Executions in Middle earth

[Vidugavia]

And now another morbid topic...

From RotK:
"And the King said to Beregond: “Beregond, by your sword blood was spilled in the Hallows where that is forbidden. Also you left your post without leave of Lord or of Captain. For these things, of old, death was the penalty. Now therefore I must pronounce your doom.“

Beregonds penalty was remitted by the wise king Elessar but if that hadn't happened, how would he be put to death?

The death penalty seems to be an accepted consequence of some serious crimes in both elven and mannish societies Middle earth but direct references to executions seems very rare in Tolkiens writings. The only described execution I can find is when Eöl is thrown down from the cliff of Caragdûr in Gondolin as a punishment for killing his wife. Is that representative for noldor society?

Many real medieval and classic methods of execution seems much to messy or otherwise problematic for my view of the righteous eldarin and dunedain societies. I don't think that the corpses of hanged criminals were exhibited in steel cages at the gates of Minas Tirith. Neither did the elves of Lindon crucify traitors, or what do you think?

How did Tolkien himself view the death penalty? Could that give us some hints of how these things were ordered in a good society in Middle earth?

[Varnafindë]

I don't know anything about Tolkien's view of the death penalty - but I would guess that one of the nobler forms of execution would be used in the Eldarin society. Being beheaded by sword, rather than by axe, is supposed to be preferable. And being shot by a group of archers seems like another possibility. I can't see the Eldar making a public spectacle of an execution - I guess it would be carried out in some secluded place.

[Valandil]

Good question, and a good thread.

Faramir was also under orders to put to death any they found in Ithilien.

My guess is that Tolkien was not in favor of the death penalty. I base that guess on the conversation Gandalf has with Frodo in "Shadows of the Past" - the second chapter of LOTR. When they speak about Gollum, Gandalf makes some interesting statements in regard to handing out death to those who deserve it.

Of course, the ability of a King to deal with matters of life-and-death is a reality of the kinds of societies depicted in Middle Earth. It is interesting to speculate on what methods might have been used - and by each of the different societies.

[GrayMouser]

Originally Posted by Varnafindë

I don't know anything about Tolkien's view of the death penalty - but I would guess that one of the nobler forms of execution would be used in the Eldarin society. Being beheaded by sword, rather than by axe, is supposed to be preferable. And being shot by a group of archers seems like another possibility.

Slightly OT, but it brings to mind an old cartoon, based on the legend that one of the bullets of a firing squad was always a blank, so no-one would know for sure that they had actually fired the killing shot.

Man tied to a post awaiting execution, head of a squad of Archers holding a bunch of arrows behind his back, one of them with a rubber suction cup.."One of you will be issued with a blank..."

Seriously, the Catholic Church today is very strongly opposed to the death penalty except in extreme circumstances, but obviously that wasn't so in the past. Wonder what the position was in Tolkien's day?

[Earniel]

I got the impression that Eöl's execution was rather an exception for the Noldor. Turgon was very attached to his sister and Gondolin needed to remain hidden at all costs. Having Eöl, a murderer and essentially an enemy knowing the way into Gondolin was too great a risk. But then again, did Tolkien actually write anything about crimes and punishment among the Eldar? It would be interesting to see if it differed from our systems. What, for instance, if they prefered communal jobs instead of locking criminals up?

In war and military, things are different IMO. You need to have a tight discipline and strict hierarchy. Punishments for transgressions are therefore harsher. If I remember correctly, striking a senior officer in the Navy was punishable by hanging, and even in the first World War soldiers accused of destertion got the bullet. So I think Tolkien went for a more realistic approach by having Beregrond face execution for failing his assigned duties.

One could argue, that Aragorn's decision to let Beregrond live features in his restoration of Gondor, also on moral grounds. That could indicate, since Aragorn was raised in Rivendell, that the Eldar (at least in the third aera) did not execute for crimes.

[Vidugavia]

Originally Posted by Eärniel

One could argue, that Aragorn's decision to let Beregrond live features in his restoration of Gondor, also on moral grounds. That could indicate, since Aragorn was raised in Rivendell, that the Eldar (at least in the third aera) did not execute for crimes.

No, I don't think so. Aragorn clearly references that the death penalty for Beregonds crimes is according to the laws "of old" in a situation when his own kingship is based on said laws. Aragorn was himself a symbol of the things of old and as an ideal dunedain king it is improbable that he was to remake the ancient laws:

"A Numenorean king was monarch, with the power of unquestioned decision in debate; but he governed the realm with the frame of ancient law, of which he was administrator (and interpreter) but not maker."
(Letters, No. 244)

[Earniel]

Originally Posted by Vidugavia

No, I don't think so. Aragorn clearly references that the death penalty for Beregonds crimes is according to the laws "of old" in a situation when his own kingship is based on said laws. Aragorn was himself a symbol of the things of old and as an ideal dunedain king it is improbable that he was to remake the ancient laws:

Yet the 'laws of old' are open to interpretation. Which laws do we consider as of old? The laws of Gondor? The laws of Arnor under which Aragorn was chieftain? The laws of Númenor before that? Or even the older laws before Númenor?

