Main  Contacts  
Table of contents
PREFACE
EROTIC SYMBOLISM-1.1
EROTIC SYMBOLISM-1.2
EROTIC SYMBOLISM-2.1
EROTIC SYMBOLISM-2.2
EROTIC SYMBOLISM-2.3
EROTIC SYMBOLISM-2.4
EROTIC SYMBOLISM-2.5
EROTIC SYMBOLISM-3.1
EROTIC SYMBOLISM-3.2
EROTIC SYMBOLISM-3.3
EROTIC SYMBOLISM-3.4
EROTIC SYMBOLISM-3.5
EROTIC SYMBOLISM-4.1
EROTIC SYMBOLISM-4.2
EROTIC SYMBOLISM-4.3
EROTIC SYMBOLISM-5.1
EROTIC SYMBOLISM-5.2
EROTIC SYMBOLISM-5.3
EROTIC SYMBOLISM-6
THE MECHANISM OF DETUMESCENCE-1.1
THE MECHANISM OF DETUMESCENCE-1.2
THE MECHANISM OF DETUMESCENCE-1.3
THE MECHANISM OF DETUMESCENCE-1.4
THE MECHANISM OF DETUMESCENCE-2.1
THE MECHANISM OF DETUMESCENCE-2.2
THE MECHANISM OF DETUMESCENCE-2.3
THE MECHANISM OF DETUMESCENCE-2.4
THE MECHANISM OF DETUMESCENCE-3.1
THE MECHANISM OF DETUMESCENCE-3.2
THE MECHANISM OF DETUMESCENCE-4.1
THE MECHANISM OF DETUMESCENCE-4.2
THE MECHANISM OF DETUMESCENCE-4.3
THE PSYCHIC STATE IN PREGNANCY-1
THE PSYCHIC STATE IN PREGNANCY-2
THE PSYCHIC STATE IN PREGNANCY-3
THE PSYCHIC STATE IN PREGNANCY-4
HISTORIES OF SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT HISTORY-1.1
HISTORIES OF SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT HISTORY-1.2
HISTORIES OF SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT HISTORY-2.1
HISTORIES OF SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT HISTORY-2.2
HISTORIES OF SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT HISTORY-3-4
HISTORIES OF SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT HISTORY-5.1
HISTORIES OF SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT HISTORY-5.2
INDEX OF AUTHORS

days. The mare is specially mentioned (Haddon and Stubbs, 

_Councils and Ecclesiastical Documents_, vol. iii, p. 422). In 

Theodore's Penitential, another Anglo-Saxon document of about the 

same age, those who habitually fornicate with animals are 

adjudged ten years of penance. It would appear from the 

_Penitentiale Pseudo-Romanum_ (which is earlier than the eleventh 

century) that one year's penance was adequate for fornication 

with a mare when committed by a layman (exactly the same as for 

simple fornication with a widow or virgin), and this was 

mercifully reduced to half a year if he had no wife. 

(Wasserschleben, _Die Bussordnungen der Abendlaendlichen Kirche_, 

p. 366). The _Penitentiale Hubertense_ (emanating from the 

monastery of St. Hubert in the Ardennes) fixes ten years' penance 

for sodomy, while Fulbert's Penitential (about the eleventh 

century) fixes seven years for either sodomy or bestiality. 

Burchard's Penitential, which is always detailed and precise, 

specially mentions the mare, the cow and the ass, and assigns 

forty days bread and water and seven years penance, raised to ten 

years in the case of married men. A woman having intercourse with 

a horse is assigned seven years penance in Burchard's 

Penitential. (Wasserschleben, ib. pp. 651, 659.) 

 

The extreme severity which was frequently exercised toward those guilty of 

this offense, was doubtless in large measure due to the fact that 

bestiality was regarded as a kind of sodomy, an offense which was 

frequently viewed with a mystical horror apart altogether from any actual 

social or personal injury it caused. The Jews seem to have felt this 

horror; it was ordered that the sinner and his victim should both be put 

to death (Exodus, Ch. 22, v. 19; Leviticus, Ch. 20, v. 15). In the middle 

ages, especially in France, the same rule often prevailed. Men and sows, 

men and cows, men and donkeys were burnt together. At Toulouse a woman was 

burnt for having intercourse with a dog. Even in the seventeenth century a 

learned French lawyer, Claude Lebrun de la Rochette, justified such 

sentences.[53] It seems probable that even to-day, in the social and legal 

attitude toward bestiality, sufficient regard is not paid to the fact that 

this offense is usually committed either by persons who are morbidly 

abnormal or who are of so low a degree of intelligence that they border on 

feeble-mindedness. To what extent, and on what grounds, it ought to be 

punished is a question calling for serious reconsideration. 

 

 

FOOTNOTES: 

 

[33] For Krafft-Ebing's discussion of the subject see _Op. cit._, pp. 

530-539. 

 

[34] In England it is not uncommon to use the term "unnatural offence;" 

this is an awkward and possibly misleading practice which should not be 

followed. In Germany a similar confusion is caused by applying the term 

"sodomy" to these cases as well as to pederasty. Krafft-Ebing considers 

that this error is due to the jurists, while the theologians have always 

distinguished correctly. In this matter, he adds, science must be _ancilla 

theologiae_ and return to the correct usage of words. 

 

[35] This childish interest, with later abnormal developments, may be seen 

in History I of the Appendix to this volume. 


Page 3 from 5:  Back   1   2  [3]  4   5   Forward