Log In
Register
Home
Topic RSS
2:24 pm
January 17, 2011
Offline
Would you have attended an execution in Tudor England?
I realise it’s impossible to act and think as someone who lived roughly 500 years ago but unless you HAD to go (As many officials had to) would you have watched an execution?
I’m NOT asking if you are for the death penalty or not I’m just asking if you would want to go for whatever reason.
The sad thing is that this was just a way of life to the Tudors so I suppose I would have gone.
6:05 pm
November 18, 2010
Offline
I probably would have gone too.
It's always bunnies.
6:24 pm
May 16, 2011
Offline
Even if I didn’t agree with the circumstances I don’t think I could stay away, to see a person die isn’t something to be excited about but I think people are very curious about it. I’d have to go, purely out of curiousity and maybe even pity. And i’d definately have to go to Anne’s, I might’ve of needed a muzzle to keep quiet but it’d be no question on whether i would attend or not, maybe that sounds ‘sick’ but it’s not and i’d most definately ball my eyes out. I don’t know, maybe, it’s the fact that you get to share that last moment with them.
• Grumble all you like, this is how it’s going to be.
7:41 am
January 3, 2012
Offline
As stupid as it actually sounds, executions in England were considered a family day out, it was also a good way of hammering home the point to children who thought it was fun to misbehave. At these executions there would probably be stalls selling hot chestnuts and bakers going around selling their cakes and savouries, there would of course be a mad scramble for any seats that were availiable, and woman would flock around the bottom of the chopping block, so that when the headsmen chopped of the head of a nobel person they would rush forward and dip their hankies or even just a scrap of rag in the blood, as it was considered efficatious. As for actually going to an execution, no I really couldn’t.
But in those days people lived with death all the time so to actually see someone executed was seen as no big deal, and in a way it kind of desensitized a kids, so that when he was called up to go to war killing someone wasn’t such a hard thing for them to do.
Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod
8:06 am
May 7, 2010
Offline
The me of today would not have been able to stomach an execution but I expect the ‘me’ of 500 years ago would have been just like everyone else and gone if it were possible. As Boleyn says it was seen as ‘no big deal’ and there would have been a perceived lesson in it for children as to what can happen by doing the wrong thing.
Let us show them that they are hares and foxes trying to rule over dogs and wolves - Boudica addressing the tribes Circa AD60
12:13 pm
January 9, 2010
Offline
I probably would’ve attended an execution. And thought nothing of it.
Don’t think I like the ‘me’ of 500 years ago….
12:35 pm
January 3, 2012
Offline
Bella44 said
I probably would’ve attended an execution. And thought nothing of it.
Don’t think I like the ‘me’ of 500 years ago….
Bella that’s just it, because we now consider the death penalty as barbaric, you probably wouldn’t have liked yourself from 500 years back, but death to people back then was just another one of those things. The trick is would you yourself from 500 years ago like who you are today. My guess is probably not, as our ideas and ideals now were not what they were 500 years. If one of your children was caught stealing a loaf of bread back then they would have one of there hands chopped off, and you would except it as a just punishment for the fact that your child had been caught doing something he shouldn’t have been doing. These days that whole thought horrifies us, a child will do stupid things and will be duly punished as we parents see fit, but back then it was completely taken out of your hands, and theorecially the magistrate could hang your child and there wouldn’t be anything you could do about it but mourn. Remember the Prilgramage of Grace there were boys as young as 12 in the rebels and they were hung, even through they probably didn’t really understand what all the big hoo har was about and were mearly following their brothers, fathers and uncles in the protest. Those were brutal and dare I say uncivilised times, thank whatever that we crawled out of thos times and evolved into some civilised and more humane.
Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod
1:14 pm
January 9, 2010
Offline
^ Thank goodness we got away with the death penalty too – the risk of executing an innocent person being too great. Which makes me ache for all the innocent people who were put to death then, including Anne. 
1:37 pm
January 17, 2011
Offline
Like I said in my first post when I posted the topic I would have gone to an execution and I still stand by that but today I was mulling this topic over and I’ve thought it would depend on the type of execution also, watching a beheading is one thing ghastly as it is but to watch someone being put to death by the hung drawn and quartered method well I’m not so sure 
That has got to be one of the worst methods ever, so barbaric…..then again this is what Tudor England enjoyed and did there best at, UGH!
4:04 pm
May 16, 2011
Offline
Yeah, i agree, I don’t think me today could stomach watching someone die but me 500 some years ago yeah probably cause everyone else was able to do it and think nothing of it.
• Grumble all you like, this is how it’s going to be.
5:22 pm
June 7, 2010
Offline
Maybe my 500 year old self would have gone to an execution. It seemed to be the thing to do, and was always a good, bloody time. But, the contemporary me would run in the other direction. It does show how people’s understanding and acceptance of certain forms of punishment has gone out of fashion, as it were.
I guess I consider how someone from Tudor England would view our judicial systems. I am sure Henry would wonder why, here in Canada (for an example), the Prime Minister cannot execute his rivals (and he has many). He may try other forms of eliminanting them (election fraud, anyone), but he cannot kill them in public execution. Would the Tudors consider us soft? Maybe a little?
