 Section 26 of Menor's Customs and Dress, this is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. Recording by Limny. Menor's Customs and Dress during the Middle Ages and during the Renaissance period by Paul Lacroix. Section 26. We have thus seen how a legion of fanatics in the East made themselves the blind and formidable tools of a religious and political chieftain, who was no less ambitious than revengeful. If we now turn our attention to Germany, we shall here find, almost at the same period, a local institution which, although very different from the Sanguinary Court of the Old Man of the Mountain, was of an equally terrible and mysterious character. We must not, however, look at it from the same point of view, for, having been founded with the object of furthering and defending the establishment of a regular social state, which had been approved and sanctioned by the sovereigns and recognized by the Church, it at times rendered great service to the cause of justice and humanity at a period when might deserved right, and when the excesses and the crimes of shameless evildoers and of petty tyrants entrenched in their impregnable strongholds were but too often made lawful from the simple fact that there was no power to oppose them. The secret tribunal of Westphalia, which held its sittings and passed sentence in private and which carried out its decrees on the spot and whose rules, laws and actions were enveloped in deep mystery, must unquestionably be looked upon as one of the most remarkable institutions of the Middle Ages. It would be difficult to state exactly at what period this formidable institution was established. A few writers and amongst these Sebastian Munster wishes to believe that it was founded by Charmaine himself. They affirm that this monarch, having subjugated the Saxons to his sway and had enforced them to be baptized, created a secret tribunal the duties of which were to watch over them in order that they might not return to the errors of paganism. However, the Saxons were incorrigible and although Christians, they still carried on the worship of their idols and for this reason it is said by these authorities that the laws of the tribunal of Westphalia were founded by Charmaine. It is well known that from the 9th to the 13th century all that part of Germany between the Rhine and the Wester suffered under the most complete anarchy. In consequence of this and of the increase of crime which remained unpunished, energetic men established a rigorous jurisdiction which, to a certain extent, suppressed these barbarous disorders and gave some assurance to social intercourse. But the very mystery which gave weight to the institution was the cause of its origin being unknown. It is only mentioned and then cursorily in historical documents towards the early part of the 15th century. This court of Judicature received the name of Femmgericht or Femmgericht which means Femic Tribunal. The origin of the word Femm, Vemm or Femm which has given rise to many scientific discussions still remains in doubt. The most generally accepted opinion is that it is derived from a Latin expression, Wemi, Waimi, Woe is Mi. The special dominion over which the Vemic Tribunal reigned supreme was Westphalia and the country which was subjected to its laws was designated as the Terche Rouge. There was no assembly of this tribunal beyond the limits of this Terche Rouge but it would be quite impossible to define these limits with any accuracy. However, the free judges, assuming the right of suppressing certain crimes committed beyond their territory on more than one occasion summoned persons living in various parts of Germany and even in provinces far from Westphalia to appear before them. We do not know all the localities wherein the Vemic Tribunal sat but the most celebrated of them and the one which served as a model for all the rest held its sittings under a line tree in front of the castle gate of Dortmund. There the chapters general of the association usually assembled and on certain occasions several thousands of the free judges were to be seen there. Each tribunal was composed of an unlimited number of free judges under the presidency of a free count who was charged with the higher administration of Vemic justice. A free county generally comprised several free tribunals or Fristule. The free count who was chosen by the prince of the territory in which the tribunal sat had two courts, one secret the other public. The public assizes which took place at least three times a year were announced 14 days beforehand and any person living within the county and who was summoned before the free count was bound to appear and to answer all questions which might be put to him. It was required that the free judges who are generally mentioned as feminoten that is to say sages and who are besides denoted by writers of the time by the most honorable epithets such as serious men, very pious, a very pure morals, lovers of justice etc. should be persons who had been born in lawful wedlock and on German soil. They were not allowed to belong to any religious order or to have ever themselves been summoned before the Vemic tribunal. They were nominated by the free counts but subject to the approval of their sovereigns. They were not allowed to sit as judges before having been initiated into the mysteries of the tribunals. The initiation of a free judge was accompanied by extraordinary formalities. The candidate appeared bare headed, he knelt down and placing two fingers of his right hand on his naked sword and on a rope he took oath to adhere to the laws and customs of the holy tribunal to devote his five senses to it and not to allow himself to be lured therefrom either by silver, gold or even precious stones. To forward the interests of the tribunal above everything illumined by the sun and all that the rain reaches and to defend them against everything which is between heaven and earth. The candidate was then given the sign by which members of the association recognized each other. This sign has remained unknown and nothing even in the deeds of the Vemic archives leads one even to guess what it was and every hypothesis on this subject must be looked upon as uncertain or erroneous. By one of the fundamental statutes of the Ter Rouge a member convicted of betraying the secrets of the order was condemned to the most cruel punishment but we have every reason for asserting that this sentence was never carried out or even issued against a free judge. In one case alone during the 14th century was an accusation of the sword made and that proved to be groundless. It would have been considered the height of treason to have given a relation or a friend the slightest hint that he was being pursued or that he had been condemned by the Holy Vem in order that he might seek refuge by flight and in consequence of this there was a general mistrust of anyone belonging to the tribunal so much so that a brother says a German writer often feared his brother and hospitality was no longer possible. The functions of free judges consisted in going about the country seeking out crimes denouncing them and inflicting immediate punishment on any evil doer caught in the act. The free judges might assemble provided there were at least seven in number to constitute a tribunal but we hear of as many as 300 assisting at a meeting. It has been erroneously stated that the sittings of the Vemic tribunals were held at night in the depths of forests or in subterranean places but it appears that all criminal business was first heard in public and could only be subjected to a secret judgment when the accused had failed either publicly to justify himself or to appear in person. When three free judges caught a malefactor in the very act they could seize him, judge him and inflict the penalty on the spot. In other cases when a tribunal considered that it should pursue an individual it summoned him to appear before it. The summons had to be written without erasures on a large sheet of villain and to bear at least seven seals that of the free count and those of six free judges and these seals generally represented either a man in full armor holding a sword or a simple sword blade or other analogous emblems. Two