Views Read Edit View history. If it was, do we have any reason to think that other people in society looked upon these kinds of marriages as anything like normative heterosexual marriage? Mar 26, Paul rated it it was ok Shelves: reviewednon-art-photohistory.
Noting that same-sex unions have been ethnographically and historically recorded in Africa, Asia and the Americas, he remarks that there is no reason why they should not have been found in Europe.
He is particularly critical of Boswell's use of "same-sex unions" as a translation of terms like adelphopoiesisbelieving that this was an "ill-chosen and dangerously slippery term" because it has been widely interpreted in the media as an innuendo for "gay marriage" and therefore lacks neutrality.
Mendelsohn argued that Boswell failed to establish his two basic contentions: that adelphopoiesis literally "creation of brothers" was a ceremony akin to marriage rather than a celebration of a ritualized friendship, probably intended for the reconciliation of heads of households, as argued by previous scholars who had considered the matter such as Giovanni Tamassia and Paul Koschakerand that homosexual lovers were commonly characterized in the Classical and early Medieval same sex unions in pre-modern europe john boswell in Lafayette as "brothers".
Archived from the original on May 7, Sign in using your Kirkus account Sign in Keep me logged in.
Mar 05, John David rated it really liked it Shelves: modern-historysociologyreligionmedieval-or-renaissaice-history. May 25, Ethan rated it really liked it Shelves: ownedlgbtreligionhistory. I still believe that the government should play no part in marriage; but, I also see that marriage same sex unions in pre-modern europe john boswell in Lafayette or straight is a spiritual union between to loving, committed human beings, and has been historically recognized by the catholic church and orthodox sects.
Already have an account?
He is particularly critical of Boswell's use of "same-sex unions" as a translation of terms like adelphopoiesis , believing that this was an "ill-chosen and dangerously slippery term" because it has been widely interpreted in the media as an innuendo for "gay marriage" and therefore lacks neutrality.
To view it, click here. They may even have occasionally provided cover for homosexual acts. Otherwise, this book is excellent. Very academic but provides great historical insight for same gender marriage. In the Introduction, Boswell highlights the subjectivity of marital unions, which differ between societies in their function and purpose.