Hanged, drawn and quartered

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
(Redirected from
Drawn and quartered
)

Froissart of Louis of Gruuthuse

To be hanged, drawn and quartered became a

hanged (almost to the point of death), emasculated, disembowelled, beheaded, and quartered. His remains would then often be displayed in prominent places across the country, such as London Bridge, to serve as a warning of the fate of traitors. For reasons of public decency, women convicted of high treason were instead burned at the stake
.

The same punishment applied to traitors against the king in

Richard Plantagenet, 3rd Duke of York in 1459, and from the reign of King Henry VII it was made part of statute law.[1][2] Matthew Lambert was among the most notable Irishmen to suffer this punishment, in 1581 in Wexford.[3]

The severity of the sentence was

monarch's authority, high treason was considered a deplorable act demanding the most extreme form of punishment. Although some convicts had their sentences modified and suffered a less ignominious end, over a period of several hundred years many men found guilty of high treason were subjected to the law's ultimate sanction. They included many Catholic priests executed during the Elizabethan era, and several of the regicides involved in the 1649 execution of Charles I
.

Although the

Act of Parliament defining high treason remains on the United Kingdom's statute books, during a long period of 19th-century legal reform the sentence of hanging, drawing, and quartering was changed to drawing, hanging until dead, and posthumous beheading and quartering, before being abolished in England in 1870. The death penalty for treason was abolished in 1998
.

History

Early punishments for treason

William de Marisco
is drawn to his execution behind a horse.

During the High Middle Ages, those in the Kingdom of England found guilty of treason were punished in a variety of ways, often including drawing and hanging. Throughout the 13th century, more severe penalties were recorded, such as disembowelling, burning, beheading, and quartering.

The 13th-century English chronicler

gibbet until dead. His corpse was disembowelled, his entrails burned, his body quartered, and the parts distributed to cities across the country.[7]

First recorded examples

Edward I Longshanks, King of England (1272–1307)

The first recorded example of the punishment in its entirety was during

high treason.[8]

On 3 October, Dafydd was drawn through the streets of Shrewsbury to his place of execution, attached to a horse's tail. There he was hanged until losing consciousness, then revived, disembowelled, eviscerated, and made to watch as his entrails burned before him for "sacrilege in committing his crimes in the week of Christ's passion" (Easter).[10][11] Finally, Dafydd's body was cut into quarters "for plotting the king's death," and the parts were sent to different regions of Edward's realm: the right arm to York, the left arm to Bristol, the right leg to Northampton, and the left leg to Hereford. The head was bound with iron and set on a spear at the Tower of London.[12][13]

In 1305, the Scottish knight Sir William Wallace, a main leader of the First War of Scottish Independence, was punished in a similar manner. He was forced to wear a crown of laurel leaves and was drawn to Smithfield, where he was hanged and beheaded. His entrails were then burned and his corpse quartered, while his head was set on London Bridge and the quarters sent to Newcastle, Berwick, Stirling, and Perth.[14]

Treason Act 1351

Edward III, under whose rule the Treason Act 1351 was enacted. It defined in law what constituted high treason.

These and other executions, such as those of

right to rule was indisputable and was therefore written principally to protect the throne and sovereign.[20] The new law offered a narrower definition of treason than had existed before and split the old feudal offence into two classes.[21][22] Petty treason referred to the killing of a master (or lord) by his servant, a husband by his wife, or a prelate by his clergyman. Men guilty of petty treason were drawn and hanged, whereas women were burned.[nb 4][25]

High treason was the most egregious offence an individual could commit. Attempts to undermine the king's authority were viewed with as much seriousness as if the accused had attacked him personally, which itself would be an assault on his status as sovereign and a direct threat to his right to govern. As this might undermine the state, retribution was considered an absolute necessity and the crime deserving of the ultimate punishment.[26] The practical difference between the two offences was therefore in the consequence of being convicted; rather than being drawn and hanged, men were to be hanged, drawn, and quartered, while for reasons of public decency (their anatomy being considered inappropriate for the sentence), women were instead drawn and burned.[24][27]

The Act declared that a person had committed high treason if they were:[19]

  • compassing or imagining the death of the king, his wife or his eldest son and heir;
  • violating the king's wife, his eldest daughter if she was unmarried, or the wife of his eldest son and heir;
  • levying war against the king in his realm;
  • adhering to the king's enemies in his realm, giving them aid and comfort in his realm or elsewhere;
  • counterfeiting the Great Seal or the Privy Seal, or the king's coinage;
  • knowingly importing counterfeit money;
  • killing the Chancellor, Treasurer or one of the king's Justices while performing their offices.

