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

Roman Crucifixion

Go to CruxDreams.com
jedakk said:
I agree. I always go way on the conservative side and say "hundreds of thousands", but the number must actually have been in the millions. After all, looking at the extents of the Roman world throughout the time that crucifixion was its standard means of capital punishment, and considering how many thousands of cities and towns there were within it, all with criminals to be punished, the numbers could be mind-boggling.

Which is why, to me, it is so easy to come up with another crucifixion story. There are millions of them.
Click to expand...

Very well explained. This runs shivers down my spine.
 
Ave,

even if I am generally more member on the "male crucifixion faction", I like this idea of "mixed crucifixions" as featured here.
I agree, that all-in-all presumably more men than women were crucified, but, who knows, maybe the Romans conducted mixed crucifixions even intentionally to enhance the attraction to such events and public executions.

I consider myself being a "crucifixion movie geek", but I remember only one movie, where a woman on the cross is being featured as one of the convicts crucified with the Jesus figure. Its the pretty unkown (and bad) movie "The Disciple". The Jesus actor is a "hottie", but the crux scene is very wek, I am sorry to say. Nevertheless I am featuring it here since it may fit into this context of this thread ...you may check it out at 1:32 to see a woman on the cross as one of the "thieves", a pretty unique moment in the history of Jesus movies...


best regards
Ty.
 
It is interesting to see that the remarks on the scale and the nature of Roman crucifixion that I wrote last year starting this thread were so thought provoking and led to many more fascinating observations. Looking backing to all of these, I just try to summarize some of the main points.

Roman crucifixion still has remarkable effects on all of us, because:
  • it’s extremely efficient, technically: some wooden beams, some nails, a hammer and a few strong men is all that’s needed, the most complicated part just is putting up the cross to let the victim hang down. That’s the actual execution, nothing more needs to be done. Likely, vertical poles could be erected for that purpose and reused to suspend the victims, nailed to the cross beam.

  • it leads, completely by itself, to an extremely painful and extremely longlasting torture of the victim, that unlike many other methods of execution not just takes minutes (burning at the stake for example) but easily days of immense pain, hanging on brutally pierced limbs with full body weight. Moreover, the victim cannot undergo the pain in a passive way but has to move his naked body constantly in despair to be able to breathe and find some relief, becoming totally exhausted but remaining conscious for a very long time in an extreme agony.

  • it is extremely humiliating in nature, being on display fully naked with those typical;y helplessly spread arms, hanging down and suffering without any power, all bodily functions visible to the spectators (urine, stool, erections). Such extreme humiliation, reducing the victim to a stripped, defenseless, immobilized object, permanently fixed to a beam of wood, of course is a strong deterrent as well.

  • it’s such a simple and somewhat indirect and slow way to execute the victim that its real nature is not immediately clear, like it is with most other methods. Also, by the cultural and religious interpretations its cruel nature is masked and concealed. Most clearly by the very common addition of a loin cloth in images, apparently in order to preserve the modesty of the victim… The idea is totally absurd: a treatment to punish and kill a bare victim by extreme pain and humiliation will never be softened by providing some clothing to avoid full exposure. But this wrongly adds some idea of humanity to the torment that it really is, as nudity was an important element of the torture on the cross: it symbolizes loss of control and power. The presumed addition of a comfortable pedestal to stand on (with pierced feet…) surely is another example of the way crucifixions are often rendered less cruel than they really were.

  • finally, the extreme scale in which this method was applied, as discussed, is still beyond imagination. Fully acceptable as it was, for any non Roman citizen, the properties described made it highly popular for those ever practical Romans, for many centuries…

    It all remains fascinating that this easily explains the existence of this forum, for anyone who has found out about the nature of this important historical practice! Some pictures are attached again, to support the imagination!

crux.jpg tumblr_nza8tgGtBv1rejbf6o1_500.jpg tumblr_no03edoeoo1sj8mzdo1_1280.jpg crux3.jpg

 
the Gladiator War of Spartacus resulting in 6000 crucifxions alone.
The difference must be that these crucifixions most likely involved men only
Excellent post; thanks.
But it probably didn't involve only men. I have heard it argued that Crassus' decided on that mass execution because, apart from his intention to emphasise that it was his victory not Pompey's, trying to return 6,000 slaves to their owners would have resulted in years of legal squabbling and argument (Crassus was a businessman after all). The short-lived nation that formed around Spartacus included slaves of every type and would have had many women, perhaps some fighting alongside the men but many as camp followers. Crassus would have applied the same reasoning to them as to the men. Since many of the men would have died fighting rather than surrender, a good proportion of those crucified on the road to Capua would have been women.
 