free judges delivered the summons personally where a member of the association was concerned but if the summons affected an individual who was not of the Vemic order a sworn messenger bore it and placed it in the very hands of the person or slipped it into his house. The time given for putting in an appearance was originally six weeks and three days at least but at a later period this time was shortened. The writ of summons was repeated three times and each time bore a greater number of seals of free judges so as to verify the legality of the instrument. The accused whether guilty or not was liable to a fine for not answering the first summons unless he could prove that it was impossible for him to have done so. If he failed to appear on the third summons he was finally condemned encore et un honneur. We have but imperfect information as to the formalities in use in the Vemic tribunals but we know that the sittings were invested with a certain solemnity and pomp. A naked sword emblematical of justice and recalling our saviours crossed in the shape of its handle and a robe emblematical of the punishment deserved by the guilty were placed on the table before the president. The judges were bare headed with bare hands and each wore a cloak over his shoulder and carried no arms of any sword. The plaintiff and the defendant were each allowed to produce 30 witnesses. The defendant could either defend himself or entrust his case to an advocate whom he brought with him. At first any free judge being defendant in a suit enjoyed the privilege of justifying himself on oath but it having been discovered that this privilege was abused all persons of whatever station were compelled to be confronted with the other side. The witnesses who were subpoenaed by either accuser or accused had to give their evidence according to the truth dispassionately and voluntarily. In the event of the accused not succeeding in bringing sufficient testimony to clear himself the prosecutor claimed a verdict in his favor from the free count presiding at the tribunal who appointed one of the free judges to declare it. In case the free judge did not feel satisfied as to the guilt he could by making oath temporarily divest himself of his office which devolved upon a second, a third or even a fourth free judge. If four free judges were unable to decide the matter was referred to another sitting for judgment had to be pronounced by the appointed free judge at the sitting. The various penalties for different crimes were left to the decision of the tribunal. The rules are silent on the subject and simply state that the culprits will be punished according to the authority of the secret bench. The royale that is capital punishment was strictly applied in all serious cases and the manner of execution most in use was hanging. A person accused who did not appear after the third summons was outlawed by a terrible sentence which deprived him of all rights, of common peace and forbade him the company of all Christians. By the wording of this sentence his wife was looked upon as a widow, his children as orphans, his neck was abandoned to the birds of the ear and his body to the beasts of the field but his soul was recommended to God. At the expiration of one year in a day if the culprit had not appeared or had not established his common rights all his goods were confiscated and appropriated by the king or emperor. When the condemnation referred to a prince, a town or a corporation for the accusations of the tribunal frequently were issued against groups of individuals it caused the loss of all honor, authority and privileges. The free count in pronouncing the sentence threw the rope which was before him on to the ground. The free judges spat upon it and the name of the culprit was inscribed on the book of blood. The sentence was kept secret. The prosecutor alone was informed of it by a written notice which was sealed with seven seals. When the condemned was present the execution took place immediately and according to the custom of the Middle Ages it scaring out was deputed to the youngest of the free judges. The members of the Vamic Association enjoyed the privilege of being hung seven feet higher than those who were not associates. The Vamic judgments were, however, liable to be appealed against. The accused might at the sitting appeal either to what was termed the Imperial Chamber a general chapter of the association which assembled at Dortmund or, and this was the more frequent custom, to the emperor or ruler of the country whether he were king, prince, duke or bishop provided that these authorities belonged to the association. The revision of the judgment could only be entrusted to members of the tribunal who, in their turn, could only act in Westfalia. The condemned might also appeal to the Lieutenant General of the Emperor or to the Grand Master of the Holy Vem, the title which from the remotest times was given to the Archbishop of Cologne. There are even instances of appeals having been made to the councils and to the popes although the Vamic Association never had any communication or intercourse with the court of Rome. We must not forget a very curious privilege which, in certain cases, was left to the culprit as a less resource. He might appeal to the emperor and solicit an order which required the execution of the sentence to be applied after a delay of one hundred years, six weeks and one day. The chapter general of the association was generally summoned once a year by the emperor or his lieutenant and assembled either at Dortmund or Adenberg in order to receive the returns of causes judged by the various Vamic tribunals to hear the changes which had taken place among the members of the order, to receive the free judges to hear appeals and, lastly, to decide upon reforms to be introduced into the rules. These reforms usually had reference to the connection of imperial authority with the members of the secret jurisdiction and were generally suggested by the emperors who were jealous of the increasing power of the association. From what we have shown on the authority of authentic documents, we understand how untrue is the tradition or rather the popular idea that the secret tribunal was an assembly of blood-thirsty judges secretly perpetrating acts of mere cruelty without any but arbitrary laws. It is clear, on the contrary, that it was a regular institution, having, it is true, a most mysterious and complex organization, but simply acting in virtue of legal prescriptions which were rigorously laid down and arranged in a sort of code which did honor to the wisdom of those who had created it. It was towards the end of the 14th and the beginning of the 15th centuries that the Vamic jurisdiction reached its highest degree of power. Its name was only pronounced in a whisper and with trembling. Its orders were received with immediate submission and its chastisements always fell upon the guilty and those who resisted its authority. There cannot be a doubt, but that the Westphalian tribunal prevented many great crimes and public misfortunes by putting a wholesome check on the nobles who were ever ready to place themselves above all human authority and by punishing with pitiless severity the audacity of bandits who would otherwise have been encouraged to commit the most daring acts with almost a certainty of escaping with impunity. But the Holy Vim, blinded by the terror it inspired, was not long without displaying the most extravagant assumption of power and digressing from the strict path to which its actions should have been confined. It summoned before its tribunals princes who openly denied its authority and cities which did not condescend to answer to its behests. In the 15th century the three judges were composed of men who could not be called of unimpeachable integrity. Many persons of doubtful morals having been raised to the dignity by party influence and by money. The partiality and the spirit of revenge which at times prompted their judgments were complained of. They were accused of being open to corruption and this accusation appears to have been too well founded. It is known that according to a feudal practice established in the Vemic system every new free judge was obliged