Showing posts with label eunuchs in literature. Show all posts
Showing posts with label eunuchs in literature. Show all posts

Thursday, October 27, 2022

'The Eunuch', a poem by Ralph Chaplin

Here's a poem, "The Eunuch," from the collection Bars and shadows: the prison poems of Ralph Chaplin. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1922.

The Eunuch

(To those who fight on the side of the Powers of Darkness)

ONCE a Eunuch by the palace
In the sunset s fading glow
Felt the soft warm breezes blow ;

Watched the fair girls of the Harem
Idly saunter to and fro.

Saw he beauty young and lavish
Fierce to lure man s every sense
(Grim the Eunuch stood and tense)

Laughingly the sparkling fountain
Mocked his bleak incompetence.

Came the Sultan from his hunting
Flaming with the zest of life ;
(Laid aside were spear and knife)

Came for wine and song and feasting.
Came to seek his fairest wife.

Opened then the marble portals.
Fragrant incense filled the air
(Sandalwood and roses rare),

While the girls with red-lipped languor
Scattered flowers everywhere.
Far away the fabled mountains
(Like some paradise of old)
Glowed with lavender and gold.

Tense the Eunuch stood and silent
Tense and sullen, tense and cold.

Now a quick impotent fury

Lashed him like a bronze-tipped cord.

Sprang he at the youthful lord.
Sprang again with blade all bloody . . .

(Famished lust and dripping sword.)

Night crept on all chill and ghastly.
Jackals trotted forth to bark,
(Murder shuddered, still and stark . .

By the palace ceased the fountain

And the whole grey world grew dark.

trees

Sunday, June 26, 2022

'Down the Coast of Barbary' by Henry Bedford-Jones

If you follow this blog, you may know I'm interested in fictional tropes about eunuchs.

Here's one I just found:

The novelette "Down the Coast of Barbary" by H. Bedford-Jones was published in Argosy, October 21, 1922. pp. 500–537. Read it on PulpMags.org in the flipbook or download the PDF.

On May 3, 2025, I wrote a better version of this material for Medium, so you may want to check it out there.

cover of Argosy magazine October 1921

Chapter 1

A young Captain Patrick Spence is an American stranded penniless in Algiers after a shipwreck and resettled locally next-door to the Dey of Algiers by helpful Englishmen. The place is "a hotbed of intrigue. Spanish armies were holding Oran against the Moors and the land was in turmoil."

In 1730, Spence finds a Punic coin in his villa garden. He brings the Rev. Dr. Shaw, who is from Oxford, to have a look at it.

Spence says: "Shaw, something's happened! Here's one of the consulate negroes on the run!" Bedford-Jones clarifies: "He was a black man. His nearly naked skin glistened with sweat." He is "panting" and speaks "in a chatter of Arabic" that Shaw understands. Shaw leaves with the man.

Two more people arrive at Spence's villa: a thin old man with "a mustache and goatee of grayish black" and "black eyes that blazed like jewels [and] held weird fires in their depths," who is wearing the royal ornament of "the glorious collar of the Golden Fleece." A woman in a silk dress is traveling with him. They stop to say hello. He identifies them as Spaniards, and they tell him he may stay with them in Morocco anytime he likes.

Next, Mulai Ali the Idrisi, described as a Moor, stops by and asks Spence if he knows a man named Ripperda. He says he's spoken to the astrologer of Arzew and their fates are linked. He offers Spence money, power, and a wife. Spence says he doesn't want payment, but "if my help will avail you, I give it freely." The man asks: "Will you go to Morocco with me? Think well! The stars have promised me success." Spence shrugs and says yes. Mulai Ali gives him a box and an unsigned note from someone who identifies himself as a slave and says "I have woven a net to catch Ripperda." Mulai Ali warns Spence to beware of a man in a black burnoose.

Chapter 2

We're informed that the Moorish provincial government is at Arzew, “the ancient Arsenaria, twenty miles east of Oran.” It's under Hassan Bey, a Turk.

We also learn that William Lewis de Ripperda was "born a Roman Catholic baron of Holland," then changed religions opportunistically, becoming ruler of Spain and then Morocco. He seeks "to form a coalition of the Barbary States against Christendom." The consul warns Spence: "unless we destroy Ripperda, this Ripperda will destroy Spain and Christendom!" Mulai Ali says: "Ripperda commands the Moslem armies before Oran; the Dey dare not offend him."

Mulai Ali invites Spence and Shaw on this quest to defeat Ripperda "because you are true men. And through you I can make treaties with England..." They agree to join him, Spence just because he feels like it and Shaw because he expects it will be a voyage through lands of archaeological interest.

Before they leave, Spence sees a man in a black burnoose with “a twisted face that was marked by a purplish birthmark about the right eye.” Soon after, the man jumps him, but other men, including "the consulate negro" with his scimitar, chase him away.

Chapter 3

They ride west, beginning their quest. Spence has sewn the mysterious box in cloth and tied it to his saddle.

Mulai Ali's scheme is to grab the throne while Ripperda is away joining the army at Oran.

They stay at the citadel [kasbah] of Hassan Bey.

We learn that the man in the black burnoose is Gholam Mahmoud, a former Janissary who serves Ripperda. We also learn that the astrologer is an Englishman, captured by Hassan from an English ship and kept by him as a slave. Mulai Ali wants Spence to release the astrologer from Hassan's clutches. Mulai Ali himself will not do it, on the religious principle that he has accepted Hassan's hospitality, but he expects that "a Christian has no scruples."

In the kasbah courtyard, in a pomegranate grove, "a huge black eunuch, half asleep," armed with a scimitar, guards a stone tower. He recognizes Mulai Ali and lets them in the tower where the astrologer is held captive. Inside, Spence is astonished to learn that the astrologer is a beautiful young girl, Elizabeth Parks.

Elizabeth tells Mulai Ali that he is destined to live no more than ten years and die violently if he persists in his way of life. He says that's quite all right with him.

Spence understands that the girl “had seized one slim hope of escaping the harem; how she had worked upon the besotted and superstitious Hassan Bey until he feared her more than he desired her.” Mulai Ali tells Spence that this is the bride he'd promised, should Spence want her, and that the eunuch will help the girl escape with them because the eunuch has hope of improving his own position, perhaps becoming chief eunuch in a sultan's harem.

Spence is to depart with the astrologer that night, and everyone else — Mulai Ali, Dr. Shaw, and the eunuch — will leave the next morning. In part, this is so Mulai Ali can communicate with the eunuch. "I know no Arabic, and I fancy the eunuch has no Spanish," Spence explains.

Chapter 4

While Hassan Bey is debauching at a party, Spence slips away to rescue the astrologer. “...a dark shape arose before him, the starlight glittered on a naked blade, and he recognized the distorted shape of Yimnah, the eunuch,” who is named here for the first time. Spence tells the astrologer that they’ll ride to Tlemcem. There are five in their party, each on their own horse: Yimnah, Elizabeth, Captain Spence, and two Spahis assisting them.

A stranger on horseback shoots at Spence, but Spence shoots back and kills him. He takes a written note off the man's body. The Spahis are able to read it. It suggests that spies are aware of Mulai Ali's location and direction of travel.

They hear a Spanish man singing. “The eunuch, Yimnah, baring his scimitar, slipped from the saddle and glided forward to the masking trees. Then he was back, his thick lips chattering words of fear, his limbs trembling.” Elizabeth translates for Spence: “He says it is the ghost of Barbarossa.” Then they see the Spaniard: the large, red-headed Lazaro de Polan, who says he is sometimes called Barbarroja. He says he is a capable fighter, and he asks Spence to hire him for his quest. Spence agrees.

Chapter 5

Outside their inn in Tlemcen, Spence briefly sees Gholam Mahmoud hiding in the shadows. Spence angrily throttles the innkeeper, demanding that he find Gholam Mahmoud, but the innkeeper denies any knowledge of the man.

Spence and Yimnah share a room. Yimnah snores. Early the next morning, Yimnah hears the call from the minaret and rises for his morning prayers. Spence sees Gholam Mahmoud on the ground and he jumps out the window.

Spence is tied up, and Barbarroja negotiates with Gholam Mahmoud. Gholam Mahmoud's arms are bare, revealing a dolphin tattoo on the right arm. This reveals him as a Janissary in the Thirty-first Orta (cohort), a bodyguard to the sultan. Barbarroja tells him he knows where the little leather casket is, and suggests he might be willing to sell it to Ripperda. Gholam Mahmoud seems nervous that the sherif might know about its existence; Barbarroja says he does not. Gholam Mahmoud says he's on orders from Ripperda "to kill Mulai Ali before he reaches Udjde, and to regain the box of leather." Barbarroja convinces Gholam Mahmoud that they both want to kill Mulai Ali, though for different motivations. He asks Gholam Mahmoud what he wants from their alliance, and Gholam Mahmoud asks for the girl, to which Barbarroja readily agrees.

Returning, Barbarroja trips over Spence's bound body. He cuts him loose. Spence asks if he's seen anyone with a twisted face. Barbarroja says the man left on a horse a half-hour earlier. The narrator indicates to us that Barbarroja is fooling Spence but will receive his comeuppance.

Chapter 6

Spence sends Barbarroja and "a Spahi" to meet Dr. Shaw, and in their absence, he flirts with Mistress Betty, asking her to draw up his horoscope. He tells her he knows that Gholam Mahmoud is near. She replies that if Mulai Ali comes to Morocco, he'll easily take the throne from the current sherif, who is "a mere tool in the hand of Ripperda."

Barbarroja tells Spence that Mulai Ali is waiting for him, so he and the girl ride out of Tlemcen, meeting up with Mulai Ali and Shaw at a rest stop for water and a smoke. Mulai Ali says he's willing to face Gholam Mahmoud alone, and counsels Spence, Shaw, Mistress Betty, "taking Barbarroja and two of the spahis," to seek safety in Udjde. He wants Spence to take the leather box, with its "copies of secret Spanish treaties," for safekeeping. Yimnah also comes to Udjde, "bringing up the rear."

On the way, Shaw asks Spence what he's decided to pay Barbarroja, since "you told him you would discuss wages with him at Tlemcen." Spence admits that he "forgot" to do so. Shaw makes a vague comment: "If the man were what he seemed — well, well, let be."

They stop briefly at a place called El Joube (The Cisterns). Here, Barbarroja threatens them, offering "peace or war." He tells them that they're about to be ambushed, but he can call them off if they hand over the girl. "Now, how much is she worth to you?" Dr. Shaw replies: "Villain!" and knocks Barbarroja unconscious. Barbarroja's hidden allies fire on the party with muskets, but they escape on their horses.

Chapter 7

One of the mounted Spahis grabs the halter of Betty's horse and races away with her. Another leaps into the saddle of Barbarroja's horse. Shaw slays one of his aggressors with a sword. Spence shoots two with a pistol.

A wide blade flamed in the moonlight. The hoarse, inarticulate rage scream of Yimnah rent the night like a paean of horror. The monstrous figure of the eunuch, streaming blood from a dozen wounds, rushed through the assailants, striking to right and left in blind fury. They opened before him, fell back from Spence, shrieked that this was no man, but some jinni of the mountains. Yimnah leaped on them, struck and struck again, screaming.

'Fools!' cracked out a voice in Spanish.

A musket flashed near the voice. There died Yimnah, the wide blade sweeping out from his hand and clashing on the stones.

The voice belonged to Gholam Mahmoud. The injured Barbarroja crawls back and argues with Mahmoud: ‘Now Spence is escaped and Mulai Ali not come. Pot-head that you are—only one eunuch bagged, and half our men down!’ He insisted: ‘I stay here to kill Mulai Ali when he comes.’ Gholam Mahmoud rides alone to Udjde.

Spence meets an Englishman who had been a cutpurse in Bristol, was conscripted into the navy, and was captured by “Algerines” and enslaved for 30 years. The man gives him directions to Udjde. After the man leaves, Spence spots Ripperda with his bodyguard, riding to Udjde.

Chapter 8

Two Spahis — “dour, bearded Turks” — are riding with Mistress Betty, one on each side of her, each holding onto her horse’s reins. Shaw, still holding his rapier, catches up with them. Betty chides him for abandoning Captain Spence in battle. He sheaths his rapier and tells her that he must carry an important letter “involving the fate of empires and of religions” to the Governor of Udjde — so that Pasha Ripperda will not remain ruler of Morocco, the Barbary States won’t attack Spain and the Moors won’t start a holy war to take it back — and that Mulai Ali’s welfare also depends on him completing his errand. So they all continue to Udjde, where they are given hospitality and Shaw dines with the governor. The governor tells him something about Mulai Ali’s adversaries: Barbarroja serves the Sherif Abdallah, and the man in the black burnoose, Gholam Mahmoud, serves Ripperda. Just then, two slaves bring a carrier pigeons with messages, one warning the governor that Ripperda will arrive tomorrow with his bodyguard, the other notifying him that Mulai Ali has been shot dead. The governor plans to receive Ripperda. Shaw says he will stay and hope that Ripperda will spare him because he has “a nominal errand to the sherif.”

Elsewhere in the town, Gholam Mahmoud sits at home, awaiting Barbarroja, who arrives, saying: “I rode my horse to death and walked the last two miles of the way here.” He then claims that he was the one who shot Mulai Ali in the back, and says he’ll permit Gholam Mahmoud to tell the pasha that they killed Mulai Ali together so that he can share credit, but he says he wants to keep the full amount of the reward from the sherif. He also reveals that Spence, whom he expects to travel west through their region, "carries the leather box behind his saddle." Gholam Mahmoud negotiates: he says he’ll let Barbarroja have the money if he will kidnap the woman Gholam Mahmoud wants. Barbarroja begins to plot how he'll get her.

Chapter 9

Shaw awakes with a change of plan. He's stressed. (He has received a letter in English signed by Spence, saying that he's been wounded, has no horse, Mulai Ali is dead, and he fears to enter the city. He asks to meet him at the deserted tomb of Osman, a half-mile from the city gate.) Shaw tells the governor: "I will take the two Spahis who brought me here and go on to Fez." The governor doesn't care much why; he's just relieved that Shaw is leaving before he has to deal with Ripperda. Shaw, the two Spahis, Mistress Betty, and a guide ("a rascally one-eyed Moor") head toward the western gate of the city. Just as they exit the western gate, they hear a crowd cheer as Ripperda enters the city by the northern gate.

The tomb of Osman was a trap. Both Spahis are slain, one by the guide with a long knife, the other by three men waiting in ambush with muskets. One of these men is Barbarroja, aka Lazaro de Polan, who crows that he forged the note pretending to be Spence. Meanwhile his men "plundered the dead Spahis." Barbarroja tells Shaw he wants "the pretty seƱorita," but he says "I owe you a debt for what you did to me at the Cisterns, and I shall settle the debt. ... And you are in my power, and my friend Gholam Mahmoud will take the leather box when Spence shows up, as he must soon do!" He recaps: "You insulted me both in Christian and Moslem fashion. ... You kicked me, for which the ancestry of Lazaro de Polan demands recompense; and you tweaked my beard, for which the ancestry of Barbarroja demands vengeance."

Shaw calls him a "vile renegade": "Dog that you are, I suppose you will have your bandits pistol me in the back!" They begin to fence. Shaw slays Barbarroja, whose three men flee.

Spence then arrives, saying the governor had suggested he come to find out if anything was wrong with Shaw and Mistress Betty. Spence's men (Ripperda's guard) chase after Barbarroja's men.

Shaw recovers Barbarroja's 800-year-old blade, the Toledo, from his fallen body.

Spence tells Shaw that Ripperda wants him. Shaw replies that Gholam Mahmoud is aware that Spence carries the casket behind his saddle, as Barbarroja had told him. Spence assures him that he's already thrown the box into the river.

Spence's men return with the three severed heads of Barbarroja's men. Spence, Shaw, and Mistress Betty ride back to Udjde.

The narrator informs us that Mulai Ali isn't really dead.

Chapter 10

Pasha Ripperda, suffering from gout, believes that Mulai Ali is dead. "This thin man with the haunted eye was the supreme ruler of western Africa; the combined Barbary armies and fleets obeyed his orders — Egypt was in alliance with him."

Spence, Shaw, and Mistress Betty enter the justice hall of the kasbah, and he greets them, though he is barely able to rise. Ripperda, "generous enough in victory," offers to forgive and forget, and Shaw accepts. The three travelers go their guest room. Spence and Shaw smoke pipes "with the girl's permission," as she listens to their conversation.

Spence describes how he cast away the box and found Ripperda "friendly enough." Shaw says: "Mistake not, Patrick; we play with fire." To which "Spence shrugged."

Out the window, they observe activity in the courtyard. Ripperda's guard forbids them to leave their room. Gholam Mahmoud has arrived — "Ripperda's confidential agent," who must have "heard of Barbarroja's death," Shaw muses. Spence acknowledges that Ripperda's men probably saw him cast the box into the river.

Pasha Ripperda's bodyguard fetches Mistress Betty on the pretext of wanting an astrological reading. Spence and Shaw must stay in the room; the narrator hints that one may soon die.

She witnesses Gholam Mahmoud, "a tall figure in black," approach Ripperda. She doesn't hear their conversation. Gholam Mahmoud whispers his offer: he'll attempt to fetch the box, and he asks for Mistress Betty "for my harem" if he succeeds in finding it. Ripperda replies: "Her and a dozen more like her....The girl belongs to you." He'll wait at Adjerud to hear the results.

Ripperda tells her he has no intention of giving her friends mercy. She asks anyway, and Ripperda says he'll sell Spence into slavery in Adjerud as a form of mercy, but he'll execute Shaw for knowing and keeping secret that "the box was gone, that I was defeated, unable to keep my promises." He then asks Mistress Betty to tell his horoscope. He lies: "you are under my protection and shall go safe to England. You have the word of Ripperda." She can tell it's a lie, so she asks for a week to prepare his horoscope. He locks her up with two female servants.

"Spence and Dr. Shaw, disarmed and bound, were dragged forth besides Ripperda's litter. From his curtained cushions, Ripperda glared out like some venomous reptile at Shaw." Mistress Betty has a litter alongside Ripperda. Betty's perspective is not mentioned, but Spence and Shaw understand the respective fates of all three of them. "Spence was tied into a high saddle," Shaw is "dragged away," and the two men shout their goodbyes.

Chapter 11

Adjerud is a prosperous small town on the Tafna River. Ripperda's ship is in port, rumored to contain his treasures. A second ship, the "Boston Lass," from "a far country," is also there, in need of repairs, and that's where Spence is enslaved with other Americans. Betty is kept in a tent near Ripperda, and she's allowed to leave under guard. On Friday, he asks for the horoscope. She tells him she sees death and needs one more day to finish it. He says that Algiers, Egypt, and Admiral Perez have just joined his side.

That night, outside her tent, a messenger from Udjde delivers a message to her (her guard pays the messenger). It's a message from Shaw, who says that Mulai Ali is alive, marching on Fez, and about to be named sherif. He adds that the messenger is backed by Mulai Ali to attempt to rescue her and Spence. Betty assumes she'll be second priority in the rescue effort or that it will be less feasible to rescue her, and meanwhile she plans to use the astrological reading to tell off Ripperda, even if he kills her for it.

The next day, she sees Gholam Mahmoud enter Ripperda's tent. She doesn't see what happens inside. Gholam Mahmoud has retrieved the box. Ripperda opens it, finds "a number of small packages wrapped in oiled silk," and is satisfied. Gholam Mahmoud demands his reward, and Ripperda says that after the girl reads his horoscope tonight, he'll be free to take her.

That night, in front of the two men and one guard, with Gholam Mahmoud smoking a water pipe, she tells Ripperda: "Your star has waned, my lord. The war against Spain is doomed to failure — nay, has already failed! Mulai Ali is alive and has been proclaimed sherif. You yourself have not a fortnight longer to enjoy life — "

Ripperda swears, interrupting her, but just at that moment, he receives a message of defeat from Admiral Perez. Algiers is defeated, Pasha Ali is dead, and he asks Ripperda to flee to Tetuan on the coast. A moment later, another messenger arrives that Mulai Ali is marching on Fez, backed by the Zenete tribes, and that Spanish ships are heading to Oran.

