Crucifixion the Bodily Support - The Acuta Crux in Patristic Writings (16)

Athanasius of Alexandria.

(Part 7p of the series: Crucifixion the Bodily Support)


Part 1        Part 2      Part 3      Part 4
Part 5a     Part 5b    Part 5c    Part 5d
Part 5e     Part 5f     Part 5g    Part 6a
Part 6b     Part 6c    Part 6d    Part 6e
Part 7a     Part 7b    Part 7c    Part 7d
Part 7e     Part 7f     Part 7g    Part 7h
Part 7i      Part 7j     Part 7k      Part 7l

Part 7m    Part 7n    Part 7o

Athanasius.

Athanasis (296 or 298 to 373 CE) was an Orthodox-Catholic theologian of Alexandria who made a name for himself and was drafted into a leading role at the Council of Nicaea, to address the teachings of the Arian branch of Christianity. Although he was a prolific writer, he appareantly did not write all that much about the Roman penalty and their execution gear and most of what he wrote is impossible: I found that it is just recitation or paraphrasing of what is found in the NT or worse, stuffing it with theology and even making references to "the Holy Cross" as an instrument of the Deity's power and of the healing of the planet.  I suppose by this time, if Athanasius had ever known about the infamous crux, he had probably forgotten about it, and recognised it only as akin to a tropaeum. But I did find some small bits in his On the Incarnation of the Word. 

Athanasius a few 'prophecies' in this work, five of which I will discuss here.

They say to them, "A man in stripes, and knowing how to bear weakness, for his face is turned away, he was dishonoured and held in no account. He bears our sins, and is in pain on our account; and we reckoned him to be in labour, and in stripes, and in ill-usage; but he was wounded for our sins, and made weak for our wickedness. the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and by his stripes we are healed.

On the Incarnation of the Word 34.2 (New Advent) 1, 2

This first one is from Isaiah 53.3-5, although it appears to be a paraphrase. But where it says "to be in labour" does not imply anything remotely resembling childbirth! The Greek for "in labour" is πόνῳ: "in hard work, toil, bodily exertion, exercise." The rest of the translation is accurate, although I will say that "made weak" is μεμαλάκισται, "softened, weakened, made effeminate," which last would be true for the writer and the reader of the day only if they still remembered that an acuta crux was typically used in Roman suspensions, and was still assumed to be applied to the suspension of Jesus. This of course, cannot be proven, and besides, even for the earliest Christians, it could still mean something else: tenderized, that is, "softened up" and weakened by a beating or scourging, as I discussed in the writings of Pseudo-Barnabas, here.

1 But, perhaps, having heard the prophecy of His death, you ask to learn also what is set forth concerning the Cross. For not even this is passed over: it is displayed by the holy men with great plainness. 2. For first Moses predicts it, and that with a loud voice, when he says: “You shall see your Life hanging before your eyes, and shall not believe.” 3. And next, the prophets after him witness of this, saying: “But (Jeremiah 11:19) I as an innocent lamb brought to be slain, knew it not; they counselled an evil counsel against me, saying, Hither and let us cast a tree upon his bread, and efface him from the land of the living.” 4. And again: “They pierced my hands and my feet, they numbered all my bones, they parted my garments among them, and for my vesture they cast lots.” 5. Now a death raised aloft and that takes place on a tree, could be none other than the Cross: and again, in no other death are the hands and feet pierced, save on the Cross only.

On the Incarnation of the Word 33:1-5. (New Advent) 3, 4

Well let me pick this apart: Moses' 'prophecy' in 35:2 is in Deuteronomy 28:66, and it has nothing to do with the suspension of Jesus the Nazarene except in the most general sense.  The statement in Deuteronomy actually reads:

And thy life shall hang in doubt before thee; and thou shalt fear night and day, and shalt have no assurance of thy life.

Devarim (Deuteronomy) 28:66, 1917 JPS Edition

Your life will hang in suspense. Day and night, you will be so terrified that you will not believe that you are alive.

Devarim (Deuteronomy) 28:66 Kaplan Edition

David W. Chapman discusses this verse a bit, and cites an anecdote in Rabbinic Law that connects the Mosaic statement with the Roman penalty:

"Another explanation is this: 'Your life will hang in doubt before you' -- this applies to one who is placed in the prison of Caesarea. 'And you will fear night and day' -- this applies to one who is brought forth for trial. 'And you will have no assurance of your life' -- this applies to one who is brought out to be crucified."

Proem I in Esther Rabbah 5 

Well what is translated as "to be crucified" is the Aramaic להצלב which could just as easily be translated as "to be hanged" or "to be impaled." 6 Or both, if it's the typical Roman penalty on a typical Roman execution pole. And of course, Athanasius mangles it, equating "your life" with the Christian God Man, and said Moses predicted the Jews would not believe on Him.

The next 'prophecy' is picked out-of-context from Jeremiah 11:19: "Come, let us cast a tree upon his bread, and efface him from the land of the living." That's in the Catholic English, but the Greek reads: Δευτε, καὶ ἐμβάλωμεν ξύλον εἰς τόν ἄρτον αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐκτρίψωμεν αὐτὸν ἀπὸ γῆς ζώντων καὶ τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ οὐ μὴ μνησθῇ ἔτι. It can also mean: "Come, and let us cast wood into his bread, and rub him out [or wear him out by constant rubbing] from the land of the living."

The third 'prophecy' is from the Psalm 22:17-19: "They pierced my hands and my feet, they numbered all my bones, they parted my garments among them, and for my vesture they cast lots.” It is still known to all Christians. Of course, the Jewish people do not view this as any prophecy at all.

And Athanasius says both are fulfilled by the death on the "cross" (σταυρός (pole)), because a death that is lifted up and takes place on wood (Θάνατος δὲ μετέωρος, καὶ ἐν ξύλῳ γινόμενος) and because the death is one where the hands and feet are dug through (θανάτῳ διορύσσονται χεῖρες καὶ πόδες). Nota bene that with ἐν ξύλῳ the preposition ἐν is paired with ξύλῳ, which is the dative of ξυλον (wood). That would make the wood the agent of cause or the instrument of death, i.e., the death takes place with, by means of, the wood. 7 With the confusion of the Canonical Gospels whether Jesus carried his own cross, pole, or even crossbeam or not, and some ancient sources stating the criminals had to pick up their own pole, it actually makes more sense if the instrument of his execution was equipped with a penetrating wooden member that was known as an acuta crux. Without one, of course, the backup strategy is to assume that John was correct in that Jesus carried the cross, or harmonize the Canonical Gospels as is traditionally done.

Utility Poles. (Source: Wikipedia.)

The fifth 'prophecy' concerns the stretching out of the arms on the crossarm of the execution pole (which was just like the crossarm of a utility pole):

1b For of whom do the prophets say: “I was made manifest to them that sought me not, I was found of them that asked not for me: I said Behold, here am I, to the nation that had not called upon my name; I stretched out my hands to a disobedient and gainsaying people.” 2. Who, then, one might say to the Jews, is he that was made manifest? For if it is the prophet, let them say when he was hid, afterward to appear again. And what manner of prophet is this, that was not only made manifest from obscurity, but also stretched out his hands on the Cross? None surely of the righteous, save the Word of God only, Who, incorporeal by nature, appeared for our sakes in the body and suffered for all.

On the Incarnation of the Word, 38:1b-2 (New Adv't) 8, 9 

This prediction is from Isaiah 65:1 and 2. It follows in train on Isaiah 64, which recounts a lament of the disasters befalling Israel and Judah, and a prayer that the LORD relent and remember his people. In that context, The beginning of Isaiah 65 depicts the LORD in response airing grievances to Isaiah against the people of Israel and Judah and saying he was not done judging the people yet, but Christians took it as a prophecy of the Crucifixion. Make of it what you will.

Anyway, the stretching out of hands part: "I stretched out my hands" in 38:1b is, in the Greek, ἐξεπέτασα τὰς χεῖράς μου (I have spread out my hands). So we have the image of a person spreading his hands out to his sides in a gesture of frustration with the one he's speaking to. Now the supposed fulfillment, is in the "prophet" who was also the "Word of God," who "stretched out his hands on the Cross:" for which the Greek is τὰς χεῖρας ἐκπετάσας ἐπὶ σταυροῦ (the hands being spread out upon a pole). The presumption, of course, is that the pole was like a modern utility pole, because the spreading out is like that of a pair of wings or a net. Of course, by the time of this writing, Athanasius was probably thinking of a CROSS: that is, a TROPAEUM. Unconvinced? Then you should come to Rome....

Next: Wrap-up

Notes:

1. On the Incarnation 34: 2 (Documenta Catholica Omnia, English Text)

There is this passage, for instance: "A man that is afflicted and knows how to bear weakness, for His face is turned away. He was dishonored and not considered, He bears our sins and suffers for our sakes. And we for our part thought Him distressed and afflicted and ill-used; but it was for our sins that He was wounded and for our lawlessness that He was made weak. Chastisement for our peace was upon Him, and by His bruising we are healed."

2. De incarnation verbi 34:2 (Documenta Catholica Omnia, Greek Text)

[34.2] Φασὶ τοίνυν·  «Ἄνθρωπος ἐν πληγῇ ὤν, καὶ εἰδὼς φέρειν μαλακίαν, ὅτι ἀπέστραπται τὸ πρόσωπον αὐτοῦ· ἠτιμά σθη καὶ οὐκ ἐλογίσθη. Αὐτὸς τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν φέρει, καὶ περὶ ἡμῶν ὀδυνᾶται· καὶ ἡμεῖς ἐλογισάμεθα αὐτὸν εἶναι ἐν πόνῳ, καὶ ἐν πληγῇ, καὶ ἐν κακώσει. Αὐτὸς δὲ ἐτραυματίσθη διὰ τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν, καὶ μεμαλάκισται διὰ τὰς ἀνομίας ἡμῶν· παιδεία εἰρήνης ἡμῶν ἐπ' αὐτόν, τῷ μώλωπι αὐτοῦ ἡμεῖς ἰάθημεν.». 

3. On the Incarnation 35: 1-5 (Documenta Catholica Omnia, English Text)

You have heard the prophecy of His death, and now, perhaps, you want to know what indications there are about the cross. Even this is not passed over in silence: on the contrary, the sacred writers proclaim it with the utmost plainness. Moses foretells it first, and that right loudly, when he says, "You shall see your Life hanging before your eyes, and shall not believe." After him the prophets also give their witness, saying, "But I as an innocent lamb brought to be offered was yet ignorant of it. They plotted evil against Me, saying, 'Come, let us cast wood into His bread, and wipe Him out from the land of the living." And, again, "They pierced My hands and My feet, they counted all My bones, they divided My garments for themselves and cast lots for My clothing." Now a death lifted up and that takes place on wood can be none other than the death of the cross; moreover, it is only in that death that the hands and feet are pierced.

4. De incarnation verbi 35:1-5 (Documenta Catholica Omnia, Greek Text)

[35.1] Ἀλλ' ἴσως περὶ μὲν τῆς τοῦ θανάτου προφητείας ἀκούσας, ζητεῖς καὶ τὰ περὶ τοῦ σταυροῦ σημαινόμενα μαθεῖν. Οὐδὲ γὰρ οὐδὲ τοῦτο σεσιώπηται· δεδήλωται δὲ καὶ λίαν τηλαυγῶς ἀπὸ τῶν ἁγίων. [35.2] Μωϋσῆς γὰρ πρῶτος μεγάλῃ τῇ φωνῇ προαπαγγέλλει λέγων· «Ὄψεσθε τὴν ζωὴν ὑμῶν κρεμαμένην ἀπέναντι τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν ὑμῶν, καὶ οὐ μὴ πιστεύσητε.». [35.3] Καὶ οἱ μετ' αὐτὸν δὲ προφῆται πάλιν περὶ τούτου μαρτυροῦσι λέγοντες· «Ἐγὼ δὲ ὡς ἀρνίον ἄκακον ἀγόμενον τοῦ θύεσθαι, οὐκ ἔγνων· ἐπ' ἐμὲ ἐλογίσαντο πονηρὸν λέγοντες· δεῦτε, καὶ ἐμβάλωμεν ξύλον εἰς τὸν ἄρτον αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐκτρίψωμεν αὐτὸν ἀπὸ γῆς ζώντων.». [35.4] Καὶ πάλιν· «Ὤρυξαν χεῖράς μου καὶ πόδας μου· ἐξηρίθμησαν πάντα τὰ ὀστᾶ μου, διεμερίσαντο τὰ ἱμάτιά μου ἑαυτοῖς, καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν ἱματισμόν μου ἔβαλον κλῆρον.». [35.5] Θάνατος δὲ μετέωρος, καὶ ἐν ξύλῳ γινόμενος, οὐκ ἄλλος ἂν εἴη, εἰ μὴ ὁ σταυρός· καὶ ἐν οὐδενὶ πάλιν θανάτῳ διορύσσονται χεῖρες καὶ πόδες, εἰ μὴ ἐν μόνῳ τῷ σταυρῷ.

5. As cited in David W. Chapman, Ancient Jewish and Christian Perceptions of Crucifixion, Grand Rapids, MI, Baker Academic (2008) p. 89. (Link.)

6. Marcus Jastrow, Dictionary of the Targumin, Talmud and Midrashic Literature, New York, G. P. Putnam's Sons, (1926) p. 1282, entry  צלב : "to hang, impale." (Link.)

7. Perseus Greek Word Study Tool, ἐν and ξύλῳ. The Autenrieth, Slater, Middle Liddell and LSJ Lexica (accessible by the link menu in the top listing box for ἐν) all verify that ἐν + dative can mean "of the instrument, means or manner" with the dative noun as the instrument, means or manner by which something is brought about. 

8. On the Incarnation 38: 1b-2 (Documenta Catholica Omnia, English Text)

Of whom, for instance, do the prophets say "I was made manifest to those who did not seek Me, I was found by those who had not asked for Me? I said, 'See, here am I,' to the nation that had not called upon My Name. I stretched out My hands to a disobedient and gainsaying people." Who is this person that was made manifest, one might ask the Jews? If the prophet is speaking of himself, then they must tell us how he was first hidden, in order to be manifested afterwards. And, again, what kind of man is this prophet, who was not only revealed after being hidden, but also stretched out his hands upon the cross? Those things happened to none of those righteous men: they happened only to the Word of God Who, being by nature without body, on our account appeared in a body and suffered for us all.

9. De incarnation verbi 38:1b-2 (Documenta Catholica Omnia, Greek Text)

[38:1] ....Περὶ τίνος γὰρ λέγουσιν οἱ προφῆται· «Ἐμφανὴς ἐγενόμην τοῖς ἐμὲ μὴ ζητοῦσιν, εὑρέθην τοῖς ἐμὲ μὴ ἐπερωτῶσιν· εἶπα ἰδού εἰμι τῷ ἔθνει οἳ οὐκ ἐκάλεσάν μου τὸ ὄνομα· ἐξεπέτασα τὰς χεῖράς μου πρὸς λαὸν ἀπειθοῦντα καὶ ἀντιλέγοντα;» [38.2] Τίς οὖν ἐστιν ὁ ἐμφανὴς γενόμενος; Εἴποι τις πρὸς Ἰουδαίους· εἰ μὲν γὰρ ὁ προφήτης ἐστί, λεγέτωσαν πότε ἐκρύπτετο, ἵνα καὶ ὕστερον φανῇ· Ποῖος δὲ οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ προφήτης ὁ καὶ ἐμφανὴς ἐξ ἀφανῶν γενόμενος, καὶ τὰς χεῖρας ἐκπετάσας ἐπὶ σταυροῦ; Τῶν μὲν οὖν δικαίων οὐδείς, μόνος δὲ ὁ τοῦ Θεοῦ Λόγος, ὁ ἀσώματος ὢν τὴν φύσιν καὶ δι' ἡμᾶς σώματι φανεὶς καὶ ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν παθών. 

Crucifixion the Bodily Support - The Acuta Crux in Patristic Writings (15)

Lactantius.
Source: Dover Beach, Wordpress.com

(Part 7o of the series: Crucifixion the Bodily Support)

Part 1      Part 2      Part 3      Part 4
Part 5a    Part 5b    Part 5c    Part 5d
Part 5e    Part 5f     Part 5g    Part 6a
Part 6b    Part 6c    Part 6d    Part 6e
Part 7a    Part 7b    Part 7c    Part 7d
Part 7e    Part 7f     Part 7g    Part 7h
Part 7i     Part 7j     Part 7k      Part 7l

Part 7m     Part 7n


Lactantius.

Lactantius, or Lucius Caecilius Firmianus Lactantius, was an early church author, or Ante-Nicene Church Father, who produced several works in Latin, called De Opificio Dei ("The Works of God"), Divinarum Institutionum Libri VII, ("The Divine Institutes"), An Epitome of the "Divine institutes", De Ira Dei ("On the Wrath of God"), De Mortibus Persecutorum ("On the Deaths of the Persecutors"), and possibly de Ave Phoenice ("The Phoenix"). 

His descriptions of the alleged crucifixion of Jesus the Nazarene might not be exhaustive, but based on what I have found in his "Divine Institutes" (where most, if not all of his descriptions of the event may be found), he seems to be knowledgeable of part of the immense variety of terms ancient Romans used to describe the act. Shall we begin?

Therefore, because He had laid down his life while fastened to the cross (suffixus), His executioners did not think it necessary to break His bones (as was their prevailing custom), but they only pierced (perforaverunt) his side.

Lactantius, Divine Institutes, 4.26 (5th pgh,  2nd sent.) 1

Here, "fastened to the cross" is rendered in the Latin as suffixus (having been fixed underneath), can mean either penetrated / impaled on an acuta crux, nailed up to a patibulum, or as was likely in the usual manner under Rome, both.

Thus his unbroken body was taken down from the cross (patibulo detractum) and carefully enclosed in a tomb.

Lactantius, Divine Institutes, 4.26 (5th pgh, 3rd sent.) 2

Now in the next sentence Lactantius makes use of the word patibulum, and detrahere, indicating to the reader that the use of a crossarm was involved in the suspension, and that the body had to be taken down from it, thereby including the second sense of suffixus into the scope of the suspension. 

For since he who is suspended on a cross (patibulo suspenditur) is both conspicuous to all and higher than others, the cross (crux) was especially chosen, which might signify that He would be so conspicuous, and raised on high...

Lactantius, Divine Institutes, 4.26 (5th pgh,  6th sent.) 3

Here he uses patibulo suspenditur for "is suspended on a cross". In the Latin, patibulo is both the dative (indirect object) and ablative (instrumental) of patibulum (door-bar, crossarm, gibbet) literally, "suspended on a cruciform gibbet" or "suspended by a transverse (spreading) beam". And he indicates the one suspended is quite literally on display to all passers-by.

For someone may perchance say, "Why, if he were God, and chose to die, did He not at least suffer by some honourable kind of death? Why was it the cross (crux) especially? Why by an infamous kind of punishment (infami genere), which may appear unworthy even of a man if he is free -- although guilty?"

Lactantius, Divine Institutes 4.26 (4th pgh, 8th-10th sents.) 4

Lactantius here understands that an execution by the crux was an infamous kind of punishment (infami genere), which, even at the turn of the 4th Century CE, was commonly understood as an unworthy method of putting a free man to death even though he was guilty as sin. In fact, the Latin infamis (of ill report, ill spoken of, disreputable, notorious, infamous) carries with it a connotation of sexual, moral or social turpitude: turpis adulescentia, vita infamis means "a disgraceful youth, an infamous life" (Cicero, For Marcus Fonteius 15.33). In fact the digitus infamis refers to the middle finger (Juvenal, Satires 10.53, Persius, Satires 2.34) -- they knew how to flip the bird!

And he understands how the person put to death was put on display: by having his arms stretched out on a horizontal beam, for he quotes a line from a lost work by Seneca, on Moral Philosophy: 

“This is that virtuous man, not distinguished by a diadem or purple, or the attendance of lictors, but in no respect inferior, who, when he sees death at hand, is not so disturbed as though he saw a fresh object; who, whether torments are to be suffered by his whole body, or a flame is to be seized by his mouth, or his hands are to be stretched out on the cross (sive extendiae per patibulum manus), does not inquire what he suffers, but how well.”

Lactantius, Divine Institutes 6.17 fin. 5

Here, per patibulum doesn't mean, "on a cross (ob tropaeum / in tropaeo)," but rather, "'through' (along) a horizontal beam." I must pause here to note, that originally, a patibulum originally meant a door bar, put in place to keep doors shut, and came to mean crux, because part of the execution of the crux at this time usually included the extension of the executed person's arms out on a crossbeam. 6

Now we go back a few chapters:

On which account the Milesian Apollo, being asked whether He was God or man, replied in this manner: "He was mortal as to His body, being wise with wondrous works; but being taken with arms under Chaldean judges, with nails and the cross (γόμφοις καὶ σκολόπεσσι / clavis et cruce) He endured a bitter end.

Lactantius, Divine Institutes 4.13 (2nd pgh, 7th sent.) 7

"With nails and the cross" we have in the Greek, γόμφοις καὶ σκολόπεσσι (with bolts and with pales): γόμφοις is the dative plural of γόμφος (wooden nail, peg; bolt, dowel; any bond or fastening), and σκολόπεσσι is the dative plural of σκόλοψ (anything pointed, esp. pale, stake, impaling stake, palisade; thorn). The Catholic translator rendered this phrase as clavis et cruce (with nails and the cross [execution pole]). So it appears that as had Origen, Lactantius understood that the Roman crux functioned as an impaling stake and was assembled out of timbers suitable for palisades. And we know by the quote that the contemporary detractors of Christianity in the late 3rd / early 4th Century had assumed it to be so of Jesus the Nazarene.

I come now to the passion itself (ipsam passionem), which is often cast in our teeth as a reproach that we worship a man, and one who was visited and tormented (affectum et excruciatum) with remarkable punishment (insigni supplicio).

Lactantius, Divine Institutes, 4.16.1 (1st pgh, 1st sent.) 8

What is interesting to note here is that "the passion itself" (ipsam passionem is gramatically feminine, reminding one of the reporach Seneca cast upon Maceneas about his desire to live over suicide, even if he had to sit on a piercing 'cross': the lines Maceneas wrote, Seneca reproached as a "turpitude of effeminate verse"! 9 Next we have "visited and tormented" (affectum et excruciatum), which has the more complete meaning of "visited, afflicted, oppressed, weakened, impaired and tormented, tortured, racked, plagued." The last phrase "with remarkable punishment" (insigni supplicio): the word insigni is the dative-ablative of insignis, which can also appropriately mean "prominent, extraordinary, notorious, severe;" and supplicio the dative-ablative of supplicium, also a "kneeling down, humiliation, torture, torment, pain, distress, suffering." So from the above passage the sense appears that the crux-penalty is: (1) effeminate; (2) a torture, a racking, (3) 'prominent', notorious, remarkable, severe; and (4) a humiliating punishment, accompanied by a bending of the knees.

Then they lifted him up (suspenderunt eum) in the midst between two malefactors, who had been condemned for robbery, and fixed him to the cross (crucique affixerunt). What here can I deplore in so great a crime (facinore)? Or in what words can I lament such wickedness?

Lactantius, Divine Institutes 4.18 (2nd pgh, 6th-8th sent.) 10

Here an affixing to the crux, that is, fixing on as an 'addition', according to Lactantius, was the last action done by the executioners who carried out the Roman penalty. The lifting preceded the fixing. And Lactantius calls it a great facinus (ablative = facinore), meaning a "bad deed, misdeed, outrage, villainy, crime; instrument of villainy." Considering that in the ancient Mediterranean world, a free man was to remain inviolate and unpenetrated, it would have been an outrage to violate him, especially when the violation made him 'effeminate', i.e., involved an act penetration. It is for this reason the typical crux (Roman crucifixion) was considered the slaves' punishment.

For we are not relating the crucifixion (crux) of Gavius, which Marcus Tullius followed up with all the spirit and strength of his eloquence, pouring forth as it were the fountains of all his genius, proclaiming that it was an unworthy deed that a Roman citizen should be crucified (in crucem esse sublatum) in violation of all laws. And although He was innocent, and undeserving of that punishment, yet He was put to death, and that, too, by an impious man, who was ignorant of justice. What shall I say respecting the indignity of this cross (hujus crucis indignitate), on which (in qua) the Son of God was suspended and nailed (suspensus atque suffixus)?

Lactantius, Divine Institutes 4.18 (2nd pgh, 9th-11th sent.) 11

Concerning the crux of Gavius, it should be noted that the act of suspension and affixion to the tool is equated with execution tool itself: in the Latin, they can be one and the same. But the Latin for "should be crucified" (in crucem esse sublatum) translates as "to be hoisted onto a crux," likely the acuta crux, the pointed seat of a piercing 'cross', or the whole Priapean assembly. And because crucem is the accusative of crux, the construction in crucem is pregnant: to be hoisted up onto the crux (probably using the patibulum) and suspended on the crux itself.

Next is "the indignity of this cross" (hujus crucis indignitate): this is an understatement, thanks to Victorian and modern delicate sensibilities (despite Mel Gibson's squalid bloodbath). The Latin indignitas (ablative indignitate) can also mean in this case, "unworthiness, vileness, shamefulness, enormity, heinousness, insulting treatment, meanness, baseness," with infamia as a synonym. I have already discussed the word above, and the Romans' knowledge of the digitus infamis (the finger) and how heinous it was for a free man, let alone a Roman citizen, to be violated with an 'effeminizing' penalty, i.e., overpowered and penetrated. So a Priapus stake sort of 'cross' is more likely to be connoted here, rather than the typical cross imagined by the Christians, where Jesus the Nazarene is lifted up and exalted as a god.

And Lactantius also explains how the procedure was done: in qua suspensus atque suffixus (on / with which [he was] suspended and fastened underneath). Now why "on / with which?" Because qua is in the ablative, in + an ablative (ex.: in hoc signo vinces (under / by this sign you will conquer)) has both a locational and an instrumental sense to it. The participle suspensus is obvious enough: it means "having been raised, elevated, suspended" which does not necessarily exclude a sense of being suspended by a support underneath as an appropriate means. The conjunction atque (and, as well as, together with; and even, and ____ too) And suffixus, (having been fixed underneath), here is combined with in qua, and the ablative pronoun is equated with its antecedent crucis (genitive of crux). So it was by the crux itself that Jesus was fastened underneath. If it was just by the nails that Jesus was 'suffixed' (to the stipes and the patibulum), Lactantius would have said so.

And as was common with early Christian authors, Lactantius quotes LXX Jeremiah 11:19: 12

Also Jeremiah: "Lord, declare it unto me, and i shall know. Then I saw their devices: I was led as an innocent lamb to the sacrifice; they mediated a plan against me, saying, 'Come, let us send wood into his bread.(mittamus lignum in panem ejus) and let us sweep away his life from the earth (et eradamus e terra vitam ejus), and his name shall no more be remembered.” Now the wood signifies the cross, and the bread His body; for He Himself is the food and the life of all who believe in the flesh which He bare, and on the cross upon which He was suspended (in crucem qua pependit).'"

Lactantius, Divine Institutes 4.18 (3rd pgh, 35th-37th sent.) 13

Now this is a strange. Philip Schaff reasons that this is "altogether fanciful and unwarranted" as an interpretation as a prophecy of the Crucifixion. 14 The NIV English translation from the Massoretic text reads, "Let us destroy the tree, and its fruit;" and the 1985 JPS Tanakh reads almost identically, "Let us destroy the tree with its fruit." However, the fanciful interpretation almost becomes a sure thing to occur under early Christianity, given the early fathers' attitude towards the Jews, 14 and the dodgy Greek translation of the LXX, with its multiple meanings of words: ἐμβάλωμεν ξύλον εἰς τὸν ἄρτον αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐκτρίψωμεν αὐτὸν ἀπὸ γῆς ζώντων. (Let us cast wood onto [put wood into] his bread, and rub him out [wear him out by constant rubbing] from the land of the living.) Lactantius' Old Latin source is hardly better: mittamus lignum in panem ejus, et eradamus e terra vitam ejus (let us send wood into his bread, and erase his life from the land). For ἐμβάλωμεν is conjugated from ἐμβάλλω: "throw in, put in; throw at, upon, against". The Greek ἐκτρίψωμεν is from ἐκτρίβω: "rub out, produce by rubbing, rubbing hard; rub out, destroy root and branch, bring [life] to a wretched end; rub constantly, wear out; thresh out; polish; wipe out." Lactantius uses the Latin mittamus, from mitto, "send, cause to go; let go, let loose, release, dismiss; send; put forth; send, throw, hurl, cast, launch, plunge." He also uses eradamus, from erado, "scratch out, scrape off; strike out, erase, shave off; abolish, extirpate, eradicate, remove, obliterate, cause to be forgotten." Certainly this interpretation of Jeremiah 11:19 would have been a complete flight of fancy, unless, of course, the 'cross' the early fathers was talking about was a Priapus stake with an acuta crux to serve as a projecting and transgressive 'seat': something like these (for adults 18+ only), but pointed and much harsher.  A simple two-beam doesn't work, either: when the suspended pushes up on his feet, he flexes out from the face of the cross. Then there is the question of wearing one's own pole on the way to his execution. Sometimes the pole is not thrown on the person's back; he has to lift it himself. 15, 16

Therefore, being lifted up and nailed to the cross (suspensus atque affixus), he cried to the Lord with a loud voice, and of his own accord gave up His Spirit.

Lactantius, Divine Institutes 4.19 (1st pgh, 2nd sent.) 17

Again, we have suspensus atque affixus (suspended and affixed as a brand or fixed on as an addition). In other words, he's hanging and he's stuck. There is nothing here that excludes a Priapus Stake with its acuta-crux.

I will now speak of the mystery of the cross (crux), least anyone should happen to say, "If death must be endured by him, it should not have been one that was manifestly infamous and dishonourable (non utique infamis ac turpis), but one which had some honour...

