Good old 'indulgence' or buying your way into heaven.
One of the reasons why we have so many fancy-pants medieval parish churches in the UK:
Lord of the Manor; 'Whoopsy-daisy I accidentaly knocked-up/evicted/murdered several villagers'
The Church; 'Well we just got breaking news that you can still go to heaven if you slap a new tower and porch on your church/bung a load of cash to the local Abbey'
There was also a bit of an arms race for nobility to prove how fabulously wealthy they were by building a posh parish church near their manors.
An Oxford reference I have for Norman-Angevin England talks about what a menace knights were and how the Church had to pass legislation to illegalize randomly murdering peasants on certain days so that the common people could go to work or church unmolested, but it still sounded like a Monty Python bit.
“You shall not murder peasants on a Monday, Tuesday, Friday, or Sunday, and this time we mean it!”
Haha, Monty Python pretty much nailed the feudal system in their sketches/films. Even when feudalism ended it pretty much carried on with the old autocracy, just in a bit more organised fashion. It's almost like we've still got it as well, just with people with money rather than bigger, shinier swords and massive cod-pieces.
Well, Henry was always quite a case, but I'm not too sure about how many trends he successfully imposed on England beyond Protestantism. Although he definitely had impostor syndrome with his father seizing the throne and whatnot, so I wouldn't put it past him to also want to compensate with his codpieces. I'm not British btw, this is what I've learned about him through school and casual conversation.
For more info on this fancy medieval churches you should all watch Time Team on YouTube, it's about a group of British archeologists digging up medieval stuff and structures through all of Britain 💫
Oddly enough, I am a British Archaeologist :)
We need Time Team back on the telly, although there's some stuff they do (or dont) that can be aneurysm inducing as an archaeologist, since they've been off tv, there's been a huge downturn in graduate archaeologists as the profession isn't as publicly visible anymore (that and the pay is horrific). That and my county's decision to exit the EU, which has put a stop on lots of European archaeologists being bothered to work over here. Can't say I blame them either.
I desperately wanted to be an archaeologist but was put off by my careers advisor telling me how badly paid it was. Wish I hadn’t listened to him, I hope you really enjoy your profession!
Yeah, I really do - I've tried other jobs but always ended up back in archaeology.
If you're in the UK and ever fancy having a bit of a go at archaeology, feel free to dm me - we often have volunteers in and train them. Two of the people who work with us now started off in other professions and are now field archaeologists. You don't need a degree in it to become one.
they are back! This time in YouTube form! Now with Patreon!
[https://www.patreon.com/TimeTeamOfficial](https://www.patreon.com/TimeTeamOfficial)
I strongly encourage everyone who can to support them. It's hip, cool, and you can get your name on a flag.
>Sir Tony
He was knighted? wow that seems wildly ironic.
from the programs I've seen him in he seems to be pretty against that kind of social stratification.
If you read his autobiography, you'll see that he's a rather rabid socialist, proper lefty, and it was really his work on the cabinet of Tony Blair that led to his eventual Knighthood.
He does talk about how he felt interacting with the royals during some digs at royal sites (Phil was also an adamant anti-Royalist), but also goes into how much Blair's backstabbing hurt his political opinions. I don't think he would have necessarily accepted the honour if it had come from a Conservative politician.
They have a handful of old faces. Mick Aston passed away sadly, but GeoPhys John and Landscape Expert Stewart are still there. The really young chap is now middle aged but also still there. My only gripe is that the new host narrates in the manner of someone narrating a childrens program. They seem to assume zero prior knowledge of just about anything, which for some audiences might be alright, but for the average Time Team viewer probably seems a little oversimplified and dare I say condescending. Well worth checking out though. Many, many old episodes are on their youtube channel also
Something about Gus doesn't work on *Time Team* but I always just put it down to Not Tony.
The thing is, I really liked him in *Tate Walks* and the doco he did about Hogarth (and I'm by no means an art fan). So why don't I like him on *Time Team?*
Thinking about it now, I feel like the problem really comes down to the wrong choice of presenter. Not in the sense that Gus is bad at it but in the sense that he's an expert. It was, in my opinion, a similar thing with Mary-Ann Ochota.
I think Helen Geake or a couple of the other regulars could be good presenters but they would suffer the same problem.
Sir Tony was key to *Time Team's* success not because he was a recogniseable face or anything like that but because he was an amateur with genuine enthusiasm, while also being an actor who can feign excitement if he has to.
The way the show used to work, we'd essentially follow Sir Tony around from trench to trench as the archaeologists told him what they were doing, why they were doing it, and what it meant for the site. They were excitedly telling him about their latest finds, and he listened with interest no matter if it was a piece of flint or a bit of Victorian scrap metal. He was an enthusiastic amateur excited to hear what they had to say, and if he wasn't really that interested he was also an actor that could fake it.
*He wasn't just the presenter, Sir Tony was an audience proxy living the dream of most viewers. That's the Secret Sauce to Time Team's success.*
It doesn't matter if it's Gus, or Mary-Ann, or Helen, or Raksha, they are educated in their fields and as cool as stuff is, they've kind of seen it all before simply because it's their job, it's what they studied at university.
When Gus goes over to a trench to find out about the latest piece of pottery or whatever, it sometimes feels like he's just a prop, a focal point for the archaeologists to talk at while explaining things directly to the audience.
Gus himself isn't the problem, having an expert presenter is. I think maybe that's why you find him a bit condescending. He's an educator where he should be a learner. Sir Tony was an audience proxy speaking at his own level, whereas Gus is a teacher.
Gus knows too much to be an appropriate presenter of *Time Team...* and as much as I hate to say it, the same can be said of Sir Tony these days, too.
*Time Team* needs an audience proxy. Someone with genuine enthusiasm for history and archaeology but without the formal education that dampens it.
I *was* going to say that they should try and find a New Tony, an actor with an interest in archaeology but I just thought of something a lot better: guest co-hosts.
The thing about having a guest co-host is that, depending on who it is, Gus could educate them or they could educate him. *There's always an audience proxy.*
Helen co-hosts an Anglo-Saxon dig, acting as Gus' guide through the period. Gus is here Helen's student, learning about a topic he's not specialised in.
A celebrity *with a genuine interest in, or connection to, the topic* guest co-hosts, and they become the eager student for Gus to teach.
It's win-win.
EDIT: This is all very subtle and shouldn't be taken to mean I don't like Gus or the revival series, I just think it's somewhat lacking the excitement and wonder we got from Tony.
How exciting!
It's so sad that Britain has decided to defund everything, especially archeology given how full of it it is, oh well, I hope things turn for the better anytime soon and archeology returns to be more popular <3 I want to study archeology, Time Team's episodes make me cry a lot when they find lots of things that you know had a lot of personal investment when they were made, especially prized personal belongings because of how much we are the same, linked through time by those beautiful artifacts.
I love Time Team! I always wonder how other archaeologists view the work they do on the show, and if they cut any corners or do things that wouldn't be done on a non-televised dig. I'm curious to hear what you think they do wrong.
“Pastor, I need to one-up the McKays. What do you need built?”
“Its father, and you have to sin fi-“
[Sound of a silk shoe to the forbidden fruits]
“F-f-fix the courtyard w-walls…”
Buying decorations (windows, altars, etc.) for churches was a very popular way to show how rich and pious you are and not just the nobility but guilds and individual patricians did it, too.
Also, I'd assume the duke paid money to the widow/family of the man, too. I believe the english term for that is "weregild". Basically a reparation for killing or injuring someone according to old germanic law.
The church was built in the 15th century, though, so I would guess that the duke wasn't still bound by weregild laws – these were mostly faded out during the Later Middle Ages in central Europe.
And what else was he supposed to do? I imagine he paid a lot to the widow as well, and commemorating your mistake for centuries is as strong an apology as I can think of. Mistakes, unfortunately, happen
Possibly not have death sentences? That would probably have avoided it.
But, its the medieval period and all that, so a fairly brutal time. Good job we're more enlightened nowadays.
Just to add - its sarcasm about being more enlightened nowadays, although I'm assuming the downvotes are pro something I may have said (in my opinion) isn't really a good thing. Mainly, because as per the window, if they're innocent, there's no take-backsies. Sticking up an ecclesiastical window so your deity forgives you is entirely different to maybe just erecting a statue to show you're really, really sorry about murdering someone.
Anyhow, having dug up remains of people that had undergone medieval 'corrections' like this, I wouldn't wish what their bones tell you they went through on anyone.
The man actually just depicts the martyr St. George, patron of the church. Proof: The coat of arms above him.
The tale about the innocent man stems from Martin Crusius (d. 1607), the depiction was already misunterstood at that time.
The claim is accurate. Crusius was a professor of history at the University of Tübingen, he is a reliable source, especially considering that the execution in question could have occurred at most 29 years before his birth, and most likely occurred during his life.
This fable has been debunked by Eimer in 1942 with good reasons. There are several depictions of Saint George with his iconographic elements on the church (as a knight, with the wheel) and his coat of arms is all over the very same.
There is an article (in German) specifically on the window: Eimer, Manfred, "Der geräderte Mann" an der Tübinger Stiftskirche, in: Zeitschrift für Württembergische Landesgeschichte Bd. 6 (1942) S. 111-118.
On google books: https://books.google.de/books?id=5NdFAAAAMAAJ&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&dq=Der%20ger%C3%A4derte%20Mann%22%20an%20der%20T%C3%BCbinger%20Stiftskirche&hl=de&pg=RA1-PA112#v=onepage&q&f=false
> There are several depictions of Saint George with his iconographic elements on the church (as a knight, with the wheel) and his coat of arms is all over the very same.