Ripperda wants to sail for Tetuan, but they hear the crowd shouting for "Ras Ripperda!" ("Ripperda's head!"), and it seems impossible to access the ship. Ripperda and his men flee on horseback. Gholam Mahmoud orders his men to raid the treasures on Ripperda's ship.

Chapter 12

Aboard the Boston Lass, the men (three from Newfoundland, the rest from Boston) are chained at their wrist and ankles. As the masses are shouting for Ripperda's head, the Spaniards unchain them and give them robes (burnooses) and scimitars to disguise them so they will not be perceived as escaping Christian slaves. Spence seems to be the natural leader of these freed men. They realize they need Ripperda's ship to escape. As they see someone else taking the ship out of port, one man objects: They should not continue standing around waiting for a lady. In reply, "somebody smote the man." Then they hear that Gholam Mahmoud, with about thirty men, has taken the ship with Mistress Betty on it, so they find smaller boats and row after it, catch up, and climb onto the deck, slaying the men who rush them.

Gholam Mahmoud slays one of the Newfoundland men. Spence breaks the neck of one of Gholam Mahmoud's men. Then he sees Mistress Betty shooting a swivel gun from the starboard rail. Gholam Mahmoud is struck first by Spence, then again in the back by someone else, and he falls overboard. They have won, with only four deaths on their side, and they have Mistress Betty.

Chapter 13

They sail past Tetuan and Gib-al-Taric, and off the coast of Tangier some of them switch, in open water, to another boat. They divide Ripperda's gold. Some of the gold is for Mulai Ali, along with the little box that contains the writings with Ripperda's plans. Some of the gold is for Spence's party, who decide to head for Boston rather than London, as they believe they have a better chance of holding onto their gold there. Spence asks Betty if she minds heading to Boston, and she tells him that she feels like Ruth. "Dost not remember what Ruth said to the man in whose hand her own lay — even as mine lies in yours?" she says. I think that's a mistelling of what Ruth said to Naomi (Your people shall be my people, I go where you go. Ruth 1:16) rather than what she said to a man, say, Boaz (Ruth 3:9). But anyhow, the story ends there.

Down the Coast of Barbary original line art

Here's my book.

The perceived connection between eunuchs and magic

According to Lewis Coser, eunuchs’ power operated “over women and children in the recesses of the harem and the court,” and eunuchs tended toward “magic and superstition in the court intrigues” which was “in contrast to the rationalism of the bureaucrats.” Eunuchs “practiced favoritism and particularism while the literati advocated universalistic standards.” That Coser said it does not mean it was necessarily always and everywhere true, nor even sometimes and somewhere. I cite him to describe this common perception. It is a binary perception of men as rational and eunuchs as irrational.
"The Political Functions of Eunuchism." Lewis A. Coser. American Sociological Review, Vol. 29, No. 6 (Dec., 1964), pp. 880-885 (6 pages) https://doi.org/10.2307/2090872 https://www.jstor.org/stable/2090872 Quotation from p. 882.

Background information (Coser 1972 journal article)

“The alien as a servant of power: Court Jews and Christian renegades.” Lewis A. Coser. American Sociological Review 1972, Vol. 37 (October):574–481. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2093452

The Ottoman princes preferred to be served by foreigners, since “they are so far removed from him in the status order they can never threaten his rule.” (Coser 1972, p. 574).

“I showed in an earlier paper (1964, cf. also Hopkins, 1963) that political eunuchs can be seen as prototypical servants of power because they lacked roots in the social structure and hence depended on the oriental monarchs who used them. Being typically recruited from young children taken in war raids on the periphery of the Empire and then castrated, they had neither effective families of orientation nor of procreation. They could establish no ties in the community, and their loyalty was available to the monarch. There are, however, many cases where uncastrated members of alien communities served absolutist power. Such aliens, although sexually potent, were as politically impotent as the eunuchs.” (Coser 1972, p. 575) [The full citation for Hopkins: Hopkins, Keith. 1963. “Eunuchs in politics in the later Roman Empire.” Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society 189 (New Series, No. 9):62–80.]

A court Jew, for example, served at the pleasure of the prince. “There was no security of tenure…nor could the Court Jew transmit the position to his descendants… Specific Court Jews served specific princes on a particularistic basis.” This made sense, according to “the economic historian David S. Landes (1960:205),” when “the credit of the state was weaker than that of the banker.” They became obsolete when banks modernized in the 19th century. (Coser 1972, p. 577) Court Jews resembled “political eunuchs of the Eastern world and celibate priests of the Catholic Church. Though they had families of their own, these families were as effectively cut off from the surrounding world of the gentiles as individual eunuchs or celibate priests were from the community and kinship that grow from sexual union.” (Coser 1972, p. 578)

“In its early stages, the Ottoman Empire was based on a relatively unstable balance between the Sultan’s forces and his civilian and military bureaucracy, and ‘feudal’ and aristocratic land owning strata. (Eisenstadt, 1960:288.) ...they fashioned a most peculiar civilian and military administration consisting almost entirely of non-native recruits unattached to the native Muslim population. * * * Between 1453 and 1623 only five of the forty-seven grand viziers were of Turkish origin.” (Coser 1972, p. 578) For Christian renegades, “no office was hereditary.” Generally, they had to retire before they could marry, and their sons were ineligible for a court job at all. (Coser 1972, p. 579) [The full citation for Eisenstadt: Eisenstadt, S. N. 1963. The Political Systems of Empires. New York: The Free Press.]

Whereas, for “the most intimate functions performed for the sultan” in his home, it wasn’t enough to be a foreigner; the sultan demanded that the servant also be castrated. (Coser 1972, p. 580 — he cites Lybyer, 1966:56ff and 123ff, but unfortunately the part of Coser's bibliography that would have the full Lybyer citation is cut off from the JStor scan.)

In China, “they represented the very antithesis of the principle of inheritance upon which any aristocratic status group necessarily rests. They were trustworthy since they could never covet hereditary power.” And consequently “their very position rested upon the rejection of aristocratic principles just as it made them consistent opponents of bureaucratic principles.” And so they were the emperor’s “instruments” when he “wished to escape the control of both gentry and bureaucracy.” (Coser 1964, pp. 883–884)

Coser (1964) points to Karl August Wittfogel, Oriental Despotism (1963) and “History of Chinese Society (1949) with a footnote: “Wittfogel is the only writer I know of who interprets political eunuchism in roughly the same manner I do here…I…profited a great deal from his erudite and perceptive discussion [in Oriental Depotism].”

Coser — born Ludwig Cohen in Berlin, 1913 — died in 2003 at age 89. An obituary in the Brandeis Sociology Newsletter says he had been "the founding chair or our department in the early 1950's."

See also

A new release in 2025: Yufei Zhou's The Science of Oriental Society: Karl August Wittfogel and the East Asian Intellectuals discussed (as per the book description) "how Wittfogel's controversial concept of "Oriental society" has influenced the assessments and interpretations of Asia's economy and society by generations of East Asian social scientists throughout the twentieth century."

Sunday, March 26, 2017

'War eunuchs' in Hirschfeld's 'The Sexual History of the World War' (1930)

In 1930, Magnus Hirschfeld published Sittengeschichte des Weltkrieges in German. Panurge Press produced an abridged, adapted English translation as The Sexual History of the World War in 1934. Another English edition was produced by Cadillac Publishing Co. in 1941. The last one, since 2015, is available to read free online through the Internet Archive. Chapter 12, "Genital Injuries, War Eunuchs, etc." includes the following information.

"Above all, it was shot wounds in the testicles and also injuries to the spinal marrow which induced a complete disappearance of the sexual functions. Injuries of this sort were not uncommon during the war which explains their frequent occurrence in literature. Yet it appears that poetry gave much more attention to this problem of emasculation during the war than did science. One of these cases became famous in medical literature because the patient became a subject for transplantation experiments."

Dr. Robert Lichtenstern reported having to remove both testicles from a soldier in 1915 in Vienna due to an infected gunshot wound. The patient immediately ceased to have erections "despite various devices calculated to arouse him"; he rapidly lost his facial and body hair; and

"he read nothing and manifested no interest whatever in the war....For the most part the patient sat near his bed or at the window, ate voraciously, slept a lot, and busied himself with absolutely nothing at all. The loss of both testicles resulted in a remarkable increase of adipose tissue, especially around the neck which gave the patient a peculiarly stupid appearance."

Doctors then transplanted another man's testicle into him, with these alleged results: "Various castration symptoms, such as adiposity, altered trichosis, loss of libido and psychic indifferentism, all receded temporarily so that the patient actually entertained the idea of marrying."

Dr. F. Pick's study found "commotion neurosis" in 10 out of 25 officers and in 7 out of 75 soldiers. These men were unable to ejaculate and in some cases also unable to get erections. Pick attributed this to physical and psychic stresses of battle, including sexual abstinence.

Several literary passages are referenced in this same chapter of Hirschfeld's book:

From an author named Bruno Vogel: "I saw Sczepczyk again. With amazing precision his generative organs had been shot from his body. 'Herr Leutenant,' he whispered, a little bit ashamed and in deep confidence, 'Herr Leutenant, and I have never yet had a girl.' He gladly accepted the cigarette I gave him and I softly stroked his hair and forehead. Finally I slipped my hand over his eyes and, as a little smile of pleasure curled over his mouth, I pushed my mercifully brutal sword into his side." The title was not mentioned, but possibly this was Vogel's Es lebe der Krieg! (1924).

The Siberian diary of Edwin Erich Dwinger The Army Behind Barbed Wire: A wounded soldier says that his wife (whose picture shows her to be "a perfect child-bearing machine") wanted at least six children. "Until now we weren't able to have any children because there wasn't any money for them." When he is told that he cannot have children due to his wound, "he turned around slowly and walked to his bed, stretched himself out painfully and never spoke to anyone else until they sent him to Siberia. It is significant that we meet the tragic figure of this emasculated man further on in the novel, but at this later stage, he rejoices that he does not have to suffer the sexual hunger which the others are being plagued by."

The poet Ernst Toller has a man named Hinkemann who "may be regarded as the final literary formula of the emasculated soldier who returns home from the wars, and the inability of his wife to continue a veritably inhuman sacrifice in his behalf....we are dealing with a group of men who will never be able to find their lost happiness by the side of a woman. From every outcry of Toller's hero, we hear the whole dismal and appalling tragedy of a creature who has gone through the vast hell of war, and it is a cry which can never be silenced. How brutal is the reply to Hinkemann by his wife's seducer, Paul Grosshahn, who rebukes the cripple for seeking to keep his wife a nun. Hinke- mann is informed by the seducer that he is in reality nothing more to his wife now than a ground for divorce!"


If you'd like to learn more about my work, I've published books. Also, I write for Medium. There, readers with a paid membership don't have to worry about the paywall.

Panurge Press and other early 20th century distributors of erotic books

Jay A. Gertzman's Bookleggers and Smuthounds: The Trade in Erotica 1920-1940 gives an engaging history of the difficulties in New York City with distributing literature that had any sexual content. "The federal antiobscenity statues, lobbied through Congress by Anthony Comstock in 1873 and enforced just as powerfully half a century later, called their wares 'obscene, lewd, lascivious, indecent, filthy, or vile.' * * * By the early 1920s, a group of young New York publishers was providing Americans with literature from European writers whom the older publishers considered too subversive to touch. Beginning in 1922, a series of court rulings made it more difficult to suppress sexually explicit material that could not be termed flagitious by any general consensus." (pp. 1, 10)

The most detailed figures in Gertzman's history include Esar Levine of Panurge Press (Esar was editor, and his brother Benjamin was business manager) and Benjamin Rebhuhn of Falstaff Press (he ran it with his wife and nephew). The Levines and Rebhuhns both had mail-order businesses and were close friends with each other. "Many Panurge titles were transferred to Falstaff in 1936 (and reprinted as new editions), and later became property of Metro Books, distributed by Benjamin Levine." (p. 30) The most important character is probably Samuel Roth, whose Golden Hind Press at 122 Fifth Avenue was raided on October 4, 1929. (p. 16) These men endured repeated prosecutions and incarcerations.

The majority of the names of booksellers in this narrative belonged to Jews. "In New York at least, during the period from 1880 to 1940, many [erotica dealers] were members of Jewish immigrant families," Gertzman writes. He adds that "German immigrants were skilled printers, lithographers, and typesetters". (pp. 28- 29)

"Although avoiding ethnic scapegoating, John Sumner [secretary of the New York Society for the Suppression of Vice] sometimes specifically described the purveyor of 'obscenity' as a Jew (or Italian or German). Rooted in his opposition to erotic literature was a fear of contamination by the unclean outsider. Society as a whole, as well as the immigrant neighborhoods, was in danger of contagion. Sumner's annual reports stigmatize individuals arrested (whether convicted or not) as 'foreign looking,' 'mentally defective,' 'exhibitionists,' 'fly-by-night.' 'Most of these defendants,' he wrote in his 1928 report, 'were of the young, radical, irreligious and over-educated type. Their personal writings wherever found, indicated an utter disregard for the law, public decency or any of the proprieties of organized society. They are literally anarchists.'" (p. 45)

The Panurge books were overpriced for the Depression era. Consequently, "Panurge classified its clients into groups. There were twenty-five 'prominent individuals'...ten 'professors'; fifty 'army officers'; twenty 'reverends'; two hundred eighty 'lawyers'; and fourteen hundred 'doctors,' including more dentists than physicians — thirty-five fully typed pages were needed to list them." (p. 57) Gertzman also says: "Judge Learned Hand appears to have recognized the more complex reality, when he found Esar Levine guilty of pandering to prurience with the circulars for his Panurge Press books. He refused to admit into evidence the Panurge Press mailing list, with its 'professors,' 'army officers,' and 'physicians.' 'Even respectable persons may have a taste for salacity,' he wrote." (p. 144)


If you'd like to learn more about my work, I've published books. Also, I write for Medium. There, readers with a paid membership don't have to worry about the paywall.

Sunday, July 12, 2015

How the novel 'Zohrab, the Hostage' (1832) portrays Aga Mohamed Shah

Aga Mohamed was a real person. He is portrayed, partly fictionalized, in Zohrab, the Hostage (1832) by James Justinian Morier, who served as British ambassador to Persia 1810-1816. In the article below, emphasis is placed on how this character is portrayed, without regard to possible "spoilers" of the three-volume novel.



Preface

Although the author acknowledges that all of Persia is full of stories – some within living memory – of "the famous Aga Mohamed Shah, famous for his cruelty, his wisdom, and his wars" and "the ominous aspect of his ferocious countenance," nevertheless he says that his story changes some historical facts. Amima was really Mohamed's mother, but in the novel, she is his niece. Mohamed really killed one brother and blinded another, but in the novel their fates are combined in a character called Hussein Kuli. The attack on Asterabad is fictitious, but inspired by "the enormities of his cruelty" during the siege of Kerman, the facts of which can be found in Sir John Malcolm's History of Persia, Vol. II. The novel contains anecdotes about a bloody handkerchief (Vol. II) and counting eyes with a whip handle (Vol. III), which he says "were related to me by creditable witnesses."

But it has not been my object to draw a miniature picture of his character; I have only attempted a sketch. He is my prototype, and I have placed him in my narrative, as a painter sometimes inserts a dragon or some such monster in the foreground of his landscape.
* * *
We are told, – Either follow tradition, or invent such fables are consistent with themselves:
"Aut famam sequere, aut sibi convenienta finge."


Volume I

The chief eunuch is called the Khajeh Bashi; he lives in the palace. He "served Aga Mohamed with great zeal, although he dreaded the violence of his character with a feeling amounting to something more than womanish fear." (p. 152) He is addressed with terms of respect, for example, "Almas Aga" (diamond lord), but he responds by acknowledging his humble status: "Almas is her slave, and only waits her commands to show her the excess of his devotedness," he says to Amima, addressing her in the third person. (p. 154) The king, Aga Mohammed Shah, calls him to appear whenever anything important happens. He is, for example, in charge of supervising the Shah's nephew Fatteh Ali's goodbye to his sister. (p. 54) He is also in charge of maintaining the Corook, which is a clear path in front of the Shah's women when they are allowed to take a journey. The public is notified in advance not to cross the Corook on pain of death. "...the whole being marshalled by the royal eunuchs, who with loud shrill voices, and angry words and gestures were casting about the eyes of watchfulness and suspicion, in order to discover any audacious trespasser who might have transgressed the awful Corook. The whole was closed by the person of the Khajeh Bashi or eunuch in chief and a numerous suite, who were ready at the smallest signal to scour the country, and inflict immediate death on any unfortunate offender." (p. 29)

"the reader will perhaps be curious to become more intimately acquainted with the person of the extraordinary being who will form one of the principal features of the following narrative.

Nature, in forming Aga Mohamed Shah, intended to have installed a mind of uncommon vigour into a body capable of seconding its energies, by making it full of activity and strength; but the whole scheme was frustrated by the cruelty of man. Whilst the sharpness of intellect was preserved, it became diseased with ill-humour and moroseness, for every time that his body became an object of contemplation, he entertained such disgust towards himself that he feeling finished by placing him at enmity with all mankind. What would otherwise have been tall and erect, was now bent with the curve of apparent age; – what would have been strength of muscle and breadth of shoulder, seemed blighted and shrivelled. His face, particularly in a country where beards are universally worn, appeared like a blotch of leprosy, for it was almost totally hairless, – it could only boast of a few straggling bristles, which here and there sprouted at irregular distances, like stunted trees upon a poor soil. The skin which covered it resembled wetted parchment, hanging in baggy furrows down the cheeks, under the chin, and about the neck. This spectral countenance, for so it might be called, was, however, lighted up by a pair of small grey eyes of more than human lustre, which, from under two ragged curtains of eyelids, flashed all their intelligence abroad, and as they expressed rage, jealousy, or cruelty, made those who were exposed to their fire feel as if they were under the fascination of some blood-seeking monster. But with all this there were moments when this face would smile, and would even relax into looks of pity and benevolence, but so treacherous were these symptoms esteemed, that at length they were only looked upon as signals of some extraordinary disaster, or as beacons to warn those in danger to be upon their guard. (pp. 10-12)

"It is impossible to describe the expression of the face upon which the eyes of all present were turned, for bereft as it was of its native manliness, all that could be read in it was distrust, envy, and hatred." (pp. 33-34)

On another occasion, his niece's servant reports that "the Shah looked in a vastly killing humour". (p. 148)

"At length he came, and though but slightly attended, still his presence produced a sensation of awe that nothing could suppress, which might be likened to the instinct of smaller animals, that feel the neighbourhood of some large and venomous snake, without actually seeing it." (pp. 174-175)

The Shah has a "hideous" humpback as an attendant and, in particular, as a barber, and "it was generally supposed that the Shah had selected him for his important office, in order to keep himself in good humour with his own deformities." (pp. 12-13) The arrangement "was the ichneumon waiting upon the crocodile," and the humpback was "hated as a spy, and dreaded as an informer." (p. 13) Similarly, the chief eunuch, the Khajeh Bashi, was "many shades uglier than his master" and that, the author commented, "perhaps might have been the reason of his preservation." (p. 153)

The Shah has a falling out with his nephew on a hunting trip, because they both shoot at the same animal, and the Shah's first gunshot does not kill it, but the nephew's second shot fells it. "As soon as the successful result of it was seen, the envy and rage of the Eunuch at once started into active passion." (pp. 43-44) Even hours after the incident, he seems "not unlike a venomous snake coiled up within itself, ready to dart upon its unconscious prey." (p. 47) Because of this incident, he essentially threatens his nephew with death – letting him know that he killed his father and will easily kill him, too – and sending him away into a kind of temporary exile.

