Upload
billybobwashere2
View
227
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
7/31/2019 Crucifixion in Antiquity CONSLUSION
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/crucifixion-in-antiquity-conslusion 1/3
Chapter Seven
Conclusion
1.Answers to the Basic Questions of the Investigation
First, what is the ancient - pre-Christian - terminology of crucifixion? The
answer is that there was no such terminology. There was only a termi-
nology of suspension - a group of words and idioms that were used more
or less interchangeably when referring to various forms of suspension
(both human and nonhuman suspensions in several cases). Within this
group there is a group of suspension punishments, and within the latter is
a group of executionary (ante-mortem) suspension punishments, and
within the last is a group of punishments that were carried out by a limb
suspension, in which sometimes nails were used, and which sometimes
resulted in an outdrawn suffering on some kind of suspension tool. The
problem is that no specific terminology is linked to this particular form
of execution - before the execution of J estis.
When it comes to the individual terms, some conclusions can be
drawn. A "taupo, is a pole in the broadest sense. It is not the equivalent
of a "cross" (t). In some cases, it is a kind of suspension device, used for
th i f t t i f ti
7/31/2019 Crucifixion in Antiquity CONSLUSION
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/crucifixion-in-antiquity-conslusion 2/3
there was no crucifixion proper. There was a whole spectrum of suspen-
sion punishments, which all shared terminology. What is described as
happening on Calvary was, so to speak, crucifixion in the making, if it is
allowed to allude to a famous book suite.
Sixth, how has the punishment of crucifixion been described, and how
st)(mld it be described in the light of the present investigation? It could
without exaggeration be said that the punishment of crucifixion has been
vividly depicted. It docs not require a lengthy search to find a full-blown
description of how a crucifixion was carried out in antiquity. It seems on
Fifth, how do the insights from the present study of the ancient texts co-
here with the contributions of the major lexica and dictionaries? The out-
come of the comparative study is that they are incoherent. At the heart of
the discrepancy is the usage of the labels "cross" and "crucifixion" in the
lexica and dictionaries. The label "cross" is commonly applied to many
1I10retexts which contain (>taupo, than those which - with at least a de-
cent amount of certainty - can be determined to contain a reference to the
punishment tool used in a crucifixion in a traditional sense. In the sameway, the label "crucifixion" is applied to a large number of texts where
the only qualifier is the occurrence of, e.g., (ava)cr"xupo\iv or ava-
crKOAOltll;;£1V.In short, a lot of texts are identified as references to "cruci-
fixion" on the basis of a simple conjecture.
3°5I, Answers to the Basic Questions of the Investigation
Fourth, how is the punishment of crucifixion defined by previous scholars?
The theme of definition occurs sparsely among the studied scholars. With
one major exception (Kuhn), the opinion of what a crucifixion is has to
be read more or less between the lines. The scholars may offer some
words in the ongoing discussion that indicate what is on their minds.
When nothing else is said, the conclusion that they use the designation
"crucifixion" in the normal English sense must be drawn. Taken together,
in view of the absent definition and the normal usage of the term, the ab-
solute majority of scholars have held the opinion that the designation
"crucifixion" is coherent with the punishment that struck Jesus according
to the main Christian traditions. But it would be of great benefit for this
often implied definition to be spelled out. The label "crucifixion" as it is
commonly understood comes from the description of the groundbreak-
ing event on Calvary. Thus, Calvary should be the beacon for which fea-
tures the label "crucifixion" shall contain. This is level one of the defini-tion. Level two is to label all other human suspensions as - "suspen-
sions.» Human suspensions that lack one or more features (i.e., post-
.mortem suspension or impaling) must not be labeled «crucifixions.»
Conclusion
man Era, and its usage is hard to define beyond denoting "to attach insome way to a crux. U
i1 ? n is mainly used in connection with human post-mortem suspen-
sions, especially when combined with r D . "~n is translated with KpE-
flavvUvat, which rather surprisingly is used only in that way. The elusive
D P ' is also used for human suspension; of what kind is, however, un-
known. In the clear majority of the texts, the Vulgate applies what,
through the execution of Jesus, had become a crucifixion terminology.