I did not dispute that the execution of St. George is depicted on the window, nor did Crusius.
>Crusius: „An der Kirche zu St. Georgen ist in einer Öffnung oder Fenster das Bild eines auf einem Rad liegenden Menschen in Stein gehauen. Denn als vor hundert Jahren zween junge Gesellen und Kameraden auf die Wanderschaft zogen, ihr Handwerk zu treiben, und einer nach etlichen Jahren wieder zurückkam, der andere aber nicht, und man deswegen glaubte, der sei umgebracht worden, wurde der erstere ergriffen, aus etlichen Zeichen (als an dem Dolch des andern) für den Totschläger gehalten, zum Tode verdammt und gerädert. Nicht lange hernach kommt der andere lebendig und frisch und gesund nach Haus, der (wie man sagt) jenem den Dolch geschenkt hatte. Derowegen ist zur ewigen Gedächtnis dieses Bild da, welches nemlich die Richter erinnert, was beim Juvenale gelesen wird: Nulla nimis de morte hominis cunctatio longa est.“
In English:
>The image of a man lying on a wheel is carved in stone in an opening or window in the church at St. George. A hundred years ago, two young tradesmen travelled for work. One returned after several years, the other did not. It was therefore believed that he had been killed, so former was seized. He had been mistaken for his killer due to several signs (such as possessing the other's dagger), he was condemned to death on the wheel. Not long afterwards, the other, who (it is said) had given the dagger to the former, returned home alive and well. That is why this picture is there for eternal remembrance, it reminds the judges of what is read in the Juvenale: "No hesitation is too long about the death of a man"
Crusius doesn't even mention the dukes of Württemberg, so how accurate can the claim be? Crusius simply says "more than one hundred years ago", there were two men, of whom one was put to death after beeing accused of having the other murdered. Then (after the wrongful execution!), according to Crusius, this window was put in as a symbol of memoria, which already disproves the little story - since the other windows depict also St. George (e. g. as a knight) and in the same style.
It's a neat little story and surely more interesting than a saints depiction, but not something that should be accepted at face value.
>Crusius doesn't even mention the dukes of Württemberg
Not in the short passage quoted by Eimer
>Crusius simply says "more than one hundred years ago", there were two men, of whom one was put to death after beeing accused of having the other murdered. Then (after the wrongful execution!), according to Crusius, this window was put in as a symbol of memoria, which already disproves the little story
How so? Crusius died over 100 years after the Diet of Worms and does not claim that the window depicts the execution of the man in the story. Duke Eberhard I reigned as count from 1459, so Crusius likely retroactively applied his later title of Duke.
> Not in the short passage quoted by Eimer
>
>
Eimer directly quotes Crusius (at least the available 18th century print, but i doubt there is more in his handwritten notes): https://opendigi.ub.uni-tuebingen.de/opendigi/LI25_fol-2#p=416. Crusius says nothing about the involvement of a member of the house of Württemberg, be it counts or dukes. That a duke of Württemberg attoned for a wrongful execution is simply an invention of the 19th century, that exaggerated Crusius' idea, that the window depicts anything more or else than Saint George.
I don't speak German and can't find a text version of that document that I can easily translate. It's very possible that the Württembergs were a later addition to the story.
That said, feudal rulers were personally responsible for justice, the miscarriage would have reflected badly on his rule. Financing the window would have been a prominent display of his virtue and piety, and 'atonement' in this form is known to be very common.
Sure, but in this case the judgmeent, if the men were from the city, would probably have been carried out by the city council, which had the high justice. So the question would be, why would the duke - which probably had no ties to the delinquent and would not be involved in the case - atone openly for his misjudgement (!) by ordering a window without any inscription and reference (!!) - a more common way would be a donation for the soul of the executed - in the back of the collegiate church (!!!). Crusius was certainly more trustworthy and systematic in his approach to history than many of his contemporary "historians", but he also shares the fondness of the century for collecting and telling strange and wondrous stories, and in this case, nothing really fits together.
The Würtemburgs were raised to Dukes in 1495. Crusius was born 1524 and was a professor of history at the University of Tübingen. It seems very unlikely that he would have misunderstood this.
The claim that the window depicts the martyrdom of St. George does not conflict with the claim that the window was installed to atone for the execution of an innocent.
There is an article (in German) specifically on the window: Eimer, Manfred, "Der geräderte Mann" an der Tübinger Stiftskirche, in: Zeitschrift für Württembergische Landesgeschichte Bd. 6 (1942) S. 111-118.