The Act did not limit the king's authority in defining the scope of treason. It contained a proviso giving English judges discretion to extend that scope whenever required, a process more commonly known as constructive treason.[28][nb 5] It also applied to subjects overseas in British colonies in the Americas, but the only documented incident of an individual there being hanged, drawn, and quartered was that of Joshua Tefft, an English colonist accused of having fought on the side of the Narragansett during the Great Swamp Fight. He was executed in January 1676.[30] Later sentences resulted either in a pardon or a hanging.[31]

Treason Act 1695

Edward Stafford, 3rd Duke of Buckingham, was executed on 17 May 1521 for the crime of treason. The wording of his sentence has survived and indicates the precision with which the method of execution was described; he was to be "laid on a hurdle and so drawn to the place of execution, and there to be hanged, cut down alive, your members to be cut off and cast in the fire, your bowels burnt before you, your head smitten off, and your body quartered and divided at the King's will, and God have mercy on your soul."[32]

The original 1351 Act required only one witness to convict a person of treason, although in 1547 this was increased to two. Suspects were first questioned in private by the

Whig politicians prompted the introduction of the Treason Act 1695.[33] This allowed a defendant counsel, witnesses, a copy of the indictment, and a jury, and when not charged with an attempt on the monarch's life, to be prosecuted within three years of the alleged offence.[34]

Execution of the sentence

Once sentenced, malefactors were usually held in prison for a few days before being taken to the place of execution. During the High Middle Ages this journey may have been made tied directly to the back of a horse, but it subsequently became customary for the victim to be fastened instead to a wicker hurdle, or wooden panel, itself tied to the horse.[35] Historian Frederic William Maitland thought that this was probably to "[secure] for the hangman a yet living body".[36]

The use of the word "drawn", as in "to draw", has caused a degree of confusion. One of the Oxford English Dictionary's definitions of draw is "to draw out the viscera or intestines of; to disembowel (a fowl, etc. before cooking, a traitor or other criminal after hanging)", but this is followed by "in many cases of executions it is uncertain whether this, or [to drag (a criminal) at a horse's tail, or on a hurdle or the like, to the place of execution; formerly a legal punishment of high treason], is meant. The presumption is that where drawn is mentioned after hanged, the sense is as here."[37] Historian Ram Sharan Sharma arrived at the same conclusion: "Where, as in the popular hung, drawn and quartered [use] (meaning facetiously, of a person, completely disposed of), drawn follows hanged or hung, it is to be referred to as the disembowelling of the traitor."[38] Sharma is not the only historian to support this viewpoint as the phrase, "hanged until dead before being drawn and quartered", occurs in a number of relevant secondary publications.[39][40] The historian and author Ian Mortimer disagrees. In an essay published on his website, he writes that the separate mention of evisceration is a relatively modern device, and that while it certainly took place on many occasions, the presumption that drawing means to disembowel is spurious. Instead, drawing (as a method of transportation) may be mentioned after hanging because it was a supplementary part of the execution.[41]

The spiked heads of executed criminals once adorned the gatehouse of the medieval London Bridge.
A liuely Representation of the manner how his late Majesty was beheaded uppon the Scaffold Ian 30: 1648; A representation of the execution of the King's Judges. In the top pane, Charles I is shown awaiting his execution. In the bottom pane, one regicide is hanged and another quartered, while the latter's head is shown to the crowd.

Some reports indicate that during

William Perkins (1558–1602) once managed to convince a young man at the gallows that he had been forgiven, enabling the youth to go to his death "with tears of joy in his eyes ... as if he actually saw himself delivered from the hell which he feared before, and heaven opened for receiving his soul."[43]

After the king's commission had been read aloud, the crowd was normally asked to move back from the scaffold before being addressed by the convict.

Jesuit priests suffered badly at the hands of their captors but were frequently the most defiant; conversely, those of a higher station were often the most apologetic. Such contrition may have arisen from the sheer terror felt by those who thought they might be disembowelled rather than simply beheaded as they would normally expect, and any apparent acceptance of their fate may have stemmed from the belief that a serious, but not treasonable act, had been committed. Good behaviour at the gallows may also have been due to a convict's desire for his heirs not to be disinherited.[50]

The condemned were occasionally forced to watch as other traitors, sometimes their confederates, were executed before them. The priest

emasculated—the latter, according to Sir Edward Coke, to "show his issue was disinherited with corruption of blood."[nb 6][52]

A victim still conscious at that point might have seen his entrails burned, before his heart was removed and the body decapitated and quartered (chopped into four pieces). The regicide Major General Thomas Harrison, after being hanged for several minutes and then cut open in October 1660, was reported to have leaned across and hit his executioner—resulting in the swift removal of his head. His entrails were thrown onto a nearby fire.[53][54][nb 7] John Houghton was reported to have prayed while being disembowelled in 1535, and in his final moments to have cried "Good Jesu, what will you do with my heart?"[57][58]

Executioners were often inexperienced and proceedings did not always run smoothly. In 1584, Richard White's executioner removed his bowels piece by piece, through a small hole in his belly, "the which device taking no good success, he mangled his breast with a butcher's axe to the very chine most pitifully."[59][nb 8] At his execution in January 1606 for his involvement in the Gunpowder Plot, Guy Fawkes managed to break his neck by jumping from the gallows.[63][64]

Engraving of the execution of Sir Thomas Armstrong

No records exist to demonstrate exactly how the corpse was quartered, although an engraving of the quartering of

parboiled and displayed as a gruesome reminder of the penalty for high treason, usually wherever the traitor had conspired or found support.[54][68] Salt and cumin seed would be added during the boiling process: the salt to prevent putrefaction, and the cumin seed to prevent birds pecking at the flesh.[69]

The head was often displayed on

Duke of Pommerania-Stettin emphasised the ominous nature of their presence when he wrote "near the end of the bridge, on the suburb side, were stuck up the heads of thirty gentlemen of high standing who had been beheaded on account of treason and secret practices against the Queen."[70][nb 9] The practice of using London Bridge in this manner ended following the hanging, drawing, and quartering in 1678 of William Staley, a victim of the fictitious Popish Plot. His quarters were given to his relatives, who promptly arranged a "grand" funeral; this incensed the coroner so much that he ordered the body to be dug up and set upon the city gates. Staley's was the last head to be placed on London Bridge.[72][73]

Later history

Another victim of the Popish Plot,

Jacobite Rising of 1745 were executed,[75] but by then the executioner possessed some discretion as to how much they should suffer and thus they were killed before their bodies were eviscerated. The French spy François Henri de la Motte was hanged in 1781 for almost an hour before his heart was cut out and burned,[76] and the following year David Tyrie was hanged, decapitated, and then quartered at Portsmouth, being the last person to be executed with this method.[77] Pieces of his corpse were fought over by members of the 20,000-strong crowd there, some making trophies of his limbs and fingers.[78] In 1803 Edward Despard and six co-conspirators in the Despard Plot were sentenced to be hanged, drawn, and quartered. Before they were hanged and beheaded at Horsemonger Lane Gaol, they were first placed on sledges attached to horses, and ritually pulled in circuits around the gaol yards.[79] Their execution was attended by an audience of about 20,000.[80]
A contemporary report describes the scene after Despard had made his speech:

