Sparrow

Anybody note that this site uses the Shroud of Turin to support its findings?

Amaleq13

You're talking about a single long nail through both ankles? If so, ouch. And the seat would be to prolong the agony by preventing suffocation, right?

Gotta hand it to those Romans. They knew how to have a good time.

Artemus

I saw that and was going to comment on it. I would take anything that this site says with a rather large grain of salt. I may look at some of the references it gives, though.

Sparrow

Make that, ahem, a pillar of salt. (that's what I love most about the bible, there's a reference for everything!. Except maybe microwave ovens and ...)

I don't doubt that some of the references might be usable, but the level of scholarship is disturbing.

spin

If I were to consider the subject of crucifixion seriously, I'd need something to break out of the airy fairy hypotheses and gets to evidence from the era. How can one really know anything about what happened then unless we have something from the period, like that ankle with part of the nail still through it (which resolves some of the story for at least one case), and/or a Roman (or similar) account which is explicit regarding the techniques used?


spin

rlogan

Joe Zias was the Curator of Archaeology/Anthropology for the Israel Antiquities Authority from 1972 to 1997 wrote this article:

Crucifixion in Antiquity

There's a photo in there of what Amaleq13 referred to. Some diagrams.

There's some good data in there - from Dacchu POW's in WWII for example.

The upshot, as captured by our lead internet scholar and Journal of Composite Studies and Bush Field Repairs editor:

"Thus the manner in which the victims were crucified was not fixed by law but appears dependent on the number of individuals involved, the sadistic ingenuity of those carrying out the execution and the time needed for this spectacle to have its maximum deterrent effect."

Llyricist

Well that at least is evidence of how they thought it was done when the shroud was painted.... possibly 500+ years ago.

Sparrow

Yes, but a painting of the Sun going around the Earth from 500 years ago would be evidence of how they thought the solar system operated, but poor evidence for geocentrism.

I'm concerned that the painter of the shroud had no other evidence than his bible. Had the painter had some firsthand evidence of what a real shroud from a crucifixion victim looked like, that would mean more, to me anyway.

But as I said earlier, if the person who put that site together is unconcerned about these issues, what other examples of dubious scholarship exist?

capnkirk

Alas...

Mel Gibson never claimed historical accuracy. His publicly announced intent was to be as true to the Gospel account as possible. He never claimed the Gospel to be fact (though I'm sure he believes 'tis so.). Some of you guys have been attacking a straw dog.

spin

I have as much interest in Mad Max's faith flick as I do in the mating habits of Galapagos lizards. His only lethal weapon is boredom, though perhaps the film is payback to all his fans. In fact you might say he's holding the church to ransom in this year of living dangerously -- or was that last year? He's surely giving women what they want with it.

Aren't you vaguely interested in what can be known from ancient times about crucifixion?


spin