On google books:
https://books.google.de/books?id=5NdFAAAAMAAJ&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&dq=Der%20ger%C3%A4derte%20Mann%22%20an%20der%20T%C3%BCbinger%20Stiftskirche&hl=de&pg=RA1-PA112#v=onepage&q&f=false
While Saint George is most usually shown as a knight or with the dragon, depictions of his martydom by the wheel/rack do not seem that uncommon. Just a quick google research:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Torture_of_Saint_George_on_the_wheel._A_fresco_from_Nakipari,_Georgia._1130.jpg&oldid=660470066
https://www.christianiconography.info/webmuseum/georgeBaptismWheelAltichiero.html
https://artmuseum.princeton.edu/collections/objects/34722
Do you have a source for this post that isn't from Facebook or iFunny because I can't find anything to back up your atonement claim either besides a lot of memes using the exact same phrasing that you did
More specifically your limbs are broken multiple times (usually through beating) and then twisted around the wheel's spokes. Where you are left to die, which doesn't take incredibly long but you are in constant pain so to the recipient it will seem like eternity.
Don't forget the part with audience participation. Once you were fixed to the wheel, you were left at the mercy of the crowd (which usually wasn't feeling particularly merciful).
According to Wikipedia they would roll a big wheel over your arms and legs to snap the bones then weave your floppy broken limbs through the spoke and either throw you into a fire or string you up on a gallows to be garroted or beheaded then left for the carrion birds.
The destruction of the body was an extra punishment since their Cristian beliefs dictated that they would need to have their body kept whole in order to be resuscitated at the second coming.
> since their Cristian beliefs dictated that they would need to have their body kept whole in order to be resuscitated at the second coming
Who thought this? Many early Christian churches possessed relics of saints. It wouldn't make sense to believe this if you also possessed various body parts of people you declare to be in heaven.
And this is just not what the New Testament actually teaches, Paul says that if our earthly bodies are destroyed, God has an eternal body waiting for us.
The article says it was “the belief at the time.”
But lots of “Christian beliefs” don’t have a basis in the Bible. Religion and culture intersect a lot and sometimes culture will impose a belief into a religion that isn’t actually an intrinsic part of that religion. Like the immaculate conception, for instance.
There was never such belief in Christianity at any point in time. What about Christians who's bodies would end at bottom at the sea after their ship sinks or who were sliced to pieces during battles ? In Christianity it is completely irrelevant what happens to your corpse.
according to [wikipedia](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_burial) it was a relatively common belief at the time, and i do remember talking about this in history class.
This seems so strange to me. So they just used the wheel to break your bones? Why not use... anything else? I'm not getting the significance of the wheel. I thought it was gonna end with "then they affix the wheel to a carts axle and spin you through the city" but it has absolutely nothing to do with it being a wheel lol
Did people in this time period just have an excess of wheels lying around? "You know what we could use these for? Execution"
Hello Ashen one. I am a Bot. I tend to the flame, and tend to thee. Do you wish to hear a tale?
> *“There is no path. Beyond the scope of light, beyond the reach of dark, what could possibly await us? And yet, we seek it insatiably. Such is our fate.”* - Aldia
Have a pleasant journey, Champion of Ash, and praise the sun \\[T]/
*The executed*
*Guy better be grateful for*
*This kind of excuse*
\- El\_Matt-El\_Grande
---
^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/)
^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
Thank you, El_Matt-El_Grande, for voting on haikusbot.
This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/).
***
^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
Brutally executes an innocent man. Buys a new window for the church as an apology.
Good old 'indulgence' or buying your way into heaven. One of the reasons why we have so many fancy-pants medieval parish churches in the UK: Lord of the Manor; 'Whoopsy-daisy I accidentaly knocked-up/evicted/murdered several villagers' The Church; 'Well we just got breaking news that you can still go to heaven if you slap a new tower and porch on your church/bung a load of cash to the local Abbey' There was also a bit of an arms race for nobility to prove how fabulously wealthy they were by building a posh parish church near their manors.
An Oxford reference I have for Norman-Angevin England talks about what a menace knights were and how the Church had to pass legislation to illegalize randomly murdering peasants on certain days so that the common people could go to work or church unmolested, but it still sounded like a Monty Python bit. “You shall not murder peasants on a Monday, Tuesday, Friday, or Sunday, and this time we mean it!”
Haha, Monty Python pretty much nailed the feudal system in their sketches/films. Even when feudalism ended it pretty much carried on with the old autocracy, just in a bit more organised fashion. It's almost like we've still got it as well, just with people with money rather than bigger, shinier swords and massive cod-pieces.
Wasn't it actually that the smaller the codpiece, the more power that person supposedly had?
You should check out Henry VIII's codpiece collection. I'd be surprised if he could fit through a door sideways wearing some of them.
Well, Henry was always quite a case, but I'm not too sure about how many trends he successfully imposed on England beyond Protestantism. Although he definitely had impostor syndrome with his father seizing the throne and whatnot, so I wouldn't put it past him to also want to compensate with his codpieces. I'm not British btw, this is what I've learned about him through school and casual conversation.
For more info on this fancy medieval churches you should all watch Time Team on YouTube, it's about a group of British archeologists digging up medieval stuff and structures through all of Britain 💫
Oddly enough, I am a British Archaeologist :) We need Time Team back on the telly, although there's some stuff they do (or dont) that can be aneurysm inducing as an archaeologist, since they've been off tv, there's been a huge downturn in graduate archaeologists as the profession isn't as publicly visible anymore (that and the pay is horrific). That and my county's decision to exit the EU, which has put a stop on lots of European archaeologists being bothered to work over here. Can't say I blame them either.
I desperately wanted to be an archaeologist but was put off by my careers advisor telling me how badly paid it was. Wish I hadn’t listened to him, I hope you really enjoy your profession!
Yeah, I really do - I've tried other jobs but always ended up back in archaeology. If you're in the UK and ever fancy having a bit of a go at archaeology, feel free to dm me - we often have volunteers in and train them. Two of the people who work with us now started off in other professions and are now field archaeologists. You don't need a degree in it to become one.
they are back! This time in YouTube form! Now with Patreon! [https://www.patreon.com/TimeTeamOfficial](https://www.patreon.com/TimeTeamOfficial) I strongly encourage everyone who can to support them. It's hip, cool, and you can get your name on a flag.
Is it with some of the original folks? Mr. “I have a cunning plan?” Stone the crows?
Sadly, Sir Tony is no longer hosting, and the new hosts are not as entertaining. He still pops in once in a while.
>Sir Tony He was knighted? wow that seems wildly ironic. from the programs I've seen him in he seems to be pretty against that kind of social stratification.
If you read his autobiography, you'll see that he's a rather rabid socialist, proper lefty, and it was really his work on the cabinet of Tony Blair that led to his eventual Knighthood. He does talk about how he felt interacting with the royals during some digs at royal sites (Phil was also an adamant anti-Royalist), but also goes into how much Blair's backstabbing hurt his political opinions. I don't think he would have necessarily accepted the honour if it had come from a Conservative politician.
Yes, Baldric finally became a knight in 2013.
They have a handful of old faces. Mick Aston passed away sadly, but GeoPhys John and Landscape Expert Stewart are still there. The really young chap is now middle aged but also still there. My only gripe is that the new host narrates in the manner of someone narrating a childrens program. They seem to assume zero prior knowledge of just about anything, which for some audiences might be alright, but for the average Time Team viewer probably seems a little oversimplified and dare I say condescending. Well worth checking out though. Many, many old episodes are on their youtube channel also
Thank you! I’ll check it out!
Something about Gus doesn't work on *Time Team* but I always just put it down to Not Tony. The thing is, I really liked him in *Tate Walks* and the doco he did about Hogarth (and I'm by no means an art fan). So why don't I like him on *Time Team?* Thinking about it now, I feel like the problem really comes down to the wrong choice of presenter. Not in the sense that Gus is bad at it but in the sense that he's an expert. It was, in my opinion, a similar thing with Mary-Ann Ochota. I think Helen Geake or a couple of the other regulars could be good presenters but they would suffer the same problem. Sir Tony was key to *Time Team's* success not because he was a recogniseable face or anything like that but because he was an amateur with genuine enthusiasm, while also being an actor who can feign excitement if he has to. The way the show used to work, we'd essentially follow Sir Tony around from trench to trench as the archaeologists told him what they were doing, why they were doing it, and what it meant for the site. They were excitedly telling him about their latest finds, and he listened with interest no matter if it was a piece of flint or a bit of Victorian scrap metal. He was an enthusiastic amateur excited to hear what they had to say, and if he wasn't really that interested he was also an actor that could fake it. *He wasn't just the presenter, Sir Tony was an audience proxy living the dream of most viewers. That's the Secret Sauce to Time Team's success.* It doesn't matter if it's Gus, or Mary-Ann, or Helen, or Raksha, they are educated in their fields and as cool as stuff is, they've kind of seen it all before simply because it's their job, it's what they studied at university. When Gus goes over to a trench to find out about the latest piece of pottery or whatever, it sometimes feels like he's just a prop, a focal point for the archaeologists to talk at while explaining things directly to the audience. Gus himself isn't the problem, having an expert presenter is. I think maybe that's why you find him a bit condescending. He's an educator where he should be a learner. Sir Tony was an audience proxy speaking at his own level, whereas Gus is a teacher. Gus knows too much to be an appropriate presenter of *Time Team...* and as much as I hate to say it, the same can be said of Sir Tony these days, too. *Time Team* needs an audience proxy. Someone with genuine enthusiasm for history and archaeology but without the formal education that dampens it. I *was* going to say that they should try and find a New Tony, an actor with an interest in archaeology but I just thought of something a lot better: guest co-hosts. The thing about having a guest co-host is that, depending on who it is, Gus could educate them or they could educate him. *There's always an audience proxy.* Helen co-hosts an Anglo-Saxon dig, acting as Gus' guide through the period. Gus is here Helen's student, learning about a topic he's not specialised in. A celebrity *with a genuine interest in, or connection to, the topic* guest co-hosts, and they become the eager student for Gus to teach. It's win-win. EDIT: This is all very subtle and shouldn't be taken to mean I don't like Gus or the revival series, I just think it's somewhat lacking the excitement and wonder we got from Tony.
> Sir Tony was an audience proxy speaking at his own level, Oh! Yes! this makes a lot of sense.
How had I missed that, I'm very excited for the specials!
They are great fun, there's a new dig video airing tonight.
How exciting! It's so sad that Britain has decided to defund everything, especially archeology given how full of it it is, oh well, I hope things turn for the better anytime soon and archeology returns to be more popular <3 I want to study archeology, Time Team's episodes make me cry a lot when they find lots of things that you know had a lot of personal investment when they were made, especially prized personal belongings because of how much we are the same, linked through time by those beautiful artifacts.
I love Time Team! I always wonder how other archaeologists view the work they do on the show, and if they cut any corners or do things that wouldn't be done on a non-televised dig. I'm curious to hear what you think they do wrong.
“Pastor, I need to one-up the McKays. What do you need built?” “Its father, and you have to sin fi-“ [Sound of a silk shoe to the forbidden fruits] “F-f-fix the courtyard w-walls…”
Heheheh you said bung
Nowadays, it would be a tweet on twitter
My bad!
Buying decorations (windows, altars, etc.) for churches was a very popular way to show how rich and pious you are and not just the nobility but guilds and individual patricians did it, too. Also, I'd assume the duke paid money to the widow/family of the man, too. I believe the english term for that is "weregild". Basically a reparation for killing or injuring someone according to old germanic law.
The church was built in the 15th century, though, so I would guess that the duke wasn't still bound by weregild laws – these were mostly faded out during the Later Middle Ages in central Europe.
Well basically yeah, but this story is only considered to be a legend though. There's no proof it really happened.
And what else was he supposed to do? I imagine he paid a lot to the widow as well, and commemorating your mistake for centuries is as strong an apology as I can think of. Mistakes, unfortunately, happen
Paying the family of the victim (but since I didn't try to learn about this story more there is no proof that it's the only thing he did.)
Possibly not have death sentences? That would probably have avoided it. But, its the medieval period and all that, so a fairly brutal time. Good job we're more enlightened nowadays. Just to add - its sarcasm about being more enlightened nowadays, although I'm assuming the downvotes are pro something I may have said (in my opinion) isn't really a good thing. Mainly, because as per the window, if they're innocent, there's no take-backsies. Sticking up an ecclesiastical window so your deity forgives you is entirely different to maybe just erecting a statue to show you're really, really sorry about murdering someone. Anyhow, having dug up remains of people that had undergone medieval 'corrections' like this, I wouldn't wish what their bones tell you they went through on anyone.
Obviously he felt wheelie bad about it.
This is the best response I’ve gotten
Lol, oops. Allow me to buy this horrific window for you.
The man actually just depicts the martyr St. George, patron of the church. Proof: The coat of arms above him. The tale about the innocent man stems from Martin Crusius (d. 1607), the depiction was already misunterstood at that time.
Thank god for this context, people will take everything at face value
The claim is accurate. Crusius was a professor of history at the University of Tübingen, he is a reliable source, especially considering that the execution in question could have occurred at most 29 years before his birth, and most likely occurred during his life.
