It was one of the most brutal and ruthless execution methods used throughout history. Spain and lands which were under Spanish influence often used a garrote to bring the lives of condemned criminals to an end. The garrote itself had an iron collar which wrapped around the neck, and when an executioner tightened the collar, it strangled the victim.
On some devices, even a sharp spike was driven into the neck of the victim. But the method was so horrific that it never caught on inside many other countries, and it was localized to Spain. In this documentary compilation, we look at the different elements of garrote execution and explore the method in detail. One of the most infamous devices ever developed for execution was the garrote machine, a deadly tool used mainly in Spain and its colonies.
This device, which tightened a metal collar around a prisoner’s neck, was not just a method of killing. It became a symbol of state power and control, used for centuries to eliminate criminals, rebels, and political opponents. The word garrote originally comes from the Spanish term garrote vil, meaning vile garrote.
In medieval Spain, a garrote was simply a cord, rope, or piece of cloth used to strangle someone manually. An executioner would loop it around the victim’s neck and twist it with a stick until the person suffocated. By the late Middle Ages, the Spanish authorities were seeking more controlled and official ways to execute people.
Manual strangulation was unpredictable and often messy, especially in public. So, during the 16th century, Spain developed a device to make the process mechanical, the garrote machine. This was a move towards a more standardized, efficient execution, just as the guillotine would later become in France. The garrote machine was a wooden or metal chair with a tall post rising from the back.
At the level of the prisoner’s neck was a sturdy iron collar attached to a screw mechanism. Behind the post was a handle or large screw that the executioner could slowly turn. When the condemned person was seated and strapped in, the iron collar was locked around their neck. Then the executioner would turn the screw, gradually tightening the collar.
Depending on the design, the collar would either strangle the prisoner by compressing the neck and airway, crush the vertebrae at the base of the skull breaking the neck, or do both at once. Some garrotes had a sharp metal spike embedded in the collar or the screw’s head. This spike was aimed at the spinal cord at the base of the skull.
When the screw was turned, it would pierce the flesh and sever the spinal cord. This was considered the quickest form of garroting, as it could kill almost instantly, at least in theory. The executioner’s skill and the condition of the machine mattered a lot. A well-maintained garrote with a sharp spike could break the neck or sever the spinal cord swiftly, causing immediate unconsciousness.
A poorly maintained one might only strangle the victim, leading to a long and agonizing death. Now, garroting was generally done in public squares or in prisons. In Spain, executions were often staged in front of crowds, sometimes as moral warnings or political statements. Here’s how a typical garroting might proceed in the 18th or 19th century.
Firstly, there was the procession of the condemned. The prisoner was led from their cell to the execution site, often accompanied by priests, soldiers, or civil guards. Prayers or last rites were common. Next, there was seating at the garrote. The condemned person was seated on the wooden chair and had their hands tied.
Straps or clamps secured the body to prevent movements. Then there was the fitting of the collar. The iron collar was placed around the prisoner’s neck and locked to the post. This ensured that there was no escape or wriggling free. Then there was the final turn. At a signal, the executioner began to slowly turn the screw at the back.
Depending on the design, this would either tighten the collar or drive the spike into the neck. Then death would come. If the spike hit the spinal cord correctly, death could be almost instant. Otherwise, the victim would be strangled or suffer neck fractures, which could take minutes to kill them. Then there was the aftermath.
Once the condemned was dead, the body was left often on display for some time. In some cases, it would be removed quickly to avoid unrest in the crowd. Spain used the garrote as its official method of execution from the early modern period all the way to the 1970s. It became the primary method for executing civilians, especially after public hanging fell out of favor.
Some notable examples include political prisoners. During the 19th century, Spanish authorities executed several political dissidents, revolutionaries, and anarchists with the garrote. It became a symbol of repression. Also, it was used in colonial use. In Spanish colonies, including the Philippines and parts of Latin America, the garrote was exported as a standard execution device.
Advertisements
The Filipino nationalist Jose Rizal was executed by a firing squad in 1896, but at the time, the garrote was still being used for other prisoners. Now, the last execution using the garrote in Spain was that of Salvador Puig Antich, a Catalan anarchist, and his execution took place on March the 2nd, 1974. His death caused international outrage and symbolized the brutality of the Franco regime.
By the mid-20th century, many Spaniards and international observers saw the garrote as cruel, outdated, and an inhumane method. It was abolished officially after Spain’s transition to democracy in 1978. Accounts of garroting vary. In some cases, the death was reported as instant and painless, especially when the spike design was used.
