willowfall said:xirvan said:The most notorious impaler was of course the original Dracula, Vlad the Impaler. He is said to have surrounded his castle in Transylvania with impaled victims. If the technique was done skillfully, the spike could avoid all vital organs and the victim could live on in agony for days. For men, the technique had the additional humiliation of changing their sex.
about victims living for days.
I can see it if the victim is impaled perpendicular to the stake. They executioner can then drive the stake through the belly area avoiding any organs in which the organ failure kills you quickly. The stake itself can impede blood loss allowing the victim to die slowly.
However if you impale the victim parallel to the stake I just can't see them surviving a long time if it goes into the chest. Let's just take me as an example, you as executioner decided to impale my pussy.
First I am designed to 'expand' down there but there will be tearing and immense pain but nothing fatal up to about 4-5 inches. However 5-7 inches deep (the depth of the average woman) that stake is going through my cervix and into my womb. Again pain and damage but not immediately fatal. Same for the stomach etal immediately above that. However once you get into my chest you have my lungs and heart and no way to get around them. Even if you missed them, there is no way there is enough room in my chest for a 4-5 inch object. That would crush my lungs or heart by squeezing them. I'm just not going to linger for days with that type of damage. Incredibly painful hours yes, but not days.
Now if you want to impale me perpendicular you need to use a stake with a blunt or rounded point. That shoves up into me and only very VERY slowly batters its way through to my chest. Now THAT would take me days to die. If you use a sharp stake you have to hope I lean back and it comes out my belly or forward and it comes out my back before it gets into my chest. I suppose most guys would want me to lean forward so they can watch my breasts jiggle, shake and swing as I linger in pain.
And it doesn't change a guy's sex you just go up his ass.
kisses
willowfall
willowfall said:Let's just take me as an example, you as executioner decided to impale my pussy.
First I am designed to 'expand' down there but there will be tearing and immense pain but nothing fatal up to about 4-5 inches. However 5-7 inches deep (the depth of the average woman) that stake is going through my cervix and into my womb. Again pain and damage but not immediately fatal. Same for the stomach etal immediately above that. However once you get into my chest you have my lungs and heart and no way to get around them. Even if you missed them, there is no way there is enough room in my chest for a 4-5 inch object. That would crush my lungs or heart by squeezing them. I'm just not going to linger for days with that type of damage. Incredibly painful hours yes, but not days.
Now if you want to impale me perpendicular you need to use a stake with a blunt or rounded point. That shoves up into me and only very VERY slowly batters its way through to my chest. Now THAT would take me days to die.
Melissa said:The TV prog also demonstrated the effect of 39 lashes by the Roman scorpion whip.... The number of lashes was set by law, unless the punishment was crucifixion.
Eulalia said:If there were a footrest - a couple of large nails would do - fixed in the Stake so you could press your toes on it only when the tip's got 6" or so inside you, you'd have to use it to try to ease the pain, though of course it would only prolong your agony - same principle as the sedilia on the Cross.
On the historical side, I don't think anyone's mentioned Boudicca's revenge on the Romans for flogging her and raping her daughters - according to Cassius Dio, she had the "most noble" captured Roman women and girls impaled on stakes, with their breasts cut off and sewn into their mouths. Tacitus, who was better informed, doesn't mention this - so it may be black propaganda - though he does say the Britons used gibbets and crosses to execute the captives.
Sorry, I've studied many historical documents on the Roman crucifixions. It seems that for a great number of crucifixions (like slaves of Spartacus), or when the killing had to be quick, the Romans did not bother to fix a sedilia on the stipes of the cross. Historians wrote about crucified slaves, who lived nearly a week on the cross: without seidilia, they never could. Of course, this was not an element of comfort! It allowed them to find another foothold - or suffering - as the nails, and to prolong their agony. And it made them to take ridiculous positions, to expose their extreme nudity, to complete their humiliation. But for those who were nailed on the cross to be burned, or to be devoured by the big cats, their death being planned in the very short term, the carpenters did not give himself the trouble of adjusting a sedilia.Ed-M said:This leads me to believe that for the cross, the sedilia was always a impaling device even if a short one.
I've yet to engounter any ancient documents in Latin about Carthaginian crucifixions wherein they are described as being suspended from a patibulum. Likewise in the Greek. Just references like fixing onto a crux (with or without motion), bearing someone up to a crux and 'paling' (staurow) someone on a 'pale' (stauros). Remember, it was the Romans who had the idea of having the slave ferry the crossbeam roundabout town prior to his execution. If they simply impaled at first, getting the idea from the Carthaginians, it wouldn't take long for them to have two other posts to hold the crossbeam and the prisoner would hang impaled... truly a bizaare and excruciation combination of sensations: you're being stretched by gravity at the same time a pale is working its way deeper into you.Eulalia said:That's interesting. I've thought for a long time that Crucifixion was an evolved form of Impalement, and the semantic development of crux reflects that. So, as you say, the cornu (in rectum or female vagina) was a 'crucial' part of the Torture. Although we think of Crucifixion as a Roman speciality, we're told they got the idea from Carthage - have we any idea what form it took there?
Going back to Willowfall's post, an even crueller thought is that, if you were impaled hogtied wrists to ankles, you'd be forcibly bent back and the Spike would burst out of your abdomen well below the diaphragm, leaving your heart and lungs intact - gruesome, eh? :ymdevil: But I don't think you'd last long, you'd be bleeding buckets.
I would disagree in that in most crucifixions, the prisoner was expected to suffer for days, plus the Romans had other methods in hastening death on a cross. The crucified slaves who fought with Spartcus were reported to have been hanged in one document and apparently impaled in another. Plus they were reported to have conversed with the soldiers for up to three days. Plus, there was the breaking of legs and the stabbing with a pilum or spear to bring about a quick death. Why go through all that trouble when all they had to do was deny the sedilia? With those coups de graces, it would seem to me that the Romans did not want to remit one iota of the utter humiliation and sitting torture of a full-blown crucifixion.chelior said:Sorry, I've studied many historical documents on the Roman crucifixions. It seems that for a great number of crucifixions (like slaves of Spartacus), or when the killing had to be quick, the Romans did not bother to fix a sedilia on the stipes of the cross. Historians wrote about crucified slaves, who lived nearly a week on the cross: without seidilia, they never could. Of course, this was not an element of comfort! It allowed them to find another foothold - or suffering - as the nails, and to prolong their agony. And it made them to take ridiculous positions, to expose their extreme nudity, to complete their humiliation. But for those who were nailed on the cross to be burned, or to be devoured by the big cats, their death being planned in the very short term, the carpenters did not give himself the trouble of adjusting a sedilia.Ed-M said:This leads me to believe that for the cross, the sedilia was always a impaling device even if a short one.
something with hell and bell perhaps?Hi,
Here's three screenshots from the clip. The one with the hook and chains looks very familiar....so what manip am I thinking of and who did it?
Melissa
italian lust or savagery or both........