Naked on the cross

[culus]

Nudity of the condemned seems to have been applied during Middle Ages and the subsequent Modern Epoch, at least before the age of Enlightment. It was particularly applied during execution for 'lower' crimes, including witchcraft and heresy, treason, etc.. Not for a nobleman to be beheaded.

It was likely to humiliate the condemned and make him/her clear that his/her social rights were forfeited. Of course, one could meanwhile cash the sale of their clothes, as a sideward profit.

In the Middle Ages traitors of high social rank, convicted of treason, like Sir Anthony Babington, were stripped stark naked and tied down, spread eagle and face up, to a hurdle, and dragged behind a horse through the streets of London to the place of execution where they would be hanged, drawn and quartered. Thousands of people would line the streets to watch.

During the Renaissance victims of the Borgias were routinely paraded stark naked and on foot or conveyed in carts to the place of their executions and displayed for the crowd. These included priests and nobles and other enemies or perceived enemies.

The humiliation of complete nudity was an essential component of these ultimate punishments.

 

[Zorf24]

Wasn't it very rare that they ever crucified a woman?

it was more common to burn women. destroying the body was considered important.

but I don't know if rare is really the right word, just not as common.

 

[nux581]

Female slave were definitely subjected to crucifixion when their owner was murdered by a fellow slave. From Wikipedia:
According to Roman law, if a slave killed his or her master, all of the master's slaves would be crucified as punishment. Both men and women were crucified. Tacitus writes in his Annals that when Lucius Pedanius Secundus was murdered by a slave, some in the Senate tried to prevent the mass crucifixion of four hundred of his slaves because there were so many women and children, but in the end tradition prevailed and they were all executed.

The household contained more than 400 slaves. Because of the number of women (and children... ugh) due to be crucified, there was considerable public clamor to ignore the law. From Tacitus' text on this matter:
No one indeed dared singly to oppose the opinion of Cassius, but clamorous voices rose in reply from all who pitied the number, age, or sex, as well as the undoubted innocence of the great majority. Still, the party which voted for their execution prevailed. But the sentence could not be obeyed in the face of a dense and threatening mob, with stones and firebrands. Then the emperor reprimanded the people by edict, and lined with a force of soldiers the entire route by which the condemned had to be dragged to execution.

Something to consider is that the people crucifying the 400 would not be directly connected to that particular event leading to the mass sentence, but would have been experienced crucifixion crews. I would expect that such men would be self-selecting for enjoyment in performing the act. My guess is that, despite general public sympathies for the hundreds of innocents condemned by law, these men would have let the full weight of their cruelty and ingenuity fall upon the unfortunate victims, stripping them for the long walk between the lines of soldiers, having had scourging administered beforehand.

I often imagine myself part of that throng, naked to all eyes, buttocks shredded from the scourging, stumbling as I bear my patibulum to the place of my humiliating, agonizing death...

 

[culus]

Mass crucifixions must have been surreal events, with so many of the helpless condemned being stripped naked and then dragged to their crosses to be spread, tied or nailed and left hanging there for all to see. The sounds of suffering and agony would have been amplified by the sheer number of those crucified. For the prurient and debauched among the crowd it would have been an orgy for the senses, particularly for the eyes, witnessing a tableau of the graphically obscene positions of the naked victims left to die on their crosses. One can imagine gawkers moving among the many crosses and examining and comparing their bodies. They would most likely have made eye contact with someone they knew, the eyes of the helpless, crucified man or woman imploring them for help and begging with labored breaths as they suffered the torment of hanging on the cross.

 

[Apostate]

They would most likely have made eye contact with someone they knew, the eyes of the helpless, crucified man or woman imploring them for help and begging with labored breaths as they suffered the torment of hanging on the cross.

Tormentors looking the tormented in the eye is an unclean kink of mine, one which Jastrow has obliging supplied over the years.

 

[voyeurjerome]

The archaeological remains seem to show that the feet were nailed on each side of the post of the cross. In this way the sex was totally visible. Flogging was also practiced totally naked. The executioner was not targeting sex, but he could be beaten by the whip .... with intense pain.

 

[Tenterden]

Ready to be sentenced by the judge after being mocked by the guards and crowned with brambles

 

[Tenterden]

watching the guards tie me to the beam my clothes shredded by the guards

 

[Tenterden]

after the flogging before being crowned with brambles
How many lashes would it take to break me

 

[Tenterden]

how would you tie my feet to the cross before nailing picture 1 or picture 2

 

[danielm09]

Hanging naked would definitely be humiliating. Especially as a man being impaled on the corner and slowly fucking your self to death would add to the humiliation

 

[Slave John]

Shame, humiliation and total degradation of the crucified male or female is a major component of this ultimate punishment and death. Exposure and deliberate manipulation of the condemned's body makes a statement that is understood by all who will witness the crucifixion. Most men and women are naturally modest where their bodies are concerned. Men are at liberty to go shirtless, but most of us are only nude when we copulate, bath or sleep, all of which are private, intensely intimate actions.