But other reports describe grim scenes of prisoners gasping, convulsing, and slowly suffocating as the screw was turned. An eyewitness to an 1850s garroting in Madrid wrote, “The screw turned slowly, and the man gave a convulsive shudder. His tongue swelled, and his eyes bulged. The priest held up the crucifix before his failing sight, and within 2 minutes, all was over.
” However, 2 minutes could feel like an eternity for the condemned. In some botched executions, it reportedly took 5 minutes or more for the prisoner to die. The unpredictability of this added to the fear and horror of the garrote. The garrote machine was preferred over hanging in Spain for several reasons. Firstly, it was considered more dignified because the prisoner remained seated rather than dangling.
It was also easier to control the process as there were no misjudged drop lengths or decapitations like in hanging. And it could also be used indoors or outdoors in small spaces, unlike gallows which required height. But above all, the garrote became a symbol of Spanish justice and state power. Like the guillotine in France, it represented an official, bureaucratic way of killing.
It also sent a clear message to the public. The state had a mechanical, impersonal way to execute its enemies. By the 20th century, the garrote was widely condemned by human rights groups. Although Spanish officials argued that it was quick and humane, photographs and eyewitness reports told a different story.
After Francisco Franco’s death in 1975, Spain underwent democratic reforms and in 1978, the garrote was officially abolished as a method of execution. No executions of any kind have been carried out in Spain since then. Today, garrote machines survive only as museum pieces, a chilling reminder of how the state once executed its own civilians.
The garrote machine was a grim innovation in the history of capital punishment. It transformed a manual form of strangulation into a mechanical process, turning execution into something both ritualized and industrial. Used for centuries in Spain and its colonies, it left a legacy of fear, controversy, and political repression.
Though intended to be efficient and even humane, the garrote was anything but. Its victims faced the terror of being strapped into a chair, their necks gripped by an iron collar, and their lives ended by the slow turning of a screw. Today, the garrote machine stands as a powerful reminder of how technology can be used not only to save lives, but also to take them, and of how societies have continually sought to systematize even the act of execution itself.
Used in Spain and its former colonies for centuries, the garrote was a simple-looking but gruesome machine designed to slowly strangle a person to death. Though often presented as a more humane alternative to other punishments, the reality was far more horrific. In truth, the garrote was a method of slow, agonizing, and often botched execution, far worse than you’d think.
To support our channel, please click subscribe. The garrote or garrote vil traces its origins back to the Middle Ages and possibly even earlier. The word itself comes from the Spanish word garro, meaning iron collar or strangling instrument. Early forms of the garrote may have been simply a rope or wire used to strangle criminals or enemies, but over time it’s evolved into a more formalized and institutional tool of death.
By the 18th and 19th centuries, the Spanish garrote had become mechanized. It was officially adopted as a standard method of capital punishment in Spain in 1820, replacing public hangings. Its use spread to Spain’s colonies, including the Philippines and also parts of Latin America. At first glance, the garrote might not appear particularly menacing.
It consisted of a wooden or metal chair to which the condemned person would be strapped. Behind the chair, affixed to the upright support, was a metal collar connected to a screw mechanism. The collar would be placed around the victim’s neck, and then a screw, sometimes tipped with a metal spike, would be turned slowly into the back of the neck or even the spine.
The goal was to crush the trachea or sever the spinal cord. However, there was no guarantee of a swift death. If the executioner turned the screw improperly or too slowly, the victim could be left choking and convulsing for minutes before dying. The lack of precision and the sheer physicality of the method meant that botched executions were certainly not uncommon.
By the standards of the 19th century, the garrote was often described as a modern and more civilized alternative to other punishments like hanging or beheading. It was seen by some as more private, more controlled, and less gory. But these justifications masked the sheer brutality of what it actually entailed.
The process involved immobilizing a conscious human being, binding them to a chair, and slowly crushing their neck with a screw, while fully aware of their impending suffocation or spinal trauma. In some designs, the screw would take multiple turns to fully penetrate the vertebrae, meaning death did not come instantly.
Pain, terror, and panic were all very much part of the experience. Accounts from the 19th and early 20th centuries paint a different picture than the supposed civility of the garrote. Witnesses often described the gasping, gurgling, and spasms as the condemned struggled. Some executions were quick, but many were not.
One particularly infamous garroting occurred in 1906 in Barcelona, when anarchist Salvador Puig Antich was executed. The execution took place after the abolition of the death penalty had been debated across Europe, and the event was viewed by many as barbaric and outdated. In Puig Antich’s case, the garrote was reportedly poorly maintained, and the process failed to break his neck cleanly.
Witnesses said he died slowly over several agonizing minutes, drawing international condemnation. A British observer in the 19th century present for a garroting in the city of Madrid wrote, “There was no sound but the turning of the screw, and then a sudden gasp and the twitching of limbs. It was hideous in its silence, far worse than hanging.
” Now, the garrote wasn’t just a tool of execution. It was a symbol of state power and repression. Spain under the fascist regime of Francisco Franco, from 1939 to 1975, used the garrote as a weapon against dissenters and enemies of the regime. It was a tool of terror used not only to execute criminals, but to make examples of political opponents.
Two of the last garrotings in Spain were particularly notorious. Salvador Puig Antich, as mentioned, and Heinz Chez, a German-born anarchist. These executions shocked much of Europe and were widely covered in the media. In both cases, the executions were seen as politically motivated. Franco’s regime was on the verge of collapse and these executions symbolized its desperation, but also its brutality.
Spain was the last European country to use the garrote. After Franco’s death in 1975 and the transition to democracy, the death penalty was officially abolished in 1978. The garrote was finally retired and its last surviving examples were sent to museums, grim relics of a dark chapter in Spanish legal history.
Today, garrotes or garroting machines can be seen in museums across Spain, including the Museo del Romanticismo in Madrid and the Museo del Ejército in Toledo. Often accompanied by stark wooden chairs and rusted screw mechanisms, these artifacts remain haunting reminders of a machine that presented itself as orderly and modern, but was in reality a slow, torturous death device.
What makes the garrote worse than you’d think is the misleading perception of dignity and also cleanliness it once carried. There was no blood, no rope bands, no decapitation, but this superficial neatness masked a much deeper horror. Victims died fully aware, often unable to scream, their windpipes collapsing under intense pressure, the screw then pushing through muscle and bone.
Death could be fast, but when it wasn’t, it was a slow-motion strangulation, mechanical and intimate. Unlike firing squads or even hangings, which might allow for a relatively quick or impersonal death, the garrote forced the condemned to face their killer just inches away. The executioner, often called the verdugo, had to turn the screw manually, applying just the right pressure to break the neck or crush the windpipe.
Some had to turn it back and start again if they missed the right spot. There was no elegance to this, just brutality masquerading as efficiency. The garrote was one of history’s most deceptive methods of execution, presented as humane, yet rooted in agony. It combined the cold logic of machinery with the raw suffering of a slow death.
Though now relegated to history books and museum displays, its legacy serves as a grim reminder that what is labeled modern or civilized can be deeply cruel. When people imagine capital punishment in Spain, they rarely picture this device, but they should. The garrote wasn’t just a footnote, it was a dominant method of execution there for over a century.
And behind every chair, every screw, and every execution, was a moment of unimaginable terror. The device usually involved the condemned prisoner being seated against a wooden or metal chair with an iron collar placed around the neck. A screw mechanism at the back was then tightened by the executioner, strangling the victim and in some versions breaking the neck.
It was grim, public, and designed to show the power of the state. One striking feature often seen in descriptions and illustrations of garrote executions possibly was the use of a blindfold. To modernize, this might seem like a small detail, but the blindfold had several important purposes. It was used to control the prisoner, maintain order, protect officials, and shape the image of the execution itself.
One of the main reasons blindfolds were used was to calm or control the condemned person in their final moments. Facing execution was terrifying. Many prisoners panicked when brought to the garrote chair. They could see the crowd, the officials, the priest, and the executioner standing behind them preparing the iron collar.
This could cause screaming, struggling, or attempts to resist. A blindfold or face covering removed much of the immediate visual terror. Once the prisoner could no longer see the machine or the people around them, some became quieter or less likely to fight. Authorities valued this because public executions were meant to appear orderly and controlled, not chaotic.
Another reason was to spare the condemned from seeing the final moments of death approaching. In many execution systems, including firing squads and beheadings, blindfolds were sometimes presented as an act of mercy. With the garrote, the victim sat still while the executioner stood behind and then tightened the mechanism.
Knowing exactly when the screw would turn could create unbearable dread. A blindfold denied the prisoner that final sight. It did not remove fear, but it may have reduced the mental torment of watching the executioner prepare to kill them. In this sense, the blindfold could be portrayed by authorities as a humane gesture, even though the execution itself was severe.
The blindfold also protected the executioner and officials from direct eye contact with the condemned. Across history, many executioners described the emotional strain of their work. Even hardened professionals could be affected when a prisoner stared at them, begged for mercy, or cursed them. In a garrote execution, the executioner often worked at extremely close range, standing directly behind the prisoner.
A A created a barrier. It turned the condemned person into a more passive figure and reduced the human connection at the final instance. This made it easier for the machinery of execution to continue without hesitation. Public image was another major factor. In Spain and some former Spanish territories, executions were public spectacles attended by crowds.
Governments wanted these events to reinforce authority. Disorder, visible terror, or emotional scenes could weaken that message. A blindfold helped to produce a cleaner, more disciplined appearance. The prisoner appeared subdued and ready to face their punishment. This mattered greatly in an age when executions were theater as much as they were justice.
Every detail, the chair, the guards, the priest, the reading of the sentence, and then the blindfold formed part of a ritual meant to display control. There was though also a practical reason. Some prisoners moved suddenly at the last second when they saw the executioner reaching for the mechanism. Sudden movement could make the collar harder to place correctly or delay the process.
The garrote relied on positioning. If the condemned twisted or jerked violently, it could complicate the execution. By limiting sight, authorities reduced the chance of last-second reactions triggered by what the prisoner could see. The blindfold therefore served the same purpose as straps, guards, or tied hands.
It made the procedure easier to complete. Religious custom could also play a part. In many Catholic countries, condemned prisoners were accompanied by clergy before execution. The final walk to death often included prayer, confession, and preparation for the soul. When seated, the blindfold could mark the transition from earthly life to judgment before God.
It symbolically separated the prisoner from the crowd and the worldly spectacle around them. Though not always the main reason, such symbolism mattered in older execution rituals. The garrote continued in use for centuries and was still employed in the 19th and 20th centuries. One of the most famous later uses was under the dictatorship of Francisco Franco, when political prisoners and criminals were executed by garrotes.
By that time, public attitudes towards punishment were changing. Many people viewed the device as cruel and outdated, yet some old ceremonial practices, including blindfolding, remained because institutions often preserve ritual long after society changes. In the end, blindfolds in garrote executions were used for several connected reasons.
They helped to control fear and resistance, reduced panic, protected executioners emotionally, improved the public image of the execution, and sometimes reflected religious symbolism. They did not make the garrote more humane, nor did they remove the terror of the condemned person’s final moments. Instead, the blindfold was part of the wider machinery of execution, small in appearance, but important in meaning.
It showed that executions were never only about killing. They were about power, ritual, and the management of death. For centuries, it was used mainly in Spain and parts of the Spanish Empire. Unlike hanging or the guillotine, the garrote killed by crushing or strangling the neck using a metal collar attached to a chair.
One of the strangest and most disturbing features of the device was that heavy iron collar placed around the prisoner’s throat. The iron band was not simply there to hold the victim in place. It was actually the most important part of the execution machine. The garrote usually looked simple. Most versions had a wooden chair fixed against an upright wooden post.
Attached to the post was a thick iron collar that could be locked tightly around the condemned person’s neck. Behind the collar was a screw mechanism operated by a handle. When the executioner turned the handle, the screw tightened the collar and pushed pressure into the back of the prisoner’s neck. The iron collar was used because the garrote depended entirely on controlling the victim’s head and neck.
The neck is one of the most vulnerable parts of the human body. By forcing the prisoner into a fixed position, the executioner could crush the throat, cut off breathing, damage blood vessels, or even break the spine. Without the iron collar, the victim could move around too much and the execution would not properly work.
Iron was chosen because it was extremely strong. A rope or leather strap could stretch or snap under pressure. Iron stayed rigid and allowed the executioner to apply enormous force without the device breaking. The metal collar also allowed the screw mechanism to tighten in a slow and controlled way. Every turn of the handle increased pressure around the neck.
The collar also prevented escape. Executions were public events in many parts of Europe and governments wanted complete control over condemned prisoners. Once the iron band locked into place, movement became almost impossible. Prisoners could not twist away or lower their heads. Even if someone panicked or struggled violently, the collar helped them firmly in position.
Earlier forms of garrote execution had been less advanced. In medieval times, some executions involved simply twisting a rope around the neck using a stick or a rod. These older methods were unreliable. Sometimes prisoners suffered for long periods before dying. The iron collar and screw mechanism turned the garrote into a far more efficient killing device.
During the 18th and 19th centuries, some governments claimed the garrote was more humane than other execution methods. Hanging could go wrong if the rope snapped or the drop was miscalculated. Beheadings with swords or axes could also fail horribly if the executioner missed. The garrote, however, appeared more controlled and mechanical.
Authorities believed the iron collar allowed executions to happen in a cleaner and more orderly manner. In Spain, the garrote eventually became the country’s official method of execution. Different versions existed depending on the social class of the condemned prisoner. Wealthier or noble prisoners sometimes used more decorated garrotes, while ordinary criminals were executed with simpler ones.
Despite these differences, every design relied on the iron collar. Some garrotes were designed mainly to strangle victims by squeezing the throat and cutting off air. Others aimed to kill more quickly by breaking the neck. Certain versions even had a pointed metal spike attached to the screw. When the handle turned, the spike pressed to the back of the neck near the spine.
This could severely damage the spinal cord and cause rapid death. Again, the iron collar was essential because it held the head completely still during the process. Despite claims that the garrote was humane, executions were often horrifying. If the screw was not positioned correctly, prisoners could slowly suffocate over several minutes.
Witnesses sometimes described victims shaking violently in the chair while their faces darkened from lack of oxygen. The iron collar made escape impossible once the execution began. The collar also carried symbolic meaning. It showed the power of the state over the condemned person. Once the metal band closed around someone’s neck, they were completely helpless.
Governments wanted executions to demonstrate authority, fear, and punishment in front of spectators. By the 20th century, the garrotes looked almost industrial with heavy iron parts and mechanical screws. It reflected a time when execution became more machine-like and clinical. One of the last countries to continue using the garrote was Francoist Spain under the rule of Francisco Franco.
Shockingly, the final execution by garrote took place as late as 1974. Today, surviving garrotes are displayed in museums, and they are deeply unsettling objects. The iron collar especially stands out because of its simplicity. It was a cold, brutal piece of metal designed for one purpose alone, to hold a human being still while they were being slowly executed.
>> The Spanish garrote, more formally known as the garrote vil, was one of the most distinctive execution devices in European history. Its most unsettling feature was a metal spike positioned at the back of the iron collar, designed to be driven into a condemned person’s neck.
This spike was not an act of added cruelty for its own sake. Instead, it reflected changing ideas about punishment, technology, and what authorities claimed was a more humane way to kill. Before the addition of the spike, the garrote worked by slow strangulation. The victim was seated, their neck fixed inside of an iron collar, and then screwed at the back, and this was tightened, and then obviously this would cut off air and blood to the brain.
In reality, that process was unreliable. Many victims took several minutes to die, sometimes losing consciousness and then partially waking up again. These prolonged deaths were disturbing to witnesses and embarrassing for the Spanish authorities who ever saw them. By the 18th and 19th centuries, European governments were becoming increasingly uncomfortable with executions that appeared chaotic or excessively cruel.
Punishment was still meant to be final and terrifying, but it was also expected to look controlled and orderly. This tension directly shaped the redesign of the garrote. The spike was added to solve this problem. As the executioner turned the screw, the collar tightened around the neck while the spike was pushed forward into the upper spine or the base of the skull.
If it struck correctly, the spike would crush the cervical vertebrae or damage the spinal cord. This caused immediate paralysis and rapid loss of consciousness followed by death. In effect, the garrote spike turned a slow strangling device into a mechanical neck-breaking machine. Officials argued that this reduced suffering and made executions quicker and also more predictable.
It also removed much of the executioner’s physical involvement, replacing strength and judgment with mechanical force. In 19th century Spain, the garrote was presented as a modern, civilized method of execution. Compared to hanging or firing squads, it was quieter, required fewer personnel, and avoided visible bloodshed.
This mattered in a period when executions were increasingly criticized but still legally and politically defended. The spike also symbolized the state’s authority. Death was delivered not by a sword or a rope, but by a machine, cold, precise, and impersonal. This reflected a broader shift in punishments away public spectacle and towards bureaucratic, state-controlled killing.
Despite official claims, the spike did not always work as intended. Correct placement depended on the position of the victim’s neck and the exact alignment of the device. When misaligned, the spike could lodge in muscle rather than bone, leaving the victim slowly strangled instead of instantly incapacitated.
One of the most notorious examples was one of its final uses with the execution of Salvador Puig Antich in 1974. Now, it is assumed that the garrote malfunctioned and the executioner had to turn the screw repeatedly before death occurred. The prolonged and visibly painful execution shocked anyone who witnessed it inside of the prison and it also drew international condemnation that led ultimately to the garrote not being used anymore.
Incidents like this exposed the flaw at the heart of the garrote’s spike. It promised a clean, humane death but could not guarantee it. Instead, it often combined the worst aspects of strangulation and also spinal injury. Shortly after Puig Antich’s execution, Spain abandoned the garrote altogether and capital punishment itself was eventually abolished.
Today, the garrote’s spike is remembered not as a humane improvement but as a grim symbol of how societies have tried to engineer mercy into systems designed to kill. The garrote shows that even when executions are mechanized and justified as modern or civilized, they actually remain deeply violent and also disturbingly imperfect.
Thanks for watching. If you did find this video interesting, maybe click subscribe. Once again, thank you for giving up your time to watch one of these videos.
