CRUCIFIXION IN THE ANCIENT WORLD: A RESPONSE TO L.L. WELBORN

CRUCIFIXION IN THE ANCIENT WORLD: A RESPONSE TO L.L. WELBORN

One. Introduction

There is a wide gulf between twenty-first century North American society and the culture in which Paul lived. In the modern world, there has been a push to foster a respect for life and the rights of the individual, which would encompass protecting them from torture. This, however, was not the case during the Roman Empire, which preyed on the fear of imperial punishment embedded within those living in the first century A.D. Arguably the cruellest and most feared form of punishment was that of crucifixion. It is difficult for modern scholars to understand the dread that this symbol of Roman power invoked, and the shame and humiliation that was associated with it.

This paper will begin with a discussion of the nature of crucifixion within the ancient world and how it was utilized by the Romans as a form of capital punishment and a means to ultimately disgrace the victim. However, in addition to shaming and killing the victim, the use of the cross as a means of punishment was also a political tool and a symbol used by the Romans to maintain fear and to exert control over subjected provinces. This will be followed by an evaluation of Welborn's work and his attempt to interpret One Corinthians one in light of the comic-philosophic tradition. This paper concludes by stating that the optimal means of interpreting Paul's phrase "the word of the cross is foolishness" is not in terms of the ancient mime, but in relationship to the nature of the cross and its incomprehensibility as a religious symbol in light of its use within the Roman Empire and the shame and humiliation that it was designed to invoke.

Two. Crucifixion in the Ancient World

At its height, the Roman Empire was a vast civilization which exerted its influence over a number of conquered nations. Due to the fact that the Roman Empire was so expansive, it was difficult to ensure order and maintain compliance by the different regions. As a result, the Roman elite adopted a lethal form of punishment that was so cruel that it was feared by all people.

Although the Romans were not the first to practice the punishment of crucifixion, which was developed by the Carthaginians and utilized by the Persians and Alexander the Great, they are the ones who made it most well-known. It is generally agreed that crucifixion was a degrading and disgusting matter and, as a result, mention of it was frowned upon and discouraged in the works of a number of cultured writers. It was considered poor form among the elites to discuss such a base concept and, correspondingly, mention of crucifixion is generally absent in the writings of some of the more refined Latin writers such as: Pliny the younger, Statius, Lucretius, and, for the most part, Virgil. Cicero

For some references to Persian crucifixions see Herodotus one point one two eight point two; three point one two five point three; three point one three two point two; three point one five nine point one; four point four three point two; six point three zero point one; seven point one nine four point one dash two. Thucydides one point one one zero point one. For Carthaginians see Polybius one point one point two five; one point two four point six; one point seven nine point four dash five. For references to other nationalities, such as Scythians, Celts, Germani, and Thrace, who utilized crucifixion as a form of punishment, see L.L. Welborn, Paul, the Fool of Christ: A Study of One Corinthians one through four in the Comic-Philosophic Tradition, three hundred ninety-three; New York: T&T Clark, two thousand five, one three zero note eighty-seven; James S. Jeffers, The Greco-Roman World of the New Testament Era: Exploring the Background of Early Christianity; Downers Grove, Illinois: Inter Varsity Press, one thousand nine hundred ninety-nine, one five eight; Raymond E. Brown, The Death of the Messiah: From Gethsemane to the Grave, A Passion Narratives in the Four Gospels; A.B.R.L.; New York: Doubleday, one thousand nine hundred ninety-four, nine hundred forty-five to nine hundred forty-six. There is also some debate surrounding whether or not the Jewish people used crucifixion, with Ernst Bammel stating that it was used in the Jewish courts since the second century B.C. Ernst Bammel, "Crucifixion as Punishment in Palestine," in Ernst Bammel (ed.), The Trial of Jesus; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, one thousand seven hundred seventy, one six three to one six five, one six five. See also J. Fitzmyer, "Crucifixion in Ancient Palestine, Qumran Literature and the New Testament," C.B.Q. forty, one thousand nine hundred seventy-eight, four hundred ninety-three to five hundred thirteen.

