Thursday, April 3, 2014

Was Richard the Lionheart a Homosexual?

by Rosanne Lortz

I still remember watching it for the first time. The Lion in Winter. The first historical piece that I encountered which asserted that Richard the Lionheart was a homosexual.

Naturally, I could hardly help wondering whether the portrayal was accurate. What evidence did the playwright and screenwriter James Goldman have for depicting Richard in this manner? Why had none of the history books I had read during my teenage years mentioned it?

Doing a little research, I discovered that no one had seriously mooted the idea that Richard the Lionheart was a homosexual up until the middle of the twentieth century. At this time a case for Richard's homosexuality was made based on these three points:

  1. He had no children (except for possibly one illegitimate son);
  2. He didn't seem very interested in getting married (deserting his wife Berengaria right after they tied the knot);
  3. In his early days, he had a very close relationship with Philip Augustus of France. 

When I saw these three points, I had to wonder if the case they made for Richard’s homosexuality was actually a compelling one. I researched a little more….

The first fact, that Richard had no children, is neither here nor there. It does not take a genius to think of other reasons for childlessness than being a homosexual. And in the medieval world, a homosexual king would have likely also been married (to a woman) and fathered children (the kings Edward II and James I come to mind), because no matter what one’s sexual proclivities were, producing an heir and preserving dynastic succession was paramount.

The second assertion, that Richard wasn’t very interested in marriage or in Berengaria, is, if you believe the well-respected novelist Sharon Kay Penman, surprisingly incorrect. In an interview with the Historical Novel Society, Penman said:
Another myth is that Richard was reluctant to wed Berengaria and Eleanor had to push him into it; he was actually the one who negotiated the marriage with Berengaria’s father…. I was surprised to discover that Richard went to some trouble to have her with him during their time in the Holy Land.
Although their marriage does not appear to have been one of the world’s greatest love matches, there is no evidence of “reluctance to marry” on Richard’s part, a fact which has been used to bolster the argument for his homosexuality.

Philip Augustus and Richard the Lionheart

The final piece of evidence used to prove Richard’s homosexuality is his relationship with the French king Philip Augustus. One of the most pertinent primary source excerpts says:
And after this peace, Richard the Count of Poitou remained with the king of France against the will of his father; and the king of France was honoring him in such a way that each day they would eat together at one table from one dish, and in the night their bed did not separate them. And because of this exceeding love which appeared between them, the king of England [Henry II] was struck with much astonishment and marveled at this, and being on his guard for himself in the future, sent his messengers frequently to France to recall his son Richard....
So, there you have it. “In the night their bed did not separate them.” But does this text give a homosexual connotation to Richard and Philip sharing a bed? Not really. It seems to be just another way that Philip was honoring Richard. Although my husband would probably object to sharing a bed with another man, we must remember that in the Middle Ages, men (yes, heterosexual men) shared beds all the time.

Some have read into this text that Richard's father Henry is upset about the strange relationship developing between his son Richard and Philip, the King of France. The text clearly shows that he is upset, but it does not seem to be from a fear of homosexual activity. His son Richard is befriending the longtime enemy of England, and Henry is trying to stop them from allying against him.

Judging this quote by the standards of the time it was written in, I think it is fair to say that the author is making no implications, veiled or otherwise, of homosexual relations between Richard and Philip.

So, given what we know about the evidence, was James Goldman within his rights to depict a homosexual relationship between Richard the Lionheart and Philip Augustus? Certainly. His play The Lion in Winter is, after all, a work of historical fiction. But viewers (and readers) must always keep in mind that the historical fiction writer deals with the realm of possibility, and not necessarily the realms of plausibility or probability.

____________________________

Rosanne E. Lortz is the author of two books: I Serve: A Novel of the Black Prince, a historical adventure/romance set during the Hundred Years' War, and Road from the West: Book I of the Chronicles of Tancred, the beginning of a trilogy which takes place during the First Crusade.

You can learn more about Rosanne's books at her Author Website where she also blogs about writing, mothering, and things historical.

12 comments:

  1. Regarding the Philippe Auguste chapter, if the king of France was gay or busexual, It would have been notorious. Philippe well documented tragic second and third marriages prove the contrary. (come to think of it, his first one too). Now it is now because he got married, but because he broke one marraige in favour of the 'other' woman. In short, he chose heterosexual partners not because it was the thing to do but because he loved the person

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, there's really not much primary source evidence pointing to any scandal of this nature surrounding Philip (except for the one piece I cited, which I think doesn't point to anything either unless you read modern notions into the text). Thanks for commenting!

      Delete
  2. Good summary of the arguments! We need to remember that even good historical fiction often tells us more about the age it was written in than the age it describes. Homosexuality became a "hot" topic in the late 20th century and Goldman's film reflected a growing interest in making homosexuality "acceptable."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good point, Helena! Thanks for reading and commenting. :-)

      Delete
  3. Hi Rosanne, really interesting article, and I love your conclusion: 'the historical fiction writer deals with the realm of possibility, and not necessarily the realms of plausibility or probability.'- very quotable!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Very concise and well written piece. Thank you!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for stopping by, Michele!

      Delete
    2. According to the page below linked "Personal servants of the lord might often sleep in the lord's chamber on a portable pallet". Admittedly nobles and Princes were not servants, but I imagine royal bedchambers would generally have been fairly roomy, so sharing a bedroom might not necessarily have involved sharing a bed!

      Delete
  5. I can think of two or thee references to men sharing beds in a Medieval or Renaissance context. In Henry V (I believe you know the play so you may know the reference) Lord Henry Scrope is described as the King's 'bedfellow', and King Edward IV of England is supposed to have been so keen to win over the Lancastrian Duke of Somerset that he went hunting with him and... allowed him to sleep in the same bedchamber,
    It does not seem to have carried any sexual connotations, but rather trust and closeness to the King. Also Kings seem to have had more than one 'bedchamber', perhaps the other being used to meet people, so perhaps this is what was meant?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Excellent example! Thanks for weighing in.

      Delete
  6. Have you read Norah Loft's The Lute-Player? She works with the theory that Richard I was homosexual. It's an interesting read.

    ReplyDelete