11-23-2009, 05:33 PM
No "specialists" are required for crucifixion! From what I've read, it's the detail pushed off on the guys who flunk out of latrine duty. Stick a big nail through a piece of wood to serve as a washer, hold the guest of honor's arm up against the crossbar, and nail it anywhere between radius and ulna. Repeat for other arm. He'll be squirming a bit, but give him a gut punch or kick in the nads, and a brawny soldier or two will be able to hold the arm in place long enough for the hammering to get done. Then while he's distracted, lift both feet off the ground and put a third nail through both heels into the side of the upright. Done! It's all very simple and low-tech, easily accomplished by anyone who can swing a hammer.
I agree that full battle gear is not necessary. Swords and spears, maybe shields. Armor and helmet only if the officers are feeling particularly annoying that day. Note that at least one soldier had his kit bag, since there was posca ("wine mixed with vinegar") and a sponge--the description of the sponge in the Gospels is a little vague, but they don't grow naturally on the hills around Jerusalem so I'm guessing this one has the traditional function! (If you do go with armor, why no segmentata? It had been in service for a good 40 years at that point, 2 whole generations of soldiers, so it would have been plenty common.)
I think we're bantering semantics with the spear! And using conflicting definitions as well. Aren't auxiliaries generally shown with a pair of lanceae? On grave stones at least. I'm defining "lancea" as a light spear with a throwing loop, suitable for either thrusting or throwing. They're shown about 6 feet tall, so they weren't likely to have been much shorter than that. "Hasta" I take to be a simple thrusting spear, anywhere from 6 to 9 feet, not having a throwing loop but not necessarily too heavy to throw. Is there more evidence to narrow things down more than that? And how much evidence is there for an auxiliary being armed with only a thrusting spear rather than multiple throwing spears? Just curious!
Happy nailing!
Matthew
I agree that full battle gear is not necessary. Swords and spears, maybe shields. Armor and helmet only if the officers are feeling particularly annoying that day. Note that at least one soldier had his kit bag, since there was posca ("wine mixed with vinegar") and a sponge--the description of the sponge in the Gospels is a little vague, but they don't grow naturally on the hills around Jerusalem so I'm guessing this one has the traditional function! (If you do go with armor, why no segmentata? It had been in service for a good 40 years at that point, 2 whole generations of soldiers, so it would have been plenty common.)
I think we're bantering semantics with the spear! And using conflicting definitions as well. Aren't auxiliaries generally shown with a pair of lanceae? On grave stones at least. I'm defining "lancea" as a light spear with a throwing loop, suitable for either thrusting or throwing. They're shown about 6 feet tall, so they weren't likely to have been much shorter than that. "Hasta" I take to be a simple thrusting spear, anywhere from 6 to 9 feet, not having a throwing loop but not necessarily too heavy to throw. Is there more evidence to narrow things down more than that? And how much evidence is there for an auxiliary being armed with only a thrusting spear rather than multiple throwing spears? Just curious!
Happy nailing!
Matthew
Matthew Amt (Quintus)
Legio XX, USA
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.larp.com/legioxx/">http://www.larp.com/legioxx/
Legio XX, USA
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.larp.com/legioxx/">http://www.larp.com/legioxx/
