Tales Told under Duress: Murder, Torture, and Narrative in Early Modern Basel

Early modern torture was a tool of judicial interrogation and investigation. It was therefore heavily regulated, at least in theory. It could only be used in capital cases, interrogators could not ask leading questions, the accused could not be permanently physically harmed, and confessions had to include new details not previously revealed. Yet historians usually study torture when the controls broke down, most notably in the context of the witch panics. Yet when a baronness was brutally murdered on Basel’s territory near the French border, the entire process was by the book. Two suspects were arrested, interrogated, and tortured until they confessed. Yet the tortures continued after their confessions, a seemingly needless and cruel effort. Basel’s magistrates were seemingly concerned that, while both murderers had confessed to their crimes, their stories did not match up. This paper investigates why the torture of both criminals continued after their confessions and why a single, unified narrative mattered to the magistrates. In short, it argues that torture aimed to achieve the “truth” of the matter, not merely a confession, and that confessions with conflicting details were inherently illegitimate. Executing criminals on the basis of conflicting stories threatened the magistrates’ claims to justice.