This is an indication that at least the translator(s) of the Vulgate had a
tendency to let the way Jesus died reflect the reading of texts which didnot describe that punishment.
It has been noticed that the ancient languages (i.e., Greek, Latin, He-
brew/Aramaic) lacked a special term for "crucifixion." What has now
been added is that the reason for this might lie in the fact that there was
no specific punishment of crucifixion. The present author cannot see any-
thing that speaks against the assumption that this absence of specificity is
what it is all about: antiquity had no special terminology for crucifixion
because there was no particular punishment called" crucifixion."
\,l.~
Second, what can be said about the punishment that the terms describe?The punishment consists in fact of punishments. There is a large group of
terms and idioms which refer to various acts of suspension, and this is
almost all that can be said about ((the punishment" - it comprises various
acts of suspension. The disparate verbs refer mainly to acts of suspension
upon, or attachment onto, various torture or execution devices, which are',
referred to with various nouns. The variation is the only firm theme. The
message of the texts in which the studied terminology is used appears to
be that a punishment could be carried out in a way that was simply fitting
for the moment. What is described as happening to Jesus on Calvary
might then be only a momentary expression of local caprice. If the previ-
ous and snbsequent executions had been described in texts, they might
have been described quite differently. What has become the solid image inthe center of the Christian faith might be just a freak of fate, not an ex-
pression of a well-defined and long-used execution form.
,
Third, how do the New Testament authors describe the death of Jesus on
the philological level? The New Testament authors are strikingly silent
about the punishment Jesus had to suffer on Calvary. The vivid pictures
of the death of Jesus in the theology and art of the church - and among
"< scholars - do not have their main source here. Perhaps crucifixion as it is
known today did not even come into being on Calvary, but in the Chris-
tian interpretation of the event. Before the death of Jesus, it appears that
7/31/2019 Crucifixion in Antiquity CONSLUSION
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/crucifixion-in-antiquity-conslusion 3/3
2. Conclusion
The frequent and colorful depictions of crucifixions and the death of Je-
sus mentioned in the previous chapter are essentially without support in
the studied text material. Neither biblical nor extra-biblical texts up to the
turn of the first century offer such detailed descriptions as the mentioned
scholars do. These scholars seem to imply that all texts in which the terms
occur are crucifixion accounts from which they can extract information
and, despite the texts' diversity, add it together. The problems connected
with this scholarly procedure have been the topic of the present investiga-tion.
It is not impossible to find references to crucifixion in the ancient text
material, but it takes more than the occurrence of a single term. It is not,
of course, possible to draw the conclusion that crucifixions did not occur.
There were probably suspensions in ancient times that cohered well with
the suspension of Jesus. Yet that is not the problem. The problem is to
determine with a decent level of probability that a text describes such a
punishment. The overwhelming majority of texts are simply not compre-hensible enough for that.
the basis of these depictions that the ancient accounts of crucifixion are
both frequent and clear-cut, but they are not. The ancient texts that with
any likelihood describe crucifixions are both rare and vague. This obser-
vation includes the texts of the New Testament.
The vague and diverse suspension accounts ought to affect the effort to
describe a crucifixion, or rather the crucifixion. An illustration of cruci-
fixion cannot be anything else than a retelling of what can be gleaned
from the New Testament texts concerning the execution of Jesus. First,that it was an executionary suspension. Second, that after being scourged
Jesus (and/or Simon) carried a , , ,aupo , , whatever that might be, to the
execution place. Third, that Jesus was undressed and attached to a "tau-
p o " perhaps by being nailed. Fourth, that a sign probably indicated the
nature of the crime. Features beyond these are not to be found in the
New Testament or the older literature of the Greco-Roman world.
Other punishments should not be characterized further than that they
were some kind of suspension on some kind of suspension device of a
whole human in some condition or a part of a human. A more detailed
account cannot be given on a general level, but must be confined to a spe-
cific text. Such an account is, however, only a description of a single text,
not a presentation of a customary form of punishment.
3°72, Conclusion
The support for colorful depiction of the death of Jesus must thus be
found somewhere else. This "else" will be the topic in a forthcoming in-vestigation by the present author.
Conclusion306