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

Pregnant

Go to CruxDreams.com

phlebas

PRIMUS POENUS
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Likes
73,860
Location
Oz
#8
Thank you

Nevertheless I have seen drawings of pregnant women nailed to the cross
Certainly they are out there. Not a lot but a steady number over the years. It's a very sensitive even taboo topic, transgressing boundaries beyond normal crucifixion sensitivities. It affects many people quite deeply, and is very much in the category of innocence punished, whatever the sins of the expecting mother. I'm unclear how it affects me personally, it is powerful and upsetting too, it has something confronting to say and I am never sure if I want to hear it! Yet the sight of that body, already pushed and stretched and then pushed even further by the cross, that metaphor of the agony of crucifixion standing for that of childbirth, it intrigues me.

Do we know what the Romans did in this situation? I sincerely hope they waited, as you say, although what would have been the fate of such a baby? Slavery?

I will offer some pics from artist finality3d, a study in contrasts.


chamber08.jpg chamber07.jpg chamber06.jpg chamber03.jpg chamber02.jpg
 

RacingRodent

Potent Rodent
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Likes
25,628
Location
Surprisingly close to a military firing range
#9
Do we know what the Romans did in this situation? I sincerely hope they waited, as you say, although what would have been the fate of such a baby? Slavery?
I am pretty sure the Romans waited, I am not sure if I can dig up a clear ruling from anywhere but my sense of things is that it would be seen as an offence against the public dignitas and thus beyond the pale. Concerns for the child itself would have been lesser, by its nature crucifixion was a punishment for non-citizens or those who had their citizen rights stripped away from them so the ongoing fate of a such a child would be tricky but adoption would not be out of the options available.
 

Marcius

Governor
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Likes
3,908
#10
I am pretty sure the Romans waited, I am not sure if I can dig up a clear ruling from anywhere but my sense of things is that it would be seen as an offence against the public dignitas and thus beyond the pale. Concerns for the child itself would have been lesser, by its nature crucifixion was a punishment for non-citizens or those who had their citizen rights stripped away from them so the ongoing fate of a such a child would be tricky but adoption would not be out of the options available.
I've provided a link to the relevant Digest quotation a few posts before.

A person condemned to die (or to the mines, but that's not our concern here) was immediately degraded by the operation of law to servile condition, becoming a so-called slave of the penalty (servus, or in our case serva poenae), a slave without a master.

Pál Sáry says in 'The Rules of Condemnation to the Mines in Imperial Rome', Journal on European History of Law 6: (2), pp. 116-121, that 'such children [i.e. children of women sentenced to the mines -- Marcius] could be manumitted and could be sold, too. Consequently, in such a case the legal position of the child was different from the position of his mother. The child was not a servus poenae but very likely a servus publicus (owned by the state)'. I suppose it was the same for children of condemned women.
 
Joined
Sep 5, 2017
Likes
80
#11
What if the woman was taken doen from the cross still alive for diferent reasans ( approacing jewish feast like easten or sabbat) ...I suspect Jesus was not quite dead when he was declared dead .... but who knws ???
Could she deliver her child and then be nailed again to a cross ?
We need a time machine to clarify all these questions ;-)
 

Marcius

Governor
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Likes
3,908
#12
What if the woman was taken doen from the cross still alive for diferent reasans ( approacing jewish feast like easten or sabbat) ...I suspect Jesus was not quite dead when he was declared dead .... but who knws ???
Could she deliver her child and then be nailed again to a cross ?
We need a time machine to clarify all these questions ;-)
We really don't... except perhaps for the Jesus affair, but it's quite likely he was dead and stayed dead, as people tend to.

Flavius Josephus writes in Vita:

Once more, when I was sent by Titus Caesar with Cerealius and a thousand horse to a village called Tekoa, to prospect whether it was a suitable place for an entrenched camp, and on my return saw many prisoners who had been crucified, and recognized three of my acquaintances among them, I was cut to the heart and came and told Titus with tears what I had seen. He gave orders immediately that they should be taken down and receive the most careful treatment. Two of them died in the physicians’ hands; the third survived.​

In many things, getting taken down from the cross while alive included, 'who you know' is of utmost importance.

Back to the New Testament-era Jerusalem setting: the Roman governor was supposed to come up from Caesarea for Jewish holy days and hold his assizes there, among other things. Hence it was more likely than not that there were people hanging on the crosses, getting burned, etc. during the festivities in question.

Pregnant women weren't crucified by Roman authorities. It just wasn't the done thing.

If one wants to put them on the cross anyway, sticking to fantasy settings is -- in my humble opinion -- the best thing to do.
 
Joined
Sep 5, 2017
Likes
80
#13
We really don't... except perhaps for the Jesus affair, but it's quite likely he was dead and stayed dead, as people tend to.

