What Types Of Crosses Were Used In Roman Crucifixions?
Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI
Biblical Authority Ministries, September 28, 2026 (Donate)
People argue about everything—it gets annoying sometimes.
But even crosses become a debate when talking to some people. Some insist that
the cross of Christ broke some of His bones, some insist it was stake without a
crossbeam, some want Christ on the cross in their imagery, and others don’t.
Then there are those who argue the Petrine cross (upside
down cross) is a Satanic cross. Sometimes, it seems like there is an endless
supply of debates in the world! Nevertheless, let’s set our crosshairs on
the cross discussion (pun intended).
The Romans, about 2,00 years ago, didn’t use just one
standardized form of cross. Several served their purpose. So, when we read
about Greek words used in the New Testament such as crux or even stauros
broadly, and Roman executioners could adapt the instrument to circumstances—even
using nearby trees that might be handy. Several forms became traditionally
associated with Roman crucifixion—likely for ease of use and reusability.
Types of Crosses Used by the Romans
- Crux
Simplex - I-Shaped Stake
The simplest form was a single upright post or stake, shaped
like an I. IN this instance there is no cross beam, so some suggest this isn’t
a proper cross and they have a point.
Even so, a condemned person could be bound or nailed to it
with their hands above their head. The Latin term crux simplex is actually
a later description as opposed to a Roman technical name. The problem
with a stake like this is that it isn’t reusable for long. Once you start
nailing into the top, you ruin the entire pole or spend time cutting it shorter
and shorter.
Hence, why the T or t shape is much more adept. You only
have to replace a crossbeam from time to time when it gets worn out. So, for
efficiency, time, and durability, stakes weren’t the best, but would do if that
was all that was available (e.g., a crossbeam was unavailable for instance).
- Crux
Commissa - T-Shaped Cross
This cross resembled a capital T and is often called the Tau
cross, after the Greek letter tau. The horizontal crossbeam was
positioned at (or near) the very top of the upright post. This configuration is
one common possibility for Roman crucifixion.
If the upright isn’t very high, the soldiers could literally lift the person who was attached to the cross beam to the top and fasten it in. Then they attach the foot nail. So, the upright pole could stay intact the whole time if necessary.
But the restriction here is that it doesn’t lift the person
up very high for everyone to see to humiliate them further in their death. A
lower cross also allows potential rescuers an easier target to save.
A T shaped cross could still be tall, and the crucifiers
just get the pole out to affix the crossbeam and the soldiers could stand the
entire cross with attached person back into place.
Nevertheless, this surely wasn’t the type of cross
for Christ because the Bible revealed that there a plaque placed above Christ’s
head saying He was the King of the Jews (in various ways and in 3 languages per
Matthew 27:37; Mark 15:26; Luke 23:38; and John 19:19).
- Crux
Immissa - Traditional T-Shaped Cross with an Upper Extension
This is the familiar Christian cross found in Christin
imagery and symbolism throughout the world. The upright extended above the
horizontal crossbeam. Early Christian tradition strongly associated this form
with the crucifixion of Jesus. It also accommodates the Gospel description of
the inscription being placed "over His head" (again, see Matthew
27:37; Mark 15:26; Luke 23:38; and John 19:19).
The condemned person may have carried the horizontal beam,
or patibulum, to the execution site rather than carrying the entire
assembled cross. The beam could then be attached to an upright post already waiting
at the site that could be removed and put back into place once the person and crossbeam
are attached. This method like the crux commissa have easily reusable
stakes. This was the standard cross that Christians tend to use when depiction
the crucifixion of Christ.
- Crux
Decussata - X-Shaped Cross
This cross was shaped like an X. Its name comes from the
Roman numeral ten, which was represented by X. Christian tradition associated
the X-shaped cross with the Apostle Andrew who was put to death on the X-style
crucifixion method, giving rise to the name "St. Andrew's Cross." St.
Andrews Cross, also called the Saltire, is what is represented on the
Scottish Flag and in part, the Union Jack.
Evidence that X-shaped structures could be used for
punishment exists, but we should be cautious about assuming that this was a
common standardized Roman crucifixion form. This was likely a rarer form.
- Inverted
Cross - Petrine Cross
An upside-down traditional cross (Crux Immissa) became
known as the Cross of Peter or Petrine Cross. According to early
Christian tradition, Peter was crucified upside down because he considered
himself unworthy to die in precisely the same manner as Christ.
The New Testament doesn’t explicitly state that Peter was
crucified upside down. John 21:18-19 does, however, record Jesus predicting the
manner of Peter's death. The tradition of Peter's inverted crucifixion appears
in later Christian sources, particularly Origen as quoted by Eusebius.[1]
Thus, the Petrine cross is primarily associated with a
particular manner of crucifixion for a specific instance rather than being a
separate standard Roman cross design. But having the pole extend above Peter
(as the Crux Immissa does) allows the entire cross to be inverted and
placed easily into the foundational connection in the ground.
It was Emperor Nero that sentenced both Peter and Paul to
death (Paul by beheading) as afforded by the church fathers.[2]
This was in AD 68 before Nero killed himself. His hatred for Christians and
persecution of them is well documented, and yet, there were even Christians in
his own household (Philippians 4:22).
- Trees
and Improvised Structures
Romans didn’t necessarily require a carefully manufactured
cross. Trees, posts, beams, and other available structures could be
incorporated into executions. The Latin word crux covered a range of
instruments used for execution and torture.
Which Cross Was Used For Jesus?
Scripture doesn’t provide a technical diagram of Jesus'
cross (which was going to be used on Barabbas). The traditional crux immissa
(t-shaped) is perfectly reasonable. Matthew 27:37 specifically says:
And they put up over His head the
accusation written against Him: THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS. (NKJV)
The reference to the inscription being "over His
head" fits naturally with an upright extending above the crossbeam,
although it doesn’t by itself conclusively establish the exact shape but makes the
most sense of the options.
Arms Stretched Out
Although the Bible never explicitly says, "Jesus' arms
were stretched out horizontally on the cross," several passages are
consistent with His hands or arms being extended. Most significantly, Psalm
22:16 prophetically says, "They pierced My hands and My feet" (NKJV),
while Zechariah 12:10 speaks of looking upon "Me whom they pierced."
Jesus Himself foretold Peter's crucifixion with the words,
"you will stretch out your hands" (John 21:18-19, NKJV), showing that
"stretching out" the hands described crucifixion—in Peter’s case, it
was upside down of course.
In the resurrection accounts, Jesus also drew attention to
the wounds in His hands (Luke 24:39-40; John 20:25-27). Isaiah 53:12 says that
the suffering Servant poured out His soul unto death. Scripture clearly teaches
that Christ's hands were pierced and connecting stretched-out hands with
crucifixion, so the crux immissa is consistent with this.
Early Christians Unanimously Used A Cross
The earliest surviving Christian references explicitly
connect Christ's cross with a t-shape. For instance, the ancient the Epistle
of Barnabas [which isn’t a Scriptural book but written soon after the Apostolic
age], generally dated to the late 1st or early 2nd century,
and certainly before about AD 135 mentions it as a T shape.
In brief, Barnabas 9:7-9, the author of Barnabas interprets
the T (tau) as representing the shape of the cross. Thus, very early in the
post-apostolic period, a Christian writer was already associating the
instrument of Christ's crucifixion with the shape of a capital T.
By about AD 150-160, the evidence becomes even clearer.
Justin Martyr[3],
discusses the shape of the cross and compares it with objects having both an
upright and a transverse element. His examples include a ship with its sail, a
plow, certain tools, and Roman military standards.
Most significantly, Justin compares the cross with the human
body when a person stands upright with his arms extended. This shows that
second-century Christians understood Christ's cross as having a horizontal
crossbeam rather than merely being a single vertical stake.
Justin's testimony is interesting because he was born around
AD 100, placing him relatively close to the apostolic period—potentially learning
from those who saw the crucifixion directly. His writings show that the
crossbeam of Christ's cross was already well established among Christians by
the middle of the 2nd century.
By the later 2nd and early 3rd centuries,
the cross (crux immissa) was increasingly recognizable as a Christian
symbol. Tertullian, writing around AD 200, described Christians as repeatedly
tracing the sign of the cross upon their foreheads during ordinary activities.
Did Christ Carry The Crossbeam Or The Full Cross?
The Bible says that Jesus "went out, bearing His
cross" (John 19:17), while the Synoptic Gospels record that Simon of
Cyrene was compelled to carry it after Jesus (Matthew 27:32; Mark 15:21; Luke
23:26). However, Scripture doesn’t specify whether Jesus carried the entire
assembled cross—which aren’t little flimsy things—or only the horizontal
crossbeam (called a “patibulum”).
Historically, there is good reason to think the crossbeam,
or patibulum, is what was carried.[4]
·
Roman sources indicate that a condemned person
could be required to carry the patibulum to the place of execution,
where it would be attached to an upright post. Plautus, writing centuries
before Christ, refers to a condemned man carrying the patibulum through
the city.
·
Seneca likewise describes condemned men
stretching out their arms upon the patibulum. This fits the Roman
practice of publicly forcing a condemned person to carry part of the instrument
of his execution.
These historical accounts are consistent with what we read
in the Bible. The Greek word stauros, translated as cross, could refer
to the execution instrument as a whole or only one component of it—i.e., the
“cross”-beam. Thus, when John says Jesus was "bearing His cross"
(John 19:17), it doesn’t necessarily mean that He carried the entire massive,
assembled structure.
Luke 23:26 is also important in that they laid hold of a
certain man, Simon a Cyrenian. On him, they laid the cross that he might bear
it for Jesus. Again, Luke calls the object the "cross" without
describing its construction.
Another point needs to be made—Jesus and Simon, were able to
carry it. This is reasonable even with a heavy and durable crossbeam/patibulum,
but an entire cross shouldn’t be a carriable. It would be drug across the
ground (not carried) due to the immense weight and the awkward imbalance of it.
As seen, Roman history makes carrying the horizontal
crossbeam, or patibulum reasonable to a person being executed as in Jesus' (or Simon's case when he helped carry it). Jesus carried this beam
toward Golgotha until Simon was compelled to carry it. Jesus has been up all
night, sweating blood, beaten by the Romans and flogged immensely (the Romans could
care less about limitation of the 40 minus 1 lashes in Jewish tradition). Jesus being in
such a horrible physical state should be obvious.
At the execution site, the crossbeam was then attached to an
upright post of the traditional cross-shaped structure upon which Jesus was nailed
and crucified.
Conclusion
Roman crucifixions could involve the simple stake, T-shaped (Tau)
cross, traditional cross with an upper extension (crux immissa),
X-shaped cross, and variations or improvised structures. The soldiers just wanted to get the job done effectively.
The inverted Petrine cross describes the manner
of Peter's execution. The Romans' objective was punishment, public humiliation, pain, and
deterrence, not conformity to one universal cross design.
Even so, we can ascertain that the likely cross of Christ
has been accurately transmitted down through the ages and based on careful Scriptural
description, it was surely the crux immissa or t-shaped cross.
□
Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham's son in law, has been an apologist
defending 6-day creation and opposing evolution since 1998. He spent 21 years
working at Answers in Genesis as a speaker, writer, and
researcher as well as a founding news anchor for Answers News. He
was also head of the Oversight Council.
Bodie launched Biblical Authority Ministries in
2015 as a personal website and it was organized officially in 2025 as a
501(c)(3). He has spoken on multiple continents and hosts of US states in
churches, colleges, and universities. He is married with four children.
Mr. Hodge earned a Bachelor and Master of Science degrees
from Southern Illinois University at Carbondale (SIUC). Then he taught
at SIUC for a couple of years as a Visiting Instructor teaching all levels of
undergraduate engineering and running a materials lab and a CAD lab. He did
research on advanced ceramic materials to develop a new method of production of
titanium diboride with a grant from Lockheed Martin. He worked as a Test
Engineer for Caterpillar, Inc., prior to entering full-time ministry.
His love of science was coupled with a love of history,
philosophy, and theology. For about one year of his life, Bodie was editing and
updating a theological, historical, and scientific dictionary/encyclopedia. Mr.
Hodge has over 25 years of experience in writing, speaking and researching in
these fields.
*Image by generative program as requested by Bodie Hodge
[1] Origen
of Alexandria (c. 185–253 AD), as quoted by Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History,
Book 3, Chapter 1.
[2] Tertullian
(c. 200 AD), The Prescription Against Heretics and Scorpiace; Eusebius
of Caesarea (4th century), Ecclesiastical History (II.25).
[3] Justin
Martyr, First Apology, 55
[4] Plautus,
Carbonaria, fragment 2, preserved by Nonius Marcellus (c. 254-184
BC); Seneca, De Consolatione ad Marciam 20.3, 1st Century AD;
see also Seneca De Vita Beata 19.3 and Fragment 124; Ruben van
Wingerden, "Carrying a patibulum: A Reassessment of Non-Christian Latin
Sources," New Testament Studies 66 (2020), pp. 433-453.
