different realities and reactions pare the condemned in prison but there was no need for any Protestant to have a priest following them to their execution. As the principal reason to punish was to deter and that was obstructed by the presence of the priest, this was forbidden at executions for murder and crimes that threatened public security.454 One can wonder why the military legislation was much severer than the civilian? Two possible suggestions: The punishments for soldiers were generally severer and an armed soldier trained to kill and prepared to die could probably be seen as a much greater threat to individuals in the government or even to royalty. That Friedrich was interested in the subject is known from a note he wrote when approving the ordinance of 1769. He stated the aim of the ordinance as hindering those planning to commit murder in order to be executed. To be executed without the presence of any priest was more deterring than any form of execution. Suicide was also better than murder as it only deprived the state of one citizen instead of two.455 A similar view to the one Friedrich stated has been given by Ernst Ferdinand Klein – the Royal ordinance of 1769 was motivated by bitter experience. It had been evident that the pastoral care given to the condemned, and especially the assurances of eternal salvation had moved those present, especially the women, and ignited in them the hope to receive such a salvation and death, resulting in the aim to murder any child in order to be executed.456 How much this often and in many circumstances repeated view was of any importance is however hard to determine. 454 Ordinance nr 48 3 July 1769 Novum Corpus 1771 p 6179 sqq. 455 ”J’ai interdit Les pretes pour Les Grand Crimes quand des hommes ne voulant pas se tuér eux meme crainte de Le Enfer tuent un enfant pour avoir Le tems de faire penitence, ou dans des Crimes affreux, pour empécher La perte des Deux Citoyens L'homicide Simple de Soy meme etant preferable a L’assasinat d’un autre, dont Le Coupable et encore puni de Mort; dans Les Mauvaisses actions ou il n’y a pas un atrossité outrée, le prete peut jouér Son rolle Comme a L’ordinaire, mais je me sais bien trouvé de L’avoir interdit dans ces Cas exsepté, parce que cela a fait plus d’Impretion que Les potensses et Les Roues.” Note on the approval by FriedrichII in 26 July 1769 Repositur 49 A 1 Hauptabteilung I GStAPK. 456 Klein 1798 p118. The view of Klein on the impact of the execution was not unique. Another good example can be found in Hitzig und Häring 1847 p 420 where an execution in Dresden 1821 is described as a festivity causing the spectators to wish to die in the same 133
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=