Height Of The Cross...

[thehangingtree]

Jesus is often depicted on a cross that holds him high above the crowds which was probably not likely to happen. In Judea trees tend to be short and not particularly straight. Plus making a square cross would require hand sawn lumber that if they were going to put that much work into some wood they would build somthing with it besides a cross. Also try lifting a pole with even a 100 lb (45kg) woman attached to one end high enough to get sufficient wood into a hole and you can see how difficult that would be.

THT, Inc. does not have these issues in today's crucifixion as he has a generous supply of kiln dried cedar and a buff crew of assistants to hoist the cross...
So the question is...
You have been condemned to death on the cross. Would you find it worse to be high above the crowd as in Eulalia's crucifixion...



...somewhat lower and and more accessible as in Messaline's....



or even lower where you are at eye level with those who crucified you and now taunt you in you agony?



You thoughts????
Tree

 

[Fantasmo]

Why not discussing this on a "real world" level as well, instead of limiting it to the fantasy (death penalty)?

With a forum friend I am currently discussing a crux play project where the female victim wants to be "high above the crowd".
This is causing problems that you mentioned: The forces and torques get really huge, erecting it is a problem and stabilizing it in an upright position as well.
In said project a big effort was made in planing and technical preparation, so it can work.
Being high above the ground is emphasizing the "exposure" aspect of crucifixion.

On the other hand I am having intense discussions with an other "would like to be if she could"-crux-lover who preferred to be crucified (in play or also her wilder fantasies) at eye level because an important part of the fantasy (either way) is communication and interaction with the crucifex.

Somewhere in between would be ideal imho. Low enough to allow communication, but high enough to feel a bit exposed.

I am not that sure if "as simple as possible" really is a valid base to claim "raw round wood was used for the cross".
In human history people always have gone to great lengths to build torture devices.
Look at the ornamented torture devices like vaginal pear etc.

Execution was also a means of suppression and those in power were ready to invest a bit to make it an impressive display of power.
War-time mass crucifixions at a battle field may have been a different case, but crucifixions after a trial may be different.

In comparison: Gallows were built, despite a simple tree being sufficient to hang somebody.

 

[thehangingtree]

"In comparison: Gallows were built, despite a simple tree being sufficient to hang somebody." Fantasmo

That they were but a few found their way to the noose dangling from a hanging tree...


Tree... as in The Hanging Tree...

 

[Fantasmo]

"In comparison: Gallows were built, despite a simple tree being sufficient to hang somebody." Fantasmo

That they were but a few found their way to the noose dangling from a hanging tree...

View attachment 42549
Tree... as in The Hanging Tree...

Sure, like "raw crosses from round sections of trees" were used as well, no doubt.
But I am persuaded that in "official" crucifixions more sophisticated constructions could be seen.
And each have their "charm"

 

[Eulalia]

THT, Inc. does not have these issues in today's crucifixion as he has a generous supply of kiln dried cedar and a buff crew of assistants to hoist the cross...
So the question is...
You have been condemned to death on the cross. Would you find it worse to be high above the crowd as in Eulalia's crucifixion...
You thoughts????
Tree

Well I'd be pissed off that I'm right up here and nobody's looking at me ​

​

My ideal would be on a hill like Calvary where my Cross could be seen from far and wide,​

and I'd be exposed to the weather, scavenging birds etc.​

In such a location, the Cross itself wouldn't need to be as high as in the first picture -​

as Fantasmo says, there'd be problems getting it up and keeping it standing steady -​

a height like in the middle picture would place my breasts within groping reach,​

and my pussy at tongue level, for regulation height soldiers,​

that would be sufficient, such a Cross would still be prominent on the skyline.​

​

 

[Fantasmo]

a height like in the middle picture would place my breasts within groping reach,​

and my pussy at tongue level, for regulation height soldiers,​

that would be sufficient, such a Cross would still be prominent on the skyline.​

​

Sounds like the perfect setup. A small step ladder still may permit "whispering something in your ear"

 

[thehangingtree]

"Well I'd be pissed off that I'm right up here and nobody's looking at me " Eulalia​

​

I'm sure you would be, but you are not crucified for your satisfaction, only ours...​

​

perhaps a shorter stipe would suffice...​

​

Tree​

​

(total asshole and prick... yeah, I know)​

 

[messaline]

Fantasmo said :

Somewhere in between would be ideal imho. Low enough to allow communication, but high enough to feel a bit exposed.

I can speak of that because I've been crucified in reality (with ropes),and, for me, I dont like to be seen in priority (just by some friends ) , but, and it's the most important feeling, I want to be able to intensely communicate with my lover , to merge with her ,
to reach a full orgasm aroused by her caresses, by her attendance and by the fact
that I'm completly and delightfully given to her rule, and for her pleasure...

Perhaps it's not asshole and prick, perhaps it's "romantic", perhaps it's unsophisticated or ingenuous, but it's "my reality" and I wanted to tell it !

Be quiet, you can continue, in CF, to crucify me for "your pleasure" first...
That's my fantazy and I need it...

Messa​

 

[Ducans]

Sounds like the perfect setup. A small step ladder still may permit "whispering something in your ear"

That's what I like too: feeling the hands taking all the time to crucify me from the moment they take of my last clothes putting me down on the ground, spreading my arms, ropes , again ropes, dragging my bound arms on the beam to the vertical post and stretching me until my body hangs at mouth height, taking the time to fix my ankles, beiing evaluate and refixed until the executioner is satisfied he can see all he wants and doiing what he wants too. beiing totally depending of his fantasies, for the time he wants too... Just in a place it's not cold.

 

[PhilX]

It's an interesting question. Of course it must have varied as would have been the actual methods of crucifixion. But I am not sure that timber was in such short supply, the Lebanon was famous for its forests, pines are far from short supply all round the Mediterranean, Holm oaks were also pretty abundant, so much so that the Greeks in the Bronze Age could only colonise coastal areas because their tools couldn't clear the forests. Also a cross made of seasoned pine twelve feet high & about eight inches diameter isn't that heavy, I know I've got one & I can lift it OK. Two or four men would have no problem lifting such a cross up with a person on it, Adgan has testified that in his account of his own crux experience. The actual timber wouldn't have to be squared or finished off in any special way. The buildings the Romans did had to have an enormous amount of timber for centering, I am sure they had as much of a supply as we do now, even if the area was short of timber the trade carried out in the whole empire kept everywhere supplied with everything necessary.

To make the execution the most humiliating I think the victim had to be exposed by the maximum amount to everyone watching, it probably meant that their feet would have been up at head height to those standing nearby. The idea of the short stipes about six or seven feet high has never impressed me. Also the method that all the 'experts' tell us of lifting the struggling kicking victim up hanging from the patibulum & then slotting that by means of a mortice & tenon to the stipes just seems impractical. Such a low set-up would make no spectacle, the victims would be too near the crowd, too easy to be mercifully despatched! Most public executions were designed to be witnessed by the largest crowd possible (justice had to be seen to be carried out), beheadings, guillotining, hangings, etc. were all performed on a platform to be seen. I see no reason why those crucified were't done so high up in full view of everyone watching.

The crowds at Tyburn for a hanging were always enormous right up to the end of the 18th century. People really enjoyed executions & turned out in huge numbers to have a great day's entertainment. There was none of our squeamishness then, they took delight in the victims suffering & humiliation, even plying them with ale so that they would piss themselves! There is a great app, Black Plaques London, that gives lurid accounts of where hangings floggings etc took place, seems it was quite a town for going to see some sort of sadistic punishment! Just imagine the extra fun they must have had in ancient Rome at crucifixions.

 

[sebastian]

An interesting debate. On a personal level the ideal cross would be the shorter one allowing real contact with the other persons body. However in antiquity, as Phil rightly says, crucifixions would no doubt have attracted large crowds all wanting a good day out and a good view of the victim's suffering; so the tall cross would probably have been the case here.
Whether crucifixions carried out by the legions in the field would have merited the use of the tall cross I'm doubtful about. They wouldn't have the luxury of loads of timber like THT and would have used what was at hand.

 

[PhilX]

Yes that is true. I am sure that mass crucifixions by legions in the field, or like Alexander the Great did at Tyre, the Theban Legion, or the slave rebels along the Appian Way were carried out in a hasty way using what was to hand, the location was probably out of the way. So the procedure must have been a lot different from when noted criminals were tried & executed in a city or town, where due legal procedure had to be seen to be carried out. The latter a deterrent for would-be criminals to ponder - long-lasting painful & nasty, the former was just to kill a load of people, death to be hasty.

 

[Eulalia]

​

​

My ideal would be on a hill like Calvary where my Cross could be seen from far and wide,​

and I'd be exposed to the weather, scavenging birds etc.​

In such a location, the Cross itself wouldn't need to be as high as in the first picture -​

as Fantasmo says, there'd be problems getting it up and keeping it standing steady -​

a height like in the middle picture would place my breasts within groping reach,​

and my pussy at tongue level, for regulation height soldiers,​

that would be sufficient, such a Cross would still be prominent on the skyline.​

​

As ever, Crucificateur2 illustrates my fantasy perfectly!​

​

​

​

I'm the woman up there obediently taking my knickers off,​

while my fine black Executioner stands appraising my pliant body,​

I'll just pull my dress off and untie my hair,​

then offer him my wrists for him to perform his duty.​

 

[Fantasmo]

Just in a place it's not cold.

And his hands not beeing cold either

 

[Fantasmo]

Also a cross made of seasoned pine twelve feet high & about eight inches diameter isn't that heavy, I know I've got one & I can lift it OK. Two or four men would have no problem lifting such a cross up with a person on it,

Here I strongly disagree, from experience with lifting similar (technical) structures.
The crucified person is shifting the center of gravity of such a cross high above the ground, about 7ft (2.1m) in this case.
A pine cross of 20cm*20cm *3.6m will be about 100kg!
So, to "sketch an image", imagine that you have a 2.1m high stick with 170kg on top of it. That's what you are dealing with!
You have several "problems":
- The sheer weight to be lifted in combination with difficult accessibility (no handles, the angle of the semi erected cross makes it difficult for several people to work on the stipes)
- It is difficult to control the stipes around its longitudinal (roll) axis
- With the foot of the stipes not captured in a hinge, the cross will fall over backwards as soon as the helpers are pushing below its center of gravity, what is at 2.1m above ground! Not nice!
- Anchoring this safely in the hole is a nightmare of its own

The only way to safely erect such a cross would be with Y-forks pushing on the patibulum left and right. And because of the size and weight it takes at least 6-8 people to be safe!

So, from this perspective the mortice & tenon may have advantages. I would bet that this was used as well, occasionally.
From a "play" perspective, it sure is interesting to try out both.

 

[Fantasmo]

Yes that is true. I am sure that mass crucifixions by legions in the field, or like Alexander the Great did at Tyre, the Theban Legion, or the slave rebels along the Appian Way were carried out in a hasty way using what was to hand, the location was probably out of the way. So the procedure must have been a lot different from when noted criminals were tried & executed in a city or town, where due legal procedure had to be seen to be carried out. The latter a deterrent for would-be criminals to ponder - long-lasting painful & nasty, the former was just to kill a load of people, death to be hasty.

...using round wood, crude, fast, whereas public executions may have used more sophisticated constructions.

 

[Fantasmo]

As ever, Crucificateur2 illustrates my fantasy perfectly!​

​

View attachment 42626​

I think there is not "one fantasy", but this is very individual. I sure think that exposure for sure is part of the thrill.
My own cross (I shall post a bit info later) has a modular stipes for that reason, I can add a 70cm section to shift her higher up, if wanted

 

[messaline]

We can see here a great engineer !

 

[Fantasmo]

We can see here a great engineer !

I don't like bad surprises in such things and do make best use of my professional skills in this matter.

 

[messaline]

It was not a teasing, but a gratitude....