Punishment In The Middle Ages

Change over time; that is a common theme with everything in the world. The concept of punishment is no different in that regard. In the 16th and 17th century the common view for punishing people was retaliation from the king and to be done in the town square. In what seemed to be all of a sudden, there was a change in human thinking, the concept of punishment changed to a more psychological approach compared to a public embarrassment/torture approach. The following paragraphs will discuss the development of prisons and what in fact gives people gives people the right to punish; as well as the overall meaning and function of prisons. The work by Michel Foucault in Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison will help with the arguments

To try to prevent crime from occurring some believed that making the punishments severe would slow the growth of crime. The punishments you would receive, varied on how bad the crime was that you committed. If you were accused for adultery or manslaughter, you were more than likely punished with a whipping or branding. When punished with a whipping the number of hits usually varied between 10 to 30. When committing adultery, you usually were required 30 hits with the whip and a hot iron brand to the forehead. You were also made to wear something around your neck showing the crime you committed. These punishments were usually for men, women were normally sent to workhouses. Hanging was also a big punishment in the 1800s. Hangings were found to be entertainment and multiple people received a job during a hanging. (Source 2, Page 101) When hanging got out of hand, they began to send the criminals to other colonies to serve their sentences. They found that it was much cheaper than holding them in the English prisons where they were overcrowded and the traveling had to be paid for. The 1800s is known to be the worst of crime because of the increase of population and the issues with wealth. Escapes were very common because the jails were overflowing and it was too much for the people to keep up with. Not only were adults at risk but children of any age were too because society was so bad. As time moved along some of the

Having extreme, agonizing, punishments was not out of the ordinary during the 17th century. The punishments and crimes were very unsystematic, and often times very foul. There were punishments that were as minor as carting,and there were punishments as severe as the death penalty.Throughout the 17th century there were a variety of punishments for different crimes that were commited.

Some other punishments were leather strap used on to hit anywhere on the body, beating with fists, and until unconscious, burning and scalding the hands, starvation, public

The image below is a primary source of people being hung in the Middle Ages for murdering. The authors perspective is shown how he has drawn people hanging down while there are people watching them to show them not to do this. The viewpoint of the author is to say not to do this otherwise it will happen to you. The crowd around the punished people are there to show the seriousness of the punishments providing a warning and awareness of the consequences. It could lead to death and torture for the rest of their lives, this reflects to the authors point of view. Overall, Crimes and Punishments in the Middle Ages were very hard for people to escape. Authors presented a lot detail to show how life was strict back in the Middle Ages. Images that

The role of the judge in the adversary system of trial, unlike the inquisitorial counterpart, has less involvement in the establishment of facts and the analysis of evidence in cases brought before the court. In the inquisitorial system of trial, the judge has a much more active role in relation to the handling and evaluation of evidence, and where relevant, can actually cross examine and question witnesses if they feel crucial evidence may have been missed. While the inquisitorial system of trial has a seemingly more intrusive judge, having an added legal expert questioning and raising areas where evidence may have been missed, is a significant improvement over a judge who may know evidence has been missed but cannot intervene such is the

trials by jury is one of the foundations of the American way. Under the Articles of

Before the English Civil War began, the legal system included justices, judges, magistrates, and lawyers. King James I, according to author Malcolm Gaskill in his works Witchcraft and Evidence in Early Modern England, had a great influence in the court systems. Before the English Civil War, the witch trials were broken up in two parts. The first being that a Justice of the Peace would examine the accused, then the second was an actual trial would occur. In those trials according to Gaskill, “English trials followed common- law principles: lay jurors had to be persuaded by lay witnesses.” Many trials during this time period demanded more solid proof before the accused could be convicted. Gaskill, also writes that the court systems prior to the Hopkins’ witch trials, people began to question intangible evidence coming from the accusers and the witnesses. This shows that before the English Civil War, the courts where yes, being tried for witchcraft, but the courts were also demanding solid evidence against the accused person. During the late sixteenth century and early years of the seventeenth century, many trials were being questioned by

Trial by hot Iron was one way to determine innocence in the Middle Ages, you had to undergo this trial to prove your innocence. In this trial the defendant would have to carry an iron that weighed one pound, after it was heated over fire and pulled out during a ritual prayer. He or she would carry the hot iron metal for 9 feet, measured by the own defendants foot size. Their hands are strapped at the end of the 9 feet. Then they would be examined after 3 days by a Priest.They were considered guilty if there hands weren't showing any progress of healing. If there hands were showing progress of healing he or she is innocent .If the crime of the accused was particularly bad such as betrayal of a Lord or murder the iron would be 3 pounds. In the

EMBED QUOTE " The greatest and most grievous punishment used in England […] where they are hanged till they be half dead, and then takes down, and quartered alive; after that, their members and bowels are cut from their bodies, and thrown into a fire, provided near hand and within their own sight, even for the same purpose."(JIIOJIIHIJLJ). This shows how severe their punishments. there were many punishments that hsfkasdhjgfljsagfdjhs. The drunkard's cloak was a popular punishment for public drunkenness. It is where a person is to wear a barrel with holes cut out for their arms and head and would like a shirt. They are forced to walk around town and be publicly humiliated. The scold's bridle is a punishment for women who gossiped or were dishonest and it was a cage-like contraption that was worn on the head that would cause injury if they talked. The ducking stool was also a device to punish women and it was a stool attached to a log that would immerse the woman into the water. Other punishments that were used during this time was hanging, burning, the pillory, whipping, branding, cutting off various body parts, pressing,

When woman was in the water “the women usually drowned.” (The Renaissance: Crime and Punishment). Another tool was the amputation saw. And the body would be in terrible pain because “it was used to remove a limb slowly and painfully.” (The Renaissance: Crime and Punishment). Beheading was used for the higher-class people, “because it was considered a more honorable way to die.” (Elizabethan Crime and Punishment).

The immense sickness wasn’t the only thing dark about Europe’s Middle Ages. The monarchs were cruel and unruly to their subjects while enforcing brutality upon their land and citizens. The laws enforced by these kings and queens were nothing short of diabolical, for there was no set list of limitations and rules meaning that the monarchs could punish anyone for anything, even if that meant simply disturbing the king. The executions of the ‘accused’ were public to the citizens, and were “a pitiless affair” (McGlynn). The kings ruled with an iron fist as their methods of justice were murderous as executions “sent out a message of warning and deterrence” and “offered the ultimate guarantee against repeat offenders”. The message monarchs tried to send while carelessly shedding blood was that they desired to make a statement, and scare citizens into not committing crimes, for they would know the gruesome consequences. If not death, the “standard, mandatory sentence” of all accused peoples was mutilation of “eyes, noses, ears, hands, feet and testicles”. To sum it all up, punishment in the Middle Ages was much more unforgiving than in this modern day of age; being burned at the stake or beheaded by the guillotine are still some of the most spine-tingling punishments to this day. In all of the depressing fog of the Middle Ages, could there truly have been a beneficial factor?

Punishments for crimes has changed tremendously from the 1800s. Crime rates began to rise because of an increase in population and wealth. Punishment has been around for thousands of years. The law originally stated that only slaves were allowed to be punished, and was later changed allowing free men to be tortured for committing crimes as well. The harsh punishments include, people getting their dominant hand cut of for stealing, and people were also burned alive. Women who committed adultery were drowned. Even the Catholic Church used torture to show they had power regardless of whether the people were guilty. Crime and punishment in the 1800s is similar and different from today because the crimes that are being committed have stayed the same where as the punishments have changed drastically.

Next, the punishments that a person could get will vary on what they committed and how bad the punishment the people thought they should get. The punishments in the Elizabethan Age are very brutal because back then, they believed that violence was acceptable and a natural habit for mankind. The Great Punishment is the worst punishment a person could get. The felon will be hung, but they will not die while being hanged. They will take the felon down, quarter their body while still alive, and bury them in the ground. Quartering someone’s body is to cut their body in quarters. Torturing a person would come next to the Great Punishment. The will put the felon on a rack, in a collar, or even burn them with a branding iron on the cheek, back, or leg. Other general punishments include being decapitated and putting their head on top of a post, they could be branded on the cheek or burned on the left hand, whipped out in public for everyone to see, they could be sent to the military, be sent to correction facilities, hung to die at the place where the felon had committed their crime, or they could even be beheaded. If the crimes were extremely severe the felon would have the reign of “Bloody Mary” put on them. Bloody Mary is a legend that appears in the mirror when her name is called multiple times and appears bloody. The Elizabethan Age was very serious about the punishments that they gave their felons.

The idea of trial by ordeal and its methods are that if an accused can endure the decided ordeal without any injury or with surviving it with minimal injury, it will be concluded that it was a will of God and that the accused is innocent. However, trial by ordeal is said to be the end point of a relatively formal judicial procedure. This formal judicial procedure has several local variations but historical research suggests that it is commonly comprised of four main