"By daily proof you shall find me to be to you both loving and kind" Anne Boleyn
5:33 pm
November 18, 2010
Offline
Boleyn said
As stupid as it actually sounds, executions in England were considered a family day out, it was also a good way of hammering home the point to children who thought it was fun to misbehave. At these executions there would probably be stalls selling hot chestnuts and bakers going around selling their cakes and savouries, there would of course be a mad scramble for any seats that were availiable, and woman would flock around the bottom of the chopping block, so that when the headsmen chopped of the head of a nobel person they would rush forward and dip their hankies or even just a scrap of rag in the blood, as it was considered efficatious. As for actually going to an execution, no I really couldn’t.
But in those days people lived with death all the time so to actually see someone executed was seen as no big deal, and in a way it kind of desensitized a kids, so that when he was called up to go to war killing someone wasn’t such a hard thing for them to do.
Exactly, it was a cross between the market, a social event and an educational lesson in legal and moral virtues. People went to catch up on gossip, show how good they were since they weren’t being disemboweled and generally having some time off from ther grind that living at that time was.
I’ve read about people in America going to the execution of the murderers of thier loved ones, saying it gave a sense of closure. Maybe that fed into it as well.
People were more casual about life and death than we are. If you lived to be an adult, you generally would have seen some of your siblings die and possibly one or more of your parents. Even on reaching adulthood, your life wasn’t safe. Especially if you were female and married.
It's always bunnies.
5:35 pm
November 18, 2010
Offline
DuchessofBrittany said
I guess I consider how someone from Tudor England would view our judicial systems. I am sure Henry would wonder why, here in Canada (for an example), the Prime Minister cannot execute his rivals (and he has many). He may try other forms of eliminanting them (election fraud, anyone), but he cannot kill them in public execution. Would the Tudors consider us soft? Maybe a little?
Thank goodness, the idea of Harper as an absolute ruler in the medeaval style gives me the creeps….
It's always bunnies.
7:21 pm
April 9, 2011
Offline
I would definitely have gone and seen an execution. And I’m not ashamed to say that. It was a form of entertainment during Tudor times. I view it as the same as going to go and watch a movie, it’s just something one does without thinking. I wouldn’t want to go and see one today, but I can understand why they drew a crowd, cause let’s be honest there was nothing else to do was there?. Not sure I could go to the execution of a family member though. Having said all that, I don’t think I could have gone to a burning. Beheading yes, Hang drawn and quatered possibly (just to have seen it I think), a hanging yes but the burning I don’t think so. It’s seems to be a combination of torture and death. I don’t think I could cope with the screaming or the smell.
2:07 pm
January 3, 2012
Offline
DuchessofBrittany said
Maybe my 500 year old self would have gone to an execution. It seemed to be the thing to do, and was always a good, bloody time. But, the contemporary me would run in the other direction. It does show how people’s understanding and acceptance of certain forms of punishment has gone out of fashion, as it were.
I guess I consider how someone from Tudor England would view our judicial systems. I am sure Henry would wonder why, here in Canada (for an example), the Prime Minister cannot execute his rivals (and he has many). He may try other forms of eliminanting them (election fraud, anyone), but he cannot kill them in public execution. Would the Tudors consider us soft? Maybe a little?
Yeah I think we would be considered as idiots to be honest. Thankfully we now have a democratic sociaty where everyone has a right to be heard, back then it was a case of it was democratic in Henry’s eyes as he said and everyone agreed. Although to be fair there was one person who was given the right to free speech, and that was Thomas More, who basically would only except the Chancellorship on conditions, and one of them was that he was kept well out of the divorce. Which Henry excepted.
Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod
6:48 pm
November 18, 2010
Offline
And then fell foul of the whole First Act of Succession…which dealt with the Great Matter…didn’t work out that well, really.
It's always bunnies.
9:37 am
May 16, 2011
Offline
I think then I would of just watched in silence, but not I would probably start crying even if I had no idea who the person was.
• Grumble all you like, this is how it’s going to be.
10:19 am
February 24, 2010
Offline
I’m trying to talk myself into saying that the me of 500 years ago would go and enjoy a hanging or worse, but I can’t bring myself to say it. I never have followed the crowds, and would like to think I wouldn’t have done so back then. I’d have a migraine or something that day.
10:32 am
January 17, 2011
Offline
The sad thing is we would have gone and witnessed it then come away and never thought another thing cos that’s how it was in those times. We accepted it was the way it was, accepted the law and whoever it was man, woman or child they would have been put to death and we’d have carried on.
11:23 am
January 3, 2012
Offline
Anyanka said
And then fell foul of the whole First Act of Succession…which dealt with the Great Matter…didn’t work out that well, really.
I guess Henry hoped that Thomas would come round given time to the whole divorce and succesion bit. Henry had managed to more or less bully everyone round to his way of thinking except for people like Fisher and More, and of course we can’t forget Queen Catherine in this either, but he couldn’t execute her and expect to get away with it, even poor Mary had to crumble under Henry’s emmence pressure, but I don’t think she actually would have done if her mother had lived longer. If KOA had out lived Henry would things be the same as was decreed in 1543 act of succesion? Would Mary actually been allowed to rule if she hadn’t of submitted?
Either way More was without a doubt a very clever and brilliant man, He went to his death as a hero and is revered the whole world over as a very forward thinking man.
Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod
