|
|
|
|
|
|
been owing to sterility or simply to continencebut it is significant that Richard was not lauded for sexual abstinence. Whereas his father's and brothers' exploits were recorded with pride or blame (depending on the attitude of the recorder), nothing is said about Richard's. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Further, just about Christmas time, while in Sicily on his way to the Holy Land, Richard convened a group of venerable and devout bishops and confessed, in abject penitence, a shameful lust. This confession seems to have distressed the bishops greatly. I find it difficult to believe that, knowing the Angevins as they did, they would have been distressed (or even much surprised) to learn that Richard had a Turkish harem in keeping. I find it equally hard to believe that Richard would have bothered to convene a group to confess such a thing. Only those sins of the flesh regarded as "unnatural" could produce other than automatic penance and absolution. The medieval age deplored the weaknesses of the flesh but was not in the least horrified by them. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On the other hand, there were no male favorites around Richard, neither pretty boys nor dominating men such as troubled the Court of Edward II. Richard did have close male friends. Many were above suspicion; a few may well have been sexual partners. None, however, ever dominated Richard. Thus, the strongest probability is that, although Richard preferred men, he simply was not much interested in sex. Something had to give to make room for the passionate concentration on personal prowess in arms and war in general; apparently it was the sexual drive that was sublimated. From what we know of him, this was also true of Alexander of Macedon. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
An effort has been made to avoid anachronisms in thought, behavior, and physical matters such as clothing and lodging. However, at the distance in time we are from the happenings in this book, accuracy is diffi- |
|
|
|
|
|