In the Joseph story in Genesis forty point nineteen there appears to be a reference to the baker being raised up and hung on a tree (śúrov) for the birds to devour. This same event is recounted in Josephus, Antiquities two point seventy-seven in which Josephus states that the baker was actually crucified. Feldman critiques this by claiming that it would be anachronistic to view the baker's death in such a manner and, although there might have been similarities to hanging on a tree, this does not indicate that it was an actual crucifixion. Louis H. Feldman, Flavius Josephus, Judean Antiquities one through four: Translation and Commentary; Leiden: Brill, two thousand four, one hundred fifty-three.

Two. Hengel notes that there is an obscure reference to the cross (crux) in Virgil's Catalepton two a point eighteen. Martin Hengel, Crucifixion in the Ancient World and the Folly of the Message of the Cross; Philadelphia: Fortress, one thousand nine hundred seventy-seven, thirty-eight.

summed up this position well when he stated, "the very word 'cross' should be far removed, not only from the Roman citizen, but from his thoughts, his eyes and his ears ... The mere mention of such a thing is shameful to a Roman citizen and a free man."

The same is true for some of the Greek writers, such as Dio Chrysostom and Aristides, who did not find crucifixion an appealing theme. Plutarch might also fall within the category of disliking the discussion of crucifixion; however, he does recognize that "every criminal condemned to death bears his cross on his back." In addition to this avoidance in high literature, the mention of crucifixion is also relatively absent from inscriptions, except for one Latin one which states, "may you be nailed to a cross."

This reservation is not found in every ancient author, however, as there are a number of authors, such as Apuleius, Lucian, Plautus and some of the Greek romance writers, who almost relish the discussion of crucifixion and use it as comedic relief in their stories or plays. There is also one example of crucifixion in graffiti. In one thousand eight hundred fifty-six, a carving was found on the Palatine Hill in Rome, dating from around two hundred twenty-five A.D., which depicts a person nailed to a cross with the head of an ass and another person raising their right hand in worship. The inscription reads, "Alexamenos worships god" (Άλεξαμενός σέβετε θεόν). It is generally assumed that this is a caricature of Jesus and the Christian faith and that it was designed to be an insult and a source of amusement.

When discussing crucifixion, the primary term that is used is otau- pów and its cognates. However, there is another term that is often associated with crucifixion and practically considered synonymous, ởvaoxo- Noritwo, which refers to impaling someone with a stake or a spear.

Welborn provides a replication of this graffiti and its inscription in his book. Hengel, followed by Welborn, expresses that the use of the ass's head was a derogatory slur against the Jewish people, due to an accusation that the Jews worshiped an ass in the Temple.

The related verbs for crucifying usually involve the act of attaching the person to the upright piece of wood.

This term is often translated crucified in various sources and is interpreted that way by Hengel, who points out that Herodotus used dvaoxoxorito for crucifying people who were alive, and åvaotavoów for crucifying people who were already dead; however, after Herodotus these words are used synonymously. Other words that are usually associated with crucifixion are stake (oxoxoy) and tree (§úrov).

Beyond these two primary terms there are a number of other expressions that refer to crucifixion, such as the "infamous stake," the "criminal wood," the "terrible cross," and the "most wretched of deaths." These euphemistic terms give an insight into how the cross was viewed within the ancient world.

Although full crucifixion accounts are not plentiful in the ancient sources, Jesus' being the most thorough and well known, there are a number of authors who recount crucifixions and some of the events that surrounded them, and thus allow the modern scholar some understanding and insight into this prominent feature of Roman society.

In particular, the slave population in Italy and throughout the empire was so extensive that only through the use and fear of the servile suppli- cium could Rome maintain control. A good example of this can be found in Tacitus, who recalls a speech before the senate by Caius Cassius during the reign of Nero, "only by fear can you keep such scum under control."

On the other hand, there might be some cause to consider them as two distinct terms even after Herodotus. For instance, Plutarch poses the question "will you nail him to a cross, or impale him on a stake?" Although in the context of the passage both of these are similar, in that both are a cruel and degrading form of punishment, it does appear that there is some slight difference between these two terms. For the remainder of this paper, however, I will use these terms synonymously because of the similarities between these terms and to avoid confusion.

"Infamis stipes," is in the Anthologia Latina four hundred fifteen point twenty-three: "The criminal, outstretched on the infamous stake, hopes for escape from his place on the cross."

Also called the "barren" (infelix lignum) in Latin. Seneca, Epistulae morales one hundred one point fourteen; Minucius Felix, Octavius twenty-four point six.

