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

Musings on Ancient Practice

Go to CruxDreams.com
J

Juan1234

Guest
I’ve been thinking about the idea of the condemned criminal carrying his or her cross to the place of execution, and it has brought me to a conundrum. It seems that most historians agree this was probably common. So the logical part of my brain figures thusly: Either they carried the entire cross, or just the crossbeam. Most folks seem to think it’s unlikely they carried the whole cross - too heavy. Which means the upright stipes must have been in place already, ready and waiting to have naked criminals nailed to it. This would seem to imply that the authorities expected to be crucifying people on a somewhat regular basis, probably with some frequency. It also seems generally agreed that once a man or woman was stripped and crucified, he or she would not be coming down even for burial. The corpse would hang there and rot for deterrent value. Which implies that the crossbeam would not be taken down either. Therefore there would be no need for the next unfortunate criminal to carry the crossbeam to the execution site. Did they bring these beams back and make the condemned carry them just as a power play, to humiliate them? Or was crucifixion much less common than I tend to think? (In which case the old patibulum might rot or be taken down between crucifixions.) But in that case, why have a permanent stipes? Or even (as seems likely) multiple stipes (need help with the plural, Eulalia.) ;) Any insight from anybody? The simple idea that SOMEBODY has to carry the cross, so it might as well be the miserable wretch about o be nailed to it — doesn’t seem to hold up.

(Oh, by the way - if you haven’t seen it, I finished “Talbus.”) :)
 
Juan1234 said:
I’ve been thinking about the idea of the condemned criminal carrying his or her cross to the place of execution, and it has brought me to a conundrum. It seems that most historians agree this was probably common. So the logical part of my brain figures thusly: Either they carried the entire cross, or just the crossbeam. Most folks seem to think it’s unlikely they carried the whole cross - too heavy. Which means the upright stipes must have been in place already, ready and waiting to have naked criminals nailed to it. This would seem to imply that the authorities expected to be crucifying people on a somewhat regular basis, probably with some frequency. It also seems generally agreed that once a man or woman was stripped and crucified, he or she would not be coming down even for burial. The corpse would hang there and rot for deterrent value. Which implies that the crossbeam would not be taken down either. Therefore there would be no need for the next unfortunate criminal to carry the crossbeam to the execution site. Did they bring these beams back and make the condemned carry them just as a power play, to humiliate them? Or was crucifixion much less common than I tend to think? (In which case the old patibulum might rot or be taken down between crucifixions.) But in that case, why have a permanent stipes? Or even (as seems likely) multiple stipes (need help with the plural, Eulalia.) ;) Any insight from anybody? The simple idea that SOMEBODY has to carry the cross, so it might as well be the miserable wretch about o be nailed to it — doesn’t seem to hold up.

(Oh, by the way - if you haven’t seen it, I finished “Talbus.”) :)
Click to expand...
Interesting theory.
 
Juan1234 said:
Did they bring these beams back and make the condemned carry them just as a power play, to humiliate them?
Click to expand...

Wouldn’t put that past them ;)

On the other hand rotting wood is in constant need of replacement, which was important for keeping Messaline’s premium French wood business afloat.
 
My theory,(for what it's worth...)
I guess that at least a week since after the condemned had expired and rotted nicely...
The Patibilum would be crudely divested of it's unfortunate victim,and then separated from the Stipes,to be henceforth loaded upon a Mule & Cart,together with other available Crossbeams,for returning to the Crux-Depot/Prison,available for the next crucifixion(s).
 