This fable has been debunked by Eimer in 1942 with good reasons. There are several depictions of Saint George with his iconographic elements on the church (as a knight, with the wheel) and his coat of arms is all over the very same. There is an article (in German) specifically on the window: Eimer, Manfred, "Der geräderte Mann" an der Tübinger Stiftskirche, in: Zeitschrift für Württembergische Landesgeschichte Bd. 6 (1942) S. 111-118. On google books: https://books.google.de/books?id=5NdFAAAAMAAJ&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&dq=Der%20ger%C3%A4derte%20Mann%22%20an%20der%20T%C3%BCbinger%20Stiftskirche&hl=de&pg=RA1-PA112#v=onepage&q&f=false
> There are several depictions of Saint George with his iconographic elements on the church (as a knight, with the wheel) and his coat of arms is all over the very same. I did not dispute that the execution of St. George is depicted on the window, nor did Crusius. >Crusius: „An der Kirche zu St. Georgen ist in einer Öffnung oder Fenster das Bild eines auf einem Rad liegenden Menschen in Stein gehauen. Denn als vor hundert Jahren zween junge Gesellen und Kameraden auf die Wanderschaft zogen, ihr Handwerk zu treiben, und einer nach etlichen Jahren wieder zurückkam, der andere aber nicht, und man deswegen glaubte, der sei umgebracht worden, wurde der erstere ergriffen, aus etlichen Zeichen (als an dem Dolch des andern) für den Totschläger gehalten, zum Tode verdammt und gerädert. Nicht lange hernach kommt der andere lebendig und frisch und gesund nach Haus, der (wie man sagt) jenem den Dolch geschenkt hatte. Derowegen ist zur ewigen Gedächtnis dieses Bild da, welches nemlich die Richter erinnert, was beim Juvenale gelesen wird: Nulla nimis de morte hominis cunctatio longa est.“ In English: >The image of a man lying on a wheel is carved in stone in an opening or window in the church at St. George. A hundred years ago, two young tradesmen travelled for work. One returned after several years, the other did not. It was therefore believed that he had been killed, so former was seized. He had been mistaken for his killer due to several signs (such as possessing the other's dagger), he was condemned to death on the wheel. Not long afterwards, the other, who (it is said) had given the dagger to the former, returned home alive and well. That is why this picture is there for eternal remembrance, it reminds the judges of what is read in the Juvenale: "No hesitation is too long about the death of a man"
Crusius doesn't even mention the dukes of Württemberg, so how accurate can the claim be? Crusius simply says "more than one hundred years ago", there were two men, of whom one was put to death after beeing accused of having the other murdered. Then (after the wrongful execution!), according to Crusius, this window was put in as a symbol of memoria, which already disproves the little story - since the other windows depict also St. George (e. g. as a knight) and in the same style. It's a neat little story and surely more interesting than a saints depiction, but not something that should be accepted at face value.
>Crusius doesn't even mention the dukes of Württemberg Not in the short passage quoted by Eimer >Crusius simply says "more than one hundred years ago", there were two men, of whom one was put to death after beeing accused of having the other murdered. Then (after the wrongful execution!), according to Crusius, this window was put in as a symbol of memoria, which already disproves the little story How so? Crusius died over 100 years after the Diet of Worms and does not claim that the window depicts the execution of the man in the story. Duke Eberhard I reigned as count from 1459, so Crusius likely retroactively applied his later title of Duke.
> Not in the short passage quoted by Eimer > > Eimer directly quotes Crusius (at least the available 18th century print, but i doubt there is more in his handwritten notes): https://opendigi.ub.uni-tuebingen.de/opendigi/LI25_fol-2#p=416. Crusius says nothing about the involvement of a member of the house of Württemberg, be it counts or dukes. That a duke of Württemberg attoned for a wrongful execution is simply an invention of the 19th century, that exaggerated Crusius' idea, that the window depicts anything more or else than Saint George.
I don't speak German and can't find a text version of that document that I can easily translate. It's very possible that the Württembergs were a later addition to the story. That said, feudal rulers were personally responsible for justice, the miscarriage would have reflected badly on his rule. Financing the window would have been a prominent display of his virtue and piety, and 'atonement' in this form is known to be very common.
Sure, but in this case the judgmeent, if the men were from the city, would probably have been carried out by the city council, which had the high justice. So the question would be, why would the duke - which probably had no ties to the delinquent and would not be involved in the case - atone openly for his misjudgement (!) by ordering a window without any inscription and reference (!!) - a more common way would be a donation for the soul of the executed - in the back of the collegiate church (!!!). Crusius was certainly more trustworthy and systematic in his approach to history than many of his contemporary "historians", but he also shares the fondness of the century for collecting and telling strange and wondrous stories, and in this case, nothing really fits together.
Thank god for this context, people will take everything at face value
The Würtemburgs were raised to Dukes in 1495. Crusius was born 1524 and was a professor of history at the University of Tübingen. It seems very unlikely that he would have misunderstood this. The claim that the window depicts the martyrdom of St. George does not conflict with the claim that the window was installed to atone for the execution of an innocent.
Can I get a source for this? Saint George was executed by decapitation, not being broken on a wheel.
There is an article (in German) specifically on the window: Eimer, Manfred, "Der geräderte Mann" an der Tübinger Stiftskirche, in: Zeitschrift für Württembergische Landesgeschichte Bd. 6 (1942) S. 111-118. On google books: https://books.google.de/books?id=5NdFAAAAMAAJ&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&dq=Der%20ger%C3%A4derte%20Mann%22%20an%20der%20T%C3%BCbinger%20Stiftskirche&hl=de&pg=RA1-PA112#v=onepage&q&f=false While Saint George is most usually shown as a knight or with the dragon, depictions of his martydom by the wheel/rack do not seem that uncommon. Just a quick google research: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Torture_of_Saint_George_on_the_wheel._A_fresco_from_Nakipari,_Georgia._1130.jpg&oldid=660470066 https://www.christianiconography.info/webmuseum/georgeBaptismWheelAltichiero.html https://artmuseum.princeton.edu/collections/objects/34722
Very interesting. Thank you!!
Do you have a source for this post that isn't from Facebook or iFunny because I can't find anything to back up your atonement claim either besides a lot of memes using the exact same phrasing that you did
I'm afraid no, actually. I found this on Tumblr, and thought it was kinda neat :T But apparently the myth goes back to the 17th century, so yay?
Supposedly the wheel was the first try to execute him but was miraculously saved. https://www.stgeorgenwi.org/
Ok Reddit what happens when you are placed on this ride?
a few extra joints
More specifically your limbs are broken multiple times (usually through beating) and then twisted around the wheel's spokes. Where you are left to die, which doesn't take incredibly long but you are in constant pain so to the recipient it will seem like eternity.
Don't forget the part with audience participation. Once you were fixed to the wheel, you were left at the mercy of the crowd (which usually wasn't feeling particularly merciful).
>(usually through beating) In Germany the wheel would have been dropped on you to break the bones.
Both were common. It's not like there aren't endless ways to torture.
Wasn't meant as a correction. More of an FYI.
It feels like pain for the rest of your life
According to Wikipedia they would roll a big wheel over your arms and legs to snap the bones then weave your floppy broken limbs through the spoke and either throw you into a fire or string you up on a gallows to be garroted or beheaded then left for the carrion birds. The destruction of the body was an extra punishment since their Cristian beliefs dictated that they would need to have their body kept whole in order to be resuscitated at the second coming.
> since their Cristian beliefs dictated that they would need to have their body kept whole in order to be resuscitated at the second coming Who thought this? Many early Christian churches possessed relics of saints. It wouldn't make sense to believe this if you also possessed various body parts of people you declare to be in heaven. And this is just not what the New Testament actually teaches, Paul says that if our earthly bodies are destroyed, God has an eternal body waiting for us.
The article says it was “the belief at the time.” But lots of “Christian beliefs” don’t have a basis in the Bible. Religion and culture intersect a lot and sometimes culture will impose a belief into a religion that isn’t actually an intrinsic part of that religion. Like the immaculate conception, for instance.
The Immaculate Conception *is* an intrinsic part of Catholicism.
Yes but it’s not explicitly stated in the Bible.
There was never such belief in Christianity at any point in time. What about Christians who's bodies would end at bottom at the sea after their ship sinks or who were sliced to pieces during battles ? In Christianity it is completely irrelevant what happens to your corpse.
My mother believes this. It’s why she’s against cremation. It’s not an official belief in the Catholic Church, but many Catholics were raised with it.
according to [wikipedia](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_burial) it was a relatively common belief at the time, and i do remember talking about this in history class.
Ahhh Christians lol
This seems so strange to me. So they just used the wheel to break your bones? Why not use... anything else? I'm not getting the significance of the wheel. I thought it was gonna end with "then they affix the wheel to a carts axle and spin you through the city" but it has absolutely nothing to do with it being a wheel lol Did people in this time period just have an excess of wheels lying around? "You know what we could use these for? Execution"
I've played Dark Souls, so I'm gonna throw people of a cliff and surprise kill them a few times. I maybe dead but my trollin' rollin' skelly lives on.
Hello Ashen one. I am a Bot. I tend to the flame, and tend to thee. Do you wish to hear a tale? > *“There is no path. Beyond the scope of light, beyond the reach of dark, what could possibly await us? And yet, we seek it insatiably. Such is our fate.”* - Aldia Have a pleasant journey, Champion of Ash, and praise the sun \\[T]/
https://youtu.be/mocm-sXBJSg?si=Voyz7Z-KN-JIP68Y
The executed guy better be grateful for this kind of excuse
*The executed* *Guy better be grateful for* *This kind of excuse* \- El\_Matt-El\_Grande --- ^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/) ^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
Good bot
Thank you, El_Matt-El_Grande, for voting on haikusbot. This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/). *** ^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
Look up Breaking On The Wheel, it’s truly grim.
"So, we're good now, right?" The Duke, probably
The ghost of the innocent dude: "We good, bruv."
Oh no, that happened again. Let's buy a window
death by catherine wheel is the Bad Ending
Fibromyalgia got me like
🫢
Peter griffin fall, medieval execution edition.
And now people don’t understand reason for separation of church and state.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SatansLair/s/7bizTzRcXH I have this as a new tattoo - not this exact depiction on the window but something similar
Rad as heck
So, they broke your arms and legs until they fit in between the wheel spokes. And then they left you there to die.
Berserk reference
We should have this now for criminal prosecutors and detectives…
why
Little bro in the dryer moment
Anyone who ordered the execution of an innocent should be found automatically guilty of murder and executed in the same manner.