Was Jesus Even Crucified? Part 6c

Part 6

WHEN Was Jesus Crucified?

Previous Parts:

Part 1 - Link
Part 2 - Link
Part 3 - Link
Part 4 - Link
Part 5 - Link
Part 6a - Link
Part 6c - Link

Part 6c – Gospels’ Dates for the Crucifixion

In part 6b I have reached the conclusion – following the lead of theologian Dr. Raymond E. Brown, that the confusion Eusebius exhibits over exactly when Jesus was crucified (if he was at all!) stems from the fact that he tried to shoehorn all manner of disparate secular historical data to fit the gospel narrative. To that I might add now, to show fulfillment of Daniel’s Seventy “Weeks,” particularly where Daniel’s prediction of an overthrow of Jerusalem by violence and warfare in the seventieth “week,” i.e., the very week after Messiah was to be cut-off, or the unction cast out. But I shall not concern myself with the Seventy Weeks here, just the information the Gospels give for dating the Crucifixion.

6c-1. During Caiaphas’ Tenure.

Mark is silent on which of the high priests during Tiberius’ tenure as Emperor was presiding when Jesus was allegedly crucified. But the Gospels gMatthew, gLuke and gJohn are in full agreement: it was Caiaphas: gMatthew states that the high priest was called Caiaphas (gMatt 26:3, 57), gLuke states that both “Annas” and Caiaphas were high priests the year John the Baptist started his career (gLuke 3:2), and gJohn states that Caiaphas was high priest the year that Jesus was hanged (gJohn 11:49, 18:13) .

Josephus dates Caiaphas’ tenure from approximately 18 CE to 36 or 37 CE.¹

6c-2. During Tiberius’ Tenure.

The other three Gospels, gMark, gMatthew and gJohn, are silent on who was Emperor, except by reference to Pilate, making Tiberius the Emperor by default. Luke, though, is explicit: he states that John the Baptist started dunking people in the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar’s government (gLuke 3:1), probably 28-29 CE. Jesus gets dunked (gLuke 3:21) and a short time later (gLuke 3:22), starts his own public career, which lasts about a year. The other three give a range, therefore, of 14 to 37 CE, with gLuke presenting a shorter stretch of about 28 or 29 to 37 CE.

6c-3: During Pilate’s Tenure.

Here, all four gospels are in agreement: it was Pontius Pilate who was the ruling Roman official at the time. The Passion narratives focusing on the Roman Trial, Crucifixion and Burial are leavened throughout with references to the Roman Prefect: gMark 15, gMatthew 27, gLuke 23 and gJohn 18:28-40, 19.

According to the extant copies of Josephus, Pontius Pilate was prefect from eleven years after Vitellus Gratus was appointed prefect, that is, about 26 CE,² until he was recalled and ordered to stand trial before the Emperor due to a massacre of Samaritans he committed by Vitellus in 36 CE.³

So this gives us a span of ten years, or, adding gLuke 3 into the mix, about seven to eight years. It is necessary, therefore, to further narrow it down and come up with a certain date. If that is possible.

6c-3.1 Excursus:

Not all scholars are convinced that Pontius Pilate was the Roman Prefect of Judaea only from 26-36 CE. Indeed, the context of both the sections of the Jewish War⁴ and Antiquities⁵ seems to indicate an accession by Pilate in 18 or 19 CE.⁶ And this would dovetail nicely with Eusebius’ complaint (see Part 6a) that the Roman government under Maximinus Daia forged a document that asserted that Jesus was crucifed in 21 CE.

6c-4: Day of the Month.

According to the Gospels, the Crucifixion was supposed to have occurred either on the Day before Passover, the 14th of Nisan, or on Passover itself, the 15th.

The Synoptics: gMark, gMatthew and gLuke place the event on the 15th, since the Last Supper was presented as a Passover (gMark 14:12-18, gMatt 26: 17-20, gLuke 22:7-15). All three identify the present-day Day before Passover, Erev Pesach, when the Passover lambs were slain, as the Day or First Day of Unleavened Bread. There may be a Jewish precedent for this, since the day before Passover is when observant Jews are supposed to look for all the leavening (chomnetz) in their houses and get rid of it (or eat it before a certain time). The Day before Passover is for them the busiest time of the year and is most certainly a day of preparation, just like the day before the weekly Sabbath, Erev Shabbos, is considered a day of preparation.

GJohn, on the other hand, is on record that the crucifixion occurred on the Day of Preparation for the Passover (gJohn 19:14), i.e., the 14th of Nisan, when the Passover lambs were slain at the House of the Holy Place (= the Temple in Jerusalem), because at the trial before Pilate, the Jews refused to enter the Roman Court lest they be ritually defiled, because they want to prepare for and eat the Passover once the trial is done (gJohn 18:28). 

Related to this, is the scene in all four canonical gospels depicting a scene where Pontius Pilate shows Jesus and and a certain Barabbas to the crowd, figuring the crowd will ask that Jesus be released, as he would rather they do, according to the gospels. Now this scene gives some scholars like John P. Meier reason (although a minor one) to believe that originally, the Synoptics and gJohn were in agreement: that the day of the month was Nisan the 14th.⁷ Except according to gMark, this was Pilate’s own habit: “At the festival it was Pilate's custom to release for the people a prisoner they requested.” (gMark 15:6).⁸ And according to both Josephus and Philo, Pilate was keen on brutalizing the Jews and undermining their laws. ⁹ So, assuming mark’s account has any basis in historical fact, Pilate would not be compelled to release any prisoner in time to enjoy the actual consuming of the Passover including the lamb on Passover Eve, but rather he very well could have customarily released him the following day.

6c-5: Day of the Week.

All of the gospels are in agreement that the crucifixion was supposed to have occurred on a Friday (Erev Shabbos), although their readers are not privy to this information until about the end of the duration of the crucifixion. The Synoptics announce this fact at the Burial of Jesus: “It was the Preparation Day¹⁰ (that is, the day before the Sabbath¹¹)” (gMark 15:42). Here Mark is referring to Erev Shabbos, not necessarily to Erev Pesach. Matthew just says the Jewish ruling class met with Pilate on “the next day, the one after Preparation Day,” (gMatt 27:62) which is a rather goofy way of saying the Sabbath or even Passover Day! Luke sees Preparation Day and the Sabbath as directly adjacent (gLuke 23:54), acknowledging the Jewish reckoning of when a calendar day ends and the next one begins. John, on the other hand, establishes that Sabbath Day as Passover Day (KJV: “for that Sabbath day was an high day”`¹²) also (gJohn 19:14, 19:31, 19:42). So Friday it is.

6c-6: Jesus’ Thirtieth Year.

Another clue is in gLuke 3:23, which states that when Jesus started his ministry (during or after Tiberius’ fifteenth year or 28-29 CE), he was about thirty years of age; except in the King James Version, the Young’s Literal Translation, the Latin Vulgate ¹³ and the original Greek, even the 1904 Greek text used by the Greek Orthodox Church and the RP Byzantine majority Text 2005, the text states that Jesus was beginning to be about thirty years of age.¹⁴ Now we could be charitable and call that to be between the ages of 25 and 30, or be rather strict about it and assume that the Arabic text is correct in saying that “Jesus began to enter into the thirtieth year,”¹⁵ i.e., was just past his twenty-ninth birthday.

Either way, to determine the date when Luke infers the death of Jesus, we first have to figure out when Luke says Jesus was born. Well that is certainly not easy. Jesus’ nativity is linked with that of John the Baptist, so that, Luke establishes the birth of Jesus to be about fifteen or sixteen months after the annunciation (Zechariah, priest of the course of Abijah).¹⁶ Now Luke (gLuke 1:5, “In the days of Herod, King of Judea”; 1:26 “In the sixth month”, 1:39, “At that time” / “In these days”; and 2:1, “At that time” / “ In those days”) appears to establish the two pregnancies and two births to have occured during the reign of King Herod the Great,16 which ended at his death in March / April of 4 BCE.¹⁷ Unfortunately for Luke, he also stated that the point of time mentioned in gLuke 2:1 was also the time when Caesar Augustus issued an edict ordering a census for the vast Roman Empire, and that (gLuke 2:2) the census occurred when Quirinus was governor of Syria, which was in 6 CE!¹⁸ It appears that Luke has shoved the 6 CE Roman census of Judea under Quirinus back to 4 BCE or perhaps earlier, such as the Matthean implied date of late 7 / early 6 BCE (gMatt 2:1, 2:7, 2:16). Now when we do the math, late 7 / early 6 BCE to Sept 28 – Sept 29 CE gives us approximately 34 years, possibly 35. “About” 30 years of age, but finishing up with it, really, and going on 35. A birth in late 5 / early 4 BCE yields about 32 years, which is closer but no cigar. Placing the birth of Jesus sometime in 3 BCE and his baptism by John the Baptist in 28 CE would yield almost exactly 30 years of age. But we miss the all-important census under Quirinis that ties the nativity of Jesus into Roman world events, don’t we?

But since Luke said he was beginning to be about 30 years of age, we can go with two approximate ages for Jesus, 25 (if we’re generous) and 29 (strict like the Arabic text – see above), and a birth in 6-7 CE. With the two ages we get a baptism date of 31-32 CE or 35-36 CE. That’s pushing the crucifixion rather close to or even beyond the end of Pilate's prefecture if Jesus was about 29, but perhaps Luke has a reason for it: after all, Josephus situates the death of John the Baptist about 34 to 36 CE.¹⁹ So a birth in 6 CE and a baptism in 35 CE ties Luke’s gospel into Josephus’ Antiquities. Which means Luke not only has manage to shove Quirinus’ census back into Herod the Great’s day, he’s also kicked the census and baby Jesus back into the time when Judea was being reduced to a Roman province!

South Park – Kick the Baby!! 

Click here if the embedded vid won’t play.

 

6c-7: The Age of the Temple.

Another possible reference to the Crufifixion is the age of the Temple noted in gJohn 2:20. Here, Jesus’ just previous statement was taken by the angry Jewish authorities to be a prediction of the destruction of the Second Temple. They note that the Temple itself has been under construction for 46 years. Josephus gives us two start of construction dates: 23 / 22 BCE and 20 / 19 BCE. ²⁰ Adding forty-six years yields two dates for this fracas: 24 / 25 CE and 27 / 28 CE respectively. ²¹ Noting that this is the first of three Passovers in gJohn, ²² gives a terminal date of 27 / 28 CE or 29 / 30 CE.

6c-8: Astronomical Confirmation

According to Dr. Raymond E Brown, “Astronomy has played an important role in the narrowing down the possible date of Jesus’ crucifixion. If Jesus died on the 14^th of Nisan, in which years during Pilate’s prefecture did that fall on Th[ursday ]n[ight]/F[riday ]d[aytime]?” ²³ He finds that the answer is not so obvious or certain, even though astronomers back then were quite mathematically accurate. Adding to the difficulty is the fact that the new moon had to be sighted accurately in Palestine, which could have been thrown off by bad atmospheric conditions. ²⁴ But it appears that the Jews in the Second Temple period determined their dates by their lunar calendar, “and to keep it in approximate synchronicity with the solar year leap months had to be added.” ²⁵ Of course, we have exactly zero historical recores for when leap montyhs were added during the years 27-30 CE. ²⁶ Still, it appears that the most likely dates for when the death of Jesus on a Friday, Nisan 14^th, allegedly occurred were: 7 April, 30 CE, 3 April 33 CE and possibly 11 April 27 CE. ²⁷ Which dates are uncertain and moot anywat because the Jewish people, priesthood and authorities during the Second Temple period used a lunar calendar.

Confirmation of this by myself using astronomical NASA data ²⁸ revealed that the date of the 14th of Nisan, according to the Julian calendar, may have fallen on a Thursday night - Friday on 11 April, 27 CE; 7 April 30 CE; and 19 April 37 CE. Now this, of course, is assuming that gJohn is correct about which day during the Passover season Jesus was supposedly crucified on! If the synoptics are right, of course, then the 14th of Nisan would have fallen on a Wednesday night - Thursday! Which yields us the possible dates for the 15th of Nisan occurring on Friday, 23 April 34 CE. ²⁹

 
6c-9: Conclusion.
 
My conclusion as to the date of the alleged crucifixion of the historical Jesus is that it cannot be determined from the Gospels of the New Testament. Sure, they all agree that Pontius Pilate was the prefect, and gLuke and gJohn says Caiaphas was the high priest, but any attempts to be more precise than that gives us dates varying from 28 CE to 37 CE. Trying to confirm a date with astronomical data turns out to be no help in nailing down a precise date.

(done)

Notes:

1.      Josephus, Antiquities 18.2.2 [33 - 35], 18.4.3 [95]

2.      Antiquities 18.2.2 [35] “When Gratus had done those things, he went back to Rome, after he had tarried in Judea eleven years, when Pontius Pilate came as his successor.”

3.      Antiquities 18.4.2 [89] “Pilate, when he had tarried ten years in Judea, made haste to Rome, and this in obedience to the orders of Vitellius, which he durst not contradict”

4.      Josephus, Jewish War 2.9.1 [168] and  2.9.2 [169]: “But when the Roman Empire was translated to Tiberius… Herod also built the city of Tiberias in galilee and in Perea [beyond Jordan] that was called Julias” (Tiberias was built about 20 CE), “Now Pilate, who was sent as procurator into Judea by Tiberius, sent by night these images of Caesar that are called effigies, into Jerusalem.

5.      Antiquities 18.2.5 [54] and 18.3.1 [55]: “So the Senate made a decree… his life was taken by the poison which Piso gave him…” (the murdered person was Germanicus Caesar, who was poisoned in 19 CE), “But now Pilate, the procurator of Judea, removed the army from Caesarea to Jerusalem… in order to abolish the Jewish laws. So he introduced Caesar’s effigies…”

6.      Two scholars who contend a 21 CE execution date are Daniel Schwarz and Robert Eisler. They are both cited by Helen K Bond, Pontius Pilate in History and Interpretation, New York / Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press, 1998, p. 1 n. 3 and p. 201 n. 35. She states that Schwartz, following Eisler (The Messiah Jesus and John the Baptist, New York, Lincoln Macveagh The Dial Press, 1931, pp. 13-20), argues unconvincingly that Pilate took up his prefecture in 19 CE; and, that the Acta Pilati, circulated in 311 CE during the principate of Maximin Daia, were not forged by the Roman government and that they did prove that Jesus was crucified in 21 CE.

7.  John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew. Rethinking the Historical Jesus, New York, The Anchor Bible Reference Library, Doubleday, a division of Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing, 1991, Vol. I, pp 386-401. Note particularly p. 400: "Yet, the obvious promise of the Barabbas narrative -- an amnesty or pardon granted to some Jewish Prisoner at Passover -- is that the amnesty or pardon was given precisely so that the Jew, upon release, could take part in the Passover meal. What would be the point of granting release to a Jewish prisoner on Passover Day after the Passover meal, the central ritual of Passover Day, had already taken place?"

8.     The Greek has it: Κατὰ δὲ ἑορτὴν ἀπέλυεν αὐτοῖς ἕνα δέσμιον ὃν παρῃτοῦντο. “Moreover, at the feast, he used to release (ἀπέλυεν) to them whom they requested. The word ἀπέλυεν being the third person singular imperfect indicative active of ἀπολύω, “loose from, undo, set free, release, relieve, send away, let go, [etc.]” So clearly it was Pilate's custom.

9.   Josephus; Antiquities 18.3.1-3 [55 - 64], also Samaritans 18.4.1-2 [85 - 89]; Jewish War 2.9.2-4 [169 - 177]. Cf. Philo, Embassy to Gaius 38.299-305, particularly lines 302 and 303 (emphasis mine):

 (302) "But this last sentence exasperated him in the greatest possible degree, as he feared least they might in reality go on an embassy to the emperor, and might impeach him with respect to other particulars of his government, in respect of his corruption, and his acts of insolence, and his rapine, and his habit of insulting people, and his cruelty, and his continual murders of people untried and uncondemned, and his never ending, and gratuitous, and most grievous inhumanity. (303) Therefore, being exceedingly angry, and being at all times a man of most ferocious passions, he was in great perplexity, neither venturing to take down what he had once set up, nor wishing to do any thing which could be acceptable to his subjects, and at the same time being sufficiently acquainted with the firmness of Tiberius on these points. And those who were in power in our nation, seeing this, and perceiving that he was inclined to change his mind as to what he had done, but that he was not willing to be thought to do so, wrote a most supplicatory letter."

10.  Preparation Day: Παρασκευή (noun, nominative feminine singular), “preparation, the day of  Preparation, before the Sabbath day of the Passover.”

11. The day before Sabbath: προσάββατον (noun, nominative neuter singular), “the eve of the Sabbath,” i.e., Erev Shabbos.

12. The phrase, “an high day”: μεγάλη ἡ ἡμέρα (adjective / article / noun feminine singular), “great / the / day” or in a more sensible arrangement, “the great day,” i.e., Passover.

 13. Et ipse Iesus erat incipiens quasi annorum triginta, “And Jesus himself was beginning [to be] about thirty years [of age].”

 14. Καὶ αὐτὸς ἦν Ἰησοῦς ἀρχόμενος ὡσεὶ ἐτῶν τριάκοντα, “And Jesus himself was beginning [to be] about thirty years [old].”

 15. Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible, quoted at Biblehub.com, Luke 3:23. Link: http://biblehub.com/luke/3-23.htm.

 16. Raymond E. Brown, The Birth of the Messiah, Garden City, NY, Doubleday & Co., Inc (1977), pp 256, 547

17. Ibid., p. 166 NOTE Matt. 2:1 in the days of Herod the King: “In 750 A.U.C. (4 B.C.) there was an eclipse [of the moon] on the night of march 12 / 13th, one month before Passover.… the best evidence favors March / April 4 B.C. as the time of Herod’s death.”

 18. Josephus, Antiquities 18.1.1 [1]-[10], 18.1.6 [23].

 19. Josephus, Antiquities 18.5.2 [115]-[119].

 20. Josephus, Antiquities 15.11.1 [380], Jewish War 1.21.1 [401].

21. Raymond E. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, New York, Anchor Bible Reference Library, Doubleday, a division of Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, Inc., 1994, p. 1374.
22. GJohn 2:13, 2:23 (first Passover); 6:4 (second Passover); 11:55, 12:1, 13:1, 18:28, 18:39 (third Passover).

23. Raymond E. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, p. 1375.

24. Ibid.

25. Ibid.

26. Ibid.

27. Ibid., p. 1376.

28. See NASA webpage at http://www.usno.navy.mil/USNO/astronomical-applications/data-services/spring-phenom.

29. Astronomical dates found by another researcher confirming gJohn’s Day before Passover / Day before the Sabbath crucifixion are: Firday, 22 March, 26 CE; Friday, 7 April, 30 CE; and Friday 3 April 33 CE. He also found the Synoptics’ Day of Passover / Day before the Sabbath crucifixion to be: Friday, 11 April, 27 CE; and Friday 23 April, 34 CE.  See the PDF at this link: http://www.biblicaltheology.com/Research/RamsundarP01.pdf.

Crucifixion the Bodily Support - "Biblical Evidence" - Installment 7.

Yes, the Romans crucified men bare-ass
naked.  For an obvious reason.

(Part 5g of the series: Crucifixion the Bodily Support)

Part 1 Part 2 Part 3 Part 4

Part 5a Part 5b Part 5c Part 5d Part 5e Part 5f

Epilogue.

What sort of gear was the instrument of Jesus' execution?

Taking each gospel individually, you have confusion. With Mark and Matthew, it could have been a simple impaling stake, pile-driven into him. With John, some kind of pole on which one was to be lifted... until we get to Pilate's court where the Jews demanded he be taken away and lifted up, i.e., hoisted, and then staurow'ed.  With Luke and Acts, he was hanging; he was fastened, fixed, or even planted on to something unspecified; and yes, he was staurow'ed.

But with harmonization I came up with a utility pole type, a mast type (with its yardarm), or an overhead beam between two poles. And an acuta-crux was present too: either in the form of an outrigged thorn-like stake or as a separate sharpened pole. This would have been the bodily support in a crucifixion.

G. Introduction to the Epilogue.

One thing I didn't touch on was Jesus' mysterious death. I didn't touch it because I thought they made it all up, that there was no basis for it in reality and that people do not die suddenly on a cross after a few hours. Crucifixion was a slow, lingering death. Well I came across a report from a few centuries back where someone who was suspended on wood took a drink of water and died suddenly.

But first, the circumstances of Jesus' death. In this, Mark, Matthew and John are in substantial agreement -- if you discount the fact that in Codex Sinaiticus and some other manuscripts it is recorded he was stabbed with a spear or lance and then he screamed out in pain, and then suddenly died. 

G.1. Death Account in Mark.

34 And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?" which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? 35 And some of them that stood by, when they heard it, said, "Behold, he calleth Elias." 36 And one ran and filled a spunge full of vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave him to drink, saying, "Let alone; let us see whether Elias will come to take him down." 37 And Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost. 

Mark 15:34-37 KJV (punctuation changes mine)

Mark reports simply that Jesus having been given vinegar to drink from the charged sponge, dies mysteriously. And given his death cry was with a loud voice, it seems he died from a separate act of violence to his person. This is more evident in the Greek: "ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς ἀφεὶς φωνὴν μεγάλην ἐξέπνευσεν. (And then Jesus, having uttered a great cry, breathed his last.)" And and the Latin: "Iesus autem emissa voce magna exspiravit. (And then Jesus, letting out with a great voice, breathed his last)"

Afterwards when Joseph of Arimathea appears before Pilate to requisition the body, Pilate is simply amazed that Jesus could die so soon. "And Pilate marvelled if he were already dead: and calling unto him the centurion, he asked him whether he had been [for] any while dead." (Mk 15:44) Mark says that the Roman Prefect is so amazed, he becomes in fact very skeptical and calls in the overseeing centurion to inquire if Jesus is really dead or not, just to make sure. Pilate knew that crucifixion, even with an acuta-crux impaling the person, was a slow, lingering death, much longer than just six hours.

G.2. Death Account in Matthew.

46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, "Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?" that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? 47 Some of them that stood there, when they heard that, said, "This man calleth for Elias." 48 And straightway one of them ran, and took a spunge, and filled it with vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave him to drink. 49 The rest said, "Let be, let us see whether Elias will come to save him." 50 Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.

Matthew 27:46-50 KJV (punctuation changes mine)

The circumstances of Jesus' death is exactly the same as in Matthew. After being given a drink, he apparently dies mysteriously and violently, and with a very loud cry. The Greek "ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς πάλιν κράξας φωνῇ μεγάλῃ ἀφῆκεν τὸ πνεῦμα. (And Jesus, again having cried loudly with a great voice, gave up his breath.)" and the Latin "Iesus autem iterum clamans voce magna emisit spiritum. (Moreover Jesus a second time cried out with a great, powerful voice, let out his breath.)" are similar to the Greek and Latin in Mark.

Source: Francesco Carotta, Jesus Was Caesar.

