During the Roman times, there was one method of execution and death penalty which was imposed
upon someone who had been found guilty of murdering their father. This punishment was
incredibly brutal and involved the condemned being sewn up in a leather sack or a bag with
a number of live animals which would attack inside the bag. Some of these animals included
monkeys, chickens and venomous snakes, but then sickeningly the condemned was thrown
into water with no way out, dying from drowning. It was an incredibly brutal execution method,
and was known as Penalty of the sack, or Poena Cullei. But what makes this one of the worst
execution methods in History? Join us today as we look at this, and remember to support
our channel, please make sure to subscribe.
The punishment of penalty of the sack was used widely during the Roman period, and it’s
first documented example is around 100BC. These early examples may not have used live
animals, and this may have occurred around the Early Imperial times, and to begin with
only snakes were documented as being put inside of the sack. It was Emperor Hadrian and during
his reign that the most well known form of the execution method came from, where a cockerel,
a dog, monkey and viper were placed inside of the sack. At this time it was also used
as a form of execution alongside someone being thrown to the beasts in the arena, where they
were forced to fight lions.
It’s has been considered whether penalty of the sack was linked to sacrifice or ritualistic
execution. One account of the execution states that, ‘The person was first whipped or beaten
with blood coloured rods, and his head was covered in a bag made of a wolf’s hide.
On his feet were placed clogs or wooden shoes, and he was then put into a sack made of ox
leather. Place along with him into the sack was also an assortment of live animals, arguably
the most famous combination being that of a serpent, a cock, monkey and a dog. The sack
was put on a cart, and the cart driven by black oxen to a running stream or the sea.
Then the sack with its inhabitant was thrown into the water. There were other variations
of the method, as in one example scholar Cicero states that the criminals mouth was covered
by a leather back rather than wolf’s hide. He also said that the person was held in prison
until the large sack had been made, and it was believed one of these sacks were used
to transport wine in.
Another variation of the method states that an individual was beaten, and they were usually
flogged until they bled, with the animals possibly then feasting of the bleeding victim,
but it’s believed they may also have been painted red to be shamed. Another account
of the method states, ‘He who has been convicted of murdering his parent shall be completely
wrapped and bound in a leather sack and thrown in a running stream"... Malleolus was convicted
of matricide. Immediately after he had received sentence, his head was wrapped in a bag of
wolf's hide, the "wooden shoes" were put upon his feet and he was led away to prison. His
defenders bring tablets into the jail, write his will in his presence, witnesses duly attending.
The penalty is exacted of him.’ In this there was no example of live animals p[laced
inside of the sack.
It has been thought that the execution method could have been used before the written accounts
came out, as there were a number of accounts of patricide documented in history before.
A close example is the execution of a man who was forced into a vessel or a large jar,
where serpents were then added to it and he was killed by them. Cicero would also later
provide the context behind the symbolic importance of the execution method saying, ‘They therefore
stipulated that parricides should be sewn up in a sack while still alive and thrown
into a river. What remarkable wisdom they showed, gentlemen! Do they not seem to have
cut the parricide off and separated him from the whole realm of nature, depriving him at
a stroke of sky, sun, water and earth – and thus ensuring that he who had killed the man
who gave him life should himself be denied the elements from which, it is said, all life
derives? They did not want his body to be exposed to wild animals, in case the animals
should turn more savage after coming into contact with such a monstrosity.
Nor did they want to throw him naked into a river, for fear that his body, carried down
to the sea, might pollute that very element by which all other defilements are thought
to be purified. In short, there is nothing so cheap, or so commonly available that they
allowed parricides to share in it. For what is so free as air to the living, earth to
the dead, the sea to those tossed by the waves, or the land to those cast to the shores? Yet
these men live, while they can, without being able to draw breath from the open air; they
die without earth touching their bones; they are tossed by the waves without ever being
cleansed; and in the end they are cast ashore without being granted, even on the rocks,
a resting-place in death.’
The punishment continued to be used as time went on in Rome, and Emperor Augustus was
even reluctant to authorise penalty of the sack, as it was so brutal. But Emperor Claudius
was the opposite, and he happily sentenced men to death using the method, and it was
said ‘The Emperor Claudius sewed more men into the culleus in five years than history
says were sewn up in all previous centuries. We saw more cullei that crucifixions,’ showing
it was a popular method of execution. The fear of the punishment was huge, and for one
man it was said, ‘the postponement of my punishment was unpleasant, waiting for it
seems worse than suffering it. I kept imagining the sack, the snake, the deep.’ Some writers
would sympathise for the animals inside of the sack who were also killed, and many claimed
that some of them including the monkey were innocent sufferers.
But it’s during the reign of Emperor Hadrian that the most common examples of the punishment
come from. One translation of the death during this time states, ‘According to the custom
of our ancestors, the punishment instituted for parricide was as follows; A parricide
is flogged with blood-colored rods, then sewn up in a sack with a dog, a dunghill cock,
a viper, and a monkey; then the sack is thrown into the depths of the sea. This is the procedure
if the sea is close at hand; otherwise, he is thrown to the beasts, according to the
constitution of the deified Hadrian.’ But by the late 3rd century it was believed to
have been disused as a method of execution, as those who killed their fathers were usually
then burned at the stake or were thrown to the beasts.
But there was another account that emerged in a 6th century codex that said, ‘Whoever,
secretly or openly, shall hasten the death of a parent, or son or other near relative,
whose murder is accounted as parricide, will suffer the penalty of parricide. He will not
be punished by the sword, by fire or by some other ordinary form of execution, but he will
be sewn up in a sack and, in this dismal prison, have serpents as his companions. Depending
on the nature of the locality, he shall be thrown into the neighboring sea or into the
river, so that even while living he may be deprived of the enjoyment of the elements,
the air being denied him while living and interment in the earth when dead.’
The Penalty of the Sack was used in the medieval times and in Germany in particular and was
used for the same offence. The rooster was not included and the serpent was changed to
an image of a snake, and the monkey was replaced with a cat. The sack itself was sometimes
also made of linen. The difference in this was that the inhabitants will drown rather
than suffocate from lack of air, and this took longer to kill. In one case the sack
was too small and when it hit the water it ripped open and the cat and dog managed to
escape, before the man drowned. It is believed that the last case took place in 1749 where
a victim was placed in a black sack along with a snake and it was kept underwater for
a long period of time.
Penalty of the sack was one of the most brutal and savage execution methods used throughout
history. The fact someone was placed in a sack with a number of aggrieved and angry
animals and then thrown in water was sadistic and incredibly terrifying.
Thanks for watching
To support our channel, please make sure to subscribe
Thanks for watching