What is the best medieval technology? Many may ask if there is even good medieval tech. That's probably because many think of medieval torture devices like the pear of anguish or the brazen bull, but there are good ones too. For example, the guillotine, which is arguably the best. The guillotine is the best medieval technology because it was a more humane way of execution, it was a popular form of entertainment, and it could be made child-sized. One reason why the guillotine was a more human way of execution was because it was painless. Since the blade of the guillotine fell and sliced through the neck so fast, the victim died before having to feel the pain. This made the executions from the guillotine way more humane. As Mental Floss states “Despite its viscerally gruesome nature, some argue that the guillotine might be the most painless of execution methods. …show more content…
This is just one of the many sources that state that the guillotine is painless, thus being more humane. The guillotine executions were very popular and many loved to go to see them. Some of them even attended the executions daily. Spectators of these executions could buy souvenirs, read a list of the names of the victims, or even grab a meal to eat at a nearby restaurant. The Age of Revolution stated, “Thousands of ‘enemies of the state’ were executed by the guillotine’s blade, and the mechanical decapitator came to stand for savagery and bloodthirstiness. The executions were a popular form of entertainment and crowds gathered to watch.” (French Guillotine Blade). Even though it was execution, it was still fun for many. This is just another reason why the guillotine is so great. Others might say the guillotine was not child-friendly. However, this is wrong because the guillotine was made into child-sized
The guillotine was first introduced during the French Revolution by a man named Dr. Joseph Ignace Guillotin. He is a physician who first was involved with the issues of medicine. On December 1, 1789 he became interested in the idea of capital punishment. He invented the guillotine. It was a contraption used for causing immediate and painless death. It included a falling blade, running between two upright boards of wood and later a basket. Therefore, one may believe that the design of the guillotine helped with executions.
Execution by Hunger Miron Dolot. Execution By Hunger: New York: W.W. Norton & Company Inc., 1985 Miron Dolot’s book, EXECUTION BY HUNGER, is a detailed account as seen through the eyes of a true survivor during the reign of Stalin and the Soviet Union between 1929-1933. In his accounts, he portrays atrocities against human civilization while documenting his real life experiences and those of his fellow Ukrainian village farmers. He portrays them as victims of their own time period.
A guillotine is a decapitation device that quickly chops off it’s victims head in the blink of an eye. According to document F, About 16,000 people were believed to have died at the hands of it. No matter how small or petty a crime was, people would have been executed for it. Even Marie Antoinette and King Louis XVI, the leaders of France before the Revolution, were decapitated by one, as was the leader of the Reign of Terror, Maximilien Robespierre. Another method to weed out the counter revolutionaries was a network of spies that watched out for anyone who spoke out against the government, “A careless word of criticism spoken against the government could put one in prison or worse” (Document E). The punishment for a crime as small as ththis was more often than not
The guillotine was one of the fastest and most painless ways to kill people. Before that though there were a lot more painful and torturous ways to execute people. For example, they used to hang people but they would also torture them, to make their death even more painful. During the Enlightment, people favored human rights and their well being, so they didn’t torture people as bad as before. During the Enlightment, people got more rights so they couldn’t be tortured as much like former executions. The guillotine made execution a lot better. The guillotine was an enlightened way to execute people.
Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite.) One of the most common ways of killing was the guillotine. The guillotine was a quick and rational means of execution and eliminate human error from the equation. (LYNN, MICHAEL. "
...st powerful symbols of the French Revolution and killed an estimated 20,000 to 40,000 people during the Reign of Terror. (Doc F) The guillotine was a sharp, angled blade that killed quickly the most deadly and feared method of invoking fear during the revolution. (Doc F) These methods; however, became too extreme and the deaths of the incident was not justified.
The agreed upon contract between the government of Bangladesh and Niko Resources Ltd. consisted of Niko being able to revive two abandoned gas fields in Bangladesh to replicate their famous Indian success story. Although no fatalities were reported in the two blowouts, Niko Resources Ltd. became the central focus of Bangladeshi politicians, journalists, activists, and villagers who tarnished their reputation while seeking compensation. In order to achieve a win-win outcome in the next phase of negotiation while reconstructing the reputation of Niko Resources Ltd. it is essential to acknowledge the underlying interests of both parties. Therefore, proposing an overlap of interest between both parties along with suggesting cultural differences that may be impacting further negotiations and their respective solutions can be a useful tool in achieving the preferred outcome.
