</noinclude>
The instrument of Jesus's crucifixion (known in Latin as , in Greek as ) is generally taken to have been composed of an upright wooden beam to which was added a transom, thus forming a "cruciform" or T-shaped structure.
Most Christian denominations present the Christian cross in this form, and the tradition of the T-shape can be traced to early Christianity and the Church Fathers. Nonetheless, some late-19th century scholars maintained that it was a simple stake (). In 2011 Gunnar Samuelsson concluded that there is not enough evidence in pre-Christian ancient texts or in the New Testament writings themselves to resolve the ambiguity of the terms referring to the instrument on which Jesus was executed.Gunnar Samuelsson, Crucifixion in Antiquity (Mohr Siebeck 2013 ), p. 303 On the other hand, David W. Chapman argues that to take one single Greek word and conclude that it has one universal and unchanging meaning like the word stauros "is a common word study fallacy in some populist literature. In fact, such terminology often referred in antiquity to cross-shaped crucifixion devices. For example, Lucian, in a brief dialogue that employs most Greek crucifixion vocabulary, refers to the "crucifixion" of Prometheus, whose arms are pinned while stretched from one rock to another. Such a cross-shaped crucifixion position in the Roman era may actually have been the norm."
Presence or absence of crossbar
Ambiguity of terms used The Koine Greek terms used in the New Testament of the structure on which Jesus died are () and (). These words, which can refer to many different things, do not indicate the precise shape of the structure; scholars have long known that the Greek word and the Latin word did not uniquely mean a cross, but could also be used to refer to one, and so do not considered necessarily incorrect the traditional picture of a cross with transom.
The ambiguity of the terms was noted by Justus Lipsius in his (1594),Justus Lipsius, De Cruce (Ex officina Plantiniana, apud viduam & Joannem Moretum, 1594) Jacob Gretser in his (1598)Jacob Gretser, De cruce Christi, rebusque ad eam pertinentibus (Sartorius 1598) and Thomas Godwyn in his Moses and Aaron (1662).Thomas Godwyn, Moses and Aaron: Civile and Ecclesiastical Rites, Used by the Ancient Hebrews (S. Griffin 1662), p. 208
John Pearson, Bishop of Chester () wrote in his commentary on the Apostles' Creed that the Greek word originally signified "a straight standing Stake, Pale, or Palisador", but that, "when other transverse or prominent parts were added in a perfect Cross, it retained still the Original Name", and he declared: "The Form then of the Cross on which our Saviour suffered was not a simple, but a compounded, Figure, according to the Custom of the Romans, by whose Procurator he was condemned to die. In which there was not only a straight and erected piece of Wood fixed in the Earth, but also a transverse Beam fastened unto that towards the top thereof".John Pearson, An Exposition of the Creed (London 1715, 5th edition), p. 203
Justus Lipsius invented a specific terminology to distinguish different forms of what could be called a cross or .Gunnar Samuelsson, Crucifixion in Antiquity (Mohr Siebeck 2013 ), p. 3 His basic twofold distinction was between the (a simple stake) and the (a composite of two pieces of wood).Lipsius 1594, p. 8 The victim could be affixed to the Lipsius 1594, pp. 8−10 or could be impaled on it.Lipsius 1594, pp. 10−12 Lipsius then subdivided the into three types: the (X-shaped),Lipsius 1594, pp. 13−14 (T-shaped)Lipsius 1594, pp. 15−17 and (resembling a traditional Christian cross).Lipsius 1594, pp. 17−21
Lipsius himself, as also Gretser and Godwyn, held that Jesus was nailed not to a , but to a .Lipsius 1594, pp. 22–24; Gretser 1598, pp. 3–7; Godwyn 1662, p. 219 However, W. E. Vine and E. W. Bullinger, as well as Henry Dana Ward, considered that the "cross" (Greek , in its original sense literally an upright pale or stake) had no crossbar, and that the traditional picture of Jesus on a cross with a crossbar was incorrect.
Stauros interpreted as simple stake only
In his 1871 study of the history of the cross, Episcopal preacher Henry Dana Ward accepted as the only form of the gibbet on which Jesus died "a pale, a strong stake, a wooden post".Henry Dana Ward, The History of the Cross, The Book Tree, published 1871/1999, p. 52.
Anglican theologian E. W. Bullinger, in The Companion Bible (which was completed and published in 1922, nine years after his 1913 death), was emphatic in his belief that never meant two pieces of timber placed across one another at any angle, "but always of one piece alone[...] There is nothing [of the word ] in the Greek of the N.T. even to imply two pieces of timber." Bullinger wrote that in the catacombs of Rome Christ was never represented there as "hanging on a cross" and that the cross was a pagan symbol of life (the ankh) in Egyptian churches that was borrowed by the Christians. He cited a letter from English Dean John William Burgon, who questioned whether a cross occurred on any Christian monument of the first four centuries and wrote: "The 'invention' of it in pre-Christian times, and the 'invention' of its use in later times, are truths of which we need to be reminded in the present day. The evidence is thus complete, that the Lord was put to death upon an upright stake, and not on two pieces of timber placed in any manner."
