It's the 16th century. You're in the

Marxburg. A castle perched high on the

hillside above the town of Browach. Far

below, the magnificent River Rine

meanders past on its way to the North

Sea.

But you're in no mood to take in the

view. Instead, you're in the grips of

acute psychological anguish. Your head

is locked between two pieces of cold

metal. You can't move and you certainly

can't escape. As you look into the icy,

remorseless eyes of your interrogator,

he asks you once again.

Is there anything you'd like to confess?

You've already given him everything.

You've got nothing left to tell him that

he hasn't already heard. So be it, he

says. And then a sharp, piercing screech

begins. It's the sound of a screw

turning slowly and a mechanism creaking

into life. Now that anxiety is

accompanied by something else, a

blinding, constrictive pain that feels

like the worst headache you've ever had,

multiplied by a thousand, your head is

squeezed as if beneath some immense

weight. You feel as if you're being

buried alive or drowned at the bottom of

the sea. And all the while that

blinding, unrelenting pain remains. Your

cheekbones vibrate under the pressure.

Your teeth and jaw grind alarmingly

against one another. You feel as if your

whole head is about to cave in, like

it's about to implode and collapse, akin

to a ripe pumpkin.

You can't take much more of this. You

are in the clutches of the skull

crusher. one of the most barbaric

entries into the rogues gallery of

torture devices.

If you're lucky, you'll get away with

just a shattered jaw and a permanently

disfigured face. If you're not so lucky,

you'll die in withering agony as your

bones splinter, your eyes pop from your

skull, and your brain is reduced to

slurry. In this video, we're exploring

this horrifying method of interrogation

and brutalization and asking what was

the skull crusher all about? Who was

actually using this nightmarish device?

And most importantly, how much of these

accounts is historical fact, and how

much is just fantasy?

The skull crusher or the headcrusher is

exactly what it sounds like. It's a

medieval and early modern torture

implement designed to exert massive

pressure onto the head of the poor

victim within. The device was built in a

number of different designs, but most

feature the same core components.

There's a small metal cap intended to

fit over the top of the victim's head.

There's the base plate that sits below

the victim's chin, and there's a handle

at the top of the device, which the

torturer will use to inflict unbearable

suffering on his victim. Connecting all

these different components is a system

of metal threads, and all of this

mounted within a robust frame made from

other metal or wood. Once the victim's

head is fitted snugly between the cap

and the base plate, the torturers can

get to work. They will begin with just a

slight twist of the handle. This creates

a downward force driving the metal cap

towards the base plate. It only takes a

small turn of that handle to generate a

huge amount of pressure. Anything

between the cap and the base plate will

be subjected to enormous levels of

force. It's just like a table vice in a

workshop, only in this case, it's the

victim's head that sits between those

cruel jaws. squeezed between the base

plate below their chin and the metal cap

above the victim's skull is quite

literally crushed. The bony cranium will

resist for a while, but once fractures

start to appear in the bone, the head

will simply collapse. There's a fine

line between torture and straight up

execution. Once strapped into the

device, the victim is completely at the

mercy of their torturer. Just a few

twists of the handle can transform the

headcrusher from a method of

interrogation to an instrument of death.

So where did this macab device actually

originate? The team at the Clink Prison

Museum in London suggest that the

headcrusher was used by the Spanish

Inquisition of King Ferdinand and Queen

Isabella from the late 15th century

onwards in their campaign against

religious heresy. Inquisitors would

specifically target conversos or

miroscos, which meant Jewish and Muslim

converts to Christianity. While

conversion was definitely seen as a good

thing in late medieval Spain, some

people who converted would still be eyed

with suspicion. The Inquisition was

designed to achieve a purely Christian

Spain, and so the idea that former

Jewish and Muslim converts might still

be practicing their old ways was not

acceptable. Those suspected of heresy

would be arrested and questioned. If

they didn't provide the inquisitors with

the information they required, they'd be

tortured. This could include a few

rounds with the skull crusher. This

crusher was certain to elicit a

confession, even if the confession was

just a desperate falsehood intended to

make the torture stop. Victims may also

reel off a list of names, giving the

inquisitors plenty of candidates for the

next round of interrogations. Again,

these names were often plucked out of

thin air. Anything to bring that

nightmare to an end. Later on,

Protestants and alleged witches were

also targeted. Many of these targets may

have been subjected to a bit of light

headcrushing. Then, they would surely

confess and be executed. If the skull

crusher didn't kill them first, of

course. However, not everyone agrees

that the skull crusher actually came

from Spain. Authors Daniel Deal and Mark

Donnelly believe that the skull crusher

was a uniquely German device which was

first recorded in 1530 in the Holy Roman

Empire.

Deal and Donnelly say that the device

was also known as the crans meaning the

garland. Another name was Schneiden, but

this is a strange one as Schneiden means

cutting in modern German. The skull

crusher was certainly going to inflict a

lot of damage, but the one thing it

wasn't going to do was cut you. The Holy

Roman Empire used torture in a similar

way to the Spanish Empire. Religious

crimes like witchcraft and heresy could

be investigated using torture as

authorities used a variety of

eyewatering methods to bring about a

confession. But heresy in the Holy Roman

Empire was a bit more complex than it

was in Spain. Ferdinand and Isabella had

a very clear vision for what they wanted

from Spain. One nation united under the

banner of Catholicism. But the Holy

Roman Empire was not a single unified

nation. more of a kind of confederation

of states and following the Protestant

Reformation in the early part of the

16th century some of those states were

Protestant whilst others Catholic. The

peace of Augsburg in 1555 granted a

degree of religious freedom to these

states. So both Protestants and

Catholics had their own designated safe

havens within the Holy Roman Empire.

This should have basically ended the use

of devices like the skull crusher, at

least for heretics, but in truth it

probably didn't. The peace of Augsburg

had fallen apart by 1618, resulting in

the 30 Years War and the deaths of up to

8 million people. If armies could still

do battle over issues as obscure as

transubstantiation, then let's be

honest, states were probably still

torturing people over it, too. There was

also the question of witches. Between

1560 and 1660, thousands of people were

put on trial for witchcraft and sorcery.

Many of these falsely accused

individuals may have been forced to

endure a date with the skull crusher.

Secular crimes like treason and sedition

may also be met with torture in the Holy

Roman Empire. Basically, any situation

in which the state needed information

from you and you were reluctant to give

that information might end with the

skull crusher. In a 2008 article for the

Daily Telegraph, journalist Ailen

Simpson went further. She said the head

crusher was used to mutilate unwed

mothers or women by crushing their teeth

in their sockets and smashing their

bones until their brains were forced out

of their skulls.

However, this doesn't quite ring true

with other accounts of how the skull

crusher was deployed. It's certainly

true that the Holy Roman Empire was a

deeply misogynistic and completely

patriarchal society. And it's also true

that women who conceived a child out of

wedlock would be brutalized and

humiliated. There are records of unwed

women being foggged for their supposed

crimes. But even the princes, lords, and

elect accounts of the Holy Roman Empire

would probably feel that crushing a

woman's skull for daring to have sex

before marriage might even for them have

been a little too much. Also, this was

supposed to be an interrogation device.

Let's remember, not a straightup

punishment. So, what exactly

was the woman supposed to confess? So,

the skull crusher may have been used in

Spain and in Germany during the late

medieval period and right into the early

modern period. But what about the

prisoners themselves? How would all of

this actually felt for the hapless

victim who was subjected to the

headcrusher? The first small twists of

the handle would probably not caused

much physical damage or pain. At this

stage, the skull would have been able to

handle the pressure. In the early phases

of the torture, the victim would feel

that their head was being squeezed in a

vice and eventually this would cause a

rolling dull pain extending right across

the cranium and into the brain. There

would also of course been a sense of

indescribable panic. Even if the victim

had not heard of the skull crushing

before, they would have seen the device

when they entered the torture chamber,

and they would have understood that the

torment had barely even begun and that

things were about to get a lot worse.

The weakest points of the skull would be

the first to experience the truly

damaging effects of the device. This

would have been the mandible or lower

jaw and the teeth. As the torturer

twisted the handle further, the teeth

would be pressed together with an

immense pressure and would shatter in

the victim's mouth. The jaw would

shatter, too, reducing the victim's

lower face to a messy, bloody pulp. At

this point, the torturer might pause.

This wasn't supposed to be a swift

death. It was supposed to be a long,

drawn out process of torture and

torment. Whilst the shattering jawbones

might release a surge of adrenaline,

deadening some of the pain, this

wouldn't last long. All the while, the

feeling of panic and dread would be

ramping up. It's believed that torturers

may have tried to add to the

psychological horror at this point. Some

historians have suggested the deployment

of a small hammer, which the torturer

would use to tap upon the metal cap.

These tiny impacts would feel like

massive blows on the victim's damaged

cranium. They would also create booming

echoes within their skull, heightening

the severe distress they must now be

experiencing. A few more twists of the

handle would be about all a victim could

bear. With the weakest points of the

skull already shattered, further

pressure would cause catastrophic injury

to the facial bones, particularly around

the eye sockets. It's thought that the

eyes might completely pop out of the

skull during the process. Some examples

of skull crater devices even include a

basket which is designed to catch the

errant eyeballs as well as any other

matter that might come pouring out of

the victim's head. The torture might

conclude at this point with the victim's

head and face irreparably damaged,

mangled to the extent that they could

never live an ordinary life again. The

torturer's handiwork would be evident

for as long as the victim lived and

would serve as a startling deterrent to

anyone considering doing anything

harmful to society like worshiping the

wrong god or worshiping the right god

but in the wrong way. Alternatively, the

torture might continue. While torturers

probably did try their best to keep

their victims alive, if they decided the

prisoner was no longer useful, they

could quite simply be killed. Another

turn of the handle would see to this.

With nothing else to crush, the full

pressure of the device would now bear

down on the victim's cranium. As the

skull splined and cracked, the brain

would be exposed and then purate by the

pressure of the cap on the victim's

head. There was no surviving this, but

at least during those final devastating

turns of the screw, the victim would

likely be unconscious, and the torment

of the headcrusher would finally be at

an end. This stomach churning account

gives us an idea of the true horror of

the skull crusher. It shows us what

would have happened if anyone was

actually subjected to it. But the big

question is, was anyone actually

subjected to the headcrusher? Was this

really a torture device that states were

genuinely using in the 15th and 16th

centuries? Well, let's break it down a

little. We'll start with an easier

question. Did the skull crusher really

exist? And this one's actually quite

simple. It certainly did exist and it

still does. Examples of these devices

are found in museum collections around

the world. There's one in the Palatio

deos Olivados in Granada in Spain. And

the medieval torture museum seems to

have three on display in the USA, one in

LA, one in Chicago, and another one in

Florida. In 2008, auctioneer John

Nicholson was invited to the Criminal

Museum in Rudesheim close to Berlin.

After the museum's owner passed away,

the curator's estate decided to sell a

collection of torture implements.

Visiting the museum was an unnerving

experience for Nicholson and he told the

Daily Telegraph newspaper, quote, "There

were these big wooden doors with great

big metal locks and metal bolts. They

opened to reveal a stone staircase

leading to the basement. The basement

was dark and damp, but featured a wide

variety of torture instruments. I had

never come across anything like it

before. It was horrible and intriguing

both at the same time. Inside was a grim

collection of torture devices. Nicholson

found exhibits like the highwoman's

coffin which would display the bodies of

briggins and bandits. And amongst this

collection, he also found a skull

crusher. While a find like this must

have been exciting, Nicholson didn't

have too much hope for the device at

auction. He predicted that it would

fetch somewhere between 50 quid to £100,

which suggests that such items are not

so rare and not particularly sought

after by collectors. So that answers our

first question. The device itself

definitely exists. But just because

something exists in a museum doesn't

necessarily make it a historical fact.

When Nicholson wandered down into that

museum basement back in 2008, he didn't

find just skull crushers and highman's

coffins, but he also found other things

like the spiked torture chair known as

the confessional or the maiden's womb

and the vast humansized chest lined with

piercing barbs known as the Iron Maiden.

Now, the Iron Maiden is one of the

quintessential medieval torture devices

that everyone has heard of or at least

seen, but which no one really knows that

much about. There's a good reason

everyone has heard of this device. The

Iron Maiden has a cool name and it plays

upon some of our deepest human fears

like the fear of small enclosed spaces

and the fear of getting pierced by lots

of little spikes. So, this explains why

it's so famous. But why does no one seem

to know anything about how, where, and

when it was used? And that's because

there isn't anything to know. There is

no evidence to suggest that the Iron

Maiden was ever actually used at all. In

the words of historian Klaus Graph, the

execution tool Iron Maiden is a fiction

of the 19th century. The objects were

adapted to the dreadful fantasies of

literature and legend.

Unfortunately, it's not quite true to

say that the Iron Maiden was never used.

In 2003, one such device was found

beneath the Iraqi National Olympic

Committee in Baghdad. The head of the

Olympic Committee was Ude Hussein, the

sadistic son of the Iraqi dictator

Saddam. According to Time magazine, it

was clearly worn from use, its nails

having lost some of their sharpness. So,

yes, it's possible to torture someone

with an Iron Maiden, but in a medieval

and early modern context, it's just not

real. It didn't happen. So, all of this

leads us to the question, which camp

does the Skull Crusher fall into? Is it

like the rack, i.e. bloody awful and

definitely real, or is it like the Iron

Maiden, which is basically mythology

cosplaying as historical fact? When we

were researching this video, we actually

grew quite suspicious that the Skull

Crusher was in the latter category and

that it was a piece of revisionist

historical fantasy. And this is because

so many accounts of the Skull Crusher

talk in worryingly vague terms, cobbling

together conjecture and assumption to

make something just about plausible. One

museum, which I won't name, describes

how the skull crusher quote symbolizes

the sheer cruelty of Middle Ages torture

techniques. And then the next sentence,

epitomize the gruesome nature of

execution in medieval times. Okay, fine.

But what does this mean? Was it used in

8th century Britain? Or was it used 600

years later in some other part of the

sprawling medieval world? Like with many

accounts of the torture, the museum

gives us no location, no dates, and

definitely no names. Even the more

honest accounts didn't fill us with much

confidence. The Hornman Museum

collection includes the torture chair

reportedly used in Quanka, Spain in the

17th century. This chair includes a

disturbing contraption that looks very

much like a headcrusher. But the

description of the device reads like

this. We know that although many

components are genuine, the chair was

greatly added to in the 19th century to

feed the Victorian interest in gruesome

historical displays. Even the entry in

Daniel Dal and Mark Donny's book begins

with the words, "As far as we are

aware." So much of the evidence is

actually not that convincing. There's a

lot of hearsay going on and a lot of

vague details about how grim and

horrible medieval torture was. Of

course, medieval torture was grim and

horrible, but we already know this.

These descriptions of the skull crusher

don't tell us anything new or anything

useful. Rather than hoping for specific

concrete examples of the torture in

practice, we're going to have to go with

the historical consensus on this one.

And the historical consensus is this.

Yes, the headcrusher torture was indeed

used in Spain and Germany, and it was a

devastatingly effective way to reduce

someone to a gibbering wreck with a

smashed skull. While 19th century

revisionists and hoaxes did add their

own twist to the historical accounts, it

does look like they weren't just making

it up. With the Iron Maiden, later

writers and curators concocted a

horrifying story out of basically

nothing, combining ancient legend with

the general idea that the Middle Ages

was a dark and unenlightened time. With

the Skull Crusher, however, it seems

that these writers and creators were

working differently. They were simply

adding their own seasoning and flavor to

an already spicy piece of historical

fact, which is very, very bad news for

you in your torture chamber on the banks

of the Rine.