to make a present to the free count who had admitted him into the order and the free counts did not hesitate to make this an important source of revenue to themselves by admitting, according to an historian, many people as judges who in reality deserved to be judged. Owing to the most flagrant and most insolent abuses of power the ancient authority of the institution became gradually more and more shaken. On one occasion, for instance, an answer to a summons issued by the Imperial Tribunal against some free judges the Tribunal of the Tehrhuj had the daring to summon the Emperor Frederick III before it to answer for this want of respect. On another occasion a certain free count, jealous of one of his associates, hung him with his own hands while out on a hunting excursion alleging that his rank of free judge authorized him to execute summary justice. From that time there was a perpetual cry of horror and indignation against a judicial institution which thus interpreted its duties and before long the state undertook the suppression of these secret tribunals. The first idea of this was formed by the electors of the Empire at the Diet of Treve in 1512. The Archbishop of Cologne succeeded, however, impairing the blow by convoking the chapter general of the Order on the plea of the necessity of reform. But besides being essentially corrupt, the Holy Femme had really run its course and it gradually became effected as by degrees a better organized and more defined social and political state succeeded to the confused honor key of the Middle Ages and as the princes and free towns adopted the custom of dispensing justice either in person or through regular tribunals. Its proceedings becoming more and more summary and rigorous daily gave rise to feelings of greater and greater abhorrence. The common saying over all Germany was they first hang you and afterwards inquire into your innocence. An all sides opposition arose against the jurisdiction of the free judges. Princes, bishops, cities and citizens agreed instinctively to counteract this worn out and degenerate institution. The struggle was long and tedious. During the last convulsions of the expiring Holy Femme there was more than one sanguinary episode both on the side of the free judges themselves as well as on that of their adversaries. Occasionally the secret tribunal broke out into fresh signs of life and proclaimed its existence by some terrible execution and at times also its members paid dearly for their acts. On one occasion in 1570, 14 free judges whom Caspar Schwitz, Count of Ettingen, caused to be seized were already tied up in bags and about to be drowned when the mob, pitting their fate, asked for and obtained their reprieve. The death blow to the vemic tribunal was struck by its own hand. It condemned summarily and executed without regular procedure an inhabitant of Munster who used to scandalize the town by his profligacy. He was arrested at night, led to a small wood where the free judges awaited him and condemned to death without being allowed an advocate. And after being refused a respite even of a few hours that he might make his peace with heaven he was confessed by a monk and his head was severed from his body by the executioner on the spot. Dating from this tragical event which excited universal indignation the authority of the free judges gradually declined and at last the institution became almost defunct and merely confined itself to occasionally adjudicating in simple civil matters. We must not omit to mention the Council of Ten of Venice and speaking of the subject of arbitrary executions and of tyrannical and implacable justice. In some respects it was more notorious than the vemic tribunal exercising as it did a no less mysterious power and inspiring equal terror though in other countries. This secret tribunal was created after a revolt which burst on the Republic of Venice on the 15th of June 1310. At first it was only instituted for two months but after various successive prorogations it was confirmed for five years on the 31st of January 1311. In 1316 it was again appointed for five years on the 2nd of May 1327 for ten years more and at last was established permanently. In the 15th century the authority of the Council of Ten was consolidated and rendered more energetic by the creation of the inquisitors of state. These were three in number elected by the Council of Ten and the citizens on whom the votes fell could not refuse the functions which were thus spontaneously and often unexpectedly assigned to them. The authority of inquisitors of state was declared to be unlimited. In order to show the power and motive action of this terrible tribunal it is perhaps better to make a few extracts from the Code of Rules which it established for itself in June 1454. This document, several manuscript copies of which are to be found in the public libraries of Paris, says The inquisitors may proceed against any person whom so ever no rank giving the right of exemption from their jurisdiction. They may pronounce any sentence, even that of death. Only their final sentences must be passed unanimously. They shall have complete charge of the prisons and the leads. They may draw at sight from the treasury of the Council of Ten without having to give any account of the use made of the funds placed in their hands. The proceedings of the tribunal shall always be secret. Its members shall wear no distinctive badge. No open arrests shall be made. The chief of the bailiffs shall avoid making dumb assailory arrests but he shall try to seize the culprit, unawares, away from his home and so securely get him under the leads of the Palace of the Dodges. When the tribunal shall deem the death of any person necessary, the execution shall never be public. The condemned shall be drowned at night in the orfano canal. The tribunal shall authorize the generals commanding in Cyprus or in Candia, in the event of its being for the welfare of the Republic, to cause any patrician or other influential person in either of those Venetian provinces to disappear or to be assassinated secretly if such a measure should conscientiously appear to them indispensable, but they shall be answerable before God for it. If any workman shall practice in a foreign land any art or craft to the detriment of the Republic, he shall be ordered to return to his country and should he not obey, all his nearest relatives shall be imprisoned in order that his affection for them may bring him to obedience. Should he still persist in his disobedience, secret measures shall be taken to put him to death wherever he may be. If a Venetian noble revealed to the tribunal propositions which have been made to him by some foreign ambassador, the agent accepting it should be the ambassador himself shall be immediately carried off and drowned. If a patrician having committed any misdeed shall take refuge under the protection of a foreign ambassador, he shall be put to death forthwith. If any noble in full senate take upon himself to question the authority of the Council of Ten and persist in attacking it, he shall be allowed to speak without interruption. Immediately afterwards he shall be arrested and instructions as to his trial shall be given so that he may be judged by the ordinary tribunals and if this does not succeed in preventing his proceedings, he shall be put to death secretly. In case of a complaint against one of the heads of the Council of Ten, the instructions shall be made secretly and in case of sentence of death, poison shall be the agent selected. Should any dissatisfied noble speak ill of the government, he shall first be forbidden to appear in the Council's and public places for two years. Should he not obey or should he repeat the offence after the two years, he shall be drowned as incorrigible, etc. One can easily understand that in order to carry out these laws, the most careful measures were taken to organize a system of espionage. The nobles were subjected to a rigorous supervision, the privacy of letters was not respected, an ambassador was never lost sight of and his smallest acts were narrowly watched. Anyone who dared to throw obstacles in the way of the spies employed by the Council of Ten was put on the rack and made