Flavius Josephus writes in Vita:

Once more, when I was sent by Titus Caesar with Cerealius and a thousand horse to a village called Tekoa, to prospect whether it was a suitable place for an entrenched camp, and on my return saw many prisoners who had been crucified, and recognized three of my acquaintances among them, I was cut to the heart and came and told Titus with tears what I had seen. He gave orders immediately that they should be taken down and receive the most careful treatment. Two of them died in the physicians’ hands; the third survived.​

In many things, getting taken down from the cross while alive included, 'who you know' is of utmost importance.

Back to the New Testament-era Jerusalem setting: the Roman governor was supposed to come up from Caesarea for Jewish holy days and hold his assizes there, among other things. Hence it was more likely than not that there were people hanging on the crosses, getting burned, etc. during the festivities in question.

Pregnant women weren't crucified by Roman authorities. It just wasn't the done thing.

If one wants to put them on the cross anyway, sticking to fantasy settings is -- in my humble opinion -- the best thing to do.
thank you for the info
 

windar

Teller of Tales
Joined
Apr 3, 2007
Likes
28,499
#15
We really don't... except perhaps for the Jesus affair, but it's quite likely he was dead and stayed dead, as people tend to.

Flavius Josephus writes in Vita:

Once more, when I was sent by Titus Caesar with Cerealius and a thousand horse to a village called Tekoa, to prospect whether it was a suitable place for an entrenched camp, and on my return saw many prisoners who had been crucified, and recognized three of my acquaintances among them, I was cut to the heart and came and told Titus with tears what I had seen. He gave orders immediately that they should be taken down and receive the most careful treatment. Two of them died in the physicians’ hands; the third survived.​

In many things, getting taken down from the cross while alive included, 'who you know' is of utmost importance.

Back to the New Testament-era Jerusalem setting: the Roman governor was supposed to come up from Caesarea for Jewish holy days and hold his assizes there, among other things. Hence it was more likely than not that there were people hanging on the crosses, getting burned, etc. during the festivities in question.

Pregnant women weren't crucified by Roman authorities. It just wasn't the done thing.

If one wants to put them on the cross anyway, sticking to fantasy settings is -- in my humble opinion -- the best thing to do.
I remember this was discussed in at least one other thread here. The consensus was that in the pre-antibiotic era, the odds of survival for someone taken down from a cross that they had been nailed to were probably poor, because of the likelihood of infection, which would have been essentially untreatable. Not zero, which raises the possibility of a "resurrection", but not good.

Of course, in the modern era in, say, The Bronx, wounds much worse than nails to the wrists and feet are quite treatable, so as long as the person was taken down alive, they would almost certainly survive (right, Moore?)...;):p
 
Last edited:

Marcius

Governor
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Likes
3,908
#17
I remember this was discussed in at least one other thread here. The consensus was that in the pre-antibiotic era, the odds of survival for someone taken down from a cross that they had been nailed to were probably poor, because of the likelihood of infection, which would have been essentially untreatable. Not zero, which raises the possibility of a "resurrection", but not good.
Josephus: I'm gonna get you to a doctor, and not just any doctor, boychiks, I'm gonna find you a nice Jewish doctor.
[at Titus]
Josephus: Find my friends a nice Jewish doctor!


The resurrection thing is best left to theology, not history... or whatever we're doing here. :devil:
 

chelior

Magistrate
Joined
Jul 26, 2010
Likes
520
#18
I remember this was discussed in at least one other thread here. The consensus was that in the pre-antibiotic era, the odds of survival for someone taken down from a cross that they had been nailed to were probably poor, because of the likelihood of infection, which would have been essentially untreatable. Not zero, which raises the possibility of a "resurrection", but not good.
Sure, the infection occured in all cases, the nails being not disinfected, sometimes rusty, and having surely already served for more than one victim.
 

madiosi

Depictor of Dreams
Staff member
Joined
Jun 15, 2014
Likes
56,364
Location
Central Germany
#19

cruzifer

Spectator
Joined
Aug 12, 2016
Likes
74
Location
Germany
#20
If she was only attached with ropes she could have had more chances ...
https://78.media.tumblr.com/68ba8f4c2cefa62473f03c1be08ac7ee/tumblr_nnay5byIxm1rlim1do1_400.jpged

The girls were crucified by the turkish , some of the survived and were sold to Arabs as slaves
I doubt so; unlike these actresses from a silent movie ("Ravished Armenia", 1919) sixteen girls had been impaled and thus all been killed according to eye-witness Aurora Mardiganian (1901-1994). During Otoman period Turks did not sell slaves into Arab countries.
 
Top Bottom