Executioner. That single word can send a shiver down the spine of even the toughest convict. While the condemned usually dominate the headlines, the men and women who wielded the axe, the rope, or the gun have stories that are often just as gripping. Without further ado, let’s explore the lives of the 10 extremely bloody executioners who made history, each one more fascinating than the victims they claimed.

10 Louis Congo

Louis Congo, a freed Black man, rose to the grim post of Louisiana’s official executioner in 1725, holding the role for roughly twelve years. As the sole individual officially empowered to mete out capital punishment and torture in the colony, Congo administered a grim menu of punishments: hanging, severing limbs, whipping, and even the dreaded breaking wheel. In one notorious case, he shattered eight enslaved men on the wheel; in another, he flogged a Frenchman accused of stabbing someone with a knife. For Congo, the color of the condemned mattered not—white, brown, or Black—all faced his relentless discipline.

One might assume that being the exclusive executioner granted Congo a position of prestige in colonial society. In reality, the French viewed the job as lowly and contemptible, relegating him to the outskirts of town as a social outcast. This marginalization left him vulnerable; on two separate occasions, angry slaves assaulted his home in retaliation for his cooperation with colonial authorities.

9 Nabi

Ever have those days when you just want to quit your job? Take a cue from Hajj Abd Al-Nabi, whose devotion to his role as Egypt’s official executioner is nothing short of legendary. As a child, Hajj described himself as a “little Satan,” spending his free time strangling cats and dogs for sport. His parents warned that such tendencies might land him in hell, but the same dark impulse later proved useful when he pursued the executioner’s office.

When he finally secured the position, his superiors issued a single, unusual request: grow a mustache. Hajj obliged at first, but quickly realized that “executing comes from the heart, not the mustache,” and he possessed a heart of stone to match his grim trade.

Hajj claims to have personally carried out 800 executions. He loves his work so much that, even in retirement, he says he would sprint back into duty at a moment’s notice if the state ever needed his services again.

8 Lady Betty

In the serene Irish town of Roscommon during the late 1700s, folk legend tells of a woman named Lady Betty. A single mother, she saw her son leave for the United States to pursue education. Years later, the now well‑dressed and successful son returned to visit his mother. Unable to recognize him, Lady Betty invited him inside, only to stab him in his sleep to steal his belongings.

When the horrific truth dawned on her—that she had murdered her own child—Lady Betty erupted in fury. She was sentenced to death, but on the day of her execution the hangman failed to appear. Sensing a chance, she bargained with the sheriff: if he commuted her sentence, she would take over the gallows and hang the other criminals for free.

The sheriff agreed, and for three decades Lady Betty performed her grim duties with murderous glee. Witnesses claimed she let the bodies swing like pendulums while she sketched each condemned in charcoal. When she finally passed away, her room was reportedly filled with hundreds of charcoal portraits of the people she had hanged.

7 Albert Pierrepoint

Albert Pierrepoint’s ascent to fame as England’s premier hangman was hardly a surprise—he hailed from a lineage of executioners. Yet Albert eclipsed his forebears through sheer skill and efficiency. His victims ranged from ordinary convicts to notorious Nazi war criminals. He boasted of personally executing at least 400, possibly as many as 600, individuals over a career that began in 1932 and spanned more than two decades.

During his prime, Pierrepoint reportedly managed to hang 17 people in a single day. After resigning in 1956 over a fee dispute, he underwent a dramatic transformation, becoming an outspoken campaigner against capital punishment. His resignation even prompted the Home Office to persuade him to return, as officials recognized that he truly was England’s finest hangman.

6 Henri Sanson

Arguably the only family more adept at executions than the Pierrepoints were the Sansons, who dominated French capital punishment for over a century and a half. The most renowned member, Charles‑Henri Sanson, carried out roughly 3,000 executions during the reign of Louis XVI and throughout the French Revolution.

With the invention of the guillotine, Sanson could behead scores of victims daily. Yet, despite his prolific output, he was not a cold‑hearted killer; he expressed genuine remorse for the thousands of lives he ended. His most harrowing experience was executing King Louis XVI himself. Sanson had hoped a rescue might intervene, but none came, forcing him to carry out the monarch’s death.

Ill health eventually compelled Sanson to resign, passing the grim baton to his son Henry, who later achieved fame by executing Marie Antoinette.

5 Antonina Makarova

During World War II, Antonina Makarova transformed from a Soviet volunteer nurse into a notorious executioner for the Nazis. As the German advance swept into Soviet territory, Makarova found herself deep behind enemy lines, captured by the SS, and subsequently appointed the official executioner for the puppet state of Lokot in central Russia—a regime that lasted only a year.

She wielded a machine gun to dispatch approximately 1,500 people, earning the moniker “Antonina the Machine Gunner.” After the war, she married a veteran and settled in Belarus. However, KGB agents eventually tracked her down in 1976. Though she initially denied the accusations, she ultimately broke down and confessed to the killings.

Seeking leniency, Makarova cooperated fully, even guiding investigators to the execution sites. The court showed little mercy; two years after her capture, she found herself on the opposite side of the gun, facing a firing squad herself.

4 Giovanni Bugatti

During an almost 70‑year tenure (1796–1864) as the Papal States’ executioner, Giovanni Bugatti was treated like a rock star. Known as “Mastro Titta” (Latin for “Master of Justice”), Bugatti performed 516 executions with an almost clinical professionalism, sometimes offering snuff to the condemned as a final gesture of empathy.

Bugatti’s executions attracted massive crowds, often whole families gathered to watch. His early methods included hanging and beheading with an axe. For particularly gruesome crimes, he employed quartering or the brutal “mazzatello,” in which the victim’s head was smashed with a mallet before the throat was cut.

After the French introduced the guillotine in 1808, Bugatti adopted it as his preferred method, using it on more than 50 occasions. He finally retired at the age of 85, receiving a lifetime pension from the Pope in recognition of his dedicated service.

3 Franz Schmidt

Serving as Nuremberg’s official executioner from 1578 to 1618, Franz Schmidt carried out almost 400 executions and tortured hundreds more. Yet his memoirs paint a picture of a sober man who performed his grim duties against his will.

The Schmidt family entered the trade after a noble forced Franz’s father—a woodsman by trade—to become the town’s executioner. Franz inherited the mantle because he had no other options. Although the pay should have elevated his status, the profession left his family shunned by society. Nevertheless, Schmidt achieved a degree of respect, even working as a healer on the side.

His perseverance paid off when the emperor granted him citizenship in Nuremberg, restoring the honor typically denied to executioners.

2 Johann Reichhart

Born into a lineage boasting eight generations of executioners, Johann Reichhart’s destiny seemed pre‑ordained. Over a career that spanned three employers and two world wars, Reichhart executed more than 3,000 people.

His first executions took place in Bavaria in 1924 under the Weimar Republic; the job earned him many enemies, forcing him to flee to Holland in 1929. He returned after the Nazis reinstated him in the 1930s, and during their regime he carried out the bulk of his work—an astonishing 2,876 executions—using a miniature guillotine called the “Fallbeil,” which allowed rapid, efficient killings.

After the Allies arrived, Reichhart switched sides, hanging over 20 convicted war criminals at Landsberg in 1946. However, his Nazi Party affiliation later led to his arrest and hefty fines. Personal tragedies followed, including a divorce and the suicide of one of his sons. He spent his final years in a nursing home, passing away in relative obscurity in 1972.

1 Souflikar

The Bostanji gardeners held a crucial role in Ottoman society: besides tending the sultan’s gardens, they were also tasked with executing the condemned. The chief of this group, the Chief Royal Gardener, was responsible for informing and carrying out executions of nobles.

The chief occasionally gave a high‑ranking official—especially a grand vizier—a chance at life by challenging him to a race across the palace grounds. If the condemned reached the finish line first, he was spared; otherwise, death awaited.

Among all the chiefs, Souflikar stands out. During the reign of Mehmed IV in the 17th century, he carried out more than 5,000 executions in just five years. His method was brutally efficient—rather than using tools, Souflikar preferred to strangle his victims with his bare hands.

+ Vasili Blokhin

Although we already mentioned him in a previous list, how could we omit Vasili Blokhin from a roundup of the 10 extremely bloody executioners? Known as history’s most prolific executioner, Soviet Major‑General Blokhin personally shot and killed more than 10,000 people during Stalin’s purges and World War II.

Like any true professional, Blokhin used his own set of German pistols, which proved more reliable than the standard Soviet sidearms. At the height of his career, he could perform up to 300 executions in a single session.

Stalin rewarded him handsomely for his service. Yet after Stalin’s death in 1953, his successor Khrushchev, in a rare moment of sobriety, stripped Blokhin of all awards and privileges. Shamed and disgraced, Blokhin reportedly ended his own life by hanging himself inside his home.

Marc V. is always open for a conversation, so do drop him a line sometime.

The top 10 bloody 20th‑century mysteries still haunt historians, detectives, and armchair sleuths alike. From vanished heirs to unsolved murders, each case carries a chilling aura that refuses to fade with time. Below we dive into the most perplexing riddles that may never see resolution.

Why These Top 10 Bloody Cases Matter

These stories aren’t just grisly footnotes; they reveal how societies grapple with the unknown, how myths grow, and how evidence can evaporate as quickly as the truth. Let’s count down from the darkest to the most enigmatic.

10 Was The Shotgun Man Real?

Early twentieth‑century Chicago was a perilous arena for Italian newcomers who settled in the enclave known as Little Sicily. Within that neighborhood, Black Hand extortion thrived, with countless criminals operating independently yet sharing a common threat: the Shotgun Man, an alleged enforcer who dealt swift, lethal retribution to anyone who defied the rackets.

The menacing figure earned the nickname “Shotgun Man” and was said to haunt the infamous intersection of Oak Street and Milton Avenue, a spot locals dubbed “Death Corner.” According to lore, he would linger at the base of a stairwell, shotgun poised, waiting for an unsuspecting victim to appear before unleashing a hail of bullets and vanishing before witnesses could react.

Over a century has passed since the rumored gun‑wielding specter allegedly stalked Chicago’s streets, yet his legend has only inflated. Some modern accounts claim he claimed more than a hundred lives, and that he could saunter through the city, gun in hand, after a killing without anyone daring to report the crime.

These sensational numbers are likely the result of myth‑making, a common phenomenon when stories are retold through generations. In reality, many of the murders attributed to the Shotgun Man lack corroborating evidence, and some may never have occurred at all. While Chicago was undeniably riddled with crime, the notion of a single, omnipotent enforcer remains unproven.

9 How Did Natalie Wood Die?

Actress Natalie Wood’s untimely demise has been a fixture of Hollywood lore for decades. On the night of November 28, 1981, she boarded the yacht Splendour alongside husband Robert Wagner, co‑star Christopher Walken, and captain Dennis Davern. The following dawn, her bruised body washed ashore roughly 1.6 kilometers from the vessel, near a small dinghy.

Official reports initially labeled the incident an accidental drowning after noting Wood’s elevated blood‑alcohol content and the presence of several prescription medications. The prevailing story suggested she had climbed into the dinghy after a heated argument with Wagner and inadvertently fell overboard.

What many people overlook is that, in 2012, the Los Angeles County coroner amended the cause of death to “drowning and other undetermined factors.” This revision followed a renewed police investigation thirty years later, spurred by lingering doubts and new forensic techniques.

Rumors have long implicated Wagner, especially after the ship’s captain broke his decades‑long silence, claiming the tragedy stemmed directly from a fight between the couple. The captain’s revelations, published in a recent memoir, ignited renewed speculation and accusations that he was profiting from Wood’s demise. Subsequent medical examinations concluded that certain bruises likely pre‑dated her immersion in the water, yet the exact circumstances remain shrouded in uncertainty.

