Anyone who thinks the lash is a particularly awful punishment should remember that when the founders used the phrase "cruel and unusual punishment," they had in mind far more awful things.

Via Clayton Cramer, I learned about a wonderful online resource:

The Proceedings of the Old Bailey--the primary criminal court of London from 1674-1834--is available online, and searchable. All 52 million words! Just for amusement, I put the word "pistol" in--and found more than 1700 occurrences. I put in "gun" and received hundreds of matches.

The very first case to come up was that of "William Burnet, offences against the king : religious offences, offences against the king : religious offences, 12th December, 1674." The man was convicted of treason for doing something we Americans would regard as a basic constitutional right enshrined by the First Amendment. In the words of the court, Mr. Burnet "actually perverted several to embrace the Roman Catholique Religion." (Gasp!)

The statute defined Catholicism as treason, and the court no doubt thought it was doing its duty by imposing the standard penalty at the time:

...there was full proof that he had often endeavoured to reconcile divers of his Majesties Protestant subjects to the Romish Church, and had actually perverted several to embrace the Roman Catholique Religion, and assert and maintain the Popes supremacy in matters Ecclesiastical, &c.

To all which he had very little to object, only alleadged, that if it were a Crime so Capital him to persuade People to the Roman Catholique Religion, (which he was verily persuaded was the onely true one) then it must be the same offence in Quakers and other different persuasions, since they as well as he made it their endeavour to draw people from the Church of England to their particular party. But to this was easily answered, that the very Words of the Law had expressed the Roman Catholique religion or Popery, but no such thing of any other Faction, and that Recriminations were no excuse, much less Justification; Whereupon after a full hearing, Debating, and weighing of the matter, the Jury brought him in guilty of High Treason upon the last Indictment , and accordingly on Saturday he received sentence, To be Hang'd, Drawn, and Quartered ; which he received with a modest Generosity, saying these words, Gloria in Excelsisdeo. &c. (Emphasis added.)

"Then Sentence was passed, as followeth, viz. That they should return to the place from whence they came, from thence be drawn to the Common place of Execution upon Hurdles, and there to be Hanged by the Necks, then cut down alive, their Privy-Members cut off, and Bowels taken out to be burnt before their Faces, their Heads to be severed from their Bodies, and their Bodies divided into four parts, to be disposed of as the King should think fit."

While I'm not a subscriber to the idea of a "living, breathing Constitution," I do think what is considered "cruel and unusual punishment" can vary over time. What is today unimaginable was once routine, and what is today routine was once unimaginable. The lash was not cruel and unusual at the time of the founding, but it is today.

(And I'd love to poll the founders on what they'd think of long prison terms for the mere possession of a substance which was to them an over the counter remedy.)