Crucifixion from an engineering standpoint
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-04-2015, 09:02 AM
RE: Crucifixion from an engineering standpoint
There's do it yourself...

and do it TO yourself....

I go for the first one...

heh

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes onlinebiker's post
17-04-2015, 09:15 AM (This post was last modified: 17-04-2015 07:42 PM by DLJ.)
RE: Crucifixion from an engineering standpoint
(17-04-2015 09:02 AM)onlinebiker Wrote:  There's do it yourself...

and do it TO yourself....

I go for the first one...

heh

Ah OK.

I think we were talking at cross-purposes there.

Wink

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
17-04-2015, 09:34 AM
RE: Crucifixion from an engineering standpoint
Is the guy nailed up known by the guys doing the nailing - as "a cross dresser"???

..

I'm betting they did... You'd need a bit of gallows humor to get through an 8 hour shift of nailing people up....

...
And I'll further bet they didn't hang out after work.... Wink

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-04-2015, 10:03 AM
RE: Crucifixion from an engineering standpoint
Something I thought was insane when I first read it was when the The Servile War (the slave revolts that involved Spartacus) ran out of steam, thousands upon thousands of combatants were crucified. Wikipedia gives a number of more than 11,000 total.

(30-03-2015 08:47 PM)Colourcraze Wrote:  IT'S THE HOLY GHOST oooOOOOOOOOOOooooooo
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-04-2015, 11:21 AM
RE: Crucifixion from an engineering standpoint
The OP raises a good point - although probably not for the reason he had in mind.

Crucifixion was less of an engineering problem than a logistical one. The uprights could be permanent and wouldn't have had to be all that high given that people were shorter. All you had to do was get the feet off the ground. The cross piece could be taken down and re-used and when the malefactor was securely attached to it lifted up and dropped on top of the stake.

BUT. In general they did not go through that much trouble with criminals. Common criminals were expended in the arena for the amusement of the crowd. Even the notion of galley slaves is a Hollywood concoction. Roman ships generally moved under sail and if they had to be rowed their own crews rowed them.

So when the Romans did crucify someone it was because they were making a point and that point was "DON'T FUCK WITH US OR YOU WILL BE HERE." If the Romans had wanted to kill "jesus" they would have run him through with a sword. They sure as hell would not have gone through the trouble of crucifying him only to allow him to be taken down for a proper burial. That would be the very antithesis of what crucifixion was about....but xtian special pleading always gets in the way.

As far as Crassus' prisoners go, Appian (writing 2 centuries later) tells the tale but Plutarch writing slightly earlier than Appian does not mention it. Earlier writers, Sallustius. Cicero, Caesar, Livius do not mention it either. So who knows?
The part of Livy's history covering the Third Servile War exists only in a summary but Lucius Annaeus Florus, writing in the mid 2d century AD did discuss Livy's account of the end of the war without reference to the crucified slaves. Florus, and thus presumably Livy, places the battle in Bruttium which is the "toe" of the boot and thus a long way from the Via Appia which by this time ran from Rome to Brundisium on the Adriatic.

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Minimalist's post
17-04-2015, 12:45 PM
RE: Crucifixion from an engineering standpoint
(17-04-2015 11:21 AM)Minimalist Wrote:  BUT. In general they did not go through that much trouble with criminals. Common criminals were expended in the arena for the amusement of the crowd. Even the notion of galley slaves is a Hollywood concoction. Roman ships generally moved under sail and if they had to be rowed their own crews rowed them.

Well; punitive gladiatorial "fights" were a later Empire phenomenon; for most of Roman history, gladiators were professionals.

(17-04-2015 11:21 AM)Minimalist Wrote:  So when the Romans did crucify someone it was because they were making a point and that point was "DON'T FUCK WITH US OR YOU WILL BE HERE." If the Romans had wanted to kill "jesus" they would have run him through with a sword. They sure as hell would not have gone through the trouble of crucifying him only to allow him to be taken down for a proper burial. That would be the very antithesis of what crucifixion was about....but xtian special pleading always gets in the way.

Someone who the local rulers claimed was rebellious or treasonous? Could well get themselves crucified as an example. But yeah, it was a public demonstration; part of that was having the bodies of criminals stick around for weeks.

(17-04-2015 11:21 AM)Minimalist Wrote:  As far as Crassus' prisoners go, Appian (writing 2 centuries later) tells the tale but Plutarch writing slightly earlier than Appian does not mention it. Earlier writers, Sallustius. Cicero, Caesar, Livius do not mention it either. So who knows?
The part of Livy's history covering the Third Servile War exists only in a summary but Lucius Annaeus Florus, writing in the mid 2d century AD did discuss Livy's account of the end of the war without reference to the crucified slaves. Florus, and thus presumably Livy, places the battle in Bruttium which is the "toe" of the boot and thus a long way from the Via Appia which by this time ran from Rome to Brundisium on the Adriatic.

