CROCE

τὸ σῶμα τὸν κόλαφον ἔκαστος κακὸν ἑαυτῷ ἐκόπησε τὸν αὐτὸν σταυρόν (Plutarch, *De sera numinis vindicta*, 9; *Moralia*, 554a); similarly Artemidorus (2.56), Chariton (*De Charea et Callirhoe* 4.2.3), and the rabbinic text *Gen. Rabbah*, in H. L. Strack–P. Billerbeck, *Kommentar zum Neuen Testament*, I, Munich 1922, p. 587: Isaac carried the wood “as the condemned man carries his cross.” Latin texts prior to the New Testament versions do not contain this phrase but describe how the condemned carried the *patibulum*, sometimes adding that they were then affixed to the cross. Thus Plautus: “Ita te forabunt patibulatum per vias stimulis,” “tibi esse pereundum extra portam / discessis (= dispansis) manibus, patibulum quom habebis,” “Patibulum ferat per urbem deinde adfigatur cruci” (*Mostellaria* 1.1.56–57; *Miles gloriosus* 2.4.6–7, 358; *Carbonaria*, frg. 2). The phrase “deligata ad patibulos (!)” is explained: “Deligantur et circumferuntur, cruci defiguntur” (Clodius 3: *Roman. historicorum fragm.*, 2.78). Dionysius of Halicarnassus (7.78) describes the preparation for execution thus: the master delivers the guilty slave to his companions to be dragged through the forum; they stretch out the condemned man’s two hands and bind them, along with his shoulders and chest, to a wooden beam reaching to the roots of his hands, then lead him naked through the streets, continually striking and mocking him.

The upright of the cross was either permanently set up at the place of execution or planted in the ground beforehand. Cicero boasts that during his consulship he removed the cross from the Campus Martius and reproaches Labienus for ordering “crucem ad civium supplicium defigi et constitui” (*Pro C. Rabirio perduellionis reo* 3.10; 4.11). In Sicily, the Mamertines “more et instituto suo crucem defixerant” (*In Verrem* 2.5.66, 169). At the end of the Jewish War, the legate ordered a cross to be erected and immediately suspended a captured youth upon it (*Flavius Josephus, Bell. Jud.* 7.6.4). No text states that the entire cross was carried; this is ruled out first by the cross of Jesus, which stood at least 4 m. high and was therefore so heavy that not only a man already weakened by scourging would have been unable to carry it, but even a healthy and robust man. Moreover, such an apparatus would have required much labor and time without any advantage. The condemned man carried only the *patibulum* on his shoulders. It must therefore be concluded that in the phrase “to carry the cross” there is a synecdoche, for not the whole cross was carried but only its smaller part, the *furca* or *patibulum*, to the place of execution (cf. C. G. Cobet, *Annotationes in Charitonem*, in *Mnemosyne* 8 [1859], pp. 229–303, esp. 275–79). This carrying of the cross was accompanied by harsh mockery of the condemned (Philo, *In Flaccum* 9.72).

The affixing to the cross was not done in the manner almost always depicted in Christian art—either on the entire cross lying on the ground or first erected—but by an intermediate method: the condemned was affixed to the *patibulum* lying on the ground and then hoisted onto the upright. This follows from what has been said: if the condemned carried the *patibulum* to the place of execution, he could simply be lifted by the soldiers onto the cross and its crossbeam. But if a bloody crucifixion was carried out, the condemned, first thrown to the ground, was affixed with nails to the *patibulum*, so that “patibulo suffixus in crucem tollitur” (Firmicus Maternus, *Matheseos* 6.31.58 and elsewhere). If the cross was very high, ladders or ropes were used. Finally, the feet of the condemned had to be fixed (with ropes or nails, perhaps through the Achilles tendon). This is confirmed by many texts that speak of “alicui in crucem tollere, elevare” or, in the passive, “in crucem tolli” or “crucem ascendere” or “in crucem excurrere”: such expressions attest that the cross was the term of an action directed upward. This is incompatible with the conception of ecclesiastical art: if the condemned had been affixed to a cross lying on the ground, he would not have been “lifted to the cross” but merely raised by means of the cross itself.

The reconstruction once prevalent among scholars in the last century must also be excluded: the entire cross erected beforehand, upon which the condemned climbed by a ladder (as in the well-known painting by Fra Angelico). The sequence of actions foretold by Jesus to Peter, including the crucifixion he would undergo, was entirely different: “You will stretch out your hands, and another will gird you and lead you where you do not wish” (Jn 21:18). The stretching out of the hands was therefore not the final act of the condemned but the first in the execution; already in the forum, after the judge’s sentence, he was stripped and his hands were stretched out upon the *patibulum*; then he was “drawn” by a rope wound around his body to the place of execution, where with the same rope he was hoisted up.

Crucified persons often lingered for a long time on the cross: “they live in extreme agony sometimes the whole night and then the entire day” (Origen, *In Mt. comm. ser.* 140: *PG* 18, 1793; ed. E. Klostermann, XI, Leipzig 1935, p. 290). A slave crucified with nails at Damascus in 1247 died only on the third day (P. Schegg, *Pilgerreise*, I, Munich 1867, p. 140). The immediate cause of death, according to modern physicians, was the blood, which could no longer reach the brain through the limbs violently stretched; retained in the lungs, it impeded the motions of the heart and after great torment finally caused the unhappy man’s death (H. Mödder). The crucified were “guarded” (Mt 27:36) by soldiers as long as they lived and after death. The corpses hung exposed to be torn apart by beasts and birds. It is not certain that the cross was regarded as the most horrendous death (which in 1 Cor 13:3 is death by fire).