Some manuscripts like the Codex Sinaiticus, has an addition to Matthew that offers a cause for Jesus' mysterious, violent death: "αλλος δε λαβων λογχη ενυξεν αυτου τη πλευραν και εξηλθεν ϋδωρ και αιμα (And another taking a lance, stabs the side of him and there came out water and blood.)" (Mt 15:49b, Codex Sinaiticus)1 And it is for this reason that Jesus cries out again with a great voice and gives up the ghost... for he is stabbed to death like Julius Caesar! So some manuscripts of Matthew here has a naturalistic explanation for this, whereas John has a supernatural explanation for it. Unfortunately, Porphyry according to his extant writings did not have a copy of it. He would have really torn into John, had he possessed it. 

G.3. Death Account in Luke. 

This, despite Luke's claims that he got his information from several eyewitnesses and many written sources, is the most contrarian "report" when it comes to describing the death of Jesus.

44 And it was about the sixth hour, and there was a darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour. 45 And the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst. 46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, "Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit:" and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.

Luke 23:44-46, KJV (punctuation changes mine)

Here, Jesus' death is not violent (apart from being suspended on a crux). Instead, what is depicted here is that Jesus know's he's now dying, calls out in a great, loud voice to his Father to receive his spirit, and then expires. Nothing in Luke indicates he was subjected to any violence other than a pummeling from his guardians at the high priest's house prior to his trial before the Sanhedrin.

G.4. Death Account in John.

John's account is more in line with Mark and the usual Matthew.

28 After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, "I thirst." 29 Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar: and they filled a spunge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his mouth. 30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, "It is finished:" and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost. 

John 19:28-30, KJV (punctuation changes mine) 

Again, we have a mysterious death after taking vinegar to slake his thirst. And we do have a stabbing by a Roman soldier wielding a lance (Jn 19:34), but it's after he has handed over his spirit to the Deity. 

G.5. Coincidentally, A Similar Death.

By coincidence, we do have a report of a person who was put on wood, took a drink of water, and forthwith gave up the ghost. The method he was put on wood was an impalement, itself, which when done properly, was a slow, lingering death.

Ottoman authorities considered impalement primarily as a punishment for use as an example or warning to others. Death by impalement was the most excruciating and when done correctly caused the victim to die slowly over two or three days. The executioner drove a metal tipped [or blunt-pointed] stake into the victim's body, passing through the entire torso without touching any of the most vital organs. 2

This event happened on the Isle of Crete under the Ottoman Turks around 1832 and was reported by Robert Ashley when he wrote of actual impalements when Ottoman troops captured one-hundred Cretan insurrectionists:

"Several were impaled, and the stake of one of the unhappy men who endured this cruel torture, fell with him during the succeeding night. On this he managed to crawl to a neighbouring fountain, assuaged his thirst with its water, and immediately expired." 3

G.6. Conclusion.

This is the same exact sort of quick death mentioned in three of the gospels. Clearly, then, these faith stories state that Jesus was impaled or deeply penetrated by some sort of acuta-crux when he hanged from his stauros, regardless of its shape. Apparently such an one in the real world could have been large enough and perhaps shaped with a sharp point so as to cause the crucified and impaled one to die almost immediately when he slaked his thirst. Clearly then, the "sedile"4 of the cross, utility pole, frame, etc., was not some plank or horizontal projecting beam one could sit on, but a cruel and unusual dildo!

Next: The Acuta Crux in Anti-Christian Discourse.

Notes:

1. Matthew 27:49b is not in the Translation window at the site. It is viewable in the Image and Transcription windows. A literal translation can be read here.

2. James J. Reid, Crisis of the Ottoman Empire: Prelude to Collapse 1839-1878, Stuttgart, Steiner (2000), p. 440. Google-books preview link here.

3. Robert Pashley, Travels in Crete, Cambridge: John W. Parker Printer to the University; London: John Murray, 1837, I, p. 69, and note 27, which discusses various historical and philological questions relating to the use of impalement in Greece and Crete. (quoted in Reid, p. 440, note 220.)

4. The term sedile is derived from a term coined by Tertullian in Ad Nationes 12.3b, 4: "Every post which is fixed in the ground in an upright position is part of a crux, and indeed the greater. But to us [Christians] a complete crux is imputed, certainly with its own yardarm and also with that projecting seat" (translation and emphasis mine; but I'm sure Tertullian would have approved). Nota bene the Latin for the last phrase is cum illo sedilis excessu, "also with that projection of a seat" which could instead be translated "together with the well-known transgression of a seat." 

Nota bene: excessu is the singular masculine ablative of excessus,and the singular masculine ablative noun supine of excedo.)

LSJ excedo: Neut. to go out, go forth or away, to depart, retire, withdraw; Lit.: In gen., with ex and abl., with abl. alone, or absol.; In partic., to go beyond, overstep, rise above, overtop a certain boundary, of personal subjects very rarely, more freq. of inanimate subjects; to depart from life, to decease, to die. Trop. In gen. (very rarely): to recede from victory, to yield the victory; In partic. To go beyond a certain boundary or a certain measure, to advance, proceed, to transgress, digress; to depart, disappear; to depart from, to leave a place; to go beyond, surpass, exceed a certain limit, to overtop, tower above.

LSJ exessus: m. excedo, A departure;  In gen.: Esp., a departure from life; Trop., a leaving of the mental powers, loss of self-possession. A standing out, projecting beyond a certain limit, Lit. projections; Trop. A departing from the subject, digression (post-Aug.); A deviation, aberration from any thing. 

Tertullian Ad Nations 12.3b,4

Crucifixion the Bodily Support - "Biblical Evidence" - Installment 6.

Detail of an epigraph from the Roman Coliseum.

(Part 5f of the series: Crucifixion the Bodily Support)

Part 1                    Part 2                    Part 3                    Part 4   

Part 5a                  Part 5b                  Part 5c                  Part 5d                  Part5e

Introduction.

What sort of gear was the instrument of Jesus' execution?

Well I said I was going to treat the four gospels as separate which I have done, and then harmonise the whole lot, to see what differences come up. So here we go.

F. Harmonisation.

There are several points to juggle to see which sorts of execution gears used by the Romans would accomplish the (actual or fictitious) execution of Jesus as described in the various gospels.

From the various gospels we have the following points:

F.1. The σταυρὸς was portable and could be borne or worn on one’s back.

This point is from Mark (Mk) 8:34, Matthew (Mt) 10:38 and 16:24, and Luke (Lk) 9.23 where everybody would follow Jesus must take up his own pole σταυρὸν, and contrary to the synoptics, John (Jn) 19:17 said Jesus carried his own pole (σταυρὸν). Whether it was an ordinary pole or impaling stake, a patibulum or cross-pole intended to spread out the arms, or two-pole cross, the σταυρὸς had to be light enough for a violently flogged condemned man to ferry on his back while staggering to the execution site.

F.2. Jesus said he would be “lifted up.”

We have three separate passages where Jesus says that he must be lifted up in the same manner as Moses had lifted up the serpent in the desert. The first instance is in Jn 3:14 when Jesus is visited at night by Nicodemus, and tells him that he is to be lifted up in the same manner as Moses lifted the bronze serpent out in the desert. Then second instance is Jn 8:28 when Jesus tells his Pharisaic Jewish opponents point-blank that when they have lifted him up, they will know that he spoke what the Father (God) taught him. Well the Jews never got the message!  The third instance is in Jn 32-33 when Jesus, at the House of the Holy Place, predict he will be lifted up. This whole snake on a pole business in the first instance, of course, screams that Jesus would be attached to a regular pole somehow and exalted. Just like Moses’ Nehustan pole, Asclepius’ staff and Hermes-Mercury’s caduceus wand.

John claims that this was to be fulfilled when the Jews drag Jesus before Pilate's court to be on trial for his life. Of course, there is no guarantee in real life that a crucified criminal or rebel will be exalted on a cross. The usual Roman term for suspension into a cross or onto a pole or an impale stake is (sus)tollere in crucem, meaning, to lift, hoist, or push up into a cross or onto a stake (pole and/or impale) or both. This is a pregnant construction with the action indicated as an act of motion. And of course, the ius gladii (legal power of the sword) rested with any Roman prefects and procurators who governed Judea since 6 CE.

The typical Roman executionary suspension procedure doesn’t exactly fulfill Jesus’ prediction, when all are taken together, Unless he is to be nailed to an assembled execution cross on the ground and then lifted up, in which case John appears to be importing the imagery of the exaltation of the wax effigy of Julius Caesar on a victory cross / tropaeum at his funeral March 17, 44 BCE into the depiction of what sort death Jesus was to die. The fulfillment doesn’t exactly conform to the image of a bronze snake being nailed to a pole and borne aloft, but it’s close enough for government work.

F.3. Jesus' foreshadowing of the two robbers, crucified on either side.

This scene is only found in Mark and Matthew. In Luke’s gospel, Luke relocates the passages about the Twelve sitting on thrones judging the Twelve Tribes of Israel (Mt 19:16-30), and who would be the greatest, forward to the Last Supper (Lk 22:24-30). John, who is supposedly one of the sons of Zebedee, drops it altogether.

In the scene with Jesus and James and John the sons of Zebedee, (Mk 10:35-40, and Mt 20: 20-23) Jesus said he was not able commit to them that they would get to sit on 'thrones' to the right and left of him when he was to come into his glory. Because here he was talking about himself being suspended on his cross! Here, Jesus reinforces this foreshadowing by bracketing this discourse with predictions of his execution or crucifixion in Mk 10:33-34 / Mt 20:17-19 and Mk 10:45 / Mt 20.28.

The word "sit" is rendered in the Greek as a conjugate of καθίζω "sit, cause to sit, take one's seat, settle, sink down." The meaning is essentially identical to the Latin sedeo, which Seneca Minor uses in his EpistulaeMorales ad Lucillum 101.11, 12 (English Link) in reference to an acuta-crux (pointed stake) to sit, sink down or settle on. This is pointing right out that the two λῃσταί (robbers) were going to 'sit' on their crosses.

F.4. The Jewish leaders and assembled crowd call for his death.

They demand that he be crucified:

"Crucify him!" (Σταύρωσον αὐτόν.) (Mk 15;13,14)

"He must be crucified." (Σταυρωθήτω.) (Mt 27: 21,22)

"Crucify, crucify him!" (Σταύρωσον, σταύρωσον αὐτόν) (Lk 23:21)

“Take him away! Take him away! Crucify him!” ("Ἆρον ἆρον σταύρωσον!) (Jn 19:15)

It should be noted here that ἆρον can just as easily be translated as “lift him up” or “hoist him” and σταύρωσον / σταυρωθήτω could just as easily be translated as “pile-drive (impale) him” / “He must be pile-driven (impaled).” For the previous meanings of the basic verb σταυρόω did not always mean "crucify." It also meant at the time and has meant before it was used to connote crucifixion, as "impalisade, fence with pales, pile-drive, impale." "Impale on [a] cross" is the definition listed in the Greek-English Lexicon to Strong's Exhaustive Concordance. And of course, we have the LSJ which defines σταυρόω as: "impalisaded, fence with pales" and also “crucify” in Roman times. Thucydides (The Peloponnesian War 7.25.7) uses the verb to connote: "to drive piles". Diodorus Siculus (Library of History 16.61.2) uses it to connote “impale” (for a corpse already cut to pieces). A more complete survey on the verb can be read here, and by looking into Gunnar Samuelsson's book, Crucifixion in Antiquity.

So one should expect one or more of the previous meanings to be brought forward into the verb σταυρόω when it is used to describe a crucifixion.

F.5. What did they offer him and when did they offer it?

Prior to Jesus’ crucifixion they, the Roman soldiers, offer him a tincture of wine mixed with myrrh (Mk 15:25), which is a tonic and a sexual aphrodisiac! In fact, Romans imported myrrh for the very purpose of using it as an aphrodisiac. Now where did Mark get this information from? It is possible that there was a common practice of the executioners to give those about to be crucified this sort of tincture with the express purpose of making them drunk and high and horny. This would make sense if the cross was equipped with an acuta crux, i.e., a sharpened stake or spike, on which one was suspended or rode, and which would be called a pale (palus), a seat (sedile), a horn (κεράς or cornu), or a thorn (σκόλοψ) in the language of the street.

But then instead, just before they crucify him, they offer him wine mixed with gall (χολῆς: “bile, cuttle-fish ink, a disgust”), i.e., something disgusting to consume. (Mt 27:34)

After Jesus is crucified, the Roman soldiers perchance come in off the road and surround him, offering him vinegar, mocking him the whole time. (Lk 23:36)

At the end of his time alive on the pole, someone offers Jesus some vinegar in a sponge supported on a reed, hoping that would shut him up. (Mk 15:36, Mt 27:48) 

Just before he passes away, the soldiers offer Jesus some vinegar in a sponge that is wrapped around a piece of hyssop, which is herbaceous that time of year. (Jn 19:29)

F.6. How did the executioners crucify him?

The four gospels have absolutely no description of how Jesus was crucified. Luke does have additional information on the mechanics and effects of a typical crucifixion. Just went on before and what were the effects after.

F.6.1 The execution process before.

The Roman soldiers flogged or scourged Jesus. (Mk 15:15, Mt 27:26, Jn 19:1)

The Roman soldiers mock-coronate him in the Praetorium. (Mk 15:16-20, Mt 27:27-31, Jn 19:2-3). Or it was Herod Antipas and his soldiers that did it. (Lk 23:11)

They lead him out. “They” by rule of antecedent were either the Roman soldiers (Mk 15:20, Mt 27:31), or some of the Jews (Lk 23:26, Jn 19:16b)

They run him through the streets either bearing or wearing his own pole (Jn 19:17), or forcing Simon of Cyrene to carry it for him (Mk 15:21, Mt 27;32, Lk 23;36).

They lead two other criminals with Jesus to be executed (ἀναιρεθῆναι "to be raised, lifted up, killed, done away with") (Lk 23:32)

They strip him completely naked before they crucified him and gamble for his clothes afterwards. The “they” who did it were Roman soldiers (Mk 15:24, Mt 27:35, Jn 19:23) or the Jewish execution party (Lk 23:34).

F.6.2. The actual mechanical procedure.

"And they crucify him." (Καὶ σταυροῦσιν αὐτὸν) (Mk 15:24)

"And they crucified him."  (Σταυρώσαντες δὲ αὐτὸν) (Mt 27:35)

"…there they crucified him." (…ἐκεῖ ἐσταύρωσαν αὐτὸν) (Lk 23:33)

“Here they crucified him…” (ὅπου αὐτὸν ἐσταύρωσαν) (Jn 19:18)

No clues or details are given in these passages concerning the actual act of crucifying Jesus, save the use of the verb σταυρόω: “impalisade, fence with pales, pile-drive, impale, crucify.”

Indeed, one has to look into Acts to find further clues as to what the mechanical process was. In Acts 2:23, we see Peter telling the assembled Jews that they crucified Jesus and put him to death (προσπήξαντες ἀνείλατε), literally fastened, fixed, or planted against something unspecified and lifted up or put to death. In Acts 2:36 Peter says they crucified (ἐσταυρώσατε) him, which could include one or more of the earlier senses of the verb σταυρόω. In Acts 4:10, Peter is reported as employing the same verb ἐσταυρώσατε for crucified again. In Acts 5:30 we see Peter tell the Sanhedrin that they killed Jesus by hanging him upon a tree, gallows or stake (κρεμάσαντες ἐπὶ ξύλου) = "whom you killed, having hanged him on a tree," a Greek transliteration for the Hebrew (תָּלָה עַל־ עֵֽץ) (talah 'al 'etz) = “hang upon a tree” (1917 JPS Tanakh) or more directly and accurately per ancient Near East epigraphy “impale on a stake” (1985 JPS Tanakh). In Acts 10:40, in Cornelius’s house, Peter again says that the Jews killed Jesus by hanging him on a tree, etc. (κρεμάσαντες ἐπὶ ξύλου).

F.6.3. The results of the mechanical procedure.

The living persons of the two criminals were bodily suspended or hanged by a means not specified (Lk 23:39):  κρεμασθέντων from κρεμάννῦμι, “hang, hang up, suspend” by any means including crucifixion and impalement. At the end of the day they were to be taken down and Joseph of Arimathea took down (καθελων) the body of Jesus (Mk. 15:46, Lk 23:53) or just took (λαβὼν) it (Mt 27:59).

This is confirmed (except for Joseph of Arimathea being a disciple) by an angry screed, recorded in Acts 5:27-29, by the Apostle Paul in the Synagogue in Pisidian Antioch where he accuses the Jews in Jerusalem and their rulers of, despite lacking a conviction meet of a death sentence, they asked Pilate to have him executed. And after they themselves carried out all that was written, they took him down as booty from the tree (καθελόντες ἀπὸ τοῦ ξύλου) on which he was hanged and laid him in a tomb.

And yet in Jn 19:31 we read that the bodies were to be lifted up and taken away (ἀρθῶσιν) before sunset, which is the apparent sense established by other uses of the verb αἴρω (ἀείρω) in the New Testament. Otherwise the bodies would remain on the crosses, poles (ἐπὶ τοῦ σταυροῦ), which signifies the cross or pole as a support for each body – which it was. In which The preposition ἐπὶ constructed with the genitive of σταυρὸς would indicate that the bodies were on, upon or on top of the σταυρὸς which means it was either an impaling stake or a pole or frame equipped with an impale.

In the case of Jesus there were nail imprints in his hands, wrists or forearms. (Jn 20:25, 27) So apparently in John there was some kind of beam they nailed his hands to.

F.7. Location of the Sign.

Now after they crucified Jesus, where did they install the sign bearing his name and charge of crimen maiestas -- high treason -- for being The King of the Jews?

In Mk 15:26, the location the titulus was posted is not indicated. In Mt 27:37 it's above or near, almost upon, his head: "And they placed upon or near the head of him of the accusation of him (καὶ ἐπέθηκαν ἐπάνω τῆς κεφαλῆς αὐτοῦ τὴν αἰτίαν αὐτοῦ).” In Lk 23:38 the narrative simply states that it's above Jesus: "Moreover there was also an inscription over him (ἦν δὲ καὶ  ἐπιγραφὴ  ἐπ' αὐτῷ).” Jn 19:19 states that “Moreover Pilate wrote a notice and put it on [top of] the cross (ἔγραψεν δὲ καὶ τίτλον ὁ Πιλᾶτος ἔθηκεν ἐπὶ τοῦ σταυροῦ)".

Okay, here the sign is above, at or near Jesus, it’s almost upon his head, and it’s put on top of the cross, hanging beam or pole. Which basically rules out a simple vertical pole, a lone impaling stake, and a crux immissa (tropaeum). What we have left to choose from are a crux commissa (wooden structural tee or a utility pole), a mast-type 'cross', or a patibulum (horizontal pole or beam) suspended between two posts (cf. Seneca, Dialogus 6 (De Consolatione) 20.3).

F.8. And it Was Granted that Two May Sit…

In Mark 10: 35-40 and Matthew 20: 20-23, Jesus is asked if James and John the sons of Zebedee could sit beside him one at his right and the other at his left, naively think that he was speaking of the sitting on his throne in the World to Come. In reply, Jesus said it was outside of his power to grant their request, for the seats were reserved for those for whom it was prepared. This, of course, was an allusion to his crucifixion.

And the two who got to sit at his right and at his left were two λῃσταί: armed robbers (Mk 15;27, Mt 27:38), also called κακούργους : criminals, evildoers (Lk 23:33), and other (men): (Jn 19:18)

“And with him they crucify two robbers (καὶ σὺν αὐτῷ σταυροῦσιν δύο λῃστάς)” (Mk 15:27).

“Then are crucified with him two robbers (Τότε σταυροῦνται σὺν αὐτῷ δύο λῃσταί)” (Mt 27:38).

"along with the criminals—one on his right, the other on his left (καὶ τοὺς κακούργους, ὃν μὲν ἐκ δεξιῶν ὃν δὲ ἐξ ἀριστερῶν).” (Lk. 23:33)

“and with him two others--one on each side and Jesus in the middle (καὶ μετ’ αὐτοῦ ἄλλους δύο ἐντεῦθεν καὶ ἐντεῦθεν, μέσον δὲ τὸν Ἰησοῦν). (Jn 19:18)

And note that the four evangelists used or implied the verb σταυρόω to denote the crucifixion of the two criminals. And obviously they were required to ‘sit’ in accordance with Jesus’ foreshadowing of his crucifixion in his conversation with James and John Ben-Zebedee.

And if the two with lesser charges were ‘seated’ each on an acuta-crux under lesser charges (armed robbery), the one crucified under the charge of high treason as "The King of the Jews" would be similarly mounted on one, as well. And his could have been taller and stouter. The gospels are absolutely clear that the Romans Soldiers (or "Jews") singled Jesus out for special treatment! So then they would not have remitted this cruel and unusual and most shameful part of the extreme punishment.

F.9. The Mockery.

The mockery in Matthew and Mark are quite different from that in Luke, and far more insulting. The two evangelists set it up so that it is clear that it is quite impossible for Jesus to come down from the cross, pole or frame he is suspended on, despite the fact that neither of the two mention nails being used, at all, anywhere in their gospels.

The ordinary passers-by call for him to "Come down from the cross:"

“Save yourself, and come down from the cross! (καταβὰς ἀπὸ τοῦ σταυροῦ!)” (Mk. 15:30)

“Come down from the cross, (κατάβηθι ἀπὸ τοῦ σταυροῦ) if you are the Son of God!” (Mt 27:40)

In the same vein the chief priests, the teachers of the law and/or elders dared him to do the same thing:

"Let this Christ... come down now from the cross (ὁ χριστὸς..  καταβάτω νῦν ἀπὸ τοῦ σταυροῦ)” (Mk 15:32)

"Let him come down now from the cross (καταβάτω νῦν ἀπὸ τοῦ σταυροῦ)" (Mt 27:42)

These verbs for “come down” are conjugated from καταβαίνω, “step down, dismount” as in “I dismount a horse (καταβαίνω ἀπὸ τοῦ ἵππου).” Now that we have in Mark and Matthew the exact same verbiage in κ. ἀπὸ τοῦ σταυροῦ that we have in κ. ἀπὸ τοῦ ἵππου, it means that Jesus must  "dismount" his suspension-torture cross, pole, or frame, meaning, of course, that he is mounted, stuck on, astride a part of it. And of course it is quite impossible to dismount it, because everyone is mocking and daring him in such a rude manner.

In Luke 23:35-39 the mockery is far different from that in Mark and Matthew. Here, no one dares Jesus to “Come down from the cross!” It is as if Luke knows that Mark and Matthew are being far too rude in their use of the Greek verb καταβαίνω "dismount" when it refers to coming down from a crucifixion instrument, meaning the cruciarius is usually mounted, i.e., penetrated on it.

Instead the people watch, the rulers sneering, the soldiers offering vinegar --- strong vinegar, not just posca, if they were having sport with him as Luke says --- and even one of the two criminals were asking him to save himself (σωσάτω ἑαυτόν) and them too.

John mentions nothing.

F.10. The Hyssop.

Now the use of the hyssop in John’s gospel (Jn 19:29) is very strange. Either the purpose of the inclusion of the hyssop was theological, or there was a Roman practice of irrumating thirsty crucified criminals with sponges laden with vinegar (Gk. οξους, Latin acetum), filthy toilet sponges or otherwise. This of course, is not an act of kindness, but to further torment the person, as he is already dehydrated, to give him a harsh, bitter-tasting fluid that acts as a diuretic.

And how did they "put it upon hyssop?" The Greek verb is, περιθέντες "they put around. In Latin, circumponentes "they set, put, placed around"; and circumdederunt "they put, set, placed around, wrapped around, surrounded, enclosed." And in the early spring hyssop, now known as oregano, marjoram and zatar, may not have been a woody perrenial from a previous year but rather an herbaceous shoot, scarcely 18" high and wholly unable to support a sponge.

There's an interesting fact about hysopped vinegar. Back then, it was used to treat wounds and irritation to the anus. This has been noted by Bill Thayer of the University of Chicago in his comment on Pliny the Elder's NaturalHistory, Book 23. (Note: for anus, Pliny used a euphemism: "seat.") 

"This text of Pliny, however, provides evidence of something very different: hyssoped vinegar was apparently considered a very strong topical anaesthetic specific for rectal pain.

"In more intelligible detail, here is the connection with the Crucifixion:…

"…The crucified man hangs from his wrists, and his chest is distended inwards and down. If a foot-rest is provided, this prolongs the torture, since the victim will be able to push himself up and get some air; but this induces cramps and eventually tetany of the arm and leg muscles, which become so painful that he eventually slumps down again — and the cycle continues to exhaustion and final asphyxiation in the down position."

"To this torture, the Romans commonly added a refinement: a sharp spike (called a sedile, a ‘seat’) was fixed on the upright beam in such a place that when the exhausted victim slips back down, it pierces the anus….

…"Now read Pliny's text again. What the soldier was doing was not giving Jesus a drink of posca using hyssop as a support for the sponge. He was administering a pain-killer to a different place altogether, and the sponge, in accordance with our passage of Pliny, was being used as a swab. The writer of the gospel was standing too far away to see exactly what the soldier was doing and interpreted it wrongly; or some redactor has been prudish."

Then again the passage could have originally stated that the executioners tied a vessel full of vinegar to a reed and put it to his mouth, as stated by Porphyry in Against the Christians (Fragment 15, Macarius, Apocriticus II:12), or the word ὑσσώπῳ, “hyssop” was originally ὑσσῷ, “javelin.” The word is missing from the passage in one of the earliest fragmentary manuscripts Papyrus P66 due to the disintegration of the papyrus.

F.11. Breaking the legs.

Another exclusive to John. So that they might take the persons down from the cross (pole, pale) per Jewish demands, what the soldiers were doing was to break the legs of each of the condemned (Jn 19:32) as a coup de grâce -- a death blow intended to end the suffering of a wounded creature. In the Gospel of Peter, this is made plain: the two thieves don't insult the one crucified with them, but one of them backtalks at one of the executioners. And the execution party decides that this one's legs shall not be broken, so that he shall die in torment. Of course, the executioners probably did not do the breaking of legs out of compassion, but more likely out of boredom or because of local authorities' demands -- in this case, get the bodies buried before sunset!

And the means of death probably wasn’t asphyxiation (the Romans set fires for that -- see image at top) but rather it might have been what we would call Harness Hanging Syndrome, since they can no longer push up with their legs. Or maybe being penetrated with an acuta-crux has something to do with this – depending on its size and shape, of course.

The phrase, "which was crucified with him" in Greek is: τοῦ συσταυρωθέντος αὐτῷ "of the one fenced with pales, pile-driven, impaled and/or crucified with him", the Latin Vulgate, qui crucifixus est cum eo "who was crucified with him" and the Old Latin qui confixus erat illi in crucem "who had been fastened or nailed together (rare), joined (by pressing), pierced through, transfixed with him onto the cross, pole, pale."

F.12. Stabbing the Side.

From Reliquarium Lateran, ca 600 CE.

Apparently, John also had a need to indicate that Jesus was not crucified by being simply directly impaled. This is because that perhaps, σταυρόω still connoted a sense of ‘pile-driving’ or impalement, even of the kind from which there was no surviving. And so, to portray that Jesus did not suffer an exit wound from an impale stake, John comes up with the stabbing scene in Jn 19:34: “But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side (λόγχῃ αὐτοῦ τὴν πλευρὰν ἔνυξεν), and forthwith came there out blood and water.” The verb here used is ἔνυξεν, “Pricked, stabbed, pierced,” but we are later to understand that the wound in the side (πλευρὰν), “side, ribs,” caused by the stabbing with the lance (λόγχῃ) was supposed to be this really huge, really deep gash.

In a hostile occupied country, a real crucifixion of a condemned man who is popular with the locals would require the soldiers to threaten the use of a spear. A pilum would be useless, because any one could bend the point back and it would be disabled. Something rigid like a Celtic lance would be far more useful. But the narrow gaps between the ribs could conceivably prevent a puncture would anything deeper than pricking or stabbing, due to the manner the spearhead tapers out. Tradition seems to back up the idea that Jesus was merely pricked or stabbed like in The Passion of the Christ.

And the stated reason for this stabbing is cited in John 19:37: "as another scripture says: 'They will look upon the one they have pierced (ἐξεκέντησαν: ‘pierced through, transfixed’, 'pierced, stabbed', or 'pricked, stabbed').” Well it seems John didn’t remember that in his story when Jesus was up on the cross, the soldier had pierced him in the sense of pricking or stabbing and later on in John 20:25-27, portrays the wound in Jesus’ side to be large enough for “doubting” Thomas to thrust his whole hand into: “ ‘Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.’… …‘Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.’ “

F.13. "It is I, myself!"

This scene described in Luke 24:36-44 is after the Resurrection, after Jesus appeared on a highway to and had supper broke bread with two others. He appears to the whole assembled eleven in a room asks them to touch his hands and feet (Lk 24:39,40) and asks for and consumes a broiled fish (Lk 24:41-43).

First, there is no evidence of nails. Second, there is no evidence of a big wound in his side. In fact, the very statement that says he ate some broiled fish mitigates against serious internal damage that would invariably be caused a simple direct impalement. Which means, of course, that Luke was trying to get the message across that Jesus was not killed by that method! Something which, apparently to me, and perhaps to him, too, Mark and Matthew utterly negligently failed to do.

And it looks to me that Luke was aware of John’s gospel when he wrote his, or vice-versa, for one with a big lance wound in his side at least when it’s in the flank hitting the digestive system is not going to be able to eat.

F.14. Conclusions:

And so, from harmonizing the four gospels (and coming up with a fifth in the process):

1. One condemned to be crucified carried his own pole (σταυρὸς) on his own back; therefore it was a large yet portable part of the instrument of his execution. (F.1)
2. One was to be lifted up on or onto his pole when and in order to be crucified. (F.2, F.4, F.6.1)
3. One who is crucified is first stripped naked, completely. (F.6.1)
4. Mark indicates Roman soldiers gave those about to be crucified a tincture of wine and myrrh. This is a sexual aphrodisiac, which means the executioners understood the sexual connotation of Roman crucifixion! Mathew edits this to indicate the wine had a disgusting substance mixed in. (F.5)
5. The verb used by the evangelists for “crucify”, σταυρόω, connotes crucifixion by impalement, or ‘pile-driving’. [F4, F.6.2]
6. The crucified one was suspended and hanging once the procedure of his crucifixion was complete. [F.6.2, F.6.3]  
7. The instrument of one’s crucifixion was referred to as a ξυλον “tree, gallows, stake.” [F.6.2, F.6.3]
8. The one crucified was also firmly supported on, with, and by the instrument of his execution. [F.6.3]
9. The manner of placement and location of the sign bearing Jesus’ name and charge of his conviction restricts the larger pole or frame from which the crucified one was hanged to a wooden structural tee of at least two parts, a utility pole, or an overhead beam supported on two poles. [F.7]
10. Both robbers and Jesus, too, sat (also sank or settled) upon on the instruments of their crucifixion. [F.8]
11. The instrument of Jesus’ execution was something he had to dismount from in order to save himself and was not able to by the very nature of its design. [F.9]
12. A sponge charged with hysopped vinegar is a very curious substance to have at the ready at a crucifixion site, unless the intent was to use it as a strong analgesic for injuries caused to the anus by repeated penetration with a spike every time one hanged in the down position. [F.10]
13. The breaking of the legs caused a quick death for those who were crucified. [F.11]
14. John alleges Jesus was stabbed in the side with a spear or lance. This seems to deflect suspicion that Jesus may have been crucified by being transpierced on an impaling stake which the Romans also called a crux and the Greeks a σταυρὸς as well as a σκόλοψ. [F.12]
15. Luke alleges that Jesus was able to eat regular food the day after his resurrection, meaning he was not transpierced with an impaling stake, nor did any spike he would have been penetrated by when he slumped during his crucifixion cause any internal damage. This also apparently cancels out Jesus being stabbed in the side with a lance. [F.13]

From Last Temptation of Christ.

So the summation of the above fifteen points is this: the condemned carried his own pole to his crucifixion, where he was stripped naked and possibly given an aphrodisiac tincture of wine and myrrh. Then he is nailed with nails, plural, through his hands or wrists to, and lifted up and caused to be suspended by, one part of the gear of his execution, while at the same time he is sitting on, then penetrated by and mounted on, and finally firmly supported by another part of the same gear. Spectators would mock him, daring him to dismount (impossible!). Sometimes, the crucified was treated with hyssoped vinegar -- which, according to Pliny the Elder, was used to treat wounds of the anus. Breaking of legs caused a quick death by a cause unknown to us, possibly the cause was hanging harness syndrome. The eating of food and showing a stab wound from a lance are assertions by Luke and John that in one he wasn't wounded in the midsection and in the other the puncture wound in the midsection was not opened by a pressure point from the inside out.

So then, from the above fifteen points, it is clear that the instrument of Jesus’ execution and that of the two thieves was a cruciform frame, either a wooden structural tee or a utility pole, equipped with an acuta-crux: a spike that pierced the anus of the crucified when he slumped into the down position. The addition of details by the later evangelists Luke and John appear to have been included with the intent to quash rumours that Jesus was transpierced by his crux, not just the nails. 

Even so, there is an outside chance that the gear of Jesus' execution could have consisted of both a suspension beam between two posts by which one is suspended, and an impaling stake upon which one was forced to sit, sink, and settle, and interpreted as such by Non-Christians.

F.15. Weeding out the Confusion of the Four Gospels and Acts.

Another way of harmonizing is to take the different types of crucifixion gear that are possible under each  of the Evangelists' works and find out what remains.

F.15.1. Mark.

1. An impaling stake. (A)

2. An ordinary pole with with an acuta-crux, or spike that the condemned had to sit on. (B)

3. A cruciform structure of the flattop T-type, with the acuta-crux. (C)

4. A cruciform mast-type structure with the vertical pole taller than the height of transverse above the ground, with the acuta-crux. (D)

5. A set of three poles, the central one shorter and pointed, where the crucified would be suspended by the transverse from the two outer poles and impaled on the central one. (G)

F.15.2. Matthew.

1. An impaling stake. (A)

2. An ordinary pole with with an acuta-crux, or spike that the condemned had to sit on. (B)

3. A cruciform structure of the flattop T-type, with the acuta-crux. (C)

4. A cruciform mast-type structure with the vertical pole taller than the height of transverse above the ground, with the acuta-crux. (D)

5. A set of three poles, the central one shorter and pointed, where the crucified would be suspended by the transverse from the two outer poles and impaled on the central one. (G)

F.15.3. Luke.

1. An ordinary pole with an acuta-crux, or spike that the condemned had to sit on. (B)

2. A cruciform structure of the flattop T-type, with the acuta-crux. (C)

3. A cruciform mast-type structure with the vertical pole taller than the height of transverse above the ground, with the acuta-crux. (D)

4. A set of three poles, the central one shorter and pointed, where the crucified would be suspended by the transverse from the two outer poles and impaled on the central one. (G)

F.15.4. From Acts.


1. An impaling stake. (A)

2. An ordinary pole with an acuta-crux (σκόλοψ), or spike that the condemned had to sit on. (B)

3. A cruciform structure of the flattop T-type, with the acuta-crux. (C)

4. A cruciform mast-type structure with the vertical pole taller than the height of transverse above the ground, with the acuta-crux. (D)

5. A cruciform structure of the flattop T-type, plain. (E) (Acts 2:36, 4:10 said he was σταυρόω'ed).

6. A cruciform mast-type structure, plain. (F)

7. A set of three poles, the central one shorter and pointed, where the crucified would be suspended by the transverse from the two outer poles and impaled on the central one. (G)

8. A set of two poles, where the crucified would be suspended by the transverse from the poles. (H)

F.15.5: From John.

1. A cruciform structure of the flattop T-type, with the acuta-crux. (C)

2. A cruciform mast-type structure with the vertical pole taller than the height of transverse above the ground, with the acuta-crux. (D)

3. A cruciform structure of the flattop T-type, plain. (E) (gJohn 19:18 said he was σταυρόω'ed).

4. A cruciform mast-type structure, plain. (F)

5. A set of three poles, the central one shorter and pointed, where the crucified would be suspended by the transverse from the two outer poles and impaled on the central one. (G)

F.15.6. By Process of Elimination:

Types and which gospels and early church "history" each type qualifies for:

(A): Impale: Mark, Matt, Acts.
(B): Pole with acuta-crux: Mark, Matt, Luke, Acts.
(C): T with acuta-crux: Mark, Matt, Luke, Acts, John.
(D): Mast  with acuta-crux: Mark, Matt, Luke, Acts, John.
(E): T without acuta-crux: Acts, John.
(F): Mast without acuta-crux: Acts, John.
(G): Suspension beam on two poles with a central impale: Mark, Matt, Luke, Acts, John.
(H): Suspension beam on two poles only: Acts.

The types that qualify for all five works are: (C): T with acuta-crux, (D): Mast with acuta-crux, and (G) Suspension beam on two poles with a central impale.

F.15.7. Final Conclusions:

Through harmonization, either by harmonizing the gospels themselves and Acts, or by eliminating the types that conform to the requirements of one work and not another, we arrive to three possible types of suspension gear. The results are the same by both methods. And they make clear: Jesus was not crucified on a simple two-beam cross by the traditional understanding of "crucifixion:" nail to a tropaeum.

And this means the traditional understanding of "crucifixion" then, therefore, goes back not to an actual executionary suspension of a Jewish preacher of the good news of the World to Come (which to the Romans meant Death To Rome), but rather to the funerary exposition of the wax image of Julius Caesar on a tropaeum, which was confused with and later changed to a 'crux' by the Church Fathers and early Byzantine Christianity, respectively.

Christians have a lot to answer for.

Pace deorum.
    

Notes:

1. The noun σταυρὸς: masculine gender, nominative [subject] singular (pale, pole, execution cross or 'tree', i.e., Priapus stake; religious or votive cross). Accusative [direct object] singular is σταυρὸν. Accusative plural is σταυρούς. Genitive [possesive, generative or point of origin object] singular is σταυροῦ.

2. The noun patibulum, neutral gender, subject, direct object (door bar, beam or pole which was worn by slaves on the way to their punishment or execution or as part of their punishment, transverse lifting beam for execution by crucifixion or direct impalement).

Resources:

Perseus Digital Library, Perseus Tufts.edu. Link

Greek and Roman Authors on Lacus Curtius, Penelope U-Chigago.edu. Link 

The Latin Library Link

Perseus Greek and Latin Word Study Tools. Link

Whittaker's Words, Univ. of Notre Dame, ND.edu. Link

Word Study Tool, Numen, The Latin Lexicon. Link 

Online Parallel Bible Suite, Biblos (Bible.cc). Link 

Gospel of John in Old Latin, Vetus Latina Iohannes. Link