Contemplating the prisoner Zohrab, the Shah is "like the bloodhound, which, though muzzled, still snarls and snaps at what he thinks ought to be his prey". (pp. 98-99) When Zohrab approaches the Shah, "he obeyed and stood nothing daunted, with head erect and a firm countenance, exhibiting in his person a specimen of manly beauty which strongly contrasted with the degraded form before whom he stood." (p. 111) Zohrab says he does not mind if the Shah insults him or destroys him, "but when thou abusest my father, he who is thy equal, and to whom thou partly owest thy elevation, he, whom compared to thee is as the finest gold to the vilest copper, then I will speak; then I will tell thee, base dog! that I throw back thy odious words to thy face, and that I spit upon thy odious presence. And now do thy worst." (p. 116)

The chief huntsman had the idea to make a pillar of skulls (kelleh minar) of animals he slaughtered and to place Zohrab's head at the top. When he presents this delightful idea to the Shah, the Shah unaccountably turns the idea of violence against the loyal huntsman. "'What head can be better than thine?' roared the tyrant, in savage merriment." He instructs the chief executioner, the Nasakchi Bashi, "who was always in attendance," to "go complete the minar" and behead the huntsman. (p. 123) The Shah's strange order is not immediately believed by those present. "His horrid face broke into a demoniacal expression of fury when he saw that there was hesitation in obeying his commands. The ragged skin which fell in furrows down his cheeks began to bloat; the eyes seemed to roll in blood, and the whole frame, from which in general all circulation seemed to fly, wore a purple hue..." He is about to behead the huntsman himself, when the executioner steps up quickly behind the doomed huntsman and does his duty "with one blow of his deadly black Khorassan blade." (p. 124) The sight of the "streams of gore flowing and spouting in all directions" caused the Shah immediately "to be soothed into quiet," and "his features resumed their wonted dull and leaden expression." (p. 125) He then turns against the executioner for having fulfilled his command: "'Dog and villain,' he exclaimed, 'why did you slay my chief huntsman? what demon impelled your officious hand in this deed? well is it for you that there is such a feeling as compassion, and that the Shah can spare as well as he can spill! Go, go! clear up your work, and finish it by wiping your own self from our presence.'" (p. 126)

After the death of the chief huntsman, the Shah is regretful, but falls short of contrition, blaming the events on the appearance of Zohrab and lamenting his own loss of face in the eyes of his subjects.

"And thus I lost that poor old Hussein! – where shall I get such another servant? Evil was the hour when the Mazanderani youth came across my path. We have committed a crime which but for him never would have been; we have lost a servant whom we shall never replace; and my subjects look upon Aga Mahomed as a monster of injustice!" (p. 184)

Zohrab's life will be spared, but he must marry Zulma, the chief executioner's daughter.



Volume II

The second volume focuses on the unrequited love of Zohrab and Amima and on Zohrab's dilemma in being forced to marry Zulma.

There is a comment about how eunuchs look older than they are:

"Upon the frame and countenance of an eunuch, an appearance of premature age settles the cast of his features even from youth, and the changes are not so strong as upon the man, whose beard, like the verdant foliage of nature, shews by the variety of its tints..." (p. 98)

The Shah is described:

He was seated on his throne surrounded by a throng of the most brilliantly arrayed courtiers and attendants. He himself was dressed so entirely with jewelry, that as the sun glanced upon him, the eye could scarcely meet the beautiful and magnificent refulgence. A crown, in the front of which shone conspicuous a diamond of immense size, was placed on his head, whilst a pair of armlets or bazƻbends, those distinguishing badges of Persian royalty, also composed of stones of immense value, were distinguished on the upper limb of each arm; here glistened those two famous diamonds the koh nƻr and the deriah nƻr, the mountain, and the sea of light, which had been seized by Nadir Shah among the spoils of the Moguls at the siege of Delhi, and upon which the Persians now looked as talisans which gave their possessor a lawful claim upon the throne.

His sword was placed across his knees; nothing could exceed the richness of its belt and sheath; a resplendent dagger glittered in a girdle of incalculable value, whilst he was backed by a pillow, so inlaid with precious stones, that it looked like a work of mosaic. But with all this his appearance was scarcely human; a dressed skeleton would have filled his place as well; at best he became a living illustration of the vanity of life. The jewels in which his person was incased, were contrasted with the ghastliness of his features, whilst those same features seemed to destroy the value of the jewelry.

But still how dreaded a king was he to his subjects! They could not attach ridicule to any thing belonging to one who had gained power and a throne by superiority of intellect, and which he had exercised in elevating their country to great eminence among the nations of Asia. There was something so uncommon in the circumstance of a being, so degraded in his person, raising himself to kingly power, that that circumstance alone gave a character of the marvellous to his appearance, and surrounded him by feelings of awe and mystery, highly conducive to the establishment of his power. (pp. 103-104)

Amima, while receiving advice from a dervish behind a curtain, faints, and in the commotion that includes the arrival of the Khajeh Bashi (chief eunuch), the curtain is pulled back and the dervish accidentally sees her face. More women and eunuchs come to solve the problem, and the dervish turns and leaves. (p. 130)

The race of a eunuch – somewhat surprising that this is the first mention, as the palace eunuchs were racially segregated in Persia – appears in this sentence: "he perceived a well-veiled and richly dressed woman alighting from a finely caparisoned mule, held by a young black eunuch." (p. 136)

Zohrab had a little adventure in which he manages to enter the area of the palace that contained the women's apartments by dressing as a woman escorted by a servant, Ali. Zohrab was forced to stop and leave Ali when "they came to the wicket where a guard of eunuchs was stationed" and then he tried to find his way out of the palace, fearing "instant death" if he attracted the attention of more eunuchs. (p. 152) Two eunuchs were suspicious and were about "to lay violent hands upon him" when Amima's servant Mariam silences them, pretending to recognize the unknown figure as a woman, and invites Zohrab in. (p. 153) His arrival startles Amima, but, after she recovers from her faint, she begins to warm to him. Just then, they hear that the Shah, accompanied by "impatient eunuchs," wished to pass through the room to go to he turret (he is actually seeking the dervish, whom he distrusts), and they fear for their lives. Zohrab had nowhere to hide in the room, and he could not put his costume back on because harem women were not allowed to veil themselves in front of the Shah. They quickly knot scarves together and lower Zohrab off the turret to a nearby roof. The Khajeh Bashi finally bursts in, "foaming with rage at the impediments placed in the way of the performance of the Shah's commands," and Mariam responds to him: "And who are you, you old carcass without a soul! you old scabbard without a sword!" He argues back that he must do the Shah's bidding, because "by a nod of his head he may take off mine," and Mariam retorts, "We'll all teach the Shah to nod...and there let us trust may your hated noddle be nodded off." (pp. 163-164) The Khajeh Bashi sees the knotted scarves on the turret and he says, "In any other harem, a katl-i-Ć¢m, a universal massacre, would ensue." Mariam says that the women may tie their scarves any way that they like, and that if the eunuch speaks any more, they will hang him with the rope. (p. 165) They untie the scarves, and the Shah enters and is none the wiser.

Zohrab meanwhile has an interview with Zulma, who professes to be mad with love for him, but he rebuffs her and tells her he never consented to the marriage and will never marry her.

Through an act of trickery, Zohrab's father, Zaul Khan, rescues him from captivity and brings him home. The Shah is furious. "He was accustomed to look upon himself as the most quick-sighted and penetrating of human beings; what then was his mortification to find himself thus completely outwitted, and by one whom he so entirely despised! The feeling was maddening to the highest degree – he could scarcely contain his wrath from falling upon the whole city at once, so enraged was he at the situation of a dupe in which he thought he was placed." (p. 261) He orders the chief executioner and the head guard to be whipped for their negligence, and they are bastinadoed into unconsciousness. (pp. 262-263)

The Shah then calls a witness to the activities of the "dervish" and of Zulma. The witness is identified as a Kechekchi (also spelled Keshekchi, meaning unknown to me) and a servant of the Shah. He says he saw the pair but admits that he was too "afraid" to do anything. At this time, the Humpback reveals that he found Amima's armband under Zohrab's pillow; it had once belonged to Amima's father, but the Shah had given it to Amima, and she had given it to Zohrab as a token of her affection.

His first impulse was to order instant execution upon her who had excited his wrath; but so malignant were his present feelings that he seemed to have pleasure in dwelling upon them, in order hat he might devise a more sweet and perfect revenge. The pause, the awful pause, which ensued during these his cogitations was felt by those present as if they stood on the verge of eternity – as if they were awaiting the signature of their death-warrant, so sure were they that none but the most dire results could accrue from the delay.
* * *
At length rousing himself from his apparent stupor, like the deadly boa rising from torpor and preparing for a fresh victim, he wreaked the first effects of his rage upon the poor keshekchi. "Strike his neck," he roared out to the full extent of his terrible voice, as he looked upon the offender. "Go, and let others know what it is to be negligent of the Shah's affairs."

Upon this a ferash ghazeb, a most ferocious monster, stepped up, and with one blow of his sword, severed the wretched man's head from his body. (pp. 267-8)

The "odious king" proceeds with more executions of the innocent along with the guilty, and his subjects respected his authority. "'Tis true they would call him a shaitan, a devil, a blood-drinker, a despot, but then at the same time they would add the epithet ajaƮb, wonderful, which in most of their minds would also imply "admirable." (p. 269)

The Humpback reveals to the Shah that a man was seen climbing down from the turret, exiting the harem. The Shah calls for the Khajeh Bashi, addressing him as "Pander." The Khajeh Bashi is terrified by the allegation. (p. 274) The Shah is angry because he had previously felt toward Amima "a devoted tenderness, a sense of gratitude towards her for allowing him to feel that at least there was one creature in the world who cared for him," but now he sees that as "a mere illusion". (p. 276) He fantasizes throwing Amima off the turret with his own hands. The Khajeh Bashi goes to Amima's quarters late at night to fetch her and bring her before the Shah. She finds this highly irregular, and tells him, "the first words I utter will be complaint of thee. Will the Shah consent to see his niece exposed to the gaze of man without her veil?" (p. 281) In response, "the hideous creature indulged in a malignant exulting chuckle". (p. 282) Instead of bringing her to the Shah, however, he brings her to a horseman, and she is left exposed in the wilderness to die. She is rescued by a man who says that his brother was castrated by Adil Shah, a rival of his father's, and that he would have met the same fate soon after had Adil Shah not died. (p. 312)



Volume III

Volume III opens with the Shah's rage:

"The violence of feeling which had urged the Shah to the destruction of his niece, was succeeded by acts of unprecedented barbarity, as if he were anxious to stifle the feelings of remorse which the one had raised in his heart, by others still more atrocious. In losing Amima he had lost the only tie in which the affections of his heart were engaged; having once surmounted this, he overthrew every barrier, and like a wild beast breaking from his confinement, spread terror and alarm wherever his steps carried him. The first ravings of his fury turned towards the Khajeh Bashi."

