Sorry, but it's wrong ! Otherwise, prove me what you are saying. Latin text does not explicitly link the punishment of "patibulum" or "furca" (which moreover does not necessarily lead to death) and the crucifixion.
Couldn't care less about the inconclusive Latin text or the greek text for that matter.
Read my post again:
But, there are somethings that we do "know", we know that, typically, the condemed carried the patibulm, we know that, typically, the vertical stake that the patibulum was nailed to was already at the site. We do know that the sheer weight of a FULL cross would have been far to heavy for any man to carry at all, much less Christ in his condition ( the patibulm alone probably weighted close to 100lbs, depending on the thickness of wood used).
We know that by typical accounts of curcifixtions ( there is no reason to beleive Christ's was any different), we also know that the sheer weight and size of a complete cross would have been vitrually impossible for a health Male to carry, much less one that was almost dead from being flogged.
I posted the calcs of how much a full cross woudl have weighted for it to be planted and hold the size of a average male ( 65" in those days).
a 6 x 6 runs you about 8lbs per foot, so just the vertical stake, which needed to go in about 3 ft to be secure, would be about 10 ft = 80lbs
Add to that the cross beam and you have another 5 ft, so - 40lbs for an average of 120lbs of solid wood.
That is really heavy.
And conservative.
Since the re-used the cross beam, it probably was 6ft, but even keeping the 5, carrying around 40lbs of lumber is pretty hard for the average person and makes more sense.
The Romans being as efficient as they were, typically, had the condemend carry the cross beam and had the vertical stake waiting for him.