Talk:Petty treason

message: The discussion of betrayal reflects a modern perspective rather than the perspective of the day. We cynically regard the harsher punishment as a defense of privilege, but in the legal framework of the day, petit treason was considered more heinous because the lord/husband/master was considered the benefactor of the underling/wife/servant. Some further research and modification of this section to reflect this medieval perspective is, I think, in order. 128.165.87.144 21:31, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Betrayal 

message: I think that the definition is strictly post 1351. I think at common law the definition of petty treason was just as unclear as that of high treason. I seem to remember reading in one of the Pleas of the Crown books (I think it was either East or Hawkins, and I'm not going to look now) that wives had been convicted for attempted murder (compassing death?) and adultery.James500 (talk) 00:03, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have moved the sentence about the 1351 Act further up the article, but if you can cite the definite source for the position before the Act and add that, that would be good. Richard75 (talk) 19:18, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

text: Well done for finding this. It seems there are actually a few errors in this article which will have to be corrected. Richard75 (talk) 20:52, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

text: The thing is that there were so many different crimes which at common law were petty treason or high treason before 1351, that it probably will not be possible to list all of them. Richard75 (talk) 23:35, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition 

message: I have reverted this edit because it appears to me to relate to high treason rather than petty treason. It might contain material that could be added elsewhere (I haven't checked).James500 (talk) 23:44, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Some of it could be added to the article on death by burning, but it has no source.Richard75 (talk) 11:18, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further attention 

message: I am concerned that the author of the Penalty section has a misconception. The article at 3 Feb 2019 states "The punishment for a man convicted of petty treason was to be drawn to the place of execution and hanged, but not quartered as in the case of high treason."
I see that other Wikipedia articles refer to the the process of dragging the condemned to the place of execution as "drawing". If that were the case, would not the expression be "drawn, hanged and quartered" (for High Treason) or "drawn and hanged" for Petty Treason?
I have *always* understood that "drawing" meant the process of disembowelling, as one would say now, to draw a chicken, or to draw a killed deer. This is supported by both Oxford and Chambers dictionaries in their inclusion of "hanging, drawing and quartering" as an illustration of "drawing" indicating disembowelling. The process of getting the condemned to any particular place was not of importance... (You shall be taken to a place of public execution...)
In my understanding (for High Treason), the condemned was hanged (but not until dead), cut down, disembowelled, and then pulled (or if he was lucky, cut) into quarters for display at various sites.
It is gratifying that the real meaning of "drawing" in this context is so unthinkable to other contributors.Allan Kinnaird (talk) 18:44, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: You're probably right: it was discussed last year here: Talk:Hanged, drawn and quartered#Meaning of "drawn". Richard75 (talk) 19:10, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Penalty