afterwards to receive the punishment which the state inquisitors might consider befitting. Whole pages of the secret statutes bear witness that lying and fraud form the basis of all the diplomatic relations of the Venetian government. Nevertheless, the Council of Ten, which was solely instituted with the view of watching over the safety of the Republic, could not intermeddle in civil cases and its members were forbidden to hold any sort of communication with foreigners. The list of names of Venetian nobles and distinguished persons who became victims to the suspicious tyranny of the Council of Ten and of the state inquisitors would be very long and of little interest. We may mention a few, however. We find that in 1385, Peter Giustiniani and in 1388, Stephen Monolesco were punished for holding secret transactions with the Lord of Padua. In 1413, John Nogarola for having tried to set fire to Verona. In 1471, Borromeo Memo for having uttered defamatory speeches against the Podestat of Padua. Not only was this Borromeo Memo punished, but three witnesses of the crime which was imputed to him were condemned to a year's imprisonment and three years' banishment for not having denounced the deed between evening and morning. In 1457, we find the Council of Ten attacking the doge himself by requiring the abdication of Francis Foscari. A century earlier, it had caused the doge, Marino Falliero, who was convicted of having taken part in a plot to destroy the influence of the nobility to be executed on the very staircase of the Ducal Palace, where allegiance to the Republic was usually sworn. Like the Holy Vim, the Council of Ten compromised its authority by the abuse of power. In 1540, unknown to the Senate and in spite of the well-prescribed limit of its authority, it concluded a treaty with the Turkish Sultan, Solomon II. The Senate at first concealed its indignation at this abuse of power, but in 1582 it took measures so as considerably to restrain the powers of the Council of Ten, which, from that date, only existed in name. End of Section 26. Manor's Custom and Dress During the Middle Ages and During the Renaissance Period by Paul LeCroe Section 27. Punishments, Part I. Refinements of Penal Cruelty Tortures for Different Purposes Water, Screw Boards, and the Rack The Executioner Female Executioners Tortures Aminde Honorable Torture of Fire, Real and Famed Red Hot Brazer or Basin Beheading Quartering Wheel Garote Hanging The Whip The Pillory The Archibus Tickling Flaying Drowning Imprisonment Regulations of Prisons The Iron Cage The Leads of Venice It is very sad, says the learned Imde Virgel, to observe the infinite variety of tortures which have existed since the beginning of the world. It is, in fact, difficult to realize the amount of ingenuity exercised by men in inventing new tortures in order to give themselves the satisfaction of seeing their fellow-creatures agonizing in the most awful sufferings. In entering upon the subject of ancient modes of punishment we must first speak of the torture which, according to the received phrase, might be either previous or preparatory, previous when it consisted of a torture which the condemned had to endure previous to capital punishment, and preparatory when it was applied in order to elicit from the culprit an avowal of his crime, or of that of his accomplices. It was also called ordinary or extraordinary, according to the duration or violence with which it was inflicted. In some cases the torture lasted five or six consecutive hours. In others it rarely exceeded an hour. Epulate de Marciere, the learned and venerable Jewish consult of Bologna, who lived at the beginning of the fifteenth century, mentions fourteen ways of inflicting torture. The compression of the limbs by special instruments, or by ropes only, injection of water, vinegar, or oil into the body of the accused, application of hot pitch, and starvation were the processes most in use. Other means which were more or less applied according to the fancy of the magistrate and the tormentor or executioner were remarkable for their singular atrocities, for instance placing hot eggs under the armpits, inducing dice between the skin and flesh, tying lighted candles to the fingers so that they might be consumed simultaneously with the wax, letting water trickle drop by drop from a great height on the stomach, and also the custom which was according to writers on criminal matters an indescribable torture of watering the feet with salt water and allowing goats to lick them. However, every country had special customs as to the manner of applying torture. In France, too, the torture varied according to the providences, or rather according to the parliaments. For instance, in Brittany, the culprit, tied in an iron chair, was gradually brought near a blazing furnace. In Normandy, one thumb was squeezed in a screw in the ordinary, and both thumbs in the extraordinary torture. At Atoun, after high boots made of spongy leather had been placed on the culprit's feet, he was tied on to a table near a large fire, and a quantity of boiling water was poured on the boots, which penetrated the leather, ate away the flesh, and even dissolved the bones of the victim. At Orleans, for the ordinary torture, the accused was stripped half naked, and his hands were tightly tied behind his back, with a ring fixed between them. Then, by means of a rope fastened to this ring, they raised the poor man, who had a weight of one hundred and eighty pounds attached to his feet, to the height from the ground. For the extraordinary torture, which then took the name of Estrapade, they raised the victim, with two hundred and fifty pounds attached to his feet, to the ceiling by means of a capstan. He was then allowed to fall several times, successively by jerks, to the level of the ground, by which means his arms and legs were completely dislocated. At Avagnon, the ordinary torture consisted in hanging the accused by the wrists, with a heavy iron ball at each foot. For the extraordinary torture, which was then much in use in Italy, under the name Viglia, the body was stretched horizontally by means of ropes passing through rings, riveted into the wall, and attached to the four limbs. The only support given to the culprit, being the point of a stake cut in a diamond shape, which just touched the end of the backbone. A doctor and a surgeon were always present, feeling the pulse at the temples of the patient, so as to be able to judge the moment when he could not any longer bear the pain. At that moment he was untied, hot formations were used to revive him, restoratives were administered, and as soon as he had recovered a little strength, he was again put to the torture, which went on thus for six consecutive hours. In Paris for a long time the water torture was in use. This was the most easily born and the least dangerous. A person undergoing it was tied to a board which was supported horizontally on two trestles, by means of a horn acting as a funnel, and whilst his nose was being pinched, so as to force him to swallow, they slowly poured four cantomars about nine pints of water into his mouth. This was the ordinary torture. For the extraordinary, double that quantity was poured in. When the torture was ended, the victim was untied, quote, and taken to be warmed in the kitchen, end quote, says the old text. At a later period the protocons were preferred. For this torture the victim was placed in a sitting position on a massive bench, with strong narrow boards fixed inside and outside of each leg, which were tightly bound together with strong rope. Wedges were then driven in between the center boards with a mallet, four wedges in the ordinary, and eight in the extraordinary torture. Not unfrequently during the latter operation the bones of the legs were literally burst. The protocons, which were often used for ordinary torture, were stockings of parchment, into which it was easy enough to get the feet when it was wet, but which, on being held near the fire, shrunk so considerably that it caused insufferable agony to the wearer. Whatever manner of torture was applied the accused, before undergoing it, was forced to remain eight or ten hours without eating. Dame Horeray, in his famous technical