8 Who Killed Bob Crane?

Bob Crane, the charismatic star of the sitcom Hogan’s Heroes, met a grisly end in 1978 when his body was discovered in his Los Angeles apartment, bludgeoned and with an electrical cord looped around his neck. The murder weapon was never definitively identified, though investigators zeroed in on a camera tripod as the likely instrument.

Suspicion swiftly fell on John Henry Carpenter, a friend of Crane’s who dealt in video equipment. Crane’s private life, rife with clandestine encounters that he filmed for personal amusement, intersected with Carpenter’s presence; blood evidence was found on Carpenter’s rental car, intensifying the probe.

Despite mounting circumstantial evidence, prosecutors initially refrained from charging Carpenter due to the lack of concrete proof. It wasn’t until 1992, when DNA technology advanced enough to test the blood, that a formal accusation was lodged. The tests, however, proved inconclusive, and the defense successfully argued that a host of other individuals—ranging from the women featured in Crane’s private tapes to their aggrieved partners—could have harbored motive.

In 2016, a determined news anchor petitioned the authorities to re‑examine the DNA using cutting‑edge methods. The fresh analysis revealed that the blood on Carpenter’s car did not belong to Crane. The revelation stunned Crane’s son, Robert Crane Jr., who then redirected suspicion toward his stepmother, Patricia Olson—the sole beneficiary of Crane’s estate.

7 What Happened Aboard the Carroll A. Deering?

The five‑masted schooner Carroll A. Deering met a baffling fate on January 31, 1921, when it ran aground on Diamond Shoals off Cape Hatteras—an area long dubbed the “Graveyard of the Atlantic.” While the vessel itself remained largely intact, its entire crew had vanished without a trace.

Bad weather delayed authorities from reaching the stranded ship for four days. When officials finally boarded the vessel, they discovered that every crew member, along with personal effects, the ship’s log, navigation tools, and even two lifeboats, were missing.

Because the abandoned schooner posed a navigation hazard, officials ordered it to be scuttled and later detonated to prevent further danger to passing ships.

Multiple inquiries attempted to untangle the mystery. Some theorists posited a mutiny, while others suspected that rum smugglers from the Bahamas had seized the ship. A third line of thought suggested the crew abandoned ship to escape an approaching hurricane.

Adding a political twist, anti‑communist groups of the era floated the idea that Bolshevik agents targeted the vessel. The proximity of the incident to the infamous Bermuda Triangle also inspired supernatural speculation. Ultimately, the investigation was closed in 1922 with no definitive answer, and the crew’s fate remains an unsolved chapter of maritime lore.

6 What Happened To The Lady Of The Swamp?

Margaret Clement was born into wealth thanks to her father’s transition from a Scottish cattle farmer to a prosperous mining magnate in Australia. By the time he passed away in 1890, he had left a sizable fortune for his widow and five children.

Margaret’s early years were marked by affluence. While two of her sisters married and pursued their own paths, in 1907 she, her sister Jeanie, and brother Peter acquired the sprawling Tullaree Mansion in Gippsland, a grand estate surrounded by dense, swampy terrain.

Peter’s marriage and subsequent departure in 1912 left Margaret and Jeanie struggling to manage the property. Their lack of business savvy and agricultural know‑how soon plunged the sisters into financial distress, forcing them into a reclusive lifestyle by the 1920s.

The public first learned of their decline in 1950, after Jeanie’s death revealed the mansion’s dilapidated condition: crumbling walls, missing utilities, and overgrown shrubbery. Margaret, often seen reading mystery novels by lamplight with only her dog Dingo for company, earned the moniker “Lady of the Swamp.”

In 1952, Margaret vanished without a trace. Neighbors Stanley and Esme Livingstone, as well as Margaret’s disinherited nephew Clement Carnaghan, fell under suspicion. Some conjectured that the treacherous swamp claimed her, while others speculated that she may have taken her own life elsewhere, seeking to emulate the dramatic endings of the stories she adored.

5 How Did Eugene Izzi Die?

Eugene Izzi carved out a niche as a prolific writer of hard‑boiled detective fiction set against the gritty backdrop of Chicago. Yet the most puzzling episode of his life unfolded on December 7, 1996, when his body was discovered dangling from a rope tied to a steel desk in his 14‑story downtown office.

At first glance, authorities classified the scene as a straightforward suicide. However, several odd details complicated the narrative: Izzi was clad in a bullet‑proof vest, his pockets contained brass knuckles and mace, and reports indicated a .38‑caliber revolver had been stored in the office.

Friends and family struggled to accept a self‑inflicted death, especially since Izzi was on the cusp of releasing a new novel. The absence of a clear motive deepened the mystery, prompting speculation that he might have feared retribution.

Izzi’s acquaintances revealed that he had recently infiltrated a paramilitary group in Indiana for research, a venture that earned him at least one threatening voicemail. He also authored a scathing article in the Chicago Sun‑Times, denouncing militias and hate organizations, which could have painted a target on his back.

4 Who Was The Zodiac Killer?

The Zodiac Killer remains one of the most infamous serial murderers in American history, chiefly because his true identity continues to elude investigators. For years, many believed Arthur Leigh Allen to be the man behind the cryptic letters and gruesome killings.

Nevertheless, several pieces of evidence undermine the Allen theory: the suspect’s physical appearance did not match the composite sketch, his handwriting differed from the taunting correspondence, and DNA analysis failed to align his genetic profile with the partial DNA extracted from the envelopes.

The case, dormant for decades, was officially reopened around 2007, prompting a fresh wave of investigative effort. Over the subsequent ten years, detectives examined a handful of new suspects, expanding the pool of possibilities.

Three individuals claimed that their fathers were the actual Zodiac. Among them was retired detective Steve Hodel, who had previously argued that his own father, George Hill Hodel Jr., was responsible for the Black Dahlia murder. Additionally, two men—lawyer Robert Tarbox and his acquaintance Randy Kenney—asserted that they had heard confessions from a sailor and a friend, respectively, each alleging that the confessor admitted to being the Zodiac.

Retired highway patrol officer Lyndon Lafferty, part of the amateur sleuth group known as the Mandamus Seven, offered yet another candidate: a former real‑estate agent from Fairfield, California, who died in 2012. The group dubbed him George Russell Tucker, alleging a conspiracy involving Tucker’s wife, an affair with a judge, and a deliberate diversion of investigative focus.

3 What Happened To The Girl In The Green Mac?

On August 18, 1944, six‑year‑old Sheila Fox set off from school in Bolton, Lancashire, only to vanish before reaching home. An extensive search involving police and volunteers yielded no trace of the child.

Witnesses recalled seeing Sheila in the company of a well‑dressed, clean‑shaven man in his mid‑to‑late twenties, described as slim‑built. The press quickly christened her the “Girl in the Green Mac,” referencing the distinctive green coat she wore.

Decades later, a tipster remembered a neighbor digging a hole in his garden on the night of Sheila’s disappearance. Investigators identified the man as 20‑year‑old Richard Ryan, who later faced convictions for rape and child‑assault offenses. Despite this promising lead, police uncovered nothing in the garden.

Subsequent efforts attempted to link Sheila’s case to other contemporary child disappearances, operating under the hypothesis of a single perpetrator. To date, however, no solid leads have materialized, and the mystery endures.

2 How Did Marvin Clark Disappear?

Born in 1851, Marvin Clark vanished in 1926 during a trip from his Tigard, Oregon, home to his daughter’s Hereford Hotel in Portland. His disappearance holds the dubious distinction of being the oldest active missing‑persons case in the United States.

Initial newspaper accounts claimed Clark traveled by stagecoach, only to disappear en route. Later corrections clarified that he had taken a bus, alighting at Portland’s terminal before fading from view.

Over the years, alleged sightings surfaced, but the first concrete clue emerged in 1986 when a John Doe was found in the woods between Tigard and Portland. The remains included period‑appropriate belongings, a revolver, a spent casing, and a bullet wound to the skull, leading examiners to rule the death a suicide.

Clark’s granddaughter, Dorothy Willoughby, suggested the unidentified body could be her grandfather, though DNA technology of the era could not confirm the hypothesis.

After Willoughby’s death in 1991, the case once again cooled. In 2011, renewed interest prompted genealogists to extract DNA from the skeleton, seeking matches among living maternal descendants of Clark. The investigation remains ongoing.

1 What Happened To Dorothy Arnold?

On the morning of December 12, 1910, 24‑year‑old New York socialite Dorothy Arnold set out for a shopping excursion. After strolling along Fifth Avenue, she met friend Gladys King, who later learned that Arnold intended to walk through Central Park. King was the last person to see her alive.

By evening, Arnold’s family recognized her absence and turned to their attorney, John Keith, who urged a discreet investigation. Keith recommended hiring Pinkerton detectives to quietly probe the disappearance without attracting public attention.

The detectives canvassed Arnold’s usual haunts, hospitals, jails, morgues, and even mental institutions, yet found no trace. Some theories suggested she might have eloped with her secret lover, George Griscom Jr., who was vacationing in Florence at the time. Pinkerton agents even traveled abroad, but to no avail.

After six weeks of fruitless searching, the family finally involved the police and publicly announced the case, offering a $1,000 reward. Two ransom notes arrived, both dismissed as hoaxes, as did a postcard allegedly signed by Dorothy.

Speculation ran rampant: some believed she committed suicide due to a forbidden romance or a stalled writing career; others suspected foul play, with her father suspecting a murder in Central Park followed by disposal in the reservoir. A convict even claimed he was paid to eliminate a body matching her description. Another theory posited that an illegal abortion led to her death and subsequent cremation. Despite countless tips, the mystery remains unresolved.

Since 2011, one topic has consistently dominated headlines in the news: the war in Syria has now been raging for over half a decade and is widely recognized as one of the most shameful and bloody civil conflicts in recent history. Yet, as horrific as it is, Syria is not alone. Since the emergence of nation‑states, humanity has witnessed civil wars of staggering brutality. When we look at post‑World War II history, few internal conflicts have matched the inhumanity of the following. Here is our top 10 shameful civil wars that rival Syria’s carnage.

10 2002

At rush hour on July 25, 1995, a bomb detonated in the Paris subway, killing eight people and wounding 150. Before the Charlie Hebdo and ISIS attacks, it was one of the worst terrorist incidents the French capital had ever seen. The perpetrators were not disgruntled French or European nationals; they were Algerian operatives. The bombing was a direct spill‑over from one of North Africa’s deadliest internal wars.

Much like today’s Syrian conflict, the Algerian war ignited when a government refused to relinquish power. The military canceled an election that seemed poised to hand victory to an Islamist party. That pre‑emptive coup sent protesters onto the streets, quickly evolving into a lethal clash between state forces and out‑of‑control jihadists. In a chilling echo of ISIS, the Islamists first targeted Algerian civilians and later French civilians in Paris with improvised explosives. Under the fanatics’ reign, teachers, artists, journalists, and judges vanished. Even fifteen years later, roughly 8,000 innocents remain missing.

On the opposite side, Algeria’s army was equally ruthless. Just as Assad drops barrel bombs on his own people, the Algerian authorities torched entire villages in a frantic hunt for terrorists who often fled weeks earlier. During the “black decade,” both sides committed war crimes, including the murder of newborn infants. By the time the dust settled in 2002, about 200,000 civilians lay dead. For perspective, the infamous Sri Lankan civil war against the Tamil Tigers claimed about half that number over more than double the time.

9 1996, 1999–2003

Throughout the 1980s, Liberia simmered with ethnic resentment. Indigenous President Samuel Doe finally overthrew the Americo‑Liberian elite who had dominated since the nation’s founding, only to promote his own ethnic group above all others. Into this volatile mix stepped Charles Taylor in 1989.

A former preacher who had fled to Libya after being indicted for embezzlement, Taylor trained a guerrilla army, returned, and toppled his old enemy. Most Liberians initially welcomed him… until a group allied with Taylor executed Doe in 1990. At that point, Taylor turned on his allies, igniting a war that engulfed the entire country.