Last edited:
CorPas said:
it’s extremely efficient, technically: some wooden beams, some nails, a hammer and a few strong men is all that’s needed, the most complicated part just is putting up the cross to let the victim hang down. That’s the actual execution, nothing more needs to be done. Likely, vertical poles could be erected for that purpose and reused to suspend the victims, nailed to the cross beam.
Click to expand...

It was extremely efficient at delivering a punishment that was slow, agonizing and humiliating beyond measure, which ended with death, and that's what the Romans and others who used it intended. If all you really wanted to do was kill someone, lots of methods would have been cheaper, required less manpower and time. But those wouldn't have had the desired effect on those who witnessed them.

CorPas said:
it’s such a simple and somewhat indirect and slow way to execute the victim that its real nature is not immediately clear, like it is with most other methods.
Click to expand...

That is certainly true! Hardly anyone actually grasps the level of suffering, the humiliation that a victim on the cross experienced. I know I can't, myself, in a real sense, only intellectually. I've never had a hand or foot pierced by anything, much less had a square iron spike driven through them and then been forced to hang on those four spikes. My imagination is not adequate to truly describe that. And that's only part of the torture.
 
CorPas said:
It is interesting to see that the remarks on the scale and the nature of Roman crucifixion that I wrote last year starting this thread were so thought provoking and led to many more fascinating observations. Looking backing to all of these, I just try to summarize some of the main points.

Roman crucifixion still has remarkable effects on all of us, because:
  • it’s extremely efficient, technically: some wooden beams, some nails, a hammer and a few strong men is all that’s needed, the most complicated part just is putting up the cross to let the victim hang down. That’s the actual execution, nothing more needs to be done. Likely, vertical poles could be erected for that purpose and reused to suspend the victims, nailed to the cross beam.

  • it leads, completely by itself, to an extremely painful and extremely longlasting torture of the victim, that unlike many other methods of execution not just takes minutes (burning at the stake for example) but easily days of immense pain, hanging on brutally pierced limbs with full body weight. Moreover, the victim cannot undergo the pain in a passive way but has to move his naked body constantly in despair to be able to breathe and find some relief, becoming totally exhausted but remaining conscious for a very long time in an extreme agony.

  • it is extremely humiliating in nature, being on display fully naked with those typical;y helplessly spread arms, hanging down and suffering without any power, all bodily functions visible to the spectators (urine, stool, erections). Such extreme humiliation, reducing the victim to a stripped, defenseless, immobilized object, permanently fixed to a beam of wood, of course is a strong deterrent as well.

  • it’s such a simple and somewhat indirect and slow way to execute the victim that its real nature is not immediately clear, like it is with most other methods. Also, by the cultural and religious interpretations its cruel nature is masked and concealed. Most clearly by the very common addition of a loin cloth in images, apparently in order to preserve the modesty of the victim… The idea is totally absurd: a treatment to punish and kill a bare victim by extreme pain and humiliation will never be softened by providing some clothing to avoid full exposure. But this wrongly adds some idea of humanity to the torment that it really is, as nudity was an important element of the torture on the cross: it symbolizes loss of control and power. The presumed addition of a comfortable pedestal to stand on (with pierced feet…) surely is another example of the way crucifixions are often rendered less cruel than they really were.

  • finally, the extreme scale in which this method was applied, as discussed, is still beyond imagination. Fully acceptable as it was, for any non Roman citizen, the properties described made it highly popular for those ever practical Romans, for many centuries…

    It all remains fascinating that this easily explains the existence of this forum, for anyone who has found out about the nature of this important historical practice! Some pictures are attached again, to support the imagination!

View attachment 511571 View attachment 511572 View attachment 511573 View attachment 511574
Click to expand...
Interesting images! The first time I was crucified I panicked after a few minutes and begged my Master to take me down. His response was to fit me with a ball gag to shut me up. I had support from the cornu shoved up my ass but the strain on my arms and shoulders was incredible and I had to try to raise my upper body to alleviate the pain. It took all of my energy to do that and, in my efforts, I involuntarily fucked myself with the cornu and had the hardest erection I had ever experienced. The juxtaposition of pain and pleasure is almost impossible to describe. Since that time I have learned to relax and go with the flow, so to speak.
 
A chance to see 3 lovely blondes nailed on the cross. Those pictures came from femaleschrist
DSC_0479 (3).JPG No WM - Photos - 20 mars.jpg DSC_0731 (5).JPG DSC_0626 (4).JPG Roxane couleur (No WM)_-2.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Almost looks real.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom