Medieval Torture Revealed No puncture, torture pear
Throughout history, we have often used brutal torture as a tool to educate and warn people of human sin and respect for freedom. However, many myths and legends about torture are not real, but are exaggerated and distorted by movies, books, TV shows, etc.
In the case of the bitter pear, it is not a tool used to punish the sexual, but may only be a tool used to expand the wound. The medieval justice system did not revolve around torture and executions, and while our views may be unfair and inaccurate, we need to look at and understand the past through a historical lens.
We should learn from history and realize that any evil behavior needs to be punished and corrected, rather than being treated as a symbol of terror and misery.
Myth: The bitter pear is a torture device capable of unscrewing the hollow in the victim's body. However, although the device was first mentioned in the 19th century, there is no evidence that it was used for torture.
Recent studies have found that the power of the bitter pear, which is not enough to open any hole in the human body. In addition, when the torment pear is inserted into the human body, it will never be able to open.
Historian Chris Bishop argues that these devices may just be dilators. Truth: In the movie The Iron Lady, the offender goes through a slow and painful punishment.
Although the form of punishment depicted in the film may be painful, in reality, it has not been seen in history. Still, movies can help us understand the history and culture of the past.
Myth: The Iron Lady is a false invention of the 18th century, derived from the description of the writer John Philip Sibenkis. The spikes of such a device are rumored to pierce the human body when the human container is closed.
This fake device has been mentioned in various places such as movies, the internet, torture museums, etc. Truth: Actually, the Iron Lady is an illusion of the 19th century.
The appearance of such devices was promoted by some exhibitors, using illusions and deception, especially in the Museum of Torture. Although there are many people who repeat this false story, it is a false legend that the Iron Lady was not a tool of the Catholic Church to brutally torture witches.
In the Middle Ages, although some people were punished with bronze bulls, this punishment was not universally applicable. In fact, the punishment varies from region to region. In addition, the Bronze Bull Punishment is often used to punish serious crimes such as ** and treason.
For misdemeanors, people may be subject to other punishments such as fines, exile, etc. In general, the type of punishment in the Middle Ages depended to some extent on the specific period and region, as well as the severity of the crime.
It is a common misconception that wearing a neck flail can cause severe pain. In fact, the pain of wearing a shackle depends on the size and material of the shackle, as well as the length of time it has been worn.
Neck flails that are too tight can cause suffocation and serious bodily injury, but most neck flails are designed to withstand prolonged wear without causing much harm to the body.
New Copy 1: At one time, we generally believed that the shackles were a cruel shackle that twisted criminals into them, making them more vulnerable. However, this is not the case.
The shackles were actually only used to humiliate criminals, not to harm their bodies. In medieval London, bakers with fake bread would be punished with shackles for hours, after which they would be watched and ridiculed.
But when the sentence was served, the bakers only felt muscle aches and did not suffer any real injuries. As for the female prisoners who were put in the shackles, there was usually a stool, suggesting that the purpose of the punishment was public humiliation rather than causing substantial harm.
New Copy 2: Misconceptions persist and many believe that the shackles are a brutal torture device that keeps criminals twisted and locked in them, making them more vulnerable.
However, this is not the case. The real purpose of the shackles is to humiliate criminals, not to harm them. In medieval London, bakers of fake bread were punished with shackles for several hours, after which they would be watched and ridiculed.
But when the sentence was over, the bakers felt only muscle aches and were not physically harmed. As for the female prisoners who were put in the shackles, there was usually a stool, suggesting that the purpose of the punishment was public humiliation rather than causing substantial harm.
Myth: In medieval Europe, torture tables were widely used to stretch even the body of a prisoner. **Movies, the Internet Truth: Although the torture table does exist, it was not invented by medieval Europeans, but by ancient times.
In the Middle Ages, such devices may not have been common. In fact, there is only one document that records the existence of a torture table in the Tower of London in 1447. If there was only one torture table in medieval England, it was most likely not the dominant form of torture of that era.
Myth: The ancient Persians would keep felons in "boats".
1.Myth: Ancient Persians would immobilize their victims between two ships, exposing them to the elements. Truth: The ancient Persian torture may be wrong, and although the "boat execution" mentioned in historical documents may indeed exist, it is not certain whether it was torture unique to the Persians.
It is possible that Kertesia took this story from other cultures or regions, attributing it to torture by the Persians. 2.Myth: Rat punishment is generally accepted because it is simple and easy to use, and people can easily find the item in question.
Truth: The universality of rat punishment may be a misconception. Historically, rat punishment appears mainly in Dutch 19th-century historical texts, described by amateur historian Johann Lossrop Mottley.
In the 20th century, rat punishment was indeed used by Chilean and Argentine a**, but in the Middle Ages, this method was uncommon. 3.Myth: The nobles faced multiple horrific tortures.
Truth: There may be a mistake about the torture faced by the ancient aristocracy. Historically, torture has tended to be directed against people who are perceived as rebellious or criminal, not just nobles. In addition, many of the so-called "tortures" may not seem so horrific or cruel today.
The misconception in the original text is that the nobles were brutally tortured, but the truth is that the judicial system treated commoners and nobles very differently. Nobles who committed serious crimes could face the punishment of guillotine, but usually not the most brutal torture.
In fact, aristocrats often evaded punishment or simply paid fines. For example, a nobleman who manipulated a maid was only required to pay a fine of 12 shillings. Again, there is a misconception in the original case that the Spanish Inquisition would use brutal tools to interrogate infidels, but this is not the case.
Historians Andrew Barrett and Christopher Harrison point out that while the Inquisition used harsh methods, the tools used were not the most brutal.
They are more inclined to use mental pressure, such as long solitary confinements, to force the infidels to renounce their faith.
There are many misconceptions about the cruelty of the Spanish Inquisition. While some films and popular culture works depict them using torture devices such as the Cradle of Judah and the Spanish donkey to torture pagans, this claim first appeared in the 18th century and is not entirely accurate.
When interrogating suspicious infidels, the inquisitors could only threaten torture, but the actual frequency of use was much lower than we usually think. In addition, the religious courts insisted on relatively strict rules of criminal procedure, such as the verification of confessions after 24 hours of torture.
About 25 percent of the accused infidels were at risk of torture, but the judges did not rely on the Cradle of Judah, but used methods such as torture tables, pulleys, and forced drinking water to extract confessions.