2007-12-02 08:43:57 · 12 answers · asked by Mrs. Depp 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
Depends on how you are asking that question. If you are asking if it was humane during that time period, then yes. The alternatives back then were pretty bad. When done correctly, a clean slice right through the neck would've left the victim dead before they knew they were hit. Bothched executions (dull blades, improper placement of the criminal under the blade) were probably pretty darn inhumane though.
2007-12-02 08:53:42 · answer #1 · answered by benvanzile 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
As humane as any as far as method of death is concerned. The terror and public spectacle on the way to the execution is another matter. Death is death and the Guillotine was certainly quick about it. It was far more humane than the chopping block. The Guillotine was used in France for a very long time after the French Revolution.
2007-12-02 08:59:56 · answer #2 · answered by ToolManJobber 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
yes in terms of getting ones life done with yes, and you also did not have to worry about clumsy swordsmen who hit in the back or chopped a bit of head but did not kill the person.
it was traditional, that the condemned were given a small bag of coins to bribe the executioner to make a clean cut and bring death, many, historically did not.
if I remember from history, the device was actually made for doing amputations and modified for capital punishment.
i read an article filed by a police reporter, of the last execution in france by guillotine, (TRUE CRIME, hardback) and the condemned was dragged kicking and screaming as the bells began to toll in the church steeple. He was forced into the collar and the release pulled. his body was rolled (still kicking) into a coffin on a horse drawn cart beside the platform and his head tossed in. the lid closed and the team whipped to start moving. The gates of the prison swung shut behind the horses and the reporter looked at his pocket watch, 54 seconds had elapsed.
2007-12-02 09:04:20 · answer #3 · answered by magnetic_azimuth 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I suppose I would choose the guillotine over drawing and quartering, hanging (remember the neck didn't always break and they had ways of drawing it out), or having my guts ripped out and burned while I watched. We humans have come up with thousands of horrible ways to hurt each other, I would hope for quick and as painless as possible.
2007-12-02 09:02:42 · answer #4 · answered by Rosie 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Beautiful
2016-03-15 05:02:34 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
1
2017-02-20 02:44:44 · answer #6 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Quite frankly, I don't know anyone who thinks it was a humane way to end someone's life nowadays.
2007-12-02 08:50:21 · answer #7 · answered by chrstnwrtr 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
DONT CHEAT ON SCHOOLWORK
how come kids have to cheat on all their school stuff??
why don't you try thinking of some answers on your own. if you get caught doing this, you could get in trouble! is that really worth risking for a quick fix like yahoo?
2007-12-03 18:06:13 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
no, it was quick and easy. They used to use dull axes, which meant they would have to hack at the neck quite a few times...
2007-12-02 08:54:36 · answer #9 · answered by confidentsupergirl 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
yes it was the other option was an Axe and it would take several strikes to cut off the head
2007-12-02 08:56:23 · answer #10 · answered by medicjames 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