Occasionally an unusual method was used. In the Jewish War, “the soldiers for mockery affixed Jews taken prisoner in various positions to the cross” (*Flavius Josephus, Bell. Jud.* 5.11.1); sometimes executioners were pleased to hang them “head downward toward the earth” (Seneca, *Ad Marciam de consolatione* 20.3). Some were taken down still alive (*Flavius Josephus, Vita* 75). Others were hastened to death by fire or smoke or breaking of the legs or a lance thrust. Finally, the bodies of those killed were surrendered to relatives who requested them: “corpora ad sepulturam dabantur” (*Digesta* 48.24.1).

IV. THE CRUCIFIXION OF JESUS

The Savior freely chose the death of the cross, because it was most ignominious, “to bear witness to His love,” so that no one might shrink from it (Lactantius, *Instit.* 4.26; *CSEL* 19, p. 382, 2–6). Other reasons have been adduced by theologians: the embrace of outstretched hands, the reparation for sin committed through “the wood,” the free choice of the very moment of death.

Dimensions of the Cross: the stature of a man ca. 1.70 m.; the upper part had to project ca. 0.30 m.; the feet were above the ground by 1 m. or 1.5 m. (to fulfill Jn 19:29); the part fixed in the ground was at least 1 m. In all, therefore, the cross was 4 m. or 4.5 m. high. The form of Jesus’ cross was four-pointed, as is proved by the comparisons used by the Fathers (with a bird in flight, a ship, the letters T and Φ) and above all by the Old Testament types applied by the Fathers: Gen 47:14–19, where Jacob blesses Ephraim and Manasseh with outstretched arms; Ex 17:11, where Moses prays with uplifted hands for the fighting people; Is 65:2, “I have stretched out my hands.” In Eph 3:18, the Fathers find the four dimensions of the cross.

Coronation of Jesus. There existed a mime of the king of the Jews, which the Roman soldiers were accustomed to perform often in their camps. When Pilate delivered to them a man who had declared himself “king of the Jews” and whose guilt had already been confirmed by scourging, the soldiers cruelly repeated this mime by using a crown of thorns, slaps, and spittle. Their guilt appears diminished by such circumstances, but not removed.

Jesus bore the crown while clothed (Mt 27:31; Mk 15:20: “they clothed him with his garments and led him to the crucifixion”). After the crucifixion his garments were divided. The Romans in this adapted themselves to Jewish sensibilities regarding modesty. From this it may be inferred that Jesus also wore a light covering over the crown. Yet the Fathers, following Roman custom, held that Jesus was naked upon the cross.

From what has been said (v. above: III) it follows that the fixing of Jesus upon the cross was not done with his entire body lying upon the ground, as the Gospel of Peter states (10; ed. L. Vaganay, Paris 1930, p. 235), nor upon the upright crossbeam alone, but by means of the patibulum which Jesus had carried upon his shoulders over his garment, and with which he was raised. The fastening was not accomplished with ropes alone but also with nails in the feet—indeed not three but four. With these four nails Christian art always represented the Crucified until the thirteenth century, as attested by St Gregory of Tours (PL 71, 710); three nails are admitted by Nonnus of Panopolis (PG 43, 901) and the Thesaurorum Caverna (ed. C. Bezold, Leipzig 1888, p. 66).

Jesus did not remain suspended upon the cross for six hours, as Mk 15:25 with some manuscripts of Jn 19:14 (as well as the so-called “autograph”: PG 92, 77) might suggest, but only for three. He did not die from cardiac injury, but from the excessive number of traumatic wounds inflicted upon his body.

V. THE SIGN OF THE CROSS — It is the most eloquent, most frequent, most popular act of Catholic worship. With it priests bless persons and things, and the faithful mark themselves at the beginning of their actions, safeguarding themselves with this sign of salvation.

The martyrs made the sign of the cross before facing martyrdom. The ancient Christian did not neglect this act of faith at the beginning of the day, in entering and leaving the house, in dressing, at the bath, at table, when lighting the lamp (Lactantius, Inst. Div., IV, 27; Tertullian, De cor. mil., 3, 11: “frontem simulacro crucis terimus”; St Jerome, Ep. 18 ad Eustochium: “ad omnem actum manus pingat Domini Crucem”). The sign of the cross was also made upon everyday objects. In the fourth century St Cyril of Jerusalem (Catech., 22, 36) says that Christians not only mark their foreheads but every thing—the bread they eat, the cups from which they drink. By the sign of the cross all things in the Church are blessed, consecrated, and sanctified: “Crux tua omnium fons benedictionum, omnium est causa gratiarum: per quam credentibus datur virtus de infirmitate, gloria de opprobrio, vita de morte” (St Leo the Great, Sermo 8 De passione Dom.).

The ancients expressed the efficacy of the triumphant sign of redemption with this anagram:

Φ
ΖΩΗ
C

that is: the Cross is Light and Life (φῶς–ζωή). In the Middle Ages no public writing, inscription, or law was begun without first tracing the cross upon II. It served as the signature of the illiterate, often preceding that of ecclesiastics. In many rural areas even dough and bread before baking were marked. The sign of the cross is seen upon the gates of cities, as upon ancient cisterns and wells, upon the mouths of ovens and household utensils. Antiquity has likewise transmitted reliquaries and caskets shaped like crosses, upon which exorcistic formulae were sometimes inscribed, as in the cross of gold collected by Pius IX from a tomb in the cemetery of Cirta. The most famous of these crosses with exorcistic inscriptions is that known as the “medal of St Benedict,” still used today against demonic infestations. From the third century ecclesiastical documents attest the use of the sign of the cross in both Western and Eastern liturgy (Tertullian, De resurrectione, 8; De corona militis, 3, 11).

As to the form of the sign of the cross, the documents cited speak of a sign made upon persons or things, but make no mention of the large sign of the cross traced upon the body. According to Tertullian (De corona militis, 3) a small sign of the cross was made with a single finger and probably with the thumb in the form of a T or X; with the thumb alone objects distant from the person were blessed in the fourth and fifth centuries. An early reference to the sign of the cross made upon the breast is found in Prudentius (Cathemerinon, 6): it is a sign, traced with brief strokes, identical to that practiced on the forehead; Gaudentius of Brescia (De lect. evang.) then speaks of a triple sign upon the heart, the lips, and the forehead; and the practice that will come down to us unaltered for the proclamation of the Gospel in the Mass. The sick were signed upon their painful limbs (St Gregory the Great, Dialogues, 2, 20; Cassian, Collationes, 8, 18). It seems that from the struggle against the Monophysites and Monothelites arose the use of two or three fingers, while the Monophysites signed themselves with one finger to indicate the single nature in Christ; the Greeks from the seventh century, to manifest their faith in the two natures of Christ, make the sign of the cross.

With two fingers, that is, with the thumb and index finger, or with the index and middle finger; from the 8th century, Greek priests gave the blessing by joining the thumb with the ring finger, imitating the monogram of Christ: IXC. The Latins, instead, gave the blessing by extending the first three fingers and keeping the ring finger and little finger bent. While in the 8th century in the East a practice had spread that was not very different from the large sign currently in use, in the West one still finds in the 13th century Lucas of Tuy, who speaks of a sign of the Cross made on the face (faciem suam muniens) in this way: “he raises the three extended fingers to the height of the forehead saying *In nomine Patris*, then lowers them to the chin saying *et Filii*, then carries them to the left saying *et Spiritus Sancti*, and finally to the right saying *Amen*” (*De alt. vita*, 2, 15). An English document from the 12th century, however, refers to a sign that reaches as far as the chest, made with three fingers. In the 16th century, the question of whether the hand should be moved from left to right or vice versa had still not achieved uniformity. The present form in the Latin Church, of blessing persons and things with all the fingers extended, and of making the sign of the Cross in the same way, was much debated in the 13th century (*Sicardo, Mitrale*, 3, 4: PL 213, 109; Innocent III, *De altaris mysterio*, 2, 45; Durandus, *Rationale*, V, 2, 13).

In the Roman liturgy, the large sign of the Cross is often used in the Mass, in the administration of the Sacraments, in blessings, and in the Divine Office; the small sign, made with the thumb alone on the forehead, mouth, and chest, is used at the Gospel of the Mass; it is also made on the Gospel book, on the mouth at *Aperi Domine* and *Domine labia mea aperies*, on the forehead and head of the baptized, on the forehead of the confirmand, in Extreme Unction, etc. The Christian people ordinarily make the large sign of the Cross at the beginning or end of prayer, in danger, etc. In Portugal and Spain, as in the Dominican Order, the large sign of the Cross is almost always preceded by the triple sign with the thumb; numerous Spanish catechisms teach making the sign of the Cross with only the two fingers of the right hand, which are brought to the abdomen rather than the chest—customs that date back to the 14th century. The most ancient formula was “Signum Crucis”; later came a profession of faith in Christ (“*In nomine Iesu*”) or in the Most Holy Trinity (“*In nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti*”), and then also an invocation of divine aid (“*Adiutorium nostrum in nomine Domini*” or “*Deus in adiutorium meum intende*”), and others.

It is founded on the close association that the Cross has with the divine Person of the Redeemer, not only as the instrument on which He accomplished the work of the world’s salvation: “ex contadu ad membra Christi et ex hoc quod Crux eius sanguine sit perfusa” (*Sum. Theol.*, 3ª, q. 25, a. 4); nor only as a reminder of the sorrows of the Passion and the divine Sufferer: “et propter hoc etiam Crucem alloquimur et deprecamur quasi ipsum Crucifixum” (ibid.); but above all as a symbol intimately linked to the sacrifice of Jesus and the mystery of the Passion. On the references of Jesus to the Cross, raised as an indication and distinguishing mark of His following (cf., e.g., Mt 10:38; 16:24 and parallel passages), the letters of the Apostles, and especially those of St. Paul, constitute an entire theology of the Cross, where it is resolved as a theoretical and practical compendium of the Gospel: “Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect” (1 Cor 1:17); “I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified” (1 Cor 2:2; cf. Gal 2:19; 5:11; Eph 2:16; Col 1:20; 2:14). The Holy Fathers followed the same path.

All this makes clear how the cult of the Cross was a logical and natural thing for the Christian, who considered his as the religion of the Cross, and which was practiced from the very beginning. This is demonstrated by the very reproaches that pagans, at the end of the 2nd century and the beginning of the 3rd, directed at Christians, calling them “worshippers of the Cross” and thus others as well; they were acknowledging a widespread reality, though distorting its meaning and value. And the apologists, in responding, did not deny the fact, but rather took pains to explain the nature of that cult and that adoration (cf. Minucius Felix, *Octavius*, chaps. 9, 12, 29; Tertullian, *Apologeticum*, 16). In the same way, later, St. Cyril of Alexandria would respond to Julian the Apostate, who accused Christians of the crime of worshipping the wood of the Cross, of tracing its sign on the forehead, and of adorning the doors of their houses with it: “We, looking upon the Cross, remember Him who died upon it, that we all might have life” (*Contra Iul.*, 6: PG 76, 795). One may add the frequent use of the sign of the Cross by the martyrs in moments of unbearable torture; their aspiration to die themselves on the Cross; and the efforts of Christians to represent the Cross in various ways, more or less hidden or secret, to escape the searches or profanations of the pagans.