Clearly there seems to be a contradiction in the old laws, for Gondor refused an king through FÃ*riel's line before, as was their law, whereas the laws of Númenor after Aldarion allowed for kingship to pass through female heirs. Aragorn's most 'recent' claim for the throne of Gondor was through FÃ*riel and yet het got accepted as king. Clearly the laws of old do not always pertain to King Elessar.

[Vidugavia]

Originally Posted by Eärniel

Aragorn's most 'recent' claim for the throne of Gondor was through FÃ*riel and yet het got accepted as king. Clearly the laws of old do not always pertain to King Elessar.

No, the claim through FÃ*riel was declared void by the council of Gondor in the days of Arvedui. Therefore Aragorn makes his claim through Elendil, a claim the said council had merely ignored.

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by Vidugavia

No, the claim through FÃ*riel was declared void by the council of Gondor in the days of Arvedui. Therefore Aragorn makes his claim through Elendil, a claim the said council had merely ignored.

Correct. Aragorn got the crown as descendant of Elendil and Isildur because by the end of the Third Age the Line of Anrion had ended. But Arvedui's claim through Elendil was ignored back in 1944, because at this time there were still male heirs of Anarion available in Gondor - Earnil II was one of them.

[Earniel]

Fair point. It was a side issue anyway.

[Gordis]

As to the main issue, I don't believe in "shooting by arrows" method. I've never heard of such in medieval history. (Not that I have ever studied the matter, of course).
I believe there would be a professional executioner involved, not some hapless soldier(s) appointed for the occasion. It takes some skill and practice to take off a head cleanly.
Beheading seems more probable for nobles, because hanging was always considered a shameful death. Axe is more English/Germanic, while a sword is more French IMO. I believe Tolkien would choose beheading with an axe for Dunedain.

[Earniel]

The only instance of execution by arrows that I know of is in art, the martyred Saint Sebastian who got shot by arrows, and so he is often pin-cushionedly portrayed. But this is rather roman than medieval, if I remember correctly. I also rather doubt its efficiency as execution method because even Saint Sebastian survived this execution attempt. Briefly though, since shortly after he was clubbed to death. Then again, Elves are usually better shots than us mortal men...

I tend to agree with you, Gordis, on the axe and the hanging. I can't see the Eldar with an established executioner, but I can see it among the Dúnedain.

Clearly they wouldn't have had lethal injections, but I wonder if they'd make use of the poison cup for situations where they didn't want a brutal or public execution? Or something like the mix of banishment/execution the Gondoreans used to rid themselves of Queen Berúthiel: sent her with only her cats adrift at sea. Apparently Berúthiel's situation didn't call for the axe, although we never learned the exact circumstances. So we can't say for sure whether her royal position saved her head, or whether the Gondoreans just preferred methods of sending people out to sea as perhaps more 'civilised' way of getting rid of people. Nations with shores certainly had that option.

[Gordis]

Yeah... St-Sebastian - but wasn't it meant as torture, not execution?

Poison cup... yes I can see a Gondorian king like Atanatar or Tarannon sending poison to one of his councillors.

As for sending a criminal off on a personal ship - wouldn't it deplete the Gondorian navy or merchant fleet in the long run? A ship is an expensive thing. Maybe... sometimes... for an evil Queen and her 999 cats...

[Earniel]

No, I'm pretty sure they shot Saint Sebastian to kill him, can't say whether they at the same time wanted to make his death as torturous as possible, though. But getting clubbed to death sounds any more appealing either.

As for the ships, well, I suppose a queen and her dozen of cats may get a fairly-sized vessel, but I reckon that the others, less royally ones, might have to make do with a leaky dinghy! And if they're really feeling mean, they'll probably drag you out into the sea during a storm. Incidentally, I think I remember this being done in ancient Ireland for really incorrigible people or repeat offenders. A sort of devine judgement, if God lets you live and reach the shore, you're forgiven. If you don't, well, you probably deserved that anyway.

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Eärniel

What, for instance, if they prefered communal jobs instead of locking criminals up?

