Note II.

ON CRUCIFIXION.

The treatise of Salmasius on the cross, composed with great judgment and perspicuity, and evidently founded on careful and extensive research, is a good specimen of the class of writings to which it belongs, and of the scholarship of the seventeenth century. The following passages are particularly deserving of attention, and their insertion will render it unnecessary to add other quotations of the same kind. — "Medium . . . . crucis lignum, quod eminebat ex anteriore parte, equi vice fuit lignei, quod inscendebat et inequitabat cruciarius. Corpus itaque ejus illo portabatur et sustentabatur. Unde et ἐποχεῖσθαι eo dixit crucifixiim Justinus, in Trypnonis dialogo; — 'καὶ τὸ ἐν τῷ μέσῳ πηγνύμενον «ὗς κέρας, καὶ αὐτὸ ἐξέχον ἐστὶν, ὲφίᾖ ἐποχοῦνται οἱ. σταυρούμενοι. JE quod in medio impactum est instar cornu, et ipsum eminet, cui inequitant, et quo vectantur quicruci affiguntur.' — De suppedaneo haec accipi non posse certo certius est. E medio crucis stipite extabat hoc lignum, in ipso stipite infixum et impactum. Eo vectatum dicit crucifixum. Ergo interfemina hoc habebat, eique quasi inequitabat, quod est ἐποχεῖσθαι· Nam de equo dicitur cui eques insidet, ἔποχον γίνεσθαι, et ἑποχεῖσὸαι· Eustathius, in loco superius citato, εἰς τὸν ἵππον ἀνάγειν, καί ἔποχον ποιεῖν· In eo ligno veluti subsidebant, toto corpore sustentati, quia illud natibus premebant, cruribus hinc inde pendulis. Hinc explicanda sunt ilia Maecenatis, quae et alibi emendavimus, quibus proeoptare se dicit, vel vitam in cruce retinere quam mori. — 'Hanc mihi vel acuta subsidem cruce sustine' — Subsi(lere se mavult in cruce vivum et videntem, quam extra crucera lumine cassura esse. Subsidem dixit propter illud medium lignum, in quo quasi equitantes subsidebant. Hominis ita subsidentis brachia, utrimque expansa, ad duas latitudinis partes extremas deligabantur, clavis etiam afRxae: pedes in ima extremitate longitudinis vinciebantur, et clavis configebantur: caput reclinatum habebatur ad extremitatem longitudinis summam, nee is pedibus insistebat suppedaneo, ut falso imaginati sunt. In medio igitur crucifixus requiescebat ligno, cui et insidebat ea parte quae sedes in homine ex eo dicitur. Idque clare Irenaeus explicat, lib. IT. adversus Haereses, cap. 46. — 'Ipse habitus crucis' — inquit, — 'fines et summitates habet quinque, duos in longitudine, et duos in latitudine, et unum in medio, ubi requiescit qui clavis affigitur.' — Unum illum in

medio stipitis crucis finem, sive extremitatem, τὸ ἅκρον in Graeco fuit; Tertullianus, in libro II adversus Nationes. sedilis excessum appellat liis verbis: — * Pars crucis, et quidem major, est omne robur quod erecta statione defigitur. Sed nobis tota crux imputatur, cum antemna scilicet sua, et cum illo sedilis excessu.' — Sedile est in quo sedetur, non quod pedibus subjicitur. Non potest itaque accipi de suppedaneo. Excessum vocat sedilis, quia excedens illud et eminens in medio crucis lignum pro sedili fuit, ad sustinendum cruciarium ei insidentem. Τὸ ἐξὲχον ἐν μέσῳ πῆγμα appellat Justinus. Πῆγμα est id omne quod ex duobus lignis componitur. Lignum igitur illud eminens e medio stipite crucis, quod ipso stipiti infixum et impactum foret, πῆγμα appellatur. Idem Tertullianus, in libro adversus Judseos, cap. 10, unicornis cornui comparat palum ilium e medio stipitis crucis exeuntem, sustentando corpori cruci affixi: — "Nam et antemna navis, quae crucis pars est, hoc extremitates ejus vocantur; unicornis autem in medio stipite palus.' — Sic legendus ille locus ex veteribus libris."¹