The appearance of the Cross to Constantine, the subsequent victory over Maxentius, and still more the discovery of the sacred wood gave new and stronger impetus to the cult of the Cross; all the more so since the emperor built a basilica in Jerusalem, which attracted many pilgrims and where solemn ceremonies began to be performed, especially on Good Friday. It can be said that from that point the cult of the Cross became a subject of preaching for the Holy Fathers; to liturgy and preaching was added art (v. below) and poetry (cf. Prudentius, *Apotheosis*, 446 ff.; *Contra Symmachum*, I, 494 ff.; St. Paulinus of Nola, *Poem.*, 30, 97 ff.; Sedulius, *Carmen paschale*, V, 188 ff.). St. John Chrysostom declares that in his day the Cross was used by the faithful as an ornament, remedy, and protection: “Hoc utique celebratum videre est in domibus, in foro, in desertis... in vestimentis, in thalami... in vasis argentis et aureis... in tectis, in libris, in urbibus, in vicis” (*Homily Quod Christus sit Deus*, 9: PG 48, 826; cf. also: *Homily 2*, *De Cruce et latrone*, 1: PG 49, 407).

Therefore it became necessary to intervene to repress excesses and abuses. A law of Theodosius and Valentinian III (Cod. Iustin., I, tit. 7) forbade, under severe penalties, painting, sculpting and tracing the Cross on floors, lest that sacred sign risk being trampled. The Quinisext Council of 692 (can. 73, Hefele-Leclercq, III, p. 572) adopted this and added the penalty of excommunication. It should also be recalled how, in the inconclusive struggle, the image of the Cross was respected; and how the very iconoclast emperors Leo III the Isaurian, Constantine V Copronymus, Leo IV, Nicephorus, Michael II and Theophilus had it impressed on their coins.

Naturally the Fathers and the Church took care that the cult paid to the Cross should not degenerate into error. The Second Council of Nicaea of 787 (Hefele-Leclercq, III, p. 768) and the Eighth Council of Constantinople of 860 (ibid., IV, pp. 521-22) define that the Cross is to be greeted (ἀσπασμός) and venerated (προσκύνησις), but not adored (ἀληθινὴ προσκύνησις); a distinction carefully drawn by the monk Theodore the Studite (d. 826) (Antirrheticus III adv. Iconomachos: PG, 91, 345 and 419), who observed that adoration directed to God is ἀληθινὴ προσκύνησις, while that directed to the Cross is relative (προσκύνησις σχετική). These and other later definitions, down to the Council of Trent, sealed with their authority the perennial devotion that had been in force among the Christian people from earliest times.

VII. THE CROSS IN LITURGY

I. The feasts of the Holy Cross

The present liturgical books have two: Inventio S. Crucis (3 May) and Exaltatio S. Crucis (14 September).

— 1.

Cross — Latin cross on a sarcophagus lid with the Adoration of the Magi (4th century) — Vatican, Grottos.

The feasts followed the development of devotion to the relic of the Holy Cross, which originated with its discovery. The year of this event remains uncertain. The Alexandrian Chronicle assigns it to 320, the Liber Pontificalis to 310 (I, p. 167), the Doctrine of Addai even to the time of Tiberius (14–37). The Peregrinatio Aetheriae (c. 394) supposes it occurred before 335, but Eusebius in the Vita Constantini, written in 337, makes no mention of it at all. The first secure document is the testimony of St Cyril of Jerusalem in Catech., XIII, 4: PG 33, 775; written in 347. Even less certain is the day of the Inventio. It should be noted, however, that the Chronicle and the Peregrinatio give 14 September, and this has caused no little confusion in identifying the two feasts in the sources.

Historically the liturgical feast of the Exaltatio precedes that of the Inventio. Its origin is Palestinian, indeed local to Jerusalem, and is to be traced to the annual celebration of the dedication (held on 13 and 14 September 335) of the two Constantinian basilicas of the Anastasis and the Martyrium. The feast grew to great renown. By the end of the 4th century the Peregrinatio speaks of crowds of monks, bishops (up to 40 or 50), clergy, layfolk, both men and women, who for eight continuous days came from all parts of the East to take part. It yielded nothing to the feasts of Easter and Epiphany (Peregrinatio ad loca sacra, cap. 48, in Itinera, ed. Geyer, p. 100). In time a solemn display of the relics of the True Cross began to be made, so that gradually this rite became the principal object of the solemnity, almost entirely overshadowing the dedication. Alexander of Cyprus (6th century) designates it precisely with the name it retained: Exaltatio praeclara Crucis (PG 86, 2176).

For the West the first evidence of a liturgical feast of the Holy Cross is found in the biography of Sergius I (687–701), where we read: “He also, from that day for the salvation of the human race, by all Christian people on the day of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross in the basilica of the Saviour, called the Constantinian, is kissed and adored” (Lib. Pont., I, p. 374).

The text implies that the feast was already celebrated before Sergius; probably first in the oratory of the Holy Cross at the Lateran, then in the basilica Sessoriana Sanctae Crucis in Hierusalem. But it cannot go back much further, as shown by the uncertainty of the sources in recording it: for example, it is found in the Gelasian Sacramentary (mid-8th century; cf. ed. Wilson, p. 198), but is missing in the Epternach manuscript of the Hieronymian Martyrology executed by a bishop consecrated by Sergius I (cf. Lib. Pont., I, p. 387, note 29). To the feast Sergius must have added the solemn display and adoration of the Cross preserved in the Sancta Sanctorum of the Lateran, of which the text speaks, a ceremony still attested in the Ordo of Cencio Camerario at the beginning of the 13th century.

While in Rome the feast of the Exaltatio took hold, fixed on 14 September, in Gaul a feast of the Inventio Sanctae Crucis had been introduced and was flourishing, fixed on 4 May. It appears to have entered the Gallican churches in the first half of the 8th century: it is not found in the Leonine (6th century) or Gregorian (7th century) Sacramentaries, nor is it mentioned by Gregory of Tours (593–94), so rich in similar material, nor in the Lectionary of Luxeuil (late 7th century). It is found, however, in the manuscripts of the Hieronymian Martyrologion of Wolfenbüttel (772) and Berne (shortly after), in the Mozarabic calendars, and in the Gelasian Sacramentaries of the 8th century (cf. P. de Puniet, Le Sacramentaire roman de Gellone, Rome [1938], pp. 92–93; Sacramentarium Pragense, ed. A. Dold, Beuron 1949, p. 71).

The date of 3 May seems to have been suggested by the legend of Judas Cyriacus, bishop of Jerusalem (BHL, 7022). The Missale Gothicum (7th–8th century) and that of Bobbio (8th century) place the feast between the octave of Easter and the Rogations, without further specification. The Reg. 316 and the Pragense already have the date 3 May. In substance the two calendars, the Roman and the Gallican, each had their own feast of the Holy Cross on different dates, and both remained in the liturgical books when these, having migrated to Gaul, returned to Rome with the additions and changes they had undergone.

The liturgical formulary of the two feasts also bears the mark of their history. The office of the Exaltatio is clearly of Roman composition: this is shown, among other things, by the antiphon O magnum pietatis opus, taken from the metrical epigraph of Pope Symmachus (498–514) for the oratory of the Holy Cross in St Peter’s, and the other Salva nos, Christe, which recalls the insignia of the same basilica (cf. U. Mannucci, Per la storia dell’ufficio della S. C., in Rass. Gregor., 1910, col. 249). The lessons recount the recovery of the Holy Cross from the hands of the Persians, which took place in 628 under Heraclius.

The office of the Inventio, on the other hand, is Gallican. The antiphons of the 12th century alluded to the legend of Judas Cyriacus and were suppressed by Clement VIII (1592–1605) “because they contained a doubtful history” and replaced by the present ones (see the ancient formulary in Tommasi, Opera, t. IV, p. 250). The remaining lessons tell of the discovery of the Cross made by St Helena. The Mass is of classic Gallican type (cf. G. Manz, Ist die Messe de Inventione S. Crucis im Sacram. Gelas. gallischen Ursprungs?, in Ephem. lit., 47 [1938], pp. 192–96).

In 1741 the commission appointed by Benedict XIV to reform the Breviary decided to suppress the feast of May 3, but the entire project, as is well known, failed, and the two feasts of the Holy Cross have remained in their place until now.

2. The cross of the altar

In the early centuries, only the matter of the sacrifice could be placed on the altar. The cross and candlesticks, carried at the head of the procession, were placed either behind the altar or at its sides. Sometimes the cross was suspended beneath the ciborium or carved on its front; however, no text tells us the precise reason for its presence. From the 11th century onward, it was adorned with a crucifix, sometimes flanked by the Madonna and St. John the Evangelist; a hole in the altar or a special pedestal allowed it to be fixed on the altar itself during the celebration of the Holy Sacrifice. The introduction and spread of private Masses may not have been without influence in placing it definitively on the altar.

The Ceremonial of Bishops, by ordering that the "Crux Dominii" be on the altar, establishes its base as high as the nearest candlestick, which varies in height, so that, as they rise, they may serve as greater adornment to the cross. Its presence on the altar, like the repeated bows and the glances directed toward it by the celebrating priest during the Holy Mass, is meant to impress upon all that this is the true representation of the sacrifice of the Cross. Therefore, it is always necessary, except during the exposition of the Blessed Sacrament, for the image yields to the reality.

3. The pectoral cross

It is a small cross of gold or other gilded metal, often adorned with precious stones, which bishops wear around their necks as their own distinctive badge, and which often contains a relic, frequently of the Holy Cross. It is also used by regular abbots, canons of many cathedral and collegiate churches, certain ecclesiastical dignitaries by special apostolic indult, and some abbesses as a sign of their rank. Pius X granted it to the cardinals of Naples. There are two kinds of pectoral crosses: one is suspended from a chain of gold or other gilded metal, which is used with ordinary vestments; the other hangs from a red silk cord for cardinals and a green one for bishops, and is worn during sacred functions and over the mozzetta. The Ceremonial of Bishops mentions only the second, considering it a pontifical ornament, while it says nothing at all about the first.

The origin of the pectoral cross is very likely connected with enkolpia and those sacred objects that Christians wore on their chests. Ancient writers do not mention it: this means that originally it was merely a matter of personal devotion. Later, the popes made it a sacred ornament, subsequently imitated by bishops and abbots. The earliest examples date back to the 9th century. Innocent III alludes to the pectoral cross as a liturgical ornament of the pope in De sacro altaris sacrificio, I, cap. 2. A 12th-century Pontifical lists among the liturgical vestments of the bishop the "Crux pectoralis, si quis ea uti velit" (E. Martène, De ant. Eccl. rit., I, Antwerp 1736, cap. 4, art. 12, ordo 23).

Silvio Mattei

VIII. The cross in archaeology

Under the name of cross, various very ancient signs of this form are called, such as the swastika or hooked cross (πέλη); the Egyptian hieroglyph φ, known as the crux ansata and found in about twenty Christian inscriptions (G. Lefèvre, Inscriptions gr. chrét. d'Egypte, II Cairo 1907); the sign +, which, to distinguish it from that known as the Latin cross (+), is called the Greek and equilateral cross; and the monogram in the form of a cross φ, which seems to derive from the Constantinian monogram (χ) or chrismon, commonly called the monogrammatic cross. It should be noted, however, that the so-called decussate cross or St. Andrew’s cross (X) is a pure invention of medieval art.

