Alex. Soiter.
* On the readinsr 9x55x70? i iTizi.rfii.; XiiicCt; for Mt, see T. Soden. i. p. 1074, and ih. p. 1313 for the reading of D in Mk. \Miat, according to v. Soden, the true reading in Mt. is we aave not been able to discover. The MSS KB represent, accord- ing; to him (and others), the recension of Hesychius.
LEGS ^Jn 19^"-).— The breaking of the legs with a heavy club or bar (ffjceXoxoria, crurifragiam) was inflicted as a capital punishment on slaves and others who incurred the anger of irresponsible masters (for retf. see Westcott's note). The \ictim, with legs broken, hands cut oti', and oiherwLse mutilated, was thrown still alive into a pit ; often the deathblow was given in some other way ('fractis cruribus occiduntvir,' Ammian Marcell. HiM. xiv. 9). Crurifragium formed no part of crucifixion itself, but was perhaps usually added in Juda?a to secure a si>eedy death, as otherwise those crucified might liiiger for several days (cf. Lactantius, iv. 26, ' His executioners did not think it necessary to break His bones, as was their pre- vailing custom '). Death would then ensue in one of the following ways — ( 1 1 From shock ; in which case it would be immediate. (2) From kfrmor- rhagc ; such blows given by a hea\"y bar miglit cause complete tearing of the skin, producing what is known as 'a compound fracture,' which would speedily result in bleeding to death OAxing to the tearing of the blood-vessels. This would Ije especi- ally likely to occur from the upright josition in which the victim was suspended. (3) From gan- grene, which would ensue if neither shock nor haemorrhage were fatal, and would make recovery impossible. Thus the bodies might be removed. Edersheim says (Life and Times, iL 613) : ' The breaking of the bones was always followed by a coup de grace by sword, lance, or stroke (the perforatio or percussio sub alas), which immedi- ately put an end to what remained of life. Thus the ■' breaking of the bones '" was a sort of increase of punisliment by way of compensation for its shortening by the final stroke that followed.' Cf. Quinctilian, ' cruces sncciduntur : percussos sepeliri camifex non vetat.' But Meyer is of opinion that the addition of a finishing blow by which (and therefore not by crurifragium in itself) death was brought about, cannot be shoAvn, and least of all from Jn 19**. Crurifragium, as well as crucifixion, was abolished by Constantine, the first Christian I emperor. The Jews did not make their request to Pilate Avith the desire to intensify the sufferings of Jesus and the robbers, but because only in tliLs way could they have the bodies taken down. They had in view I)t 21^ (though this law did not refer to crucifixion, a punishment unknown to the Israelites), more especially as they feared the pollution of the coming Sabbath, which was a high day (v.^i).
Jesus being crucified ' in the midst,' the soldierc wotdd naturally begin with the robbers who were on either side, and so come last to Him. This is better than Bengel's explanation ( " cui destinatum cruri- fragium distulerant. diutumioris doloris causa'). His legs were not broken as He was already dead, but a soldier gave the spear-thrust to make sure. Thus the type of the Paschal lamb (Ex 12^. Xu 9^), and the declaration of God's protection of the righteous (Ps 34*'), were remarkably fulfilled (Jn 1^) ; and the sacred body of Christ, which had preA'iously been subjected to instdt and abuse, was 13 reserved from the last indignity when once His work was finished. The omission of the crurifra- gium is very important, showing that the execu- tioners were couA'inced of the reality of the death of Jesus. The Synoptists make no mention of the incident, probably (as Godet) because Jesus Him- self was not affected by it and His Person alone was of consequence to them, not those of the two male- factors. Neither would St. John have mentioned it but for the relation of the fact to the prophecy which struck him so forcibly. ' To understand what John felt at the moment which he here recalls, we must suppose a Vjelieving Jew. familiar with the OT, seeing the soldiers approach who are
24
LEPROSY
LEPROSY
to break the legs of the three victims. He asks himself anxiously what is to be done to the body of the Messiah, which is still more sacred than the Paschal lamb. And lo, simultaneously and in the most unexpected manner, this body is rescued from the brutal operation which threatened it, and receives the spear-thrust, thereby realizing the spectacle which repentant Israel is one day to behold.'
The so-called Gospel according to Peter has a curious perversion of the account, representing the crurifragium as omitted not in the case of Jesus, but in that of the penitent robber. ' One of the malefactors reproached them, saying, We have suffered this for the evils that we have done, but this man having become the Saviour of men, what wrong hatii He done to you? And they, being- angered at him, commanded that his legs should not be broken, that he might die in torment ' (see Robinson and James, Gospel and Revelation of Peter ; also the edd. by Swete (p. 7) and by the author of Supcrn. Pel. (p. 63)).