homosexuality in islamized turkic states

[arnewise12]

is it true that some turkic states that got islamzed after they got muslims were f*g**ts, I mean not the people but the ruling class, I read that sultan mahmud was a pedofil,, he had a young boy lover, and some seljuks princes were bisexuals and even some ottomans princes were gay, why are they gay, what made them gay, was it becasue they got contact with the greek boylovers, or what, please enlighten me?

[H. İhsan Erkoç]

It's mostly because of the Iranian culture (no offence to the Iranians, but that's true).

[keaganjoelbrewer]

You must keep an open mind when approaching sexuality in history. Sexual distinction such as 'gay', 'straight', 'bisexual' and so on are twentieth century inventions, twentieth century western inventions to be more precise. In the past, people do not seem to have created their entire identities around sexuality as westerners tend to do today. Whether you f_cked boys, girls or both did not really seem to matter, even though the major religions discourage homoerotic relationships. There is a vast corpus of literature on the history of sexuality nowadays, so go look some up.

Also, you must always take stories about the sexuality of past persons with a grain of salt. The accusation of homoerotic relationships was and still is a common political tool to try to taint the reputation of an enemy statesman. I don't know anything about the accusations you mention against Seljuk or Ottoman statespeople, but you must always keep in the back of your mind the possibility that such accusations are simply political propaganda. If so and so historical source says "Sultan Jim had sex with a boy", it will always simply be writing on a page. Without a time machine you can never know for certain.

And anyway, does it really matter if historical people were 'gay', 'bi' or 'straight'? People of any sexual orientation can be good or bad people, people you identify with or people you don't identify with. I personally don't believe that the sexuality of historical figures should have any influence on how we interpret the past, except perhaps for the sake of curiosity.

[Azadan Januspar]

Oct 28, 2008 10:19:26 GMT 3 H. İhsan Erkoç said:

It's mostly because of the Iranian culture (no offence to the Iranians, but that's true).

There's no offense. But that is interesting that as I through my historical studies especially hsitory of literature came to see some points about the history of homosexuality in medieval middle-east. The results I get so far somehow is contraray to what you mentioned (I will yield what I have read or will read comprehensively in the nearest future).

yet I'd like to know your sources about this, somehow the reason for such claim based on the medieval Persian literature which is good matter to study. In addition to the the historcal opposing views of pre and post-conquest Iran about this.

[H. İhsan Erkoç]

Whether you f_cked boys, girls or both did not really seem to matter, even though the major religions discourage homoerotic relationships.

Well, according to Chinese and Islamic sources, the Turks executed people who got involved in homosexual acts (the Mongol Jasaq forbid that too). This means the Turks did really matter that.

There's no offense. But that is interesting that as I through my historical studies especially hsitory of literature came to see some points about the history of homosexuality in medieval middle-east. The results I get so far somehow is contraray to what you mentioned (I will yield what I have read or will read comprehensively in the nearest future).

yet I'd like to know your sources about this, somehow the reason for such claim based on the medieval Persian literature which is good matter to study. In addition to the the historcal opposing views of pre and post-conquest Iran about this.

Unfortunately, I am no expert on Seljuk-Ottoman history nor medieval Iranian culture, so what I know is quite limited. However, I have two examples that come to my mind:

1) In his article about Mavlânâ Jalâla'd-dîn Rûmî, Hüseyin Nihal Atsız published a short poem written in Old Anatolian Turkish from him, where he praises a young boy in a somewhat homosexual way. Here is an online version of the article (in Turkish): www.atsizcilar.com/nihal_atsiz_makaleleri.htm

2) If you have Ibn Fadlân's travel report, you can check it yourself. At the place where he describes the Oghuz Turks, he gives a story about a homosexual Khwârazmian merchant who "trickes" a young Oghuz boy and has intercourse with him. When the Oghuz discover this, they want to kill both according to their custom, but the merchant saves his life by paying them a big ransom; he is also banished from Oghuz territory, which means he is not allowed to make trade with the Oghuz anymore.

[ALTAR]

Simply the answer is The Middle Eastern(Arab, Persian etc.) and Greek Cultures harmful effects on Turkish Dynaties and Ruling Class.

For instance Greeks had a big fame about homosexuality from the ancient periods. It was still going on in Byzantine Period too. After the collapse of Byzantine Empire, It was passed to Ottoman Palace Life.

Especially Janissaries were well-known homosexuals because their marriage was banned by Padishahs. Janissaries were the people who were originally Non-Turk Christians in the Balkans.

[arnewise12]

Well, according to Chinese and Islamic sources, the Turks executed people who got involved in homosexual acts (the Mongol Jasaq forbid that too). This means the Turks did really matter that.

I have read this to, they saw homosexualism as a sin.