"Bene ait [Augustinus,] corpus videri stare crucifixi in ea longitudine crucis quae a transverso ligno pertinet ad solum usque, id est, ad eam partem quae desinit esse conspicua, et in terram demersa occultatur. Nam, quamvis in ea parte sederet crucifixus, ligno e medio stipite longitudinis extante sustentatus, stare tamen potius videbatur quam sedere. Palus quippe fuit inter femina cruciarii positus, cui tanquam equuleo sic insidebat ut stantis statum praeberet. Non enim prohibebat recta extendi femora et genua, pedesque in imo conjungi, ubi et clavis confixi tenebantur ad ipsum lignum arrectarium. Sic stabat simul et sedebat cruciarius. Stabat, quia directum et extentum corpus ejus stantis formam praeferebat. Sede bat autem, quia ea parte qua sedetur in pale, qui sedilis instar, erat requiescebat. Mala tamen ea sessio fuit, et ad hoc tantum instituta, ut diutius persistere in cruce posset ac durare corpus cruciarii. Cum enim ad exemplum edendum, ut alia omnia supplicia, ita istud prascipue inventum esset, ea de causa longo tempore in cruce detinebantur qui hoc supplicio afFecti fuerant. Necessaria itaque plane fuit hsec pali in media cruce defixio, ad sustentandum corpus patientis, quo in hoc statu diutius posset pendens conservari. Manus enim confixas clavis, aut brachia funibus religata, vix potuissent molem corporis suo pondere deorsum mentis sustinere, ubi tabo diffluere ac dissolvi ex mora longiore caepisset. Quod enim de suppedaneo aiunt, cui et pedes innixos quasi scabello volunt requievisse nemo est sensus communis vel mediocriter particeps quin videat, mentis pondere suo deorsum corporis mortui onerosum truncum non posse pedibus, quamvis in ligno vjnctis et constrictis, portari etsustentari."²

"Cum satis constet cruciarios suam crucem ipsosmet portasse, non tam magnam aut altam fuisse oportet quin hominis unius onus esse potuerit. Alta admodum crux, cum sua antemna, et cum palo qui e medio stipite eminebat, non fuisset ferendo, uni praesertim homini, et per aliquantum itineris spatium, ut saepe locus supplicii extra urbem satis longe distabat a carceris loco e quo educebatur nocens plectendus. Praeterea, cum elogium, sive titulus, ad caput crucifixi poneretur, omnibus iegendus expositus, si nimis alta crux fuisset, de piano non potuisset legi. Nam λευκώμαῖα non solebant grandioribus literis exarari, quam quae possent non nimium excelso loco positae a praetereuntibus facile cognosci. Postremo, certum est, nulla scala admota, impositos fuisse cruciarios illi sedili quod in media cruce depactum erat. Denique, de piano etiam cruciariis crura frangebant carnifices. Miles deinde ille qui lancea transfodit latus Domini in cruce pendentis, non alte suspensum fuisse indicat. Nam lancea, sive hasta Romana, quamvis aliquantum excesserit staturara hominis, tamen miles qui transverberasse ea dicitur Christi latus, non ex imo in altum debuit hastam infigere, sed ictum dirigere paululum ea allevata . . . . . . . Crura, ut jam dixi, fran gebantur cruciariis, et de piano quidem, a carnificibus vel militibus. Quod et historia Christi ostendit apud Johannem, ubi narratur petiisse a Pilato Judaeos ut Christo, et latronibus cum eo crucifixis, crura frangi juberet, et de cruce eorum corpora tolli. — 'Venerunt ergo milites, et prioris quidem latronis fregerunt crura, et alterius qui cum eo crucifixus est. Ad Jesum autem cum venissent, ut viderunt eum jam mortuum, non fregerunt ejus crura.' — [Joann. cap. 19, v. 32, 33.] Ex quibus verbis non obscure liquet de piano frangi potuisse, et fracta vulgo esse crura cruciariis, absque ulla scalarum ope, aut scamni. Tres igitur, aut ad summum quatuor pedes a terra elatus videtur fuisse locus crucis in quo pedes cruciarii erant sufRxi, ut a milite vel carnifice, stante in pedibus suis, crura ejus frangi facile possent. Unde etiam colligi potest, minima adjutum longitudine, aliquem protensa manu potuisse os in cruce pendentis attingere. Manum, inquam, aliquis extendens, et in manu habens vel pedalis longitudinis aut bipedalis bacillum vel virgam, ad os cruciarii, in humerum puta inclinatum caput habentis, potuit pervenire.³"

