# What would the Romans have done with the cross? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [April 16, 2014, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-the-romans-have-done-with-the-cross/686249 "2014-04-16T12:52:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2014, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-the-romans-have-done-with-the-cross/686249/61 "2014-04-21T21:31:00Z")
> [@Enola\_Straight](#): > > BTW…if crosses _were_ “recycled”, how many times could one be used before Christ had His turn? Every depiction of the cross I have seen shows a beam with 4 sides so I guess at leat 4 times. > [@Malthus](#): > > I can’t think of anything less ritually pure than a bloody cross). The disembowelling table? > [@Mr.Kobayashi](#): > > A quick question on this Bible quote - what’s the significance of water? I’ve read that apparently the most likely explanation is pleural effusion and mistaking serous fluid or lymph as water. Is this likely? I remember there being a myth surrounding the soldier that did the spearing. I hope you all had a nice easter. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2014, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-the-romans-have-done-with-the-cross/686249/62 "2014-04-21T21:48:34Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I think this is basically correct - Jesus wasn’t particularly important to the Romans. The Gospels talk about how Pontius Pilate examined Him and found “this man has done nothing worth of death”. It was important to the Jewish authorities that Jesus be killed - He was threatening to the business of the Temple, collecting the temple taxes, keeping the lucrative sacrifice business going, etc. But the Romans didn’t care much - there were lots of Messiahs around, and it appears that Pilate only crucified Jesus because there was a riot beginning from the people the Jewish authorities collected to pester Pilate into getting rid of someone they didn’t want around. This is completely contradicted by historical scholarship, and is actually one of the more egregious fictions of the Gospels. According to Reza Aslan, far from being fair-minded or weak-willed, Pilate was known for his extreme depravity and his aversion to Jews and the Jewish nation. During his tenure in Jerusalem he crucified so many thousands of Jews that the people of Jerusalem lodged a formal complaint with the Roman emperor. To imagine that such a man would hesitate to send Jesus to the cross and to blame it all on the Jewish high priests is incredible and is actually an astounding example of the Gospels’ revisionist history. Jesus at the time, as I stated myself earlier, wasn’t all that important a figure, and only became so retroactively, but he was certainly important **enough** to the Romans to be considered a real threat to the state. Pilate crucified countless other Jews for far less. ---
**Author:** ![fiddlesticks](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiddlesticks/32/18129_2.png) [@fiddlesticks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fiddlesticks)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2014, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-the-romans-have-done-with-the-cross/686249/63 "2014-04-21T21:56:07Z")
> [@md2000](#): > > I kind of agree that a chunk of wood with blood all over it would likely be used only for more executions, until it was too worn or full of holes even for that -even by the Romans. Then it would only be good for firewood. If it was a traditional crosspiece like the medieval illustrations show, maybe afterwards a carpenter could shave off the top layer with the blood and make something else of it. The book _Last Temptation of Christ_ (not sure about the film) has Jesus the Carpenter making crosses for the local Galilean Romans in his pre-rabble rousing days. ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2014, 12:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-the-romans-have-done-with-the-cross/686249/64 "2014-04-22T12:41:01Z")
Remember too that the gospels were “fine tuned” by the surviving church - mostly Paul’s followers, catering to gentiles. They were edited to make a messiah freeing the Jews a saviour to all mankind. In the process, it was important to push the blame away from the empire of potential converts and onto a group already vilified and oppressed and dispersed following two failed uprisings. Hence, Pilate only reluctantly orders the crucifixion which would have to be a Roman decision - but only because the temple authorities insisted. ---
**Author:** ![Cartooniverse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cartooniverse/32/3084_2.png) [@Cartooniverse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cartooniverse)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2014, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-the-romans-have-done-with-the-cross/686249/65 "2014-04-22T19:11:40Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Every depiction of the cross I have seen shows a beam with 4 sides so I guess at leat 4 times. This is a much gorier turn than I’d expected. ☹ It seems more economical for the Roman workers who fashioned the immense cross beam not to use nails as we perceive them to be. It’s much more economical to bore a hole just the size of a very large nail clear through the beam. ( Which I’ve always envisioned as a 6x6x8 feet wide beam ). This means you line up the hole with the wrist bone juncture and drive the long nail through the person and into the existing hole that goes clear through. A 10" long nail drive through a 6" square beam would allow an inch of protrusion to lashes to be wound around. Lashing the wrists and ankles insure that the wrists and ankles could not be pulled free, and allowed the cross beam to be used for a very long time. This is a violent and bloody process, but it seems prudent to remind all that it was a violent and bloody process that emerged in a time when just about ALL OF LIFE was much more coarse, bloody and violent. This article discusses what the [lifespan for humans was 2,000 years ago](http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/life_history/age-specific-mortality-lifespan-bad-science-2009.html) and seems to debunk some myths. Note that it mentions the lifespans of Romans. One suspects that the local peasantry did not enjoy the nutrition and medicine commonly associated with Roman culture. 45 years was pushing it back then. Life for almost everyone sucked to some degree. For the deeply impoverished, it was barely existing. Point being that in the context of a much more brutal and coarse existence, finding ways to brutally kill ones enemies is not surprising. ( As a philosophical side-note, this article from [2010 on Lethal Injection Execution](http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/capital-punishment-by-lethal-injection/) goes into just how brutal or not brutal a method _that_ is. I think that people struggle with this. With the idea that re-useable hardware ( wooden beams ) were of value and the act was so astonishingly amoral and immoral that it seems an added offense that the wood used were not somehow revered or at least re-used, or taken apart. Logic says this was business. A business model involving a rare material ( very thick study wooden beams made of [likely] imported wood ) would demand economy of use of material. Clear holes through makes sense, grotesque and gross as it may seem. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2014, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-the-romans-have-done-with-the-cross/686249/66 "2014-04-22T20:38:50Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > According to Reza Aslan, far from being fair-minded or weak-willed, Pilate was known for his extreme depravity and his aversion to Jews and the Jewish nation. Who said anything about his being fair-minded or weak-willed? He crucified Jesus just to avoid trouble. > [@](#): > > During his tenure in Jerusalem he crucified so many thousands of Jews that the people of Jerusalem lodged a formal complaint with the Roman emperor. I hadn’t heard about this - do you have a contemporary cite? > [@](#): > > To imagine that such a man would hesitate to send Jesus to the cross and to blame it all on the Jewish high priests is incredible and is actually an astounding example of the Gospels’ revisionist history. Actually [Flavius Josephus](http://www.livius.org/pi-pm/pilate/pilate06.html) says much the same thing - > [@](#): > > At this time there appeared Jesus, a wise man. For he was a doer of startling deeds, a teacher of the people who receive the truth with pleasure. And he gained a following both among many Jews and among many of Greek origin. And when **Pilate, because of an accusation made by the leading men among us, condemned him to the cross** , those who had loved him previously did not cease to do so. And up until this very day the tribe of Christians, named after him, has not died out. Note that Josephus says the same thing as the Gospels - Pilate condemned Jesus because of the accusations of the Jewish leadership. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2014, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-the-romans-have-done-with-the-cross/686249/67 "2014-04-22T23:26:24Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I hadn’t heard about this - do you have a contemporary cite? It’s not exactly contemporary, and not exactly accurate (it’s not about crucifixions), but a complaint to Tiberius is mentioned in Philo’s “Embassy to Gaius”, which is his account of an embassy of Alexandrine Jews to Caligula, asking for the Emperor’s protection. This is the section where he’s warning Caligula that Caligula’s plan to set up a statue of himself in the Temple of Jerusalem will cause trouble there, and talking about a time that Pilate tried to dedicate shields to Tiberius, the response of the population of Judea, and Tiberius’s response. From here: [Philo: On the Embassy to Gaius](http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/yonge/book40.html) > [@](#): > > "Moreover, I have it in my power to relate one act of ambition on his part, though I suffered an infinite number of evils when he was alive; but nevertheless the truth is considered dear, and much to be honoured by you. Pilate was one of the emperor’s lieutenants, having been appointed governor of Judaea. He, not more with the object of doing honour to Tiberius than with that of vexing the multitude, dedicated some gilt shields in the palace of Herod, in the holy city; which had no form nor any other forbidden thing represented on them except some necessary inscription, which mentioned these two facts, the name of the person who had placed them there, and the person in whose honour they were so placed there. (300) But when the multitude heard what had been done, and when the circumstance became notorious, then the people, putting forward the four sons of the king, who were in no respect inferior to the kings themselves, in fortune or in rank, and his other descendants, and those magistrates who were among them at the time, entreated him to alter and to rectify the innovation which he had committed in respect of the shields; and not to make any alteration in their national customs, which had hitherto been preserved without any interruption, without being in the least degree changed by any king of emperor. (301) "But when he steadfastly refused this petition (for he was a man of a very inflexible disposition, and very merciless as well as very obstinate), they cried out: ‘Do not cause a sedition; do not make war upon us; do not destroy the peace which exists. The honour of the emperor is not identical with dishonour to the ancient laws; let it not be to you a pretence for heaping insult on our nation. Tiberius is not desirous that any of our laws or customs shall be destroyed. And if you yourself say that he is, show us either some command from him, or some letter, or something of the kind, that we, who have been sent to you as ambassadors, may cease to trouble you, and may address our supplications to your master.’ (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 to Tiberius. (304) And he, when he had read it, what did he say of Pilate, and what threats did he utter against him! But it is beside our purpose at present to relate to you how very angry he was, although he was not very liable to sudden anger; since the facts speak for themselves; (305) for immediately, without putting any thing off till the next day, he wrote a letter, reproaching and reviling him in the most bitter manner for his act of unprecedented audacity and wickedness, and commanding him immediately to take down the shields and to convey them away from the metropolis of Judaea to Caesarea, on the sea which had been named Caesarea Augusta, after his grandfather, in order that they might be set up in the temple of Augustus. And accordingly, they were set up in that edifice. And in this way he provided for two matters: both for the honour due to the emperor, and for the preservation of the ancient customs of the city. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2014, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-the-romans-have-done-with-the-cross/686249/68 "2014-04-22T23:32:56Z")
The other account that might relate on this would be the incident that got Pilate removed, where Pilate had slaughtered a group of Samaritan pilgrims, leading the Samaritans to complain to the Governor of Syria, who arrested him. This is from Josephus: > [@](#): > > 1. But the nation of the Samaritans did not escape without tumults. The man who excited them to it was one who thought lying a thing of little consequence, and who contrived every thing so that the multitude might be pleased; so he bid them to get together upon Mount Gerizzim, which is by them looked upon as the most holy of all mountains, and assured them, that when they were come thither, he would show them those sacred vessels which were laid under that place, because Moses put them there 12 So they came thither armed, and thought the discourse of the man probable; and as they abode at a certain village, which was called Tirathaba, they got the rest together to them, and desired to go up the mountain in a great multitude together; but Pilate prevented their going up, by seizing upon file roads with a great band of horsemen and foot-men, who fell upon those that were gotten together in the village; and when it came to an action, some of them they slew, and others of them they put to flight, and took a great many alive, the principal of which, and also the most potent of those that fled away, Pilate ordered to be slain. > 2. But when this tumult was appeased, the Samaritan senate sent an embassy to Vitellius, a man that had been consul, and who was now president of Syria, and accused Pilate of the murder of those that were killed; for that they did not go to Tirathaba in order to revolt from the Romans, but to escape the violence of Pilate. So Vitellius sent Marcellus, a friend of his, to take care of the affairs of Judea, and ordered Pilate to go to Rome, to answer before the emperor to the accusations of the Jews. So 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; but before he could get to Rome Tiberius was dead. ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2014, 6:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-the-romans-have-done-with-the-cross/686249/69 "2014-04-23T06:18:31Z")
Also, there’s some debate how authentic some of the word of Josephus are concerning Jesus, and how much is writer embellishment by later transcribers who wanted to put Jesus in a good light. OTOH, some of his more off-hand and less than respectful remarks are probably authentic. Josephus mentions captives during the Jewish rebellion being nailed up. The quote makes it sound like this is not typical and is an extra cruelty due to the savage nature of the war. I like the idea of a multi-use crossbeam, but I do have to think that a 6x6 beam would not be light. Something that size would at least be of cedar and fairly pricey. Like I said, I imagine a rough pole about the size of a 2x4 would be more than adequate if it were disposable. Wiki says the nails were about 3/8" thick, so the wood just has to no split with that size of nail. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Pig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/c57346/32.png) [@Little\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Pig)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2014, 11:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-the-romans-have-done-with-the-cross/686249/70 "2014-04-23T11:02:04Z")
The Romans? Oh, I thought you meant [The Ramones](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramones) Nevermind… ---
**Author:** ![Ranger\_Jeff](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ranger_jeff/32/2065_2.png) [@Ranger\_Jeff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ranger_Jeff)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2014, 12:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-the-romans-have-done-with-the-cross/686249/71 "2014-04-23T12:39:34Z")
> [@md2000](#): > > A lot of the artifacts and sites were basically a “supply and demand” situation. To some extent, things like true crosses served to satisfy market demand once Christianity was legal and worshippers wanted to find souvenirs. This hit the peak during the crusades. Armies of important Europeans and pilgrims invaded the Holy Land and wanted to see it all. the locals were happy to oblige, producing all the sites necessary to satisfy the devout. In fact there are two crypts for Jesus, three or four fields where angels appeared to the Shepherds outside Bethlehem, and the location of the last supper is on the second floor of an obviously medieval building built 1,000 years too late. Not to mention according to author [David Farley](http://www.slate.com/articles/life/faithbased/2006/12/fore_shame.html), “Depending on what you read, there were eight, twelve, fourteen, or even 18 different holy foreskins in various European towns during the Middle Ages.” Talk about “supply and demand”! 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2014, 12:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-the-romans-have-done-with-the-cross/686249/72 "2014-04-23T12:41:37Z")
While I don’t think we know exactly how crucifixion persons were affixed to the cross, I was under the impression when archaeologists studied the remains of a crucified man back in the 80s they found that his heel was nailed to the main beam but his arms were not nailed at all. That does seem a bit counterintuitive, the main beam is the large piece of wood and you’d assume if possible you’d want to avoid nailing into it as that could only be done so many times before it had to be replaced. But the recovered skeleton clearly has its heels nailed and its arms not, suggested the arms were tied to the cross beam. It was projected they were actually tied sort of “straddling” the crossbeam, so imagine the arms actually “behind” the crossbeam as if the man was trying to put his arms behind the crossbeam. This would have kept the man’s upper torso much further up on the cross. Tying or nailing the hands or wrists would allow the condemned to sag down the length of their arms. A pre-drilled hole would also make some degree of sense as **Cartooniverse** suggests, but at least in the case of the man’s skeleton recovered in the 80s there was evidence of the nail hitting a hard knot in the wood and then most likely bending (based on the nail itself), so in his case at least they were nailing a new hole into the main beam. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2014, 12:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-the-romans-have-done-with-the-cross/686249/73 "2014-04-23T12:54:43Z")
> [@md2000](#): > > Josephus mentions captives during the Jewish rebellion being nailed up. The quote makes it sound like this is not typical and is an extra cruelty due to the savage nature of the war. Pontius Pilate died in AD 39, and the first great Jewish revolt started in AD 66, so I don’t think you can blame that on Pilate. And thanks, **Captain Amazing**. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2014, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-the-romans-have-done-with-the-cross/686249/74 "2014-04-24T20:49:45Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Who said anything about his being fair-minded or weak-willed? He crucified Jesus just to avoid trouble. > > I hadn’t heard about this - do you have a contemporary cite? > Actually [Flavius Josephus](http://www.livius.org/pi-pm/pilate/pilate06.html) says much the same thing - > Note that Josephus says the same thing as the Gospels - Pilate condemned Jesus because of the accusations of the Jewish leadership. > > Regards, > Shodan It is widely believed by scholars that this particular cite in Josephus contains later additions to the text (inserted by Christians). The consensus appears to be that it was originally a genuine reference to Jesus, but Christian copyists at an early date simply could not resist guilding the lilly. > **[Josephus on Jesus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus#Testimonium_Flavianum_2)** > > The first-century Jewish historian Flavius Josephus provides external information on some people and events found in the New Testament. The extant manuscripts of Josephus' book Antiquities of the Jews, written around AD 93–94, contain two references to Jesus of Nazareth and one reference to John the Baptist. > The first and most extensive reference to Jesus in the Antiquities, found in Book 18, states that Jesus was the Messiah and a wise teacher who was crucified by Pontius Pilate. It is commonly... If this is the case, it is not valuable as support for the literal historical truth of these events. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2014, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-the-romans-have-done-with-the-cross/686249/75 "2014-04-24T20:57:44Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > While I don’t think we know exactly how crucifixion persons were affixed to the cross, I was under the impression when archaeologists studied the remains of a crucified man back in the 80s they found that his heel was nailed to the main beam but his arms were not nailed at all. That does seem a bit counterintuitive, the main beam is the large piece of wood and you’d assume if possible you’d want to avoid nailing into it as that could only be done so many times before it had to be replaced. But the recovered skeleton clearly has its heels nailed and its arms not, suggested the arms were tied to the cross beam. It was projected they were actually tied sort of “straddling” the crossbeam, so imagine the arms actually “behind” the crossbeam as if the man was trying to put his arms behind the crossbeam. This would have kept the man’s upper torso much further up on the cross. Tying or nailing the hands or wrists would allow the condemned to sag down the length of their arms. > > A pre-drilled hole would also make some degree of sense as **Cartooniverse** suggests, but at least in the case of the man’s skeleton recovered in the 80s there was evidence of the nail hitting a hard knot in the wood and then most likely bending (based on the nail itself), so in his case at least they were nailing a new hole into the main beam. Here’s an article on the find: [http://www.timesofisrael.com/in-a-stone-box-a-rare-trace-of-crucifixion/](http://www.timesofisrael.com/in-a-stone-box-a-rare-trace-of-crucifixion/) Allegedly, it is so far the only one of its kind. Here is some interesting scholarly speculation on the exact issue of whether the cross was reused: > [@](#): > > In reconstructing the crucifixion we have used the skeletal evidence which was available in conjunction with observations by Haas, Barbet[19] and the ancient historical sources. According to these sources, the condemned man never carried the complete cross, as is commonly believed; instead the crossbar was carried, while the upright was set in a permanent place where it was used for subsequent executions. Furthermore, we know from Josephus that during the first century C.E., wood was so scarce in Jerusalem that the Romans were forced to travel ten miles from Jerusalem to secure timber for their siege machinery.[20] Therefore, one can reasonably assume that the scarcity of wood may have been expressed in the economics of crucifixion in that the crossbar as well as the upright would be used repeatedly. Thus, the lack of traumatic injury to the forearm and metacarpals of the hand seems to suggest that the arms of the condemned were tied rather than nailed to the cross. There is ample literary and artistic evidence for the use of ropes rather than nails to secure the condemned to the cross.[21] Moreover, in Egypt, where according to one source crucifixion originated, the victim was not nailed but tied.[22] It is important to remember that death by crucifixion was the result of the manner in which the condemned man hung from the cross and not the traumatic injury caused by nailing. Hanging from the cross resulted in a painful process of asphyxiation, in which the two sets of muscles used for breathing, the intercostal muscles and the diaphragm, became progressively weakened. In time, the condemned man expired, due to the inability to continue breathing properly.[7] > > — Israel Exploration Journal, Vol. 35 (1985) > **[Jehohanan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehohanan)** > > Jehohanan (Hebrew: יהוחנן, romanized: Yəhōḥānān) was a Judean man sentenced to death by crucifixion sometime in the 1st century CE. His ossuary was found in 1968 when building contractors working in Giv'at ha-Mivtar accidentally uncovered a Jewish tomb. The stone ossuary had the Hebrew inscription of "Jehohanan the son of Hagkol" (Hebrew: יהוחנן בן הגקול, romanized: Yehoḥanan ben Hagqol; the meaning of hgqwl is uncertain, hence his name sometimes being given as Johanan ben Ha-galgula). > In his in... ---
**Author:** ![LawMonkey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/d6d6ee/32.png) [@LawMonkey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LawMonkey)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2014, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-the-romans-have-done-with-the-cross/686249/76 "2014-04-24T22:38:12Z")
> [@Urbanredneck](#): > > Jesus was an significant person of his era. Well, not really. He was another itinerant preacher and/or rabblerouser at a time when itinerant preachers and/or rabblerousers were a fine a dozen. His band of followers knew of him; some other folks may have heard of him or seen him preach and/or rouse the rabble, and that’s about it. All indications are that absolutely nobody at the time had any idea that Christianity was going to become a bit of a big deal in a couple hundred years. Luckily, as someone else mentioned, it’s pretty easy to manufacture relics to order, so it’s not like anybody lost out on the potential souvenir market when it developed. ETA: Whoops. Didn’t see this thread had a second page and this had already been dealt with. Never mind. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Mister\_Rik](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mister_rik/32/491_2.png) [@Mister\_Rik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mister_Rik)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2014, 2:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-the-romans-have-done-with-the-cross/686249/77 "2014-04-25T02:34:23Z")
I read an interesting theory a while back that proposed that Jesus was crucified on an actual tree. The writer pointed out the number of times different NT writers used the word “tree” to refer to the cross. But his main bit of evidence was the part of the crucifixion story that described the soldiers breaking the thieves’ legs. Early in the story, Jesus is specifically described as being crucified _between_ two thieves. But then, later, during the leg-breaking, the soldiers are described as breaking first one thief’s legs, then the second thief’s legs, and then discovering that Jesus was already dead. So, why would the soldiers break the first thief’s legs, walk _past_ Jesus to break the second thief’s legs, and then turn back to Jesus? Explanation: All three of them were nailed to the same “upright”, i.e. a large tree. So when the soldiers set out to break legs, they just made a circle around the tree, from one guy to the next, and Jesus just happened to be last. Obviously, there’s no way to _prove_ the theory, but I thought it was an interesting idea. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2014, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-the-romans-have-done-with-the-cross/686249/78 "2014-04-25T14:32:01Z")
> [@Mister\_Rik](#): > > I read an interesting theory a while back that proposed that Jesus was crucified on an actual tree. The writer pointed out the number of times different NT writers used the word “tree” to refer to the cross. But his main bit of evidence was the part of the crucifixion story that described the soldiers breaking the thieves’ legs. > > Early in the story, Jesus is specifically described as being crucified _between_ two thieves. But then, later, during the leg-breaking, the soldiers are described as breaking first one thief’s legs, then the second thief’s legs, and then discovering that Jesus was already dead. > > So, why would the soldiers break the first thief’s legs, walk _past_ Jesus to break the second thief’s legs, and then turn back to Jesus? > > Explanation: All three of them were nailed to the same “upright”, i.e. a large tree. So when the soldiers set out to break legs, they just made a circle around the tree, from one guy to the next, and Jesus just happened to be last. > > Obviously, there’s no way to _prove_ the theory, but I thought it was an interesting idea. This theory seems unlikely, given the historical shortage of wood in Jerusalem. This appears, from historical and acheological evidence, to have always been true - see the post above, where it is noted that there was likely no local wood, even for a crossbar on the cross (assuming it was made that way): > [@](#): > > Furthermore, we know from Josephus that during the first century C.E., wood was so scarce in Jerusalem that the Romans were forced to travel ten miles from Jerusalem to secure timber for their siege machinery.[20] Therefore, one can reasonably assume that the scarcity of wood may have been expressed in the economics of crucifixion in that the crossbar as well as the upright would be used repeatedly. Source: Israel Exploration Journal, Vol. 35 (1985) The notion of huge trees, big enough around to accomodate three side-by-side crucifictions, and straight and tall enough to make an impressive hanging, in the immediate vicinity of Jerusalem is simply not persuasive … the only really large trees I know of that grow there are olive trees, which are certainly big enough around, but would make very bad “crucifiction trees” because of their shape (the big ones are incredibly low, twisty and gnarled, with many low branches). It would be hard to find an olive that had a straight, tall section suitable for crucifiction on. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-the-romans-have-done-with-the-cross/686249.md?page=3)