work called Practiquée et Inturillon Dion des Causes Criminale, 1544, also recommends that the hair should be carefully shaved from the bodies of persons about to undergo examination by torture, for fear of their concealing some counter-charm which would render them insensible to bodily pain. The same author also recommends, as a rule, when there are several persons, quote, to be placed on the rack, in quote, for the same deed, to begin with those from whom it would be most probable that confession would be first extorted. Thus, for instance, when a man and a woman were to suffer one after the other he recommended that the woman be first tortured as being the weaker of the two. When a father and son were concerned the son should be tortured in presence of the father, quote, who naturally fears more for his son than for himself, in quote. We thereby see that the judges were adept in their art of adding moral to physical tortures. The barbarous custom of punishment by torture was on several occasions condemned by the church. As early as 866 we find from Pope Nicholas V's letter to the Bulgarians that their custom of torturing the accused was considered contrary to divine as well as to human law. For, says he, a confession should be voluntary, not forced, by means of the torture an innocent man may suffer to the utmost without making any avowal, and, in such a case, what a crime for the judge, or the person who may be subdued by pain and may acknowledge himself guilty, although he be not so, which throws an equally great sin upon the judge, in quote. After having endured the previous torture the different phases of which were carried out by special tormentors or executioners, the condemned was at last handed over to the maus tre des haute au voe, that is to say the executioner, whose special mission was that of sending culprits to another world. The executioner did not hold the same position in all countries, for whereas in France, Italy, and Spain a certain amount of odium was attached to this terrible craft, in Germany on the contrary, successfully carrying out a certain number of capital sentences was rewarded by titles and the privileges of nobility. At Rutenlegen, in Sao Bia, the last of the councillors admitted into the tribunal had to carry out the sentence with his own hand. In Franconia this painful duty fell upon the councillor who had last taken a wife. In France the executioner, otherwise called the king's sworn tormentor, was the lowest of the officers of justice. His letters of appointment, which he received from the king, had nevertheless to be registered in parliament. But, after having put the seal on them, it is said that the councillor threw them under the table in token of contempt. The executioner was generally forbidden to live within the precincts of the city, unless it was on the grounds where the pillory was situated, and in some cases, so that he might not be mistaken amongst the people. He was forced to wear a particular coat, either of red or yellow. On the other hand his duties ensured him certain privileges. In Paris he possessed the rite of Havage, which consisted in taking all that he could hold in his hand from every load of grain which was brought into market. However, in order that the grain might be preserved from ignomious contact, he levied his tax with a wooden spoon. He enjoyed many similar rites over most articles of consumption, independently of benefiting by several taxes or fines, such as the toll on the piet-pône, the tax on foreign traders, on boats arriving with fish, on dealers in herrings, water-crests, etc. and the fine of five souls, which was levied on stray pigs, see previous chapter, and etc. And lastly, besides the personal property of the condemned, he received the rents from the shops and stalls surrounding the pillory, in which the retail fish-trade was carried on. It appears that, in consequence of the receipts from these various duties forming a considerable source of revenue, the prestige of wealth by degrees dissipated the unfavorable impressions traditionally attached to the duties of the executioner. At least, we have authority for supposing this when, for instance, in 1418 we see the Paris executioner, who was then captain of the Birgeoisie Militia, coming in that capacity to touch the hand of the Duke of Burgundy, on the occasion of his solemn entry into Paris with Queen Isabel of Bavaria. We may add that popular belief generally ascribed to the executioner a certain practical knowledge of medicine, which was supposed inherent in the possession itself, and the acquaintance with certain methods of cure unknown to doctors was attributed to him. People went to buy from him the fat of culprits who had been hung, which was supposed to be a marvelous panacea. We may also remark that, in our day, the proficiency of the executioner in setting dislocated limbs is still proverbial in many countries. More than once during the 13th century these of the executioner were performed by women, but only in those cases in which their own sex was concerned. For it is expressly stated in an order of St. Louis that persons convicted of blasphemy shall be beaten with birch rods, the men by men and the women by women only, without the presence of men. This, however, was not long tolerated, for we know that a period soon arrived when women were exempted from a duty so little adapted to their physical weakness and moral sensitivities. The learned writer on criminal cases, José Damarro de, whom we have already mentioned, and whom we shall take as our special guide in the enumeration of the various tortures, specifies 13 ways in which the executioner carries out his executions and places them in the following order. Fire, the sword, mechanical force, quatering, the wheel, the fork, the gibbet, drawing, spiking, cutting off the ears, dismembering, flogging or beating, and the pillory. But before entering upon the details of this revolting subject we must state that whatever punishment was inflicted upon a culprit it was very rare that its execution had been preceded by the amende honorable, which, in certain cases, constituted a distinct punishment, but which generally was but the prelude to the torture itself. The amende honorable, which was called simple or short, took place without the assistance of the executioner in the council chamber, where the condemned, bareheaded and kneeling, had to state that, quote, he had falsely said or done something against the authority of the king or the honor of some person, end quote. For the amende honorable infigurie, that is to say, in public, the condemned in his shirt barefooted the rope around his neck followed by the executioner and holding in his hand a waxed taper, with a weight which was definitely specified in the sentence which had been passed upon him, but which was generally of two or four pounds, prostrated himself at the door of a church, where in a loud voice he had to confess his sin and to beg the pardon of God and man. When a criminal had been condemned to be burnt, a stake was erected on the spot specially designed for the execution, and round it a pile was prepared composed of alternate layers of straw and wood and rising to about the height of a man. Care was taken to leave a free space around the stake for the victim and also a passage by which to lead him to it. Having been stripped of his clothes and dressed in a shirt smeared with sulfur, he had to walk to the center of the pile through a narrow opening and was then tightly bound to the stake with ropes and chains. After this, faggots and straw were thrown into the empty space through which he had passed to the stake until he was entirely covered by them. He was then fired on all sides at once. Sometimes the sentence was that the culprit should only be delivered to the flames after having been previously strangled. In this case, the dead corpse was then immediately placed where the victim would otherwise have been placed alive and the punishment lost much of its horror. It often happened that the executioner in order to shorten the sufferings of the condemned whilst he prepared the pile of large and pointed iron bar amongst the faggots and opposite the stake, breast high, so that, directly, the