Finally, c) a cross like the Latin letter X, or, as it is otherwise called, the cross of St. Andrew.

But most of all the others, the cross with a diameter lower than the upper end of the pillar, a cross like the letter t, with a prominent end, i.e. four-pointed, was widely used. Now the question arises, on which of the crosses we have indicated was the Lord Jesus Christ crucified? Undoubtedly, first of all, that it was not on the cross of St. Andrew, otherwise he would not have been called by the name of this apostle.

Consequently, the Saviour was crucified on one of the other two crosses, and between them, in the presence of numerous evidences, both material and immaterial, it is easy to point with all certainty to one, a four-pointed one.38 There were no more complex crosses in Rome than those we have mentioned, and there should not be, since for the purpose for which crosses existed at that time, namely, for the crucifixion of criminals on them, a four-pointed cross was needed. as the most convenient for this, since the person for whom it was invented is a four-pointed figure at crucifixion. There were no crosses with two, and even more so with three crosses, and there is not the slightest need, no reason to assume their existence at that time. But, the so-called Old Believers will object, the titla and the foot make up the second and third diameters in the Cross of Christ.

In order to show them that the titla does not refer to the essence of the cross at all, and that the pedestal, and especially the oblique one, appeared already in later centuries and is applied to the cross without a firm historical foundation, solely according to an ingrained custom, we will examine in detail:

1) what is a titla, according to the meaning of the Romans; what substance it was made of; how it was written, whether it was always necessary for the cross and related to its essence, and

2) Were there pedestals on Roman crosses, were they needed for any solid purpose, and, in particular, was there a pedestal on the Cross of Christ and was it necessary?

The word "titla" (Greek ??????) is neither Russian nor Greek, but Roman, from titulus, and has many meanings. We will go through all these meanings here. The word titulus was used by the Romans not only when it was a question of execution, whether crucifixion or some other kind of execution, i.e. not only in the sense of a certain appendage to the cross, but also in many other cases, when there was no talk of it at all, as it is done now not only among the Romans, but also among other peoples. into whose languages this word has passed. Therefore, we will consider the meaning of the word titulus from two sides: what does the word titulus mean – titulus 1) in those cases where there is no talk of execution at all, and 2) in the case when we are talking about execution proper, so that, in this way, the imaginary Old Believers know what the titla of the cross is.

1) In the first case, titlas or titles – tituli – were called: a) Warriors (milites) as defenders – tutuli, since they defend the fatherland – tueantur (they say, among other things, that this is where the nickname of Titus comes from).

?) Titla means the same as a monument, because it protects, as it were, a tueatur and preserves the memory of something; therefore, the tombs are called tituli. Josephus, mentioned in 1 Sam. 23:17 the monument calls it a tomb. "What is this titulus that I see?" asked King Josiah. "This is the tomb of the man of God," answered the citizens of that city. Thus, statues, columns, pyramids erected in memory of something are also called tituli.

Further, – ?), according to the remark of Baronius, under the year 112 after the birth of Christ, the titles or titles were called plats, signifying royal power, with the image of the emperors or with the inscription of their names (corresponding to the current flags or coats of arms). St. Ambrose, writing to Marcellina, calls such cloths (cortinas) royal, and the royal fiscal usually assimilated and dedicated a certain thing to the king by superimposing these coats of arms.

These titles or coats of arms were the property not only of the rulers, but also of private people, even the property of every rank and condition; In this case, the titla was 5) a simple sign that assimilated something to someone and thus served as a seal of property. This is evident from the explanation of Bl. Augustine on the Twenty-First Psalm.

From civil society this word passed to the church: a certain place or a certain house with a cross erected on it, as if with the imposition of some coat of arms, was assigned to sacred use; thus, the Greek emperor Theodosius, in his last book on the pagans,39 prescribed that pagan temples, after placing on them the sign of the venerable cross, should be appropriated to Christians. Hence it came about that this very place, or church, began to be called by the title – titulus – titla.40 In the course of time, only the main churches began to be called titles. Thus, titla ) meant the same as the church.

Finally?) the last meaning of the word "tita" is a name, the name of something; for example, Suetonius in the Life of Domitian says: "He restored (restituit) the numerous and most extensive creations destroyed by fire, but only under his own name (title), without any mention of the former creator".41 In the same sense, the word "titla" is used in the Chetya Minea of Makariev, in the life of St. St. Maximus the Confessor: "For Prepren was Pyrrhus (Patriarch of Constantinople). He came to the faithful and was received from the Church kindly and honestly, together with the title of the Patriarch" (January 25).

These are all the meanings of the word "titla" in those cases where there is no question of the cross.