First: since it is said in the Hebrew (v. 29) “hung on a tree [wood],” the 70 explained of what kind this wood was: namely δίδυμον [didymon], that is, “double” [twin]. For there is one cross [that is] simple, another composite: and this [composite is] either decussate [X-shaped], or immissa, or commissa [T-shaped] — as Lipsius (bk. On the Cross) and our [own] Gretser (bk. 1, chs. 1 and 2, On the Cross) expound at length. This King, therefore, [was hung] on a commissa
(col. 937)
cross, which — usual in those times — had a shape very similar to the old Hebrew thau [ת] and the Latin T. Whence by the Rabbis it is called also hashethi haereb [the “warp and woof”]. Procopius of Gaza, however, [says]: “perhaps the wood was μονόξυλον [monoxylon, a single piece].” Secondly: There is, even in captured Kings, something venerable and august, I-know-not-what; and the punishment of the cross was quite infamous. Whence [it is called] both “the tree, and the unlucky wood” (in Livy 1, and Seneca Epistle 101); “the infamous stake” (in the Catalecta of Virgil); “a most shameful death” (Wisdom 2); “Cursed [is] the hanged one” (Deut. 21:23, Gal. 3:13). Nay, none but the vile and abject persons of slaves were hung — whence, in Tacitus (bk. 4 Histories), “a servile punishment”; [in] Lactantius (bk. 4, ch. 26), “[a punishment] unworthy of a free man, however guilty”; [and] in Arnobius (bk. 1 Against the Nations), it is called “a punishment infamous [even] for vile persons.” Yet the King of Ai was affected with it: first, because he had so badly received the Israelites, and, more insolent and swollen from that little-victory, almost insulted Joshua himself and God. Secondly: Because, when God wished to destroy the Canaanite nations for [their] sins, he wills greater punishments to be inflicted on their heads [chiefs], because from them especially the examples of crimes are wont to remain in the people.