Rating: 
Summary: Historical same sex love companion.
Review: Acceptance of homosexuality is already a rich source of heated talk, but discussion on gay marriage certainly does not help in dampening spirits. To bring some new perspective to the possible sanctioning of gay unions, historian John Boswell tried to look for evidence of same sex blessed unions in the early European middle ages. Certainly homosexuality was viewed quite differently in earlier times and Christian faith condemned it rather late, somewhat simultaneously with the advent of celibacy in the clergy. In this book, Mr. Boswell presents us his findings and comments. Indeed there is some serious evidence that same sex union were at least more than tolerated a millenium ago. The book is thus an interesting read and helps us consider in a different light some specious arguments presented today to deny civil recognition for homosexual unions. Unfortunately, the book suffers from wanting to say more than what the findings warrant. A pity since the mere fact of finding evidence for same sex unions is already quite telling even if it is not clear in some cases whether it was only a special friendship recognition or a bona fide carnal union recognition. Perhaps the haste at which the book was written and edited explains this, since Mr. Boswell was sick and died around the time of publication. That haste might be deduced from the fact that 25% of the book are notes, and the feeling that ones get upon finishing it that the book could have been at least 50 pages shorter. Still, a convincing case for getting out of today's conventional parameters for marriage is hinted by this book: clearly Mr. Boswell shows us that marriage and homosexuality were not that contrary centuries ago, and did not hinder the development of Western Civilization. And I might add, this book makes us wonder where Mr. Boswell's desire to chart new path of historical research would have lead him, and with what findings he would have regaled us. Not to mention how much stronger the book could have been with a tighter editing and criticism.
Rating: 
Summary: Read this NOW!!
Review: After reading this fine book, I wished that there was some way I could thank Boswell for such a revelation. Knowing that this would be impossible since he passed away, there is no way to thank him, but simply to praise his work, and tell other people about it. This study in same-sex unions performed throughout premodern European history debunks the notiont that marriage was only performed between a male and a female. The book presents astounding facts and information that has been suppressed, or misinterpreted by homophobe bias. In the appendices of the book, there are actual transcriptions of the same-sex marriage ceremonies used, in the vernacular, and translated by Boswell into English. This study was made all the more fascinating by the wealth of footnotes. When Boswell came across an ambiguous word that could mean many things in different languages, he includes that specific word written in its own language in the text. The appearance of these arcane languages in the text were beautiful, and one could call them "eye candy." There was writing from ancient Greece, some Slavic languages, and Hebrew. This novel is a major contribution to European history, and history in general, and being a college student and a future professional historian myself, I am glad to know that Boswell's presence graced the field of history, and has brought the craft of history to new heights.
Rating:
Summary: Thoughtful authorship, profound implications
Review: At the very least, Boswell deserves credit for bringing to light centuries worth of church documents some people would probably prefer to ignore or even deny the existence of. This work is scholarly and includes a huge amount of notes in their original languages. Anyone interested can read for themselves and make their own translations. The reader should fully digest Boswell's careful explanation of the immense differences between ancient and modern conceptions of and formulations of "marriage", "friendship" and "romantic love". Boswell also includes some of the ceremonies themselves. Many are remarkable for their beauty and power. If you are at all religious, this book will help you in your search to reach a humane, compassionate understanding of the beauty of all the rich permutations of love our Creator has given us.
Rating:
Summary: ABOUT MORE THAN ONLY SAME-SEX UNIONS
Review: Boswell's book should be read by everyone interested in some kind of "fixed union", even heterosexuals who want to be married by the Church. Some very interesting insights to all "unions". If you're like me, you'll want to abolish or redefine "marriage" in the 21st century.
Rating:
Summary: Not always opposites attract
Review: Friends of mine who had been familiar with Boswell's first book, 'Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality', from its initial publication in 1980 waited impatiently for the follow-up volume. In the end, it took fourteen years to produce, and sadly, did not live up the expectations that had been given it.Firstly, it did not in fact reveal (if such places exist, the not-always-so-hidden charge behind the disappointment) communities that had continued the practice of tolerance to same-sex couples through the last millenium within the structures of Christendom. For part of the book he covers old ground, talking about the milieu of the Greco-Roman world, and talks about the development of the idea of marriage and liturgical practices for that. He then proceeds to give examples of liturgies which, Boswell claims, are proof that the church did recognise and bless same-sex unions. This claim is still debated, as there is no blantant 'I now pronounce you husband and husband (or wife and wife)' kinds of statements or liturgies here, but rather testimony to friendship, companionship, communal support, of a sort that is ambiguous. While this book is important for liturgical forms and narrative discussion (although the narratives can be reinterpreted as something different from Boswell's), it failed to deliver the knock-out punch readers of the first book had been waiting for, i.e., conclusive proof the church was up to no good. Boswell does make some points worthy of attention in the debate, such as, 'The extent of early Christian hostility to same-sex eroticism has been exaggerated by modern Christians, who tend to overlook comparable Christian strictures against divorce or other common aspects of modern life also condemned by the early church, while focusing their energy and moral outrage on this particular issue.' Boswell is interesting but far from satisfying on either side of the debate. So, after providing us with some historical framework, we must move on to more explicitly theological discussions. Boswell's contribution is an important one, in that it shows that this has been an issue with varying degrees of acceptance and controversy throughout the life of the church, and the history of society in general. It does not, however, settle anything, or satisfy either side -- it is rather more grist for the mill for both sides. An important book, but not definitive by any means. Unfortunately, Boswell died not long after the publication of this volume, and so further clarifications, or any unpublished research of sensitive nature, will not be forthcoming.
