Most Painful Part Of Crucifixion

[Deleted member jedakk]

what will be more painful: the nailing of the wrists or the nailing of the feet? What do you think, is it more painful to drive the nail from top of the foot to the bottom, or sideways through the anklebones? What will be more painful, the nailing itself, the raising of the cross or arms and legs cramping and shaking when hanging by the nails?

I don't have any experience to say, but my gut says that nailing the wrists would be the most painful. Just judging by how painful carpal tunnel syndrome is, which affects the Median nerve, if the nail hit or even touched that nerve the pain would be very intense.

As far as the feet, I only consider nails placed through the tops of the feet, two nails, not one. A nail through the calcaneus bone, or heel bone, as in the skeletal remains found at Givat HaMivtar in Israel, would crack the bone, and indeed it was reported that the bone was cracked by the nail.

The cracked bone could never have held a nail as the victim struggled on a cross. And once it worked its way free of the bone, the nail would soon have sawed its way through the soft tissue of the back of the heel. This could only work if the victim was in a static position, not struggling, or was actually dead before being nailed to the cross. I don't know what happened to the victim whose bones were found, but I do not believe it was a live, upright crucifixion as we typically think of it.

And this is just the nailing process that I'm talking about. Hanging by those nails would be another dimension of pain.

 

[windar]

I don't have any experience to say, but my gut says that nailing the wrists would be the most painful. Just judging by how painful carpal tunnel syndrome is, which affects the Median nerve, if the nail hit or even touched that nerve the pain would be very intense.

As far as the feet, I only consider nails placed through the tops of the feet, two nails, not one. A nail through the calcaneus bone, or heel bone, as in the skeletal remains found at Givat HaMivtar in Israel, would crack the bone, and indeed it was reported that the bone was cracked by the nail.

The cracked bone could never have held a nail as the victim struggled on a cross. And once it worked its way free of the bone, the nail would soon have sawed its way through the soft tissue of the back of the heel. This could only work if the victim was in a static position, not struggling, or was actually dead before being nailed to the cross. I don't know what happened to the victim whose bones were found, but I do not believe it was a live, upright crucifixion as we typically think of it.

And this is just the nailing process that I'm talking about. Hanging by those nails would be another dimension of pain.

So we're speculating, rather than basing conclusions on solid data? Tree got a $300,000 grant to conduct these studies. He said he had a whole bunch of willing subjects who were named things like Barb and Eulalia and Marcella and Thessela. What happened? Did he blow the whole budget on Seagrams and hookers?

 

[Madiosi]

So we're speculating, rather than basing conclusions on solid data? Tree got a $300,000 grant to conduct these studies. He said he had a whole bunch of willing subjects who were named things like Barb and Eulalia and Marcella and Thessela. What happened? Did he blow the whole budget on Seagrams and hookers?

Also a valuable usage!

 

[Loxuru]

I think, every part and every moment of crucifixion/being crucified is the most painful, since it all has to be undergone continuously by the condemned.

 

[Naraku]

As far as the feet, I only consider nails placed through the tops of the feet, two nails, not one. A nail through the calcaneus bone, or heel bone, as in the skeletal remains found at Givat HaMivtar in Israel, would crack the bone, and indeed it was reported that the bone was cracked by the nail.

The cracked bone could never have held a nail as the victim struggled on a cross. And once it worked its way free of the bone, the nail would soon have sawed its way through the soft tissue of the back of the heel. This could only work if the victim was in a static position, not struggling, or was actually dead before being nailed to the cross. I don't know what happened to the victim whose bones were found, but I do not believe it was a live, upright crucifixion as we typically think of it.

And this is just the nailing process that I'm talking about. Hanging by those nails would be another dimension of pain.

I'm not so sure that a cracked heel bone would have led to the nail coming free.
It would take more than one crack for the nail to start cutting through the skin and the foot coming loose. The bone would have had to be completely shattered to the point where the fragments could separate far enough to allow passage of the nail. And this would have taken considerable time.
In the case of Jehohanan, it isn't clear if the crack occurred during the nailing or during the attempt to remove the nail postmortem; an attempt which failed due the bending of the nail. The act of trying to pull the nail free of the bone and ultimately pulling both nail and foot free of the stipes may have caused the crack.

 

[Wolfie1389]

I would think the most painful part would be the mental anguish...

The utter realization that upon this cross, you will die... slowly...

 

[AlexArts]

Further down, between your bent legs is your cunt. Your womanly center -- your very essence!

I can't agree with that. As artist...

 

[billybob41]

I don't have any experience to say, but my gut says that nailing the wrists would be the most painful. Just judging by how painful carpal tunnel syndrome is, which affects the Median nerve, if the nail hit or even touched that nerve the pain would be very intense.

As far as the feet, I only consider nails placed through the tops of the feet, two nails, not one. A nail through the calcaneus bone, or heel bone, as in the skeletal remains found at Givat HaMivtar in Israel, would crack the bone, and indeed it was reported that the bone was cracked by the nail.

The cracked bone could never have held a nail as the victim struggled on a cross. And once it worked its way free of the bone, the nail would soon have sawed its way through the soft tissue of the back of the heel. This could only work if the victim was in a static position, not struggling, or was actually dead before being nailed to the cross. I don't know what happened to the victim whose bones were found, but I do not believe it was a live, upright crucifixion as we typically think of it.

And this is just the nailing process that I'm talking about. Hanging by those nails would be another dimension of pain.

I'd tend to think that nails through the bone would be much more painful than flesh. Bones have nerves, too. I'd agree that if you nailed someone through the heels, they'd die faster. They'd presumably get exhausted by the pain. If the bones crack as you say, and the nails cut through the flesh, then they're hanging from their wrists alone. They tire faster from raising themselves.

So, back to the original question, I'll vote for the part where the victims get nailed through the heels or ankles, if that happens. If it doesn't happen, then I'll vote for the first nails through the wrists.

 

[helmut]

Interesting questions and theories one truth we haven't considered here is the fact that the Romans recorded very little about crucifixion, suggesting that it may have been a socially objectionable subject. They certainly executed large numbers of people by crucifixion but , they didn't discuss or write about it much that's one of the reasons why there are only records of a few women being crucified.
Another interesting point is that they may not have used crosses as we envision such structures; it may have just been an upright post, something to keep them up off the ground and on public view.
There's a lot of info on the subject scattered all through this site. Someone who is interested might look in the older postings in "When in Rome".

 

[old slave]

Interesting questions and theories one truth we haven't considered here is the fact that the Romans recorded very little about crucifixion, suggesting that it may have been a socially objectionable subject.

How many novels, TV shows, even factual descriptions, detail the actual workings of a modern slaughterhouse? We all know animals die after some sort of stunning (or not if some religion is involved), and the majority eat the product, but we would rather not get involved with the details.

So a slave, a non-citizen therefore only a commodity like an animal is, deserves to die the proscribed death. Genteel writers need never venture near the killing field, and have far more interesting political or philosophical topics to discuss.

 

[windar]

How many novels, TV shows, even factual descriptions, detail the actual workings of a modern slaughterhouse? We all know animals die after some sort of stunning (or not if some religion is involved), and the majority eat the product, but we would rather not get involved with the details.

So a slave, a non-citizen therefore only a commodity like an animal is, deserves to die the proscribed death. Genteel writers need never venture near the killing field, and have far more interesting political or philosophical topics to discuss.

There's also survivor bias. Not everything the Romans wrote and spoke about survives. One wonders what from our era will survive 2000 years from now if humans still exist as a species. I've had this discussion many times with people who say, "movies, books, music, what have you were better back in the day," but we are comparing everything around now with the subset of past works that were worthy enough to have survived.

There's not much record of anti-capital punishment or anti-slavery movements back then, but surely there were those who found those practices immoral as many find eating animals to be today.

 

[phlebas]

There's also survivor bias. Not everything the Romans wrote and spoke about survives. One wonders what from our era will survive 2000 years from now if humans still exist as a species. I've had this discussion many times with people who say, "movies, books, music, what have you were better back in the day," but we are comparing everything around now with the subset of past works that were worthy enough to have survived.

There's not much record of anti-capital punishment or anti-slavery movements back then, but surely there were those who found those practices immoral as many find eating animals to be today.

It is interesting how little has come down to us on the topic. If it weren't for Christianity the practice would probably be remembered as an obscure ancient form of punishment, rather than carrying the weight of symbolism that it has today.

It would be terribly painful - this is where we get the word excruciating after all - but the real ordeal starts when that first nail goes in, flesh giving way to iron, the moment of no turning back.

 

[Deleted member jedakk]

but the real ordeal starts when that first nail goes in, flesh giving way to iron, the moment of no turning back.

From Sabina in The Serpent's Eye:

Until the hammer came down and the nail tore through my wrist, it was still possible for my Domina to stop my crucifixion. I could still get up and walk away with only the stripes of my whipping. Please please please stop it now stop it now!
​

This brings to mind a quote from Marcel Pagnol's Jean de Florette: "Quand on a commencé d'étrangler le chat, il faut le finir." - When you have begun to strangle the cat, you must finish.

At some point, there is no going back.

 

[Deleted member 16320]

I personally think that this particular crucifixion was the most painful, because every nail is killing wood gradually.

 

[Deleted member 16320]

I personally think that this particular crucifixion was the most painful, because every nail is killing wood gradually.

 

[Deleted member 16320]

This is probably the most used method of crucifixion, the convict sometimes dies even days-which may even be the fact that the prisoner was given water, food, and sometimes had a support ....

 

[Deleted member 16320]

And this crucifixion is my best interest - some Friday, skatingjesus, etc., and so on, and in his comics - andarooos - he will do this crucifixion, for some major character, he promised to do it once! But I promise it for two years ....
I just do not know the name of this kind of crucifixion ....

The spikes over the ankles have to be hurt, and their hands twisted, and behind the back too hurt ....

On the contrary, this seems to me to be a fiction, the hands did not happen, there would be a rupture and a falling fall of the executed ... but she is looking at it well ...

 

[Deleted member 16320]

According to scientists, executed in this way, behind the heels, but the Christians have their theory of blablabla ...

 

[windar]

Until the hammer came down and the nail tore through my wrist, it was still possible for my Domina to stop my crucifixion. I could still get up and walk away with only the stripes of my whipping. Please please please stop it now stop it now!

SPOILER ALERT for those who haven't read "The Bronx Crux Murders" http://www.cruxforums.com/xf/threads/the-bronx-crux-murders.6173/ If you have, then see below
















If we're going to cite our own fictional stories as authorities, then I can state categorically that one can survive crucifixion almost to death with the intervention of the brave men and women of the NYPD SWAT team and the EMTs and ER staff of one of New York's excellent hospitals.

Note: Please do not try this at home.

 

[messaline]

If you have, then see below

See what ? Sorry, but I've nothing ...