This energetic, but inflammatory appeal, was followed by such enthusiastic plaudits, that the Sheriff hinted to the Clergyman to withdraw, and forbade Colonel Despard to proceed. The cap was then drawn over their eyes, during which the Colonel was observed again to fix the knot under his left ear, and, at seven minutes before nine o'clock the signal being given, the platform dropped, and they were all launched into eternity. From the precaution taken by the Colonel, he appeared to suffer very little, neither did the others struggle much, except Broughton, who had been the most indecently profane of the whole. Wood, the soldier, died very hard. The Executioners went under, and kept pulling them by the feet. Several drops of blood fell from the fingers of Macnamara and Wood, during the time they were suspended. After hanging thirty-seven minutes, the Colonel's body was cut down, at half an hour past nine o'clock, and being stripped of his coat and waistcoat, it was laid upon saw-dust, with the head reclined upon a block. A surgeon then in attempting to sever the head from the body by a common dissecting knife, missed the particular joint aimed at, when he kept haggling it, till the executioner was obliged to take the head between his hands, and to twist it several times round, when it was with difficulty severed from the body. It was then held up by the executioner, who exclaimed—"Behold the head of EDWARD MARCUS DESPARD, a Traitor!" The same ceremony followed with the others respectively; and the whole concluded by ten o'clock.[81]

The severed head of Jeremiah Brandreth, one of the last men in England sentenced to be hanged, drawn, and quartered

At the burnings of Isabella Condon in 1779 and Phoebe Harris in 1786, the sheriffs present inflated their expenses; in the opinion of Simon Devereaux they were probably dismayed at being forced to attend such spectacles.

Prince Regent were beheaded with an axe. The local miner appointed to the task of beheading them was inexperienced though, and having failed with the first two blows, completed his job with a knife. As he held the first head up and made the customary announcement, the crowd reacted with horror and fled. A different reaction was seen in 1820, when amidst more social unrest five men involved in the Cato Street Conspiracy were hanged and beheaded at Newgate Prison. Although the beheading was performed by a surgeon, following the usual proclamation the crowd was angry enough to force the executioners to find safety behind the prison walls.[89] The plot was the last crime for which the sentence was applied.[90]

Reformation of England's capital punishment laws continued throughout the 19th century, as politicians such as

Gathorne Hardy, but this did not apply to traitors.[97] An amendment to abolish capital punishment completely, suggested before the bill's third reading, failed by 127 votes to 23.[98][99]

Hanging, drawing, and quartering was abolished in England by the Forfeiture Act 1870, Liberal politician Charles Forster's second attempt since 1864[nb 11] to end the forfeiture of a felon's lands and goods (thereby not making paupers of his family).[101][102] The Act limited the penalty for treason to hanging alone,[103] although it did not remove the monarch's right under the 1814 Act to replace hanging with beheading.[88][104] Beheading was abolished in 1973,[105] although it had long been obsolete; the last person on British soil to be beheaded was Simon Fraser, 11th Lord Lovat in 1747. The death penalty for treason was abolished by the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, enabling the UK to ratify protocol six of the European Convention on Human Rights in 1999.[106]

In the United States

In some of the places where the

American War of Independence developed into a fierce civil war among American factions, there are recorded cases of both sides resorting to hanging, drawing, and quartering – both Loyalists and Patriots finding reasons to construe their opponents as being "traitors" deserving of such a fate.[107][108][109]