With slight exceptions, a more graphic or correct account of crucifixion than is here furnished by Salmasius can scarcely be conceived. Amongst other points, he fully proves the existence and utility of a material part of the cross which, although described by several ancient authors, has been almost entirely overlooked in modern times; namely, the short horizontal bar which projected forwards from the middle of the upright post, and whereon the crucified person sat astride; whilst, in consequence of his legs being extended, and his feet nailed to the lower part of the post, he at the same time appeared to stand. Owing to this arrangement, the punishment was less excruciating, and more protracted than is commonly imagined; in proof of which examples are above given of persons who, having been taken from the cross within a moderate time, and consigned to medical care, recovered and survived. The following are additional instances of the same kind: — The first is the case of Matthew Lovat, an Italian lunatic, labouring under that peculiar form of insanity which prompts to suicide, who from this cause inflicted various injuries on himself, repeated at intervals during several years. In the month of July, 1802, he committed an act of self-mutilation; and on the 21st of September, 1803, attempted to crucify himself, but was prevented from accomplishing his purpose by several people, who came upon him just as he was driving the nail into his left foot. He was more successful in a second attempt of this kind, which took place at Venice on the 19th of July, 1805, when he was forty-six years of age. About eight o'clock in the morning of that day he was observed by the people who passed in the street fixed to a cross, with the exception of his right hand, which hung loosely by his side. The cross was inclosed in a net of small cords, and suspended by ropes from a beam in his chamber, out of the window of which, having a low parapet, he had contrived, after nailing himself to the cross, to throw the whole apparatus. He had also crowned himself with thorns, two or three of which pierced the skin of his forehead; had transfixed his hands and feet with three long and sharp nails, and inflicted two inches below the left hypochondrium a wound with a cobler's knife, which did not however injure any of the internal parts. As soon as he was perceived, some humane people ran up stairs, disengaged him from the cross, and put him to bed. In the course of the day he was removed to an hospital, where he was carefully treated, and early in August all his wounds were completely cured. He was afterwards transferred to a lunatic asylum, and on the 8th of April, 1806, died of exhaustion, induced partly by long and repeated abstinence from food, and partly by pectoral disorder.⁴ — Several other cases of voluntary crucifixion are mentioned in the Correspondence of the Baron de Grimm, as having occurred at the French metropolis during the years 1759, and 1760, amongst the fanatical followers of the Abbe Paris who, in consequence of the irregular nervous and muscular actions which they displayed, obtained the name of Convulsionnaires. All the parties were females of humble condition, and regarded as nuns, or religious devotees, acting under the guidance of an ecclesiastical director. They were liable to fits of nervous agitation, or weakness, which were said to be relieved by bodily inflictions, administered at their own request by the director or others. Four women are particularly described as having with this view undergone crucifixion, one of them twice, and another three times, and as having remained on the cross for different periods, varying from half an hour to nearly four hours; yet they uttered no cries, did not lose any considerable quantity of blood, and all speedily recovered. These facts appear to have been minutely observed by numerous spectators, and to have been immediately committed to writing from notes taken at the time. Like similar facts previously mentioned, they serve to show that the death of the cross, when not accelerated by extraneous agency, is peculiarly slow and lingering, and that the bodily sufferings with which it is attended are by no means so intolerable as is usually supposed.⁵

Of the fortitude with which such sufferings, and even much greater ones, have been encountered and endured, numerous examples might be added to the few here subjoined, several of which are borrowed from Wanley's extensive collection of anecdotes illustrative of human character. — "Asdrubal managed the war of the Carthaginians in Spain, and by force and fraud had made himself the master of most of it; but having slain a certain nobleman of Spain, a servant of his, a Frenchman [Gaul] by birth, highly resented it, and determined with himself to revenge the death of his lord, though at the price of his own life. Whereupon he assaulted Asdrubal, and slew him. He was taken in the fact, tormented, and fastened to a cross; but, in the midst of all his pains, he bore a countenance that showed more of joy than grief, as one that was well satisfied in his revenge." — The description of this occurrence by Valerius Maximus is equally concise and forcible. — "Servus barbarus Asdrubalem, quod dominum suum occidisset graviter ferens, subito aggressus intererait. Cumque comprehensus orani modo cruciaretur, laetitiam tamen quam ex vindicta ceperat in ore constantissime retinuit." — "Theodorus being threatened with death by Lysimachus; — Speak in this manner — said he, — to thy purple minions, for to Theodorus it is all one whether he putrefy under ground, or on a cross above it." — "Andronicus Comnenus fell alive into the hands of his enemy; who, having loaded him with injuries, abandoned the miserable emperor to the people, for the punishment of his perfidiousness, [and during several days he was consequently subjected to every kind of cruelty and indignity.] All these, and greater inhumanities, the aged emperor underwent with that invincible patience, that he was heard to say no other thing than, — Lord have mercy upon me; — and— Why do ye break a bruised reed?" — "When they would have fastened Polycarp to the stake, the brave bishop cried out to let him alone as he was; for that God, who had enabled him to endure the fire, would enable him also, without any chains of theirs, to stand unmoved in the midst of the flames; so with his hands behind him, unstirred he took his crown."⁶ — Josephus gives an account of a deserter, who during the siege of Jotapata by Vespasian went over from the Jews to the Romans, and remarks; — "But Vespasian had a suspicion about this deserter, as knowing how faithful the Jews were to one another, and how much they despised any punishments that could be inflicted on them; this last, because one of the people of Jotapata had undergone all sorts of torments, and though they made him pass through a fiery trial of his enemies in his examination, yet would he inform them nothing of the affairs within the city, and, as he was crucified, smiled at them." — That the tortures of impalement and of burning alive are far greater than those of crucifixion, there can be no doubt; yet even these dreadful punishments have often been borne with admirable courage and magnanimity. An example of the former kind occurred a few years since, at the execution of some chiefs taken prisoners from the eastern part of the kingdom of Sennaar by the present viceroy of Egypt. — "Two of these chiefs the pasha ordered to be impaled in the market-place of Sennaar. They suffered this horrid death with great firmness. One of them said nothing but, — There is no God but God, and Mohammed is his apostle, — which he frequently repeated before impalement; whilst the other, named Abdallah, insulted, defied, and cursed his executioners, calling them robbers and murderers, till too weak to speak, when he expressed his feelings by spitting at them."⁷