Over the next decade, Taylor would end one civil war, start another, and exacerbate a neighboring Sierra Leone conflict. He even managed to become Liberia’s president, campaigning under the slogan, “He killed my Ma, he killed my Pa, but I will vote for him.” During the two wars, over 250,000 Liberians died—about 7.5 % of the population—and 25,000 were raped.

What made Taylor’s wars stand out wasn’t merely their brutality but their surreal horror. He ruled through terror, employing units like the infamous Butt‑Naked Battalion to frighten everyone. Despite the bizarre name, the battalion was anything but amusing. Children were fed amphetamines, injected with hallucinogens, handed guns, and ordered to kill anyone crossing their path. They fought either naked or clad in lurid women’s wigs and ball gowns.

8 2002

Sierra Leone shares a long, swampy border with Liberia—an almost 300‑kilometre stretch of wetland. Politically, the two nations were tightly intertwined in the 1990s. Thanks to Charles Taylor’s intervention, an insurgency that could have been quelled erupted into a merciless decade‑long war.

The spark was the astonishingly incompetent reign of President Joseph Momoh, a man so corrupt he’d make Putin look like Lincoln. When his regime stopped paying even the army, ex‑Corporal Foday Sankoh raised a rebellion, seizing towns along the Liberian border. Backed by Taylor, they were initially hailed as heroes—until they weren’t.

Within a year, Sankoh’s Revolutionary United Front (RUF) was accused of raping and mutilating civilians. The army was equally reprehensible. Low rations and unpaid salaries drove soldiers to become “sobels”—soldiers by day, rebels by night. In effect, both sides merged into a single terror‑focused force.

Sobels later tortured civilians in hideous ways, even forcing victims to commit cannibalism. Taylor’s financing of the rebels and the diamond‑fuelled proxy wars ensured the conflict had no foreseeable end. It wasn’t until the UN deployed 17,000 troops backed by the British army that the endless terror finally subsided. By then, 50,000 people lay dead, and even today, girls sold into sex slavery during the war still await assistance or justice.

7 1996

During the Cold War, the CIA developed a habit of inserting its nose into Latin America, often with disastrous results. They helped install Chile’s monster Augusto Pinochet and encouraged Argentina’s junta to “disappear” 30,000 opponents. Yet perhaps nothing matches the CIA’s involvement in Guatemala.

In 1954, democratically elected President Jacobo Arbenz legalized the Communist Party, sparking a CIA‑induced panic. The agency responded by engineering a coup that removed Arbenz, replacing him with Colonel Carlos Castillo Armas. Armas was swiftly murdered and succeeded by General Miguel Ydigoras Fuentes, an outright psychopath.

When indigenous left‑wing groups rose against Fuentes, he unleashed a terror campaign few nations have ever witnessed. Civilian suspects were murdered in the night, their mutilated bodies dumped on public roads. He also birthed a culture of murder and abuse within the army that persisted long after his ouster.

In 1999, a UN report reviewing the 36‑year war concluded that 93 % of human‑rights violations were perpetrated by the Guatemalan state. The war claimed about 200,000 lives, most of them civilians. The majority of the dead—83 %—were from the Maya minority, leading many to label the conflict a genocide.

6 Present

The most depressing fact about Colombia’s ongoing conflict—often called the longest current civil war in the world—is that it isn’t even the first war Colombians faced in the 20th century. In the 1940s, a riot in Bogotá sparked death squads from conservative and liberal factions, leading to a wave of murders.

Known as La Violencia, this silent war was marked by extreme brutality. Liberals decapitated conservatives and played soccer with their heads. Conservatives slashed liberals’ throats and pulled their tongues out—a mutilation dubbed the “Colombian necktie.” In total, 200,000 Colombians died in atrocious ways. La Violencia also sowed the seeds for the present conflict.

Fast forward to the 1960s: an uneasy truce banned all parties from Colombian politics except the Liberals and Conservatives. The Communist Party, feeling sidelined, urged peasants to form their own armies. One such group, based in Marquetilla, was bombed into oblivion by the Colombian army. Only 48 survivors remained; they would become the founding members of the left‑wing rebel outfit FARC.

Soon after, other rebel groups sprang up. The Catholic ELN emerged a few months later. The war stayed low‑key until the 1980s, when the cocaine trade entered the picture, making everything messier.

FARC and ELN used drug production to amass millions, recruiting more members and eventually seizing control of one‑third of the country. Simultaneously, figures like Pablo Escobar launched deadly criminal enterprises that often clashed with the rebels. Other left‑wing groups such as M19 emerged, only to find right‑wing paramilitaries hunting them. The Colombian army began committing war crimes, and civilians were caught in the crossfire. By the 1990s, the number of factions, alliances, and gangs in the war was essentially uncountable, similar to Syria today.

To date, the Colombian conflict has killed over 250,000 people and displaced seven million—more than any other war on the planet except for Syria. Fortunately, peace talks with FARC and ELN are underway, offering hope that this protracted civil war may finally draw to a close.

5 1992

One of the most remarked‑upon aspects of the Syrian civil war is that it isn’t really a civil war in the usual sense. It’s an extremely complicated proxy war, pitting Saudi Arabia against Iran and Hezbollah, Russia against Turkey and the West, and Islamic extremism against secular governance. It also includes the Kurdish battle for a homeland.

In the 1980s, another nation was embroiled in a similarly complex civil war. While it lacked the religious element of Syria’s, El Salvador’s conflict involved a comparably massive number of outside players, each pushing their own agendas.

The war’s source was a clash between the Marxist rebel group FMLN and the right‑wing government after a 1979 coup that saw the government shooting down protestors. It quickly morphed into a larger ideological battle over land, freedom of expression, and the plight of the poor. Behind the scenes, the conflict became a proxy battleground.

Because the war unfolded during the Cold War, the FMLN received official backing from the Soviet Union, though the Russians largely kept their distance. The real supporters were Cuba and Nicaragua, pushing for a socialist revolution akin to their own. Opposing them was the United States, terrified of Central America turning “red.” Costa Rica, Mexico, and even France also stuck their noses in, each pursuing distinct goals.

The result was disastrous. Approximately 75,000 Salvadorans perished over the decade as government death squads looted and raped entire towns, while the FMLN carried out devastating acts of terrorism. It wasn’t until 1992—after the Soviet Union’s collapse, which sapped Russian and U.S. interest—that the war finally ended. Even today, many murky details of this shameful proxy war remain concealed.

4 1970

When Nigeria first achieved independence from Britain, it was less a viable state than a disaster in the making. The North comprised a series of Muslim feudal states, the South and East were Christian, and an animist kingdom persisted in fragmented form. Four major ethnic groups—the Hausa, Fulani, Yoruba, and Ibo—distrusted one another intensely. Adding to the chaos, the country’s oil reserves were concentrated in the East.

The flashpoint arrived when Muslim Hausas launched a rampage, massacring 30,000 Christian Ibos. Up to one million Ibos fled eastward, where Lieutenant Colonel Odumegwu Ojukwu declared independence, establishing the Republic of Biafra. Oil went with the secessionist state.

The Nigerian military had other plans. When Biafra’s oil fields were recaptured, the fledgling state lost its entire income. Unable to import food, the Ibo people of Biafra endured an apocalyptic famine. In just two short years, one million people died from malnutrition—roughly four times the death toll in Syria since 2011. Many victims were children too young to understand why they were starving.

Eventually, Biafra was reabsorbed into Nigeria in 1970. Yet Nigeria’s troubled history did not end there. Over the following decades, a succession of coups and counter‑coups paralyzed the nation, culminating in the ongoing Boko Haram insurgency.

3 Present

It would be impossible to do justice to all of Myanmar’s internal conflicts in a single article. When the British left Burma in 1948, they abandoned a patchwork of ethnic and religious groups with little in common. No sooner had the national government formed than fighting erupted, and it has continued more or less uninterrupted to this day.

Unlike most civil wars, there has been no single group the government has fought continuously. Initially, major rebels were communists, later replaced by an ethnic Christian insurgency, which was then eclipsed by a broad uprising among all of the country’s diverse factions. Parts of Myanmar split into de facto autonomous states organized along ethnic lines and have remained that way ever since. Because the military junta refuses to recognize them, fighting along their borders has been essentially constant.

Elsewhere, oppressed groups without a microstate of their own have resorted to guerrilla warfare, using terror to attack the government. Adding another layer of complexity, the Rohingya ethnic group has been targeted in an extermination campaign the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum terms “genocide.”

The outcome is one of the bleakest, hardest‑to‑understand conflicts on the planet. Rohingya Muslims have been forced into slavery by Buddhist oppressors, while ordinary citizens have endured security forces that rape and murder with impunity. Simultaneously, different ethnic statelets have forged alliances and fought one another in an unending war. With around 15 rebel groups currently active, a lasting peace in Myanmar seems distant.

2 1972, 1983–2005, 2003–Present, 2013–Present

It’s saying something when a conflict that has claimed half a million lives is the least nasty civil war a country has endured. The first Sudanese civil war erupted before the British formally declared independence on January 1, 1956.

At that time, Sudan was roughly one‑third the size of the continental United States and contained over 600 ethnic groups speaking 400 languages. A religious divide also existed: the Arab‑dominated Muslim North held power, while the black, primarily Christian South felt exploited. Additionally, tensions brewed between black African farmers and nomadic Arab tribes in the West. A half‑hearted attempt at a federal system failed, making conflict inevitable.

The initial war (1955‑1972) lasted 17 years, with rebels seizing swathes of Southern territory, the North launching attacks, and around 500,000 people dying. An Ethiopia‑brokered peace agreement halted the carnage in 1972, but peace was short‑lived. A decade later, the Arab government in Khartoum tried to impose Sharia law nationwide, prompting the South to take up arms again.

In 1989, Omar al‑Bashir overthrew the Arab government in a military coup and immediately intensified the war with the South. His forces deployed helicopter gunships to attack civilian villages and dropped bombs so indiscriminately that aid convoys struggled to reach those in need. By 2003, over two million people had perished, and a new front opened in the West.

In Darfur, resentment toward the government boiled over. Black farmers formed rebel groups, while Arab tribes coalesced into deadly, government‑backed militias. The resulting genocide saw 300,000 massacred in brutal assaults, while the Sudanese army engaged in coordinated mass rapes against villagers. Just as the war with the South wound down, this new conflict erupted. Fast forward to 2016, and it remains ongoing.

Worse still, the conflict never truly ended. When the North and South made peace in 2005, it seemed a victory for humanity. The South voted for independence, becoming the world’s newest state—South Sudan—in 2011. Almost immediately, internal rivalries resurfaced. The two main tribes, the Dinka and the Nuer, which had co‑existed under a unified Sudan, now clashed over power.

In 2013, the Dinka leader claimed the Nuer attempted a coup to oust him, while the Nuer argued the coup was a false‑flag operation designed to trigger genocide against them. Most observers believe both sides simply sought an excuse to fight. Their wish was granted. At the time of writing, the new country is locked in a civil war that the UN estimates has killed 50,000.

1 2001

After that mammoth entry on Sudan’s numerous conflicts, it’s difficult to imagine any recent civil conflict being more complex or multifaceted. Yet one civil war surpasses Sudan—and even Syria—in terms of utter messiness: the disintegration of Yugoslavia.

It’s hard to imagine a more fertile ground for conflict than post‑Tito Yugoslavia. The nation was a patchwork of religious and ethnic differences held together more by wishful thinking than anything else. Serbs resented Croats for siding with fascists in World War II (leading to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Serbs), Kosovars resented Serbs for political domination, and both Croats and Serbs claimed historical rights to Bosnia. When the federation finally began to crumble in 1991, it set the stage for a sectarian conflict almost unparalleled in modern history.

