346Chapter 18
cult. It had been a crime in England for centuries, nor-
mally punished by the pillory, and a public execution
for homosexuality took place as late as 1772. Yet homo-
sexuality was relatively open in England in the eigh-
teenth century and gentlemen’s clubs of homosexuals
existed with impunity in London, though periodic ar-
rests of sodomites (the term homosexualwas not coined
until the late nineteenth century) occurred, such as the
police campaign of 1707. King Frederick William I of
Prussia was horrified to discover that both of his sons—
the future Frederick the Great and Prince Henry, whom
the Continental Congress briefly considered as a con-
stitutional king for the United States—were homosexu-
als. The double standard obscures the extent of
lesbianism in the eighteenth century even more, but
high society enjoyed widespread rumors about many
prominent figures such as Queen Anne of England.
Contemporary works such as Mary Wollstonecraft’s
Mary: A Fiction,Diderot’s La Religieuse,and Fielding’s The
Female Husbandindicate that the subject was much dis-
cussed.
As the partial tolerance of homosexuality suggests,
the eighteenth century was a period of comparatively
relaxed sexual restrictions, especially compared with
the more repressive sixteenth and seventeenth cen-
turies. Some historians even describe the Old Regime
as a period of sexual revolution. In Protestant countries,
strict moral Puritanism weakened, and Catholicism re-
pudiated its own version of Puritanism—Jansenism. In
all countries, the ruling classes set an example of per-
missiveness. Most monarchs (who married for reasons
of state, not for love) kept lovers, gently called fa-
vorites. Louis XV kept a small personal brothel and
Catherine the Great had an equally long list of fa-
vorites. Augustus the Strong, king of Poland and elector
of Saxony, fathered at least 365 children, only one of
them legitimate.DOCUMENT 18.3
The Husband in the Law: The Frederician Code of 1750
The Frederician Code, adopted in Prussia under Frederick the Great,
was one of the greatest efforts to reorganize a legal system during the
eighteenth century. It was chiefly the work of the minister of justice,
Samuel von Cocceji. He relied on the principles of Roman law but also
drew ideas from Germanic customary law and from the “enlightened”
philosophy of the eighteenth century. The following excerpt states the
legal rights of a husband; a similar section specified the rights and priv-
ileges of the wife, without curtailing the authority of husband.
- As the domestic society, or family, is formed by the
union of the husband and wife, we are to begin with enu-
merating the advantages and rights which result from this
union. - The husband is by nature the head of his family. To
be convinced of this, it is sufficient to consider, that the
wife leaves her family to join herself to that of her hus-
band; that she enters into his household, and into the
habitation of which he is the master, with intention to
have children by him to perpetuate the family. - Hence it follows, judging by the sole light of rea-
son, that the husband is master of his own household, and
head of his family. And as the wife enters into it of her
own accord, she is in some measure subject to his power;
whence flow several rights and privileges, which belong
to the husband with regard to his wife.
For, (1)the husband has the liberty of prescribing laws
and rules in his household, which the wife is to observe.
(2)If the wife be defective in her duty to her hus-
band, and refuse to be subject, he is authorized to reduce
her to her duty in a reasonable manner.
(3)The wife is bound, according to her quality, to as-
sist her husband, to take upon her the care of the house-
hold affairs, according to his condition.
(4)The husband has the power over the wife’s body,
and she cannot refuse him the conjugal duty.
(5)As the husband and wife have promised not to
leave each other during their lives, but to share the good
and evil which may happen to them; the wife cannot, under
pretext, for example, that her husband has lost his reason,
leave him, without obtaining permission from the judge.
(6)For the same reason, the wife is obliged to follow
her husband when he changes his habitation; unless, (a)it
has been stipulated by the contract of marriage, or other-
wise, that she shall not be bound to follow him if he
should incline to settle elsewhere; or (b)unless it were for
a crime that the husband changed his habitation, as if he
had been banished from his country.
Bell, Susan G., and Offen, Karen M. eds. Women, the Family, and
Freedom: The Debate in Documents,vol. 1. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford
University Press, 1983.