• Sign up or login, and you'll have full access to opportunities of forum.

Feet Or Wrists First?

Wrists or Feet First?

  • Total voters
    243
Go to CruxDreams.com
Indeed, 'rectus' = 'right, correct', 'imbecilius rectus' = 'right idiot' -
though recte (= rightly), it's 'imbecillus',
'im-becillus' = 'without a stick', a Roman equivalent of 'lacking his marbles'.
It was imbécille in earlier French, but both French and English spellings
were influenced by a mistaken notion that the Latin was 'imbecilis'
(the great Dr Johnson, no less, promoted that idea).
'Rectum' is short for 'intestinum rectum', 'straight gut, colon'.
 
If I had absolute control I would not do either. I would bind their wrists with comfortable leather straps and provided handles by their hands so they could support themselves(temporarily). This would mean they would last longer and their suffering would consequently be prolongued.It seems that nailing their hands or feet could lead to a premature death through shock, blood loss or sceptis, rather than the slow suffocation intended by cruxificition. If you like blood why not slash them across the back or buttocks where no major veins are near the surface.
I do like the drawings though.
 
Well, the answer you'd get here is that nails are part of the fantasy here, something no one can really do in real life. And maybe an additional note that the nails rarely caused severe bleeding if the victim was nailed correctly. But "no nails" is definitely the default for sane people, just not in my art.
 
But its difficult to imagine just the split wrists supporting the weight of the whole body, as I think they would eventually have to to cause death.
 
The muscles most likely to be damaged by the nails are the ones that control the fine movements of the hand and fingers - carpal tunnel damage would be especially likely. Even though pulling themself up would be incredibly agonizing, it would still be possible, as long as the shoulders, upper arms, and back aren't too badly damaged.
 
But surely once it was no longer possible for the victim to pull him/herself up, the weight of the body on the wrists might mean that the nails would rip through the hands? leaving the victim no longer supported
 
Nails might rip through the hands, sure. But they wouldn't rip through the wrist, the radius bone is in the way. That's why the nails are usually shown through the wrist. Additionally, if the victim wants to rip the nail out through the hand when the nail was driven through the wrist, they'll have to break or dislocate basically every bone in their palm to get there. Pretty unlikely.
 
danielm09 said:
One nail for the feet or feet nailed individually?
Click to expand...
feet nailed individually is much more easier for the executioners, it will be a slower torture for the victim and the genitals are visible in an obscene display if the thighs are straddled. If the feet are nailed directly to the stipes with toes showing downwards, the victim will get muscle cramps each time when stretching the legs.
 
danielm09 said:
One nail for the feet or feet nailed individually?
Click to expand...
As 'naildance' points out, nailing feet individually is more shameful for victims as their legs are somewhat splayed, exposing their intimate areas to public display.

To maximise this splaying effect AND greatly increase the agony suffered each time the victim pushes her tortured body up to breathe, nailing the feet to opposite sides of the stipes would be most brutal.
 
I think that for the Romans it is quite easier to nail hand and feet when the victim lays on the wood.
When done the cross will be raised.
Ropes round the wrists and arms use for prolongation the suffering.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom