Décartèlement or Quartering: an edifying penalty in Modern Age

Fiche du document

Date

22 avril 2022

Discipline
Type de document
Périmètre
Langue
Identifiants
Collection

Archives ouvertes

Licence

info:eu-repo/semantics/OpenAccess



Citer ce document

Antoine Follain, « Décartèlement or Quartering: an edifying penalty in Modern Age », HAL-SHS : histoire, ID : 10670/1.zztxzi


Métriques


Partage / Export

Résumé 0

In Modern Age violence has many facets. 1 At this time, the capital punishment was neither simple nor quick or discreete but it was supposed to inflict the condemned atrocious pain and to destroy his body. French legislation never exactly determined which penalty matched with each case. As to the collection of German laws Constitution criminelle de Charles-Quint or Carolina (1532), it contained a great number of articles either precise on the penalty or open to any method. 2 For example, a poisoning was punished by torture on the wheel if the culprit was a man but if a woman, by drowning "ou punie d'une autre peine de mort, suivant ce qui se trouvera en usage" (or another death penalty depending on what was the use) (art. 130). The honourable pouvoir arbitraire (arbitrary) of the judges let them decide a death penalty and how to inflict it, in accordance with the use and their preference in the means. Once death penalty had been publicly announced (see Annex), it was executed in a spectacular way which was part of the judiciary approach. It aimed at turning the condemned into an exemplary execute "afin que la peine d'un seul puisse inspirer de la crainte au plus grand nombre" (so that the penalty of one person could inspire threat to the biggest number). 3 According to some lawyers' commentaries, the condemned did not own his own body anymore, and it was justified that Justice use it to the benefits of society. This loss of ownership happened even earlier since it was mentioned to justify the use of torture. At the end of a trial, everything was done to have an edifying show. Killing by hanging or decapitation were simple means. Hanging used gravity, with a slipknot because the techniques which broke the neck were not in use. Consequently, it provoked suffocation and death. The cost was moderate, there was no blood flow and other flows did not have the same symbolic value. The execute was clearly visible as he was in height. The corpse could remain in place or hung elsewhere to remain exhibited as long as necessary. Decapitation was more technical. It killed clearly and quickly so long as the executioner was qualified, if not, it was a butchery. 4 Other means put question, why suffocating, decapitating, scalding, torture on the wheel, burning or tearing apart ? The diversity of means deserves the following reasonings.

document thumbnail

Par les mêmes auteurs

Sur les mêmes sujets

Sur les mêmes disciplines

Exporter en