4. Gummed or hooked cross

The swastika (from the Sanskrit Svasti = health, "good," "happiness"), called the gammate cross because it consists of four equal arms ending in a segment at a right angle, like the Greek capital gamma, seems to be the oldest sign of good fortune and religious significance in primitive solar cults. It is found, painted or incised, from the Neolithic age onward, on vases, amulets, spindle whorls, sepulchral monuments, fabrics, and figures. The oldest examples so far discovered are those found on vases at Mussiani Tepe near Susa, in Elam, dating to 4000-3000 B.C. Around 3000 B.C. it appears in the pottery of the Danube region, then in Troy, in Greece, in southern Italy in Etruria, among the Germans around 1000 B.C., and in India in 500 B.C. From the 3rd century A.D. onward, alone or with other signs, it appears on many funerary inscriptions in Lycaonia and Isauria; in the monument of Clodius Hermetis at St. Sebastian in Rome; and in the cemeteries of Domitilla, Pamphilus, Generosa, and the vineyard of Maxima (M. A. Boldetti, Osservazioni sopra i cemeteri, 2 vols., Rome 1720, p. 60; E. Josi, Il cimitero di Panfilo, in Riv. d'arch. crist., 1 [1924], p. 67, fig. 18; Wilpert, Pitture, tavv. 112, 3; 180; 212; G. Cotzoni, Le questioni cronologiche della C. e dei monogrammi X e †, Athens 1939), where, even if "not necessarily considered a way of concealing the Christian [meaning], at least in inscriptions where it is not merely an ornamental sign, it may allude either to Christ, the Sun of Salvation, or to the happiness of the deceased." The swastika also appears in northern Europe in the 6th-7th centuries A.D. It remains a sacred symbol for Buddhists, who in Tibet have adopted it in the form of hooks turned to the right. A variant of the straight hooked cross was the curvilinear one, formed by two intersecting S’s, which also had symbolic significance.

5. Monogrammatic cross

In the Letter of Barnabas (9, 8), from the beginning of the 2nd century, the siglum IH is supposed to be known as an abbreviation of the name 'Iησούς, but as is evident from monuments, the name of Jesus first, and then as the sign of Christ, were best known as the Chi Iota (X), the Chi Rho (XP), and the monogram in the form of a cross (†), all three of which, moreover, were in use almost exclusively as a compendium scripturae in writings and monuments long before Christianity: the first on coins of Chios; the second as an abbreviation of common names beginning with XP and as a sign on Athenian, Ptolemaic, Syrian coins, as well as those of Emperor Decius (249-251 A.D.); the third on coins of the Armenian king Tigranes (96-94 B.C.), the Arsacids (92-38 B.C.), and Herod the Great (38 B.C.).

The rather rare X, which, as an overlay of the initials I(Ἰησοῦς) X(Χριστός) dating from the 3rd century, is called pre-Constantinian. The X, which also arose somewhat later in the West and owed its rapid spread—particularly in Rome—to Constantine and its repeated appearance on his coins, has been termed Constantinian. It is only from the 4th century that this, as a compendium of the scriptural name of Christ, becomes a true monogram, the signum Christi and figure of the Cross (cf. St. Augustine, Tract., 118, 5: PL 34, 1950). The earliest example of it is provided by a Roman inscription, attributed to the year 323 (G. B. De Rossi, in Bull. d'arch. crist., 1 [1953], p. 23). In another Roman inscription, from 340 (G. Cotzoni, op. cit., p. 88), as if to emphasize its connection with Christ, the apocalyptic letters A and Ω are associated with it, which from then on are frequently encountered. From Rome it spread in all its variants, with or without a circle or enclosed in a crown, as is excellently represented on Christian sarcophagi in the scene of the Resurrection, which has been called anastasis or, more precisely, *Crus invicta*, because the Resurrection of the God-Man is the victory of the Cross (cf. Wilpert, Sarcofagi, tavv. 11, 4; 18, 1-5; 44, 1-3; 142, 1 and 3; 145, 1 and 7; 146, 1 and 3; 192, 6; 238, 1, 4; 7; 239, 2; 241, 1-4; 243, 1; 285, 1). In the East, the earliest certain instance known to date is from 354 (G. Cotzoni, op. cit., p. 69).

Since the allusion to the Cross was too concealed in this form, the monogram was also represented with a horizontal line through it (X). From this, as found on Constantinian coins around 335 and on funerary inscriptions of 335, there developed the monogrammatic Cross (†), which appears also in the forms † X and X X X. In 365 (G. Cotzoni, op. cit., p. 91) the monogrammatic Cross appears with the A and Ω, in di-

scriptions found above one of the ossuaries discovered in 1945 near Jerusalem enjoyed only ephemeral success (v. L'Osservatore Romano, 1945, nos. 220-31, 255, 279).

As far as is currently known, the oldest Christian monument bearing a Cross appears to be the inscription from Palmyra, dated to the year 136 (cf. H. Leclercq, in DACL, III, col. 3048; here erroneously assigned to 134), which displays two Crosses in the form of an X: a sign that, even in the form of +, was used in the ancient Hebrew alphabet to express the *tav*. Following this are the inscriptions, with the Greek Cross, from Dura Europos and Madula in Syria, dated respectively to the years 163 and 197-98. Later, apart from the disputed Cross on the coin of King Abgar IX (179-234), there are the Crosses from three other inscriptions at Dura Europos, from 234, two of which display the well-known cryptogram or magical *Sator Arepo*, similar to two from Pompeii. For the period from 313 to 350, only three examples of the Cross have survived.