Rating:
Summary: Wonderful Scholarship
Review: I couldn't disagree more with claims that this book is dry. As a student planning to become a historian focusing on homosexual history (one that is interested in the pre-1869 "gay identities" that social constructionists like to downplay), I thought this book was insightful, interesting, and an easy read. The field of gay history needs more scholars like the late Boswell.
Rating: 
Summary: A fantastic misreading of history
Review: I find it amazing that so many readers think that Boswell, may he rest in peace, has discovered that in fact the early church actually blessed same sex unions. THis book, combined with his "Christianity, Social Tolorance, and Homosexuality", has done more to promote the legitimacy of homosexuality in theological terms than any other other, with Spong's half-baked attempts coming in a close second. Please understand that I am not trying to bash gays or gays who are living the CHristian life. It is only that this sort of book misrepresents that tradition of the Church- east and west. Read Boswell, by all means. But also read critiques. One very useful and kind critique is found in Marva Dawn's "Sexual Character" which goes into great detail about the scholarship of Boswell. I must say that the question is so very important to the Church and society and the Church should not be vindictive or loose withthe facts- but neither should those who disagree with the Tradition. THere are several thorough reviews of Boswell's books at First THings so I won't repeat what is written there. However, I would suggest that we all need to be careful in reading into texts and history what would make us feel better about ourselves. Orthodox and heretic both do this, and it is exactly why we need to listen carefully to all sides as dispassionately as possible.
Rating:
Summary: Thought provoking enlightenment
Review: I have now read this book twice and both times I find myself looking at great scholarship. However, there is something missing. Boswell elucidates marriage history extraordinarily well, and his citations to same-sex unions are remarkable. There was no silver bullet that clearly and convincingly ties the same sex ceremonies he cites to the kind of same-sex relationship that parallels heterosexual marriage. We must remember that the concepts of homosexual and heterosexual did not exist in pre-modern Europe. They are a product of hte 19th century. Nonetheless, Bosell's scholarship is a delight to read, and raises excellent questions about our past.
Rating:
Summary: Thought provoking enlightenment
Review: I have now read this book twice and both times I find myself looking at great scholarship. However, there is something missing. Boswell elucidates marriage history extraordinarily well, and his citations to same-sex unions are remarkable. There was no silver bullet that clearly and convincingly ties the same sex ceremonies he cites to the kind of same-sex relationship that parallels heterosexual marriage. We must remember that the concepts of homosexual and heterosexual did not exist in pre-modern Europe. They are a product of hte 19th century. Nonetheless, Bosell's scholarship is a delight to read, and raises excellent questions about our past.
Rating: 
Summary: Anything will pass for scholarship
Review: In this work, Boswell argues that rituals for the binding of two males (in Eastern Christendom) between the 12th and 16th centuries is evidence of the support for same-sex marriages in earlier Christianity. This is yet another example of a scholar misinterpreting historical facts in order to serve an agenda.
Robert L. Wilken, Professor of the History of Christianity at the University of Virginia, wrote an excellent critique of Boswell's work. The article is entitled "Procrustean marriage beds" and is found in Vol. 121 of Commonweal, 09-09-1994, pp 24. It is also on the web (do a google/yahoo search).
Here's an excerpt:
On an initial reading these rituals appear similar to marriage ceremonies. They refer to the joining of two people in life-long relationship, they speak of a bond of peace and love and oneness of mind, they include ritual actions that parallel those of marriage ceremonies. Yet there are certain features of the rituals that are unlike marriage ceremonies. For example, the texts make it clear that the relation of the participants is spiritual not carnal ("by faith and spiritually"), there is no mention of the marriage bed, the term "marriage" is not used (as it is in marriage rites), the biblical readings are different from those used in marriage ceremonies, several of the rites, significantly, indicate that the relationship is that of an "elder" to a "younger," and the persons joined in the ceremonies are males.
Wilken then continues with specific examples. It turns out that, as Wilken states, "What these rituals solemnize is not 'gay marriages' but a form of ritualized friendship between males that had been practiced in the Eastern Mediterranean since the time of Homer." And, of course, Wilken proceeds to support this and gives reason for why this was done. His article is an excellent read.
For those Christians who promote the affirmation of homosexual practice, this book is too good to be true. Alas, it turns out that such is the case.
|