The people gather quickly when they hear the Shah is about to sit on the throne, "for in the presence oft he tyrant, who could say that his turn for destruction might not be the next upon the book of fate?" In this case, the Shah speaks pointedly to the prime vizir Mirza Hajji Ibrahim to demonstrate to everyone that "he had arisen blameless, and that the confidence reposed in him had not in the slightest degree diminished." (p. 23) The Shah then gives military orders about clothing, provisions, and weapons. "His sagacity awed almost as much as his cruelty. Every one felt that, under the scrutiny of such an eye and such a mind, to do one's duty was inevitable, and therefore none flinched, but went heartily to work in its accomplishment." (p. 24)

Shir Khan Beg was summoned, and "the eyes of all were turned towards him, as one destined to receive a further infliction of punishment. ...he could scarcely stand, so truly was he terrified (in common let it be said with all the Persians of his day) by merely knowing himself to be near the presence of the Shah. He made his proper bow, and left his shoes at the door." (p. 40) Later, however, Shir Khan Beg is honored with rich dress, including a ceremonial diamond-hilted dagger whose honor he has always dreamed of. The Shah is thus able to assign him to a dangerous expedition. (pp. 98-102)

Zohrab has an opportunity to kill the Shah. Ali points his musket at him, but Zohrab orders him down.

"The moment of vengeance elapsed, and once of serious meditation succeeded. Zohrab was lost in a thousand reflections upon the sigh of the being whose life he had just spared. His own persecutor, the murderer of his Amima, the invader of his country, the announced murderer of himself, his father, mother, and family; the proclaimed shedder of the blood of thousands of innocent people. All this had gone by, and he had refrained from taking vengeance into his own hand. The Mussulman youth felt that such destinies were to be wielded by the hand of an all wise Providence, and not placed at the disposal of a weak and erring mortal such as himself." (pp. 132-133)

Zulma tells the Shah that, one day, Ali arrived from Asterabad to deliver a letter to the humpback. Ali repeatedly refused to tell Zulma what the letter contained, but finally, Zulma seized it from him, discovered its "treachery," and reported it to the Shah. The Shah asked the executioners to ready the rope on a lightning-struck pine tree, as Ali waited, pinned by guards, and he also sent for the humpback.

"There sat the king, coiled up as it were in the folds of his power, like the dragon of the wilderness spreading terror around; above him reared the towering stem of the pine, scathed and blackened, overtopping all the trees of the forest, stretching out its burnt and withered ranches in stiff and rigid outlines, and presenting no bad emblem of the withered person of the Shah himself." (pp. 158-159)

As soon as the humpback is brought to him and the Shah reads the letter, the humpback is hoisted up on the rope and swings from the pine tree. The Shah then asks for Ali. (pp. 164-165)

"After the defeat of the royal army at the attack of the Tehran gate, the Shah had solemnly sworn on the Koran and by his own head, that he would deliver up the city for three successive days to the pillage of his troops; and that he would not be satisfied unless at the end of that time twenty mauns of human eyes were placed before him. Humanity shudders at this recital, but true it is that in Persia, now as in ancient times, the extraction of eyes was always a punishment resorted to when death was not inflicted. Noses and ears were also frequently commanded to be brought before the conqueror, upon sacking a city; eyes almost always." (p. 198)

The Shah hates Zaul, "and he determined never to sheathe his sword until dead or alive he had both father and son in his possession." In the Shah's tent, surrounded by his supporters, "his face beaming with ferocious malignity, he pronounced the awful sentence of the katl-i-aum, or general massacre, and to give it an appearance of lawful and religious severity, he caused a firman for that purpose to be issued, sanctioned by a fetvah of the Mushtehed of Persia." (p. 199-200) It was the Siege of Kerman, and there was "heard the uplifted voices of a whole city in malediction of the tyrant." (p. 200)

From his horse, the Shah yelled, "A hundred tomauns for the head of Zaul, and five hundred for Zohrab alive." Everyone takes up the call for arms. (p. 202)

Zohrab sees his father slain, and then he cuts a pursuer in half (p. 204) and manages to rescue his father's body before being beaten and brought to the Shah. The Shah tells him it is his last day. Zohrab asks to be killed immediately so that he can "die without being grateful to thee for any thing." Then he asks the Shah if he may be the "atoning sacrifice" for the innocent people so that the bloodshed will stop. "If thou hast a heart, let my words reach it; and if thou hast a soul, let the fear of a future life and future retribution overtake it." The Shah calls him a "dog" and orders him to stop preaching. Zohrab retorts that he is the "father of dogs". (p. 213) To increase his suffering, the Shah orders: “Let his confinement be so strict, that the Shah will be jealous if even a ray of light visits him.” (p. 214)

Eyes of victims are brought to the Shah. Sadek assures the Shah that it is the requested number. The "unfeeling" Shah warns him that, if there are not enough, Sadek's own eyes will be taken to meet the request. The executioner shows him the tray of eyes and begins to count them, then the Grand Vizir Hajji Ibrahim bursts out with a plea for mercy for the innocent victims. "The perverseness of the Shah's mind, acting upon his hot and ardent nature, was like a parasitical plant, which is seen to entwine itself, cover over, and take possession of a large tree in the forests of tropical climates..." He then dismisses his executioner from his responsibilities. (pp. 216-218)

When the Shah's nephew Fatteh Ali appears, older than everyone remembers him, they long for his kingship. (pp. 234-235) The Shah cannot abide hearing complimentary words about his nephew because he feels that he is being negatively compared to his nephew. (p. 238) When the Shah tells his nephew that he killed his sister Amima, his nephew curses him, and the Shah orders him killed. (pp. 248-249) Fatteh Ali is taken to prison, lamenting Amima’s death. Sadek longs to tell him the truth but can’t. (pp. 253-254)

The Shah tells Sadek that "my liver is turned into blood," but Sadek prostates himself and begs: "Your slave is too great a lover of his Shah to commit such an act. Let the Shah kill him, but let him stay his hand from the blood of the innocent youth." The Shah calls Sadek a "base reptile" and dismisses him, but privately, the Shah worries that he is losing favor among his own servants. (pp. 259)

The Shah orders Zohrab to be paraded backwards on a donkey, spit on, then impaled. (p. 265)

Then he tells Zulma: Her father, the chief executioner, must kill Sadek before dawn. He doesn’t tell her why. Meanwhile, Sadek finds his name on a kill list, and Sadek and Hussein conspire to stab the Shah in his sleep. The Shah awakens enough to run around the room first before he’s stabbed in the heart and falls, still declaring he is the Shah. “And thus fell the scourge of Persia’s fair kingdom, and of her soft and thoughtless sons.” (p. 280)

Sadek removes the Shah's head and also takes the kill list. He then breaks the news to the confined prince Fatteh Ali that his uncle, the Shah, is dead, and that his sister, Amima, lives. Sadek puts the severed head in the Grand Vizir's room as a prank. (p. 285)

When Zulma hears the news of the Shah's death, she wants to tell the imprisoned Zohrab. Fatteh Ali gives him the news about the Shah and Amima. Fatteh Ali is bedecked with the koh noor and deriah noor jewels on his arms. (p. 320)

Zohrab marries Amima. Zulma settles for a quarrelsome marriage with Shir Khan Beg. Sadek chooses voluntary exile.



Book

James Morier. Zohrab, the Hostage. London: Richard Bentley, New Burlington Street, 1832.


If you'd like to learn more about my work, I've published books. Also, I write for Medium. There, readers with a paid membership don't have to worry about the paywall.

Wednesday, December 10, 2014

An unknown masterpiece of medieval Hindu tales introduced to English readers

In 1917, while studying at the Central Library in Kensington, London, to make a thorough inventory of Richard Francis Burton's writings, the independent scholar Norman Mosley Penzer stumbled across a strange and haunting collection of stories. It was eleventh-century Indian literature known as the Katha Sarit Sagara, or the Ocean of Story, written around 1070 by Somadeva, the court poet for Kashmir. It was translated from the Sanskrit into English by Charles Henry Tawney (1837-1922) – a linguist of Sanskrit, Hindi, Urdu, and Persian who had studied at Cambridge and gone to India in 1865 – and printed by the Asiatic Society of Bengal in a small series called Bibliotheca Indica (1880-1884).

Penzer would go on to release his own annotated reprint of Tawney's work in the 1920s. The story of his effort is documented in the book itself, in contemporary reviews, and in his preserved personal correspondence.

The Ocean of Story is a large collection of spiritual allegories involving divine agents and magic. It encompasses everything between birth and death, including romance, trickery, swift horses, menacing lions, and the pursuit of enlightenment. As the Morning Post wrote on Aug. 10, 1926, "it is of the same order as the Arabian Nights, the Decameron, and the Canterbury Tales, stories strung together like a necklace of beads, a convention beloved by the Middle Ages..." Of particular interest to the European audience was the myth of the "poison-damsel," that is, women with poisonous blood sent to assassinate enemies.

Penzer recognized that the passage he encountered "must belong to a work of the highest importance...I felt instinctively that this odd part of an unknown Indian work was to be of the utmost importance to me personally," even though "I could lay no claim whatever to Oriental scholarship." He temporarily switched his research focus away from Burton to learn more about the Ocean of Story.

