Mercy-Killing a Crucifixion Victim: Ever Happen?

Suppose your friend is nailed to a cross because of some offense against Rome. Depending on how cruel the Romans want to be, he could be up there for hours if not days, in agonizing pain. So you grab your bow, aim a mercy shot right to the heart, then disappear into the woods before the Romans find you.

Do Roman historical records support this ever happening?

I never read anything like that. However, what is documented is the custom of breaking the condemned man’s legs to hasten his death.

From what I’ve read, the executioners themselves would sometimes show mercy by breaking the condemned person’s legs.

Well, the Bible seems to say that it was at least attempted with to Jesus. He was offered a sponge that tasted of gall, which is a word that could be translated as “poison.” Jesus refused it.

How would that work? Does it cause massive bleeding (broken bone severing an artery or something) ? Or is it the shock of it (maybe not killing you on the spot but massively weakening you, even more so than the crucifixion itself)?

Crucifixion kills by slow suffocation. While hanging limp, the victim cannot breathe. The only way to draw breath is for the victim to push himself up straight with his hands and feet (causing excruciating pain in itself). The victim is stuck indefinitely between hanging and suffocating, or lifting himself to breathe and causing agonizing pain. Breaking the legs was an act of mercy because it prevented the victim from being able to keep lifting himself to breathe and hastened suffocation. Obviously the “mercy” here is relative to say the least.

Josephus once wrote that he had seen all kinds of torture and execution, and that crucifixion was by far the most cruel. There’s a reason that the word “excruciation” comes from the Latin word, crucio (“crucify”).

That probably wasn’t a reference to poison. It was used to reference a bitter taste (of which poison was a possibility), but in this context it probably referred to bitter herbs mixed with the sour wine (the word is sometimes translated as vinegar, but the Greek actually refers to a low grade, sour wine and water mixture, commonly drunk by peasants). This wine sometimes had herbs like myrrh added to it to sweeten it and make it more palatable, but the passage could have also been alluding to anesthetics or soporifics being added to the wine. I don’t think poison is likely. Breaking the legs was faster than poison.

Wasn’t that one guy stabbed by a Roman soldier?
Was that to hasten death or to verify it?

At least as the Bible tells it, they were going to break his legs, but seeing he was already dead they did the spear thingy just to make sure.

My understanding has always been that the Roman soldier, who legend names Longinus, stabbed that one guy as a means of verification.

Nevermind.

^^
they say breaking the legs causes instant death. just can’t find the cite.

When Julius Caesar was about 25 (75 BC), he was captured by Cilician pirates while sailing to Greece. The version that has come down to us is that the pirates originally asked for 20 talents as ransom but Caesar told them he was worth 50. He joked with his captors and promised to bring them to justice when released. Eventually he was and he had them captured and crucified but had their throats cut to lessen their suffering to ease their suffering.Julius Caesar: Historical Background

It is fair to question how much of the details are accurate. Would Caesar really let us know that he was a scared rabbit as a captive? But it could be true, as Jack Hawkins says in “Bridge on the River Kwai” I suppose if you are about to be shot, there isn’t a whole lot you can do.

I believe sometimes victims were merely tied to the cross, to make it last even longer.

(The OP’s question kind of reminded me of this thread.) :wink:

I’ve heard this many times, normally in church services, though did hear that it is untrue and such a person would be able to breath while hanging. The breaking of the legs as pointed out below would cause death by some other means perhaps shock.

You heard wrong.

After doing some careful research (ok, I read the wiki page on crucifixion), it appears the asphyxiation theory of crucifixion is in question now, if not completely defunct. I stand corrected.

Wikipedia (and myself) seems to disagree with you

I’m no expert on ancient execution technigues, but I believe both Seppuku, and The Death of a Thousand Cuts could vary widely in how much actual suffering one had to go through. I wouldn’t be at all surprised to learn that rank and file Roman soldiers were not above a little bribery.

Crucifixion’s a doddle.