What else would they have done with thousands of rebellious slaves? They certainly killed them. And they would have headed back to Capua to demobilise in any case, with or without the survivors as prisoners. Our sources are spotty but I'm not aware of anyone who seriously disputes that particular incident.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
17-04-2015, 02:03 PM
RE: Crucifixion from an engineering standpoint
Quote:Well; punitive gladiatorial "fights" were a later Empire phenomenon; for most of Roman history, gladiators were professionals.


Gladiatorial training was expensive and they would not waste time on common criminals although some of the better physical specimens could be offered the "opportunity." Most were thrown to wild beats or burned alive. Other common criminals were sent to the mines as slaves which was also a death sentence.

Quote:Someone who the local rulers claimed was rebellious or treasonous? Could well get themselves crucified as an example. But yeah, it was a public demonstration; part of that was having the bodies of criminals stick around for weeks.

Ever notice that the "jews" were so perturbed about "jesus" hanging on a cross on the Passover that they had to take him down but no one gave a shit about the other two criminals who were supposedly still up there with him? A little more special pleading from the jesus freaks.

Quote:What else would they have done with thousands of rebellious slaves? They certainly killed them.

I'm sure they did...probably right there on the battlefield. But it is a fact that the earliest writers we have for that particular situation do not mention anything like it. How do such legends grow? Consider the wise men tale about the nativity.
Matty says "magi came from the East." He doesn't say they were kings. He doesn't mention their names. He doesn't even say there were 3. Those details were invented later on and incorporated into the story.

Nevertheless

[Image: 1040-004-2659CE24.jpg]

It's a long way from Bruttium to Capua and thence to Rome.

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Minimalist's post
17-04-2015, 03:29 PM
RE: Crucifixion from an engineering standpoint
(17-04-2015 02:03 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  I'm sure they did...probably right there on the battlefield. But it is a fact that the earliest writers we have for that particular situation do not mention anything like it. How do such legends grow? Consider the wise men tale about the nativity.
Matty says "magi came from the East." He doesn't say they were kings. He doesn't mention their names. He doesn't even say there were 3. Those details were invented later on and incorporated into the story.

Caesar and Cicero don't mention the events more than obliquely, although they were both alive at the time; what we have of Livy barely mentions the affair, and Plutarch is almost as late as Appian. What else is there?

It's not like I have any particular vested interest, but if that's your standard for antiquity, you're left accepting literally nothing of the pre-modern era. There's nothing incommensurate or implausible in rebellious slaves being put up as an example and spectacle. Not to say there's material proof, but it seems pointlessly stubborn to insist against it when the other fragmentary sources merely offer silence rather than contradiction.

(17-04-2015 02:03 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  [Image: 1040-004-2659CE24.jpg]

It's a long way from Bruttium to Capua and thence to Rome.

Sure, perhaps a week's march. Except they were all going that way anyway.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-04-2015, 04:22 PM
RE: Crucifixion from an engineering standpoint
Bart Ehrman mentions in his blog that the crucified criminals were left up to rot and be scavenged by dogs, buzzards and other animals. It's felt that the crucifixes were very short, just so the feet couldn't touch the ground, both to save wood and allow the dogs and four footed scavengers to do their work. It's doubtful that Jesus was even taken down.

With all the thousands of people crucified over several hundred years archaeologists have found the grave of only one man who was crucified.



http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily...n-methods/

this photo shows that the nail went in sideways not through the top of the foot as most Jesus paintings show. The example in the photo is using a fake foot bone just to demonstrate and the actual nail is over on the left side.


[Image: Copy_of_Copy_of_foot.jpg]

Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.... on Donald J. Trump:

He is deformed, crooked, old, and sere,
Ill-fac’d, worse bodied, shapeless every where;
Vicious, ungentle, foolish, blunt, unkind,
Stigmatical in making, worse in mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes dancefortwo's post
17-04-2015, 04:35 PM
RE: Crucifixion from an engineering standpoint
(17-04-2015 08:38 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(17-04-2015 08:33 AM)cjlr Wrote:  They're quite historically accurate. The Romans crucified tens of thousands of people. Although most crosses weren't actually crosses like in Christian iconography; usually they just used poles, but T, X, and Y structures weren't entirely unknown.

And they put them up by digging holes and dropping the shafts into them. That's a pretty easy job for a half dozen guys, when the person on the cross can't move at all.

Yeah,
  1. Nail (or tie) guy to cross
  2. Lift cross upright and plant in hole
  3. suffering, agony, death
  4. Prophet.

5. Collect money from believers.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: