The phenomenon of death penalty in the Middle Ages： the golden age of executioners constituted by countless tortured bodies.

△ Coppergraph, the execution method of four horses dismembered

2. Rulers’ ruling tools

With the beginning of the new millennium, more and more laws pursue social peace. These laws are mainly to limit the occurrence of conflicts and resist the use of violence by nobles. Of course, when dealing with certain felons, it is also possible to adopt the death penalty. In the 11th century, the death penalty is only applicable to people without freedom. At the beginning of the 12th century, both cities and villages showed their yearning for peace, and physical punishment and death penalty gradually became important, but these punishments were usually exempted by paying fines. Since the 12th century, the church has intensified its persecution of those who deviate from the Catholic Church.

In 1199, the Pope issued an order to identify heresy as the same as the crime of killing the emperor, thus providing a legal basis for the use of the death penalty to eradicate heretics. In the crusade against the Albi Sect, a religious group in South France, the French monarch systematically used the death penalty to deal with pagans for the first time since 1209. The first secular monarch to enact laws to punish pagans by burning at stake was Friedrich II of Hohenstaufen dynasty.

Since then, relevant laws have been promulgated one after another. In 1231, Pope Gregory IX defined the duties of the Inquisition, thus establishing a set of legal trial procedures for pagans.

In the legal documents of the 12th and 13th centuries, the number of death penalty used to eradicate heretics rose sharply, which led Victor Acht to conclude in 1951 that "the birth of the death penalty began in the 12th and 13th centuries", which was also the title of his book "The Birth of the Death Penalty".

Of course, this view has also been criticized. Critics believe that it is easy to make people mistakenly think that there was no death penalty before that. We would like to explain here that since the 12th century, there have been more and more records of aristocratic rulers punishing crimes with the death penalty in legal documents, which shows that the death penalty has gradually become the ruling tool of rulers. As for the actual application scale of the death penalty, the records in the literature are not so clear.

The use of the death penalty was recorded throughout the Middle Ages. Of course, until the end of the Middle Ages, the death penalty occurred almost exclusively in the areas ruled by kings and principalities. From the early medieval literature, we can often find cases in which the king sentenced criminals to hang. However, it is doubtful that monarchs and princes began to regularly sentence prisoners to death in the heyday of the Middle Ages. Heinrich I, Duke of Silesia, once listened to the advice of his wife Hedwig, instead of punishing criminals with the death penalty, he sent criminals to build Trebnitz Monastery until the crime was redeemed. This practice has been widely praised.

In addition, the extent to which the king used the death penalty should not be overestimated. As for the record that Karl the Great executed all 4,500 captured Saxons in one day in Verdun in 782, it still sounds quite legendary, and its authenticity is still controversial.

According to records, most of the death penalty cases in the Middle Ages were related to political rebellion and military conflicts. In 899, a woman was tied to a post and hanged because she confessed to taking part in poisoning the Emperor Anulf after torture.

　For mutinies and uprisings, medieval rulers often adopted the method of putting the traitor leader to death, so as to make an example of them. According to the small chronicle of Sicily, in 1232, the city of Messina launched an uprising against the Hohenstaufen emperor Friedrich II. Friedrich II led the army to occupy Messina the following year, and claimed to forgive all the insurgents for their crimes, but a few days later he broke his word and executed several insurgents.

It can be seen that until the end of the Middle Ages, the death penalty was mainly used by princes for revenge and was the winner’s justice.

△ The most severe "pull-up" torture

3. Death penalty jurisdiction means money.

Compared with princes, the rulers of cities are not inferior. In 1333, there was a serious conflict between Walter von Grozek and Strasbourg, Zurich, Bern, Lucerne and Basel. The reason is that Walter attacked businessmen in these cities. The conflict ended in Walter’s Waterloo, and his palace in Alsace was ransacked. The city that won the victory quickly sent all the captured more than 50 soldiers to the guillotine.

If the death penalty is regarded as the revenge of the princes in the late Middle Ages and the justice of the winners, it is not surprising that the princes used the death penalty to mediate some misfortunes or unhappiness in the ruling areas.

In 1500, the Duke of Albrecht of Saxony died. He is called "Albrecht the Tolerant", but there is a story circulating among the people that is not commensurate with this title.

In a game, Duke Albrecht lost to an infantryman for many years. Later, he tried to settle the debt with the infantryman, but the infantryman refused. In a rage, Albrecht called the executioner and ordered him to take the stubborn infantry to the guillotine. Only then did the infantry realize their dangerous situation, and hurriedly asked Albrecht for forgiveness, claiming that they were willing to give up their debts, but it was too late. Albrecht the Tolerant did not show any tolerance, and the infantry was taken away and beheaded.

As for unwelcome women, some people use similar methods to eradicate them. King Henry VIII of England is a very famous example. He guillotined two of his six wives, Anna Boleyn and catherine howard, on the grounds that they had committed treason.

Although this may have angered some contemporaries in the 16th century, Henry acted according to the medieval tradition.

The imperial free city holds the jurisdiction of death penalty in its own hands, which has a great influence on the history of death penalty. On the one hand, these imperial free cities set out to establish civil self-government institutions, on the other hand, they also tried to bring sovereignty into the hands of city councils.

On October 19th, 1331, King John of Bohemia granted the breslau Parliament the jurisdiction of death penalty. Prior to this, the high judicial power (death penalty jurisdiction) was in the hands of the Speaker, who had to be a citizen of breslau, but formally did not obey the Parliament.

In Nuremberg, according to a privilege granted by Friedrich II in 1219, the speaker of the royal family holds both high judicial power and low judicial power. The goal of parliament is to get judicial power from the royal family, because judicial power is regarded as a core tool to maintain power and rule. In 1480, a jurist in Nuremberg believed that the royal judicial power was gallows and ropes.

In the 14th century, the Nuremberg Parliament basically mastered the lower judicial power. Gross, a member of the aristocratic family, got the position of speaker in 1339 by mortgage. Although the post was briefly returned to the hands of the military chief of Nuremberg Castle, it became the collateral of Nuremberg City in 1385 and was mortgaged for a long time a few years later. Finally, in 1427, the border governor Friedrich transferred the castle to Nuremberg City, together with various powers of the military chief of Nuremberg Castle. As a result, the Nuremberg parliament finally mastered the position of speaker, although formally, the parliament is not the owner of high judicial power.

We can list many cities, but the results are almost the same. First, the governor position was obtained from the upper class of the city through mortgage, and then the mayor and parliament obtained the death penalty jurisdiction through various channels. In 1387, in a special decree, King wenzel confirmed that Frankfurt had independent jurisdiction over the death penalty. In 1400, the king granted the same power to the Zurich City Council. In 1415, St. Gallen obtained the jurisdiction of death penalty, and Eichstadt only got this power in 1446.

And the lubricant among them is all money. Like every ruling title, death penalty jurisdiction means real money, so it will be bought, sold and mortgaged.

4. The dark side of urban modernization

As for why these big cities have often executed the death penalty since 1400, there is still no convincing explanation. We can only find some general reasons.

Since the 14th century, Free City and Imperial Free City have implemented the policy of residents’ autonomy to a great extent, and pursued a different social model from aristocratic areas. If we follow Max Weber’s theory that "the state is an entity with a monopoly position in the legal use of violence", then these cities will be the first pioneers in the gradual formation of the concept of the state in the late Middle Ages, because the most important purpose of urban policy is to safeguard rights and peace.

In order to achieve peace unconditionally, we must crack down on any form of violence and self-administration of justice through coercive measures by those in power, one of which is punishment.

However, it is too simple to think that the increase of death penalty cases in the Middle Ages is only a counterattack by the authorities against violence. Because it was mainly thieves who were sentenced to death at that time, safeguarding rights and peace first meant stabilizing and maintaining the existing property distribution. "Cities began to … gradually penetrate into all areas of citizens’ lives by formulating and managing rules and regulations, so as to achieve the goal of fairness, peace and win-win."