fire was lighted, the bar was quickly pushed against the victim, giving a mortal blow to the unfortunate wretch who would otherwise have been slowly devoured by the flames. If, according to the wording of the sentence, the ashes of the criminal were to be scattered to the winds, as soon as it was possible to approach the center of the burning pile, a few ashes were taken in a shovel and sprinkled in the air. They were not satisfied with burning the living. They also delivered to the flames the bodies of those who had died a natural death before their execution could be carried out, as if an anticipated death should not be allowed to save them from the punishment which they had deserved. It also happened in certain cases where a person's guilt was only proved after his decease that his body was disinterred and carried to the stake to be burnt. The punishment by fire was always inflicted in case of heresy or blasphemy. The Spanish Inquisition made such a constant and cruel use of it that the expression athodefe, act of faith, strangely perverted from its original meaning, was the only one employed to denote the punishment itself in France in the beginning of the 14th century, fifty-nine Templars were burned at the same time for the crimes of heresy and witchcraft. And three years later, on the 18th of March, 1314, Jacques Molay and a few other dignitaries of the order of the Templars also perished in the flames at the extremity of the island of Notre-Dame. On the very spot where the equestrian statue of Henry IV now stands. Everyone is acquainted with the fact that judges were found iniquitous enough to condemn Joan of Arc to death by fire as a witch and a heretic. Her execution, which took place in the marketplace of Rowan, is remarkable from a circumstance which is little known, and which had never taken place on any other occasion. When it was supposed that the fire which surrounded the young heroine on all sides had reached her and no doubt suffocated her, although sufficient time had not elapsed her body, a part of the blazing wood was withdrawn, in order to remove any doubts from the people, and when the crowd had satisfied themselves by seeing her in the middle of the pile, chained to a post and quite dead, the executioner replaced the fire. It should be stated in reference to this point that Joan, having been accused of witchcraft, there was a general belief among the people that the flames were harmless to her, and that she would be seen emerging from her pile, unscathed. The sentence of punishment by fire did not absolutely imply death at the stake. For there was a punishment of this description which was specially reserved for base coiners and which consisted in hurling the criminals into a cauldron of scalding water or oil. We must include in the category of punishment by fire certain penalties which were, so to speak, but the preliminaries of a more severe punishment such as the Sulphur fire in which the hands of the Paracides or the criminals accused of high treason were burned. We must also add various punishments which if they did not involve death were none the less cruel, such as the Red Hot Brazier Brazen Adrant, which was passed backwards and forwards through the eyes of the culprit until they were destroyed by the scorching heat, and the process of branding various marks on the flesh as an ineffecable stigma, the use of which has been continued to the present day. End of Section 27. Recorded by herehis.com In certain countries, decapitation was performed with an axe, but in France it was carried out, usually by means of a two-handed sword or glossary or a knife, or a knife, or a knife, or a knife, or a knife, or a knife, or a knife, or a knife, or a two-handed sword or a glossary of justice which was furnished to the executioner for that purpose. We find it recorded that in 1476 Sixty sous parces were paid to the executioner of Paris for having bought a large espiaffae for the beheading of the condemned and for having the old sword done up which was damaged and had become notched carrying out the sentence of justice upon major Louis de Luxembourg. Originally decapitation was indiscriminately inflicted on all criminals condemned to death. At a later period, however, it became the particular privilege of the nobility who submitted to it without any feeling of degradation. The victim, unless the sentence prescribed that he should be an ignominious aggravation of the penalty, was allowed to choose whether he would have his eyes covered or not. He knelt down on the scaffold, placed his head on the block and gave himself up to the executioner. The skill of the executioner was generally such that the head was almost invariably severed from the body at the first blow. Nevertheless skill and practice at times failed for cases are on record where as many as eleven blows were dealt, and at times it happened that the sword broke. It was, no doubt, the desire to avoid this mischance that led to the invention of the mechanical instrument now known under the name of the guillotine which is merely an improvement on a complicated machine which was much more ancient and generally supposed. As early as the 16th century, the modern guillotine already existed in Scotland under the name of the Maiden, and English historians relate that Lord Morton, region of Scotland during the minority of James VI, had it constructed after a model of a similar machine which had long been in use at Halifax in Yorkshire. They add, and popular tradition also has invented an unalvious tale in France that this Lord Morton, who was the inventor or the first to introduce this kind of punishment was, himself, the first to experience it. The guillotine is, besides, very accurately described in the Chronicles of Jean D'etan in an account of an execution which took place at Genoa at the beginning of the 16th century. Two German engravings executed about 1550 by pens in all degree also represent an instrument of death almost identical with a guillotine. And the same instrument is to be found on a bas-relief of that period which is still existing in one of the halls of the tribunal of Luenborg in Hanover. Possibly the invention of such a machine was prompted by the desire to curtail the physical sufferings of the victim instead of prolonging them as under the ancient system. It is, however, difficult to believe that the medieval judges were actuated by any humane feeling when we find that in order to reconcile a respect for propriety with a due compliance with the ends of justice the punishment of being alive was resorted to for women who could not, with decency, be hung up to the gibbets. In 1460 a woman named Parit accused of theft and of receiving stolen goods was condemned by the provost of Paris to be buried alive before the gallows and the sentence was literally carried out. Quartering may in truth be considered the most horrible penalty invented by judicial cruelty. This punishment really dates from their remotest ages. But it was scarcely ever inflicted in more modern times except on regicides who were looked upon as having committed the worst of crimes. In almost all cases the victim had previously to undergo various accessory tortures but sometimes his right hand was cut off and the mutilated stump was burnt in a cauldron of sulfur. Sometimes his arms, thighs or breasts were lacerated with red hot pinchers and hot oil, pitch or molten lead was poured into the wounds. After these horrible preliminaries a rope was attached to each of the limbs of the criminal, one being round each leg from the foot to the knee and round each arm from the wrist to the elbow. These ropes were then fastened to four bars to each of which a strong horse was harnessed as if for towing a barge these horses were first made to give short jerks and when the agony had elicited heart-rending cries from the unfortunate man he felt his limbs being dislocated without being broken the four horses were all suddenly urged on with the whip in different directions and thus all the limbs were strained at one moment. If the tendons and ligaments still resisted the combined efforts of the four horses the executioner assisted and made several cuts with a hatchet on each joint for this horrible torture