Lactantius, Divine Institutes 4.19 (1st pgh, 2nd sent.) 18

The sort of death was, in Latin,  infami ac turpis (manifestly infamous and polluted), or (particularly notorious and shameful). Again, the sense is better conveyed, I would think, if the so-called 'cross' the Romans used was actually a Priapus stake.

Conclusions:

From Lactantius' descriptions of the Crucifixion of Jesus the Nazarene, we can make the following conclusions about his understanding of crucifixion: First, the person is attached both by affixion (affigere: to fix or fasten to), i.e., nailing to a pole, impaling on a stake, or both; and suffixion (suffigere: to fix or fasten beneath), i.e., impaling on a stake, nailing up to a patibulum which serves as an overhead crossbeam, or both. Second, the person is suspended prior to being attached to the crux (pole, stake). The method of suspension was being hoisted onto the crux to remain on it (in crucem sublatus), and its instrument was the patibulum, which also came to be known as an alternate name for the crux by this time. Once suspended, the prisoner hanged (pependit) on the crux, by means of it. The arms of the prisoner were stretched out along the crossbeam, effectively "opening up" his body and putting him on display. The assembled crux included at least two pointed wooden stakes (σκόλοπες, pali) and the prisoner was attached to it with nails (γόμφοι, clavi). Lactantius, like Justin Martyr and Tertullian, understood LXX Jeremiah 11:19 as a prophecy of the Crucifixion, despite the texts of Massoretic Hebrew, the Tanakh, and the Protestant English Bibles meaning nothing of the sort. As a prophecy of the Crucifixion, it could mean either "let us put wood on his bread," or "let us send wood into his bread." The suffering or passion of the prisoner was considered by the ancient Romans to be effeminate, indeed the noun itself is grammatically feminine. Lastly, crucifixion itself was considered a manifestly infamous, notorious, polluted and shameful (utique infamis ac turpis) type of death, so much so that Lactantius considered the Crucifixion an outrage, a crime, an act of villainy (facinus) and a vileness, an insulting act, an emormity (indignitas). Now with all this information, the crux that would best fit the description of the crux that Jesus suspended on and attached to would be, of course, a tota crux  or Priapus stake: certainly with its yardarm, and together with the well-known projection of a seat.

Vivat Crux Graffito: Vivas in cruce
(May you live on a crux.)

Of course, a century before Lactantius, a magical-gem engraver had a similar conception of Jesus' Crucifixion:

Magical gem from the Levant with The Crucifixion, 2nd-3rd C. CE.
The arms are in a relaxed position and the legs are hanging free.
Jesus Christ in this depiction appears to be impaled,
as well as suspended from a patibulum.

Resources:

Wikipedia.org, Lactantius.
New Advent.org, Church Fathers, Lactantius, The Divine Institutes.
New Advent.org, Church Fathers, Lactantius, The Epitome of the Divine Institutes.
Documenta Catholica Omnia, Lactantius.
Nonius Marcellus, De Compendiosa doctrina ad filium, L. IV, p. 221, 11-14 (Google preview).
Justus Lipsius, de Cruce, L. II, cap. viii, p. 87 (Google preview, p. 87)
Seneca, Epistularum Moralium ad Lucillium 101.13 (The Latin Library).
New Advent.org, Bible, Jer. 11, gMark 15, gMatt 27, gLuke 23, gJohn 19.
Christian Classics Ethereal Library, ANF07 Fathers of the Third and Fourth Centuries, Lactantius, Divine Institutes IV.xviii.
Chariton, Chaereas and Callirhoe 4.2.6,7 (Google preview).
British Museum, magical gem / intaglio.
Perseus Greek Word Study Tool.
Perseus Latin Word Study Tool.
Numen Latin Word Study Tool.
Notore Dame William Whitaker's Words.
Perseus Digital Library (Persius, Cicero).

Notes:

1. Lactantius, Divinarum Institutionum Libri VII 4.26: Suffixus itaque quia spiritum deposerunt, necessarium carnifices non putaverunt, ossa ejus suffringere (sicut mos eorum ferebat) sed tantummodo latus ejus perforaverunt. "And so because, having been fixed underneath, he had given up his breath, the executioners did not suppose a necessary to break beneath his bones (just as their custom would bring about), but they only stabbed his side."

2. Lactantius, Divinarum Institutionum Libri VII 4.26: sic integrum corpus patibulo detractum est, et sepulcro diligentur inclusum. (Thus the unbroken body was taken [or pulled] down from the crossarmed execution pole and diligently enclosed in a sepulcher.)

3. Lactantius, Divinarum Institutionum Libri VII 4.26: Nam quoniam is, qui patibulo suspenditur, et conspicuus est omnibus, et caeteris altior, crux potius electa est, quae significaret illum tam conspicuum tamque sublimem futurum,... (For seeing that he, who is suspended by a patibulum, and is conspicuous to everybody, and higher than the others, rather a crux is chosen, which may signify Him who is about to be so very obvious and even so borne aloft.)

4. Lactantius, Divinarum Institutionum Libri VII 4.26.29: Cur si Deus fuit, et mor voluit, non saltem aliquo honesto genere mortis affectus est? Cur potissium cruce? Cur infami genere supplicii, quod etiam homine libero, quanvis nocente, videatur indignum (Why, if he were God, and preferred to die, was he not afflicted at least with any honourable kind of death? Why especially with a crux? Why with an infamous sort of punishment, which as yet for a free person, although guilty, may be seen as beneath him.)

5. Lactantius, Divinarum Institutionum Libri VII 6.17 fin.: 'Hic est ille homo honestus, non apice, purpurave, non lictoram insignis ministeria, sed nulla re minor, qui cum mortem in vicinia videt, non sic perturbatur, tanquam rem novam viderit; qui, sive toto corpore tormenta patienda sunt, sive flamma ore rapienda est, sive extendiae per patibulum manus, non quaerit quid patiatur, sed quam bene.' ("This is that honorable man, not with ornaments or in purple, not distinguished by the attendance of lictors, but in no wise inferior, who, when he sees death in the vicinity, he is thus not perturbed, as much as [when] he would have seen a novel thing; who, whether in the whole of his body tortures are about to be endured, or whether a flame is caught up in his mouth, or whether his hands [are] about to be stretched out along the patibulum, one asks not in what respect he may suffer, but how well.") 

6. Nonius Marcellus, De Compendiosa doctrina ad filium, L. IV, p. 221, 11-14 (Google preview). With a good explanation of the Latin such as can be found here, one can understand that Nonius shows how a patibulum at that time (3rd or 4th C. CE) could mean either a crux*, a beam to which one was tied before he was fastened on to or planted down on a crux**, and a door-bar.  A crux, then meant either *a pole with at least a cross-arm, or ** a regular pole (in case of nailing feet) or an impaling stake.

7. Lactantius, Divinarum Institutionum Livri VII, 4.13: Propterea Milesius Apollo consultus, utrumne Deus, an homo fuerit, hoc modo respondit: (On which account Milesius-Apollo having been consulted, whether God, or a man he was, responded in this way:)

Θνητός ἰήν κατά σάρκα, σοφος, τερατώδεσιν ἔργοις,
Ἀλλ' ὑπὸ χαλδαίων κριτῶν ὅπλοις συναλωθεις
Γόμφοις καί σκολόπεσσι πικρών ἀνέτλησε τελουτην

Mortalis erat corpore, sapiens portentificus (a) operibus
Sed sub chaldaeis judicibus armis comprehensus
Clavis et cruce amarum toleravit finem.

(One mortal according to the flesh, wise, with portentious works.
But under Chaldean judges he was arrested with arms.
With bolts / nails and with pales / a crux he endured a bitter end.)

Cf. Justus Lipsius, de Cruce, L. II, cap. viii, p. 87 (Google preview, p. 87): Memimit et Apollo in oraculo quopiam de Christo: Γόμφοις καί σκολόπεσσι πικρών ἀνέτλησε τελουτην -- Clavisque et palis mortem exantlauit (Memimit and Apollo in an oracale [said] something about Christ: With nails and with pales he endured a bitter end.)

8. Lactantius, Divinarum Institutionum Livri VII, 4.16: Venio nunc ad ipsam passionem, quae velut opprobrium nobis objectari solet, quod et hominem, et ab hominibus insigni supplocio affectum et excruciatum colamis; (I come now to the passion itself [lit.: herself], which as a disgrace they often throw out at us, and because we worship a man, even [one who] by [other] men was afflicted and tortured-out with notorious punishment.)

9. Seneca, Epistularum Moralium ad Lucillium 101.13 (The Latin Library): quid sibi vult ista carminis effeminati turpitudo? (What does he mean by it, [such] turpitude* of effeminate verse?)

*also baseness, shamefulness, disgrace, dishonor, infamy.

10. Lactantius, Divinarum Institutionum Livri VII, 4.18: Tum suspenderunt eum inter duos noxios medium qui ob latrocinia damnati erant crucique affixerunt. Quid ego hic in tanto facinore deplorem? aut quibus verbis tantum nefas conquerar? (Then they suspended him in the middle between two [noxious] criminals, who were condemned for armed robbery, and affixed him to the crux. What can I say here in such a great outrage? Or with what words can I lament so great an impious deed?)

11. Lactantius, Divinarum Institutionum Livri VII, 4.18: Non enim Gavianam crucem describimus, quam Marcus Tullus universis eloquentiae suae nervis ac viribus, velut effusis totius ingenii fontibus, prosecutus est, facinus indignum esse proclamans, civem Romanum contra omnes leges in crucem esse sublatum. Qui quamvis innocens fuerit, et illo supplicio indignus, mortalis tamen, et ab homine scelesto, qui justitiam ignoraret, affectus est. Quid de hujus crucis indignitate dicemus, in qua Deus a cultoribus Dei suspensus atque suffixus? (For by no means do we describe the crux of [Publius] Gavius which Marcus Tullus [Cicero] followed up with the whole of his strengths and powers, as though with a pouring forth from the fountain of his entire contstution, proclaiming it is an unworthy outrage [that] a Roman citizen, against all the laws, [is] to be hoisted up onto a crux. Who, although he was innocent, and undeserving of that [humiliating] punishment, nevertheless, destined to die, and by a wicked man ignorant of justice, he was afflicted. What shall I say of the shamefulness of this crux, with which the God by the husbandmen of God was borne up and fastened beneath [nailed up / impaled]?)

12. LXX, Jeremiah 11:19: ἐγὼ δὲ ὡς ἀρνίον ἄκακον ἀγόμενον τοῦ θύεσθαι οὐκ ἔγνων ἐπ' ἐμὲ ἐλογίσαντο λογισμὸν πονηρὸν λέγοντες δεῦτε καὶ ἐμβάλωμεν ξύλον εἰς τὸν ἄρτον αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐκτρίψωμεν αὐτὸν ἀπὸ γῆς ζώντων καὶ τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ οὐ μὴ μνησθῇ ἔτι. (And I was as a meek lamb, that is carried to be a victim: and I knew not that they had devised counsels against me, saying: Let us put wood on his bread*, and cut him off** from the land of the living, and let his name be remembered no more.)

* the Greek can mean alternatively, "let us or send wood into his bread."
** a better sense of the Greek ἐκτρίψωμεν is: "let us rub him out, wear him out by constant rubbing," etc.

13 Lactantius, Divinarum Institutionum Livri VII, 4.18: Hieremias (cap. 11): 'Domine, significa mihi, et cognoscam: tunc vidi meditationes eorum; ego sicut agnus sine malitia perductus sum ad victimam: in me cogitaverunt cogitationem, dicentes: "Venite, mittamus lignum in panem ejus, et eradamus e terra vitam ejus, et nomen ejus non erit in memoria amplius."' Lignum autem crucem significat, et panis corpus ejus, quia ipse est cibus, et vita omnium qui credunt in carnem quam portavit, et in crucem qua pependit. (Jeremiah (ch. 11): "Lord, point it out to me, and I will know. Then I saw their deliberations: I just as a lamb without malice was led through to the sacrifice. Against me they designed a plot, saying, 'Come, let us send wood into his bread, and erase his life from the land [of the living], moreover his name will not be in a good memory any more.'" However the wood signifies the crux, and bread his body, because he himself is the food, also the life of all who trust in his flesh which he bore, and in the crux by which he hanged.)

14. Schaff, Philip, editor, Fathers of the Third and Fourth Centuries, Vol. 7, p. 121, n. 754 and 755. Link to online copy at ccel.org.

15. Chariton, Chaereas and Callirhoe 4.2.6,7 (Google preview) ...κάκεινος ουδέ ιδών αυτούς ουδέ απολογουμένων ακούσας ευθύς εκελευσε τούς εξ καί δέκα τούς όμοσκήνους ανασταυρωσαι. Προήχθησαν ουν ποδας τε καί τραχήλους συνδεδεμένοί καί έκαστος αυτων τον σταυρόν έφερε: τη δέ αναγκαία τιμωρία καί τήν εξωθεν φαντασίαν σκυθρωπήν προσέθηκαν οί κολαζοντες εις φόβου παράδειγμα τοις ομοίοις. Χαιρέας μέν ουν απαγόμενος έσίγμα, Πολύχαρμος δέ τόν σταυρόν βαστάζων 'δια σέ' φησιν, 'ω Καλλιρρόη, ταυτα πασχομεν.' (Without even seeing them or listening to their defence he immediately ordered the sixteen cell-mates to be crucified / impaled. They were duly brought out, chained together foot and neck, each carrying his own pole. The executioners added this grim spectacle to the requisite penalty as a deterrent to others so minded. Now Chaereas said nothing as he was led off with the others, but upon taking up [his own] pole, Polycharmus exclaimed, "It is your fault, Callirhoe, that we are in this fine mess."). The Greek βαστάζων has the following meanings: "taking up, raising, lifting up; clasping, holding in one hands; bearing, carrying, supporting; carrying off, taking away, stealing."

16. gMark 15:21, καὶ ἀγγαρεύουσιν παράγοντά τινα Σίμωνα Κυρηναῖον, ἐρχόμενον ἀπ' ἀγροῦ, τὸν πατέρα Ἀλεξάνδρου καὶ Ῥούφου, ἵνα ἄρῃ τὸν σταυρὸν αὐτοῦ (And they forced one Simon a Cyrenian, who passed by coming out of the country, the father of Alexander and of Rufus, to take up his cross). "To take up" in the Greek is ἄρῃ, 3rd person aorist subjunctive active of αἴρω / ἀείρω "to take up, raise, lift up; bear, sustain; raise up, exalt; lift and take away." Cf. gMatt 27:32: Ἐξερχόμενοι δὲ εὗρον ἄνθρωπον Κυρηναῖον, ὀνόματι Σίμωνα: τοῦτον ἠγγάρευσαν ἵνα ἄρῃ τὸν σταυρὸν αὐτοῦ (And going out, they found a man of Cyrene, named Simon: him they forced to take up his cross); gLuke 23:26, Καὶ ὡς ἀπήγαγον αὐτόν, ἐπιλαβόμενοι Σίμωνά τινα Κυρηναῖον ἐρχόμενον ἀπ' ἀγροῦ ἐπέθηκαν αὐτῷ τὸν σταυρὸν φέρειν ὄπισθεν τοῦ Ἰησοῦ. (And as they led him away, they laid hold of one Simon of Cyrene, coming from the country; and they laid the cross on him to carry after Jesus); and John 19:17 καὶ βαστάζων ἑαυτῷ τὸν σταυρὸν ἐξῆλθεν εἰς τὸν λεγόμενον Κρανίου τόπον, ὃ λέγεται Ἑβραϊστὶ Γολγοθᾶ (And bearing [lit.: lifting up and carrying] his own cross, he went forth to the place which is called Calvary, but in Hebrew Golgotha). Note that gMark, gLuke and gJohn are or can be in agreement, that the act of carrying or bearing the cross began with an act of lifting it up. GLuke is in opposition -- he has the Jewish leaders lay wood on Simon of Cyrene's "bread," that is, his body; the author of gLuke clearly doesn't like the idea of a Priapus stake! Unfortunately, it would break the "prophecy" of Jer. 11:19 if the cross were merely a two-beam (or one pole and one plank) construction, because then wood is neither put on Jesus' "bread" nor caused to go into it.

17. Lactantius, Divinarum Institutionum Livri VII, 4.18: Suspensus igitur atque affixus exclamavit ad Dominum voce magna, at ultro spiritum posuit. (Consequently, having been suspended as well as affixed he called out to the Lord with a great voice, and of his own accord he put aside his own spirit.)

18. Lactantius, Epitome Divinarum Institutionum ad Pentadium Fratrem, 51 Dicam nunc de sacramentum crucis, ne quis forte dicat: Si suscipienda illi mors fuerat, non utique infami ac turpis, sed quae haberet aliquid honestatis. (I will tell now of the guaranty of the crux, lest anyone perchance may say, "If death must be accepting to him, [it should not have been] particularly notorious and shameful, but one which had to some extent some honour.)

Crucifixion the Bodily Support - "Biblical Evidence" - Installment 6.

Detail of an epigraph from the Roman Coliseum.

(Part 5f of the series: Crucifixion the Bodily Support)

Part 1                    Part 2                    Part 3                    Part 4   

Part 5a                  Part 5b                  Part 5c                  Part 5d                  Part5e

Introduction.

What sort of gear was the instrument of Jesus' execution?

Well I said I was going to treat the four gospels as separate which I have done, and then harmonise the whole lot, to see what differences come up. So here we go.

F. Harmonisation.

There are several points to juggle to see which sorts of execution gears used by the Romans would accomplish the (actual or fictitious) execution of Jesus as described in the various gospels.

From the various gospels we have the following points:

F.1. The σταυρὸς was portable and could be borne or worn on one’s back.

This point is from Mark (Mk) 8:34, Matthew (Mt) 10:38 and 16:24, and Luke (Lk) 9.23 where everybody would follow Jesus must take up his own pole σταυρὸν, and contrary to the synoptics, John (Jn) 19:17 said Jesus carried his own pole (σταυρὸν). Whether it was an ordinary pole or impaling stake, a patibulum or cross-pole intended to spread out the arms, or two-pole cross, the σταυρὸς had to be light enough for a violently flogged condemned man to ferry on his back while staggering to the execution site.

F.2. Jesus said he would be “lifted up.”

We have three separate passages where Jesus says that he must be lifted up in the same manner as Moses had lifted up the serpent in the desert. The first instance is in Jn 3:14 when Jesus is visited at night by Nicodemus, and tells him that he is to be lifted up in the same manner as Moses lifted the bronze serpent out in the desert. Then second instance is Jn 8:28 when Jesus tells his Pharisaic Jewish opponents point-blank that when they have lifted him up, they will know that he spoke what the Father (God) taught him. Well the Jews never got the message!  The third instance is in Jn 32-33 when Jesus, at the House of the Holy Place, predict he will be lifted up. This whole snake on a pole business in the first instance, of course, screams that Jesus would be attached to a regular pole somehow and exalted. Just like Moses’ Nehustan pole, Asclepius’ staff and Hermes-Mercury’s caduceus wand.

John claims that this was to be fulfilled when the Jews drag Jesus before Pilate's court to be on trial for his life. Of course, there is no guarantee in real life that a crucified criminal or rebel will be exalted on a cross. The usual Roman term for suspension into a cross or onto a pole or an impale stake is (sus)tollere in crucem, meaning, to lift, hoist, or push up into a cross or onto a stake (pole and/or impale) or both. This is a pregnant construction with the action indicated as an act of motion. And of course, the ius gladii (legal power of the sword) rested with any Roman prefects and procurators who governed Judea since 6 CE.

The typical Roman executionary suspension procedure doesn’t exactly fulfill Jesus’ prediction, when all are taken together, Unless he is to be nailed to an assembled execution cross on the ground and then lifted up, in which case John appears to be importing the imagery of the exaltation of the wax effigy of Julius Caesar on a victory cross / tropaeum at his funeral March 17, 44 BCE into the depiction of what sort death Jesus was to die. The fulfillment doesn’t exactly conform to the image of a bronze snake being nailed to a pole and borne aloft, but it’s close enough for government work.

F.3. Jesus' foreshadowing of the two robbers, crucified on either side.