Penzer first wrote to Tawney on July 26, 1919 to pitch the idea of a multi-volume reprint of his translation that would be enhanced by some updated notes on history and context. Tawney responded immediately with encouragement, but made clear – in letters on July 28 and Aug. 4 – that, at age 81, facing eviction from his house, he would not be able to participate intellectually or financially. His only advice was that Penzer use a horizontal line over a vowel to indicate its "long" nature in Sanskrit, rather than the "acute accent" mark that Tawney regretted using in his earlier work. "I shall always retain a feeling that you have paid me an undeserved compliment," he closed.

It took some effort for Penzer to find a willing publisher. This he found in the proprietor of Chas. J. Sawyer books in London (a business that operated from 1894 until 2012). In his "Retrospect" in Vol. IX, Penzer recalled Sawyer as saying that, although he had never before heard of the Ocean of Story, he sensed it to be "an unknown masterpiece" that he would be pleased to back financially.

The work was sold on a subscription basis; its ten volumes were released serially. The publisher asked 18 guineas up front for the full set, although it seems that the asking price dropped over time. The advertising brochure said that "each volume consists of approximately 350 pages…The binding is black buckram, with gold medallions on the front cover and back, with a gold ribbon marker and top edges gilt," and that it would look pleasing alongside Burton's translation of the Arabian Nights. The print run was limited to 1500 sets.

In 1923, Penzer published his Annotated Bibliography of Sir Richard Francis Burton. In his entry for Burton's adaptation of "Vikram and the Vampire," he found reason to insert an extended mention of the Ocean of Story, although it was generally otherwise unrelated to Burton's work.

The next year, in 1924, the first volume of the new Ocean of Story was released. Tawney did not live to see it.

The work did not merely reprint Tawney's translation. Penzer added extensive notes and comments, and forewords were written for volumes I through IX, respectively, by Sir Richard Carnac Temple, Sir George A. Grierson, M. Gaster, F. W. Thomas, E. Denison Ross, A. R. Wright, Maurice Bloomfield, W. R. Halliday, and Sir Atul Chatterjee. The tenth volume contained the appendices and index.

When Grierson wrote to Penzer on Aug. 6, 1924 expressing his interest in writing a foreword for the second volume, he explained that he would require three weeks to complete the task due to his poor eyesight. The same affliction plagued other elderly scholars. Bloomfield was originally invited to write his foreword for the sixth volume, but he wrote to Penzer on June 4, 1926 explaining that he could no longer read small print, "and with that taboo goes a glimmering of anything like investigation." Agreeing to a postponement, he mailed his completed foreword to Penzer on Oct. 31, 1926, and it was included in the seventh volume.

The collection received a great deal of attention in the popular newspapers and the literary press. The Times Literary Supplement gushed on Aug. 14, 1924:  "Of Mr Penzer's notes and appendices, no praise can be excessive." The same publication later reviewed Volumes II and III under the headline "The Hindu Nights," drawing a comparison with the better-known Arabian Nights. The Liverpool Post wrote on Jan. 16, 1927 that Tawney "never indulges in cheap Orientalism, nor does he try to Westernise these stories...His language...translates us into another world."

Halliday came to Penzer's attention when he reviewed Volumes I and II of the Ocean of Story for the journal Folk-Lore, particularly as his reviews chiefly complained of factual inaccuracies. Halliday's review of Volume III was rather more complimentary, accompanied by the disclaimer that "I feel that I owe Mr. Penzer amends, particularly as he has heaped coals of fire upon my head by allowing me to write a Foreword to volume VIII."

At the end of the ninth volume, Penzer wrote a "Terminal Essay" in which he extended appreciation to the others involved in his project. "My idea of inviting a different scholar to write a Foreword to each volume has proved a great success, and my work is now enriched by nine excellent Essays, each dealing with the great collection from a different angle," he wrote.

In October 1924, the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society attempted a brief list of examples of the contents of the Ocean of Story:  "...deisul or circunambulation, the chastity index motif, the external soul motif, the Garuda Bird, the Paisachi language, the Ghandharva form of marriage, communicating by signs, the entrapped suitor motif, and the magical articles motif." The Spectator explained on Nov. 20, 1926 that "there had been a great intermixture of cultures by the time of Somadeva. There are tales which are obviously derived from the pre-Aryan civilisation of India; there are Greek, Mongolian, and Arabic influences."

"Mr. Penzer's wide knowledge of the literary sources," said the Manchester Guardian on Aug. 19, 1926, "has enabled him to quote a larger number of analogous tales from other countries, and his references range from Ancient Egypt to the Norse; but he has not yet had an opportunity to grapple thoroughly with the problem."

After Tawney's death, Penzer remained in touch with his family members. On Jan. 5, 1928, Penzer received a letter from one of Tawney's children in King's Pride, Camberley: "I got your very kind letter this morning and I liked so very much what you said about Father and thank you very much for thinking it and saying it...One of his last regrets was his book had not been appreciated...but as you say perhaps he does know."

On the back of a postcard with one penny of pre-printed postage, Penzer wrote: "Finished the 'Ocean of Story' on Saturday, Jan. 21st 1928 at 9.52 A.M."  He kept the postcard. The tenth and final volume containing the index was published that February.

Penzer died in 1960. At some point, his personal correspondence and newspaper clippings related to the Ocean of Story came into the possession of Chas. J. Sawyer Booksellers. On Mar. 27, 1972, Sawyer sold the collection of "Orientalia Penzer, Miscellanea relating to Ocean of Story" for 50 pounds to a private collector in the United States. This was Morris Harold Saffron, a physician with a historical interest in medieval medicine, whose English translation of the work of the twelfth-century Maurus of Salerno had just been published two months previously. Saffron had studied at Columbia University in New York City, and today the Penzer miscellanea are under the curation of Columbia's Rare Book and Manuscript Library.

Originally posted to Helium Network, Jan. 24, 2013.

Image: Entrance to the Golden Temple, Amritsar, India, c. 1907, by Herbert Ponting (1870-1935) © The Commons. No known copyright restrictions. Flickr.


If you'd like to learn more about my work, I've published books. Also, I write for Medium.

Tuesday, December 9, 2014

Put down your dagger and be nice to eunuchs!

In Defense of Eunuchs is a Byzantine work of rhetoric written in Greek. It responds to the slander that was often hurled at eunuchs (castrated men). The author, Theophylact, wrote it in honor of his brother, Demetrius, who had been castrated by their father so he could enter imperial service. The length of the work is comparable to a magazine essay (to use an anachronism), but the format is primarily a dialogue.

Theophylact was born in the mid-eleventh century, became Archbishop of Ohrid in 1090, and wrote this work in the early twelfth century. The Orthodox archbishopric was under the authority of the Church in Constantinople, the center of the Byzantine empire. Today, the city of Ohrid (pronounced okh-REED) is in the modern-day Republic of Macedonia, near the borders of Albania and Greece.

Theophylact is believed to have written In Defense of Eunuchs after both he and the Byzantine emperor Alexius I Comnenus traveled to the Greek city of Thessalonica, about 250 km southeast of Ohrid. Two imperial visits were known to have occured between late 1105 through early 1107, so the work could be reasonably dated any time after 1105. This information is explained in Victor T. Cheney's work A Brief History of Castration, based on the French-language work of Paul Gautier, Theophylacte D'Achrida Discours, Traites, Poesies. Cheney loosely translated the entire work into English based on Gautier's French translation. He calls it "The Justification of Eunuchism." (For classical purists, this kind of derivative translation might be considered a twice-warmed leftover, but one needs knowledge of Greek or French to avoid relying on this translation.) All quotations below are from Cheney.

The work opens with a poem and a brief introduction in which Theophylact dedicates the work as a "gift" to his brother and briefly sums up some of the work's main points. What follows is a dialogue he claims to have reconstituted from something he heard in Thessalonica.

The first speaker (believed to be Stephan, a military commander, revealed as an ascetic Christian) briefly levels the accusations against eunuchs that were typical of the era. He says that "eunuchs are the stingiest and most selfish of mortals" and adds "liberty, ambition, jealousy, love of pettiness, pretense, meanness, and undue sensitivity" to their list of vices. Palace eunuchs who serve in the women's quarters will become sexually involved with the women, leading to an "ungodly situation." To highlight the threat to Christian virtue, he references the Sidonian goddess Astarte, who was said to have been born from the remains of a castrated god. On the other hand, eunuchs who are singers, whether in the theater or the Church, are drunken jokers who are sexually active with men. In either case, they are, finally, seen as "bad omens."

[As an aside: There's a 1923 film directed by Fritz Freisler, Irrlichter der Tiefe, in which Anita Berber plays the goddess Astarte. See this post on Facebook.]

The debate pauses briefly to allow the author Theophylact to illustrate the facial expressions of the two men. The accuser is "quiet" but "concentrated," intent "on binding the eunuch in chains" rhetorically. The defendant, himself a eunuch (believed to be Simon the Sanctified, a monk from Mount Athos), smiles politely and launches a lengthy, spirited comeback. Twice he asks the accuser to lay down his rhetorical "dagger."

The eunuch says that his accuser must be referring to foreign eunuchs in Persian harems, and surely it is unfair to attribute the same vices to Christian eunuchs in the Byzantine empire like himself. He name-drops eunuch ecclesiastics: the Archbishop of Thessalonica and the Bishops of Pydna, Petra, Edesse, and Bulgaria, all of whom, he said, "were voluntarily castrated to counter their own passions." He distinguishes these holy eunuchs from those "profligate" ones whose castration is motivated by the idea of consequence-free sex; the latter are not defended by him. Some early Gnostic "heretics" were profligate, leading the Church Fathers to oppose castration, but most contemporary eunuchs are motivated by "purity and piety," so the Church accordingly became more accepting by the twelfth century.

The eunuch notes that the accuser is a celibate ascetic. If the accuser considers his own sex organs to be "superfluous," why would it be blameworthy for another man to choose to remove his own superfluous organs, as one might remove a "sixth finger"? And if the accuser chooses to become thin and pale through fasting, altering his own natural constitution, why is the eunuch's altered body seen as more unnatural?

