Crucifixion controversy

Crucifixion controversy is an ongoing debate about how Jesus was actually crucified. Perhaps surprisingly, little direct evidence is available today from archeological work and Roman writings as to whether, for example, nails were driven through the victims' hands or wrists as part of the crucifixions that widely occurred in ancient Rome.

But an extensive medical investigation that was published by the American Medical Association's peer-reviewed flagship journal, JAMA, concluded that:

“

The hands could be nailed or tied to the crossbar, but nailing apparently was preferred by the Romans. The nails were tapered iron spikes approximately 5 to 7 in (13 to 18 cm) long with a square shaft 3/8 in (1 cm) across. The nails commonly were driven through the wrists rather than the palms.

”

It is estimated that "100,000 to 150,000 people before Emperor Constantine outlawed the practice in A.D. 337 after converting to Christianity."

Although there is extensive written evidence about the Roman practice of crucifixion, which was learned from the Carthaginians, only 5 crucified artifacts have been discovered in modern times: "ones from Gavello, Italy, and Mendes, Egypt, have been identified .... Construction workers in Jerusalem found the only other one featuring a nail in 1968, but the body was not intact, and thus is not fully accepted as firm evidence of crucifixion ...."

Nail in the Wrists

The solitary discovery of a crucified body in Jerusalem concluded that there was a nail mark on the wrist, while subsequent researchers disputed that and asserted that it was merely a scratch.

Nail in the Hands?

Physicians studied the possibility of suspending a crucified man with names through his hands rather than his wrists and concluded that it is possible, but requires placing the nail in a specific and precise location in the hand. Otherwise, the weight of the body would cause the nail to tear through the hand.

So why would Roman soldiers take that risk of error, rather than simply use the sturdier approach of placing the nails in the wrists instead? They likely would use the easier, more secure approach of using the wrists, as shown in the Shroud of Turin. Note, however, that until the late 20th century it was commonly assumed and typically portrayed in paintings that the nails were through the hands of Jesus, not his wrists.

In Acts 12:7, the same Greek term must be translated as "wrists", because it was what the chains fell off of (not hands).

See also

• Shroud of Turin
• John C. Robison, "Crucifixion in the Roman World: The Use of Nails at the Time of Christ" (June 2002)
• John 20:27 as translated here
• John 20:27