*has visions of shifty-looking elves wearing numbered orange jumpsuits picking up trash by the road*

[Varnafindë]

Originally Posted by Gordis

As to the main issue, I don't believe in "shooting by arrows" method. I've never heard of such in medieval history. (Not that I have ever studied the matter, of course).
I believe there would be a professional executioner involved, not some hapless soldier(s) appointed for the occasion. It takes some skill and practice to take off a head cleanly.
Beheading seems more probable for nobles, because hanging was always considered a shameful death. Axe is more English/Germanic, while a sword is more French IMO. I believe Tolkien would choose beheading with an axe for Dunedain.

I believe that when you were sentenced to death by axe in Medieval Britain, you might be allowed to pay the executioner to use a sword instead. If you could afford it. Failing that, you could at least pay him to use one stroke instead of two or three ...

Originally Posted by Eärniel

Then again, Elves are usually better shots than us mortal men...

I tend to agree with you, Gordis, on the axe and the hanging. I can't see the Eldar with an established executioner, but I can see it among the Dúnedain.

Clearly they wouldn't have had lethal injections, but I wonder if they'd make use of the poison cup for situations where they didn't want a brutal or public execution?

I think archery firing squads might be used amongst the Elves, because they are such good shots. I hadn't heard about it amongst Men either.

Even if they don't want a public execution, they can still have a beheading. In the Tower of London you can see the execution site which was used for those few executions where they wanted to give the victim some privacy (I think only six altogether, including two of Henry WIII's wives).

[Osric]

Firstly, before leaping on to the judicial executions you asked about, I'll just note that imprisonment was not a common punishment historically. In the later Kin-Strife with food commonly in short supply, keeping people prisoner would be rare except in awaiting trial.

It almost always came down to the payment of monetary fines. (These may or may not have been 'means-tested'?) An extension of that would be payment in service, such as working an extra day on a week on the lord's lands, where the individual lacked the funds to pay the fine. A further extension of that we could consider would be forced labour, such as a year in a mine in the Morthond Vale, five years rowing the galleys of the King's Navy etc. And in the Kin-Strife and other times of consuming war, there might even be penal regiments.

I do think that the aversion to suicide would be something that 'carries over' into Middle-earth so that the law would never direct someone to take their own life.
I think Morgoth's Ring tells us that elves can lay down their lives by an effort of will, the fëa simply ceasing to support the mortal body, but it adds that this was generally held to be a mark of one who was lacking in Estel. This attitude to suicide may be a lofty philosophical ideal, that influences lawmakers and hence the laws of the Kings -- who would not have the authority to demand that a Man take his own life -- whilst everyday folk may or may not even be aware of it.

Then again, Morgoth contaminated the attitudes of Men to death. They do not view it as going to the Gift of Eru but as something dreadful. Different people may interpret this as meaning that Men in M-e are more afraid of death than in our own history, or just as Tolkien's mythological rationale for the degree of dread about death that we do feel.

Peter Jackson seems to think that _suicide_missions_ are an acceptable part of Gondorian culture... But it's only to be expected that people would entertain more thoughts of suicide when life is cheap because of the likelihood of imminent death anyway, and the only alternative being arguably worse: lifelong slavery under the yoke of Sauron. Such would be far stranger at any other time in history. (And remember the extreme pressures of lying palantir-visions that it took to turn Denethor that far.)

So is the death penalty a given? In the ideal Numenor, and the ideal Gondor of Elendil and Isildur's rule, I suspect not.
"Authority is not given to you, Steward of Gondor, to order the hour of your death. ..." Tolkien gave a special -- religious -- significance to that word: Authority. (At least later, when he wrote the Osanwe-kenta essay, where he also gave it that capital A. Shame it's the first word in the sentence here...) Denethor did have the Authority to use the Stone of Anor, the palantir authorised for use by the Kings of Gondor and their appointed stewards. This Authority seems usually to be a divine sanction for one being to compel the actions of another.
If Denethor had not the Authority to take his own life, then he presumably could not have had the Authority to take the life of any other!
The ultimate sanction would then probably be outlaw status: to be put beyond the protection of the Law of the King and condemned to live outside the kingdom, in exile (where you would not benefit from the King's annual prayer for the goodwill of Eru).

But in the fallen Numenor as influenced by Sauron, and presumably at some point in the history of the decline of Gondor, I guess the death penalty does come in -- probably under military law first, again where death is a closer companion than in peaceful lands, and where breaches of discipline could cost the lives of others.

I agree with the other posters that public execution would not be the spectacle that it has been in our own history. It might be seen as a necessity where a penalty is as much for deterrence of others as punishment of the individual. But it would remain sombre rather than a matter of bloodthirsty entertainment.
And in later, more feudalised Gondor where the rule of the nobles was necessary to the order of society, I'd say nobles would not be publicly punished for anything less than treason. I think it would be cool for nobles to continue the historical tradition of exile.
The next extension of exile would be what I might call death by deprivation -- the good folk of the nation refusing any succour to the condemned man, such that he dies by lack of food or water (depending on the severity with which the sanction is applied). But that would be a very civilian mode of execution, and I'm inclined to look for one that would first have been introduced for the extreme requirements of military law and only then spread into civilian society, rather than civilian society having invented their own death penalties.

