How might one go about safe amputations of wings in the Middle Ages?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
1
down vote

favorite
1












I have a species that is born with small wings, that grow to be able to carry them by the magic of handwavium, but they are human in all other respects. It’s the Middle Ages, and the inquisition has started. The church is hunting down my species for impersonating angels. The adults whose wings can carry them are fine, but many parents are opting to remove their children’s wings whilst they are young, as the church is okay with those who renounce the so called heresy. The church is also performing the amputations on any of the angel creatures they find.



How might I limit the deaths and trauma from this procedure?










share|improve this question









New contributor




Amelia Harris is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.























    up vote
    1
    down vote

    favorite
    1












    I have a species that is born with small wings, that grow to be able to carry them by the magic of handwavium, but they are human in all other respects. It’s the Middle Ages, and the inquisition has started. The church is hunting down my species for impersonating angels. The adults whose wings can carry them are fine, but many parents are opting to remove their children’s wings whilst they are young, as the church is okay with those who renounce the so called heresy. The church is also performing the amputations on any of the angel creatures they find.



    How might I limit the deaths and trauma from this procedure?










    share|improve this question









    New contributor




    Amelia Harris is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.





















      up vote
      1
      down vote

      favorite
      1









      up vote
      1
      down vote

      favorite
      1






      1





      I have a species that is born with small wings, that grow to be able to carry them by the magic of handwavium, but they are human in all other respects. It’s the Middle Ages, and the inquisition has started. The church is hunting down my species for impersonating angels. The adults whose wings can carry them are fine, but many parents are opting to remove their children’s wings whilst they are young, as the church is okay with those who renounce the so called heresy. The church is also performing the amputations on any of the angel creatures they find.



      How might I limit the deaths and trauma from this procedure?










      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      Amelia Harris is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      I have a species that is born with small wings, that grow to be able to carry them by the magic of handwavium, but they are human in all other respects. It’s the Middle Ages, and the inquisition has started. The church is hunting down my species for impersonating angels. The adults whose wings can carry them are fine, but many parents are opting to remove their children’s wings whilst they are young, as the church is okay with those who renounce the so called heresy. The church is also performing the amputations on any of the angel creatures they find.



      How might I limit the deaths and trauma from this procedure?







      medical middle-ages winged-humans






      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      Amelia Harris is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      Amelia Harris is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 20 mins ago









      Willk

      91.7k22179391




      91.7k22179391






      New contributor




      Amelia Harris is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      asked 2 hours ago









      Amelia Harris

      446




      446




      New contributor




      Amelia Harris is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





      New contributor





      Amelia Harris is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      Amelia Harris is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.




















          4 Answers
          4






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          2
          down vote













          No idea about how to avoid trauma, but in the Middle Ages there was castration and punitive amputation of hands, none of those must have been pleasant.



          Amputation was done with a tourniquet (a double one if the doctor was good), a swift cut with a saw and then they started with vascular ligatures (tying off blood vessels), covering the stump with a flap of skin. Then, they bandaged the area with linen covered in vinegar to avoid infections. In the worst cases, they used cauterization (closing the blood vessels by burning them), but they knew it was dangerous for the recuperation of the patient.






          share|improve this answer




















          • Useful, but better for cylindrical limbs than wings, which would leave massive long gashes on the back.
            – Amelia Harris
            18 mins ago










          • Useful, but better for cylindrical limbs than wings, which would leave massive long gashes on the back.
            – Amelia Harris
            16 mins ago

















          up vote
          2
          down vote













          Circumcision has been done for centuries, which could be an analog for wings removal. But there are some differences on the procedure to note. While in circumcision you basically cut skin, in wings you have bones.



          While some deaths are inevitable, the proper technique should avoid some of them.



          • Clean the area with clean water and some fortified wine. The more alcohol the better.

          • Use clean and sharp knife, make it red hot moments before the procedure.

          • DON'T, IN ANY CIRCUMSTANCE, CUT THE BONE. Osteomielites is a dangerous and deadly infection.