This scene is only found in Mark and Matthew. In Luke’s gospel, Luke relocates the passages about the Twelve sitting on thrones judging the Twelve Tribes of Israel (Mt 19:16-30), and who would be the greatest, forward to the Last Supper (Lk 22:24-30). John, who is supposedly one of the sons of Zebedee, drops it altogether.

In the scene with Jesus and James and John the sons of Zebedee, (Mk 10:35-40, and Mt 20: 20-23) Jesus said he was not able commit to them that they would get to sit on 'thrones' to the right and left of him when he was to come into his glory. Because here he was talking about himself being suspended on his cross! Here, Jesus reinforces this foreshadowing by bracketing this discourse with predictions of his execution or crucifixion in Mk 10:33-34 / Mt 20:17-19 and Mk 10:45 / Mt 20.28.

The word "sit" is rendered in the Greek as a conjugate of καθίζω "sit, cause to sit, take one's seat, settle, sink down." The meaning is essentially identical to the Latin sedeo, which Seneca Minor uses in his EpistulaeMorales ad Lucillum 101.11, 12 (English Link) in reference to an acuta-crux (pointed stake) to sit, sink down or settle on. This is pointing right out that the two λῃσταί (robbers) were going to 'sit' on their crosses.

F.4. The Jewish leaders and assembled crowd call for his death.

They demand that he be crucified:

"Crucify him!" (Σταύρωσον αὐτόν.) (Mk 15;13,14)

"He must be crucified." (Σταυρωθήτω.) (Mt 27: 21,22)

"Crucify, crucify him!" (Σταύρωσον, σταύρωσον αὐτόν) (Lk 23:21)

“Take him away! Take him away! Crucify him!” ("Ἆρον ἆρον σταύρωσον!) (Jn 19:15)

It should be noted here that ἆρον can just as easily be translated as “lift him up” or “hoist him” and σταύρωσον / σταυρωθήτω could just as easily be translated as “pile-drive (impale) him” / “He must be pile-driven (impaled).” For the previous meanings of the basic verb σταυρόω did not always mean "crucify." It also meant at the time and has meant before it was used to connote crucifixion, as "impalisade, fence with pales, pile-drive, impale." "Impale on [a] cross" is the definition listed in the Greek-English Lexicon to Strong's Exhaustive Concordance. And of course, we have the LSJ which defines σταυρόω as: "impalisaded, fence with pales" and also “crucify” in Roman times. Thucydides (The Peloponnesian War 7.25.7) uses the verb to connote: "to drive piles". Diodorus Siculus (Library of History 16.61.2) uses it to connote “impale” (for a corpse already cut to pieces). A more complete survey on the verb can be read here, and by looking into Gunnar Samuelsson's book, Crucifixion in Antiquity.

So one should expect one or more of the previous meanings to be brought forward into the verb σταυρόω when it is used to describe a crucifixion.

F.5. What did they offer him and when did they offer it?

Prior to Jesus’ crucifixion they, the Roman soldiers, offer him a tincture of wine mixed with myrrh (Mk 15:25), which is a tonic and a sexual aphrodisiac! In fact, Romans imported myrrh for the very purpose of using it as an aphrodisiac. Now where did Mark get this information from? It is possible that there was a common practice of the executioners to give those about to be crucified this sort of tincture with the express purpose of making them drunk and high and horny. This would make sense if the cross was equipped with an acuta crux, i.e., a sharpened stake or spike, on which one was suspended or rode, and which would be called a pale (palus), a seat (sedile), a horn (κεράς or cornu), or a thorn (σκόλοψ) in the language of the street.

But then instead, just before they crucify him, they offer him wine mixed with gall (χολῆς: “bile, cuttle-fish ink, a disgust”), i.e., something disgusting to consume. (Mt 27:34)

After Jesus is crucified, the Roman soldiers perchance come in off the road and surround him, offering him vinegar, mocking him the whole time. (Lk 23:36)

At the end of his time alive on the pole, someone offers Jesus some vinegar in a sponge supported on a reed, hoping that would shut him up. (Mk 15:36, Mt 27:48) 

Just before he passes away, the soldiers offer Jesus some vinegar in a sponge that is wrapped around a piece of hyssop, which is herbaceous that time of year. (Jn 19:29)

F.6. How did the executioners crucify him?

The four gospels have absolutely no description of how Jesus was crucified. Luke does have additional information on the mechanics and effects of a typical crucifixion. Just went on before and what were the effects after.

F.6.1 The execution process before.

The Roman soldiers flogged or scourged Jesus. (Mk 15:15, Mt 27:26, Jn 19:1)

The Roman soldiers mock-coronate him in the Praetorium. (Mk 15:16-20, Mt 27:27-31, Jn 19:2-3). Or it was Herod Antipas and his soldiers that did it. (Lk 23:11)

They lead him out. “They” by rule of antecedent were either the Roman soldiers (Mk 15:20, Mt 27:31), or some of the Jews (Lk 23:26, Jn 19:16b)

They run him through the streets either bearing or wearing his own pole (Jn 19:17), or forcing Simon of Cyrene to carry it for him (Mk 15:21, Mt 27;32, Lk 23;36).

They lead two other criminals with Jesus to be executed (ἀναιρεθῆναι "to be raised, lifted up, killed, done away with") (Lk 23:32)

They strip him completely naked before they crucified him and gamble for his clothes afterwards. The “they” who did it were Roman soldiers (Mk 15:24, Mt 27:35, Jn 19:23) or the Jewish execution party (Lk 23:34).

F.6.2. The actual mechanical procedure.

"And they crucify him." (Καὶ σταυροῦσιν αὐτὸν) (Mk 15:24)

"And they crucified him."  (Σταυρώσαντες δὲ αὐτὸν) (Mt 27:35)

"…there they crucified him." (…ἐκεῖ ἐσταύρωσαν αὐτὸν) (Lk 23:33)

“Here they crucified him…” (ὅπου αὐτὸν ἐσταύρωσαν) (Jn 19:18)

No clues or details are given in these passages concerning the actual act of crucifying Jesus, save the use of the verb σταυρόω: “impalisade, fence with pales, pile-drive, impale, crucify.”

Indeed, one has to look into Acts to find further clues as to what the mechanical process was. In Acts 2:23, we see Peter telling the assembled Jews that they crucified Jesus and put him to death (προσπήξαντες ἀνείλατε), literally fastened, fixed, or planted against something unspecified and lifted up or put to death. In Acts 2:36 Peter says they crucified (ἐσταυρώσατε) him, which could include one or more of the earlier senses of the verb σταυρόω. In Acts 4:10, Peter is reported as employing the same verb ἐσταυρώσατε for crucified again. In Acts 5:30 we see Peter tell the Sanhedrin that they killed Jesus by hanging him upon a tree, gallows or stake (κρεμάσαντες ἐπὶ ξύλου) = "whom you killed, having hanged him on a tree," a Greek transliteration for the Hebrew (תָּלָה עַל־ עֵֽץ) (talah 'al 'etz) = “hang upon a tree” (1917 JPS Tanakh) or more directly and accurately per ancient Near East epigraphy “impale on a stake” (1985 JPS Tanakh). In Acts 10:40, in Cornelius’s house, Peter again says that the Jews killed Jesus by hanging him on a tree, etc. (κρεμάσαντες ἐπὶ ξύλου).

F.6.3. The results of the mechanical procedure.

The living persons of the two criminals were bodily suspended or hanged by a means not specified (Lk 23:39):  κρεμασθέντων from κρεμάννῦμι, “hang, hang up, suspend” by any means including crucifixion and impalement. At the end of the day they were to be taken down and Joseph of Arimathea took down (καθελων) the body of Jesus (Mk. 15:46, Lk 23:53) or just took (λαβὼν) it (Mt 27:59).

This is confirmed (except for Joseph of Arimathea being a disciple) by an angry screed, recorded in Acts 5:27-29, by the Apostle Paul in the Synagogue in Pisidian Antioch where he accuses the Jews in Jerusalem and their rulers of, despite lacking a conviction meet of a death sentence, they asked Pilate to have him executed. And after they themselves carried out all that was written, they took him down as booty from the tree (καθελόντες ἀπὸ τοῦ ξύλου) on which he was hanged and laid him in a tomb.

And yet in Jn 19:31 we read that the bodies were to be lifted up and taken away (ἀρθῶσιν) before sunset, which is the apparent sense established by other uses of the verb αἴρω (ἀείρω) in the New Testament. Otherwise the bodies would remain on the crosses, poles (ἐπὶ τοῦ σταυροῦ), which signifies the cross or pole as a support for each body – which it was. In which The preposition ἐπὶ constructed with the genitive of σταυρὸς would indicate that the bodies were on, upon or on top of the σταυρὸς which means it was either an impaling stake or a pole or frame equipped with an impale.

In the case of Jesus there were nail imprints in his hands, wrists or forearms. (Jn 20:25, 27) So apparently in John there was some kind of beam they nailed his hands to.

F.7. Location of the Sign.

Now after they crucified Jesus, where did they install the sign bearing his name and charge of crimen maiestas -- high treason -- for being The King of the Jews?

In Mk 15:26, the location the titulus was posted is not indicated. In Mt 27:37 it's above or near, almost upon, his head: "And they placed upon or near the head of him of the accusation of him (καὶ ἐπέθηκαν ἐπάνω τῆς κεφαλῆς αὐτοῦ τὴν αἰτίαν αὐτοῦ).” In Lk 23:38 the narrative simply states that it's above Jesus: "Moreover there was also an inscription over him (ἦν δὲ καὶ  ἐπιγραφὴ  ἐπ' αὐτῷ).” Jn 19:19 states that “Moreover Pilate wrote a notice and put it on [top of] the cross (ἔγραψεν δὲ καὶ τίτλον ὁ Πιλᾶτος ἔθηκεν ἐπὶ τοῦ σταυροῦ)".

Okay, here the sign is above, at or near Jesus, it’s almost upon his head, and it’s put on top of the cross, hanging beam or pole. Which basically rules out a simple vertical pole, a lone impaling stake, and a crux immissa (tropaeum). What we have left to choose from are a crux commissa (wooden structural tee or a utility pole), a mast-type 'cross', or a patibulum (horizontal pole or beam) suspended between two posts (cf. Seneca, Dialogus 6 (De Consolatione) 20.3).

F.8. And it Was Granted that Two May Sit…

In Mark 10: 35-40 and Matthew 20: 20-23, Jesus is asked if James and John the sons of Zebedee could sit beside him one at his right and the other at his left, naively think that he was speaking of the sitting on his throne in the World to Come. In reply, Jesus said it was outside of his power to grant their request, for the seats were reserved for those for whom it was prepared. This, of course, was an allusion to his crucifixion.

And the two who got to sit at his right and at his left were two λῃσταί: armed robbers (Mk 15;27, Mt 27:38), also called κακούργους : criminals, evildoers (Lk 23:33), and other (men): (Jn 19:18)

“And with him they crucify two robbers (καὶ σὺν αὐτῷ σταυροῦσιν δύο λῃστάς)” (Mk 15:27).

“Then are crucified with him two robbers (Τότε σταυροῦνται σὺν αὐτῷ δύο λῃσταί)” (Mt 27:38).

"along with the criminals—one on his right, the other on his left (καὶ τοὺς κακούργους, ὃν μὲν ἐκ δεξιῶν ὃν δὲ ἐξ ἀριστερῶν).” (Lk. 23:33)

“and with him two others--one on each side and Jesus in the middle (καὶ μετ’ αὐτοῦ ἄλλους δύο ἐντεῦθεν καὶ ἐντεῦθεν, μέσον δὲ τὸν Ἰησοῦν). (Jn 19:18)

And note that the four evangelists used or implied the verb σταυρόω to denote the crucifixion of the two criminals. And obviously they were required to ‘sit’ in accordance with Jesus’ foreshadowing of his crucifixion in his conversation with James and John Ben-Zebedee.

And if the two with lesser charges were ‘seated’ each on an acuta-crux under lesser charges (armed robbery), the one crucified under the charge of high treason as "The King of the Jews" would be similarly mounted on one, as well. And his could have been taller and stouter. The gospels are absolutely clear that the Romans Soldiers (or "Jews") singled Jesus out for special treatment! So then they would not have remitted this cruel and unusual and most shameful part of the extreme punishment.

F.9. The Mockery.

The mockery in Matthew and Mark are quite different from that in Luke, and far more insulting. The two evangelists set it up so that it is clear that it is quite impossible for Jesus to come down from the cross, pole or frame he is suspended on, despite the fact that neither of the two mention nails being used, at all, anywhere in their gospels.

The ordinary passers-by call for him to "Come down from the cross:"

“Save yourself, and come down from the cross! (καταβὰς ἀπὸ τοῦ σταυροῦ!)” (Mk. 15:30)

“Come down from the cross, (κατάβηθι ἀπὸ τοῦ σταυροῦ) if you are the Son of God!” (Mt 27:40)

In the same vein the chief priests, the teachers of the law and/or elders dared him to do the same thing:

"Let this Christ... come down now from the cross (ὁ χριστὸς..  καταβάτω νῦν ἀπὸ τοῦ σταυροῦ)” (Mk 15:32)

"Let him come down now from the cross (καταβάτω νῦν ἀπὸ τοῦ σταυροῦ)" (Mt 27:42)

These verbs for “come down” are conjugated from καταβαίνω, “step down, dismount” as in “I dismount a horse (καταβαίνω ἀπὸ τοῦ ἵππου).” Now that we have in Mark and Matthew the exact same verbiage in κ. ἀπὸ τοῦ σταυροῦ that we have in κ. ἀπὸ τοῦ ἵππου, it means that Jesus must  "dismount" his suspension-torture cross, pole, or frame, meaning, of course, that he is mounted, stuck on, astride a part of it. And of course it is quite impossible to dismount it, because everyone is mocking and daring him in such a rude manner.

In Luke 23:35-39 the mockery is far different from that in Mark and Matthew. Here, no one dares Jesus to “Come down from the cross!” It is as if Luke knows that Mark and Matthew are being far too rude in their use of the Greek verb καταβαίνω "dismount" when it refers to coming down from a crucifixion instrument, meaning the cruciarius is usually mounted, i.e., penetrated on it.

Instead the people watch, the rulers sneering, the soldiers offering vinegar --- strong vinegar, not just posca, if they were having sport with him as Luke says --- and even one of the two criminals were asking him to save himself (σωσάτω ἑαυτόν) and them too.

John mentions nothing.

F.10. The Hyssop.

Now the use of the hyssop in John’s gospel (Jn 19:29) is very strange. Either the purpose of the inclusion of the hyssop was theological, or there was a Roman practice of irrumating thirsty crucified criminals with sponges laden with vinegar (Gk. οξους, Latin acetum), filthy toilet sponges or otherwise. This of course, is not an act of kindness, but to further torment the person, as he is already dehydrated, to give him a harsh, bitter-tasting fluid that acts as a diuretic.

And how did they "put it upon hyssop?" The Greek verb is, περιθέντες "they put around. In Latin, circumponentes "they set, put, placed around"; and circumdederunt "they put, set, placed around, wrapped around, surrounded, enclosed." And in the early spring hyssop, now known as oregano, marjoram and zatar, may not have been a woody perrenial from a previous year but rather an herbaceous shoot, scarcely 18" high and wholly unable to support a sponge.

There's an interesting fact about hysopped vinegar. Back then, it was used to treat wounds and irritation to the anus. This has been noted by Bill Thayer of the University of Chicago in his comment on Pliny the Elder's NaturalHistory, Book 23. (Note: for anus, Pliny used a euphemism: "seat.") 

"This text of Pliny, however, provides evidence of something very different: hyssoped vinegar was apparently considered a very strong topical anaesthetic specific for rectal pain.

"In more intelligible detail, here is the connection with the Crucifixion:…

"…The crucified man hangs from his wrists, and his chest is distended inwards and down. If a foot-rest is provided, this prolongs the torture, since the victim will be able to push himself up and get some air; but this induces cramps and eventually tetany of the arm and leg muscles, which become so painful that he eventually slumps down again — and the cycle continues to exhaustion and final asphyxiation in the down position."

"To this torture, the Romans commonly added a refinement: a sharp spike (called a sedile, a ‘seat’) was fixed on the upright beam in such a place that when the exhausted victim slips back down, it pierces the anus….

…"Now read Pliny's text again. What the soldier was doing was not giving Jesus a drink of posca using hyssop as a support for the sponge. He was administering a pain-killer to a different place altogether, and the sponge, in accordance with our passage of Pliny, was being used as a swab. The writer of the gospel was standing too far away to see exactly what the soldier was doing and interpreted it wrongly; or some redactor has been prudish."

Then again the passage could have originally stated that the executioners tied a vessel full of vinegar to a reed and put it to his mouth, as stated by Porphyry in Against the Christians (Fragment 15, Macarius, Apocriticus II:12), or the word ὑσσώπῳ, “hyssop” was originally ὑσσῷ, “javelin.” The word is missing from the passage in one of the earliest fragmentary manuscripts Papyrus P66 due to the disintegration of the papyrus.

F.11. Breaking the legs.

Another exclusive to John. So that they might take the persons down from the cross (pole, pale) per Jewish demands, what the soldiers were doing was to break the legs of each of the condemned (Jn 19:32) as a coup de grâce -- a death blow intended to end the suffering of a wounded creature. In the Gospel of Peter, this is made plain: the two thieves don't insult the one crucified with them, but one of them backtalks at one of the executioners. And the execution party decides that this one's legs shall not be broken, so that he shall die in torment. Of course, the executioners probably did not do the breaking of legs out of compassion, but more likely out of boredom or because of local authorities' demands -- in this case, get the bodies buried before sunset!

And the means of death probably wasn’t asphyxiation (the Romans set fires for that -- see image at top) but rather it might have been what we would call Harness Hanging Syndrome, since they can no longer push up with their legs. Or maybe being penetrated with an acuta-crux has something to do with this – depending on its size and shape, of course.

The phrase, "which was crucified with him" in Greek is: τοῦ συσταυρωθέντος αὐτῷ "of the one fenced with pales, pile-driven, impaled and/or crucified with him", the Latin Vulgate, qui crucifixus est cum eo "who was crucified with him" and the Old Latin qui confixus erat illi in crucem "who had been fastened or nailed together (rare), joined (by pressing), pierced through, transfixed with him onto the cross, pole, pale."

F.12. Stabbing the Side.

From Reliquarium Lateran, ca 600 CE.

Apparently, John also had a need to indicate that Jesus was not crucified by being simply directly impaled. This is because that perhaps, σταυρόω still connoted a sense of ‘pile-driving’ or impalement, even of the kind from which there was no surviving. And so, to portray that Jesus did not suffer an exit wound from an impale stake, John comes up with the stabbing scene in Jn 19:34: “But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side (λόγχῃ αὐτοῦ τὴν πλευρὰν ἔνυξεν), and forthwith came there out blood and water.” The verb here used is ἔνυξεν, “Pricked, stabbed, pierced,” but we are later to understand that the wound in the side (πλευρὰν), “side, ribs,” caused by the stabbing with the lance (λόγχῃ) was supposed to be this really huge, really deep gash.

In a hostile occupied country, a real crucifixion of a condemned man who is popular with the locals would require the soldiers to threaten the use of a spear. A pilum would be useless, because any one could bend the point back and it would be disabled. Something rigid like a Celtic lance would be far more useful. But the narrow gaps between the ribs could conceivably prevent a puncture would anything deeper than pricking or stabbing, due to the manner the spearhead tapers out. Tradition seems to back up the idea that Jesus was merely pricked or stabbed like in The Passion of the Christ.

And the stated reason for this stabbing is cited in John 19:37: "as another scripture says: 'They will look upon the one they have pierced (ἐξεκέντησαν: ‘pierced through, transfixed’, 'pierced, stabbed', or 'pricked, stabbed').” Well it seems John didn’t remember that in his story when Jesus was up on the cross, the soldier had pierced him in the sense of pricking or stabbing and later on in John 20:25-27, portrays the wound in Jesus’ side to be large enough for “doubting” Thomas to thrust his whole hand into: “ ‘Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.’… …‘Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.’ “

F.13. "It is I, myself!"

