futurehistorian1 Posted February 26, 2006 Report Share Posted February 26, 2006 First off id just like to say that im back i used to be a very very active member on this site then kinda forgot about it. Well im back now so heres my question How often did the romans use torture. Did they use itr for reasons other than punishment how often did they use it and what kind of devises did they use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost_Warrior Posted February 27, 2006 Report Share Posted February 27, 2006 According to Roman law, the testimony of a slave was not legal to be used in court UNLESS it had been obtained through torture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M. Porcius Cato Posted February 27, 2006 Report Share Posted February 27, 2006 According to Roman law, the testimony of a slave was not legal to be used in court UNLESS it had been obtained through torture. What do you think the reasoning for this was? To prevent slaves from offering testimony themselves? Whom would this benefit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primus Pilus Posted February 27, 2006 Report Share Posted February 27, 2006 According to Roman law, the testimony of a slave was not legal to be used in court UNLESS it had been obtained through torture. What do you think the reasoning for this was? To prevent slaves from offering testimony themselves? Whom would this benefit? This was limited originally to criminal cases but was later expanded to include other cases such as adultery in the imperial period. Since the testimony of a slave, if lying, could be so instrumental in either helping or harming their masters so severely, only torture would allow the court to assume they were telling the truth. Brutal but effective I suppose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Dalby Posted February 27, 2006 Report Share Posted February 27, 2006 Since the testimony of a slave, if lying, could be so instrumental in either helping or harming their masters so severely, only torture would allow the court to assume they were telling the truth. Brutal but effective I suppose. Effective in producing an answer, but not necessarily in producing the truth. Under torture, I think I would say whatever I believed the torturer wanted to hear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost_Warrior Posted February 27, 2006 Report Share Posted February 27, 2006 Same here, I really don't think that was an effective measure. It was believed to be effective, but a misguided effort. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primus Pilus Posted February 27, 2006 Report Share Posted February 27, 2006 Since the testimony of a slave, if lying, could be so instrumental in either helping or harming their masters so severely, only torture would allow the court to assume they were telling the truth. Brutal but effective I suppose. Effective in producing an answer, but not necessarily in producing the truth. Under torture, I think I would say whatever I believed the torturer wanted to hear. Agreed, I refine my statement to indicate brutal but effective in getting the testimony to match the desired result of the interrogator/torturer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.