[me to John L.]:
> ... you say that death from tied crucifixion took days, and
> yet in your earlier statement you said that "all executed
> criminals were dead by the end of the day shift".
> Mike, you take this statement out of context which
> gave the locus referent to those nailed, not tied.
Well, I've gone back now and reread the original message, and I
don't see any locus referent being given - either in the excerpt
from your unpublished paper in which this statement occurs, or in
the larger body of the entire message. (Interested readers can
check this for themselves at
> In the literature you will come across inaccurate descriptions
> regarding crurifragium, "breaking the legs" accompanied by the
> term "accident" used in the peripateic sense and conveying to
> readers that it was not typical and probably only applied in
> Jerusalem because of compliance with the client-king in contract
> to abide by religious practices. This is romantic to say the
> least. Death by nailing was quickly resulted the same day.
> Crurifragium, hastened death for those who had stronger
> constitutions and for one reason or another lingered on and had
So let me get this straight. You're saying that the literature
does NOT support your claim that the legs of the nailed-crucified
were invariably broken at or near the end of the day-shift?
Certainly no embarassment to you if this was your own claim, but I
would like to make sure.
Mt. Clemens, MI