If public suicide is ruled out, the punitive administration of hemlock might not be. Thinking about it, following the mention of opening a vein in the bath, I'm surprised no culture has ever performed executions by exsanguination or 'bleeding out'.
The suggestion of shooting with arrows is surely a retrofit of the firing squad, and scarcely known before guns became common. Having soldiers perform it is still only one step away from the mob killing represented by a stoning. I don't know how common a mode St Sebastian's execution was at the time. The only other example I can think of is the alleged death of St Edmund, which sounds more like a vehicle for the brutality of his captors than a mode of execution. And if Tolkien has this in mind, surely the Death of Boromir would have dropped some clue! Boromir succumbing to the lure of the Ring and then promptly 'happening' to suffer precisely the death that his
kingdom's laws would prescribe for a criminal...?
I think the emphasis would be on as swift and humane a death as possible, for which decapitation or hanging to break the neck would seem to be the universal best options. The latter is tricky to achieve, between an insufficient drop merely causing the victim to die of strangulation (as was the case in judicial hangings prior to 1850), and too long a drop pulling his head from his vertebrae.

In times like the Kin-Strife and the War of the Ring, the jurisdiction of military law would be extended and civil law would become harsher than in peace-time, because times are harder and society is more damaged by any trangression.
I think the largest factor for general consideration is what the manner of the death implies about the lawmaker(s) prescribing it, the rulers or judges pronouncing it, and/or the public witnessing it -- and the attitude of each to the condemned. The less (ultimately Eldarin-instilled) Dunadan nobility there is in it, the harsher the manner of death is likely to be prescribed and the more it is likely to be displayed to the people. but at the same time, the less loyal the people are to their rulers, or the more sympathy they might have for the 'criminal', the more likely the rulers are likely to insist that they be forced to witness the execution.

Cheers!
--Os.

[Willow Oran]

I got the impression that Eöl's execution was rather an exception for the Noldor. Turgon was very attached to his sister and Gondolin needed to remain hidden at all costs. Having Eöl, a murderer and essentially an enemy knowing the way into Gondolin was too great a risk. But then again, did Tolkien actually write anything about crimes and punishment among the Eldar? It would be interesting to see if it differed from our systems. What, for instance, if they prefered communal jobs instead of locking criminals up?

To return to the execution of Eöl, since it is one of (I think) the only concrete examples we have...

It seems like any execution would be an exceptional circumstance for elven societies, since they simply weren't supposed to die. But that this one did take place, it implies that elven rulers had planned (or perhaps had to start planning) ahead for situations where it might be unavoidable. We can infer from the choice to throw the condemed elf off a very high cliff that:

a) They wouldn't force someone to commit suicide,

and

b) They didn't like spilling blood.

These preferences are consistent with Beruthiel's sentence and so for Noldorin and Noldor-influenced Edain societies we should probably be looking at other, similarly passive-agressive execution methods. One possibility that I don't think has been suggested yet but might fit for Numenor in it's decline would be entombment, or the practice of burying the condemed person alive.

It's significant that there are no concrete examples of executions from the Sindar. Even Turin, after Saeros' death, is only exiled. If we take this along with the challenge set for Beren, we may guess that exile was the punishment favored by the Sindar (probably through Melian's influence, as exile is also among the most dire punishments inflicted by the Valar) and that their justice system may have involved trials of strength or endurance.

Since the Edain would have been influenced by both major elven cultures but had more overall contact with the Noldor, we might expect their societies to use a combination of those penalties.

[The Dread Pirate Roberts]

A thought or two on exile.

Exile is more than simply letting one go free, for the exiled has no freedom to return to home and friends. Justice cannot be avoided as the exiled will learn his lesson, reform his life, and engage in acts of atonement or meet with further trouble and possible death if he is intransigent. Even if an exile meets with some success as an outlaw living a life of crime, I think estel demands that justice will eventually find him, as it finds all people. More than simply hope, there is a faith in the rightness of the world, even as it stands marred, a sort of karma if you will.

Maybe. The above is just a stream of consciousness and not thought out for very long.

[Willow Oran]

There's also the fact that the exiled person would probably be very limited in what he/she was allowed to take with them. Forcing a person to leave their home and all the protection/comfort thereof and go out into the wilds to struggle for survival is a harsh punishment in of itself.