In the West, the Latin Cross appears not only in the aforementioned example from Herculaneum (v.); it is also veiled in the form of the *tav* (T) and, perhaps, sometimes even of the anchor; hence the monograms X and +. In the cemeteries it is rather rare, and of the few surviving examples from the pre-Constantinian period none is dated. However, with the Greek Cross from the inscription of Rufina at St. Callistus and the blasphemous graffito on the Palatine (v. ACCUSATIONS AGAINST THE CHRISTIANS), it seems that one can at most date it to the end of the 2nd century. There is also the hypogeum of the Aurelii (v.) on Via Manzoni. From 314, though amid pagan symbols (whose appearance and prominence followed the progressive predominance of Christianity in the Empire), the Cross appears on the coins of the imperial mints of Tarragona, Lyon, Trier, and Aquileia. From the mid-4th century, with the Cross, i.e., after the discovery of the Cross in Jerusalem (326-36), compositions begin to appear with A + Ω and + Ω or in other variants; and often, especially in Syria, surrounded by a circle or a crown, or with the fish, doves, or peacock. This monogram, almost simultaneously with its emergence and before the Constantinian form, on coins and then on monuments, passed from the West to the East (For the monogram in the paintings of the catacombs, V. Wilpert, Pitture, pp. 117-18; tavv. 154, 1; 162, 2; 207, 241; 251).

At the beginning of the 5th century the X disappears from Roman sepulchral inscriptions and the + becomes rarer. Outside Rome, however, both continued to be used for a long time on monuments and objects, and it is known that from the time of Justinian, especially in Syria, it was customary to depict the monogram on the exteriors of houses (C. M. Kaufmann, Handbuch der christlichen Archäologie, Paderborn 1922, fig. 215, p. 270). Cases of the monogrammatic Cross still appear in the 8th century. Even from the beginning of the 5th century, however, these two monograms, together with the Cross that later prevailed, appear in the splendor of museums. Notable examples are the fine +, crowned by the *manus Dei*, on the vault of the Baptistery of Naples and the triple X of the Baptistery of Albenga, surrounded by the twelve doves (Wilpert, Mosaiken, tavv. 29, 88; as well as 32, 51, 91, 109). In the late Middle Ages the Constantinian monogram was replaced by the sigla IHS, which, according to popular etymology, was interpreted as *in hoc signo* or, as today, *Jesus Hominum Salvator*. To this, more recently, a small cross was added above the IH (IHHS).

3. **Jewelled Cross.** — The open Cross (+ +), commonly called *capitata* or *immissa*, was used as an ornament both before and after Christ; as a Christian symbol and in its equilateral or so-called Greek form it appears in Syria and the West.

The + Cross is first found at Herculaneum (v.); the four small Crosses (+ +) traced on sarcophagi, almost simultaneously, the *Crus invicta* (Wilpert, Sarcofagi, tavv. 142, 3 and 146, 3) and the open representation of it, as is incontestably shown by the sarcophagus lid found in 1942 in the Vatican Grottos, also assigned to about 340, which presents the first true image of the Cross (v. Bruyne, Importante coperchio di sarcofago, in Riv. d'arch. crist., 20 [1945], pp. 249-80), and moreover in the *capitata* or Latin form, which is believed to have been the Cross of Christ.

With the expansion of the cult of the relics of the Cross and the construction of the related Constantinian basilicas, the number of representations of the Cross grew extraordinarily. From the end of the 4th century, the Cross—which was initially depicted merely as a sign of the Passion and then as the invincible Cross—was associated with the final coming of the Son of Man (Mt. 24:30; Rev. 1:7) and became its glorious and triumphant sign (often substituting for Christ Himself): hence it is depicted adorned with jewels and in gold, or among the symbols of the Evangelists and the Apostles, or enthroned, predominantly in apses and starry vaults. This is attested by the sarcophagus of Probus (c. 395) and several others (Wilpert, Sarcofagi, pls. 18, 1, 4, 5; 145, 7; 238, 4, 7; 243, 1), but above all by the mosaics of the apse of S. Pudenziana (late 4th century), the atrium of the baptistery of S. Giovanni in Laterano, and the arch of S. Maria Maggiore in Rome (432–40); the dome of the mausoleum of Galla Placidia (2nd quarter of the 5th century), the baptistery of the Orthodox (449–59), and the oratory of the archiepiscopal palace (494–519) in Ravenna; the beautiful jeweled Cross, with the four rivers flowing from its base, on the front of an altar in Nola, as well as that between two saints in the cemetery of Ponzano in Rome, both from the end of the 5th century; the Cross on the dome of the church of Casaranello; the apse of S. Apollinare in Classe in Ravenna (6th century) and of S. Stefano Rotondo in Rome (648), with the bust of Christ, one at the crossing and the other at the summit (Wilpert, Mosaiken, pls. 42–44, 1–3; 70–72; 81; 101; 108; 255, 1; 259, 1). In many other cases, not only in mosaics, paintings, and sculptures, but also in minor arts, and from the mid-4th century onward, there are examples of pectoral crosses (the most memorable being the gold one found in S. Lorenzo in Rome, late 1st century).

It seems that from the 5th century onward, processional crosses, altar crosses, and hand crosses were frequently depicted in the Middle Ages (Wilpert, Mosaiken, pp. 47–50).

Thus the Cross, once a sign of ignominy, was transformed into a sign of glory and became the most common and honored Christian symbol.