Over the course of five separate wars, the once‑mighty country collapsed into seven new states. The least terrible war was also the first: the Ten‑Day War, a short conflict that saw Slovenia split but resulted in fewer than 70 deaths. If anyone hoped this signaled an easy divorce, they were swiftly disappointed.

When Croatia declared independence in 1991, it triggered a titanic battle. Former comrades from the Yugoslav army found themselves fighting each other in devastated towns that had once been models of ethnic cooperation. Serb forces shelled the ancient city of Dubrovnik and laid siege to Vukovar for 87 days. In response, Croat forces flushed tens of thousands of Serbs out of Eastern Slavonia in an atrocious act of ethnic cleansing. By the war’s conclusion, 20,000 were dead.

But even that paled compared to Bosnia. The three‑way conflict between ethnic Serbs, Croats, and Muslim Bosniaks saw some of the worst war crimes in history. Serb forces laid siege to Sarajevo with snipers, killing nearly 14,000 (including 1,500 children) and committing genocide at Srebrenica, murdering nearly 8,000 Muslim men and boys over a handful of days. Bosniak commanders held Serb prisoners in filthy holes filled with feces and embedded their forces among the civilian population. Croat forces conducted mass rapes in the Lasva Valley. All sides committed war crimes.

By the war’s end, over 100,000 were dead, but the Yugoslavian conflict still wasn’t over. The 1998‑99 war in Kosovo saw ethnic cleansing, mass rapes, organ harvesting from corpses, and NATO jets bombing the Serbian capital of Belgrade. Over 13,000 people died, followed by another 200 or so killed during the Macedonian Insurgency of 2001.

All in all, the Yugoslavian breakup killed around 133,000 and traumatized millions more. It was perhaps the messiest civil conflict since World War II. We can only pray that nothing like it ever happens again.

When you hear the word 10 bloody facts, you might picture modern crime scenes, not medieval warriors. Yet the Mamluks—slave soldiers who seized power in Egypt—crafted a saga drenched in blood, intrigue, and astonishing reversals. Below, we explore ten jaw‑dropping moments that defined their ruthless empire.

10 Bloody Facts About the Mamluks

10 Slave Origins

The Arabic word mamluk translates simply to “property.” The very first Muslim power to institutionalize such slave soldiers was the Abbasid Caliphate in Baghdad, during the Islamic Golden Age. Under Abbasid patronage, the empire experienced a cultural renaissance: Persian scholars translated Zoroastrian treatises on medicine, philosophy, art, and poetry, while Arab scribes adapted Greco‑Roman works uncovered after the Muslim conquest of Egypt.

Even as this intellectual blossoming unfolded, many Arab and Berber rulers in North Africa and al‑Andalus felt the Abbasids were abandoning the holy mission of universal Islam. In the independent realms of Córdoba, the Fatimid Caliphate, and the Ghaznavid Empire, stricter interpretations flourished, leading to heightened persecution of Christians and Jews.

To cement their grip on North Africa and Central Asia, the Abbasids began converting nomadic Turkic peoples from the Pontic‑Caspian steppes. Simultaneously, Christians from the Mediterranean basin and the Caucasus were either converted or captured. Many of these individuals, sold into slavery by impoverished families, were trained as elite cavalry after embracing Islam. Their loyalty lay with the Abbasid caliph in Baghdad—a model later echoed by the Ottoman Empire, which employed its own slave Janissaries to dominate southeastern Europe.

9 Takeover Of Jerusalem

Turkic Muslims proved to be fiercely independent, earning an even more terrifying reputation than their Arab predecessors. In August 1071, the Byzantine Empire suffered a crushing defeat at the hands of the Seljuks—a Turkic confederation that counted seasoned Mamluk veterans—in the Battle of Manzikert. Emperor Romanos IV Diogenes was captured, and the Byzantines never fully reclaimed Anatolia.

Just two years later, Seljuk Sultan Malik‑Shah I seized Jerusalem, doing so with the blessing of the Abbasid caliph. Under his rule, the Seljuks expanded into Mesopotamia, Azerbaijan, Syria, and Khorasan. Though Malik‑Shah fostered learning—supporting poets like Omar Khayyam—his conquest of the Holy Land unleashed brutal massacres that galvanized Christendom against the Turks, setting the stage for Pope Urban II’s call for the First Crusade.

8 Ayyubid Soldiers

Arguably the most celebrated Muslim commander in history, the Kurdish warlord Saladin (Salah al‑Din Yusuf Ibn Ayyub) rose from the shadow of his uncle, Shirkuh—an earlier Kurdish general serving the powerful Turkic ruler of Aleppo and Damascus, Nur ad‑Din. Acting on Nur ad‑Din’s orders, Shirkuh invaded Egypt to halt the Christian Kingdom of Jerusalem’s advance on the fertile Nile delta.

When Saladin came of age, he wrested control of Egypt, dismantling the Shia Fatimid Caliphate and installing Sunni Islam as the state religion. Before his famed clash with England’s King Richard I (“the Lionheart”), Saladin led a ruthless campaign against the Fatimids, cementing the Ayyubid Sultanate’s Sunni identity. The Ayyubid army, which famously recaptured Jerusalem after 88 years of Crusader rule, relied heavily on Mamluk horsemen and infantry. Until its collapse in 1250, the Sultanate leaned on the might and skill of its Mamluk troops.

7 Fighting The Fifth And Seventh Crusades

Even after Saladin’s triumph, European powers never abandoned their appetite for Egypt’s riches. Beginning in 1219, a Crusader army led by Spanish Cardinal Pelagius captured the port of Damietta, hoping to press onward toward Cairo. The force, which included the Knights Templar, ultimately faltered due to supply shortages, forcing a retreat.

In December 1244, King Louis IX of France launched the Seventh Crusade, deploying roughly 35,000 men and a fleet of a hundred ships. Their objective: seize Damietta, Alexandria, and Cairo, then barter these cities for key Syrian strongholds such as Aleppo and Damascus. On June 6 1249, the French seized Damietta, but the campaign sputtered when they failed to take the fortified town of al‑Mansurah, halting any advance on Cairo.

Throughout both crusades, Mamluk soldiers clashed with Western knights and foot soldiers, proving decisive on the battlefield. After the fall of Damietta, the Ayyubid queen Shajar Al‑Durr rose to power in Cairo with Mamluk backing. In March 1250, the Mamluks captured King Louis IX—later canonized as Saint Louis—ransom‑free, demanding 400,000 livres for his release.

6 The Seizure Of Egypt

The Seventh Crusade’s fleeting success deepened political fractures within Ayyubid Egypt. Since Saladin’s death, Mamluk officers had wielded substantial influence, often threatening violence to keep Ayyubid sultans in line. When the formidable Ayyubid queen Shajar Al‑Durr became the undisputed ruler of Cairo, the Mamluks pressured her into marriage.

She wed the Mamluk general Aybak, who thus became Egypt’s first Mamluk sultan. Aybak’s reign ended abruptly when he was assassinated while bathing, but his legacy endured: he founded the Bahri dynasty, a ruling house of Cuman‑Kipchak Turk origin. From Aybak’s ascension onward, Egypt remained under Mamluk sultans—most of whom were of Turkic descent—until the 16th century.

5 The Most Terrifying Warlord

Baibars (also spelled Baybars) stands out as the most infamous Mamluk sultan. His ascent is nothing short of a rags‑to‑riches tale. Born a poor Kipchak Turk near the Black Sea, Baibars saw his homeland overrun by Mongols in 1242, after which he was sold into slavery and purchased by the Ayyubid Sultan as‑Salah Najm al‑Din Ayyub.

Displaying extraordinary martial talent, Baibars rose to command the sultan’s personal guard. His first major victory came during the Seventh Crusade, when his forces repelled King Louis IX at al‑Mansurah. After a personal feud with Sultan Aybak forced him into exile in Syria, Baibars lingered there for several years.

In 1260, Mamluk Sultan Qutuz summoned Baibars back to Egypt, hoping he would lead an army against the invading Mongols—the era’s most feared military machine. Qutuz’s gamble paid off, as Baibars would soon become a central figure in the Mamluk triumph over the Mongols.

4 The Battle Of Ain Jalut

In 1260, Mongol ruler Hulagu dispatched envoys to Cairo demanding surrender. When Sultan Qutuz rebuffed the overture, he ordered the emissaries’ heads displayed on the city gates—a stark warning to the Mongols. Undeterred, Hulagu mustered a massive force in Syria and Palestine, preparing to crush the Mamluk resistance.

While the Mongols assembled, internal strife erupted in Mongolia over the succession of the Great Khan. Hulagu raced back to secure his brother Kublai’s appointment, leaving a 20,000‑strong Mongol contingent under commander Kitbuqa to press on into the Levant.

On September 3 1260, the Mongols met an equally sized Mamluk army near the oasis of Ain Jalut in the Jezreel Valley. Employing a classic feigned retreat, the Mamluks lured the Mongols into a trap, then unleashed their swift cavalry. The Mongol army was shattered, Kitbuqa beheaded, and the Mamluks secured a decisive victory that halted Mongol expansion into the Mediterranean.

3 The Capture Of Antioch

After the triumph at Ain Jalut, Baibars turned his attention to the remaining Crusader strongholds. He and his loyal Mamluk troops assassinated Sultan Qutuz, proclaiming Baibars as the new ruler of Egypt and Syria. Between 1265 and 1271, Baibars, a devout Muslim zealot, launched a relentless campaign against the last Crusader enclaves in the Levant.

In 1268, the Mamluks laid siege to Antioch, the final Crusader bastion in the Holy Land. Despite fierce resistance, the city fell to Baibars. He oversaw a gruesome massacre of its inhabitants, reducing the once‑prosperous metropolis to a desolate settlement, according to French historian René Dussaud.

By 1271, Baibars had also captured the legendary Krak des Chevaliers, cementing his reputation as a Muslim hero in the East and a nightmare incarnate for European Christians. His victories effectively ended the Crusader dream of a permanent foothold in the Middle East.

2 The War Against The Ottomans

Despite sharing Turkic roots, the Mamluks and the rising Ottoman Empire became bitter rivals during the 15th and 16th centuries. The Ottomans coveted Mamluk‑controlled Egypt and Syria to unify the Sunni world under a single caliphate, while the Mamluks viewed Ottoman encroachment as an existential threat.

The first clash erupted in 1485, when Ottoman Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror, fresh from victories at Rhodes and Otranto, turned his gaze toward the Mediterranean. Yet his successor, Bayezid II, proved a less capable commander, resulting in stalemates over Anatolian and Cilician territories.

Fearing Ottoman aggression, King Ferdinand II of Aragon, Castile, León, and Sicily forged an alliance with the Mamluks, supplying them with food and arms until the war concluded in 1491. A year later, the Nasrid dynasty of Granada fell to the Spanish, ending the Reconquista.

Between 1516 and 1517, Sultan Selim I led the Ottomans in a decisive war against the Mamluks, capturing Aleppo, Palestine, and finally Cairo. This conquest ended the Mamluk dynasty’s rule over Egypt and ushered most of the Muslim world under Ottoman domination.

1 Battle Of The Pyramids And Egyptian Independence

Even after losing their sultanate, the Mamluks remained a potent political force in Egypt. The Ottomans kept many Mamluk troops within their ranks, and as late as 1798 a Mamluk bey—Murad Bey—still commanded forces, albeit under Ottoman oversight.

That year, the brilliant French General Napoleon invaded Egypt, seizing Cairo and aiming to dominate the Red Sea and the country’s wealth to fund his European campaigns. Roughly 25,000 Mamluk warriors defended Alexandria and Cairo but offered scant resistance.

The Battle of the Pyramids proved a humiliating defeat for the Ottoman‑Mamluk coalition, yet Napoleon’s hold was short‑lived. Ten days after taking Cairo, his fleet suffered a crushing defeat at the hands of Admiral Horatio Nelson during the Battle of the Nile.

Napoleon’s brief triumph exposed the Ottoman government’s reliance on the Mamluks, many of whom grew weary of serving Istanbul. By 1805, Egypt had effectively achieved independence under Muhammad Ali, an Albanian‑born Ottoman viceroy. Muhammad Ali founded a dynasty that ruled Egypt until 1952, a legacy made possible by the support of Mamluk soldiers and Balkan mercenaries.

When a nation tears itself apart, the devastation can be even more harrowing than wars between states. The 12 bloody civil conflicts of the modern era illustrate how political, religious, and ethnic divides can plunge societies into chaos, resulting in massive human‑rights abuses and stalled progress. Below, we dive into each brutal struggle, complete with eye‑opening facts, casualty figures, and the lingering fallout that still shapes these regions today.

13 List of Most Brutal Civil Wars of Modern Era

What qualifies as the most savage modern civil war? Which recent conflict has left the deepest scars? Below is our countdown of the twelve deadliest civil wars that have defined recent history, each marked by staggering loss of life, widespread suffering, and enduring political consequences.

12 Bosnian War

There are nations that sit on a powder‑keg, waiting for a spark. Bosnia was exactly that in the early 1990s. As the Soviet Union crumbled, Bosnia‑Herzegovina, a multi‑ethnic tapestry, erupted into a ferocious civil war that many human‑rights observers later described as ethnic cleansing on a massive scale.

The former Yugoslav republics declared war, and Bosnian Serb forces primarily targeted the Muslim population in 1992. The conflict raged for more than three years, with casualty estimates ranging from 90,000 to 300,000 lives lost.

Nationalist Croat and Serb militias also swept the countryside, committing acts that fit the definition of ethnic cleansing. The United Nations eventually intervened with air strikes and sanctions, forcing both sides to the negotiating table and culminating in a peace treaty.

11 Sectarian Violence in Pakistan

Pakistan endures relentless attacks on a variety of religious and ethnic groups. Sunnis, Shias, Ahmadis, Hindus, and Christians have all been targeted over the decades. Between 1987 and 2007 alone, sectarian clashes between Shia and Sunni factions claimed roughly 4,000 lives.

The principal culprits identified for these attacks include the Tehrik‑i‑Taliban‑Pakistan (TTP), various Sunni militant outfits, and even branches of ISIS operating within the region.

10 Islamic Resistance and Communism in the Philippines

The Philippines has long been a battleground for two very different insurgencies: a communist guerrilla movement and a Muslim separatist struggle. Both have roots in the martial‑law era of the 1960s and 70s.

The Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) emerged almost simultaneously with the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP). While the CPP sought to overthrow the dictatorial regime, the MNLF fought for autonomy—or outright secession—of Muslim‑populated areas. Most of the fighting has unfolded in rural provinces, and the conflicts persist to this day.

Despite numerous peace talks and treaties aimed at ending the violence, the Philippines continues to grapple with a resilient Muslim insurgency, a growing tide of Islamic extremism, and a thriving communist guerrilla presence.

9 Chinese Civil War

The Chinese Civil War officially ignited in the 1920s, but the two main factions—Chiang Kai‑shek’s Nationalist Kuomintang (KMT) and Mao Zedong’s Communist Party—temporarily united during World War II to repel Japanese invaders.

Chiang, a staunch anti‑democrat, championed a centralized, militarized state, ruthlessly crushing opposition, including communists. Mao, meanwhile, mobilized impoverished peasants from the countryside, rallying them against the KMT’s forces. By the war’s end, the communists emerged victorious, establishing the People’s Republic of China on the mainland, while the KMT retreated to Taiwan.

This protracted struggle claimed an estimated eight million lives, earning its place among the most devastating civil wars of the modern era.

8 Sri Lankan Civil War

In 2011, the United Nations reported that the Sri Lankan Civil War had claimed over 100,000 lives across a 26‑year span. The conflict pitted the government against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), a separatist group seeking an independent Tamil state.

The war began in 1983 and concluded in 2009 when the LTTE finally surrendered. Civilian casualties surged during the war’s final five months, with roughly 40,000 non‑combatants killed.

Even after the fighting stopped, Sri Lanka has struggled to rebuild the rule of law, and investigations into alleged human‑rights violations remain incomplete.

7 Angolan Civil War

Angola fought for independence from Portugal, eventually achieving freedom with assistance from Cuba and the Soviet Union. A socialist government was installed, but soon after, a brutal civil war erupted.

The conflict saw UNITA (the Union for the Total Independence of Angola), backed by the CIA, battling the MPLA (the People’s Movement for the Liberation of Angola). For nearly 27 years, the two sides clashed fiercely, making this one of the longest‑lasting civil wars of modern times.

The war finally ended in 2002 after UNITA leader Jonas Savimbi was killed. A cease‑fire was signed, elections were held, but the conflict left the Angolan economy in ruins and claimed roughly 500,000 lives.

6 The Laos Secret War

The Laotian Civil War, often called the Secret War, pitted the communist Pathet Lao against the Royal Lao Government. The moniker “Secret War” stems from the covert involvement of the CIA, which supplied the Royalists with arms and training.

After the French withdrew from Indochina, the Royal Lao Government assumed power but excluded the anti‑colonial Pathet Lao movement, sparking a brutal conflict. Casualties climbed to an estimated 450,000 in Laos and 600,000 in neighboring Cambodia, while over a million refugees fled the region.

The war also featured the use of chemical weapons, adding another layer of horror to an already devastating conflict.

5 Somali Civil War

Since 1991, Somalia has been engulfed in a civil war that continues to this day. The late 1980s saw President Siad Barre’s unpopular regime crumble under pressure, leading to violent confrontations that accelerated his ouster.

In the 1990s, a new power struggle emerged, with the northern region declaring independence—though it remains unrecognised internationally. The country has become a focal point for UN humanitarian aid, with peacekeeping forces regularly deployed to assist the beleaguered populace.

4 Iraq Civil War

In the wake of the September 11 attacks, the United States invaded Iraq under the pretext of locating weapons of mass destruction. The ensuing chaos sparked a civil war that gave rise to the extremist group ISIS.

ISIS quickly seized key cities such as Fallujah and Mosul, prompting the resignation of Prime Minister Nouri al‑Maliki and triggering massive refugee flows and civilian casualties throughout the region.

3 Boko Haram Insurgency

Boko Haram, a jihadist movement, launched an armed uprising in Nigeria in 2009 against the federal government. By 2012, the group had splintered into multiple factions, with the most violent led by Abubakar Shekau. In 2015, several Boko Haram factions aligned themselves with al‑Qaeda.

Casualties mounted quickly: by 2013, around 1,000 people had perished, and by 2014, deaths surged to over 10,000. The insurgency has since spilled over into neighboring African nations, further destabilising the region.

2 War in North West Pakistan

The conflict in Pakistan’s north‑west, also known as the War in Waziristan, pits the Pakistani state against militant groups such as the Tehrik‑i‑Taliban‑Pakistan (TTP) and ISIS. The hostilities began in 2004 when the government launched operations to root out al‑Qaeda operatives in the region.

What started as a targeted campaign soon escalated into full‑blown armed resistance, with cumulative casualties approaching 60,000. The fighting persists, underscoring the enduring volatility of the area.

1 Spanish Civil War

From 1936 to 1939, the Spanish Civil War stands out as one of the most savage internal conflicts of the modern age. The war pitted General Francisco Franco’s Nationalist forces against the democratically elected Republican government.

The Nationalists received backing from Nazi Germany, while the Soviet Union supported the Republicans. This clash served as a prelude to World War II, foreshadowing the global ideological battles that would soon follow.

Beyond the battlefield, the Spanish conflict illustrates how foreign intervention, ideological extremism, and internal division can combine to create a cataclysmic civil war.

The Ptolemaic Kingdom offers a fascinating glimpse into a world of bloodshed, and the 10 bloody wars that defined it bookend the lives of two iconic figures: Alexander the Great and Cleopatra.

10 The Rise Of The Dynasty

10 Bloody Wars Ignite: The Rise Of The Dynasty

The assassination of Alexander the Great sent the ancient world spiralling into turmoil as his former generals scrambled for supremacy, sparking a half‑century of conflict known as the Wars of the Diadochi—the “successors” wars.

Two rival factions emerged: one championed Alexander’s half‑brother Arrhidaeus, while the other pressed the claim of his unborn son by Roxana, the future Alexander IV. Ultimately, both were installed as joint monarchs, with Perdiccas acting as regent and commander‑in‑chief.

This arrangement was merely a clever ruse for Perdiccas to consolidate his own power. He began eliminating opponents, and at the 323 BC Partition of Babylon he assigned his loyal generals as satraps across the empire.

Ptolemy I Soter received Egypt. He swiftly moved against Cleomenes, a powerful official dispatched to Alexandria to serve Perdiccas, having him arrested and executed. He then absconded with Alexander’s body, burying it in Egypt instead of the Macedonian tomb prepared for the great conqueror.

Perdiccas deemed the theft an act of war and launched an invasion of Egypt, only to fail in crossing the Nile and suffer massive losses. His own officers turned on him, assassinating him in 321/320 BC.

Some scholars argue that Ptolemy could have seized the regency after Perdiccas’s death, but he instead chose to found his own dynasty in Egypt, cementing a new royal line.

9 Three Intrigues, An Execution, And An Exile

Ptolemy I was succeeded by his son, Ptolemy II Philadelphus, yet it was his daughter, Arsinoe II, who proved to be a master of intrigue, ruthlessly maneuvering herself into positions of power wherever she went.

Ptolemy II bolstered his rule through two politically astute marriages to Lysimachus, king of Thrace and a fellow Diadochi. Around 299 BC, Lysimachus wed Ptolemy’s sister Arsinoe II, while the Egyptian king married the Thracian ruler’s daughter, also named Arsinoe.

The Ptolemaic Arsinoe bore Lysimachus three sons, yet the throne already belonged to Lysimachus’s own son, Agathocles. The designated heir was later convicted of treason and executed circa 282 BC—a move many historians attribute to Arsinoe’s machinations to clear the path for her own offspring. This scandal sparked revolts in Asia Minor, and Lysimachus, trying to suppress the unrest, fell in battle.

Arsinoe subsequently married her half‑brother Ptolemy Ceraunus, who sought to strengthen his claims over Thrace and Macedonia. Though she may have plotted against him, the plan failed, and Ceraunus ordered the murder of two of her sons.

Eventually, Arsinoe returned to Egypt. The Thracian Arsinoe—her brother’s wife—was later exiled on accusations of plotting regicide, a charge many suspect was fabricated by the Egyptian queen herself. Not long after, Arsinoe married her brother and ascended as queen of Egypt.

8 A Purge Of Ptolemies

Ptolemaic Egypt reached its zenith under Ptolemy III Euergetes, whose triumphs in the Third Syrian War marked a golden age. The subsequent reign of his son, Ptolemy IV Philopator, signalled the onset of decline, as historians portray him as a weak monarch easily swayed by indulgent courtiers.

Ascending the throne in 221 BC at twenty‑three, Ptolemy IV devoted himself to a life of excess, delegating the administration to his chief minister, Sosibius. The Greek historian Polybius records that Sosibius orchestrated the murders of several close relatives, including Ptolemy’s mother, Berenice II, his brother Magas, and his uncle Lysimachus.

Following the pattern of his forebears, Ptolemy IV married his sister Arsinoe III. After his death in 204 BC, Sosibius and another official, Agathocles, arranged for Arsinoe III’s death, ensuring they could act as regents for the under‑age Ptolemy V.

7 Anything For Power

Numerous members of the Ptolemaic line displayed a willingness to commit ruthless acts to seize power, but few matched the savagery of Ptolemy VIII Physcon.