　Generally speaking, the urban history in the late Middle Ages is described as a successful history. "Medieval cities were the embryos of modern countries. In the strict hierarchical society in the Middle Ages, cities showed signs of typical characteristics of modern countries in the fields of constitution, management, bourgeoisie, organization, police force, finance, social economy and welfare undertakings."

The death penalty is the dark side of urban modernization in the late Middle Ages. William Ebbell regarded the late Middle Ages as a "greenhouse for modern ruling countries". As the ruler, the city is the direct promoter of the birth of the executioner profession.

As a profession, executioner was first mentioned in Augustburg and Lubeck at the end of 13th century. In the 14th century, there were more and more records about executioners. But even a big city like Frankfurt did not have its own executioner until 1373.

Until the 16th century, many cities executed the death penalty by renting executioners from neighboring big cities. Schaaffhausen, for example, often turned to konstanz and Zurich for help. Executioners in Nuremberg and Munich are also often invited to help in the execution ground in neighboring cities. In addition, at the end of the Middle Ages, the executioner profession began to have a full-time division of labor.

In the early Middle Ages, executioners were also responsible for supervising slaughterhouses, catching stray dogs, and supervising casinos and regional brothels. In the late Middle Ages, executioners only had to torture and execute criminals.

This process of full-time division of labor is another powerful evidence that the number of death sentences rose sharply in the 15th century.

5. History of fear and conflict

The history of the death penalty was a history of fear and conflict until the 16th century. It is mainly reflected in the fact that if the request for pardon of prisoners is rejected, it may lead to diplomatic and political conflicts, which is much more serious than the execution of prisoners.

Rulers have always been afraid of retaliation, afraid that the verdict may bring trouble, and the most straightforward embodiment is to set up a special oath institution. Until the 17th century, every prisoner who got out of prison had to promise in writing that he would not take revenge after he got out of prison.

In addition to fear of revenge, rulers are also afraid of actions to save prisoners. In 1427, the city of Paris announced that Suwadji de Fremont Villas, the enemy of the city, would be hanged.

However, the execution process is very strange. The judge and the executioner were so anxious that they didn’t even let Suwadji repent and sent him directly to the gallows. During the execution, the rope was broken. According to the practice at that time, the hanged man should be pardoned when the rope was broken, but the judge ordered the executioner to execute again. This time, Suwadji died.

The recorder explained why the executioner was in a hurry to execute, which was contrary to the usual practice. Before the execution, there was a risk that Suwadji would be rescued. Suwadji had many powerful relatives who would try to rescue him.

In 1501, Kopf, a resident of Munich, was burned blind due to severe abuse of his wife, and then left Munich with his brother Sigmund. Both of them said that the city and duke of Munich deprived them of their rights and would be at odds with the city of Munich, which is why the two brothers attacked and robbed Munich businessmen, set fires in the suburbs of Munich and did other things that were not conducive to Munich for many years.

In the early 16th century, even a powerful city like Nuremberg had to consider the possible political and military consequences of executing a prisoner. In 1501, in order to prevent Hans von Seckendorf from sending troops to rescue ulrich Blumenschein, an aristocratic robber sentenced to death, the Nuremberg Parliament specially set up a patrol knight in front of Nuremberg City during the execution, because Seckendorf had made a lot of efforts to rescue Blumenschein before, but failed.

In 1508, at the request of the Bishop of Wü rzburg, Nuremberg arrested the robber Kanz Roesler. The Bishop motioned for Roesler to be sentenced to death on charges of undermining the peace of the city-state. However, before making a decision, members of the Nuremberg parliament discussed: If the death penalty is imposed, in case it causes dissatisfaction among the surrounding knights and leads to violent conflicts, whether Nuremberg City can accept it.

Finally, Parliament decided to sentence Roesler to death. At the same time, the parliament sent two explanatory letters to the surrounding knights. As for the powerful neighbor, the border governor of Brandenburg-ansbach, the parliament also sent someone to state the reasons for Roesler’s death sentence.

This abstract is selected from History of Death Penalty in Europe, published by CITIC Publishing Group/Chu Chen Culture in September 2018.