian Pankowski (a w riter sensitive to hom osexual m atters) to treat Jan K ochanow ski’s

“G adka” as “a p ortrait o f a male hom osexual’s body” (!), w hen the real solution to the puzzle is “m usket.” See M . Pankowski, “Polska poezja nieokrzesana (próba określenia zjawiska),” Teksty, 1978, no 4(40), 45.

W illiam Shakespeare, Complete Works, H enry Pordes, L ondon, 1983, 1201.

A fter P H am m ond, Figuring Sex between M e n ^ , 16; see also the following edition o f Shakespeare’s sonnets: Shakespeare’s Sonnets, ed. K. D uncan-Jones, L ondon, 1997, 151.

G erm an Ritz, N ić w labiryncie pożądania, trans. B. D rąg, A. Kopacki, M . Łukaszewicz, W ied za Powszechna, Warsaw, 2002, 54.

46

48

50

th e ir w orks, is o f little help to m e, for th e archeology o f gay studies is in terested p rim arily in w h a t Ritz w ants to exclude.

W ritin g th e h is to ry o f h o m o sex u ality b ased on old texts often m ean s gro p in g in th e dark. There exists a slight possibility, how ever, th a t th e m eager “can n o n ” o f O ld Polish h o m o sex u al behaviors sketched o u t at th e b e g in n in g o f th is article is h ig h ly incom plete.

A n d anyway, old h is to ry o f h o m o sex u ality is above all a h is to ry o f silence or speaking w ith so m eb o d y else’s voice. T hen again, p erh ap s th e scholars o f O ld Polish culture, b e ­ g in n in g w ith B rü ck n er a n d e n d in g w ith Tazbir did n o t search carefully en o u g h , did n o t a tten d to th e texts w ith a qu eer sensitivity (because th e y could n o t, w o u ld no t, o r d id n o t k n o w how ). In th e end, th ey only fo u n d th e m o s t b latan t th in g s an d th re w th e m in th e category o f “black erotics a n d deviation”: “th e m an h a d relations w ith h im ‘in posticum , a n d gave h im th e V enus’s curse in p o stico .” In no w ay do I w a n t to q uestion th e au th o rity o f th e b rillia n t scholars w hose w o rk I co n tin u e to d raw on as a stu d e n t o f old culture, b u t I w an t to suggest th a t it is w o rth lo o k in g fro m a different histo rical an d ideological perspective at th e p h e n o m e n a th ey are describing.

A n o th e r obstacle in such research is th e fact th a t specialists in old literatu re and cu ltu re often te n d to be conservative, p atriarch al, an d deeply tra d itio n a list in th e ir view s a n d con seq u en tly show a m u c h g reater te n d en c y to w ard ho m o p h o b ia. There are excep­

tio n s, o f course. I p erso n ally k n o w scholars o f O ld Polish culture w ho are lesbian and gay, an d th e level o f openness, tolerance, an d sensitivity to th e p ro b lem o f h o m o sex u al­

ity am o n g m an y o f m y O ld Polish scholar frien d s could be th e source o f envy to m an y a p o ststru ctu ralist. The w ritin g o f old epochs is, how ever, deeply ro o te d in religion and as such often interests individuals w ho find in it a reflection o f th e ir ow n, often o rthodox, o p in io n s an d philosophy.51

It has been said often e n o u g h th a t in th e co n te m p o ra ry Polish rig h t-w in g n atio n alist discourse, th e place o f th e p re-w ar Jew is tak en by lesbians an d gays. This w ay o f th in k in g is deeply ro o te d in history. As Bosw ell observes,

the fate of Jews and gay people has been alm ost identical throughout European history, from early C hristian hostility to exterm ination in concentration c a m p s ^ th e same periods of Euro­

pean history w hich could not m ake room for Jewish distinctiveness reacted violently against sexual nonconform ity; the same countries w hich insisted on religious uniform ity im posed m ajority standards o f sexual conduct.”52

T here is one difference, how ever; in th e case o f h o m o sex u al p erso n s, th ere are, no gay grandparents w ho rem em ber the pogrom s, no gay exile literature, to rem ind the living o f the fate of the dead, no liturgical com m em orations o f tim es o f crisis an d suffering. Relatively

Recently attem pts have been m ade to look at O ld Polish culture from a different perspective, for example: D. Śnieżko, “Jak czytało staropolskie ciało. Somatyczne doświadczenia lektury,” Teksty Drugie, 2006, no 6 (102); and M . W ilk, “C am p w literaturze staropolskiej,” Kampania. Zjawisko campu we współczesnej kulturze, ed. P Oczko, W ydawnictw o Krytyki Politycznej, Warszawa, 2008.