Unless we are high maintenance when it comes to being in good physical condition and controlling excess body hair, the average person is probably not a runway model. So, to be stripped completely naked and hung by the wrists from a wooden cross, with legs splayed wide, belly stretched and genitals obscenely exposed is the ultimate humiliation.

A crowd of boisterous and callous onlookers will gather to watch, free to stare at a woman's naked breasts and open vagina and at a man's penis and scrotum, dangling beneath his belly.

If a cornu is added to the scenario the humiliation is complete. Being impaled up the rectum is the final act of degradation for the condemned and for males, doubly humiliating, as the prostate is stimulated mercilessly and will lead to an erection while hanging on the cross. Now, something meant to be seen only by the eyes of one's lover is exposed for all to see. And, if ejaculation results, the spilling of his semen, in public, will be followed, in fairly short order, by involuntary urination as he hangs helpless on the cross. Nothing is private and the only mercy is for a quick death, but that is not to be.

It sounds intriguing to me.

 

[Slave John]

Definitely naked. But best if publicly disrobed before your torturers and any others present. And a St. Andrew's cross or similar device to spread the legs and completely expose your sex for all to see, touch, and torment.

 

[Apostate]

Definitely naked. But best if publicly disrobed before your torturers and any others present. And a St. Andrew's cross or similar device to spread the legs and completely expose your sex for all to see, touch, and torment.

Another common theme.

 

[Darkprincess69]

Another common theme.

If I'm not mistaken, I saw that second pic (or one very much like it, possibly from the same shoot) as a thumbnail on this site on Valentine's Day 2013, as a result of a webseatch, and I wanted to download it but I found I had to join the site in order to get it, so I did. And I'm still here 7 years later

 

[Deleted member 32050]

It is an obvious fact and this nudity of the crucified men and women is part of the torture of the cross!
The humiliation of the condemned is an important part in his ordeal.
I can't imagine a crucified male or female without him being totally naked.

Yes, I too love being totally naked when I'm crucified. here are a few photos of me in my naked sexual humiliation.

 

[PhilX]

I might get flamed for this, but I seriously doubt many woman were crucified.

A bit late in commenting...

Women were crucified as has been pointed out. And of course all here should know of the great Eulalia of Barcelona who after lots of torture was finally crucified on an X shaped cross (more fun for the guys). Here are two rather good images I found.

I read that women were crucified facing the cross whilst as we know men were facing away from it (of course there is so much speculation that we can all make our own scenarios) . As I have written before, I wonder if the cross was seen as a symbolic 'raping device', i.e. the cross itself symbolising the dominant masculine power of Rome. Looking at an empty cross with arms spread wide as if embracing and the sedile thrusting out in front like an erect penis, or maybe even a cornu of cast bronze in the actual shape of a penis with bulging glans, it does resemble a rampant male. So the action of crucifixion places the condemned as the sexual victim to be publicly 'fucked by Rome'. Therefore it made sense for women to be made to face the cross in a parody of vaginal copulation (face to face), and men with their back against the cross as in buggery.

 

[Kav]

Yes, I too love being totally naked when I'm crucified. here are a few photos of me in my naked sexual humiliation.

Would love to have you as one of my male crux models.

 

[JohannTeig]

A point that gets overlooked in discussion of the question of nudity in Roman times,
and more generally in the ancient world, is that the sight of the private parts was
offensive, humiliating, and even positively harmful to the viewer.
If Romans did think it necessary to cover the condemned man's or woman's parts
in a loincloth, it was to protect themselves, not the victim.

I doubt this. Consider the countless original Greek and Roman Nude statues complete with private parts. Also, the countless phallic ornaments used as door chimes etc. Of course it depends on context. While nudity per se might not have been shameful, when bathing, or in sports events. Being crucified helplessly nude certainly was.

 

[Eulalia]

I doubt this. Consider the countless original Greek and Roman Nude statues complete with private parts. Also, the countless phallic ornaments used as door chimes etc. Of course it depends on context. While nudity per se might not have been shameful, when bathing, or in sports events. Being crucified helplessly nude certainly was.

In context (a long time ago!) I was referring to the later Empire when - under the influence of Christianity, and 'Middle Eastern' (Jewish, Persian etc.) cultures more generally, there was a marked swing against nudity, and fear/ revulsion at the sight of the nude body.