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

Were females breast flogged to ribbons before crucifixion?

Go to CruxDreams.com
Eulalia said:
Accounts of martyrdoms, and a few non-Christian sources, refer to women's breasts being torn with hooks in the course of routine torture -
although we have to be cautious of such sources, this is mentioned so frequently as if it was more or less taken for granted.
Click to expand...
Most respected Eulali,
Are you implying that those respected historians and chronicalers may have inserted fake news stories of breast tearing just because it got them off and sold more scrolls. Rupertus Murdocus to scribes: "More breast tearing hooks. We sold out on that last week!"
 
Eulalia said:
Accounts of martyrdoms, and a few non-Christian sources, refer to women's breasts being torn with hooks in the course of routine torture -
although we have to be cautious of such sources, this is mentioned so frequently as if it was more or less taken for granted.
Click to expand...

Like in the McDonalds ads the juicy burger weighs in at two pounds, but on your bun is paper thin?
 
Eulalia said:
Accounts of martyrdoms, and a few non-Christian sources, refer to women's breasts being torn with hooks in the course of routine torture -
although we have to be cautious of such sources, this is mentioned so frequently as if it was more or less taken for granted.
Click to expand...
But to confess my own fantasies: nice big fishhooks in the areolas is, I think very becoming to well-turned breasts. I would not enjoy ripping out (to much real gore) but a little tugging and twisting could be a lot of fun.
 
We are talking about the useless mutilations. Women of this forum could have a different fantasies but no one of them wants to be mutilated... In their fantasies of course.
 
AlexArts said:
We are talking about the useless mutilations. Women of this forum could have a different fantasies but no one of them wants to be mutilated... In their fantasies of course.
Click to expand...
I believe that in real life mutilations are ALWAYS useless. In fantasy, if minor mutilation does not interfere with the large action, the thought can be stimulating. Can it not?

Any description, for instance, of cutting of breasts (in fantasy) will totally turn me off. But my description of the hooks above arouses me. Are we allowed our own fantasies on CF, it we don't force them on others (and NEVER force anything on another person in RL)?
 
The single specific mention of a woman crucified was in the writings of Josephus, a freedwoman named Ide. The passage has been posted on CF umpteen times, just google "josephus ide."

Ten years ago Tarquinius Rex wrote a story that I believe is still somewhere around CF. He called the freedwoman Didi, and Steve Cordero did the HOLY SHIT!!! illustration.
 

Attachments

  • 0742F324-981A-4568-AF63-C9F733ABBB07.jpeg
    0742F324-981A-4568-AF63-C9F733ABBB07.jpeg
    301.6 KB · Views: 373
AlexArts said:
Of course... Can you show me this writings?
Click to expand...


Certainly.

"In Josephus' Antiquities (18.79f), we hear of "the freedwoman of a Roman eques who, in league with the priests of a temple of Isis in Rome, had helped him to deceive the woman he longed for, was crucified under Tiberius along with the priests of the Egyptian goddess, who were not Roman citizens but only peregrini" (Hengel, Crucifixion, 1977, pp. 60).

And we know of a certain Blandina, who, during the persecutions of Christians in Lyons (ca. 177) was crucified upside-down, and scourged naked (though this is might be a pious embellishment or invention, there is no reason to disbelieve the essence of it), this is found in Eusebius (H.E. V.1.55.)

Relatedly, Herodotus recounts (4.202.1 and 9.120.4) the female relations/spouses of crucified victims being killed before them in their sight, as part of the punishment."

In addition

"Up to the time of Nero, in Rome the collective execution of all slaves on the premises where one slave had killed the master seems to have been undisputed. Under this emperor, in 61 C.E., a minority of the Senate in vain attempted to prevent a crucifixion of 400 slaves of the household of Pedanius Secundus, the prefect of Rome.

- Barth, Markus, and Helmut Blanke. The letter to Philemon: A new translation with notes and commentary. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2000."

It mentions all slaves, and I find it hard to believe that among 400 that none were women.

Also,

"In the case of Lucius Pedanius Secundus specifically, we may deduce that women were among those crucified because gender was one of the arguments raised in support of clemency. Since we are told that tradition prevailed and all of the former Consul's slaves were crucified, it appears women (as well as children) must have been among the victims of the mass execution.

The near-contemporary historian Publius Cornelius Tacitus writes in his Annals that:

[C]lamorous voices rose in reply from all who pitied the number, age, or sex, as well as the undoubted innocence of the great majority. Still, the party which voted for their execution prevailed. (14:45)"​

I believe that is enough in the way of examples.
 
Apostate said:
The single specific mention of a woman crucified was in the writings of Josephus, a freedwoman named Ide. The passage has been posted on CF umpteen times, just google "josephus ide."

Ten years ago Tarquinius Rex wrote a story that I believe is still somewhere around CF. He called the freedwoman Didi, and Steve Cordero did the HOLY SHIT!!! illustration.
Click to expand...
Didn't he do several variations. I think one I saw as Deborah on the cross. Speaking of piercing nipples with hooks, I now seem to remember he did that to Deborah to hang her titulus on her breasts on the way to the cross. I, in my on perversion, thought that a very nice touch
 
AlexArts said:
You right.
But how you explain that all ancient illustrations contains the depictions of crucified males only?
Click to expand...

Some measure of propriety perhaps? There are a few things in history that particular societies didn't prefer be brought to light, and were therefore left out of their records. In the last example it is mentioned that some tried to protest the executions on the basis of gender, I'm sure there were those that supported inequality of punishment.

This is not to suggest that crucifixions of women were common, I'm simply stating some historical sources showing that it was in fact done.
 
Elder Owl said:
This is not to suggest that crucifixions of women were common, I'm simply stating some historical sources showing that it was in fact done.
Click to expand...
Fair enough...
After the rebellion of Spartacus 6000 males were crucified at the same time. Six thousands... It means that this measure was very common for men and uncommon for women.
 
Yes I agree, far more men were definately executed by crucifixion. My point is simply that at least some women, at one point or another, were executed by crucifixion as well.
 
Elder Owl said:
Yes I agree, far more men were definately executed by crucifixion. My point is simply that at least some women, at one point or another, were executed by crucifixion as well.
Click to expand...
Like Eulalia said, there are a lot of horrible things that were developed only for women.
 
AlexArts said:
Like Eulalia said, there are a lot of horrible things that were developed only for women.
Click to expand...

I'm sure, though that steers closer to off topic for this post than I'd rather go.

As for the original question, though I have no historical proof one way or the other, I would say no. It isn't likely that they destroyed the breasts of crucified women, for a few reasons. It would speed death, which rather defeats the point. Another is that some people back then already took umbrage to women being executed in this manner at all, adding the brutality of breast destruction would likely incite some sort of discord. Finally, I don't believe it was necessarily a common part of crucifixion to flog first. In respect to the Gospel, Pilate attempted to placate the Religious leaders by having Jesus flogged. He had hoped to let Jesus go after that, but it didn't work, so he proceeded with the crucifixion. These were two seperate punishments in this instance, and not likely often used together I imagine.
 
I think the breasts tortures were a necessary things... Always
I've heard that there is an ancient tutorial for executioners. In this tutorial were a lot of recommendations to pay most attention to women's breasts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom