This was a fascinating read! It called to mind some of the encyclopaedic notes that I've come across in Anglo-Latin computus manuscripts detailing the specific types of wood used in the construction of the Cross and its length. I learned a lot from your article - thank you!
One aspect of the Roman practice of crucifixion that has always troubled me was the fact that the Romans sought every means to deprive the condemned of human dignity (I believe Pär Lagerkvist mentions this). Thus, the presence of a loincloth in Christian art is the artist's attempt to restore that last shred of human dignity to the Incarnate One. Have you ever seen that mentioned in your studies?
Yes, the loincloth is an issue. It is almost certainly added to art for the sake of modesty. Everything suggests the victims were totally stripped to increase their degradation.
William Merritt Chase is one of the few artists who deprives Christ of the loincloth while finding a way to avoid being graphic and anatomically correct.
Deacon, could you comment a bit on whether the nailing was through the palms or the wrists? I read in a Roman history text once that standard practice would be wrists, enabling the bones to help support the body’s weight.
The location of the nails is a controversial point, with the testimony of visionaries, stigmatics, and centuries of art weighed against claims of forensic science and a very important relic. Short version: Jesus is traditionally depicted with nails in his palms, but this would not have supported his weight and the nails must have been in his wrist. The controversy is unresolved, although I have my own thoughts.
The modern doubts about the palms took shape with the publication of Pierre Barbet's _A Doctor at Calvary_ in 1950. A surgeon, Dr. Barbet conducted experiments that showed that nails through the center of the palm would not bear the weight of a human body without tearing. He suggested that the nail would have been driven through a gap at the heel of the hand surrounded by the hamate, capitate, triquetral and lunate bones, and known as Destot's space after its discoverer, Etienne Destot.
This conclusion was challenged on two grounds. First, it's possible or even probable that the arms were tied to the cross and the nails simply added as an extra brace or to cause more pain.
Second, Frederick Zugibe, a medical examiner, claims that the palm would have worked if the nails were driven at an angle, exiting at the wrist. He published these conclusions in _The Cross and the Shroud: A Medical Inquiry into the Crucifixion_ (1998, revised 2005).
Both authors, however, agree that the Shroud of Turin provides compelling evidence that the nails were not driven straight through the palm and out the back of the hand. The blood flow on the shroud testifies to an exit wound in the wrist. I believe the shroud is genuine, but whether the nail entered directly through the wrist, through the palm and downward through the wrist, or through Destot's space is undetermined. I'm inclined to agree with Barbet, however.
Very nice work. I love the examination of the specific language being used. Also the inclusion of the St. Thomas commentary is a nice piece of evidence for the nails. When I get to discussing the Crucifxion, years from now, I'll reference this work. Do you list references anywhere?
I've mostly gathered this myself from various sources, but I think there's a book called Witness to Mystery that has nice photos and might be a good source.
I was wondering if you were going to include the Colossians reference. I don’t know if I ever quite glommed to the one in Luke 24. Well done!
This was a fascinating read! It called to mind some of the encyclopaedic notes that I've come across in Anglo-Latin computus manuscripts detailing the specific types of wood used in the construction of the Cross and its length. I learned a lot from your article - thank you!
One aspect of the Roman practice of crucifixion that has always troubled me was the fact that the Romans sought every means to deprive the condemned of human dignity (I believe Pär Lagerkvist mentions this). Thus, the presence of a loincloth in Christian art is the artist's attempt to restore that last shred of human dignity to the Incarnate One. Have you ever seen that mentioned in your studies?
Yes, the loincloth is an issue. It is almost certainly added to art for the sake of modesty. Everything suggests the victims were totally stripped to increase their degradation.
William Merritt Chase is one of the few artists who deprives Christ of the loincloth while finding a way to avoid being graphic and anatomically correct.
https://useum.org/artwork/Crucifixion-William-Merritt-Chase-1875
Deacon, could you comment a bit on whether the nailing was through the palms or the wrists? I read in a Roman history text once that standard practice would be wrists, enabling the bones to help support the body’s weight.
I've added this to tomorrow's post.
Nails: In the Palm or the Wrist?
The location of the nails is a controversial point, with the testimony of visionaries, stigmatics, and centuries of art weighed against claims of forensic science and a very important relic. Short version: Jesus is traditionally depicted with nails in his palms, but this would not have supported his weight and the nails must have been in his wrist. The controversy is unresolved, although I have my own thoughts.
The modern doubts about the palms took shape with the publication of Pierre Barbet's _A Doctor at Calvary_ in 1950. A surgeon, Dr. Barbet conducted experiments that showed that nails through the center of the palm would not bear the weight of a human body without tearing. He suggested that the nail would have been driven through a gap at the heel of the hand surrounded by the hamate, capitate, triquetral and lunate bones, and known as Destot's space after its discoverer, Etienne Destot.
This conclusion was challenged on two grounds. First, it's possible or even probable that the arms were tied to the cross and the nails simply added as an extra brace or to cause more pain.
Second, Frederick Zugibe, a medical examiner, claims that the palm would have worked if the nails were driven at an angle, exiting at the wrist. He published these conclusions in _The Cross and the Shroud: A Medical Inquiry into the Crucifixion_ (1998, revised 2005).
Both authors, however, agree that the Shroud of Turin provides compelling evidence that the nails were not driven straight through the palm and out the back of the hand. The blood flow on the shroud testifies to an exit wound in the wrist. I believe the shroud is genuine, but whether the nail entered directly through the wrist, through the palm and downward through the wrist, or through Destot's space is undetermined. I'm inclined to agree with Barbet, however.
Thank you, sir. That’s a great addition.
Very nice work. I love the examination of the specific language being used. Also the inclusion of the St. Thomas commentary is a nice piece of evidence for the nails. When I get to discussing the Crucifxion, years from now, I'll reference this work. Do you list references anywhere?
I've mostly gathered this myself from various sources, but I think there's a book called Witness to Mystery that has nice photos and might be a good source.