But the persians wasnt gay for sure for the beginning it was those greeks that learnd it to them, herodutus wrote that persians didnt have gay people among them until the greeks came, so its not wrong saying the first gay was greek is it,


But in ghaznavid , seljuk and ottoman times, it was the upper class not the comman man that was involved in such things, isnt that right

[Azadan Januspar]

You must keep an open mind when approaching sexuality in history. Sexual distinction such as 'gay', 'straight', 'bisexual' and so on are twentieth century inventions, twentieth century western inventions to be more precise. In the past, people do not seem to have created their entire identities around sexuality as westerners tend to do today. Whether you f_cked boys, girls or both did not really seem to matter, even though the major religions discourage homoerotic relationships. There is a vast corpus of literature on the history of sexuality nowadays, so go look some up.

I don't need to judge this phenomenon but to examine the genuineness of the claim.

Well, according to Chinese and Islamic sources, the Turks executed people who got involved in homosexual acts (the Mongol Jasaq forbid that too). This means the Turks did really matter that.

The Islamic sources as far as I know are the primary source for the vice versa e.g. Tarikh Baihaqi .However I’m not really familiar with Chinese sources in details. And I’m not quite sure about the Mongols and some deeds of Ghengis Khan, I leave it here until I further read about that matter.

Unfortunately, I am no expert on Seljuk-Ottoman history nor medieval Iranian culture, so what I know is quite limited. However, I have two examples that come to my mind:

1) In his article about Mavlânâ Jalâla'd-dîn Rûmî, Hüseyin Nihal Atsız published a short poem written in Old Anatolian Turkish from him, where he praises a young boy in a somewhat homosexual way. Here is an online version of the article (in Turkish): www.atsizcilar.com/nihal_atsiz_makaleleri.htm

2) If you have Ibn Fadlân's travel report, you can check it yourself. At the place where he describes the Oghuz Turks, he gives a story about a homosexual Khwârazmian merchant who "trickes" a young Oghuz boy and has intercourse with him. When the Oghuz discover this, they want to kill both according to their custom, but the merchant saves his life by paying them a big ransom; he is also banished from Oghuz territory, which means he is not allowed to make trade with the Oghuz anymore.

As homosexuality has been a phenomenon amongst all the nations of the world just giving two examples without studying the culture, is quite an inaccurate way to proclaim a fact like this: “It's mostly because of the Iranian culture (no offence to the Iranians, but that's true).”

Simply the answer is The Middle Eastern(Arab, Persian etc.) and Greek Cultures harmful effects on Turkish Dynaties and Ruling Class.

Were you being sensational stating those? They are not right for Iranian culture.
Iranian culture in sense of a culture belonged to the Iranians which is, when it comes to judge, the culture of pre-conquest Iranians has rarely saw this in social aspects of the culture, that is to say there is no reference to its widely practicing in sources available for the pre-conquest Iran(in which the elements of the culture are Iranian). The reason why , mister Altar , could be seen on the reasonable free presence of women in many directions of social life even in military as far as the reign of Sassanians and rational rules on marriage rather than troublesome ones. Needless to say that the prominent presence of women in society always showed sizeable reduction of homosexuality or pedophilia in historical societies.

“For instance Greeks had a big fame about homosexuality from the ancient periods. It was still going on in Byzantine Period too. After the collapse of Byzantine Empire, It was passed to Ottoman Palace Life.”
Historically wrong for this case, the cause of its continuity this time was not from Greece rather than it had its own roots from east.
“Especially Janissaries were well-known homosexuals because their marriage was banned by Padishahs. Janissaries were the people who were originally Non-Turk Christians in the Balkans.”

According to history merchantry, military expeditions provoked homosexuality. It’s not weird to see in communities like Janissaries, whom are banned to marry, get involved in homosexuality.
However the rise of homosexuality understood through the sources at hand in post Arabic conquest Middle East and especially medieval middle east of 10th. And like Ihsan said it can be seen in the literature of these times. (Medieval Middle East culture essentially had notable elements of three main cultures i.e. Arabic, Iranian and Turkic).
Greeks could be considered as a pioneer in this field. “Yet the time of Abassid Caliphate”, according to Dr.Cirus Shamiss, “could be considered a starting point for what we see afterwards in literature”. The provoking events in that era were: establishment of strong system of slavery, movement in translation of Greek phlisophy in Middle East. Therefore “ we see the emersion of style which would be continued in literature of Iran this way of sexual expression was employed before all else by Valeba ben al-Hobab والبه بن الحباب ً” a poet native of Kufa (died 786) and then transferred by Abu Nouvas into Persian poetry”
Then by the beginning of the Medieval era in Middle East the third cultural element appears i.e. Turks.
It is important that before the Ghaznavid then Seljuk domination over Iranian territories by 10th century there were other dynasties of Iranian origin, the most significant of them Samanids, were controlling seprate parts of Iran. i.e. Taherids, Safarids , from their age remained 58 verses and the Samanids from their ages remained 2000 verses, in all of which there’s no implication to homosexual matters. Notable it is to say that from the very beginning of the conquest of Transoxiana by Arab armies the trade of Turkish slaves thrived. This resulted in Turkification of the many middle eastern armies including those of Samanids, after whose fall we observe the establishment of the first Turkish state Ghaznavids. Again according to Dr.Cirus Shamisa Turks practiced homosexuality, which I myself won’t accept until I read more sources on this claim.
The affairs of the founder of Ghaznavid, Sultan Mahmud and his ghulam Aba Najm Ayaz ibn Oymaq long repeated in many poetries of Persian literature. According to Social History of Iran by M.Ravandi there were stories of Amir Yousef amour ( brother of sultan) with his Chamberlain name of Tughrul.