With regard to the "primary" or "original" meaning of the Greek word , William Edwy Vine (1873–1949) wrote in his Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, published in 1940: " denotes, primarily, 'an upright pale or stake'. On such malefactors were nailed for execution. Both the noun and the verb , 'to fasten to a stake or pale', are originally to be distinguished from the ecclesiastical form of a two beamed cross". He said the shape of the ecclesiastical form of a two-beamed cross "had its origin in ancient Chaldea, and was used as the symbol of the god Tammuz (being the shape of the mystic Tau, the initial of his name) in Chaldea and nearby lands, including Egypt". He added that third-century churches, which by then had departed from certain doctrines of the Christian faith, accepted pagans into the faith in order to increase their prestige and allowed them to retain their pagan signs and symbols. "Hence the Tau or T, in its most frequent form, with the cross-piece lowered, was adopted to stand for the 'cross' of Christ."Cross, Crucify - Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words This association of the cross symbol with Tammuz had already been made by Abram Herbert Lewis in his 1892 book Paganism Surviving in Christianity.Abram Herbert Lewis, Paganism Surviving in Christianity (G.P. Putnam's Sons 1892), p. 238
Stauros interpreted as patibulum Andreas J. Köstenberger (2004) notes that traditional academic reconstruction of the cross has first Jesus, then Simon of Cyrene bear the , i.e. only the horizontal crossbar, Latin . Yet when Simon carries the to Golgotha, the crossbar is then hoisted to the stake to make the traditional crucifix shape.Andreas J. Köstenberger, John. 2004, page 542: "Traditional reconstruction has Jesus bear the cross, that is, the horizontal crossbar called a patibulum, until he collapses on the way, at which time Simon of Cyrene is pressed into service (Matt. 27:32 pars.). 6." Schröter (1997) notes that the lack of references in ancient sources, aside from Plautus (The Charcoal Woman 2The Charcoal Woman Carbonaria 2 "Patibulum ferat per urbem, deinde affigatur cruci." and The Braggart Warrior 2.4.6–7)The Braggart Warrior Miles gloriosus 2.4.6-7 "Credo ego istoc exemplo tibi esse eundum actutum extra portam, Dispessis manibus patibulum quom habebis" and Plutarch (Moralia 554AB),Plutarch: "Every wrongdoer who goes to execution carries out his own cross [ekferei ton autou stauron]" (Moralia 554A-B: "Concerning Things Avenged Slowly by the Deity" §9). to "bearing the cross" implies that a criminal carrying his own was not very common.Sverre Böe Cross-Bearing in Luke 2010 Page 72 "the criminal could be forced to carry the patibulum of the stauros from his prison, from the court or his home to the[...] of references in ancient sources concerning the expression "carry the cross" implies that it was not very common." citing Jens Schröter, Erinnerung an Jesu Worte. Studien zur Rezeption der Logienüberlieferung in Markus, Q und Thomas (WMANT 76), Neukirchen-Vluyn 1997Craig A. Evans The Bible Knowledge Background Commentary: Matthew-Luke - 2003 - Page 509 "so also Plutarch, who says that "Every wrongdoer who goes to execution carries out his own cross" (Moralia 554AB: "Concerning ...")Charles Quarles Buried Hope Or Risen Savior: The Search for the Jesus Tomb 2008- Page 58 "According to Plautus, the condemned man carried the crossbeam of his cross (the patibulum) through the city to the place of crucifixion (Carbonaria 2: Miles gloriosus 2.4.6-7 §359-60)"
James B. Torrance in the article "Cross" in the New Bible Dictionary writes that the Greek word for "cross" (; verb ; Latin , 'I fasten to a cross') means primarily an upright stake or beam, but also allows the construction that Jesus and Simon of Cyrene carried a to Golgotha.Knowing Christ S. Craig Glickman - 1980 "It was this patibulum, not the whole cross, which Jesus was too weak to carry, and which was borne by Simon the Cyrenian." J. B. Torrance, "Cross," New Bible Dictionary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1962), p. 279.ed. Wood, D. R. W., & Marshall, I. H, "Cross, Crucifixion," New Bible Dictionary, InterVarsity Press: Downers Grove 1996, c1982, c1962, p. 245
In applying the word to the crossbeam, these writers indicate that the complete structure on which Jesus died was not a single upright post but formed what is normally called a cross.
Raymond Edward Brown remarks that in the canonical gospels "not a word is reported about the form of the cross, about how he was affixed, about the amount of the pain",Raymond E. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, vol. 2 (Doubleday/Chapman 1994 ), p. 945 but excludes the use for Jesus of a , "since he carried a cross[beam] to the place of execution".Raymond E. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, vol. 2 (Doubleday/Chapman 1994 ), p. 948
Stauros interpreted as ambiguous in meaning