          • Cut the joint near the body and close the wound with stitches. Boiled stitches.

          • Every day change the dressings, you can clean it with fortified wine and antiseptic herbs to your liking.

          If you get an abscess, open the stitches and drain. Also, start praying, a lot.






          share|improve this answer




















          • That last sentence makes for an interesting plot point. Something like if you die, it's because you were unholy and your god didn't want you to live.
            – John Locke
            1 hour ago











          • This is a good idea on the first point of preventing death but is less useful for preventing trauma, a rather major point due to the hope of causing Stolckhom Syndrome which doesn’t really work if a kid has really bad PTSD because of you.
            – Amelia Harris
            19 mins ago

















          up vote
          1
          down vote













          Amputations are never safe, even with modern medicine. In the middle ages they were often the difference between a fast and painful death from an injury and a slow and painful death from infection, with few survivors.






          share|improve this answer




















          • Unless your surgeon learnt his trade in the army --- they generally had higher success rates, if only because they did more of the procedures than non military surgeons and kind of had an inkling what they were about.
            – elemtilas
            36 mins ago










          • This just says why not, not how.
            – Amelia Harris
            19 mins ago










          • This just says why not, not how.
            – Amelia Harris
            18 mins ago

















          up vote
          0
          down vote













          The safest amputation, in any era, is no amputation at all!



          And the reasoning is simple: assuming by "church" you mean the Church (i.e., the Catholic Church), I find it next to utterly unbelievable that they would so bother with a subset of the population as to necessitate parents torturing and disfiguring their children for the sake of their safety.



          There are many issues I see with the premise:



          • First, it's not a "heresy" to be born with wings. Heresy means a willful choice to believe other than what is accepted as Truth. If you grow up Catholic and learn the basics of catechism and so forth and then decide at some point that you don't like Jesus being God and invent a new religion where Jesus isn't God, that's heresy. And at the time, that could certainly land you in trouble!

          • I really can't imagine any parent would let their child go through that torture! (My own world has winged folk, too -- they would be utterly repulsed by the very notion!). I think most parents would rather hide their children away, send them away to a safe country or leave and go to a different country or region first rather than cut their limbs off.

          • If this is supposed to be the Church (i.e., Catholicism) then I hardly find it convincing or credible that they'd run around trying to round up "counterfeit angels". I also hardly find it convincing that the Inquisition (which of the three varieties?) would
            be so interested in killing these winged people! This smacks more of Dan Brown sensationalism than anything rooted in history, theology or faith.

          • The Inquisitions (there were three over the course of a long millennium) were certainly an embarrassment to the Church, but it was hardly the bloodfest it's made out to be in the popular culture. Their targets were individuals accused of various theological & moral crimes (heresy being the principle one).

          Basically: there's really no need to worry about wing amputations (disarticulations, actually), because the notion is really quite silly in historical context.



          In any event, even if I could suspend disbelief without (intellectually) hurling, all these people really have to do is pick up their kids and fly away from their tormentors!





          share




















            Your Answer




            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            );
            );
            , "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function()
            var channelOptions =
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "579"
            ;
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
            createEditor();
            );

            else
            createEditor();

            );

            function createEditor()
            StackExchange.prepareEditor(
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: false,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            );



            );






            Amelia Harris is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









             

            draft saved


            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f128019%2fhow-might-one-go-about-safe-amputations-of-wings-in-the-middle-ages%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest






























            4 Answers
            4






            active

            oldest

            votes








            4 Answers
            4






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes








            up vote
            2
            down vote













            No idea about how to avoid trauma, but in the Middle Ages there was castration and punitive amputation of hands, none of those must have been pleasant.



