“I discount his findings discounting asphyxiation as a mode of death.”I
t is your opinion that there was not a footrest, but saying “the position of the feet suggest this” is just an assumption, hence your word “suggest”.
An important point of Dr. Zugibe’s work is that the assumption of the footrest was just to establish the point that the palms could support a nailing if the footrest was there, i.e., some conditions could allow for the palms being nailed. Dr. Zugibe’s best anatomical estimation was that the nail went from fold of the thumb on the palm and exit through the upper wrist — which would have given better support.
Another important point is that if the victim’s arms were at 60 to 70 degrees from vertical (which seems to be the common case), the volunteer-victims reported no problem breathing in the SAGGING position. So, when sagging, and footrest or not, they could still breathe. No reason, then, for pushing up against the foot-nails.
We can assume Christ was having serious lung problems from scourging, and he MIGHT have died from asphyxiation because of that, but it was not purely the position on the cross that did it. It was massive trauma, not a simple explanation of asphyxiation.
Discount away — your opinion, and as far as I can tell, not backed up by medical findings.
My opinion is backed by other medical findings in peer-reviewed publication, just not Dr. Zugibe's with whom I have personally discussed them. . . and I have discussed my discounting of Zugibe's theories with other medical and forensic specialist who are also Shroud researchers at symposia. They too discount it. Other forensic pathologists disagree with Zugibe's assumption of the existence of a foot rest, which distributes the force of lifting the body's weight over the surface of one foot, rather than concentrating the weight on the wound of a one centimeter nail driven through the most painful part of the foot. A pedulum was most likely found on crucifixions in Rome, not in the outlying provinces. It was a costly addition to the stapes, not likely to be added to a cross for common criminals. . . they tended to wear out rapidly with repeated use as the nails were repeatedly driven in and pulled out, eroding the wood. Besides, the comfort of the condemned was not of importance. Discomfort was.
Having a fit, uninjured volunteer find he has no trouble breathing while hanging from a padded wrist restraint does NOT present the same degree of agony or anywhere near the ability of a victim who has been beaten and scourged to inhale while impaled on a nail through his feet and hanging on similar nails through his wrists. Zugibe's findings were roundly criticized on these grounds in peer review. Other volumetric measures not so subjective as the opinion of the volunteer as to their ability to breathe, measured loss of lung capacity and the ability of the diaphragm to function in that unnatural position. Add the accumulation of fluid in the lungs from the beatings and trauma and asphyxiation is not an unlikely possibility.
Zugibe's finding that his volunteer could breathe while dangling flies in the face of the historically widely reported practice of crucifragium, the breaking of the legs of crucifixion victims to hasten their deaths when necessary, a practice the executioners were quite familiar with and even had a term for the practice. This practice was reported by Josephus as a common event. These are facts, not opinion.
Dr. Zugibe tested whether a nail through the palm of a cadaver could support the weight of the average body of a man matching the proportions found on the Shroud. He did NOT try with a living, struggling man to see what would happen over time to the wound through the palm. He is to be credited for confirming the work of other forensic pathologists that showed a nail through the wrist would support the weight of a body.
Zugibe's also came to the opinion, unlike every other investigator and forensic pathologist that the body was washed, despite numerous pieces of evidence to the contrary and little convincing evidence supporting his contention. He, cannot for example, reconcile his washing conclusion with the transferred blood tracks on the arms. . . for if the body had been washed before the Shroud were placed on the body, the blood tracks would have been washed away and simply not there to be transferred to the Shroud. He is not the be-all-and-end-all of scientific research or facts, not even in forensic study.