This scene described in Luke 24:36-44 is after the Resurrection, after Jesus appeared on a highway to and had supper broke bread with two others. He appears to the whole assembled eleven in a room asks them to touch his hands and feet (Lk 24:39,40) and asks for and consumes a broiled fish (Lk 24:41-43).

First, there is no evidence of nails. Second, there is no evidence of a big wound in his side. In fact, the very statement that says he ate some broiled fish mitigates against serious internal damage that would invariably be caused a simple direct impalement. Which means, of course, that Luke was trying to get the message across that Jesus was not killed by that method! Something which, apparently to me, and perhaps to him, too, Mark and Matthew utterly negligently failed to do.

And it looks to me that Luke was aware of John’s gospel when he wrote his, or vice-versa, for one with a big lance wound in his side at least when it’s in the flank hitting the digestive system is not going to be able to eat.

F.14. Conclusions:

And so, from harmonizing the four gospels (and coming up with a fifth in the process):

1. One condemned to be crucified carried his own pole (σταυρὸς) on his own back; therefore it was a large yet portable part of the instrument of his execution. (F.1)
2. One was to be lifted up on or onto his pole when and in order to be crucified. (F.2, F.4, F.6.1)
3. One who is crucified is first stripped naked, completely. (F.6.1)
4. Mark indicates Roman soldiers gave those about to be crucified a tincture of wine and myrrh. This is a sexual aphrodisiac, which means the executioners understood the sexual connotation of Roman crucifixion! Mathew edits this to indicate the wine had a disgusting substance mixed in. (F.5)
5. The verb used by the evangelists for “crucify”, σταυρόω, connotes crucifixion by impalement, or ‘pile-driving’. [F4, F.6.2]
6. The crucified one was suspended and hanging once the procedure of his crucifixion was complete. [F.6.2, F.6.3]  
7. The instrument of one’s crucifixion was referred to as a ξυλον “tree, gallows, stake.” [F.6.2, F.6.3]
8. The one crucified was also firmly supported on, with, and by the instrument of his execution. [F.6.3]
9. The manner of placement and location of the sign bearing Jesus’ name and charge of his conviction restricts the larger pole or frame from which the crucified one was hanged to a wooden structural tee of at least two parts, a utility pole, or an overhead beam supported on two poles. [F.7]
10. Both robbers and Jesus, too, sat (also sank or settled) upon on the instruments of their crucifixion. [F.8]
11. The instrument of Jesus’ execution was something he had to dismount from in order to save himself and was not able to by the very nature of its design. [F.9]
12. A sponge charged with hysopped vinegar is a very curious substance to have at the ready at a crucifixion site, unless the intent was to use it as a strong analgesic for injuries caused to the anus by repeated penetration with a spike every time one hanged in the down position. [F.10]
13. The breaking of the legs caused a quick death for those who were crucified. [F.11]
14. John alleges Jesus was stabbed in the side with a spear or lance. This seems to deflect suspicion that Jesus may have been crucified by being transpierced on an impaling stake which the Romans also called a crux and the Greeks a σταυρὸς as well as a σκόλοψ. [F.12]
15. Luke alleges that Jesus was able to eat regular food the day after his resurrection, meaning he was not transpierced with an impaling stake, nor did any spike he would have been penetrated by when he slumped during his crucifixion cause any internal damage. This also apparently cancels out Jesus being stabbed in the side with a lance. [F.13]

From Last Temptation of Christ.

So the summation of the above fifteen points is this: the condemned carried his own pole to his crucifixion, where he was stripped naked and possibly given an aphrodisiac tincture of wine and myrrh. Then he is nailed with nails, plural, through his hands or wrists to, and lifted up and caused to be suspended by, one part of the gear of his execution, while at the same time he is sitting on, then penetrated by and mounted on, and finally firmly supported by another part of the same gear. Spectators would mock him, daring him to dismount (impossible!). Sometimes, the crucified was treated with hyssoped vinegar -- which, according to Pliny the Elder, was used to treat wounds of the anus. Breaking of legs caused a quick death by a cause unknown to us, possibly the cause was hanging harness syndrome. The eating of food and showing a stab wound from a lance are assertions by Luke and John that in one he wasn't wounded in the midsection and in the other the puncture wound in the midsection was not opened by a pressure point from the inside out.

So then, from the above fifteen points, it is clear that the instrument of Jesus’ execution and that of the two thieves was a cruciform frame, either a wooden structural tee or a utility pole, equipped with an acuta-crux: a spike that pierced the anus of the crucified when he slumped into the down position. The addition of details by the later evangelists Luke and John appear to have been included with the intent to quash rumours that Jesus was transpierced by his crux, not just the nails. 

Even so, there is an outside chance that the gear of Jesus' execution could have consisted of both a suspension beam between two posts by which one is suspended, and an impaling stake upon which one was forced to sit, sink, and settle, and interpreted as such by Non-Christians.

F.15. Weeding out the Confusion of the Four Gospels and Acts.

Another way of harmonizing is to take the different types of crucifixion gear that are possible under each  of the Evangelists' works and find out what remains.

F.15.1. Mark.

1. An impaling stake. (A)

2. An ordinary pole with with an acuta-crux, or spike that the condemned had to sit on. (B)

3. A cruciform structure of the flattop T-type, with the acuta-crux. (C)

4. A cruciform mast-type structure with the vertical pole taller than the height of transverse above the ground, with the acuta-crux. (D)

5. A set of three poles, the central one shorter and pointed, where the crucified would be suspended by the transverse from the two outer poles and impaled on the central one. (G)

F.15.2. Matthew.

1. An impaling stake. (A)

2. An ordinary pole with with an acuta-crux, or spike that the condemned had to sit on. (B)

3. A cruciform structure of the flattop T-type, with the acuta-crux. (C)

4. A cruciform mast-type structure with the vertical pole taller than the height of transverse above the ground, with the acuta-crux. (D)

5. A set of three poles, the central one shorter and pointed, where the crucified would be suspended by the transverse from the two outer poles and impaled on the central one. (G)

F.15.3. Luke.

1. An ordinary pole with an acuta-crux, or spike that the condemned had to sit on. (B)

2. A cruciform structure of the flattop T-type, with the acuta-crux. (C)

3. A cruciform mast-type structure with the vertical pole taller than the height of transverse above the ground, with the acuta-crux. (D)

4. A set of three poles, the central one shorter and pointed, where the crucified would be suspended by the transverse from the two outer poles and impaled on the central one. (G)

F.15.4. From Acts.


1. An impaling stake. (A)

2. An ordinary pole with an acuta-crux (σκόλοψ), or spike that the condemned had to sit on. (B)

3. A cruciform structure of the flattop T-type, with the acuta-crux. (C)

4. A cruciform mast-type structure with the vertical pole taller than the height of transverse above the ground, with the acuta-crux. (D)

5. A cruciform structure of the flattop T-type, plain. (E) (Acts 2:36, 4:10 said he was σταυρόω'ed).

6. A cruciform mast-type structure, plain. (F)

7. A set of three poles, the central one shorter and pointed, where the crucified would be suspended by the transverse from the two outer poles and impaled on the central one. (G)

8. A set of two poles, where the crucified would be suspended by the transverse from the poles. (H)

F.15.5: From John.

1. A cruciform structure of the flattop T-type, with the acuta-crux. (C)

2. A cruciform mast-type structure with the vertical pole taller than the height of transverse above the ground, with the acuta-crux. (D)

3. A cruciform structure of the flattop T-type, plain. (E) (gJohn 19:18 said he was σταυρόω'ed).

4. A cruciform mast-type structure, plain. (F)

5. A set of three poles, the central one shorter and pointed, where the crucified would be suspended by the transverse from the two outer poles and impaled on the central one. (G)

F.15.6. By Process of Elimination:

Types and which gospels and early church "history" each type qualifies for:

(A): Impale: Mark, Matt, Acts.
(B): Pole with acuta-crux: Mark, Matt, Luke, Acts.
(C): T with acuta-crux: Mark, Matt, Luke, Acts, John.
(D): Mast  with acuta-crux: Mark, Matt, Luke, Acts, John.
(E): T without acuta-crux: Acts, John.
(F): Mast without acuta-crux: Acts, John.
(G): Suspension beam on two poles with a central impale: Mark, Matt, Luke, Acts, John.
(H): Suspension beam on two poles only: Acts.

The types that qualify for all five works are: (C): T with acuta-crux, (D): Mast with acuta-crux, and (G) Suspension beam on two poles with a central impale.

F.15.7. Final Conclusions:

Through harmonization, either by harmonizing the gospels themselves and Acts, or by eliminating the types that conform to the requirements of one work and not another, we arrive to three possible types of suspension gear. The results are the same by both methods. And they make clear: Jesus was not crucified on a simple two-beam cross by the traditional understanding of "crucifixion:" nail to a tropaeum.

And this means the traditional understanding of "crucifixion" then, therefore, goes back not to an actual executionary suspension of a Jewish preacher of the good news of the World to Come (which to the Romans meant Death To Rome), but rather to the funerary exposition of the wax image of Julius Caesar on a tropaeum, which was confused with and later changed to a 'crux' by the Church Fathers and early Byzantine Christianity, respectively.

Christians have a lot to answer for.

Pace deorum.
    

Notes:

1. The noun σταυρὸς: masculine gender, nominative [subject] singular (pale, pole, execution cross or 'tree', i.e., Priapus stake; religious or votive cross). Accusative [direct object] singular is σταυρὸν. Accusative plural is σταυρούς. Genitive [possesive, generative or point of origin object] singular is σταυροῦ.

2. The noun patibulum, neutral gender, subject, direct object (door bar, beam or pole which was worn by slaves on the way to their punishment or execution or as part of their punishment, transverse lifting beam for execution by crucifixion or direct impalement).

Resources:

Perseus Digital Library, Perseus Tufts.edu. Link

Greek and Roman Authors on Lacus Curtius, Penelope U-Chigago.edu. Link 

The Latin Library Link

Perseus Greek and Latin Word Study Tools. Link

Whittaker's Words, Univ. of Notre Dame, ND.edu. Link

Word Study Tool, Numen, The Latin Lexicon. Link 

Online Parallel Bible Suite, Biblos (Bible.cc). Link 

Gospel of John in Old Latin, Vetus Latina Iohannes. Link