Plautus is particularly fond of this term maxuma mala crux, Captivi four hundred sixty-nine; Casina six hundred eleven; Menaechmi sixty-six, eight hundred forty-nine; Poenulus three hundred forty-seven; Persa three hundred fifty-two; Rudens five hundred eighteen; Trinummus five hundred ninety-eight. For other examples see Hengel, Crucifixion.

Welborn states that "the only detailed descriptions of crucifixion in antiquity are those found in the Christian gospels." These are clearly not the only depictions of crucifixion within the ancient world, although they are no doubt the most famous. For another example of crucifixion in the ancient world, see the trial of Horatii in Livy one point twenty-six point six in which the steps of torture were outlined during the trial. Although these steps are not actually part of Horatii's crucifixion, it does provide another insight into how crucifixion was enacted in the ancient world. Other recountings of crucifixion, although they are partial, also inform our understanding.

For information regarding the size of the slave population within the Roman Empire, see K. Hopkins, Conquerors and Slaves: Sociological Studies in Roman History, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ninety-nine to one hundred two; Hengel, Crucifixion, fifty-six.

Tacitus, Ann. fourteen point forty-four point three. This speech is in response to the murder of a prefect by one

It is typically assumed that a Roman citizen did not have to worry about being crucified, and that this sort of punishment was reserved for slaves and foreigners (peregrini). Although being a citizen did spare a person from undue punishment and grant him a trial, it is not entirely correct to say that citizens were exempt from the punishment of crucifixion. There are some instances in which Roman citizens were nailed to a cross, but this was only for serious crimes and high treason. Such a death is referred to as summum supplicium. The classic example of this was Verres, who, as the governor of Sicily, imposed this sentence on a Roman citizen, P. Gavius, for serving as a spy for Spartacus in the slave revolt. Another example is the crucifixion of deserters by Scipio the Elder. In this example, a number of Roman citizens, who were handed over by the Carthaginians after the Second Punic War, were crucified because through their act of treason they had forfeited their citizen privileges.

of his slaves and the brutal response of crucifying all four hundred of the household slaves.

Justinian, Digest forty-eight point nineteen point thirty-eight point two: "Those who are responsible for sedition and disturbance when a mob has been excited are, according to their social standing, either hanged on the gallows (in furcam tolluntur) or thrown to the beasts or deported to an island." There is one noteworthy example of a person crying out that he was a Roman citizen as he was being beaten by rods and as a cross was being constructed. Cicero expresses that Verres did not even pause his punishment when the only words that proceeded from the person's mouth were, "I'm a Roman citizen." This action was seriously questioned by Cicero who held it up as an example of the state of the Roman Empire. Cicero, Ag. Verr. two point five point sixty-two to sixty-three.

There is one account of a person who, after he had been condemned to crucifixion, cried out in desperation that he was a Roman citizen, however, because of this lie he was placed on a particularly high cross that was painted white. Suetonius, Galba nine point two.

Nineteen. In general, this sentence was hardly imposed on Roman citizens, although Romans who did commit major crimes against the state often ended up dead, or committed suicide, an honourable death in the Roman Empire. In fact, suicide and other forms of honourable death were much more beneficial than being crucified. Hengel notes that a Roman citizen, if given the death sentence, was left some freedom to determine the manner in which he would die. For an interesting discussion on suicide and whether the perpetrator should be given a proper burial, see Seneca the Elder, Controversiae eight point four.

Twenty. Cicero, Actio Secunda M. Tullii Ciceronis in P. Verrum two point five point one five eight to two point five point one six five. P. Gavius was faced towards the mother country due to the nature of the charge against him.

Twenty-one. Livy thirty point four three point one three; Valerius Maximus two point seven point one two. In the Second Punic War, discipline was particularly problematic and so increasingly harsh punishments were implemented in order to maintain control over the army. Another example of this is Avidius Cassius, who crucified any soldier who took any item from the province they had just conquered.

The actual act of crucifying a person involved nailing or hanging a person to a tree or to timbers in the shape of a T, X or the common modern image of a cross. Seneca states that there was not uniformity in crucifixions, "Yonder I see crosses, not indeed of a single kind, but differently contrived by different peoples; some hang their victims with head toward the ground, some impale their private parts, others stretch out their arms on a fork-shaped gibbet." A related question is how Jesus or other crucifixion victims were attached to the cross. Hewitt states that tying a victim to the cross was more common, although there are a number of references to the use of nails in the act of crucifixion. The nailing of the person to the cross was considered very painful: "with limbs outstretched ... they are fastened and nailed to the stake in the most bitter torment, evil food for the birds and grim pickings for the dogs."

