How much does a person bleed while crucified?

[Piper Marie]

I don't have a blood fetish, or at least I don't think I do, I do like the way it looks when it drips off fingers and toes and off the tips of nipples, but generally speaking, I do not think I do outside of various types of fetish art or stories, not in the real world.

How much would a person bleed if they were crucified in the desert? Would their bodies being covered in sweat increase the blood flow or make it look like they were bleeding more than they are? Would movement from the crux dance of death increase it? or would the nails block the flow at all?

How much initial blood are we talking about during the hammer blows that push the nails into the body? would it spray while it's being pounded in, or would it just kinda gush around the wound?

How long would it take a person to die of bloodloss, assuming it was the cause?

This is not counting being whipped before being crucified, but I guess I could be curious about that as well.

 

[Madiosi]

I think, a good educated executioner hit not arteries and venes with the nails.

 

[Piper Marie]

I think, a good educated executioner hit not arteries and venes with the nails.

in that case, I guess I would also have to know how many veins there are in the arm/wrist, and the skill of the executioner to determine where to avoid them.

 

[Fox-on-Cross]

On your arm below your wrist you can push with your nails and feel where the best passage without damage is.

 

[Barbaria1]

I think there is a fair amount of discussion on this issue on other threads. If anyone has some links that might be useful. My general impression is that, as long as the crucifixion is done right, the loss of blood may be less than one might imagine.

 

[Jollyrei]

Certainly, any scientific type of analysis I've seen suggests (based on historical accounts and biological knowledge, I assume) that death was not mainly due to blood loss.

 

[Piper Marie]

Would there be more than this?

 

[bobinder]

Would there be more than this?

SJ's picture looks convincing for the early stages of a crucifixion, in my opinion.

As Jolly observes, the nail wounds are not intended to be fatal, but the pain contributes to shock, which in sufficient quantity can become fatal.

Basic First Aid advises that a foreign body should be left in a wound to plug it and reduce bleeding. This would be an early effect of nailing, before the subject's movement aggravates the wound, opening it to bleed more freely. Clotting will also occur to some extent, and reduce the blood flow.

First Aid also advises raising the wound above the level of the heart, if possible, so there will be less bleeding from the wrists in a traditional, upright crucifixion, than from the feet.

My own impression is that there may be some splatter during nailing, but the wounds would be effectively plugged until the subject is elevated and writhing in pain. I probably overdo the visual impact of the bleeding for dramatic effect, but I think over time, there would be a trickle of blood along the length of the arm, and eventually down the sides of the body.

Perspiration on the surface of the skin is likely to allow blood to run more freely than on dry skin, so the visual effect would appear more dramatic.

Ultimately the amount of visible bloodshed will depend on time suspended and energy expended (always assuming no arterial damage, as noted by others.) But of course, everybody is different, so there are no hard and fast rules.

 

[Piper Marie]

is there an image here at cruxforums that comes closer than the works by skatingjesus in the matter of blood during crucifixion?

 

[bobinder]

is there an image here at cruxforums that comes closer than the works by skatingjesus in the matter of blood during crucifixion?

Until somebody films the real thing, the images we have are speculative.
But 3D artists like SJ and Jedakk have put a lot of thought into their pictures, and they look pretty convincing to me.

 

[Barbaria1]

SJ's picture looks convincing for the early stages of a crucifixion, in my opinion.

As Jolly observes, the nail wounds are not intended to be fatal, but the pain contributes to shock, which in sufficient quantity can become fatal.

Basic First Aid advises that a foreign body should be left in a wound to plug it and reduce bleeding. This would be an early effect of nailing, before the subject's movement aggravates the wound, opening it to bleed more freely. Clotting will also occur to some extent, and reduce the blood flow.

First Aid also advises raising the wound above the level of the heart, if possible, so there will be less bleeding from the wrists in a traditional, upright crucifixion, than from the feet.

My own impression is that there may be some splatter during nailing, but the wounds would be effectively plugged until the subject is elevated and writhing in pain. I probably overdo the visual impact of the bleeding for dramatic effect, but I think over time, there would be a trickle of blood along the length of the arm, and eventually down the sides of the body.

Perspiration on the surface of the skin is likely to allow blood to run more freely than on dry skin, so the visual effect would appear more dramatic.

Ultimately the amount of visible bloodshed will depend on time suspended and energy expended (always assuming no arterial damage, as noted by others.) But of course, everybody is different, so there are no hard and fast rules.

