Perhaps we should see who can find the earliest crosses existing, here is my contribution:
Roman ring, 4th-5th century (www.ancientresource.com)
Who ever made this clearly intended to make a cross, and thought it to be with a cross bar.
Aaron Walton
JoinedPosts by Aaron Walton
-
16
It Was NOT a Cross or a Torture Stake!
by cameo-d ina lot of old paintings depict it as a t shape.. this one is c.1490.
.
.
-
-
Aaron Walton
-
16
It Was NOT a Cross or a Torture Stake!
by cameo-d ina lot of old paintings depict it as a t shape.. this one is c.1490.
.
.
-
-
Aaron Walton
Do you know who the History Channel source is? They ought to be quoting someone of ancient times since no crosses remain till this period (I think they have only found one used nail). The History Channel has some really bad sources (my mother was watching an episode and everyone was a Kabalistic Jew) and think that Adam had a wife before Eve (and everyone else thinks so because of the History Channel).
I like the 'Tau' better than the stake, it is a lot more plausiable than Jesus carrying a telephone pole (or the equiviant there of). Though it may be better that we do not use Renaissance art (1400 years after the fact) to gain any idea what Jesus or the cross may have looked like.
Correct me if I am wrong, is it not true that the whole reason they change it to a stake is because crosses are pagan? If so, when did the Romans care about what you kill people with? Why would they not use something pagan?I am curious about the little monkey demon playing with the skull. Do you think it is a message of some kind? Were the artists trying to tell us something?
Concerning the monkey and the skull... In various paintings you will see a skull in the bottom (e.g. http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_drsACX1RqfU/Sd7dWo0nWqI/AAAAAAAAB5s/lYi5FYfikWg/s400/GolgothaVDyckA.jpeg) if I am not mistaken, the argument is namely because it is indeed 'the place of the skull' and that is the best depiction of it. Why is there a monkey is a good question.