See also

References

Footnotes

  1. ^ "Rex eum, quasi regiae majestatis (occisorem), membratim laniatum equis apud Coventre, exemplum terribile et spectaculum comentabile praebere (iussit) omnibus audentibus talia machinari. Primo enim distractus, postea decollatus et corpus in tres partes divisum est."[6]
  2. ^ On de Marisco, Paris states "postea decollatus et corpus in tres partes divisum est" (Once beheaded his body is divided into three parts).[5]
  3. ^ Treason before 1351 was defined by Alfred the Great's Doom book. As Patrick Wormald wrote, "if anyone plots against the king's life ... [or his lord's life], he is liable for his life and all that he owns ... or to clear himself by the king's [lord's] wergeld."[17]
  4. ^ Women were considered the legal property of their husbands,[23] and so a woman convicted of killing her husband was guilty not of murder, but petty treason. For disrupting the social order a degree of retribution was therefore required; hanging was considered insufficient for such a heinous crime.[24]
  5. ^ "And because that many other like cases of treason may happen in time to come, which a man cannot think nor declare at this present time; it is accorded, that if any other case supposed treason, which is not above specified, doth happen before any justice, the justice shall tarry without going to judgement of treason, till the cause be shewed and declared before the king and his parliament, whether it ought to be judged treason or other felony." Edward Coke[29]
  6. ^ For an explanation of "corruption of blood", see Attainder.
  7. John Cooke to his execution, before being displayed in Westminster Hall; his quarters were fastened to the city gates.[56]
  8. Henry VIII, was drawn to Tyburn, and hanged and beheaded.[71]
  9. ^ Although women were usually burned only after they had first been strangled to death, in 1726 Catherine Hayes's executioner botched the job and she perished in the flames, the last woman in England to do so.[76]
  10. ^ Forster's first attempt passed through both Houses of Parliament without obstruction, but was dropped following a change of government.[100]

