different realities and reactions When the soldier finally was subdued, the king said that he should be thrown back into the river and drowned.464 The descriptions of Friedrich in the two stories from Potsdam does not sound particularly humane and a case from 1775 has some similarities to them. From a lower instance the outcome proposed to Friedrich was that a man convicted of killing the child of his master due to melancholia should be sentenced to imprisonment for life. The decision of Friedrich is said to have been that the former soldier, who, according to the king, already during his military service had killed a child, should be ”ohne Priester exsecutirt”. If he had in mind the military legislation, meaning no access to pastoral care at all, or only no clergy present at the site of execution is unknown due to the short and informal note.465 We have already noted that the king could point to suicide as a solution to prefer, thereby coming into conflict with the traditional ecclesiastical view on suicide. Problematic from a perspective of increasing humane legislation is not only the legislation already mentioned but also for example the earlier act of king Friedrich stating that a woman causing a soldier to desert was to be hanged. Two such hangings were also executed in Breslau.466 Friedrich has been described as an Enlightenment ruler, who abolished torture and generally made the criminal law more humane.467 At the same time he could cause more persons to be executed or put in circumstances themselves probably would describe as horrible, because of the overwhelming risk they would go to hell instead of heaven. Although we should pursue the question of influence behind the ordinances, we can also wonder if much influence was necessary? Friedrich himself seems to have been both interested in this area and rather keen to proclaim such ordinances. The prehistory of the ordinances is still in need of being pieced together. Probably underhand contacts have played a role in it. Ideas 464 Knauth 1825b p 30 sq. 465 ’executed without priest’ Büsching 1788 p 250 states that the case was brought before the king 17 May 1775 and quotes his written reply. 466 Frauenstädt 1903 p 279 sq. 467 See e g Berner 1978 p 32 sq. 136
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=