Death Wound of the Messiah

Posted on by K.B. Vogelman

Recognized as a prophecy by both Jewish and Christian authorities alike is Zechariah 12:10 – with a few twists. Within each of their own Jewish ranks, there are differing views about the meaning of the verse as well as the Christian and Hebrew translations of one Hebrew word, daqar.

Translations of the Hebrew text word daqar as either “pierced” or “thrust him through” is the difference between the two Jewish and most Christian Bible translations.

^{Zech. 12:10} “And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplication; and they shall look unto Me because they have thrust him through; and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his first-born.” – Jewish Publication Society

^{Zech. 12:10} “And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn.” – New King James Version

Setting the historical context, Zechariah authored his prophetic book about the same time as the life of Zerubbabel, grandson of Jeconiah, the last sitting king in the House of David. Zerubbabel had led the Jews from Persia back to Jerusalem to rebuild the city and the Temple destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar.

Jewish sage Rabbi Rashi in The Complete Jewish Bible with Rashi Commentary referred to Sukkah (Succah) 52a where an interesting debate takes place among the Rabbis. Initially, the rabbinic discussion was centered on lust – the topic of whether men and women should be separated during worship and mourning services.

Rabbi R. Judah expressed through a question if the verse meant the Holy One would slay the Evil Inclination in the presence of both the righteous and the wicked during the Messianic age.

Sukkah 52a:

“What is the cause of the mourning?

“R. Dosa and the Rabbis differ on the point. One explained, The cause is the slaying of Messiah the son of Joseph, and the other explained, The cause is the slaying of the Evil Inclination. “It is well according to him who explains that the cause is the slaying of Messiah the son of Joseph, since that well agrees with the Scriptural verse, And they shall look upon me because they have thrust him through, and they shall mourn for him as one mourneth for his only son; “but according to him who explains the cause to be the slaying of the Evil Inclination, is this [it may be objected] an occasion for mourning? Is it not rather an occasion for rejoicing? Why then should they weep?^[2]

With that question, the dialog switched direction generating a debate around the prophetic nature of Zechariah 12:10 itself.^[1] Jewish sages eventually agreed that Zechariah 12:10 refers to the Messiah and Rashi later agreed:^[3]

“…as one mourns over an only son: As a man mourns over his only son. And our Sages expounded this in tractate Sukkah (52a) as referring to the Messiah, son of Joseph, who was slain.” – Rabbi Rashi^[4]

Jewish Bibles commonly read the Messiah will be “thrust through,” while most Christian Bibles typically translate daqar as pierced, such as by nails.^[5] Neither interpretation follows a standard Christian Bible definition.

Good News Translation and God’s Word Translation interprets daqar as “stabbed.” The Message and Contemporary English Version each translate the prophecy as piercing with a spear. Another takes the middle road, Bible in Basic English says “wounded by their hands.” ^[6]

Regardless if daqar is translated as “pierced” or “thrust through,” none of the interpretations clearly indicate the manner of how the wound was inflicted, by nails or a weapon? The answer can be found through language analysis.^[7]

Nine other times the Hebrew word daqar appears in the texts of the Old Testament or Tanakh including another in Zechariah.^[8] In all instances, daqar is used in the context of wounds inflicted by a type of weapon such as a sword or spear. Applying this word usage definition to Zechariah 12:10, the wound was inflicted by means of a type of weapon.

John’s Gospel account of the crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth describes how he was both pierced by nails and had a spear thrust into his side when he was crucified.^[9] Later, John described the resurrected Jesus who suddenly appeared in a locked room where he invited the doubting Disciple Thomas to touch the healed wounds in his hands and in his side. Taking the offer, the doubtful Thomas exclaimed, “My Lord and my God!”^[10]

Were the Gospel accounts of the Jerusalem crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth a fulfillment of the Zachariah 12:10 prophecy when the slain Messiah was deeply wounded by means of daqar?

Updated July 12, 2024.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

REFERENCES:

[1] Sukkah 52a. Halakhah.com. Trans. Soncino Babylonian Talmud. n.d. pp 74-77, footnote #1-3. <http://www.halakhah.com/rst/moed/16b%20-%20Succah%20-%2029b-56b.pdf>
[2] Sukkah 52a, p 75. <http://www.halakhah.com/rst/moed/16b%20-%20Succah%20-%2029b-56b.pdf>
[3] “Rashi (Solomon Bar Isaac).” Jewish Encyclopedia. 2011. <http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/13862-solomon-b-isaac-rashi>
[4] The Complete Jewish Bible – with Rashi Commentary. Zechariah 12:10. <https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/16216#showrashi=true>
[5] “daqar.” Lexicon-Concordance Online Bible. n.d. <http://lexiconcordance.com/hebrew/1856.html> Benner, Jeff A. Ancient Hebrew Research Center. “Zechariah 12:10 | “Pierced him” or “Pierced me?”” 2022. <https://www.ancient-hebrew.org/studies-verses/zechariah-12-10-pierced-him-or-pierced-me.htm> Benner, Jeff A. Ancient Hebrew Research Center. Zechariah 12:10. image. 2022. <https://www.ancient-hebrew.org/studies-verses/files/landing_zechariah.png>
[6] Contemporary English Verson; Good News Translation; God’s Word translation; Zechariah 12:10. BibleHub.com. 2020. <https://biblehub.com/zechariah/12-10.htm> The Message; Bible in Basic English. Zechariah 12:10. NetBible.org. 2020. <http://classic.net.bible.org/verse.php?book=Zec&chapter=12&verse=10>
[7] Sapir, Avinoam. LSI Laboratory for Scientific Interrogation, Inc. n.d. <http://www.lsiscan.com/index.htm> “SCAN – Scientific Content Analysis (Statement Analysis).” Advanced Polygraph. 2011. <http://www.advancedpolygraph.com.au/scan.htm> “Introduction to Text Analysis: About Text Analysis.” Duke University | Libraries. 2017. <https://guides.library.duke.edu/text_analysis> “What Is the Definition of Textual Analysis?” Reference.com. 2018. <https://www.reference.com/education/definition-textual-analysis-a95087916fcb24cb> Pfarrer, Mike “What is content analysis?” University of Georgia | Terry College of Business. 2012. <http://www.terry.uga.edu/management/contentanalysis>
[8] “daqar.” NetBible.org. Hebrew text. <http://classic.net.bible.org/search.php?search=hebrew_strict_index:01856>
[9] John 19. NetBible.org. Greek text. Strong. “nusso <3572>” CR Matthew 27; Mark 15; Luke 23.
[10] John 20.

The Trial of Jesus — Guilty or Innocent?

Posted on by K.B. Vogelman

The Trial of Jesus — Guilty or Innocent?

Jesus of Nazareth had been arrested by a posse of the Jewish leadership in the Garden of Gethsemane outside Jerusalem. Escorted by the armed guards back into the city, Jesus would be aberrantly tried on the charge of blasphemy as defined in the Law of Moses.^[1]

Prosecuting the case in defense of God’s Law was Chief Priest Caiaphas and the defendant representing himself was Jesus of Nazareth. The verdict of the aberrant trial would have colossal implications in one of two very different ways.

Rome would surely react unfavorably to any potential new Jewish figurehead if they did nothing. A conviction as an insurrectionist and tax evader might be viewed by Rome positively and trouble could be averted.

Conviction from a Jewish perspective would publicly label Jesus as a blasphemer worthy of death, not worship. God’s Law would be successfully defended and upheld.

Acquittal would mean, at the very least, that Jesus would likely be considered the Son of God, worthy of worship. Such a verdict would be an embarrassment for the Jewish Council and pose a threat to their religious political power base.

As an added bonus, a conviction would eliminate the subversive threat to the Jewish leaders political power base. A Jewish Talmud Gemara would later expose the reasoning:^[2]

^{San 49b} “…thus the blasphemer and the idol-worshipper are executed. Wherein lies the particular enormity of these offences? — Because they constitute an attack upon the fundamental belief of Judaism.”^[3]

Gravity of the situation called for a fair and thorough trial, but how likely was that reality? At stake was the defense of Judaism, a religious institution headed by the same power base that was responsible for rendering the verdict – the prosecution witnesses even came from among those serving as judge and jury.^[4]

Defense witnesses for Jesus were nowhere to be found. Not because there weren’t any, but being under the threat of death themselves, who would come forward in his defense?^[5] Even his most stalwart disciple, Peter, upon whom Jesus had declared he would build his church would deny knowing Jesus three times that very night as the aberrant trial progressed.

Other ominous signs did not favor a fair trial given it was not conducted in accordance with Jewish law. Legal code in the Talmud defined how capital offenses were to be tried and convictions rendered. Among them:^[6]

MISHNA: Sanhedrin 32a:

“Capital charges must be tried by day and concluded by day.”

