Were the other men at Calvary "nailed" to their crosses?

[JVMOMOF4]

My son asked " Were the other two men at Calvary nailed to the cross or tied? If most people who were crucified then were tied to their crosses, why did they nail Jesus? " Can anyone help me answer him? Thank you!

 

[pippin]

Recently I saw a program on the History Channel on crucifiction. Archeologists have found the body of a first century Jewish man with a nail in his ankle. This would indicate that other people were also nailed to crosses.

 

[tobinatorstark]

Some might have been nailed, but I am sure that the 2 other men that were crucified that day were tied.

 

[inJESUS]

I never thought of this before. Why wouldn’t they be nailed in the first place?

 

[patrick457]

I think so. Then again, I’m in the camp that believes merely tying someone was the exception; that is, nailing was the rule.

 

[Catholicben]

I’ve always been taught that they [the romans] wanted the worst for Jesus, and tying was the normal from, nailing was the worst form.

 

[patrick457]

I’ve always been taught that they [the romans] wanted the worst for Jesus, and tying was the normal from, nailing was the worst form.

Yes, that was one of the theories followed. Some scholars have in fact argued that crucifixion was a bloodless form of death in that the victims were tied to the cross (Brandenburger 1969, Jeremias 1966). However, Martin Hengel (author of Crucifixion, 1977) takes along with Hewitt (1932) an opposing view and argues that nailing the victim by both hands and feet was the rule and tying the victim to the cross was the exception. Josephus for example, records that:

So the soldiers, out of the wrath and hatred they bore the Jews, nailed those they caught, one after one way, and another after another, to the crosses, by way of jest, when their multitude was so great, that room was wanting for the crosses, and crosses wanting for the bodies.

Perhaps, however, the number of individuals being crucified may in fact determine the manner in which the execution took form. For example in the case of 6,000 prisoners of war being crucified along the Via Appia between the cities of Rome and Cappua, it would seem plausible that the most quick and efficient manner of crucifixion was employed. That would be to simply tie the victim to the tree or cross with his hands suspended directly over his head. Death thus would occur within minutes or perhaps an hour if the victims feet were not nailed or tied down.

 

[marytk]

Recently I saw a program on the History Channel on crucifiction. Archeologists have found the body of a first century Jewish man with a nail in his ankle. This would indicate that other people were also nailed to crosses.

I was able to see this. (the ankle bone with the nail in it) it did make it seem all the more real. It was in Jerusalem

 

[Antegin]

When victims are just tied to the cross, a healthy man could take days to expire because he would have to exhaust himself before he could suffocate. Something would have to happen to the man to make him no longer want to push up enabling the lungs to take in air. The flaggelation Jesus took left Him in a shocky weakened state that would have killed Him all by itself. Nailing the victims through major nerves not only fastened them securely to the cross, but every effort to breath was excrutiating pain and only the undeniable will to live would make one push on the nailed feet to take one more breath. That will to live kept people nailed on the cross alive for days, so to get things moving on, the Roman soldiers would break the femur, the most painful bone break in the body, but also very effective at stopping the crucified from getting even one more breath.

 

[patrick457]

When victims are just tied to the cross, a healthy man could take days to expire because he would have to exhaust himself before he could suffocate. Something would have to happen to the man to make him no longer want to push up enabling the lungs to take in air. The flaggelation Jesus took left Him in a shocky weakened state that would have killed Him all by itself. Nailing the victims through major nerves not only fastened them securely to the cross, but every effort to breath was excrutiating pain and only the undeniable will to live would make one push on the nailed feet to take one more breath. That will to live kept people nailed on the cross alive for days, so to get things moving on, the Roman soldiers would break the femur, the most painful bone break in the body, but also very effective at stopping the crucified from getting even one more breath.

That was the reason Jesus died rather quickly–He was already very weakened physically and emotionally. Add to that serious blood loss caused by the scourging, which causes a state of shock among victims (in fact, a few victims have died due to this brutal scourging).

Nailing someone through the palms/wrists are not sufficient to kill a man (though it would be very painful, especially in the palm region), though days of hanging there without food and drink or protection from the sun, coupled with the above factors that you mention are sufficient to send a lot of men to their deaths.

 

[roanoker]

Everything I’ve read about it indicates that some were tied and some nailed. Tying was easier for the Romans as getting the nails out was more time consuming.

 

[patrick457]

Everything I’ve read about it indicates that some were tied and some nailed. Tying was easier for the Romans as getting the nails out was more time consuming.

Another time-consuming work is producing the nails. I’ve heard the Romans would just reuse the same nails over and over to cut the costs, if the nails were not taken out by people who sought them as amulets, that is.

 

[patrick457]

Recently I saw a program on the History Channel on crucifiction. Archeologists have found the body of a first century Jewish man with a nail in his ankle. This would indicate that other people were also nailed to crosses.

That was Jehohanan bar-Hagakol. The nail penetrated the lateral surface of Jehohanan’s bone emerging on the middle of the surface in which the tip of the nail had become bent. The bending of the tip of the nail upon itself suggests that after the nail penetrated the tree or the upright it may have struck a knot in the wood thereby making it difficult to remove from the heel when the victim was taken from the cross.

http://davidritsema.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/crossheel.jpg
Jehohanan’s heelbone (right) with a reconstruction (left).

Remains of olive wood found between the head of the nail and the heel bone suggest that prior to penetrating the heel bone the nail was driven through a wooden plaque so as to increase the head of the nail thus making it difficult for the victim to free his legs from the upright.

The Jewish Roman World of Jesus | About Dr. Tabor
An artist’s conception of Jehohanan’s crucifixion. Noticeably, in here Jehohanan is pierced by one nail at both heels.

Despite the assertion by Dr. Nicu Haas in his 1970 article that both legs were affixed by one nail, a subsequent reexamination by Joe Zias and Seketes in 1985, found that many of the conclusions upon which his attempted reconstruction were made, were flawed. For instance, the nail which he reported to be 17-18 centimeters in length was actually only 11.5 cm thus making it anatomically impossible to affix two feet with one nail. Furthermore, there was no evidence of traumatic injury to the forearms, therefore it would appear that Jehohanan was bound AND nailed to the cross as shown in the figure below.

http://www.centuryone.org/images/cross.gif
An artist’s conception of Jehohanan’s posture at crucifixion. You can see that in this conception, the arms are tied while the ankles are nailed.

 

[colliric]

I do not believe it was so. They were probally tied.

 

[Jolly_Joe]

We don’t know.

It doesn’t matter.

JJ