-
Sign up or login, and you'll have full access to opportunities of forum.
Surviving Crucifixion
- Thread starter Nuala
- Start date
CrossMyHeart89
Spectator
Once I've been crucified and my cross raised, I wouldn't want to be rescued. I'd rather die than live with paralyzed hands anyway...
D
Deleted member jedakk
Guest
That is a big consideration all right. In a Roman crucifixion using nails through the wrists and feet, and considering the size of the nails used, there could be permanent damage.
I did some calculations years ago based on the material properties of a wrought iron Roman nail and figured out that to carry the stresses from a 150 pound victim, the nails would need to be about 0.35 inches square at the point where they entered the wood. Since Roman nails were tapered, the part that passed through the wrists or feet would have been larger, maybe as big as 0.4 inches square where they passed through or between bones. This is a minimum; I doubt that Roman executioners gave a lot of thought to that, just used nails that were at least "big enough" to do the job.
Here's an X-ray of a human foot with a square Roman nail cross-section superimposed:
The blue circle is an approximation of the size of a nail head proportional to a Roman nail of that size. The scale is based on the size of my own foot, which is a US size 13, so for most people the nail would be bigger relative to the foot and the space available for it to pass through. I think a nail driven like that would either break one or both of the bones adjacent to it or tear the ligaments at the joints above and spread them apart.
Here's the same size nail superimposed on a wrist:
There's no guarantee that an executioner would get the nail precisely as I've shown it, but that seems to be the likely location, what some refer to as the "hollow spot" just where the "lifeline" of your palm ends. A nail driven there would either break one or more of the small bones or else tear the ligaments apart between them and spread them, which I think is more likely. It would be difficult to miss the Median Nerve as this is very close to the Carpal Tunnel, so yes, you'd have permanent nerve damage and some paralysis of fingers, but I doubt that you'd lose the entire use of your hand.
As I think about how you'd have rescued a crucifixion victim nailed to a cross in a public place back in Roman times, it seems really unlikely that anyone would have been successful in pulling that off. Probably "rescue" meant somehow getting to them long enough to slip a knife under their ribs and end their suffering.
Attachments
I think that's pretty typical of nails found on Roman sites,
the kind used to nail tiles to roofs, for example.
D
Deleted member jedakk
Guest
You are probably aware of the enormous hoard of Roman nails of all sizes found at Inchtuthil in Scotland, somewhere around 800,000 of them in very good condition. I used pictures of some of those to estimate the proportions of Roman nails, i.e. taper and head sizes, when I was doing my analysis of the size of nails that would be required to crucify someone. The Glasgow Steel Nail Company has a good article on their site about Inchtuthil: http://www.glasgowsteelnail.com/romans2.HTM
Trevor Barford
Spectator
I read somewhere that someone in Roman times managed to get three of his friends taken down after crucifixion but only one out of the three of then survived the overall ordeal. I would imagine the other two would have died from infection and the associated injuries from crucifixion. Can remember where I read about the above.
Trev
Trev
THT Inc. bought a lot of them!!!
M
montycrusto
Guest
I read something very similar in a book on the Turin Shroud.
D
Deleted member jedakk
Guest
That was Josephus, who asked General Titus, later Emperor Titus, to have three of his acquaintances taken down from crosses. One of them survived. He didn't write any details about the manner of the passing of the other two, whether from infection or other reasons. They might even have been injured before the Romans crucified them, just speculation.
Fox-on-Cross
Great-Cruxinquisitor
For Roman blacksmiths it is easier to make thick nails then thin. For building roofs and ships only large nails are needed. Here is so jedakk said the size of the pass from the nail 0.4x0.4 inches what means 1x1cm. Such a crazy wound is irreparable.
D
Deleted member jedakk
Guest
That's about the size of a .38 caliber or 9mm bullet, and a lot of people do heal from such wounds, which is not to say that they don't leave scars, permanent disabilities and limitations, etc. It's a big hole in a body.
One thing to remember about such a nail wound, however, is that soft tissue is mostly pushed aside as the nail passes through, and will tend to rebound if the nail is removed. So the actual wounds a victim would have if taken down from the cross might not actually be 1 cm square or whatever. However, at least part of that tissue in the wound would have been damaged and non-viable and would become necrotic, so that's another issue in recovery.
malins
Stumbling Seeker
Actually there's been a bit of discussion, steel rods of somewhat smaller size - but sometimes approaching that - will sometimes be put right through bones for medical purposes. Of course they aren't crudely hammered through, they're sterile, smooth etc. I'd think a huge amount of injury would come from the way the nail is working in the wound when weight is put on it, the victim moves, and such; and the fact it's square and will scrape bone and tissue; ... and infection, necrosis etc. Apart from direct nerve damage (uuuh, bad enough already) - putting the nail through is maybe just the very beginning of the serious injuries. Anyway I'll be trying to write a crux scenario where nails are used but a chance is left for the victim to survive if a certain condition is met. Some of the information here I'm sure will be helpful...
old slave
FELIS RESPICIENS
At regular intervals on this forum, pictures and stories depict the use of a piece of wood between wrist and nail-head. This is not the most common method, but appears enough to make me suspect there might be some truth that they were used. (There are better scholar-members, who may know the answer?)
Anyone who has tried to drive a large nail through a small piece of wood will know the danger of splitting it. We will quickly drill a hole now, but back then, a hole would have meant a lot more effort. So why do it?
I presume it was needed to stop the limb coming off the nail, even though the nail had a head big enough to stop the wood coming off. So the presumption is that the wound is at least as big as the head of the nail, not just as big as the shank. I can easily visualise this happening with the writhing and twisting of the limbs, whether as deliberate acts to try to find comfort, or involuntary spasms, cramps etc enlarging the original nail-hole.
Such a large set of wounds must influence the outcome and may alter the conclusions of some of these posts.
Anyone who has tried to drive a large nail through a small piece of wood will know the danger of splitting it. We will quickly drill a hole now, but back then, a hole would have meant a lot more effort. So why do it?
I presume it was needed to stop the limb coming off the nail, even though the nail had a head big enough to stop the wood coming off. So the presumption is that the wound is at least as big as the head of the nail, not just as big as the shank. I can easily visualise this happening with the writhing and twisting of the limbs, whether as deliberate acts to try to find comfort, or involuntary spasms, cramps etc enlarging the original nail-hole.
Such a large set of wounds must influence the outcome and may alter the conclusions of some of these posts.
malins
Stumbling Seeker
Hmmm.
I'm imagining being fixed with nail-heads driven in flush to the skin and twisting around there, maybe that in itself would enlarge the wound as my flesh would be working against the nail-head too, and when we look at the Roman nails, that part also is rough and angular, not a clean disc. (uuurgh)
So that piece of wood might in fact keep the nailhead away from the opening of the wound, and allow to twist more freely. So the wound wouldn't necessarily be as big as the nailhead, but it could slowly go that direction, and maybe that piece of wood works against that. It would be one of those 'small mercies' that make suffering longer...
D
Deleted member jedakk
Guest
Looking at the size of the nail head in the pictures and examples in museums of Roman nails, I just can't buy into the idea that a victim could ever pull the wound over that, especially considering the spacing of the bones.
My own theory, with no evidence whatever to back it up, is that, assuming that the Romans ever actually used pieced of wood between the nail head and the victim's wrist or foot, it was because the nails could bend under the victim's weight, pressing the lower edge of the head into the flesh. Her struggling would tend to make that edge cut deeper, perhaps leading to serious bleeding, particularly on the wrists, and an early exit. A piece of wood might protect the victim's flesh from being cut by the nail head. That is, if anyone ever actually used them.
My own theory, with no evidence whatever to back it up, is that, assuming that the Romans ever actually used pieced of wood between the nail head and the victim's wrist or foot, it was because the nails could bend under the victim's weight, pressing the lower edge of the head into the flesh. Her struggling would tend to make that edge cut deeper, perhaps leading to serious bleeding, particularly on the wrists, and an early exit. A piece of wood might protect the victim's flesh from being cut by the nail head. That is, if anyone ever actually used them.
I also doubt they would bother with predrilled wood washers which the would have to be as if they were not would depicted would split in two driving a nail through it...