Physcon endured a protracted struggle for the throne against his elder brother, Ptolemy VI Philometor. In 145 BC the older brother fell in battle, prompting his sister‑wife Cleopatra II to push for her young son, Ptolemy VII Neos Philopator, to assume rulership.

The exact nature of Physcon’s reign remains a point of scholarly debate; some contend he never truly ruled. If he did, his tenure was brief, as Cleopatra was forced to marry him and share power. Once Neos Philopator was deposed, Physcon ordered his execution.

Having secured the throne, Physcon rechristened himself Ptolemy Euergetes, echoing an illustrious ancestor. He wed his niece, Cleopatra III, while still married to her mother—a tangled family web typical of the dynasty.

In 131 BC, Cleopatra II orchestrated a rebellion that forced Physcon to flee Alexandria with Cleopatra III. They spent four years in exile on Cyprus, during which Cleopatra II acted as regent for her son, Ptolemy Memphites, who never came of age because Physcon eventually reunited with his son only to murder him.

Physcon then displayed a gruesome display of power: he severed the boy’s head, hands, and legs, sending the dismembered limbs to Alexandria on Cleopatra’s birthday. Despite these barbaric acts, the siblings eventually reconciled publicly, governing jointly alongside Cleopatra III until Physcon’s death in 116 BC.

6 Violent Ends For Violent People

The brief yet ferocious reign of Ptolemy XI Alexander II stands out as a stark blemish on the three‑century Ptolemaic saga.

He succeeded his father, Ptolemy X Alexander I, in 80 BC and took as wife—also his cousin—Berenice III, who had briefly ruled alone and won the affection of the Egyptian populace.

However, the newly‑wedded pharaoh grew hostile toward his wife. Within three weeks of their marriage, he ordered Berenice’s assassination. The public outrage was swift: an Alexandrian mob stormed the palace gymnasium and killed the young king.

5 Rome Intervenes

Ptolemy XII Auletes claimed the throne in 80 BC, at a time when Egypt had become a Roman client state, obliged to pay a hefty tribute that imposed crushing taxes on its citizens.

In 58 BC, Rome seized Cyprus, and Ptolemy’s brother—the King of Cyprus—committed suicide. The Egyptian populace demanded that Ptolemy either demand the return of Cyprus or renounce Rome’s dominance, but he refused both, prompting a rebellion that forced him into exile.

Seeking refuge, he fled to Rome and lodged with the powerful general Pompey. While in the capital, discussions erupted in the Senate about restoring him to power in Egypt.

A delegation of one hundred Egyptians, led by the philosopher Dio of Alexandria, prepared to present their grievances before the Senate, hoping to secure aid for their ousted monarch.

Yet Auletes leveraged his wealth and Pompey’s connections to sabotage the mission: most of the envoys were murdered—including Dio—while the few survivors were bought off with bribes.

Although violence solved the messenger problem, a divine dilemma persisted. The Romans, in typical crisis fashion, consulted the Sibylline Books, a collection of prophetic sayings.

The Sibylline prophecy warned, “If the king of Egypt comes requesting any aid, refuse him not friendship, nor yet succour him with any great force; else you shall have both toils and dangers.”

4 The March Gabinius

The Sibylline injunction led the Senate to deny military assistance to Ptolemy, yet avarice ultimately overrode the prophetic counsel. Pompey dispatched his lieutenant, Aulus Gabinius, to invade Egypt without Senate approval—a risk the powerful general could afford.

During Ptolemy’s exile, his daughter Berenice IV assumed the throne. She attempted to cement an alliance by marrying Seleucus of Syria, only to have him slain and then wed Archelaus.

Archelaus perished when Gabinius seized Alexandria. The Roman general reinstated Ptolemy, leaving behind a Roman legion to safeguard the restored king, a force later known as the Gabiniani.

Back on the Egyptian throne, Ptolemy ordered the execution of his own daughter. He also plundered the wealth of the realm’s richest citizens to settle the massive debt he owed to Gabinius and Pompey.

Gabinius’s triumph was short‑lived. The Roman populace condemned his defiance of the Sibylline warnings and the Senate, leading to his arrest upon return to Rome on charges of high treason.

Through generous bribery and political maneuvering, Gabinius was acquitted of the most serious charge, though he was later convicted of lesser offenses, exiled, and had his property confiscated.

3 The Murder Of Pompey

In 52 BC, Ptolemy XII appointed his daughter Cleopatra VII Philopator as co‑regent, hoping she would share power with her brother Ptolemy XIII Theos Philopator. Both siblings, however, sought Roman backing.

At that juncture, Julius Caesar was locked in a civil war that would topple the Republic, having just secured a decisive victory over Pompey at Pharsalus.

Pompey, seeking refuge and support, sailed to Egypt, expecting the familiar hospitality his father had once received from Ptolemy XIII. Yet Ptolemy, eager to curry favor with Caesar, chose a different path.

He dispatched a contingent to greet Pompey under the pretense of friendship, but the men seized the opportunity to stab, decapitate, and discard Pompey’s body into the Nile. Ancient sources name two Gabiniani—former tribune Lucius Septimius and centurion Salvius—alongside Egyptian commander Achillas as the perpetrators.

The gruesome act backfired spectacularly: Caesar, presented with Pompey’s severed head and his signet ring, was reportedly moved to tears, expressing disgust at the treacherous murder.

2 War Of The Ptolemies

Whether Pompey’s assassination swayed Caesar remains uncertain, yet the Roman leader threw his weight behind Cleopatra. Lacking sufficient troops for open warfare, Caesar entrenched himself within Alexandria in 47 BC as Ptolemy’s forces, led by Achillas, laid siege to the city.

Another child of Ptolemy XII, Arsinoe IV, entered the fray, asserting her claim to the throne by siding with her brother Ptolemy XIII. She ordered the execution of Achillas, replacing him with her tutor Ganymedes.

Eventually, Caesar received reinforcements from his ally Mithridates of Pergamum, securing a decisive victory at the Battle of the Nile in 47 BC. Ptolemy XIII drowned in the river at the age of fifteen, while Arsinoe IV was first paraded through Rome as a captive and later exiled to the Temple of Artemis in Ephesus, only to be executed at Cleopatra’s behest.

1 The End Of The Dynasty

Cleopatra reclaimed the Egyptian throne, yet Julius Caesar arranged for her to rule jointly with her younger brother, Ptolemy XIV. Their marriage was fleeting; in March 44 BC Caesar was assassinated in Rome. Two months later, Ptolemy XIV died under mysterious circumstances, with historians such as Cassius Dio and Josephus suggesting Cleopatra poisoned him to elevate her son, Ptolemy XV Philopator Philometor Caesar—better known as Caesarion—as the new ruler.

If Cleopatra indeed orchestrated his death, it was to secure Caesarion’s position as pharaoh, proudly branding him as Julius Caesar’s offspring.

With Caesar gone, Cleopatra turned to Marcus Antony, a member of the Second Triumvirate governing Rome. In 34 BC Antony issued the Donations of Alexandria, granting lands and titles to Cleopatra’s children, as well as to three of his own offspring.

Crucially, Antony recognized Caesarion as the legitimate heir of Julius Caesar, a move that enraged the Roman establishment, which saw Antony as abandoning Roman interests for Egyptian influence. Octavian, Caesar’s adopted son, perceived Caesarion as a direct threat.

War erupted between Antony and Octavian, culminating in Octavian’s triumph at the Battle of Actium and the subsequent siege of Alexandria. Antony and Cleopatra allegedly committed suicide, while Octavian ordered Caesarion’s execution.

Following these events, Egypt was annexed as a Roman province. Octavian, now Augustus Caesar, became the first Roman emperor, marking the definitive end of the Ptolemaic dynasty.

Today more than 48 million surgeries are performed in the United States alone, and the sheer volume makes the operating room feel almost ordinary. With 28 million of those being outpatient procedures—meaning patients stroll out the same day without an overnight stay—the knife has become a familiar tool. Yet beneath that familiar veneer lie stories that are anything but ordinary. In this top 10 bloody tour we’ll peel back the curtain on the shocking, fascinating, and sometimes downright macabre beginnings of the surgeries we now take for granted.

10 Year-Old Boy’s Appendix in 1735

Appendicitis—when the tiny appendix swells, inflames, and fills with pus—affects roughly 8% of the population at some point. If the inflamed organ bursts, bacteria and debris spill into the abdominal cavity, a scenario that, left untreated, almost certainly spells death.

The condition has been noted for millennia. As early as A.D. 130, Galen’s anatomical treatises mentioned a painful abdominal ailment, and physicians continued to reference it for centuries. Yet the appendix itself remained a mystery until the late 1400s, and its link to the painful syndrome was only cemented by German surgeon Lorenz Heister in 1711. For countless generations, that 8% lived (and often died) without ever understanding why they suffered.

Understanding the cause, however, mattered less than finding a cure. In 1735, English surgeon Claudius Amyand performed the world’s first recorded appendectomy on an 11‑year‑old boy whose appendix had been pierced by a swallowed pin. The operation was a landmark, and the boy also turned out to have a rare type of inguinal hernia that would later bear Amyand’s name.

That single case delivered two firsts at once: the inaugural appendectomy and the discovery of the Amyand hernia. It would be another 24 years before surgeons began using the procedure routinely to treat appendicitis. Today, roughly 300,000 appendectomies are carried out each year in the United States, sparing millions from the pain and peril of a ruptured appendix.

9 First Brain Surgery: Trepanation Performed On Our Distant Ancestors

The brain sits beneath a delicate covering called the meninges, which is riddled with blood vessels. When a head injury tears these vessels, blood can pool between the brain and skull, creating a subdural hematoma. Pressure builds, threatening to crush the brain and cause death unless relieved.

Enter the burr hole: a small opening drilled into the skull to let the trapped blood escape—a primitive pressure valve. Though it sounds modern, trepanation dates back 5,000 years. Archaeologists have found that 5‑10% of Neolithic skulls bear evidence of such holes, indicating that ancient peoples performed this life‑saving procedure long before anesthesia or antiseptics existed.

But not all trepanations were medical. In southern Russia, twelve skulls uncovered within a 31‑mile radius all featured burr holes in the exact same spot—the obelion, a region near the back of the skull where a ponytail might sit. None of the skulls showed signs of trauma, suggesting the holes were ritualistic rather than therapeutic.

Anthropologist Elena Batieva posits that these individuals were perfectly healthy when their skulls were pierced, likely as part of a dangerous rite. Several of the skulls never healed, indicating the ritual may have been fatal for some. The true purpose of these ceremonial trepanations remains a mystery, locked away in bone.

8 First Biopsy: A Hollow Needle in A.D. 1000

Although the word “biopsy” was only coined in 1879 by Ernest Besnier, the practice predates the term by centuries. The earliest known biopsy was performed by the renowned court physician Abu al‑Qasim Khalaf ibn al‑Abbas Al‑Zahrawi—also known as Albucasis—who lived between 936 and 1013 A.D. He slipped a long needle into a patient’s thyroid gland, extracting tissue to diagnose a condition he called “Elephant of the throat,” a technique eerily similar to today’s fine‑needle aspiration.

Al‑Zahrawi’s medical manuscripts also catalogued the instruments he used, describing hollow needles that served as precursors to the modern tools employed for biopsies, injections, and blood draws. His detailed illustrations reveal a sophisticated understanding of minimally invasive sampling long before the modern era.

7 First Successful Cesarean: Mother and Child Saved In 1794

For most of history, a cesarean section was a last‑ditch effort performed only when the mother was already dead or dying. The operation almost guaranteed the mother’s death, though it could sometimes rescue the infant. Mythology even reflects this grim reality—Greek legend tells of Asclepius being delivered from his mother’s dead womb.

The holy grail of obstetrics was a cesarean that saved both mother and child. While medieval accounts claim successes, the first indisputable case occurred in America in 1794. Elizabeth Bennett, in the throes of a perilous labor, begged her physicians to perform a cesarean. They refused, deeming it fatal for her. Her husband, Dr. Jessie Bennett, stepped in and performed the operation himself, miraculously delivering a healthy baby and preserving his wife’s life.

That groundbreaking event paved the way for modern obstetrics. Today, roughly one‑third of births in the United States are delivered via cesarean section, a testament to how far the procedure has come from its deadly origins.

6 First Cataract Surgery: Ancient “Couching” Technique

Cataracts—cloudy protein deposits that fog the eye’s lens—have plagued humanity since antiquity. One of the earliest visual records is an Egyptian statue of the priest Ka‑aper (c. 2457‑2467 B.C.) depicting a heavily clouded eye.

Ancient surgeons devised a bold remedy: a copper needle or lancet was inserted into the eye to dislodge the cataract, pushing it deeper into the vitreous cavity. This method, known as “couching,” didn’t remove the lens opacity but often restored enough vision for the patient to function. The practice appears in the Code of Hammurabi, where a law warned that a physician who caused loss of an eye would have his hands cut off.

Couching persisted for millennia until 1748, when French physician Jacques Daviel performed the first true cataract extraction, removing the cloudy lens entirely. This marked a turning point toward the sophisticated eye surgeries we enjoy today.

10 People Who Woke Up During Surgery

5 First Cholecystectomy: Removal of the Gallbladder in 1882

The gallbladder, a modest pouch beneath the liver, stores bile to aid fat digestion. When gallstones, infection, or rare cancers strike, patients suffer painful attacks. In the 1880s, German physician Carl Johann August Langenbuch, then only 27, routinely opened patients’ abdomens, incised the gallbladder, and cleared its contents—a painful, temporary fix.

Unwilling to settle for short‑lived relief, Langenbuch envisioned a bold solution: total removal of the gallbladder. Skeptics feared the procedure could be lethal. After practicing on cadavers, Langenbuch performed the first successful cholecystectomy on a living patient in 1882, ending a 17‑year battle with gallstones. The patient recovered quickly with minimal side effects.

By 1897, over a hundred cholecystectomies had been performed, and today the operation ranks as the second most common surgical procedure worldwide.

4 First Coronary Artery Bypass Graft: Performed in 1960

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) reroutes blood around clogged heart arteries using a vessel taken from elsewhere in the body. The road to this lifesaving surgery was paved by a series of incremental breakthroughs. In 1910, Alexis Carrel explored coronary circulation in dogs, laying foundational knowledge. Claude Beck (1935) experimented with substances in the pericardium, while Arthur Vineberg (1946) pioneered a bypass by linking the left internal thoracic artery to the heart wall. Charles Bailey’s 1956 coronary endarterectomy stripped blockages directly.

The pivotal moment arrived inadvertently when Mason Sones mistakenly injected contrast dye into a patient’s right coronary artery, discovering the technique for coronary angiography—allowing surgeons to see arteries in real time rather than operating blind.

All these advances culminated in 1960 when a team led by Robert Goetz performed the first successful CABG. Although the patient died 13 months later, autopsy revealed the graft remained intact, confirming the procedure’s efficacy and opening the door to modern cardiac surgery.

3 First Tonsillectomy: Common Even in 1000 B.C.

A tonsillectomy removes the two lymphoid tissues at the back of the throat, often the first surgical experience for many children plagued by recurrent sore throats.

The practice stretches back to antiquity. Ancient Hindu texts from around 1000 B.C. describe tonsil removal, but the most detailed early account comes from Roman physician Aulus Cornelius Celsus (A.D. 40). He recorded that surgeons would grasp the entire tonsil by hand and extract it in one swift motion—a technique that persisted well into the twentieth century.

2 First Orthopaedic Surgery: A 3,000‑Year‑Old Knee Pin

For decades, a mummy housed at the Rosicrucian Museum in California was thought to be an ordinary ancient Egyptian burial dating from the 11th‑16th centuries B.C. In 1995, researchers X‑rayed six of the museum’s mummies and discovered a startling anomaly in one: a nine‑inch metal pin lodged in its left knee.

Initially, project leader Professor Griggs assumed the pin was a modern addition, perhaps an artifact of recent restoration. However, further examination revealed a resin resembling bone cement surrounding the pin, as well as ancient fat and textiles, confirming the pin was part of a genuine 2,600‑year‑old surgical procedure.

Dr. Richard Jackson, a physician involved in the study, marveled at the biomechanical savvy of the ancient surgeon, noting the pin’s design mirrors modern rigid fixation methods. The operation was not intended to improve the individual’s earthly life; instead, it was performed post‑mortem to ensure the deceased’s body remained functional for the afterlife—a testament to Egyptian reverence for bodily integrity beyond death.

1 First Plastic Surgery: An Ancient Indian Nose Job

Contrary to popular belief, “plastic” surgery does not refer to synthetic polymers but derives from the Greek word plastikos, meaning “to give form.” The earliest recorded cosmetic procedures predate modern materials by over a millennium. The 6th‑century A.D. Indian medical treatise, the Sushruta Samhita, details a sophisticated nasal reconstruction technique.

The text instructs surgeons to measure the missing nose with a leaf, harvest a cheek skin flap attached by a small pedicle, and graft it onto the nasal stump after freshening the recipient site. The reconstructed nose is then supported with castor‑oil plant tubes, powdered herbal dressings, and continuous sesame‑oil applications. Once the graft heals, adjustments can be made to achieve the desired length.

The Sushruta Samhita catalogs 1,120 illnesses, 121 instruments, and 300 procedures, illustrating the breadth of ancient Indian surgical knowledge. This rhinoplasty method remained undocumented in the West until 1794, when a London publication described a similar technique used to rebuild the nose of a mutilated cart driver, marking the first Western encounter with Indian plastic surgery.

Top 10 Disturbing Facts About Doctors

top 10 bloody horror fans, brace yourselves: if the notorious Marquis de Sade were swapping his quill for a screenplay, he’d probably have penned the gruesome scripts behind every franchise listed here.

Why These Top 10 Bloody Franchises Stand Out

Each series on this list cranks the dial on gore, depravity, and outright revulsion to levels that most viewers would deem intolerable. While many of the movies were born on shoestring budgets and feature non‑A‑list talent, their shock value has cultivated cult followings that refuse to let the bloodshed fade.

10 Guinea Pig Franchise

In 1985, Japanese director Satoru Ogura unleashed Guinea Pig: Devil’s Experiment, a film that plunges a kidnapped woman into a nightmarish tableau of torture. The shock of that debut ignited a six‑film series, each one dripping with visceral violence, from dismemberments to exploding heads.

The second entry, Guinea Pig 2: Flower of Flesh and Blood, sparked a full‑blown FBI investigation after actor Charlie Sheen, convinced he’d witnessed a genuine snuff film, handed a copy to authorities. Both U.S. and Japanese investigators eventually concluded the footage was a staged simulation—featuring a samurai‑clad figure gruesomely hacking a woman—but the scare endured, even echoing in a British court case involving an imported copy.

Later installments kept the carnage coming: Guinea Pig 3: Shudder! The Man Who Never Dies (1986) displayed attempted suicide, mutilation, and decapitation; Guinea Pig 4: Mermaid in a Manhole (1988) added further murder and dismemberment; and Guinea Pig 5: Devil Woman Doctor (1990) turned up exploding heads, perspiring blood, and savage flesh‑slicing.

9 Entrails of a Virgin, Entrails of a Beautiful Woman, and Female Inquisitor

Kazuo “Gaira” Komizu’s 1986 debut, Entrails of a Virgin, blends softcore pornography with a grotesque swamp creature that torments a film crew with perverse, murderous games. Reviewer James Mudge calls it a misogynistic nightmare where women endure “awful acts of perversion before they die,” all while a mud‑covered monster spouts incomprehensible philosophy.

Despite its lurid tone, the film attempts a narrative: a crew lost in a foggy forest, filming a pornographic feature, retreats to an abandoned building for debauchery—sex, humiliation, wrestling—only to be interrupted by the swamp beast, which proceeds to slaughter them one by one.

Komizu followed up with Entrails of a Beautiful Woman (1986), a similarly lewd and violent affair featuring a penis‑headed monster, and the third entry, Female Inquisitor (1987)—also known as Rusted Body: Guts of a Virgin—which pits an over‑sexed female interrogator, a sadomasochistic torturer, against a group of victims while she extorts money from an embezzler.

8 Men Behind the Sun & Its Three Sequels

Directed by T.F. Mou, Men Behind the Sun (1988) dramatizes the horrific experiments of Imperial Japan’s Unit 731, presenting graphic biological and chemical weapon tests on captive humans. While the film’s gore is undeniably disturbing, its premise stems from a serialized novel of dubious reliability rather than strict historical fact.

The unsettling success of the original spawned three more entries—Laboratory of the Devil, Narrow Escape, and Black Sun: The Nanking Massacre—each pushing the envelope with scenes such as extracting a fully‑developed fetus from a pregnant woman’s womb, beheading a man, and other grisly wartime atrocities.

7 Hostel I, II, and III

Eli Roth’s 2005 debut, Hostel, redefined modern horror by swapping the fear of death for the terror of deliberate, methodical torture. Critics like Owen Gleiberman noted the film’s emphasis on meat hooks, power drills, and other brutal implements, turning captured tourists into unwilling participants in a grotesque pay‑to‑kill scheme.

British critic Mark Kermode lambasted Hostel II (2007) as “infantile tripe,” decrying its misogynistic business‑men who slice and dice female victims while female sadists watch gleefully. He urged the filmmakers to “grow up,” underscoring the sequel’s failure to evolve beyond cheap shock value.

By the time Hostel III (2011) arrived, the series had shifted settings from grimy Eastern Europe to glitzy Las Vegas, a move that Chris Nashawaty argued diluted the original’s grim authenticity, resulting in a “bloody mess” that felt more like a misguided party than a horror experience.

6 Angel Guts Franchise

Japan’s Nikkatsu studio rescued itself from financial ruin in the late 1970s with the “Roman porno” wave, birthing the five‑film Angel Guts series (1978‑1994). Inspired by Takashii Ishii’s manga Tenshi No Harawata, each installment follows a different woman named Nami, who endures rape, violence, and relentless trauma, despite sharing a name across the films.

With four directors contributing, the series varies in style, yet critics like Jim McLennan see a unifying theme: a stark tribute to the resilience of women battered by male violence, offering a grim yet compelling commentary on exploitation cinema.

5 Red Room and Red Room 2

Daisuke Yamanouchi’s 1999 cult entry Red Room pits four contestants against each other for a million‑dollar prize, forcing them into a locked space where they inflict escalating torture on one another. Reviewer Dave Jackson noted the early scenes test personal limits, while later moments descend into sexual humiliation, degradation, and absurdly goofy cruelty.

The 2000 sequel, Red Room 2, continues the twisted competition. Although Alex Davis found it less graphically gory than its predecessor, he highlighted the psychological over physical torment, noting the players’ strategic alliances and betrayals as they scramble to survive the sadistic challenges.

4 Freeway and Freeway II: Confessions of a Trickbaby

Matthew Bright’s 1996 dark‑comedy thriller Freeway reimagines Little Red Riding Hood as a gritty road‑movie starring Reese Witherspoon as a teen who outguns a serial‑killer psychiatrist. Variety’s Joe Leydon dubbed the film “roadkill,” describing its mix of gore, suspense, and twisted humor as the heroine steals the killer’s car after a brutal showdown.

The 1999 sequel, Freeway II: Confessions of a Trickbaby, swaps the wolf for a Hansel‑and‑Gretel‑style tale, with Natasha Lyonne’s “White Girl” and Maria Caledonio’s “Cyclona” escaping prison only to encounter a trans‑woman nun, Sister Gomez (Vincent Gallo). Critics like Jason Korsner called it perhaps the most gratuitously violent and vulgar road‑movie imaginable.