J. Boswell, Christianity, Sexual Tolerance, and H o m o se xu a lity., 15-6.

51

fe w gay people today are aware o f the great variety o f positions in which tim e has placed their kind, an d in previous societies alm ost none seem to have h ad such awareness.”53

The h isto ry o f (the traces of) h o m o sex u al p erso n s in P oland, o r even m o re m odestly, th e h is to ry of th e ir rep resen tatio n , is still w aitin g to b e research ed an d w ritte n .54 W e are still w aiting for th e h is to ry o f g roups w ho w ere m arginalized, repressed, oppressed, and excluded fro m th e d o m in a n t d iscourse (h isto ry fro m below ).55 I w ill n o t be su rp rised to h ear I am advocating “w ritin g h isto ry fro m th e b ack” (after all, in P oland w e have already h eard th e use o f th e te rm “m e n s tru a l literatu re”); a n d I w ill n o t b e su rp rised to h e a r n o th in g . E xcellent texts on th e subject exist elsew here in th e w o rld ,56 an d th o se could serve us as a m odel. W hile this gap is slowly b e in g filled in relatio n to 19th cen tu ry an d con tem p o rary Polish culture,57 th e O ld Polish p erio d is still terra incognita. Obviously, th is is a p ro ject th a t w ould req u ire m o re th a n on e researcher: one w ould n eed to p e r­

fo rm a q u eer re -re a d in g o f letters, jo u rn a ls, c o u rt d o cu m en ts, folk sources, an d h o m e chronicles o f th e nobility. O n e w o u ld also n e e d to lo o k at ways in w h ich hom o sex u ality w as in scrib ed in th e g eneral - if n o t u n ifo rm an d historically v aried - m odels o f O ld Polish affect, in th e cru d e k n ig h tly sensuality an d sexuality, an d in histo rical conceptions o f g en d er roles in P oland.58 This is th e naïve research p ro p o sal I w ish to m ake h ere an d to declare m y w illingness to p articip ate in it.

Translation: K rystyna M a zu r

53 Ibid., 17., italics mine.

54 O nly one laconic text is available on this subject: a few pages long essay by

A. Selerowicz, “Leksykon kochających inaczej. Fakty, daty, zjawiska,” Softpress, Poznań, 1994, 13-18.

55 I am paraphrasing Ew a D om ańska’s “Historiografia insurekcyjna,” Literatura na świecie, 2008, no 1-2, 360.

56 I wiU m ention b u t a few: J. BosweU, Same-Sex Unions in Pre-Modern Europe, ViUard Books, N ew York 1994; G. H ekm a, Homoseksualiteit in Nederland van 1730 tot de moderne tijd, M eulenhoff, A m sterdam 2004; The Pursuit o f Sodomy. M ale Homosexuality in Renaissance and Enlightenm ent Europe, ed. by G. Kent, G. H ekm a, H arrington, Park Press, N ew York, 1989; A. Bray, Homosexuality in Renaissance England, Colum bia University Press, N ew York, 1995; Hidden From History, ed. by M .B. D uberm an, M . Vicinus, G. Chauncey, N ew A m erican Library, N ew York 1989. A comprehensive bibliography m ay be found at: http://w w w .fordham .edu/halsall/pw h/gayhistbib.htm l 57 See for example, K. Tomasik, Homobiografie. Pisarki ipisarze polscy X I X I X X wieku,

W ydawnictw o Krytyki Politycznej, W arszawa, 2008.

58 See, for example, the quoted works by Z Kuchowicz; T Chrzanow ski, “Ciało sarmackie,”

Teksty, 1997, no 2; A. W olan, “Sarmacki eros,” Dziś. Przegląd społeczny. 1993, no 8;

W. Nawrocki, “L ibertyńska prowokacja moralna: poezja ostrych kodów erotycznych, in:

Płodny jest św iat w y stęp k u ^, 7-24.