The eunuch says that "the Bible equates eunuchism with holiness: a eunuch as a servant of God," citing the examples of Daniel and his companions, Nehemiah, and Ebedmelech. Of the scriptures in general, he says that "I honor and worship them as life-giving rules. But I do not consent to be their prisoner." He prefers to "leap over" the old Hebrew laws "in an act of faith." While quoting scripture numerous times, he also makes arguments that appeal to human nature and common sense. Once, for emphasis, he mentions the names of Miltiades and Koroibos, who were ancient, pre-Christian, Greek representatives of dummies.

He says the fourth-century Emperor Constantine was given the honorific "The Great" because he favored eunuchs, overturning past precedents against eunuchs. In the sixth century, Emperor Justinian I criminalized the act of castration but continued to employ eunuchs. The speaker points out that this position is contradictory. He uses the metaphor of a false gold coin that makes the sound of copper when it is struck, implicitly declaring that the worthlessness of the emperor's decision should be apparent to all. "Either abolish castration and never use eunuchs," he apostrophized the long-dead emperor, "or transfer them to the highest posts and favor castration."

On a purely logical basis, the eunuch's strongest argument lies in his claim (if true) that the proportion of eunuchs who are evildoers is smaller than the proportion of non-eunuch men who are evildoers. Furthermore, he says, villainous men express a higher degree of evil than do villainous eunuchs. In other words, men are more likely to commit greater acts of evil than are eunuchs. If this claim is true, then, logically, castration actually reduces the amount of evil in the world. Its average effect on human behavior should be verifiable by "examin[ing] a number of priests from one or two churches, drawing on both your side and mine." It is unfair to condemn all eunuchs based on anecdotes of a few wicked ones who may be statistical anomalies.

Similarly, if church singers are blamed for stirring base passions with innovative melodies and harmonies, it should be recalled that this musical innovation was introduced by male composers, not by the eunuch performers.

The speaker does not express it quite so succinctly. This argument becomes an occasion for colorful speech, such as the repetition of the accusations that a eunuch's evil is "like the produce of an exhausted earth, which lacks good quality and taste" and that imperial bureaucrats "behave like young lions who roar and terrify other animals."

He believes his strongest argument – which he saves for last – is that eunuchs do not suffer from sexually-transmitted diseases because they have taken an irrevocable step that prevents them from sinning in a moment of weakness. They choose this life of purity, and they choose to alter their bodies to "reflect" their free choice. "You have said that many eunuchs are unchaste. This shows that the continent ones are chaste by will," he avers.

Inquiring if he should continue, his accuser is given an opportunity to speak again, and he responds: "That is enough for now." The two men embrace and kiss, and the eunuch triumphantly lifts up his young nephew who had listened closely the whole time.

To close the dialogue, the author, Theophylact, speaks once more in his own voice, as he had done at the very beginning. He indicates only his concern in remembering everything that had been said, since, especially in his old age, "I am not Simonides or Hippias, sages of great memory." What he finally recorded in this treatise he refers to as "merchandise" from his trip to Thessalonica.


If you'd like to learn more about my work, I've published books. Also, I write for Medium. There, readers with a paid membership don't have to worry about the paywall.

Monday, December 1, 2014

'Why shouldn't I be baptized?': A rich, castrated African meets an Apostle

The eunuch, a servant of the queen in Ethiopia, asks the Apostle Philip: "Why shouldn't I be baptized?" Philip baptizes him.

Image: The Baptism of the Ethiopian Eunuch by the Deacon Philip (painted 1545-1550) by Lambert Sustris (1515-1591) © public domain Wikimedia Commons.

In Chapter 8 of the New Testament's Book of Acts, verses 26-40, a eunuch official of the Ethiopian queen has just completed a religious pilgrimage to Jerusalem and is beginning his return journey south. The Apostle Philip overhears him reading aloud a passage from Isaiah 53:7-8 that laments unjust humiliation and lack of descendants. Philip takes the opportunity to accompany the eunuch for a short distance and tell him about Jesus, and the eunuch asks Philip to baptize him.

If indeed the eunuch was a real historical person, and not only a figure in a parable, it is not clear that his baptism would have represented his actual conversion to Christianity. The King James Version of the Bible published in 1611 includes a verse (Acts 8:37) in which the eunuch professes his new Christian faith immediately before being baptized. However, the Rev. Dr. Charles Francis Potter in "The Lost Years of Jesus Revealed" explained that this line "is not in our four oldest Greek manuscripts, Codexes Vaticanus and Sinaiticus of the fourth century and Codexes Alexandrinus and Ephraemi of the fifth.'" Modern translators of the Bible recognize that this line was added to the text perhaps a century later to deliver a certain theological teaching, and newer publications include the verse only as commentary in the margin.

We do not know the race or religion of this nameless eunuch. He may have been connected to the Essenes, a Jewish sect popular around Jesus's time, as suggested by Potter, since baptism was popular among the Essenes. Potter further speculated that the Ethiopian queen may have sent him on the thousand-mile journey to Jerusalem to retrieve religious writings such as the apocryphal Book of Enoch. This would explain why he was in possession of a scroll with Isaiah's text, and why he bothered traveling to Jerusalem when castrated men were explicitly forbidden from the Temple (Deut. 23:1).

Warren Gage, an Old Testament Professor at Knox Theological Seminary, wrote in "The Ethiopian Eunuch Finds Joy" that according to "tradition," the Ethiopian eunuch

"fathered the Coptic Church... It is the church that gave us Clement of Alexandria, Origen and Athanasius. Through the centuries, the millions of this church call this eunuch their father. He, a eunuch, was chosen in the good mercies of to be the father of faith in Africa!"

The word "eunuch" sometimes refers to a position typically held by castrated men rather than indicating whether a particular individual was actually castrated (a matter that would be impolite to verify in most social contexts). It is reasonable to question whether the individual described in Acts was castrated. Scholz questioned why none of the early Church Fathers who castrated themselves, such as Origen, mentioned this Biblical episode; had they recognized the Ethiopian eunuch as physically castrated, surely they would have seen him as a role model.

However, Mathew Kuefler pointed out in "The Manly Eunuch" that the late-fourth-century St. Jerome once expressed his preference to refer to the Ethiopian eunuch as a "man" because of "the vigor of his faith." (He also recommended a pilgrimage to the fountain at Bethsur near Hebron where the eunuch was thought to have been baptized.) Had Jerome not believed this individual was actually castrated, he would not have needed to explicitly dignify him as a man. Furthermore, Africa has a long history of castrating slave boys, so the idea of an Ethiopian eunuch is not far-fetched. For one more modern example, Britain's foreign office learned in November 1884 that the Ottoman Sultan had a ship bound for Zanzibar that contained eight slave children, half of whom were castrated boys from Ethiopia. (Britain opposed slavery but did not wish to offend Zanzibar; ultimately they did not search the ship, according to Ehud R. Toledano in "The Ottoman Slave Trade and Its Suppression: 1840-1890.") This is only one example representing countless such offenses throughout history going back to ancient times. It is thus quite plausible that the nameless Ethiopian eunuch in the Book of Acts - if he was a real person - indeed was castrated, and that the Biblical reference to him as a "eunuch" together with his interest in Isaiah's lament of lost descendants was an attempt to convey the fact of his castration.

Castrated men were considered damaged in a Jewish tradition that placed high value on descendants. In the ancient world overall, they were often loathed because of their association with servitude; many castrated men were slaves themselves and were compelled to participate in the slave system by guarding harems of kept women. Some, like the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts, rose to positions of wealth and power in royal courts and were given servants to drive their horses on long journeys, yet still were not free according to our definition of the term today. 

Given his situation, the Ethiopian eunuch can be seen as a role model for self-respect and spiritual autonomy. Acts 8:36-38 (New International Version 1984) tells the story:

"As they traveled along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch said, 'Look, here is water. Why shouldn’t I be baptized?' And he gave orders to stop the chariot. Then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water and Philip baptized him."

The queen's official perceives that he is as entitled as any other human being to receive a sacrament from one of Jesus's twelve Apostles and he takes the initiative to perform the action without delay. The event is a popular subject in Christian art, for example, in this painting by Rembrandt Van Rijn. The story of the Ethiopian eunuch thus has an important place in Bible study and in religious history.

April 2017 update: Artsy's page on Rembrandt Harmensz. van Rijn provides Rembrandt's bio, images of over 200 of his works, exclusive articles, up-to-date Rembrandt exhibition listings, and related artists and other information. The Kunstmuseum Basel is scheduled to exhibit “Hola Prado! Two Collections in Dialogue” featuring the work of Rembrandt Harmensz. van Rijn.

Learn more on the Wikipedia article for "Ethiopian eunuch."

You may be interested (I haven't yet gotten access to it): Sean D. Burke, Queering Early Christian Discourse: The Ethiopian Eunuch. It's a book chapter from Bible Trouble: Queer Reading at the Boundaries of Biblical Scholarship, ed. Teresa J. Hornsby and Ken Stone, The Society of Biblical Literature, 2011. (pp. 175-190)

Article originally posted to Helium Network on Oct. 15, 2011.


If you'd like to learn more about my work, I've published books. Also, I write for Medium.

Related to studying codices

The VisColl team "received a three-year grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities Digital Humanities Advancement Grants program to fund the VCEditor 2.0 Project" to "support work undertaken by staff in the Schoenberg Institute for Manuscript Studies and the Penn Libraries Digital Library Development team." (viscoll.org) The Trump regime 2025 terminated the project.

Consider the role of silence here:

"Unsure how to understand this, the eunuch asks ‘does the prophet say this, about himself or about someone else?’ This is all Philip needs to speak – and starting with this scripture, to proclaim to him the good news of Jesus. (v.35). Luke’s choice of phrase, ‘opening his mouth’ (ESV) is interesting here, as it echoes the previous description of the suffering servant who ‘did not open his mouth’. It is well know that Jesus’ humiliating death came to be interpreted through the figure of the suffering servant. But as Diarmaid McCulloch notes in his book Silence: A Christian History, the only unusual feature about the Servant’s behaviour is his silence (Isaiah 53.7). I suggest that this motif of silence is significant here because it is by breaking through the silence of the eunuch’s exclusion from the Temple, that Philip opens the way for the eunuch to join the household of God." (Jonathan Halliwell, CofE Network of Distinctive Deacons, emphases mine)