Identifying Roman Soldiers at The Crucifixion

[thebutcher]

Hello everyone, thank you for letting me join your forum.

 

I am trying to come up with a best guess of the origin of the Roman soldier who pierced Jesus' side with the spear during the Crucifixion. Obviously no one can ever find a definitive answer to this question.In doing online research for my book, I found a posting on this forum that was somewhat helpful, but can't locate the exact thread at the moment. St John's Gospel is the only one that mentions Jesus being pierced by a "spear" ( even the defintion of spear is open to discussion, was it actually a Roman pilum, etc.).

 

The soldiers in question were obviously assigned in some way to Pontius Pilate in the Prefect of Judea at the time ( circa 33 AD or BCE if you prefer). Someone suggested they were locals recruited into the Roman Army to protect the Prefect ( possibly Samaritans ).Someone else put forth that they could have come from Syria where a legion was posted at the time. What I am trying to establish is where could this soldier possibly have come from and what his prior experience in the Roman Army could have been based on actual historical data and Roman Army deployments. The Character is around 33 years old in 33 AD and has been a soldier since the age of 17. His back story was to include that he was a Roman Citizen, but I'm wondering if that premise would even fit for a soldier in Judea at 33 AD.

 

It's not that I'm lazy, but I'm having a hard time nailing this down (I'm at a library right now) and wanted to see if anyone had a definite up to date opinion on this topic. Thanks in advance to anyone who can help!

[GhostOfClayton]

We've had a crack at this one before.

 

Have a look at this thread.

[starman]

John's Gospel is the only one that mentions Jesus being pierced by a "spear"

 

According to Ehrman, who seems to speak for scholars generally, John's gospel is the least reliable historically. None of the synoptics mention this.

[XIIII]

I am trying to come up with a best guess of the origin of the Roman soldier who pierced Jesus' side with the spear during the Crucifixion.

 

I asked this question many years ago and the conclusion was that our "Roman soldier" in the fable is in fact probably one of Herod's men and almost certainly not a legionary, much less a Roman.

[caldrail]

Opinion is bound to be divided because the main source for this event is the bible, which is not an accurate hisotircal reference. The use of a spear to test whether Jesus had died might be no more than a translators mistake and in particular one from medieval myth. There is of course an incident in the First Crusade in which one of the defenders of Antioch predicted that the 'Holy Lance' that pierced the side of Jesus would be found if they dug in a certain spot. A lance was recovered, the desperate knights were re-inspired with zeal, and rode out to meet the entire turkish army which ordinarily would have spelt their doom. The turks fled (????!!!!)

 

The point here is that the implement used to in the story is merely a prop, or at least one given given religious significance as many items real or fictional have in christian mythos. To be completely accurate, the phrase 'spear' in the context of the story is nothing more than a general description and should not be used in a definitive specific context.

[XIIII]

There is of course an incident in the First Crusade in which one of the defenders of Antioch predicted that the 'Holy Lance' that pierced the side of Jesus would be found if they dug in a certain spot.

 

The True Cross itself was found in the same manner, suspiciously or miraculously depending on your point of view. According to Gibbons, even Christian contemporaries during the Crusades joked that there were enough "True Cross" fragments being peddled to build Noah's ark.

[Divus Iulius]

The Christian Crucifixion was based on a short passage from Josephus' writings and Caesars Passion

 

The only person known in history to survive a Roman crucifixion is a friend whom Josephus saves after intervening with the Roman commander. Three are taken down but only one survives.

 

Josephus, Life, 75, p. 20 of Whiston

Edited August 3, 2012 by Divus Iulius

[caldrail]

The Imperial Cult of Caesar was nbased on a political need to inspire loyalty from the empires military. The religious symbolism derives from the rulers absolute power and since the Romans saw humanity as a step toward divinity, their distinction between the two was a bit more blurry than ours. After all, people like Julius Caesar claimed divine ancestory to underline their authoprity before they became top-dog. In the writings of Roman commentators we sometimes see allusions toward prophecies and signs - Suetonius for instance makes that part of his style and recounted odd anecdotes (which have very dubious authenticity) to emphasis that the individual he's describing had some divine favour, that he was marked out by the gods for future significance.

 

As much as I'm willing to denounce the myths surrounding Jesus as much as anyone else, the parallel with Caesar is not wholly convincing. Crucifixion was used as a criminal punishment throughout the empire and it wasn't seen as religiously significant until Jesus was crucified, and then only to symbolise his suffering to save us all as the christians like to claim. The image of the cross used in this way was a more potent symbol than the fish, the previous christian symbol, and survived the late imperial chi-ro and celtic variations by the strongly romano-christian medieval world.

[Melvadius]

Personally I am somewhat surprised by the conflation of the writings of Josephus, which were definitely post 70AD, with those of the early Apostiles. So far as I am aware none of the apprently earlier writings make any mention of the fulfilment of the major prophecy concerning the destruction of the 'temple' in 70AD.

