Is the idea to: snap their neck, or choke them?
Hanging is supposed to snap the neck. The Hangman’s Noose is made so it can be slipped over the poor soul’s neck and cinched up tight, usually behing the left ear. When the person drops (3-4 ft), the noose should snap the neck. Of course, if the noose is not tied correctly, the person will choke to death - pretty gruesome !
And if the rope is too long, decapitation ensues. Also pretty gruesome.
Rope length depends on the weight of the damned.
Can anyone cite proof that hanging is supposed to snap the neck? I’ve heard this all my life, but I don’t think it squares with the sentence: “…to hang by the neck until you are dead.”
Certainly snapping the neck is more humane, and may have been instituted at some point, but I suspect that hanging was, for most of its lifetime of use, a public strangling, “pretty gruesome” by design.
Nitpick: What if the person being hanged is innocent? The word you were looking for is "condemned."
Nametag, I think you are saying that the “until you are dead” line implies that they are supposed to linger over the dying process. But I think those sentenced to die in the electric chair are also sentenced to “have electrical current passed through [their bodies] until [they] are dead.” It’s just legalese.
And as to the OP, I think the only real idea is to kill them. The above-mentioned phraseology provides the trap door with a back door: if the neck isn’t snapped, you’re still going to hang there until you’re gone.
Well Nametag you’re not totally off as it would seem…
Apparently only 34 out of the 120 executions by hanging employed the long drop method. IOW the majority of judicial hangings aimed at strangulation, a far more beastly way to die. But I have no idea how reliable my source is (link below).
What you never thought you wanted to know about hanging.
Sparc
My stats were for 2001 according to previous link BTW.
My stats were for 2001 according to previous link BTW.
Re: Strangulation vs. neck snapping.
In judicial hangings, the idea is to snap the condemned’s neck. That’s why there is a drop. But I think this is a fairly modern development. There were gallows in the Old West that were designed to drop the condemned and break his neck; but before that, they’d just haul a guy up. For example, there was a mutiny case in the early U.S. (1700s, I think) where nooses were put around three mutineers’ necks and the rest of the crew took the ropes and lifted them from the deck. They strangled to death. I think this was rather common. The old “sit the guy on the horse and then give the horse a whip” method we’ve all seen in movies would also not snap the guy’s neck.
So “You will hang by the neck until you are dead” predates, I think, the practice of trying to snap the condemned’s neck. With the move toward more humane executions, the hangman would try to break the neck by figuring out how far the prisoner must drop. If the rope was too short, the poor man would strangle. If the rope was too long, the lid would come off of the old jam pot.
Just curious, has anyone ever been hung with string or thread (and has anyone ever found a string or thread strong enough to hold a person, at least during the hanging days)?
What a morbid topic :eek:
- Windwalker
Read Joseph Persico’s “Nuremburg…” which goes into considerable detail about the haning of the convicted Nazis. Most of them were botched, and were strangled manually by the exeuctioner.
Were the botchings accidents in the case of the Nazis?
Manually by the executioner? Please clarify. I just don’t see some guy choking some bastard Nazi with his hands.
If I was the condemned, I would want a Firing Squad - no blindfold.
Gopher Here is a site discussing the botched executions:
http://www.bizarremag.com/ask/war.html#Anchor-35326
It says that at least one of the condemned was finished off by having the executioner swing on the condemned’s ankles. Whether the executions were botched intentionally seems to be a disputed matter.
Then there’s the case of Mitchell Rupe, a Washington murderer who ate his way to 400+ pounds while on death row. It seems Washington actually still shangs people, and at his weight any length of rope would cause his head to pop off. That was determined to be cruel and unusual, so he eventually wrangled his way to a life sentence.
All CP debates aside, how is instant death by decapitation more cruel than frying on an electric chair (though it is definately more unusual)? Would be more traumatic for the witnesses than anything.
2 points, both from my teen years when I was interested in such things…Feel free to correct me if they are both nonsense:
- The point of the hanging was to break the neck…Thus rendering the subject paralyzed so his lungs would not work, and suffocate to death.
(Isn’t that the way anyone with a broken neck dies? I don’t really see a reason for instant death due to an injury of the neck.)
- Washington (or Oregon?) still has hanging as a mode of execution…I recall hearing about a guy who chose hanging for his execution in the early 90’s.
In the days of Tyburn Tree and its like, one was hanged until strangulation did them to death. Reading the Newgate Calendar makes this clear. the addition od the long (er) drop I believe came in in the 19th C. and lead to death by broken neck.
IANAD, but breaking the neck up high enough kills by abruptly breaking the spinal connection to everything from conciousness through heartbeat.
They say that if it is done correctly, it is the swiftest and least painful way to go.
I know nothing about physiology, but it seems to me that one would still breath when paralyzed in this way. People fully paralyzed after an accident still breathe…
I always assumed one would immediatly lose consciousness when one’s neck is broken. It’s the way rabbits are usually killed, and they don’t appear to stay conscious.