often lasted several hours. Each horse had drawn out a limb. They were collected in place near the hideous trunk which often still showed signs of life and the whole were burned together. Sometimes the sentence was that the body should be hung to the gibbet and that the limb should be displayed on the gates of the town or sent to the ruins in the extremities of the kingdom. When this was done an inscription was placed on each of the limbs which stated the reason of its being thus exposed. The wheel is the name applied to a torture of very ancient origin but which was applied during the Middle Ages to quite a different torture from that used in olden times. The modern instrument might have called the cross for it only served for the public exhibition of the body of the criminal whose limbs had been previously broken alive. This torture which does not date earlier than the days of Francie I is thus described. The victim was first tied on his back to two joists forming a St. Andrew's Cross each of his limbs being hung on its arms. Two places were hollowed out under each limb about a foot apart in order that the joints alone might touch the wood. The executioner then dealt a heavy blow over each hollow with a square iron bar about two inches broad and rounded at the handle thus breaking each limb in two places to the eight blows required for this. The executioner generally added two or three on the chest which were called coup de grâce and which ended this horrible execution. It was only after death that the broken body was placed on a wheel which was turned round on a pivot. Sometimes, however, the sentence ordered that the condemned should be strangled before being broken which was done in such cases by the instantaneous twist of a rope round the neck. Strangling, thus carried out, was called garroting. This method is still in use in Spain and is specially reserved for the nobility. The victim is seated on a scaffold, his head leaning against a beam and his neck grasped by an iron collar which the executioner suddenly tightens from behind by means of a screw for several centuries and down to the revolution. Hanging was the most common mode of execution in France. Consequently, in every town and almost in every village there was a permanent gibbet which owing to the custom of leaving the bodies to hang till they crumbled into dust was very rarely without having some corpses or skeletons attached to it. These gibbets which were called fuchsia patibolaires or justices because they represented the authority of the law were generally composed of pillars of stone joined at their summit by wooden traverses to which the bodies of criminals were tied by ropes or chains. The gallows, the pillars of which varied in number according to the will of the authorities, were always placed by the side of frequented roads and on an eminence. According to prescribed rule the gallows of Paris which played such an important part in the political as well as the criminal history of that city were erected on a high north of the town near the high road leading into Germany. Montfoucon originally the name of the hill soon became that of the gallows itself. This celebrated place of execution consisted of a heavy mass of masonry composed of 10 or 12 layers of rough stone and formed an enclosure of 40 feet by 25 or 30. At the upper part there was a platform which was reached by a stone staircase the entrance to which was closed by a massive door. On three sides of this platform rested 16 square pillars about 30 feet high made of blocks of stone a foot thick. These pillars were joined to one another by double bars of wood which were fastened into them and bore iron chains 3 feet and a half long to which the criminals were suspended. Underneath halfway between these and the platform other bars were placed for the same purpose. Long and solid ladders riveted to the killers enabled the executioner and his assistants to lead up criminals or to carry up corpses destined to be hung there. Lastly the center of the structure was occupied by a deep pit the hideous receptacle of the decaying remains of the criminals. One can easily imagine the strange and melancholy aspect of this monumental jibble if one thinks of the number continually attached to it and which were feasted upon by thousands of crows. On one occasion only it was necessary to replace 52 chains which were useless and the accounts of the city of Paris prove that the expense of executions was more heavy than that of the maintenance of the exhibit a fact easy to be understood if one recalls to mind the frequency of capital sentences during the Middle Ages. Montfoucon was used not only for executions but also for exposing corpses which were brought there from various places of execution in every part of the country. The mutilated remains of criminals who had been boiled, quartered or beheaded were also hung there in stacks of leather or wicker work. They often remained hanging for a considerable time as in the case of Pierre Dessas who had been beheaded in 1413 and whose remains were handed over to his family for Christian burial after having hung on Montfoucon for three years. The criminal condemned to be hanged was generally taken to the place of the execution sitting or standing in a wagon with his back to the horses his confessor by his side and the executioner behind him. He bore three ropes round his neck two the size of the little finger and called tortusa each of which had a slipknot the third called the jet was only used to pull the victim off the ladder and launch him into eternity. When the cart arrived at the foot of the gallows the executioner first ascended the ladder backwards drawing the culprit after him by means of the ropes and forcing him to keep pace with him on arriving at the top he quickly fastened the two tortusa to the arm of the gibbet and by a jerk of his knee he turned the culprit off the ladder still holding the jet in his own hand he then placed his feet on the tied hands of the condemned and suspending himself by his hands to the gibbet he finished off his victim by repeated jerks thus ensuring complete strangulation. When the words shall be hung until death does ensue are to be found in a sentence it must not be supposed that they were used merely as a form for in certain cases the judge ordered that the sentence should be only carried out as far as would prove to the culprit the awful sensation of hanging. In such cases the victim was simply suspended by ropes passing under the armpits a kind of exhibition which was not free from danger when it was too prolonged for the weight of the body so tightened a rope round the chest that the circulation might be stopped many culprits after hanging thus an hour when brought down were dead or only survived this painful process a short time we have seen elsewhere that when the criminal passed before the convent of the Thedew the nuns of that establishment were bound to bring him out lying in three pieces of bread and this was called a Danumosu Depeshon it was hardly ever refused and an immense crowd assisted at this sad meal after this the procession went forward and on arriving near the gallows another halt was made at the foot of the stone cross in order that the culprit might receive the religious exhortations of his confessor the moment the execution was over the confessor and the officers of justice returned to the châtelet where a repast provided by the town awaited them sometimes the criminals in consequence of a peculiar wording of the sentence were taken to Montfacan whether dead or alive on a ladder fastened behind a cart this was an aggravation of the penalty which was called the penalty of the lash was inflicted in two ways first, under the custoid that is to say within the prison and by the hand of the jailer himself in which case it was simply a correction and secondly in public when its administration became ignominious as well as painful in the latter case the criminal was paraded about the town stripped to the waist and at every crossway he received a certain number of blows on the shoulders given by the public executioner with a cane or a knotted rope when it was only required to stamp a culprit with infamy he was put into the pillory