“In capital charges, anyone may argue in his favour, but not against him.”

“Capital charges may be concluded on the same day with a favourable verdict, but only on the morrow with an unfavourable verdict therefore trials are not held on the eve of a Sabbath or Festival.”

Pretrial events began at the residence of Annas, a Sanhedrin power broker, former Chief Priest and father-in-law of Chief Priest Caiaphas. Annas began with cursory questions asking Jesus about his disciples and his teachings. Jesus replied that he had always spoken openly in the Temple and synagogues – there were no secrets.

“Why do you ask me? Ask those who heard what I said to them; they know what I said.”_(NRSV)

Not sitting well with his captors, one of them reacted by hitting Jesus. Holding firm, Jesus again challenged his captors saying:

“If I have spoken wrongly, testify to the wrong. But if I have spoken rightly, why do you strike me?””_(NRSV)

With this, Annas sent the posse with their blindfolded and bound prisoner to Caiaphas. By the time they arrived at the Sanhedrin meeting hall at the Temple, Jesus had been mocked and beaten.

Chief Priest Caiaphas presided over the trial held that fateful night. The Law required two eyewitnesses to corroborate the same point of evidence to establish a fact for a conviction.^[8]

Initially the High Priest’s prosecution effort was not going well with many accusers coming forward; however, no two witness testimonies could agree.^[9] Finally, two witnesses made the same accusation: “We heard Him say, ‘I will destroy this temple made with hands, and in three days I will build another made without hands.’”

Not quite the same, Jesus actually had said, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”^[10] Nevertheless, Jesus was accused of saying he would destroy the Temple and rebuild it in just three days when previously it took 46 years to build.

Implying only God could do this, it created an opening, Caiaphas understood the implications. He pounced on the moment with an indicting question that cut to the heart of the trial:

^{MK 14.61} “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?” _{(ISV, NLT, NRSV)}

An answer in the affirmative would be self-incriminating and condemning. It was the moment of truth – was Jesus of Nazareth willing to put his life on the line knowing that he would die if he acknowledged this to be true? The answer to Caiaphas was unambiguous:

“I am.”

To be crystal clear, Jesus added:

^{MK 14:62}“’you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of the Power’ and ‘coming with the clouds of heaven.’”_{ISV, NET, NRSV)}

Immediately the verdict was rendered when Chief Priest Caiaphas tore his robe and said,

^{MT 26:65} “He has blasphemed! What further need do we have of witnesses?”_(NASB)

Sentencing was still not a slam dunk. Under Rome’s laws, the Jews were not allowed to carry out capital punishment.^[11]

Would a heathen Roman government even entertain a charge of blasphemy based solely in Jewish religious law? Probably not, they figured.

On the outside chance Rome did level such a charge, would they issue a death penalty judgement for blasphemy? Even more unlikely.^[12]

Considering their options, the Jewish Council sought to convince Pilate that Jesus was guilty of failure to pay taxes to Caesar and for insurrection to Rome. Either of those charges could result in the Roman death penalty.

For Pilate, the accusation of insurrection was a hot button issue with Rome having battled insurrections throughout his tenure as Procurator … at least this was assumed to be the case.^[13] Ultimately, Pilate found Jesus to have no guilt on either charge. Subsequent Jewish political pressure compelled Pilate to sentence Jesus to be crucified.

Was the trial of Jesus fair or was the verdict a divinely predestined outcome?

Updated June 5, 2024.

NASB = New American Standard Bible translation
ISV = International Standard Version translation
NLT = New Living Translation
NRSV = New Revised Standard Version translation
Gospel accounts: Matthew 26-27, Mark 14-15, Luke 22-23, John 18-19.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

REFERENCES:

[1] Leviticus 24:15-16. John 18:3, 12: “chiliarchos <5506>” and “speira <4686>”. CR Edersheim, Alfred. The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. 1883. Book V, Chapter 15, pp 1382-1392 & pp 1393-1421. <http://philologos.org/__eb-lat/default.htm> Edersheim, Alfred. The Temple – Its Ministry and Services. Chapter 10. 1826 -1889. The NTSLibrary. 2016. <http://www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books/The%20Temple%20by%20Alfred%20Edersheim.pdf>Babylonian Talmud.
[2] “Lady Justice.” ClipArtBest.com. image. 2022. <http://www.clipartbest.com/clipart-4cbo7xgei>
[3] Soncino Babylonian Talmud. Ed. Isidore Epstein. 1935 – 1948. Sanhedrin 49b.<https://israelect.com/Come-and-Hear/sanhedrin/index.html>
[4] Josephus. Against Apion. Book II. <http://books.google.com/books?id=e0dAAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false> Spiro, Ken. “History Crash Course #39: The Talmud.” <http://www.aish.com/jl/h/cc/48948646.html> Valentine, Carol A. . “The Structure of the Talmud Files.” <https://israelect.com/Come-and-Hear/structure.html> CR Numbers 30:35.
[5] Sanhedrin 43a.
[6] Sanhedrin 32a – 36b.; CR. Deuteronomy 19:16-18.
[7] Edersheim, Alfred. The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. 1883. Chapter 13. The NTSLibrary. 2016. <http://www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books/The%20Life%20and%20Times%20of%20Jesus%20the%20Messiah.pdf> Josephus. Antiquities. Book XX, Chapters IX.1 & X.1; Book XVIII, Chapter IV. Whitson, William. The Complete Works of Josephus. 1850. Footnotes – Book XX, Chapter VIII. <http://books.google.com/books?id=e0dAAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false>
[8] Deuteronomy 17:6, 19:15; Numbers 35:30. Sanhedrin 9a, 30a. Resnicoff, Steven H. “Criminal Confessions in Jewish Law .“ 2007. <http://www.torah.org/features/secondlook/criminal.html>
[9] Sanhedrin 41a. “Capital Punishment.” Jewish Virtual Library. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/capital-punishment>
[10] John 2:19. NASB.
[11] Sanhedrin 41a. “Capital Punishment.” Jewish Virtual Library. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/capital-punishment>
[12] Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. Book V, Chapter 14.
[13] Forsythe, Gary Edward. “Ancient Rome – The Roman Army.” 2007. <http://history-world.org/roman_army.htm>

Cicero’s Prosecution of Murder By Crucifixion

Posted on by K.B. Vogelman

Cicero’s Prosecution of Murder By Crucifixion

Crucifixion is as closely associated with the image of Jesus of Nazareth as any other save perhaps the Nativity manger scene. Still, some dispute Rome’s execution of Jesus by nailing him to a cross.^[1]

All four Gospels record that Jesus of Nazareth was scourged, nailed to a cross and killed by crucifixion. Golgatha was the location just outside and overlooking the city of Jerusalem where passersby could see and mock him.

Aside from this, the Gospels describe in limited detail the gory specifics of a crucifixion for one very simple reason – it was not necessary.

“Tacitus (“Annales,” 54, 59) reports therefore without comment the fact that Jesus was crucified. For Romans no amplification was necessary.” – Jewish Encyclopedia

Just about everyone living in the Roman Empire knew about crucifixion – and most likely from firsthand experience.^[2] Shouting out “crucify him!” the Jewish crowd at Pilate’s judgement of Jesus certainly knew about it.

Not even Roman historians Josephus, Tacitus or Suetonius found it necessary to explain crucifixion.^[3] But, there are a few exceptions…

Cicero, commonly regarded as the greatest orator in Roman history, was a Senator and Consul who lived about 100 years before Pontius Pilate was Procurator of Judea.^[4] A lesser known fact is that Cicero was a prosecutor, a Roman lawyer.

Secondary Orations Against Verres is a work of Cicero who wrote about his prosecution of Verres charged with premeditated murder by crucifixion of a noble Roman citizen, Publius Gavius.^[5] Motive of the murder – punishment for the public crusade by Gavius for freedom and citizenship.

Directed squarely at Verres, the prosecutorial words of Cicero describes in detail to the trial court the crucifixion process Verres used to kill Gavius:^[6]

“…according to their regular custom and usage, they had erected the cross behind the city in the Pompeian road…you chose that place in order that the man who said that he was a Roman citizen, might be able from his cross to behold Italy and to look towards his own home?… for the express purpose that the wretched man who was dying in agony and torture might see that the rights of liberty and of slavery were only separated by a very narrow strait, and that Italy might behold her son murdered by the most miserable and most painful punishment appropriate to slaves alone.