 

BTW where do you get the idea that the Cruciform Tropaeum is a symbol tied to Julius Ceasar and therefore (sic) Christianity - the only site I have seen that promulgated is David Icke's who as several in Britain are all too aware has an unfortunate medical history.

[XIIII]

Video would be much more interesting without the author referring to Christians as retards.

[Melvadius]

Video would be much more interesting without the author referring to Christians as retards.

 

For which reason the post has been removed for its offensive content - keep it polite folks otherwise we will have to consider taking further action - Legati

[eborius]

Hello everyone, thank you for letting me join your forum.

 

I am trying to come up with a best guess of the origin of the Roman soldier who pierced Jesus' side with the spear during the Crucifixion. Obviously no one can ever find a definitive answer to this question.In doing online research for my book, I found a posting on this forum that was somewhat helpful, but can't locate the exact thread at the moment. St John's Gospel is the only one that mentions Jesus being pierced by a "spear" ( even the defintion of spear is open to discussion, was it actually a Roman pilum, etc.).

 

The soldiers in question were obviously assigned in some way to Pontius Pilate in the Prefect of Judea at the time ( circa 33 AD or BCE if you prefer). Someone suggested they were locals recruited into the Roman Army to protect the Prefect ( possibly Samaritans ).Someone else put forth that they could have come from Syria where a legion was posted at the time. What I am trying to establish is where could this soldier possibly have come from and what his prior experience in the Roman Army could have been based on actual historical data and Roman Army deployments. The Character is around 33 years old in 33 AD and has been a soldier since the age of 17. His back story was to include that he was a Roman Citizen, but I'm wondering if that premise would even fit for a soldier in Judea at 33 AD.

 

It's not that I'm lazy, but I'm having a hard time nailing this down (I'm at a library right now) and wanted to see if anyone had a definite up to date opinion on this topic. Thanks in advance to anyone who can help!

[eborius]

Hello everyone, thank you for letting me join your forum.

 

I am trying to come up with a best guess of the origin of the Roman soldier who pierced Jesus' side with the spear during the Crucifixion. Obviously no one can ever find a definitive answer to this question.In doing online research for my book, I found a posting on this forum that was somewhat helpful, but can't locate the exact thread at the moment. St John's Gospel is the only one that mentions Jesus being pierced by a "spear" ( even the defintion of spear is open to discussion, was it actually a Roman pilum, etc.).

 

The soldiers in question were obviously assigned in some way to Pontius Pilate in the Prefect of Judea at the time ( circa 33 AD or BCE if you prefer). Someone suggested they were locals recruited into the Roman Army to protect the Prefect ( possibly Samaritans ).Someone else put forth that they could have come from Syria where a legion was posted at the time. What I am trying to establish is where could this soldier possibly have come from and what his prior experience in the Roman Army could have been based on actual historical data and Roman Army deployments. The Character is around 33 years old in 33 AD and has been a soldier since the age of 17. His back story was to include that he was a Roman Citizen, but I'm wondering if that premise would even fit for a soldier in Judea at 33 AD.

 

It's not that I'm lazy, but I'm having a hard time nailing this down (I'm at a library right now) and wanted to see if anyone had a definite up to date opinion on this topic. Thanks in advance to anyone who can help!

 

 

This may help you a little. High officials of the Empire, Provincial governers etc. had personal bodyguards drafted to them from regional Roman forces. For example Neratius Marcellus, Governer of Britain cerca. 100 AD. in Vindolanda letters has troops assigned from Batavian & Tungrian Cohorts stationed at that fort. These bodyguards would be classed as 'protectores singulares' (centuries later there were permenant units with this title).

These would be cavalry and auxiliaries, very unlikely to be legionaries. It is also most unlikely that they would have been from one of the local populations, so not Jewish or Samaritan. Idumenean (Arab) auxiliaries are a pssibility. None of these could have Roman citizanship while serving (though their officers could have been)but would gain that status after discharge. The pilum was not the only spear type used by the Roman army, there were several types of 'lancea' also. I have excavated several lance-heads in Roman forts in Britain. Such lances would have be used by cavalry, as the pilum was an infantry weapon, used as a javelin, for throwing, NOT as a stabbing spear. Longer thrusting spears would be needed by cavalry, similar to the Greek 'contos'. Such a longer weapon is perhaps more likely for the lance that 'pierced Jesus side' if he was high up on a cross. At the time of the cruxifiction, around the Jewish Passover festival Jerusalem would have been packed with pilgrims (as later at the outbreak of the first Revolt) and seething with potential trouble-makers. As the Roman governer, and King Herod would have to be there during the festival, troops would have been required to help maintain order, as well guard these important persons. The Temple seems to have had a Jewish guard ot 'police force', who may have been the ones who arrested Jesus, but it seems that a 'Roman' force did the execution and possibly guarded the tomb (though they would bhave been in dire trouble for falling asleep on the job! It is to be noted that Saint Paul travelled some few years later to Italy with members of the 'Gallic, or Itallic Cohort', in Acts. This indicates an auxiliary unit which must have been serving in Palestine during the period. Hope this gives you some pointers, or prevents you making errors. Good luck.