Skip to main content
×
×
Home
  • Print publication year: 2010
  • Online publication date: May 2010

1 - The development of the law

Summary

German modernization, far from loosening the hold of a culture of honor, strengthened and expanded it. The law itself was crucial in this respect. In the course of the nineteenth century, German law was liberalized as it moved from an adjudication system based on estate (Stand) to one of formal equality and civil rights. Defamation law followed suit and was reconstituted along more democratic lines. But this transformation, rather than undermining the old values of honor, provided them with a new lease on life. The result, by the Kaiserreich, was a hybrid legal culture that merged key liberal legal principles – the Rechtsstaat, legal equality, civil rights – with a jurisprudence that assumed and protected the social hierarchies and status differences embedded in the concept of honor. In so doing, it provided the institutional basis for the vast expansion of defamation lawsuits, as the conflicts of modern society came to play themselves out in honor disputes. Legal developments in Prussia were key here, since it was Prussia's criminal code that formed the basis for the statutory laws regulating defamation after German unification in 1871. Two critical developments determined the shape of the Kaiserreich's defamation laws: (1) the end of a jurisprudence based on legally unequal estates; (2) the liberal rediscovery of the Privatklage, which was part of the broader fight against an arbitrary, politicized justice system – a cause that profoundly stamped mid-century liberalism.

Medieval and early-modern justice looked very different from what it would become in the nineteenth century.

Recommend this book

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this book to your organisation's collection.

Honor, Politics, and the Law in Imperial Germany, 1871–1914
  • Online ISBN: 9780511730160
  • Book DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511730160
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to *
×
Sellert, W., “Standesgerichtsbarkeit,” in Adalbert, Erler et al. (eds.), Handwörterbuch zur deutschen Rechtsgeschichte vol. 4 (Berlin, 1990), pp. 1916–17.
Conrad, Bornhak, Preussische Staats- und Rechtsgeschichte (Berlin, 1979), pp. 186–87.
Evers, , “Erörterungen über den preussischen Injurien-Prozess,” Archiv für preussisches Strafrecht 8 (1860), 609–17.
Stenographische Berichte über die Verhandlungen des Preussischen Hauses der Abgeordneten (SBPA) (Berlin, 1861), p. 901.
Johann, Jacoby, Gesammelte Schriften und Reden (Hamburg, 1872)
Erich, Döhring, Geschichte der deutschen Rechtspflege seit 1500 (Berlin, 1953)
Monika, Wienfort, Patrimonialgerichte in Preussen (Göttingen, 2001).
Carl, Ludwig Heinrich Rabe (ed.), Sammlung preussischer Gesetze und Verordnungen vol. 5 (Halle and Berlin, 1817), p. 269.
Frommel, M., “Staatsanwaltschaft,” in Erler, , Handwörterbuch zur deutschen Rechtsgeschichte vol. 4 (Berlin, 1990), pp. 1809–10.
SBPA, Anlagen 6 (Berlin, 1861), pp. 959–61.
Das preussische Straf-Gesetzbuch nebst dem Einführungs-Gesetz (Berlin, 1851), pp. 78, 101.
Esmein, A., A History of Continental Criminal Procedure (Boston, 1913), pp. 571
Carl, Kade, Die Privatklage in den Strafprozessordnungen der Jetztzeit (Berlin, 1900)
Rainer, Schröder, Rechtsgeschichte (Münster, 2004), p. 7
Buchda, G., “Anklage,” Handwörterbuch zur deutschen Rechtsgeschichte vol. 1, pp. 171–74.
Saxony's, Privatklage provisions were the most extensive (Strafprozessordnung (code of criminal procedure), August 11, 1855)
Heinrich, Gerland, “Die systematische Stellung des Privatklageverfahrens im Strafprocess,” Der Gerichtssaal 60 (1902)
Motive, Anlage IV, in Hahn, C. (ed.), Die gesammten Materialien zur Strafprozessordnung vol. 1 (Berlin, 1880), pp. 431ff
Helmut, Rannacher, Der Ehrenschutz in der Geschichte des deutschen Strafrechts (Breslau-Neukirch, 1938)
Köstlin, C. Reinhold, Abhandlungen aus dem Strafrechte (Tübingen, 1858).
“Das Princip der Strafverfolgung” in his Gesammelte kleinere Schriften über das Strafrecht (Vienna, 1868), pp. 429–67
Rüdiger, Koewius, Die Rechtswirklichkeit der Privatklage (Berlin, 1974), p. 22
Verhandlungen des ersten deutschen Juristentages (Berlin, 1860), p. 71
Mayer, S., Zur Reform des Strafprozesses (Frankfurt a.M., 1871), pp. 1–2
… der der Regierung bequem ist.” Stenographische Berichte über die Verhandlungen des deutschen Reichstags, vol. 47, December 21, 1876, p. 983.
Verhandlungen des zweiten deutschen Juristentages (Berlin, 1861), pp. 657ff
Stenographische Berichte über die Verhandlungen des deutschen Reichstags, 2. Legislatur-Periode, IV Session 1876. Vol. 3, Anlagen (Berlin, 1876).
James, Whitman, “Enforcing Civility and Respect: Three Societies,” Yale Law Journal 109 (2000) 1324
Magdeburgische Zeitung 119 (1876).
Glaser, , “Privatanklage,” Encyklopädie der Rechtswissenschaft, 2. Theil, vol. 3 (Leipzig, 1881), pp. 175–85.
Gerland, , Systematische Stellung des Privatklageverfahrens im Strafproceß (Stuttgart, 1901), pp. 12–13
Lilienthal, , “Üble Nachrede und Verleumdung,” in Mittermaier, et al. (eds.), Vergleichende Darstellung des deutschen und ausländischen Strafrechts: Besonderer Teil vol. 4 (Berlin, 1906), p. 440.
Karl, Binding, Die Wirkungen des Eintrittes der Staatsanwaltschaft in das Privatklageverfahren (Leipzig, 1908), pp. 4–5.
Rudolf, Beinert, Die Ausdehnung der Privatklage (Halle, 1906), p. 35