            Amputation was done with a tourniquet (a double one if the doctor was good), a swift cut with a saw and then they started with vascular ligatures (tying off blood vessels), covering the stump with a flap of skin. Then, they bandaged the area with linen covered in vinegar to avoid infections. In the worst cases, they used cauterization (closing the blood vessels by burning them), but they knew it was dangerous for the recuperation of the patient.






            share|improve this answer




















            • Useful, but better for cylindrical limbs than wings, which would leave massive long gashes on the back.
              – Amelia Harris
              18 mins ago










            • Useful, but better for cylindrical limbs than wings, which would leave massive long gashes on the back.
              – Amelia Harris
              16 mins ago














            up vote
            2
            down vote













            No idea about how to avoid trauma, but in the Middle Ages there was castration and punitive amputation of hands, none of those must have been pleasant.



            Amputation was done with a tourniquet (a double one if the doctor was good), a swift cut with a saw and then they started with vascular ligatures (tying off blood vessels), covering the stump with a flap of skin. Then, they bandaged the area with linen covered in vinegar to avoid infections. In the worst cases, they used cauterization (closing the blood vessels by burning them), but they knew it was dangerous for the recuperation of the patient.






            share|improve this answer




















            • Useful, but better for cylindrical limbs than wings, which would leave massive long gashes on the back.
              – Amelia Harris
              18 mins ago










            • Useful, but better for cylindrical limbs than wings, which would leave massive long gashes on the back.
              – Amelia Harris
              16 mins ago












            up vote
            2
            down vote










            up vote
            2
            down vote









            No idea about how to avoid trauma, but in the Middle Ages there was castration and punitive amputation of hands, none of those must have been pleasant.



            Amputation was done with a tourniquet (a double one if the doctor was good), a swift cut with a saw and then they started with vascular ligatures (tying off blood vessels), covering the stump with a flap of skin. Then, they bandaged the area with linen covered in vinegar to avoid infections. In the worst cases, they used cauterization (closing the blood vessels by burning them), but they knew it was dangerous for the recuperation of the patient.






            share|improve this answer












            No idea about how to avoid trauma, but in the Middle Ages there was castration and punitive amputation of hands, none of those must have been pleasant.



            Amputation was done with a tourniquet (a double one if the doctor was good), a swift cut with a saw and then they started with vascular ligatures (tying off blood vessels), covering the stump with a flap of skin. Then, they bandaged the area with linen covered in vinegar to avoid infections. In the worst cases, they used cauterization (closing the blood vessels by burning them), but they knew it was dangerous for the recuperation of the patient.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered 1 hour ago









            Alberto Yagos

            4,647828




            4,647828











            • Useful, but better for cylindrical limbs than wings, which would leave massive long gashes on the back.
              – Amelia Harris
              18 mins ago










            • Useful, but better for cylindrical limbs than wings, which would leave massive long gashes on the back.
              – Amelia Harris
              16 mins ago
















            • Useful, but better for cylindrical limbs than wings, which would leave massive long gashes on the back.
              – Amelia Harris
              18 mins ago










            • Useful, but better for cylindrical limbs than wings, which would leave massive long gashes on the back.
              – Amelia Harris
              16 mins ago















            Useful, but better for cylindrical limbs than wings, which would leave massive long gashes on the back.
            – Amelia Harris
            18 mins ago




            Useful, but better for cylindrical limbs than wings, which would leave massive long gashes on the back.
            – Amelia Harris
            18 mins ago












            Useful, but better for cylindrical limbs than wings, which would leave massive long gashes on the back.
            – Amelia Harris
            16 mins ago




            Useful, but better for cylindrical limbs than wings, which would leave massive long gashes on the back.
            – Amelia Harris
            16 mins ago










            up vote
            2
            down vote













            Circumcision has been done for centuries, which could be an analog for wings removal. But there are some differences on the procedure to note. While in circumcision you basically cut skin, in wings you have bones.



            While some deaths are inevitable, the proper technique should avoid some of them.



            • Clean the area with clean water and some fortified wine. The more alcohol the better.

            • Use clean and sharp knife, make it red hot moments before the procedure.

            • DON'T, IN ANY CIRCUMSTANCE, CUT THE BONE. Osteomielites is a dangerous and deadly infection.

            • Cut the joint near the body and close the wound with stitches. Boiled stitches.

            • Every day change the dressings, you can clean it with fortified wine and antiseptic herbs to your liking.

            If you get an abscess, open the stitches and drain. Also, start praying, a lot.






            share|improve this answer




















            • That last sentence makes for an interesting plot point. Something like if you die, it's because you were unholy and your god didn't want you to live.
              – John Locke
              1 hour ago











            • This is a good idea on the first point of preventing death but is less useful for preventing trauma, a rather major point due to the hope of causing Stolckhom Syndrome which doesn’t really work if a kid has really bad PTSD because of you.
              – Amelia Harris
              19 mins ago














            up vote
            2
            down vote













            Circumcision has been done for centuries, which could be an analog for wings removal. But there are some differences on the procedure to note. While in circumcision you basically cut skin, in wings you have bones.



            While some deaths are inevitable, the proper technique should avoid some of them.



            • Clean the area with clean water and some fortified wine. The more alcohol the better.

            • Use clean and sharp knife, make it red hot moments before the procedure.

            • DON'T, IN ANY CIRCUMSTANCE, CUT THE BONE. Osteomielites is a dangerous and deadly infection.

            • Cut the joint near the body and close the wound with stitches. Boiled stitches.

            • Every day change the dressings, you can clean it with fortified wine and antiseptic herbs to your liking.

            If you get an abscess, open the stitches and drain. Also, start praying, a lot.






            share|improve this answer




















            • That last sentence makes for an interesting plot point. Something like if you die, it's because you were unholy and your god didn't want you to live.
              – John Locke
              1 hour ago











            • This is a good idea on the first point of preventing death but is less useful for preventing trauma, a rather major point due to the hope of causing Stolckhom Syndrome which doesn’t really work if a kid has really bad PTSD because of you.
              – Amelia Harris
              19 mins ago












            up vote
            2
            down vote










            up vote
            2
            down vote









            Circumcision has been done for centuries, which could be an analog for wings removal. But there are some differences on the procedure to note. While in circumcision you basically cut skin, in wings you have bones.



            While some deaths are inevitable, the proper technique should avoid some of them.



            • Clean the area with clean water and some fortified wine. The more alcohol the better.

            • Use clean and sharp knife, make it red hot moments before the procedure.

            • DON'T, IN ANY CIRCUMSTANCE, CUT THE BONE. Osteomielites is a dangerous and deadly infection.

            • Cut the joint near the body and close the wound with stitches. Boiled stitches.

            • Every day change the dressings, you can clean it with fortified wine and antiseptic herbs to your liking.

            If you get an abscess, open the stitches and drain. Also, start praying, a lot.






            share|improve this answer












            Circumcision has been done for centuries, which could be an analog for wings removal. But there are some differences on the procedure to note. While in circumcision you basically cut skin, in wings you have bones.



            While some deaths are inevitable, the proper technique should avoid some of them.



            • Clean the area with clean water and some fortified wine. The more alcohol the better.

            • Use clean and sharp knife, make it red hot moments before the procedure.

            • DON'T, IN ANY CIRCUMSTANCE, CUT THE BONE. Osteomielites is a dangerous and deadly infection.

            • Cut the joint near the body and close the wound with stitches. Boiled stitches.

            • Every day change the dressings, you can clean it with fortified wine and antiseptic herbs to your liking.