Dr.Safa in his work History of Literature in Iran says: “ The Turkish slaves that were bought in this age (Seljuks) some were employed to satisfy the Emirs and yet some of them were treated violently.”

Not to forget again that Dr.Shamissa again believes that the little presence of women in those ages was a key factor for this behavior ( homosexuality mostly pederasty) which reflected even in the literature.

[ALTAR]

Oct 29, 2008 4:45:24 GMT 3 Azadan Januspar said:

Historically wrong for this case, the cause of its continuity this time was not from Greece rather than it had its own roots from east.

According to history merchantry, military expeditions provoked homosexuality. It’s not weird to see in communities like Janissaries, whom are banned to marry, get involved in homosexuality.

However the rise of homosexuality understood through the sources at hand in post Arabic conquest Middle East and especially medieval middle east of 10th. And like Ihsan said it can be seen in the literature of these times. (Medieval Middle East culture essentially had notable elements of three main cultures i.e. Arabic, Iranian and Turkic).

Greeks could be considered as a pioneer in this field. “Yet the time of Abassid Caliphate”, according to Dr.Cirus Shamiss, “could be considered a starting point for what we see afterwards in literature”. The provoking events in that era were: establishment of strong system of slavery, movement in translation of Greek phlisophy in Middle East. Therefore “ we see the emersion of style which would be continued in literature of Iran this way of sexual expression was employed before all else by Valeba ben al-Hobab والبه بن الحباب ً” a poet native of Kufa (died 786) and then transferred by Abu Nouvas into Persian poetry”
Then by the beginning of the Medieval era in Middle East the third cultural element appears i.e. Turks.
It is important that before the Ghaznavid then Seljuk domination over Iranian territories by 10th century there were other dynasties of Iranian origin, the most significant of them Samanids, were controlling seprate parts of Iran. i.e. Taherids, Safarids , from their age remained 58 verses and the Samanids from their ages remained 2000 verses, in all of which there’s no implication to homosexual matters. Notable it is to say that from the very beginning of the conquest of Transoxiana by Arab armies the trade of Turkish slaves thrived. This resulted in Turkification of the many middle eastern armies including those of Samanids, after whose fall we observe the establishment of the first Turkish state Ghaznavids. Again according to Dr.Cirus Shamisa Turks practiced homosexuality, which I myself won’t accept until I read more sources on this claim.

The affairs of the founder of Ghaznavid, Sultan Mahmud and his ghulam Aba Najm Ayaz ibn Oymaq long repeated in many poetries of Persian literature. According to Social History of Iran by M.Ravandi there were stories of Amir Yousef amour ( brother of sultan) with his Chamberlain name of Tughrul.

Dr.Safa in his work History of Literature in Iran says: “ The Turkish slaves that were bought in this age (Seljuks) some were employed to satisfy the Emirs and yet some of them were treated violently.”

Not to forget again that Dr.Shamissa again believes that the little presence of women in those ages was a key factor for this behavior ( homosexuality mostly pederasty) which reflected even in the literature.

In Islamic Arab Chronicles(Taberi, Cahiz, Ibn-i Khaldun etc.) had many records about the high moral of Turks too. They wrote that they had no tradiitions like practicing homosexuality.

But you are right and I agree with you about the increase of homosexuality after Islamic Conquests of Arabs. However, Byzantines had influenced Ottoman Palace Culture and Lifestyle after the conquest of Istanbul. So that Ottomans had hold both Arab and Byzantine cultural elements together(about homosexuality too).

[H. İhsan Erkoç]

Thank you for the detailed explanations.

The Islamic sources as far as I know are the primary source for the vice versa e.g. Tarikh Baihaqi .However I’m not really familiar with Chinese sources in details. And I’m not quite sure about the Mongols and some deeds of Ghengis Khan, I leave it here until I further read about that matter.

I checked my notes again, could not find any such records from Chinese sources, I seem to have confused it with the executions of adulterers (well my memory isn't perfect) However, I found my note regarding the story given by Ibn Fadlan. He clearly states that the Oghuz considered sodomy as a very big crime and they either executed the ones who committed this crime or banished them from their lands after getting ransom. After this, he describes the story I gave above. Plus, the Jasaq of Činggis Qan clearly bans homosexual acts and gives death punishment to it.

Again according to Dr.Cirus Shamisa Turks practiced homosexuality, which I myself won’t accept until I read more sources on this claim.

Does he give which sources he used?

[Azadan Januspar]

Does he give which sources he used?

I read the book months ago but not thoroughly. The infos i have from the paper I wrote about some personal names and stuff. I will give you the sources of that claim once I get a chance to read it again.