Notes

  1. ^ "Part 1 of The Commonwealth of Ireland". celt.ucc.ie.
  2. ^ "Travels of Sir William Brereton in Ireland, 1635". celt.ucc.ie.
  3. ^ hÉireann, Stair na (5 July 2016). "1581 – The Wexford Martyrs were hanged, drawn and quartered". Stair na hÉireann | History of Ireland.
  4. ^ Powicke 1949, pp. 54–58
  5. ^ a b c Giles 1852, p. 139
  6. ^ Bellamy 2004, p. 23
  7. ^ Lewis & Paris 1987, p. 234
  8. ^ a b Beadle & Harrison 2008, p. 11
  9. ^ Diehl & Donnelly 2009, p. 58
  10. ^ Bellamy 2004, pp. 23–29
  11. .
  12. ^ Bellamy 2004, pp. 23–26
  13. ^ Murison 2003, pp. 147–149
  14. required)
  15. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/7554, archived from the original on 24 September 2015 (subscription or UK public library membership
    required)
  16. ^ Wormald 2001, pp. 280–281
  17. ^ Tanner 1940, p. 375
  18. ^ a b Bellamy 1979, p. 9
  19. ^ Tanner 1940, pp. 375–376
  20. ^ Bellamy 1979, pp. 9–10
  21. ^ Dubber 2005, p. 25
  22. ^ Caine & Sluga 2002, pp. 12–13
  23. ^ a b Briggs 1996, p. 84
  24. ^ Blackstone et al. 1832, pp. 156–157
  25. ^ Foucault 1995, pp. 47–49
  26. ^ Naish 1991, p. 9
  27. ^ Bellamy 1979, pp. 10–11
  28. ^ Coke, Littleton & Hargrave 1817, pp. 20–21
  29. ^ Anthony, A. Craig (2001), "Local Historian Examines the Execution of Joshua Tefft at Smith's Castle in 1676" (PDF), Castle Chronicle, 10 (4): 1, 8–9, archived from the original (PDF) on 21 March 2014
  30. ^ Ward 2009, p. 56
  31. ^ Smith, Lacey B. (October 1954), "English Treason Trials and Confessions in the Sixteenth Century", Journal of the History of Ideas, 15 (4): 471–498 [484]{{citation}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link)
  32. ^ Tomkovicz 2002, p. 6
  33. ^ Feilden 2009, pp. 6–7
  34. ^ a b Bellamy 1979, p. 187
  35. ^ Pollock & Maitland 2007, p. 500
  36. ^ "draw", Oxford English Dictionary (2 ed.), Oxford University Press, hosted at dictionary.oed.com, 1989, archived from the original on 25 June 2006, retrieved 18 August 2010. (subscription or participating institution membership required)
  37. ^ Sharma 2003, p. 9
  38. ^ Hirsch, Richard S. M. (Spring 1986), "The Works of Chidiock Tichborne", English Literary Renaissance, 16 (2): 303–318{{citation}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link) p. 305
  39. ^ Kronenwetter, Michael (2001), Capital Punishment: A Reference Handbook, Santa Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO, p. 204
  40. ^ Mortimer, Ian (30 March 2010), Why do we say 'hanged, drawn and quartered?' (PDF), ianmortimer.com, archived (PDF) from the original on 22 November 2010
  41. ^ Beadle & Harrison 2008, p. 12
  42. ^ Clarke 1654, p. 853
  43. ^ a b Bellamy 1979, p. 191
  44. ^ Bellamy 1979, p. 195
  45. ^ Pollen 1908, p. 327
  46. ^ Bellamy 1979, p. 193
  47. ^ Pollen 1908, p. 207
  48. ^ Bellamy 1979, p. 194
  49. ^ Bellamy 1979, p. 199
  50. ^ Bellamy 1979, p. 201
  51. ^ Bellamy 1979, pp. 202–204
  52. required)
  53. ^ a b Abbott 2005, pp. 158–159
  54. ^ Abbott 2005, p. 158
  55. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/12448, archived from the original on 22 December 2015 (subscription or UK public library membership
    required)
  56. ^ Abbott 2005, p. 161
  57. required)
  58. ^ a b Bellamy 1979, p. 204
  59. ^ Phillips 2010, p. 517
  60. ^ Kastenbaum 2004, pp. 193–194
  61. ^ Westerhof 2008, p. 127
  62. ^ Northcote Parkinson 1976, pp. 91–92
  63. ^ Fraser 2005, p. 283
  64. ^ Lewis 2008, pp. 113–124
  65. ^ Maxwell 1913, p. 35
  66. ^ Evelyn 1850, p. 341
  67. ^ Bellamy 1979, pp. 207–208
  68. ^ Kenny, C. (1936), Outlines of Criminal Law (15th ed.), Cambridge University Press, p. 318
  69. ^ Abbott 2005, pp. 159–160
  70. ^ Abbott 2005, pp. 160–161
  71. ^ Beadle & Harrison 2008, p. 22
  72. required)
  73. required)
  74. ^ Roberts 2002, p. 132
  75. ^ a b c Gatrell 1996, pp. 316–317
  76. .
  77. ^ Poole 2000, p. 76
  78. ^ Gatrell 1996, pp. 317–318
  79. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/7548, archived from the original on 24 September 2015 (subscription or UK public library membership
    required)
  80. ^ Granger & Caulfield 1804, pp. 889–897
  81. ^ Devereaux 2006, pp. 73–93
  82. ^ Smith 1996, p. 30
  83. ^ Shelton 2009, p. 88
  84. ^ Feilden 2009, p. 5
  85. ^ Block & Hostettler 1997, p. 42
  86. ^ Romilly 1820, p. xlvi
  87. ^ a b Joyce 1955, p. 105
  88. required)
  89. ^ Abbott 2005, pp. 161–162
  90. ^ Block & Hostettler 1997, pp. 51–58
  91. ^ Wiener 2004, p. 23
  92. ^ Dubber 2005, p. 27
  93. ^ Levi 1866, pp. 134–135
  94. ^ Chase 2007, pp. 137–140
  95. ^ McConville 1995, p. 409
  96. ^ Kenny, p. 319
  97. ^ Gatrell 1996, p. 593
  98. ^ Block & Hostettler 1997, pp. 59, 72
  99. ^ "Second Reading, HC Deb vol 200 cc931–8", Parliamentary Debates (Hansard), 30 March 1870, archived from the original on 20 October 2012
  100. ^ Anon 3 1870, p. N/A
  101. ^ Anon 2 1870, p. 547
  102. ^ "Forfeiture Act 1870", legislation.gov.uk, 1870, archived from the original on 13 November 2012
  103. ^ Anon 1870, p. 221
  104. ^ Statute Law (Repeals) Act 1973 (c. 39), Sch. 1 Pt. V.
  105. ^ Windlesham 2001, p. 81n
  106. .
  107. .
  108. .

Bibliography

Further reading