            If you get an abscess, open the stitches and drain. Also, start praying, a lot.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered 1 hour ago









            Faed

            946214




            946214











            • That last sentence makes for an interesting plot point. Something like if you die, it's because you were unholy and your god didn't want you to live.
              – John Locke
              1 hour ago











            • This is a good idea on the first point of preventing death but is less useful for preventing trauma, a rather major point due to the hope of causing Stolckhom Syndrome which doesn’t really work if a kid has really bad PTSD because of you.
              – Amelia Harris
              19 mins ago
















            • That last sentence makes for an interesting plot point. Something like if you die, it's because you were unholy and your god didn't want you to live.
              – John Locke
              1 hour ago











            • This is a good idea on the first point of preventing death but is less useful for preventing trauma, a rather major point due to the hope of causing Stolckhom Syndrome which doesn’t really work if a kid has really bad PTSD because of you.
              – Amelia Harris
              19 mins ago















            That last sentence makes for an interesting plot point. Something like if you die, it's because you were unholy and your god didn't want you to live.
            – John Locke
            1 hour ago





            That last sentence makes for an interesting plot point. Something like if you die, it's because you were unholy and your god didn't want you to live.
            – John Locke
            1 hour ago













            This is a good idea on the first point of preventing death but is less useful for preventing trauma, a rather major point due to the hope of causing Stolckhom Syndrome which doesn’t really work if a kid has really bad PTSD because of you.
            – Amelia Harris
            19 mins ago




            This is a good idea on the first point of preventing death but is less useful for preventing trauma, a rather major point due to the hope of causing Stolckhom Syndrome which doesn’t really work if a kid has really bad PTSD because of you.
            – Amelia Harris
            19 mins ago










            up vote
            1
            down vote













            Amputations are never safe, even with modern medicine. In the middle ages they were often the difference between a fast and painful death from an injury and a slow and painful death from infection, with few survivors.






            share|improve this answer




















            • Unless your surgeon learnt his trade in the army --- they generally had higher success rates, if only because they did more of the procedures than non military surgeons and kind of had an inkling what they were about.
              – elemtilas
              36 mins ago










            • This just says why not, not how.
              – Amelia Harris
              19 mins ago










            • This just says why not, not how.
              – Amelia Harris
              18 mins ago














            up vote
            1
            down vote













            Amputations are never safe, even with modern medicine. In the middle ages they were often the difference between a fast and painful death from an injury and a slow and painful death from infection, with few survivors.






            share|improve this answer




















            • Unless your surgeon learnt his trade in the army --- they generally had higher success rates, if only because they did more of the procedures than non military surgeons and kind of had an inkling what they were about.
              – elemtilas
              36 mins ago










            • This just says why not, not how.
              – Amelia Harris
              19 mins ago










            • This just says why not, not how.
              – Amelia Harris
              18 mins ago












            up vote
            1
            down vote










            up vote
            1
            down vote









            Amputations are never safe, even with modern medicine. In the middle ages they were often the difference between a fast and painful death from an injury and a slow and painful death from infection, with few survivors.






            share|improve this answer












            Amputations are never safe, even with modern medicine. In the middle ages they were often the difference between a fast and painful death from an injury and a slow and painful death from infection, with few survivors.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered 1 hour ago









            pojo-guy

            6,48511121




            6,48511121











            • Unless your surgeon learnt his trade in the army --- they generally had higher success rates, if only because they did more of the procedures than non military surgeons and kind of had an inkling what they were about.
              – elemtilas
              36 mins ago










            • This just says why not, not how.
              – Amelia Harris
              19 mins ago










            • This just says why not, not how.
              – Amelia Harris
              18 mins ago
















            • Unless your surgeon learnt his trade in the army --- they generally had higher success rates, if only because they did more of the procedures than non military surgeons and kind of had an inkling what they were about.
              – elemtilas
              36 mins ago










            • This just says why not, not how.
              – Amelia Harris
              19 mins ago










            • This just says why not, not how.
              – Amelia Harris
              18 mins ago















            Unless your surgeon learnt his trade in the army --- they generally had higher success rates, if only because they did more of the procedures than non military surgeons and kind of had an inkling what they were about.
            – elemtilas
            36 mins ago




            Unless your surgeon learnt his trade in the army --- they generally had higher success rates, if only because they did more of the procedures than non military surgeons and kind of had an inkling what they were about.
            – elemtilas
            36 mins ago












            This just says why not, not how.
            – Amelia Harris
            19 mins ago




            This just says why not, not how.
            – Amelia Harris
            19 mins ago












            This just says why not, not how.
            – Amelia Harris
            18 mins ago




            This just says why not, not how.
            – Amelia Harris
            18 mins ago










            up vote
            0
            down vote













            The safest amputation, in any era, is no amputation at all!



            And the reasoning is simple: assuming by "church" you mean the Church (i.e., the Catholic Church), I find it next to utterly unbelievable that they would so bother with a subset of the population as to necessitate parents torturing and disfiguring their children for the sake of their safety.



            There are many issues I see with the premise:



            • First, it's not a "heresy" to be born with wings. Heresy means a willful choice to believe other than what is accepted as Truth. If you grow up Catholic and learn the basics of catechism and so forth and then decide at some point that you don't like Jesus being God and invent a new religion where Jesus isn't God, that's heresy. And at the time, that could certainly land you in trouble!

            • I really can't imagine any parent would let their child go through that torture! (My own world has winged folk, too -- they would be utterly repulsed by the very notion!). I think most parents would rather hide their children away, send them away to a safe country or leave and go to a different country or region first rather than cut their limbs off.

            • If this is supposed to be the Church (i.e., Catholicism) then I hardly find it convincing or credible that they'd run around trying to round up "counterfeit angels". I also hardly find it convincing that the Inquisition (which of the three varieties?) would
              be so interested in killing these winged people! This smacks more of Dan Brown sensationalism than anything rooted in history, theology or faith.

            • The Inquisitions (there were three over the course of a long millennium) were certainly an embarrassment to the Church, but it was hardly the bloodfest it's made out to be in the popular culture. Their targets were individuals accused of various theological & moral crimes (heresy being the principle one).

            Basically: there's really no need to worry about wing amputations (disarticulations, actually), because the notion is really quite silly in historical context.



            In any event, even if I could suspend disbelief without (intellectually) hurling, all these people really have to do is pick up their kids and fly away from their tormentors!





            share
























              up vote
              0
              down vote













              The safest amputation, in any era, is no amputation at all!



              And the reasoning is simple: assuming by "church" you mean the Church (i.e., the Catholic Church), I find it next to utterly unbelievable that they would so bother with a subset of the population as to necessitate parents torturing and disfiguring their children for the sake of their safety.



              There are many issues I see with the premise:



              • First, it's not a "heresy" to be born with wings. Heresy means a willful choice to believe other than what is accepted as Truth. If you grow up Catholic and learn the basics of catechism and so forth and then decide at some point that you don't like Jesus being God and invent a new religion where Jesus isn't God, that's heresy. And at the time, that could certainly land you in trouble!

              • I really can't imagine any parent would let their child go through that torture! (My own world has winged folk, too -- they would be utterly repulsed by the very notion!). I think most parents would rather hide their children away, send them away to a safe country or leave and go to a different country or region first rather than cut their limbs off.

              • If this is supposed to be the Church (i.e., Catholicism) then I hardly find it convincing or credible that they'd run around trying to round up "counterfeit angels". I also hardly find it convincing that the Inquisition (which of the three varieties?) would
                be so interested in killing these winged people! This smacks more of Dan Brown sensationalism than anything rooted in history, theology or faith.

              • The Inquisitions (there were three over the course of a long millennium) were certainly an embarrassment to the Church, but it was hardly the bloodfest it's made out to be in the popular culture. Their targets were individuals accused of various theological & moral crimes (heresy being the principle one).

              Basically: there's really no need to worry about wing amputations (disarticulations, actually), because the notion is really quite silly in historical context.



              In any event, even if I could suspend disbelief without (intellectually) hurling, all these people really have to do is pick up their kids and fly away from their tormentors!





              share






















                up vote
                0
                down vote










                up vote
                0
                down vote









                The safest amputation, in any era, is no amputation at all!



                And the reasoning is simple: assuming by "church" you mean the Church (i.e., the Catholic Church), I find it next to utterly unbelievable that they would so bother with a subset of the population as to necessitate parents torturing and disfiguring their children for the sake of their safety.



                There are many issues I see with the premise:



                • First, it's not a "heresy" to be born with wings. Heresy means a willful choice to believe other than what is accepted as Truth. If you grow up Catholic and learn the basics of catechism and so forth and then decide at some point that you don't like Jesus being God and invent a new religion where Jesus isn't God, that's heresy. And at the time, that could certainly land you in trouble!

                • I really can't imagine any parent would let their child go through that torture! (My own world has winged folk, too -- they would be utterly repulsed by the very notion!). I think most parents would rather hide their children away, send them away to a safe country or leave and go to a different country or region first rather than cut their limbs off.

                • If this is supposed to be the Church (i.e., Catholicism) then I hardly find it convincing or credible that they'd run around trying to round up "counterfeit angels". I also hardly find it convincing that the Inquisition (which of the three varieties?) would
                  be so interested in killing these winged people! This smacks more of Dan Brown sensationalism than anything rooted in history, theology or faith.

                • The Inquisitions (there were three over the course of a long millennium) were certainly an embarrassment to the Church, but it was hardly the bloodfest it's made out to be in the popular culture. Their targets were individuals accused of various theological & moral crimes (heresy being the principle one).

                Basically: there's really no need to worry about wing amputations (disarticulations, actually), because the notion is really quite silly in historical context.



                In any event, even if I could suspend disbelief without (intellectually) hurling, all these people really have to do is pick up their kids and fly away from their tormentors!





                share












                The safest amputation, in any era, is no amputation at all!



                And the reasoning is simple: assuming by "church" you mean the Church (i.e., the Catholic Church), I find it next to utterly unbelievable that they would so bother with a subset of the population as to necessitate parents torturing and disfiguring their children for the sake of their safety.



                There are many issues I see with the premise:



                • First, it's not a "heresy" to be born with wings. Heresy means a willful choice to believe other than what is accepted as Truth. If you grow up Catholic and learn the basics of catechism and so forth and then decide at some point that you don't like Jesus being God and invent a new religion where Jesus isn't God, that's heresy. And at the time, that could certainly land you in trouble!

                • I really can't imagine any parent would let their child go through that torture! (My own world has winged folk, too -- they would be utterly repulsed by the very notion!). I think most parents would rather hide their children away, send them away to a safe country or leave and go to a different country or region first rather than cut their limbs off.

                • If this is supposed to be the Church (i.e., Catholicism) then I hardly find it convincing or credible that they'd run around trying to round up "counterfeit angels". I also hardly find it convincing that the Inquisition (which of the three varieties?) would
                  be so interested in killing these winged people! This smacks more of Dan Brown sensationalism than anything rooted in history, theology or faith.

                • The Inquisitions (there were three over the course of a long millennium) were certainly an embarrassment to the Church, but it was hardly the bloodfest it's made out to be in the popular culture. Their targets were individuals accused of various theological & moral crimes (heresy being the principle one).

                Basically: there's really no need to worry about wing amputations (disarticulations, actually), because the notion is really quite silly in historical context.



                In any event, even if I could suspend disbelief without (intellectually) hurling, all these people really have to do is pick up their kids and fly away from their tormentors!






                share











                share


                share










                answered 8 mins ago









                elemtilas

                8,44521844




                8,44521844




















                    Amelia Harris is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









                     

                    draft saved


                    draft discarded


















                    Amelia Harris is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












                    Amelia Harris is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











                    Amelia Harris is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













                     


                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function ()
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f128019%2fhow-might-one-go-about-safe-amputations-of-wings-in-the-middle-ages%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                    );

                    Post as a guest













































































                    Comments

                    Popular posts from this blog

                    What does second last employer means? [closed]

                    Installing NextGIS Connect into QGIS 3?

                    One-line joke