I think Bob has this issue pretty well scoped out.

 

[hongzu117]

I consulted my doctor friend，he thought as he knew that people who had been crucified should not be bleeding profusely.They should be more worried about inflammation, pain, tetanus and asphyxia.

 

[Barbaria1]

I consulted my doctor friend，he thought as he knew that people who had been crucified should not be bleeding profusely.They should be more worried about inflammation, pain, tetanus and asphyxia.

... and death?

 

[hongzu117]

... and death?

Of course.

 

[old slave]

This thread So How Long Would I Last On A Cross? has some thoughts and diagrams, though there are many other submissions, most unfortunately buried in more general threads.

And everone should read Safe Crux! by Erin for a first-hand account

 

[thehangingtree]

Would there be more than this?


View attachment 577460

Your legs would be spread wider...

 

[Piper Marie]

Your legs would be spread wider...

Just how I like it.

 

[cire]

I don't have a blood fetish, or at least I don't think I do, I do like the way it looks when it drips off fingers and toes and off the tips of nipples, but generally speaking, I do not think I do outside of various types of fetish art or stories, not in the real world.

How much would a person bleed if they were crucified in the desert? Would their bodies being covered in sweat increase the blood flow or make it look like they were bleeding more than they are? Would movement from the crux dance of death increase it? or would the nails block the flow at all?

How much initial blood are we talking about during the hammer blows that push the nails into the body? would it spray while it's being pounded in, or would it just kinda gush around the wound?

How long would it take a person to die of bloodloss, assuming it was the cause?

This is not counting being whipped before being crucified, but I guess I could be curious about that as well.

Like Madiosi, I think that the bleeding/blood loss has a lot to do with the skills of the executioner.
When the nails are driven at the right spot through the wrist, the victim won't lose that much blood.
Most likely, when the arms are stretched, the body will be lower than the wounds.
A fact that will slow down the blood loss , too.
Still enough though, that small streams of blood were running down the arms, the side of the ribcage, hips and legs.

With the nailed feet it's, I think, a different story. Much more blood must have been lost there.


I doubt that the victims died because of the blood loss alone. Bleeding weakened the crucified, but they suffocated, died because of stress, had a sepsis, heart attacks, strokes, thrombosis, as in the regular life.

The cross though, as we know, was extremely shortening the life span of the crucified.
For a good while, the crucified were able to live and communicate on the cross.
An entertainment factor for the spectators, besides the actual spectacle of the crucifiction.
Ancient documents are even stating, that it could take days until the crucified were killed by the cross.


Of course, I'm not a doctor and don't have profound knowledge of the human physis. That's just what I think about it.
Eventually somebody can get more into detail.

 

[Ducans]

Like Madiosi, I think that the bleeding/blood loss has a lot to do with the skills of the executioner.
When the nails are driven at the right spot through the wrist, the victim won't lose that much blood.
Most likely, when the arms are stretched, the body will be lower than the wounds.
A fact that will slow down the blood loss , too.
Still enough though, that small streams of blood were running down the arms, the side of the ribcage, hips and legs.

With the nailed feet it's, I think, a different story. Much more blood must have been lost there.


I doubt that the victims died because of the blood loss alone. Bleeding weakened the crucified, but they suffocated, died because of stress, had a sepsis, heart attacks, strokes, thrombosis, as in the regular life.

The cross though, as we know, was extremely shortening the life span of the crucified.
For a good while, the crucified were able to live and communicate on the cross.
An entertainment factor for the spectators, besides the actual spectacle of the crucifiction.
Ancient documents are even stating, that it could take days until the crucified were killed by the cross.


Of course, I'm not a doctor and don't have profound knowledge of the human physis. That's just what I think about it.
Eventually somebody can get more into detail.

Me neither, but what I think is that if the victim was sitting on a sedile - not perforate the vagina or anus- or/and haves the feet resting on a piece of wood, the victim could lives for days, especially if he receives some drink and that he's not roasted by the sun. On a T cross and bound with ropes the victim could support the treatment even longer. All depended from the intention of the sentence and executioners

 

[Loxuru]

I have read on a few occasions (I don't recall where, it could be even somewhere on CF), that the Roman's technique of crucifixion was specifically intended to restrict blood loss as much as possible, in order to make this not the major cause of death. By avoiding profuse blood loss,, suffering would be prolonged.