In the middle ages, the tradition began depicting Jesus on a high cross because he was someone important.I think that version is very believable - I think there are literary references that imply that, at least at the Sessorium and other places where Crucifixion was regularly carried out (including Golgotha?), upright stipites were kept in place, the rotting bodies on their patibula (unless they were taken down, with official permission, by family or friends, as Jesus was) were quite possibly not removed until the stipes was needed for a new convict. A simple wheeled trolley or portable platform kept handy at the place of execution would be all that would needed to crucify her a bit higher, to make her more conspicuous to passers-by. But if the Gospel accounts are to be believed, Jesus wasn't hanging very high, low enough to converse with his mother and John, be offered a sponge soaked in vinegar and gall, and be stabbed in the side with a spear.
The problem of the condemned hanging for minutes by the wrists only, can be overcome by having him/her standing on the ground when the patibulum is put on the stipes. Somehow like this pic Bobinder posted above in this thread:
The nailing of the feet could then be carried out by bending the legs and nailing sideward through the base of the ankles. This would imply that the condemned will not hang high above the ground, but with the head at normal headlevel. The toes will almost touch the ground, but this 'almost' makes a big difference.
Perhaps we got used to representataions of crucified hanging high above the ground, but maybe that is due to artistic paintings of a crucified Christ through the centuries. Maybe condemned were nailed to lower crosses.
Just a thought.
I think that version is very believable - I think there are literary references that imply that, at least at the Sessorium and other places where Crucifixion was regularly carried out (including Golgotha?), upright stipites were kept in place, the rotting bodies on their patibula (unless they were taken down, with official permission, by family or friends, as Jesus was) were quite possibly not removed until the stipes was needed for a new convict. A simple wheeled trolley or portable platform kept handy at the place of execution would be all that would needed to crucify her a bit higher, to make her more conspicuous to passers-by. But if the Gospel accounts are to be believed, Jesus wasn't hanging very high, low enough to converse with his mother and John, be offered a sponge soaked in vinegar and gall, and be stabbed in the side with a spear.
I think that's likely to be the way they saw him. But the synoptic Gospels do make the point that he was crucified between two thieves, one on the left and one on the right, as if to signal his 'central' position, and that was taken up by commentators, and, once visual portrayal of the crucifixion became accepted (which it wasn't until after Constantine, when it had ceased to be used for executing criminals), Jesus' 'central' position was emphasised, e.g. making him a bit higher than the thieves:In reality, the Romans did not see Jesus as anyone important. In fact, they crucified him because he was claiming to be important.
I hate to think what commentators would have been saying if he was on the Left or the Right.... the synoptic Gospels do make the point that he was crucified between two thieves, one on the left and one on the right, as if to signal his 'central' position, and that was taken up by commentators...
View attachment 540243 Syriac Rabbula Gospels 586 a.d.
...and that was taken up by commentators...
Thankfully she is not talking about Tree...."Commentators" ? Only St Jean was viewing the scene ! Marc, Luc and Matthieu have written their New Testament later without even having been present during the Passion ...
So, there was only one commentator and when we read what he could write in his "Apocalypse", we can doubt about his brain'health ...
"Commentators" ? Only St Jean was viewing the scene ! Marc, Luc and Matthieu have written their New Testament later without even having been present during the Passion ...
So, there was only one commentator and when we read what he could write in his "Apocalypse", we can doubt about his brain'health ...
"Commentators" ? Only St Jean was viewing the scene ! Marc, Luc and Matthieu have written their New Testament later without even having been present during the Passion ...
So, there was only one commentator and when we read what he could write in his "Apocalypse", we can doubt about his brain'health ...