which was generally a kind of scaffold furnished with chains and iron collars and bearing on its front arms of the feudal lord in Paris this name was given to a round isolated tower built in the center of the market the tower was 60 feet high and had large openings in its thick walls and a horizontal wheel was provided which was capable of turning on a pivot this wheel was pierced with several holes made so as to hold the hands and head of the culprit who, on passing and repassing before the eyes of the crowd came in full view and was subjected to their hootings the pillories were always situated in the most frequent in places such as markets, crossways, etc notwithstanding the long and dreadfully enumeration we have just made medieval punishments we are far from having exhausted the subject for we have not spoken of several more or less atrocious punishments which were in use at various times and in various countries such as the pain of the cross especially employed against the Jews the Alcubisada which was well adapted for carrying out prompt justice on soldiers the Chateaunia which resulted in death after the most intense tortures the Pala flaying alive and lastly drowning a kind of death frequently employed in France hence the common expression Jean de Saca de Corde which was derived from de Saca into which persons were tied who were condemned to die by immersion but we will now turn away from these horrible scenes and consider the several methods of penal sequestration and prison arrangements it is unnecessary to state that in barbarous times the cruel and pitiless feeling which induced legislators to increase the horrors of tortures also contributed to the aggravation of the fate of prisoners each administrator of the law had his private jail which was entirely under his will and control law or custom did not prescribe any fixed rules for the internal government of prisons there can be little doubt however that these prisons were as small as they were unhealthy if we may judge from that in the Rue de la Tonnerie which was the property of the provost the merchants and the aldermen of Paris in 1383 although this dungeon was only 11 feet long by 7 feet wide from 10 to 20 prisoners were often immured in it at the same time Paris alone contained 25 or 30 special prisons without counting the vadi-pas of the various religious communities the most important were the Grand Châtelet the Petit Châtelet the Bastille the Ochon Jauré and the Four Laïques the ancient seat of the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the bishop of Paris nearly all these places of confinement contained subterranean cells which were almost entirely deprived of air and light as examples of these may be mentioned the Châtelet of the Petit Châtelet where under the reign of Charles VI it was proved that no man could pass an entire day without being suffocated and the fearful cells excavated 30 feet below the surface of the earth in the jail of the Abbey of Saint Germain to prove the roof of which was so low that a man of middle height could not stand up in them and where the straw of the prisoner's beds floated upon the stagnant water which had oozed through the walls the Grand Châtelet was one of the most ancient prisoners of Paris and probably the one which held the greatest number of prisoners by a curious and arbitrary custom prisoners were compelled to pay a fee on entering and going out of this prison which varied according to their rank and which was established by a law of the year 1425 we learn from this enactment the names by which the various places of confinement composing this spacious municipal prison were known a prisoner who was confined in Nebuvois or Laissez-les had the right of having a bed brought from his own house and only had to pay a du wadi plus to the jail or anyone who was placed in the Boucherie in the Beaumont or in the Griche-Eche which are closed prisons had to pay four deniers pour plus anyone who was confined in the Beaumont lies on mats or on layers of rushes or straw if he preferred he might be placed in the Gourdonna in the Baquillat or in the Obelette where he did not pay more than in the Fosse for this, no doubt the smallest charge was made sometimes, however the prisoner was left between the doors and he then paid much less than he would in the Baquillat or in the Joliet the exact meaning of these curious names is no longer intelligible to us notwithstanding the terror which they formally created but their very strangeness gives us reason to suppose that the prison system was at that time subjected to the most odious confinement of the basest cruelty from various reliable sources we learned that there was a place in the Grand Châtelet called a Coste de Paca in which the prisoners had their feet continually in water and where they could neither stand up nor lie down and a cell called Fendi-Haza which was a horrible receptacle of vermin and reptiles as to the Fosse no staircase being attached to it the prisoners were lowered down into it by means of a rope and pulley by the law of 1425 the jailer was not permitted to put more than two or three persons in the same bed he was bound to give bread and water to the prisoners who had no means of subsistence and lastly he was enjoying to keep the large stone basin which was on the pavement full of water so that prisoners might get it whenever they wished in order to defray his expenses he levied on the prisoners various charges for attendance and forbidding and he was authorized to detain the person who failed to pay him the power of compelling payment of these charges continued even after a judge's order for the release of a prisoner had been issued the subterranean cells of the Bastia did not differ much from those of the Châtelet there were several the bottoms of which were formed like a sugarloaf upside down thus, neither to stand up nor even to adopt a tolerable position sitting or lying down it was in these that King Louis XI who seemed to have a partiality for filthy dungeons placed the two young sons of the Dupes de Magnon ordering besides that they should be taken out twice a week and beaten with birch rods and as a supreme measure of atrocity he had one of their teeth extracted every three months it was Louis XI who in 1476 ordered the famous iron cage to be erected in one of the towers of the Bastia in which Giamont Bishop of Verdun was incarcerated for 14 years the Château de Lois also possessed one of these cages which received the name of Cachetubayou because the cardinal Jandibayou was imprisoned in it Philippe de Comines in his memoirs declares that he himself had a taste of it for eight months before the invention of cages Louis XI ordered very heavy chains to be made which were fastened to the feet of the prisoners and attached to large iron balls called according to Comines the king's little daughters the prison known by the name of the Leeds of Venice is of so notorious a character that its mere mention is sufficient without its being necessary for us to describe it to the subject of voluntary seclusion to which certain pious persons submitted themselves as acts of extreme religious devotion it will only be necessary to allude here and to remark that there are examples of disconfinement having been ordered by legal authority in 1485 Rene d'Ivoire the widow of a squire had been condemned to be burnt for adultery and for murdering her husband but on letters of remation from the king the parliament commuted the sentence pronounced by the provost of Paris and ordered that Rene d'Ivoire should be shut within the walls of the cemetery of the saints of innocence in a small house built at her expense that she might therein do penance and end her days in conformity with this sentence the culprit having been conducted to the cell which had been prepared for her the door was locked by means of two keys one of which remained in the hands of the church warden of the church of the innocence and the other was deposited at the office of the parliament the prisoner received her food from public charity and it is said that she became an object of veneration and respect by the whole town the end of section 28 recording by Jim Cleventure Little Rock, Arkansas Jim at joclev.com