On Tuesday, July 29, 1981, eight year-old Cheryl Ziemba, and her four year-old brother, Christopher, bodies were found in a coal dump in Old Forge, Pennsylvania. Only two days after the bodies were discovered, fifteen-year old, Joseph Aulisio, a member of the search party, was arrested for the murders. He had lured the two kids into a house that was under construction and owned by his father and shot them from only 10 feet away, Cheryl was shot in the head and Christopher had been shot in the chest. To this day there has been no motive established as to why Aulisio wished to kill these two kids. Nearly a year later in May 1982, a jury sentenced the then sixteen year-old to death, who was casually chewing gum when the jurors presented him with his sentence and then turned to his dad and pumped his fist in the air yelling “It’s party time!”. It has been 34 years since that conviction, and Aulisio continues to sit in jail with no signs of remorse. So why wouldn’t the death penalty be enforced with someone so inhumane and removed from society? Why not eliminate this being from society ...
A man is standing there with a noose around his neck. When there is a signal, the rope is cut, and the man’s body is dropped through the trap door. He is hanged like that in front of a crowd, which is even including old people and small kids. Is there anybody thinks about how would a child react if he had to witness such a horrible scene? An execution takes one’s life to warn the community with the hope that the crime rates would go down. But it is extremely cruel, and it makes people feel like they are living in the ancient world when there are no human rights. Now the world is evolving in the way of civilizing, so execution should be kicked out of this society because instead of bringing benefits to the community, the execution brings a lot of more destruction.
Several other punishments of the medieval period were also rather gruesome. If you were charged with treason, but you were a noble person otherwise, you were to be simply hanged and buried. If you committed murder, and were found guilty of attempted murder, you’d be tied up, near the scene of the crime and left to starve to death. If you were convicted of a successful murder, you’d be hung for a little while, have your hands cut off, and then led to where you’d be executed. Rouges were to be sent to the stockades and whipped, anyone who disturbed the peace were to be continuously du...
...the pleasure with minimal amount of pain would be to continue to use capital punishment. With the therapeutic aspect of closure for victims, it provides the necessary outcome for the victims to be able to move on from the situation.
Americans have argued over the death penalty since the early days of our country. In the United States only 38 states have capital punishment statutes. As of year ended in 1999, in Texas, the state had executed 496 prisoners since 1930. The laws in the United States have change drastically in regards to capital punishment. An example of this would be the years from 1968 to 1977 due to the nearly 10 year moratorium. During those years, the Supreme Court ruled that capital punishment violated the Eight Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. However, this ended in 1976, when the Supreme Court reversed the ruling. They stated that the punishment of sentencing one to death does not perpetually infringe the Constitution. Richard Nixon said, “Contrary to the views of some social theorists, I am convinced that the death penalty can be an effective deterrent against specific crimes.”1 Whether the case be morally, monetarily, or just pure disagreement, citizens have argued the benefits of capital punishment. While we may all want murders off the street, the problem we come to face is that is capital punishment being used for vengeance or as a deterrent.
The Ethics of Capital Punishment Ethics is "the study of standards of right and wrong. " philosophy dealing with moral conduct, duty and judgement. ' [1] Capital Punishment is the death penalty for a crime. The word "capital" in "capital punishment" refers to a person's head as in the past. people were often executed by severing their heads from their bodies.
The punishment is not about inflicting pain or exacting revenge, it is about forcing the killer to stew in their own doing and be cut off from any form of enjoyment whatsoever. Anyone could agree that being deprived of even the simplest of pleasures is indeed the worst punishment one could endure aside from death. This also removes killers from society permanently. While I believe that it is wrong to relieve someone of their basic human rights, I feel that it is justified to relieve them of their legal rights if it is for the betterment and safety of society.
It must be remembered that criminals are real people too, which have. life and with it, the feeling of pain, fear and the loss of their loved ones and all the other emotions that the rest of us feel. There is no such thing as a humane way of putting someone to death. Every type of execution causes the prisoner physical suffering, some. methods perhaps cause less than others, but be in no doubt that being.