It is a crime to bind a Roman citizen; to scourge him is a wickedness; to put him to death is almost parricide. What shall I say of crucifying him? So guilty an action cannot by any possibility be adequately expressed by any name bad enough for it…that you exposed to that torture and nailed on that cross…He chose that monument of his wickedness and audacity to be in the sight of Italy, in the very vestibule of Sicily, within sight of all passersby as they sailed to and fro.”

“…it was the common cause of freedom and citizenship that you exposed to that torture and nailed on that cross.^“^[7]

Scourging whips and a cross were the murder weapons – death by crucifixion. Cicero’s prosecution case described how humiliation, psychological and mental anguish were part of the excruciating, long lasting torment and death of the scourged victim being nailed to the cross.

As a manner of execution, crucifixion was reserved only for slaves at that time in Roman history. Verres was allowed to self-exile to Massalia in southern France, then sentenced in abstentia to an undisclosed fine.

Seneca the Younger was born in Spain about a century later, virtually the same year as Jesus of Nazareth, and educated in Rome. He became a stoic philosopher, statesman and dramatist gaining acclaim as a writer of tragedies and essays.^[8]

“Dialogue” is another name for a letter written by Seneca for which he is known to have written several. Seneca had a penchant for including horror scenes in his tragedies.

Using a metaphor of crucifixion, he included it in a Dialogue written to his embittered friend, Marcia. She had been grieving three years over her son’s death.

Obviously familiar with the gruesome realities of crucifixion, the letter suggests he expected Marcia to be familiar it, too. Describing the mental anguish of people of virtue striving to overcome their own self-imposed tribulations, he wrote:

“Though they strive to release themselves from their crosses those crosses to which each one of you nails himself with his own hand – yet they, when brought to punishment, hang each upon a single gibbets [sic]; but these others who bring upon themselves their own punishment are stretched upon as many crosses as they had desires….”^[9]

Generally, a “gibbet” is believed to be a gallows-like structure or an upright pole typically used to hang executed victims’ bodies by chains or ropes for public display as a method of scorn. By comparison, crucifixion involved living victims who were “stretched” out and nailed to crosses.^[10]

Jewish historian Josephus personally witnessed crucifixions commonly used by Rome to punish such crimes as robbery and insurrection. Eventually crucifixions, he wrote, devolved to the point they became Roman sport.^[11]

Josephus made nine references to Roman crucifixions. In one, he wrote of crucifixions by Procurator Florus and in another from his own Roman eyewitness perspective during the siege of Jerusalem in 70 AD:^[12]

“…they also caught many of the quiet people, and brought them before Florus, whom he first chastised with stripes, and then crucified…for Florus ventured then to do what no one had done before, that is, to have men of the equestrian order whipped and nailed to the cross before his tribunal…”^[13]

“So the soldiers, out of the wrath and hatred they bore the Jews, nailed those they caught, one after one way, and another after another, to the crosses, by way of jest, when their multitude was so great, that room was wanting for the crosses, and crosses wanting for the bodies.”^[14]

Common knowledge, the Roman Empire had victims nailed to the cross as an extreme, tortuously slow physical and psychological means to kill them. Cicero’s description of a crucifixion is a very similar to crucifixion accounts in the Gospels and consistent with medical science findings.

Are the Gospels credible in saying that Roman crucifixion by being nailed to a cross was the means used to kill Jesus?

Updated May 5, 2024.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

REFERENCES

[1] “Jesus did not die on cross, says scholar.” The Telegraph. n.d. <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/7849852/Jesus-did-not-die-on-cross-says-scholar.html rel=”nofollow” rel=”nofollow”> Warren, Meredith J.C. “Was Jesus Really Nailed to the Cross?” The Conversation. 2016. <https://theconversation.com/was-jesus-really-nailed-to-the-cross-56321 rel=”nofollow”>   Perales, Ginger. “Was Jesus Nailed or Tied to the Cross?” 2016. <http://www.newhistorian.com/jesus-nailed-tied-cross/6161 rel=”nofollow”>
[2] Josephus, Flavius. Wars of the Jews. Book IV, Chapter V. <http://books.google.com/books?id=e0dAAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false>
[3] Tacitus, Gaius Cornelius. The Annals. Ed. Church, Alfred John and Brodribb, William Jackson. <http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.02.0078> Perseus Digital Library. Ed. Crane, Gregory R. Tufts University. n.d. Word search “crucified” <http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/searchresults?page=4&q=crucified> Suetonious. The Lives of the Twelve Caesars. “The Life of Augustus.” #57, Footnote “e.” <https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Suetonius/12Caesars/Augustus*.html#ref:no_crucifixions_when_Augustus_entered_a_city>
[4] Linder, Douglas O. Imperium Romanun. “The Trial of Gaius (or Caius) Verres.” 2008. <http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/Verres/verresaccount.html> Bunson, Matthew. Encyclopedia of the Roman Empire. “Cicero; Cicero, Marcus Tillius.” <https://archive.org/details/isbn_9780816045624>
[5] Cicero, Marcus Tullius. “The Fifth Book of the Second Pleading in the Prosecution against Verres.” Ed. Crane, Gregory R. <http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0018%3Atext%3DVer.%3Aactio%3D2%3Abook%3D5>
[6] Greenough, James. B.; Kittredge, George; eds.   Select Orations and Letters of Cicero. 1902. Introduction I. Life of Cicero. VII. “From the Murder of Caesar to the Death of Cicero.” <http://books.google.com/books?id=ANoNAAAAYAAJ&pg=PR1#v=onepage&q&f=false>   Quintilian, Marcus Fabius. Quintilian’s Institutes of Oratory. 1856. Book 8, Chapter 4. Rhetoric and Composition. 2011. <http://rhetoric.eserver.org/quintilian/index.html> “Crucifixion.” JewishEncyclopedia.com < http://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/4782-crucifixion > “Trial of Gaius Verres – governor of Sicily.” Imperium Romanun. 2021. <https://imperiumromanum.pl/en/article/trial-of-gaius-verres-governor-of-sicily/> Linder. “The Trial of Gaius (or Caius) Verres.” Sack, Harald. SciHi Blog. “Marcus Tullius Cicero – Truly a Homo Novus.” image. 2020. <https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fscihi.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F12%2FCicero-619×1024.png&tbnid=7Et1cliwXqmeIM&vet=10CAQQxiAoAmoXChMIwI731KCFgwMVAAAAAB0AAAAAEA0..i&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fscihi.org%2Fmarcus-tullius-cicero-homo-novus%2F&docid=iBCg84NfCo2gMM&w=619&h=1024&itg=1&q=images%20of%20Cicero&client=firefox-b-1-d&ved=0CAQQxiAoAmoXChMIwI731KCFgwMVAAAAAB0AAAAAEA0>
[7] Cicero. “The Fifth Book of the Second Pleading in the Prosecution against Verres.”
[8] “Seneca.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Ed. Zalta, Edward N. 2015. <https://plato.stanford.edu> Mastin, Luke. “Ancient Rome – Seneca the Younger.” 2009. Classical Literature. <http://www.ancient-literature.com/rome_seneca.html>
[9] Seneca, Lucius Annaeus. “De Consolatione Ad Marciam+.” “To Marcia on Consolation.” Moral Essays. Trans. John W. Basore. 1928-1935.   “Seneca’s Essays Volume II.” Book VI. Pages xx 1-3. The Stoic Legacy to the Renaissance. 2004. <http://www.stoics.com/seneca_essays_book_2.html#%E2%80%98MARCIAM1>   Seneca, Lucius Annaeus. “De Vita Beata+.” “To Gallio On The Happy Life.” Moral Essays. Trans. John W. Basore. 1928-1935. “Seneca’s Essays Volume II.” Book VII. The Stoic Legacy to the Renaissance. 2004. <http://www.stoics.com/seneca_essays_book_2.html#%E2%80%98BEATA1>
[10] “gibbet.” The Free Dictionary by Farlex. 2022. <https://www.thefreedictionary.com/gibbet>“gibbet.” Merriam-Webster.com. 2022. <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gibbet>
[11] “Crucifixion.” JewishEncyclopedia.com. Ciantar, Joe Zammit. Times Malta. “Recollections on Crucifixion – Part one.” image. 2022. <https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/recollections-on-crucifixion-part-one.861097> Champlain, Edward. Nero. Harvard University Press. 2009. <https://books.google.com/books?id=30Wa-l9B5IoC&lpg=PA122&ots=nw4edgV_xw&dq=crucifixion%2C%20tacitus&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false>
[12] “FLORUS, GESSIUS (or, incorrectly, Cestius).” JewishEncyclopedia.com. <http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/6200-florus-gessius>
[13] Josephus, Flavius. Wars of the Jews. Book II, Chapter XIV. <http://books.google.com/books?id=e0dAAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false>
[14] Josephus. Wars. Book V, Chapter XI.