The crucified woman would carry the crossbeam....to the cross uprights, probably several which remain permanent and in place.. their body is nailed to it by the wrists ....after a proper scourging and some hard anal rapes by her executioners.... and she is raised up...totally nude for all to lust after....her lustful body would actually help the executioners crucify her...placing her feet nicely on the stipes to be nailed to relive the pain in her wrists...then her lust filled body would begin her dance....body taken down after a few weeks and the crossbeam returned to be used in the future...

http://www.cruxforums.com/xf/attachments/crux08n-gif.525380/
http://www.cruxforums.com/xf/attachments/elaines-raising-gif.769479/
http://www.cruxforums.com/xf/attachments/sunshinecru12-test2-gif.457820/
http://www.cruxforums.com/xf/attachments/elaines-last-foot-nailed-gif.769505/
 
Last edited:
Juan1234 said:
I’ve been thinking about the idea of the condemned criminal carrying his or her cross to the place of execution, and it has brought me to a conundrum. It seems that most historians agree this was probably common. So the logical part of my brain figures thusly: Either they carried the entire cross, or just the crossbeam. Most folks seem to think it’s unlikely they carried the whole cross - too heavy. Which means the upright stipes must have been in place already, ready and waiting to have naked criminals nailed to it. This would seem to imply that the authorities expected to be crucifying people on a somewhat regular basis, probably with some frequency. It also seems generally agreed that once a man or woman was stripped and crucified, he or she would not be coming down even for burial. The corpse would hang there and rot for deterrent value. Which implies that the crossbeam would not be taken down either. Therefore there would be no need for the next unfortunate criminal to carry the crossbeam to the execution site. Did they bring these beams back and make the condemned carry them just as a power play, to humiliate them? Or was crucifixion much less common than I tend to think? (In which case the old patibulum might rot or be taken down between crucifixions.) But in that case, why have a permanent stipes? Or even (as seems likely) multiple stipes (need help with the plural, Eulalia.) ;) Any insight from anybody? The simple idea that SOMEBODY has to carry the cross, so it might as well be the miserable wretch about o be nailed to it — doesn’t seem to hold up.

(Oh, by the way - if you haven’t seen it, I finished “Talbus.”) :)
Click to expand...
Maybe the KKK burnt the crosses afterwards...

twonines said:
If you are a stockholder in Messaline`s business you need to declare an interest. Failure to do so can result in severe consequences.
Click to expand...
Are we busting Moore for insider trading now? She can't be caned until the last one is healed, so we'll have to come up with another punishment...
 
A few considerations :
Under the shogunate in Japan (16th to 19th century) there were special execution grounds outside the city. Rough estimations of the numbers of people executed there, gives an average of 1-2 per day. These execution grounds were kept outside the city, to avoid spiritual pollution of the city grounds, but I guess there was the practical issue which could have brought the Romans to keep crucifixion sites also outside the city gates : the smell of dead people's corpses.
Likewise, crucifixion under the Romans was for slaves, non citizens and lower classes. Most of the self-declared 'decent' romans, did not bother much about the cruel fate of these condemned. Add to this the low crime treshhold for being condemned to the cross - theft was enough, a rate of one to two per day average could be envisaged either. Not a lot, momentary, but on the long run, a huge crowd.
Finally, in hot dry climates, it needs only two weeks for a body to decompose. So, envisaging a cycling of two - three weeks for a stipes, one only needed, say thirty forty stipes maximum, and a comparable amount (a little more for spare) of crossbeams.
 
Barbaria1 said:
Wouldn’t put that past them ;)

On the other hand rotting wood is in constant need of replacement, which was important for keeping Messaline’s premium French wood business afloat.
Click to expand...
A boatbuilder's question. Why would the crossbeams rot more quickly than the stipes?

My thought is that the carrying of the crossbar was part of the humiliation and torture. Carrying it on raw, whipped shoulders, stumbling under the weight, was all part of the humiliating death.
 
theseus said:
A boatbuilder's question. Why would the crossbeams rot more quickly than the stipes?

My thought is that the carrying of the crossbar was part of the humiliation and torture. Carrying hot on raw, whipped shoulders, stumbling under the weight, was all part of the humiliating death.
Click to expand...
An excellent point. So SOMEBODY had to carry the cross beams BACK from the crosses for reuse, I suppose... Wonder who that would be.
 
Juan1234 said:
stipes (need help with the plural, Eulalia.
Click to expand...
Stipites, I think. But I shouldn't worry about it!

One point, in the Mediterranean lands where crucifixion was practised,
I think a good solid, well-seasoned stipes set on a well-drained hill
would have lasted lifetimes without rotting.
Insect damage might have been a greater threat.

Apparently a patibulum was originally a kind of wooden yoke
bound to the shoulders of a slave or criminal as a punishment in itself,
maybe victims had such a yoke tied on them, then they were driven out to the sessorium,
and hung up on it?
 
Loxuru said:
Slaves, I suppose.


I read once, that nails were expensive to produce, hence they were recovered and reused.
Click to expand...
Which would also explain why they were rarely used. Arguably the damage of nailing might result in a far faster death. This is the kind of thing the methodical Romans would calculate and, together with the cost of nails that broke or sunk too deep, would lead to most being tied, not nailed. Sorry if that disappoints some here.
 
Last edited:
Nails were expensive but could be reused, and repaired/reforged
the material was expensive, sure thats why the reuse.

Ropes are great in a static situationst, but with a crucified "dancing" they chafe, get contaimanited with all sorts of shit/sweat etc and loosen over time by the contant movement.
We are not talking about modern synthtic ropes here.
probably hemp or other strings of plant fibers, quite perishable when getting wet or contaminated.

Nails dont care about those problems.
Using nails would proclaim this is for real!!
More painfull and more intimidating statement to anyone who sees someone hanging on the nails.
A quick rescue with nails was quite impossible with ropes you need something sharp and a short time.
Nails you need something specific like a crowbar and it would take longer if yount want to damage the victim you want to rescue.

You could do it quicker inflicting massive damage like i guess after an execution, hack the arms below the nail with an axe or something similar.
Gravity will rip the feet at the nails, get the patibulum down remove nails without the body interfering.
Remove footnails on site, patibulum nails could be removed at base
Definite not the way to rescue someone:)
Also: even if rescued from the nails those puncture wounds getting infected might kill the victim days later.
(josephus friends 3 rescued 2 died anyways)

No not convinced by the mostly rope crucifixion theory, not dissapointed either;)
I guess there were crucifixions done with ropes or with a mix of ropes and nails.

The occasional broken point of a nail to be left in the wood.
Yeah iron was expensive, but its not like they are using gold or silver spikes, you recovered it if possible/practical

Same as arrowhead and the like in battle a percentage will never be recovered.
Thnk the occasional lost nail is peanuts in the grand scheme of things

IMO ropes have a lot of cons in relation with using nails.

added josephus reference
 
Last edited:
I think that the patibulum could have been reused, but there is a limit to how many times. Each time a nail is driven into the wood it causes damage and in time the wood will split and the whole thing becomes unusable. The stipes would have been thicker and could stand more nailings but would also have to be replaced after a time. Still, it would have lasted longer. Someone - I can't remember who or I would give them credit - once speculated that there may have been footrest that attached to the stipes and could be replaced more easily and cheaply than erecting a new stipes and would allow the stipes to remain in use longer. I incorporated this idea into one of my drawings:
Arena2012.jpg
Note the footrest which I envisioned as fitting into a notch in the stipes.

I do think the main idea of carrying the patibulum was to humiliate the condemned, but there may have been a practical aspect as well.
 
Naraku said:
I think that the patibulum could have been reused, but there is a limit to how many times. Each time a nail is driven into the wood it causes damage and in time the wood will split and the whole thing becomes unusable. The stipes would have been thicker and could stand more nailings but would also have to be replaced after a time. Still, it would have lasted longer. Someone - I can't remember who or I would give them credit - once speculated that there may have been footrest that attached to the stipes and could be replaced more easily and cheaply than erecting a new stipes and would allow the stipes to remain in use longer. I incorporated this idea into one of my drawings:
View attachment 790923
Note the footrest which I envisioned as fitting into a notch in the stipes.

I do think the main idea of carrying the patibulum was to humiliate the condemned, but there may have been a practical aspect as well.
Click to expand...

First time I’ve seen that drawing. It’s dated 2012, so before my time here. But I want to compliment you on it. I like the detailing and the perspective ... a fine piece of work IMO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom