Beast with two backs
euphemistic metaphor for two persons engaged in sexual intercourse
Making the beast with two backs is a euphemistic metaphor for two people engaged in sexual intercourse. In English, the expression dates back to at least William Shakespeare's Othello (Act 1, Scene 1, ll. 126–127, c. 1601–1603):
I am one, sir, that comes to tell you your daughter and the Moor are now making the beast with two backs.
It refers to the situation in which a couple—in the missionary position, on their sides, kneeling, or standing—cling to each other as if a single creature, with their backs to the outside. The earliest known occurrence of the phrase is in Rabelais's Gargantua and Pantagruel (c. 1532) as the phrase la bête à deux dos. Thomas Urquhart translated Gargantua and Pantagruel into English, which was published posthumously around 1693.
In the vigour of his age he married Gargamelle, daughter to the King of the Parpaillons, a jolly pug, and well-mouthed wench. These two did oftentimes do the two-backed beast together, joyfully rubbing and frotting their bacon 'gainst one another.
See also
The Beast with Two Backs, a studio album by the goth rock band Inkubus Sukkubus.
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Beast with two backs” as euphemistic metaphor for two persons engaged in sexual intercourse. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as euphemistic metaphor for two persons engaged in sexual intercourse. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 23, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q4876873. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1601, 1603, 1532 and 1693.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Beast with two backs”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Beast with two backs primary sources, Beast with two backs archive and Beast research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Beast with two backs”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Beast with two backs” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.