The Glorious Sexual Revolution: William III and the Expression of Queer Subjectivities in Early Modern Britain

1533年的《鸡奸法》是英国第一部民事鸡奸法，规定男子之间的性交为死罪。然而，对“鸡奸者”的明确迫害直到17世纪末和18世纪初才开始。历史学家认为，1690年成立的“礼仪改革协会”（Society for the Reform of Manners）是造成压迫上升的原因，首次将同性恋问题引起公众的关注（Norton，2016）。这个项目将挑战这种话语，提供替代证据来解释为什么迫害和更广泛的酷儿主体性意识开始在这一时期。它将扩展酷儿理论家的工作，如朱迪思·巴特勒和赫尔穆特·帕夫，摆脱本质主义，这种本质主义通常是同性恋历史的基础（巴特勒，2006 &帕夫，2012）。这将允许对后来被描述为“同性恋”的早期现代起源进行更细致的研究。作为其主要来源基础，本研究将分析反威廉讽刺。这些文件包含对国王威廉三世（1650 - 1702）及其宫廷的鸡奸指控。通过将研究重点从审判和犯罪转移到其他替代性行为的指标上，该项目将挑战传统的历史叙述，这些叙述将可识别的同性恋身份表达在19世纪。相反，它将致力于定位17世纪后期以同性欲望和女性化行为为中心的酷儿主观性。这将通过将最近的学术思想与更微妙的性别身份概念化相结合来支持，这些概念并不局限于二进制（Puff，2012）。通过这种原始的方法，这个项目有可能改变我们对英国同性恋欲望和行为发展的理解。

The 'Buggery Act' of 1533 was England's first civil sodomy law, making sexual intercourse between men a capital offence. However, the explicit persecution of 'sodomites' did not begin until the late 17th and early 18th centuries. Historians have argued that the 'Society for the Reformation of Manners', created in 1690, was responsible for this rise in oppression, bringing homosexuality to public attention for the first time (Norton, 2016). This project will challenge this discourse, offering alternative evidence to explain why the persecution and wider awareness of queer subjectivities began during this period. It will expand on the work of queer theorists, such as Judith Butler and Helmut Puff, to move away from the essentialism that has typically characterised works foundational to the history of homosexuality (Butler, 2006 & Puff, 2012). This will allow for a more nuanced study of the early modern origins of what is later characterised as 'homosexual'. As its primary source base, this research will analyse anti-Williamite satires. These documents contain explicit accusations of sodomy against King William III (1650 - 1702) and his court. By shifting research focus away from trials and criminality to look at other indicators of alternative sexual behaviour, this project will challenge conventional historical narratives which place the expression of a recognisable homosexual identity in the 19th century. Instead, it will work to locate queer subjectivities which centre on same-sex desire and effeminate behaviour in the late 17th century. This will be supported by incorporating recent scholarly ideas with more nuanced conceptualisations of sexual identity that are not restricted to binaries (Puff, 2012). Through this original methodology, this project has the potential to transform our understanding of the development of homosexual desire and behaviour in Britain.