Countries are shaped and built by many different characteristics. Crimes and punishments are two of these characteristics which have influenced countries and their laws for many centuries. Though, some of the crimes and their ensuing punishments are now obsolete, many are still pertinent in modern times. Each country has a different definition of crime and punishment, displays different political and societal values, and can regulate interactions between Western and non-Western cultures.
In the seventeenth century, China condemned every crime, no matter how inconsequential. Most criminals were often punished by the use of a bastinado1 while other methods included the use of cangues2, symbols marking the face of a criminal for the crimes they have committed, and execution, but only by decree of the emperor himself. These were the reports Pere du Halde3 was receiving from missionaries. Pere du Halde was writing of China’s construction of crime and punishment as an outsider, so Pere du Halde did not experience the actions being described first-hand.
China’s definition of crime and punishment was being shared from someone that had not experienced, therefore it is difficult to understand what China’s true definition is. However, through the many reports Pere du Halde received, China sees most crimes as the same and punishes each criminal in a similar fashion, with a few exceptions. With that, the political values of China show that the country will not tolerate any level of crime and will judge those according to the mandates of the mandarins and emperor.
Also during the seventeenth century, missionaries were punishing criminals for committing crimes against the Christian church, heresy, and criminals which were labeled as Judaizers4. These actions were taking place particularly in Peru and other parts of South America, where Portugal was establishing missions. Punishments against heretics and Judaizers consisted of torture followed by execution, particularly by burning at the stake. The inquisition was a period where the church was seen as the political ruling power of Peru and other South American territories.
The inquisition’s mission was to convert all people to Christianity, by any means necessary, and to punish those that refused or committed heresy. Many people died and others fled in fear of their lives because the inquisition’s definition of crime and punishment was based on religious views and punitive actions. Moving into the nineteenth century, after the illustrious French Revolution5, France was going through, again, another movement of civil unrest and the restoration of order and liberty.
Known as the July Revolution6, Charles X was abdicated of his throne, and with the help of Francois Guizot, Louis-Philippe became France’s new king. Francois Guizot began to speak of the July Monarchy, beginning with the dissolution of the old regime and the task of establishing order and liberty under a new monarchy. Later, on the fifth of October, in 1831, Guizot spoke of the idea of equality and that is was the fundamental principle of the political organization (Guizot, Oct. 5, 1831). This was a great mistake, according to Guizot.
He states that there are universal rights and equal rights for all, that cannot be stripped from any human without injustice and disorder. Guizot also claims that aristocracy is necessary for modern democracy. Lastly, Guizot speaks in September of 1842, claiming he is now against the idea of universal suffrage, seeing it as the destruction of democracy. Because of Guizot’s new point of view, he claimed this could lead to the demise of the United States. Guizot makes little effort in defining crime and punishment, but does describe many qualities to establish order.
South Africa had a similar approach to the legal construction of crime and punishment, like the French in the nineteenth century, during the twentieth century. The National Party in South Africa was looking towards establishing rights between people of different races so that crime and punishments could be conducted in different manners depending upon race. The National Party believed in a policy of separation, or apartheid7, meaning a separation between Europeans and non-Europeans; the White race and the Coloured race. This policy of separation was based on the Christian principals of justice and reasonableness (National Party 1948).
The National Party believed that if they were to take the approach towards equality amongst all, the White race would die out. Under the policy of separation, each race would be protected and allowed to develop their own ideas. The National Party then established a series of statutes including all marriages between Europeans and non-Europeans were prohibited, the State would supervise in the moulding of youth, encourage non-Europeans to make the Christian religion a bases of their lives, and the Coloured community would take the middle position between Europeans and Natives (National Party 1948).
Again, there is little in mentioning how crimes would be punished, but a series of statutes were established in order to control crimes with minimal punishment. Each country has a different definition of what is considered a crime and then what types of punishments should be acted upon. Pere du Halde reported that the Chinese punished most crimes in a similar faction, no matter the severity of the crime. This is different compared to the inquisition in Peru, who was punishing people for committing crimes of heresy and siding with Judaizers.
The inquisition’s method of dealing with these so called criminals was torturing, where some people died, and then execution, if a person survived the torture stage. The Chinese and the inquisition in Peru have visual evidence of what defines a crime and the punishments that follow, unlike the French during the July Monarchy, and the National Party in South Africa. Through Guizot’s speeches and the National Party’s policy, one can determine that the two are looking to establish order and liberty, while avoiding equality which could cause the destruction of democracy according to Guizot in 1842.
The National Party also saw equality as the death of the White race, and wanted to establish a policy of separation to keep each individual race alive. Both failed in providing a solid definition of crime, but the National Party did provide a series of statutes that would be punished if broken. The French and National Party provided more details on how to combat crime by establishing order and liberty, and limiting peoples’ equal rights. Each country was under a different form of political power. China was under a dynastic rule, while people in Peru and other South American countries experienced theocracy during the inquisition.
France was trying to reestablish the monarchy and itself once again after another revolution of the people, while South Africa was under a democratic republic. These different political structures influenced how crimes were to be punished and described problems within each structure. China was successful in controlling crime and dealing out punishments, however, their dynastic political system made it hard for travelers and guests. Visitors may not have known the laws in China, therefore would be appalled if they were punished for a crime they did not know they committed.
Dynastic rule was, however, better than the rule by theocracy under the inquisition in Peru and parts of South America. Rule by the church may seem like a good practice, but then it begins to question the religious values of the church and their actions. This is very obvious during the inquisition in Peru and South America. Missionaries were punishing people in cruel ways for committing acts of heresy or siding with Judaizers. Methods of torture and execution seem to contradict the religious values of the church.
Therefore, theocracy and the inquisition undermined many people and left many others in fear and questioning. Since the people of France successfully completed another revolution, their political structure was unstable. Guizot pointed out in his speeches that France’s mission was to establish order and liberty under the constitutional monarchy (Guizot, Feb. 28, 1831). Then talks of equality began and Guizot spoke about both sides of equality, one being that equality could be a good thing or that equality would be the demise of a nation.
Though, Guizot does not mention anything pertaining to crime and punishment, the structure of the new regime would be unstable when punishing crimes, possibly leading to another revolution. The National Party in South Africa wanted to avoid equal rights for everyone. The party wanted to keep each race alive without ruining one or the others. This idea though, was not the best of ideas. The National Party wanted to control the non-Europeans by having the Europeans in power and disregarding most non-Europeans rights. This political structure was not sound, similar to that of France, and could have led to a revolution.
Interactions between Westerners and non-Westerners could be determined in China, South Africa and the inquisition. Guizot spoke little on what would involve interactions between Westerners and non-Westerners. In China, with their legal construction of crime and punishment, Westerners would have to be careful of their actions, for they could commit a crime according to Chinese law and be punished. Westerners would be confused as to why they received the punishment they did and could become aggressive to non-Western cultures.
Interactions in South Africa though were different from those in China. Westerners, Europeans, in South Africa wanted to control everyone, including non-Westerners. This would eventually lead to problems between Westerners and non-Westerners. Non-Westerners could become agitated with Westerner power and begin a revolution to establish equal rights for all races. During the inquisition in Peru, interactions between Westerners and non-Westerners, were tense. Christianity was being forced upon many non-Westerners, as well as, Westerners who were Judaizers.
These interactions caused the death of several people and led to people fleeing for their lives. The political and social values of each country helped to define each country’s idea of crime and punishment. These definitions of crime and punishment then influenced interactions between Westerners and non-Westerners. China was under a dynastic rule, which punished every crime, no matter how inconsequential, in similar fashion. Because of this, many Westerners would be wary of going to China or would be aggravated if punished for a crime that they did not understand.
The inquisition was based on a theocracy, which was set to unite everyone under the Christian doctrine and punish those that refused or saw a different path in the Christian religion. Both Westerners and non-Westerners were being punished leaving many in fear of their lives. France was starting anew after another revolution and wanted to establish order and liberty so that crime and punishment could be handled. South Africa and the National Party wanted to avoid equality which would cause aggression between Europeans and non-Europeans.
