Friday, October 9, 2009

History of Execution Methods in France

In class we discussed the reign of terror, in which countless people were beheaded using the guillotine. Even though we look upon this as an inhumane and disgusting method to kill someone with, it was said to be the most humane method at the time. In order to better understand why this was so, I decided to research the history of execution methods in Europe up until the guillotine.
Burning was a very popular method of execution in the 1500s and 1600s. Many suspected witches were burnt at the stake during this time period, until it was later abolished in 1834. However, this punishment was mostly reserved for witches, as it was considered the most humane punishment for a woman at the time. Another device used not only for death but also for torture is the wheel. A person was either attached to the outside of the wheel and rolled over spikes, or to the spokes and beaten until all of their bones were broken. This was mostly used during the middle ages. Then came the Headman's Axe. The criminal would be decapitated using an axe or a sword. The axe would sometimes miss, prolonging the agony of the person. Finally, the guillotine was invented in France in 1789 by Dr. Joseph Guillotin. It was invented so that everyone could be killed in the same way, and more humanely. The blade was finely perfected in 1792, and then the first public use was in the same year. It was used during the French Revolution mostly, and the last official use was in 1977.
Looking at the preceders to the guillotine, it seems like a very humane method of execution for the time. During the French Revolution, everyone was looking for equality, and good treatment of every citizen. But with the guillotine being used so many times, it feels to us like many people were treated inhumanely. But to the French at the time, it probably was similar to lethal injection of these times, though it was public, which is another reason why we look upon it so hatefully. This was the culture of the time, but to us it seems strange and horrifying. Because of this technology gap, maybe we make all of the blood seem more horrifying then it might actually be, though not much.

Citation: RIN.RU. Unexplained. http://istina.rin.ru/eng/ufo/text/296.html (October 9 2009).

4 comments:

  1. Do you think it is fair to categorize murder based on the humanness of the method?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Rehan, I think its fair to categorize murder based on the humaneness of the method. If you make someone suffer a slow, painful death, over years and years, it is obviously worse than having your head sliced off in an instant. I'm not trying to justify capital punishment here, I just don't really see your point. Feel free to clarify.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I guess what I was trying to get across is that, murder is murder, you can categorize the humaneness but in the end, it's still murder and one form should not be overlooked just because its more humane then another form

    ReplyDelete
  4. i'm not saying that it was right to murder people, what i was saying is that based on the history of how people were killed in the days before the guillotine was invented, we can understand how maybe this was not as much of a shock to them as it is to us. if you look at how people were executed before this, you can see it is a lot more humane. that is all I am saying, not anything having to do with murder being ok in society or at all.

    ReplyDelete