The Historical Argument- Evidence for the Crucifixion

What sort of historical evidence is there for the crucifixion of Christ?

As far as I know there are three major sources which document Christ's crucifixion:

1. Jewish- Talmud, b. Sanhedrin 43
2. Roman- Gaius Cornelius Tacitus, a Roman Historian
3. Christian- The writers of the gospels and Paul

And now for a closer look:

1. Jewish
J. Shachter and H. Freedman describe the Talmud and the Sanhedrin:
"The word Sanhedrin in the tractate which bears its name has a specialised meaning somewhat remote from that of its Greek original ([G]). It designates the higher courts of law which in the latter part of the period of the Second Temple administered justice in Palestine according to the Mosaic law in the more serious criminal, and especially capital cases. The main subject of our tractate is the composition, powers, and functions of these courts. Incidentally, as is only natural, it deals in some detail with the conduct of criminal cases; and in this way it forms, along with Makkoth, the chief repository of the criminal law of the Talmud."

Christ's crucifixion is documented in Talmud, b. Sanhedrin 43
(http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_43.html):
"On the eve of the Passover Yeshu (Jesus) was hanged (crucified). For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, 'He is going forth to be stoned because he has practised sorcery and enticed Israel to apostacy. Any one who can say anything in his favour, let him come forward and plead on his behalf.' But since nothing was brought forward in his favour he was hanged on the eve of the Passover! 35 — Ulla retorted: 'Do you suppose that he was one for whom a defence could be made? Was he not a Mesith [enticer], concerning whom Scripture says, Neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him? 36 With Yeshu however it was different, for he was connected with the government [or royalty, i.e., influential].'" (emphasis mine)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Roman
A description of Tacitus from Alfred John Church and William Jackson Brodribb
"Gaius Cornelius Tacitus (56?-117 CE), writer, orator, lawyer, and senator, was one of the greatest historians of antiquity. His Annals and Histories are a panorama of first century Rome, from Tiberius to Domitian. His prose style is in the first tier of Latin writers. Tacitus presents a vivid picture of the high-water point of the Roman empire, and does not gloss over the toxic corruption and brutality of the time."

While writing about the misfortune of many early Christians, Tacitus mentions Christ's crucifixion (http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/tac/a15040.htm):

"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular." (emphasis mine)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Christian

Probably the earliest Christian account of the crucifixion comes from Paul (ex. 1 Corinthians 1:23). Although Paul was not an eyewitness, he was a contemporary.

All four gospel accounts record the crucifixion.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

At a later date, we will examine whether or not the gospels are historically reliable. At this point, it seems to me that the crucifixion of Christ is a well enough documented fact that I would bet my life on it. Here are my reasons:

1. Multiple attestation: Jewish, Roman, Christian
2. Coherence: All of the accounts above agree that Jesus was crucified
3. In the Jewish account, the mention of Christ's crucifixion is in a legal document. The account does not seem to be tampered with, flows with the context, and comes from a hostile source.
4. As for the Roman account, Tacitus is a highly reliable historian (see description above). His account also does not seem to be tampered with, he anchors Christ historically to Tiberius and Pontius Pilatus (adds to coherence), and he is also a hostile source.
5. The crucifixion has broad explanatory power with reference to the beliefs of the early church
-----------------------------------------------------------

Conclusion:
Historically speaking, Jesus Christ was crucified.