3 The Texas Chainsaw Massacre Franchise

Tobe Hooper’s 1974 classic The Texas Chainsaw Massacre introduced audiences to Leatherface, a chainsaw‑wielding, mask‑clad cannibal whose family revels in brutal, skin‑suit horror. Derek Malcolm of The Guardian praised the film as “a formidable piece of directorial artifice,” highlighting its sweaty, pulse‑pounding chase scenes.

Conversely, Time Out’s Chris Peachment slammed the original as a misogynistic exploitation, likening it to “having your leg sawed off without anesthetic.” Despite such criticism, the franchise’s eight sequels—most recently in 2022—demonstrate its lasting appeal among gore aficionados.

2 Saw Franchise

James Wan’s 2004 debut Saw sparked a worldwide frenzy, racking up over a hundred million dollars and spawning nine installments to date. While some critics, like Trace Thurman and Shaun Monroe, praised its clever mystery and satisfying twists, others—David Germain, Mike Goodridge, and Scott Tobias—dismissed it as “cruelly empty,” “overstuffed,” or “dumber than a box of rocks.”

Despite the polarizing reviews, the franchise’s enduring popularity proves that audiences remain hooked on its blend of gruesome traps, moral dilemmas, and relentless suspense, keeping the series alive well into the 2020s.

1 Nekromantic and Nekromantic 2

German filmmaker Jörg Buttgereit’s 1987 cult piece Nekromantic follows a woman who falls in love with a corpse, a bizarre romance meant to protest censorship. The sequel, Nekromantic 2 (1991), provoked German authorities to confiscate and even attempt to destroy its negatives, accusing Buttgereit of glorifying violence.

Buttgereit argued the crackdown stemmed from the authorities finally recognizing his notoriety. An art historian’s interpretation of the film as a metaphor for East Germany helped a judge lift the ban, allowing the controversial sequel to finally see the light of day.

Mary I of England was the only surviving child of King Henry VIII and his first wife, Catherine. As the Catholic queen of a country that had fallen into religious conflict and established a breakaway church, she saw it as her duty to bring her subjects back under the “true” religion. This led her to persecute hundreds of Protestants after she came to power.

Overshadowed by her sister and successor, the Protestant Elizabeth I, Mary has largely been pushed aside in the public’s imagination. Today, most people associate her reign only with the Marian persecutions, and her chilling moniker, “Bloody Mary,” is probably more famous than she is. But as with most historical figures, there’s more to her story.

Here are ten reasons Mary wasn’t as evil as we’ve been taught.

10 Born into a Divided Family

Mary’s mother was Catherine of Aragon, a Spanish princess who’d been betrothed from a young age to young Arthur of the House of Tudor, then heir to the English throne. Shortly after the marriage, Arthur, in typical medieval fashion, succumbed to an untimely death, leaving the teenaged Catherine a widow in a foreign land. Arthur’s father, Henry VII, was also widowed and considered marrying Catherine himself but eventually proposed she wed his younger son and new heir, the future Henry VIII.

Negotiations over the marriage took so long that by the time it happened, Henry had already succeeded his father, and Catherine was in her twenties. It was into this tangled mess that Mary arrived in 1516 after several failed pregnancies. Her birth came at a time when royal parents were not exactly on the up and up regarding daughters being equal to sons. Altogether, Catherine gave birth to six children, including three sons, but none survived except Mary. The absence of a male heir eventually completely pulled Henry VIII away from his family.^[1]

9 Traumatized as a Teenager by Her Father

With no male heir, Henry VIII grew increasingly obsessed with the topic, seeking desperately to find an explanation for his lack of sons. Renaissance enlightenment principles aside, he concluded that by taking his brother’s widow as his wife, he’d broken the laws of God and been cursed with no heirs, even though the marriage had been sanctioned by the Vatican. Whether he legitimately believed this or simply found it a convenient pretext to remarry, only he knew.

Although Mary was already being educated as heiress presumptive, Henry remained vehemently opposed to a female successor. First, he appealed to the Pope to dissolve his marriage to Catherine. When that failed, he enlisted allies to continue with annulment proceedings domestically, undertook a secret marriage to his mistress, Anne Boleyn, and appointed himself Supreme Head of the Church in England. To uphold the claim that his marriage to Catherine had never been valid to begin with, he delegitimized the teenage Mary and removed her from the line of succession, all before Anne’s first child had even been born.^[2]

8 Humiliated and Forced to Wait on Her Baby Sister

In 1533, Anne gave birth to Elizabeth, her first and only child with Henry. Having been stripped of her royal titles, Mary was further humiliated by being made an attendant to her infant sister, who had replaced her in the line of succession. To make matters worse, Mary’s mother, Catherine, by this point, had been banished from court, and mother and daughter were officially forbidden from communicating.

For years, Mary refused to cave to pressure to accept her illegitimacy and recognize her father as head of the church, a testament to her strength of character in the face of what must have seemed insurmountable odds. Eventually, she did make those pronouncements but sent a secret message to the Pope explaining she’d done so under duress. Despite what Elizabeth’s birth and position represented for her, Mary loved her sister and was influential in getting her back on good terms with their father after he executed Elizabeth’s mother, Anne, for treason.^[3]

7 Spared the Life of Her Usurper

After Henry VIII’s third wife, Jane Seymour, gave birth to a son named Edward, Mary assumed she’d never be queen. If all went according to Henry’s plan, Edward would succeed him and have sons of his own. And Mary would live the life of any ordinary princess. Edward did become king but lived only a few years after that, dying in his teens of a respiratory illness, having neither married nor had children. Although their father had reinstated Mary to the line of succession, Edward again removed her as he lay dying, not because he didn’t want a female heir but because he didn’t want her to undo the work of the Reformation, in which he’d been brought up.

Edward and Mary’s sister Elizabeth had also been raised Protestant, like Edward, but legally it would’ve been inadvisable to exclude only Mary, who held the stronger claim as the eldest. To this end, he also bypassed Elizabeth and instead designated his Protestant cousin, Jane Grey, as heir. After Edward’s death, Jane’s reign lasted a matter of days, with Mary rallying supporters and marching on London. Knowing Jane had only followed orders, Mary spared her life. Tragically, Jane remained a pawn in the conspirators’ dealings and eventually was put to death to thwart further attempts to unseat Mary.^[4]

6 Courageous and Trailblazing for the Time

Although feminism wasn’t exactly a hot topic in Mary’s time, her life was as close an example to it as we might expect for a sixteenth-century queen. In one of her most daring moments, Mary fled to a loyalist outpost as soon as she heard that her brother, Edward VI, was near death. If she’d remained nearby, she’d have been imprisoned and prevented from ascending the throne by Edward’s supporters, spelling the end of the Tudor dynasty. She was bold, decisive, and politically astute in an era when women were chiefly praised for modesty and obedience.

As Henry VIII’s eldest surviving heir, Mary based her claim to the throne on legitimacy, sidelining the topic of religion. This gained her support from both Catholics and Protestants. Both the common people and gentry came to her side, and Jane Grey’s government fell apart within days. Not long after Mary’s proclamation, Parliament passed an act enshrining the full and absolute power of the crown irrespective of gender, establishing equal rights between kings and queens regnant.^[5]

5 Guided by the Religious Conventions of Her Time

Today, we’d be horrified at the idea of burning someone at the stake for any reason, let alone their religious beliefs. But Mary grew up in a time when the importance of practicing the true religion was a matter of salvation. She believed her brother’s death proved God wanted a Catholic on the throne. Seeing the Pope as God’s representative on earth, she rejected the title of Supreme Head of the Church.

For Mary, finding herself on a throne she thought she’d never ascend was a vindication of her beliefs. To allow England to continue its course of separation from the Vatican would’ve been an affront to her duties as sovereign. Protestants who refused to convert back to Catholicism paid with their lives in a gruesome manner, but everything Mary had been taught told her it was her obligation to root out heresy in her dominions.^[6]

4 No Different from Other Monarchs of the Age

Giving someone the title “Bloody Mary” conjures up images of a cold, ruthless killer. And though you might argue the shoe fits, the truth is Mary was no different from other monarchs of the time when it came to eliminating disobedient subjects. In pursuit of his ambition to leave his marriage and father sons with other women, Henry VIII, who never quite reconciled his Catholic upbringing with his zeal for reform, put both Catholics and reformers to death, including death by burning.

Mary’s successor, Elizabeth I, not only executed many of her own subjects but even put to death a fellow queen. While it’s true that Mary’s infamous burnings reached almost 300 in a short period, Elizabeth once ordered over twice as many executions after quashing a Catholic rebellion early on in her rule. Of course, neither sister ever reached the dizzying heights of their father. By the end of his 36-year reign, Henry VIII had executed an estimated 57,000 people, a bone-chilling average of 1,500 death sentences a year. Among the victims were two of his own wives. And these numbers leave out what was happening in other parts of the world whose leaders were often even more brutal.^[7]

3 Counter-Reformation Was Popular During Her Reign

Since it was ultimately unsuccessful, it’s easy to imagine Mary’s attempt to re-Catholicize England as unpopular, but the truth is it wasn’t. Of course, those who subscribed to the principles of the Reformation were opposed, but Mary came to the throne less than a quarter-century after her father’s break with Rome. At that time, the question of religion in England was far from resolved, with Catholics still outnumbering Protestants.

Before Mary even set out her religious policy, news of her accession brought the revival of Catholic Mass in churches across the realm. She was no tyrant either—Parliament largely supported Mary’s policies and repealed most of her brother’s and father’s reforms. Eighteen months into her reign, England was fully realigned with the Catholic Church. Had Mary produced an heir, the child would’ve been raised Catholic, the Reformation may have fizzled out, and the restoration would’ve gone down in history as a cornerstone of her reign.^[8]

2 Laid the Groundwork for Some of Her Successor’s Achievements

Mary’s reign has largely been characterized by historians as ineffective and backward-looking, but these are oversimplifications. The two biggest “failures” of Mary’s reign—attempting to re-Catholicize England and the loss of the historically English territory of Calais in France—are often judged out of context (as we’ve already seen concerning the restoration). Future English monarchs presided over the loss of territories much more extensive than Calais, but it didn’t define their reigns, nor was it seen as evidence of their unsuitability.

In fact, Mary was a conscientious monarch who worked tremendously hard. Although her marriage to a foreigner was initially unpopular, she ensured her rights as queen were not ceded to her husband. During her reign, she undertook reforms in the navy as well as in coinage and the militia, reendowed several hospitals, and established a groundbreaking trading company with Russia. A revised customs book increased crown revenue and remained in effect through the reign of her successor. She also had plans drawn up for currency reform, which were carried out after her death.^[9]

1 Died Too Soon to Consolidate Her Policies

Despite having suffered from ailments of the reproductive system for years, Mary was eager to birth an heir and secure the succession. In 1554, she married the future Philip II of Spain, but the union produced no children. Although Mary was genuinely in love with her husband, by the time it was apparent she wouldn’t become pregnant, he’d retreated to his own dominions abroad. His absence affected her greatly, perhaps eliciting bitter memories of abandonment from her youth.

Only five years into her reign, Mary died during a flu epidemic at 42, having spent the last months of her life suffering from the same chronic disorders that had plagued her since adolescence. With no heir of her own, she had no one to carry on her legacy, and her reign proved much too short for her policies to take effect. Although considered illegitimate by Catholics, her sister Elizabeth was crowned in 1559 and soon reestablished the Protestant church. Her reign has largely gone down in history as a golden age, in sharp contrast with Mary’s.

It’s often said that history is written by the victors. Mary I of England, whose motto as queen was “Truth, the daughter of time,” would probably agree.^[10]