The fertilizing winter sun having been crucified, and the summer sun risen into the heavens in resurrection, the blood of the grape, ripened by its the heat, was symbolically “the blood of the cross”, or “the blood of the Lamb.” Jesus is not the true vine for no reason.

Because of our Christian culture and its imagery, the cross is necessarily the instrument of the saviour god’s torture. However, because the celestial origin of crucifixion in solar myths is that the sun crosses over the celestial equator, the heavenly sign of the equinoxes, the image of a crossover in the sky would be a cross like the Greek letter Chi (X) not a Plus (+). Constantine’s cross in the heavens that signalled his victory at the Milvian bridge was a Chi not a Plus, and the traditional Roman sign of the Christian was Chi Ro, the first two letter of the name Christ. This shape is the shape a man takes when he is stretched out by bonds such as he might have if tied to the ground, to a tree or a wheel. So we might be looking for icons in which the god is depicted such that his body forms a cross, like that of the famous illustration by Leonardo.

It has always been presumed that death, and especially death by crucifixion, involved the highest state of suffering possible to be endured by mortals. Hence, the gods must suffer in this way as an example of courage and fortitude which their followers must emulate. To do this they must be superior to their devotees. They must not merely die, but submit to the most ignominious mode of suffering death that could be devised—crucifixion. This gave the highest finishing touch to the drama.

And thus the legend of the crucifixion became the crowning chapter, the aggrandizing episode in the history of their lives. It was presumed that nothing less than a god could endure such excruciating tortures without complaining. Hence, when the victim was reported to have submitted with such fortitude that no murmur was heard to issue from his lips, this circumstance of itself was deemed sufficient evidence of his godship.

The story of the crucifixion, therefore, deified or helped deify great men and exalt them to the rank of gods, though it was usually falsely added for this purpose. Though some of the disciples of Buddhism, and some of the earliest professors of Christianity also, including, according to Christian history, Peter and his brother Andrew, voluntarily chose this mode of dying in imitation of their crucified Lord, they were not promoted to divine honours. Christianity focused all its attention on the singular sacrifice of its Christ but had it evolved slightly differently some of the earliest saints at least would now be worshipped as gods. They had been granted the divine qualification of crucifixion.

To retain their following, religions are based on unchangeable dogmas which disciples must accept to the exclusion of all knowledge adverse to their own creed. Whenever they are able, they actually destroy contrary evidence for fear of rivalry. Then they magnify their own religion to a unique position above all others. The earlier Christian saints, having determined like Paul, to know only “Jesus Christ and him crucified”, made stern efforts to obliterate from the page of history facts damaging to their case.

The disciples of the Christian faith have burnt books, blotted out passages and bowdlerised testaments which suggested the opposite of their belief. Not only that, they have demolished monuments showing crucifixions of previous atoning gods so that they are now unknown. Hence, the disbelief of Christians when other cases are mentioned. It continues in more recent times.

An ancient sculpture or icon in context tells us more about origins, and there have been reports of a crucified Hindu god, assumed to be Krishna, in ancient temples. Iconography can be placed in a historical period more closely than a text. Those responsible for evaluating these pictures should do so, not just pretend they are not there. Documents themselves are often unreliable, especially religious ones that have a clear purpose of persuasion to a particular belief. It is better to regard them as unreliable until they can be shown to be genuine.

A report on the Hindu religion, made out by a deputation from the British Parliament, sent to India to examine their sacred books and monuments, was left in the hands of a Christian bishop at Calcutta, with instructions to forward it to England. On its arrival in London, it was so horribly mutilated as to be scarcely recognisable. An account of the crucifixion was gone. But, if the Christian myth was syncretized to Krishna in the years since Christianity arrived in India, written sources like this would be valueless. No one knows when a legend was introduced.