European Article CIoy European journal of Criminology 20I4, Vol. 11 (2) 228-250 A tale of two regicides @@TeAto~)21 The Author(s) 2013 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.ul/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1477370813494860 euc.sagepub.com J ayne Mooney OSAGE City University of New York, USA Abstract This paper examines two attempted 18th century cases of regicide: those of Robert Frangois Damiens against Louis XV and Margaret Nicholson against George Ill, which have similar circumstances yet, on the face of it, strikingly different outcomes. For both assailants were seemingly unremarkable individuals, employed for much of their working lives as domestic servants, the attacks were relatively minor and both were diagnosed as 'mad'. However, Margaret Nicholson was to be confined for life in Bethlem Royal Hospital for the insane, whereas Robert Frangois Damiens was tortured and torn apart by horses at the Place de Grbve. The name of Damiens resonates today amongst scholars of criminology through the utilization of his execution by Michel Foucault in the opening to his seminal work Discipline and Punish: the Birth of the Prison (1975); Margaret Nicholson is less widely known. By analyzing the considerable amount of media and literary coverage devoted to these attempted regicides at the time this paper concludes by locating these crimes as symptomatic of the 'spirit of the times'. Keywords Historical research, regicide, popular resistance She is fortunate to live in this kingdom, hey? It is not long since a madman tried to stab the King of France. The wretch was subjected to the most fiendish torments - his limbs burned with fire, the flesh lacerated with red-hot pincers, until in a merciful conclusion, he was stretched between four horses and torn asunder. We have at least outgrown such barbarities. The Madness of George III by Alan Bennett (1992: 3) On Wednesday 2nd August, 1786, Margaret Nicholson, a middle-aged woman who had spent most of her working life in domestic service, approached King George III at St James's Palace as he got out of his carriage with what looked like a rolled-up petition. As the King moved forward to receive it she stabbed him with 'an old ivory-handled dessert Corresponding author: Jayne Mooney, Associate Professor, Department of Sociology, John Jay College of Criminal justice and the Graduate Center, CUNY, 524 W 59th St, New York, NY 10019, USA. Email: [email protected] Mooney 229 knife' (The Gentleman's Magazine, 1786, 56: 709). Shocked but not hurt, the knife hav- ing barely penetrated his clothing, George III turned towards his assailant uttering the words, "The poor creature is mad! Do not hurt her! She has not hurt me" (Burney, 1890: 357).1 In France, 30 years prior to Nicholson's assault, another servant, the poor 'wretch' in the opening passage of The Madness of George III, Robert-Franqois Damiens, approached King Louis XV as he went to board his carriage and stabbed him with a pen knife. This resulted in a 'small wound' below his fifth rib. In a gesture similar to that of George III, the King was reported to have said, "There is the man who struck me. Let him be seized, and no harm done to him" (The Monthly Review, 1757, 17: 64-65). The two events received an enormous amount of media attention and, following Margaret Nicholson's attack on George III, were frequently compared; the response to Nicholson being seen as representative of a 'civilized', more advanced society. Both Damiens and Nicholson were widely characterized as 'mad'. Damiens, it was said, would "often talk to himself and mutter inwardly" (The Monthly Review, 1757, 17: 59); Nicholson's mother and brother declared her state of mind "to be very unsettled" (The Lady s Magazine, 1786: 396) and following examination, Drs. John and Thomas Monro, the most famous psychiatrists of the day, declared Margaret Nicholson "intellectually damaged" (The Lady's Magazine, 1786). Nicholson was thus certified 'insane' and con- fined to Bethlem Royal Hospital in London for life; Damiens was repeatedly tortured before being torn apart by horses in the Place de Grave in Paris. In this paper I wish to examine the similarities and differences between these two attempted regicides and to keep in mind the historian EH Carr's often-cited invocation to keep the frontiers between the two disciplines of history and sociology "wide open for two way traffic" (Carr, 1961: 84). My major theoretical focus will be on the relationship between the motivations of the individual actors and the 'spirit of the times'. In this task I do not evoke the notion of 'downward causality' (see F0rland, 2008), but rather tend towards Margaret Gilbert's (1992) conception of 'plural subjects'. In this, the actors involved contribute to the construction of the 'spirit of the times' which, in turn, by creat- ing imaginative communities, have consequences over and above