By these and many other instances recorded in history it is abundantly proved that persons of both sexes, and all ages, have often endured the most severe torments with invincible fortitude; and it cannot therefore be supposed that the Saviour of the world, whose human nature was perfect both in body and mind, was deficient in so common an endowment. Some commentators have, nevertheless, injudiciously ascribed the agony of Christ in the garden of Gethsemane to his dread of the ordinary sufferings of crucifixion, which awaited him on the following day; but the opinion is so manifestly erroneous that, without further argument on the subject, the following facts will alone suffice for its refutation. They are derived from the well-known narrative of the last days of Dr. Rowland Taylor, rector of Hadley in Suffolk, and one of the early victims of the Marian persecution. On account of his refusal to conform to the Church of Rome, the domination of which was at that time promoted by the whole force of the government, this venerable and exemplary clergyman was, after a tedious imprisonment of nearly two years, condemned to be burnt at a stake in the very town where he had exercised his ministry; and the cruel sentence was carried into effect on the 9th of February, 1555, O.S. It could not in this case be pretended that natural sensibility was blunted by ferocity of character, defect of education, or a low and brutal course of life; for Dr. Taylor was a pious and learned Christian minister, remarkable for his faithful and benevolent attention to his pastoral duties, and greatly beloved by his parishioners. He was also a married man, advanced in years, and had been the father of nine children. If under such circumstances, and in the immediate prospect of so horrible a death, he had given way to fear and dejection, it would have been very natural and excusable; but, instead of this, he uniformly evinced a degree of cheerfulness and courage which some persons might even be disposed to condemn, as bordering on levity. His conduct on the occasion could not however be duly appreciated, without quoting the lively description of Fox the martyrologist, which will form a suitable conclusion to these remarks. When Dr. Taylor was travelling to the place of his execution, he was conducted from London to Chelmsford by the sheriff of Essex, with his yeomen. — "At Chelmsford"— says the historian, — "the sheriff of Suffolk met them, there to receive him, and to carry him forth into Suffolk. And being at supper, the sheriff of Essex very earnestly persuaded him to return to the popish religion, thinking with fair words to persuade him." — After doing this the sheriff and all the yeomen of the guard drank to his health. — "When they had all drunk to him, and the cup was come to him, he stayed a little, as one studying what answer he might give. At last, he thus answered and said; — Mr. Sheriff, and my masters all, T heartily thank you for your good will. I have hearkened to your words, and marked well your counsels. And, to be plain with you, I do perceive that I have been deceived myself, and am like to deceive a great many of Hadley of their expectation. — With that word they all rejoiced . . . . . . At last, — Good Mr. Doctor, — quoth the sheriff, — what meant ye by this, that ye say ye think ye have been deceived yourself, and think ye shall deceive many one in Hadley? — Would ye know my meaning plainly? — quoth he. — Yea, — quoth the sheriff, — good Mr. Doctor, tell it us plainly. — Then said Dr. Taylor, — I will tell you how I have been deceived, and, as I think, I shall deceive a great many. I am, as you see, a man that hath a very great carcase, which I thought should have been buried in Hadley church-yard, if I had died in my bed, as I well hoped I should have done. But herein I see I was deceived. And there are a great number of worms in Hadley church-yard, which should have had jolly feeding upon this carrion which they have looked for many a day. But now I know we be deceived, both I and they; for this carcase must be burnt to ashes, and so shall they lose their bait and feeding that they looked to have had of it. — When the sheriff and his company heard him say so, they were amazed, and looked at one another, marvelling at the man's constant mind, that thus without all fear made but a jest at the cruel torment and death now at hand prepared for him. Thus was their expectation clean disappointed." — Nor was this a solitary instance of his intrepidity, for the same author soon after adds; — "They that were present and familiarly conversant with this Dr. Taylor reported of him, that they never did see in him any fear of death; but especially and above all the rest which besides him suffered at the same time, always showed himself merry and cheerful. In the time of his imprisonment, as well before his condemnation as after, he kept one countenance, and like behaviour. Whereunto he was the rather confirmed by the company and presence of Mr. John Bradford, who was in the same prison and chamber with him. The morning when he was called up by the sheriff to his burning, being suddenly awaked out of his sound sleep, he sat up in his bed, and putting on his shirt, had these words, speaking somewhat thick after his accustomed manner; — Ah, whoreson thieves! ah, whoreson thieves! rob God of his honour? rob God of his honour? — Afterwards, being risen, and tying his points, he cast his arms about a great beam which was in the chamber between Mr. Bradford's bed and his, and there hanging by the hands, said to Mr. Bradford, — O Mr. Bradford — quoth he, — what a notable sway should I give, if I were hanged! — meaning for that he was a corpulent and big man. These things I thought good here to note, to set forth and declare to those who shall read this history, what a notable and singular gift of spirit and courage God had given to this blessed martyr."8

1) Salmasius, De Cruce, pp. 229-232.

2) Salmasius, De Cruce, pp. 251, 252.

3) Salmasius, De Cruce, pp. 283, 284, 316, 317.

4) Cesare Ruggieri, M.D., Narrative of the Crucifixion of Matthew Lovat, &c., in the Pamphleteer, vol. iii. pp. 361-375.

5) Grimm, et Diderot, Correspondance Littéraire, &c., vol. iii. pp. 11-24, 134-157.

6) Wanley, Wonders of the Little World, vol. i. pp. 260, 341, 356, 402; — Valerius Maximus, Opera, pp. 285, 532; —Whiston's Josephus, vol. iv. pp. 32, 33.

7) Narrative of an Expedition to Dongola and Sennaar, &c. pp. 177, 178.

8) Fox, Book of Martyrs, &c. pp. 128, 129.