Regardless of the nature of the cross, or how that person was attached, after the person was raised up on the cross the crucifixion of a person continued until that person died, usually from suffocation.

This fear and dislike of the cross was expressed by Lucian in his comical discussion of the Greek letter Tau. In his work, The Consonants at Law, Lucian has the Greek letter Sigma bring a charge against his

Although it was within his right, it was almost considered more savagery than strictness of discipline. Scriptores Historia Augustae, Avidius Cassius three point four.

Twenty-six. There was an interesting article published in two thousand four in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine that evaluated the various medical positions on the possible cause of death for someone who was crucified. Among the various doctors questioned, who have also written articles on the topic, the various possible causes of death include: cardiac rupture, heart failure, hypovolaemic shock, syncope, acidosis, asphyxia, arrhythmia plus asphyxia, pulmonary embolism, voluntary surrender of life, and one physician stating that Jesus did not die on the cross. After evaluating these options, and some of the re-enactments of crucifixions, although they were not true re-enactments because the volunteers did not die, they came to the (un)conclusion that there are a variety of ways that people die on the cross. This article does, however, provide some unique insights into the modern evaluation of ancient methods of torture and proposes that in the future a collaborative effort should be made by historians, archaeologists and physicians to better understand ancient crucifixion. Matthew E. Maslen and Piers D. Mitchell, "Medical Theories on the Cause of Death in Crucifixion," Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine ninety-nine (two thousand six), one hundred eighty-five to one hundred eighty-eight.

neighbouring letter Tau, for it injures his kinfolk and mankind. Lucian closes his work with Sigma bringing this final word against Tau:

That is the way he injures mankind as far as their speech is concerned, but look at the material injury he has done them! Men weep and bewail their lot and curse Cadmus over and over for putting Tau into the alphabet, for they say that their tyrants, following his figure and imitating his build, have fashioned timbers in the same shape and crucify men upon them; and that it is from him that the sorry device gets its sorry name (stauros, cross). For all this do you not think that Tau deserves to die many times over? As for me, I hold that in all justice we can only punish Tau by making a T out of him.

Although this is a humorous and fanciful court scene, the fear behind the cross and being crucified was very real, no doubt because it was designed to be a very painful and humiliating process.

What was discussed above is merely the act of crucifixion; the entire process was much more involved and degrading. The whole process of crucifixion was designed to humiliate the victim and maximize the amount of shame and suffering that person incurred. Regardless of whether the person was still living or dead, this type of public exposure striped the victim of their last vestiges of honour, leaving them entirely shamed.

In the ancient sources, one thing that is associated with crucifixion and punishment of crimes is a torture list. Crucifixion did not occur by itself, but was accompanied by a number of other physical and emotional punishments that compounded the shame and pain. Within the ancient sources there are a number of torture lists which outline the various punishments that could be meted out to a criminal once a person was condemned to be crucified. Philo describes how people were arrested, scourged, tortured and then crucified because they grieved at the horrendous acts of Flaccus. Seneca lists a number of tortures that were implemented by the Romans that caused incredible fear within the populous. He mentions the rack, the hook, being completely impaled by a stake, people being torn apart by chariots, being clothed in inflammable materials, and the cross. In addition to these, there is also mention of blinding of the eyes and scourging of both the back and front. Although a number of these tortures were also means of execution, the Romans also combined them to increase the person's suffering and to increase fear within the populous.

Although the beatings, floggings and other tortuous acts were cruel, Sallust suggests that real cruelty would be to flog but not torture the victim before the crucifixion. "The usual mutilation was not inflicted, since the victim was to suffer a long time." By not torturing the victim, the person would remain on the cross for an extended period of time, thus magnifying the pain, suffering and humiliation. On the other hand, all of the torture that Jesus received might have been considered a favour or merciful so that he would not have to suffer as long on the cross. This could be one of the reasons why Jesus died so quickly on the cross.

As mentioned above, one of the key goals of crucifixion was the humiliation of the person and one of these methods revolves around sexual humiliation and assault. During crucifixion the victim would be stripped of his or her clothing and be hung up for all to see. This forced nakedness would be very shaming in Roman culture and there is no good reason to assume that Jesus, in his crucifixion, would not have been naked as well. If the idea was to shame the victim, full nakedness, especially within the Jewish context and their scruples against public nakedness, would be part of the humiliation process. This aspect would only be compounded as people would begin to lose control of their body, defecating themselves and even having the bloating of the penis and spontaneous erections. Depending on the position of the person being crucified, the display of the genitals could have been especially emphasized.

Both Josephus and Seneca mention the creativity of the Romans when it came to crucifixion, with Seneca stating that the sexual violence was taken to the extreme of impaling the victim through their private parts. There is no evidence that this happened to Jesus, but these accounts are telling in that they express a very sexualized aspect to the crucifixion.

One of the most disturbing developments in David Tombs' article is the real possibility of Roman solders sexually assaulting crucifixion victims in order to increase the person's shame and humiliation. Tombs states,

Based on what the Gospel texts themselves indicate, the sexual element in the abuse is unavoidable. An adult man was stripped naked for flogging, then dressed in an insulting way to be mocked, struck and spat at by a multitude of soldiers before being stripped again and reclothed for his journey ... only to be stripped again and displayed to die whilst naked to a mocking crowd. When the textual presentation is stated like this, the sexual element of the abuse becomes clear ...

This is very disturbing and distasteful for the modern reader, but within the Roman culture, convicted persons, who were not Roman citizens, were not protected and lost complete control over their bodies and their ability to defend themselves. Consequently, the solders could impose any form of humiliation on the person as they desired. Some might be more innocent, as in the dressing up of Jesus as a king, but others might not be. As a result, the exploitation of sexually vulnerable people by Roman soldiers was an intricate component in the humiliation of the victim.

In addition to individual crucifixions, the use of crucifixion was also employed en mass as punishment. Besides providing a painful execution, the Romans used crucifixion as a powerful image. There are episodes such as the revolt at Spartacus, in which six thousand captives were crucified along the Via Appia from Capua to Rome. The bodies were left on the cross and were allowed to rot, providing a powerful image of the suffering and degradation that awaited those who dared to challenge Roman authority. Another example of this is related by Josephus and his recounting of some of the tactics employed by the Romans during the Jewish revolt:

They were accordingly scourged and subjected to torture of every description, before being killed, and then crucified opposite the walls. Titus indeed commiserated their fate, five hundred or sometimes more being captured daily; on the other hand, he recognized the risk of dismissing prisoners of war, and that the custody of such numbers would amount to the imprisonment of their custodians. But his main reason for not stopping the crucifixions was the hope that the spectacle might perhaps induce the Jews to surrender, for fear that continued resistance would involve them in a similar fate.

It was the hope of the Romans that horrifying cruelty of crucifixion might act as a deterrent, or "state terror policy," against those who might think to undermine Roman rule.

This, however, did not always accomplish its goal, as can be seen by the number of revolts within the Roman Empire. In order to punish the revolters, crucifixion was imposed on the captives. For instance, in some of the slave revolts, hundreds and even up to six thousand slaves were crucified as punishment for their rebellion. The same is true for provincial rebellions, as can be seen in a number of the records

Another example of how crucifixion was used to create fear in the slave population is when Alexander Severus crucified the slaves who rebelled against him "on the street which his slaves used most frequently on the way to the imperial palace."

regarding the Jewish people and their uprisings. Josephus recalls that in four BC Varus, who was the governor of Syria at the time, put down an upheaval against Herod's son Archelaus by crucifying two thousand of the movement's leaders. According to Roman law, rebellious subjects were not enemies, but bandits. Likewise, Josephus recounts how Felix set out to clear the Judean countryside of "bandits," with the number of people who were crucified being too many to count. These are just two examples, but the pattern of firmly putting down rebellions through the use of harsh methods is maintained throughout Roman history. Again, crucifixion was a deterrent for further revolts and rebellions against the Empire.

The use of crucifixion within the ancient world was practically ubiquitous, and certainly a common feature within Roman society. Not only was it used as a personally humiliating and degrading punishment, it was also utilized politically to create fear within the Empire and in order to maintain order. If order was broken, then swift and harsh methods for regaining dominance were employed. Crucifixion expressed Rome's might and the consequences for disobedience. With this in mind, I now turn to Paul's use of the cross and crucifixion within I Corinthians One.