those of each separate group. The concept of imagined communities is, of course, true for all communities, which are by their nature social constructions and to this extent imagined entities. In this, following F0rland, I thus reject methodological individualism whilst retaining the pri- macy of ontological individualism. Additionally, I will consider whether these two regi- cides are idiosyncratic events which can only be presented idiographically by considering the 'facts of the matter' or, alternatively, nomothetically in terms of generalizations about madness and mental pathology. My method involves a detailed examination of both cases supported by contemporary press sources and the widespread public comments from both intellectuals and the gen- eral populace. Historical research presents a number of challenges that should be acknowledged from the outset. Mary Bosworth (2001), in her interesting discussion of the methodological implications and problems of studying the imprisonment of women in 18th century France, notes the patchy and faint information that is often the only mate- rial available in historical research2 and how the researcher's ethical stance can affect interpretation of the data. However, as Bosworth points out, these problems are not to be avoided, for as criminologists we have a duty to understand and document the past as 230 European Journal of Criminology 11(2) much as the present and to provide a critical commentary on it. Further, an analysis of the past may provide a foundation on which to interpret the present; thus, studying the 'vio- lence' that incarcerated women endured in this period helps to reveal "the longevity of the symbolic and actual violence and suffering that rests at (the) core" of punishment (Bosworth, 2001: 437) which has a resonance with this present study. While we must always exercise a degree of caution in interpreting historical data, it should be noted that my work, being based on two well-known attempted regicides, does benefit from a wealth of documentary information. As Eisener (2011) in his study of regicide points out, the positive aspect of studying such prominent subjects is the easily accessible details of their cases. Robert-Franois Damiens My God, give me strength, give me strength. Lord, my God, have pity on me. Lord, my God, I am suffering so much. Lord, my God, give me patience. (The words of Robert-Frangois Damiens, during his punishment at the Place de Grave, Paris, 26 March, 1757).3 The fate that befell Robert-Franqois Damiens has come to be seen as symbolic of the cruelty of the ancien rgime, with the administration of justice presented as arbitrary, dominated by religious bigotry, often decided in secret and incorporating interrogation and punishment techniques which were excessive and brutal. Although by the mid 1700s the use of torture and the death penalty were beginning to wane in France, there were still troubling instances that serve to remind us of the cruelty that people can inflict on one another (Bosworth, 2001). In the case of Robert-Franqois Damiens the level of inhuman- ity expressed was quite simply appalling. Damiens' assault on Louis XV caused immense excitement; the Archbishop of Paris ordered the reciting of prayers for 40 hours without rest (Mackinnon, 1902). As the King was God's representative on Earth, the incident was deemed to warrant the great- est of punishments. Condemned as a regicide, his fate was, therefore, to mirror that of Franqois Ravaillac, a known religious fanatic, who had assassinated Henry IV of France in 1610. Like Ravaillac, Damiens was first to be taken "in a tipcart naked" to make the amende honorable before the main door of the Church of Paris, where he was to hold "a burning wax torch weighing two pounds" and "there on his knees he will say and declare that he had committed a very mean, very terrible and very dreadful parricide, and that he had hurt the King"; he was to then "repent and ask God, the King and Justice to for- give him" (Anon, 1757: Pidces originales et procidures du proc s, fait a Robert- FranqoisDamiens). From the Church of Paris Damiens was taken to the Place de Grave, and the hand that had held the knife was burnt with sulphur; 'red-hot' pincers were used to tear at the flesh on his arms, thighs and chest. Molten lead, wax and boiling oil were poured into every wound. He was asked if he wanted to say anything; he replied "no". Priests approached and held the crucifix for him to kiss. He was then "quartered", that is, his arms and legs were harnessed to four "wild" horses to be pulled apart and, if this was not horror enough, "though they (the horses) were driven to four contrary points, Mooney 231I none of the members gave way, though all drawn to an amazing degree of extension." After an hour of being pulled in this way, they cut the sinews and even "after both thighs and one arm were off' Damiens still breathed.