IX. THE CROSS IN ART

I. BARBARIAN CROSSES

This term refers to crosses found in barbarian tombs, mainly in Italy but also in France and Germany. They may have served as personal devotional objects, like pectoral crosses, but instead of being worn around the neck, they were attached to garments. They are made of very thin gold leaf, with small holes for sewing, and feature braided ornaments and sometimes extremely crude figures; they have equal arms and generally measure 7 or 8 cm, though some notable exceptions exist, such as the one in the museum of Innsbruck, from Livezzano, about 16 cm long, and the one found in the so-called tomb of Gisulfo at Cividale, adorned with garnets and lapis lazuli. They were in use in the 6th century.

6. VOTIVE CROSSES

Precious royal gifts, usually suspended from crowns (v. corona), which were hung above altars. Among those found in the treasure of Fuente de Guarrazar near Toledo in the last century, the most notable is the one belonging to King Recceswinth (8th century, now in the Cluny Museum). Also well known are those from the cathedral of Monza, one a gift of Agilulf (591–615), the other perhaps of Berengar I (888–924). In all of these, the gold surface is completely covered with gems and pearls.

7. PROCESSIONAL AND ALTAR CROSSES

In the early Middle Ages, crosses were often simple and unadorned. After the 13th century, the cross intended for placement on the altar was supported by a base, which sometimes became more elaborate with symbolic ornaments or architectural motifs in the Gothic period, or pictorial ones in the Baroque era, and sometimes even supported small statues, usually of the Virgin and St. John. However, in terms of form and decorative technique, the altar cross followed the same development as the processional cross.

In the 13th century, goldsmiths began to avoid rigid lines: the ends of the crosses became lobed, and a second crossbar (likely derived from Eastern types) was placed above the horizontal arm, creating a lighter effect; the technique of filigree was joined by niello, and precious stones were arranged in a more spaced-out rhythm (e.g., the cross of Amiens Cathedral and that of the church of Blanchefosse in the Ardennes). At the same time, the workshops of the Rhine and Limousin produced crosses covered with champlevé enamel, more modest in material but rich in color (Poldi Pezzoli Museum in Milan, Copenhagen Museum, Gerona Cathedral). In the following century, the most precious translucent enamels were used (processional cross in the Schlossmuseum in Berlin, altar cross in the National Museum in Florence), and large knots or floral motifs made the contours more dynamic. But it was in the 15th-century processional crosses that Gothic fantasy found its most exuberant expression. From the first half of the century come the splendid crosses of the major “schools” of Venice, made of rock crystal and silver, all intricately adorned with flowers and figures of angels. More austere, with a predominance of plastic elements, are the Abruzzese crosses, including those by Nicola da Guardiagrele (S. Maria Maggiore in Lanciano, 1422; Aquila Cathedral, 1434). In Sicilian crosses, the opulence of the goldwork shows Arab-Spanish influences (e.g., the cross of Mazara, similar to the Spanish one of Cervera) or Catalan influences (S. Martino delle Scale). Gothic nostalgia persisted into the first half of the 16th century, but as the century advanced, a more austere simplicity of contours returned, and new coloristic refinements were achieved with new materials, such as engraved crystal (e.g., the cross by Valerio Belli in the Victoria and Albert Museum in London) or hardstone; and in the course of the 17th century, coral was also used.

8. RELIQUARY CROSSES

Already in the first half of the 4th century, the distribution of fragments of the Holy Wood had begun, and relics were kept by the faithful in ring settings and pectoral crosses. Those of the churches were preserved in precious statuettes, mostly in the form of crosses, sometimes as staffs, which did not differ from other crosses in form and ornamentation but had—usually at the center—a compartment to hold the relic. This was concealed by a lid formed by a large precious stone in the jeweled cross of the Sancta Sanctorum (6th century); it was also hidden in the enameled cross with scenes from the infancy of the Redeemer in the Vatican Museums (from the time of Paschal I). Later, however, the relic was almost always visible through a crystal.

Among the most precious reliquary crosses of the 10th century is the one from Limbourg; for the 12th century, mention may be made of the one in Cosenza Cathedral and the so-called St. Leontius cross in Naples Cathedral, both with Byzantine enamel plaques; for the 13th century, the one from Genoa known as the Zaccaria cross, from the spoils of Foce, and those from Atri Cathedral and S. Niccolò in Pisa, in rock crystal, perhaps of Venetian workmanship, with miniatures on a gold background as brilliant as enamels. The same type is found in a 14th-century cross in S. Francesco in Assisi; while translucent enamels are used in a cross from Padua and another for various relics in the National Museum in Florence.

These reliquaries generally had a case, often also cruciform (a chased silver casket in the Vatican Christian Museum, 9th century); but sometimes they were in the form of a rectangular tablet in which the statuette was set (the reliquary of Cardinal Bessarion in Venice).

9. Painted crucifixes

Wooden crucifixes, carved and painted with a large image of the Crucifix and with illustrative scenes on the sides, are an almost exclusively Italian usage, especially in Tuscany and Umbria. They appear at the beginning of the 12th century, are developed with new realism during the 12th century, and simplified in their iconographic scheme in the 14th century,

since the priest celebrated Mass standing behind the altar, the crucifix was not placed above the mensa, but stood to the left, supported by a crucifer, and also served as a processional cross. Among the most precious crucifixes of this type

10. Boundary crosses

Made of stone, generally placed on a high pedestal; they stood at the entrance of a town or at the boundary of a property or district. The oldest known examples are those of Bewcastle (7th century) and Hexham (8th century), adorned with low-relief carvings that represent the earliest documents of English sculpture. After the 12th century they are frequent in France, where many were destroyed during the Revolution; in Spain (Ávila, gate of S. Vicente; Durango); and in Italy, where the best known are those along the streets of Bologna, now in S. Petronio.

X. THE TREE OF THE CROSS

This is a symbolic representation of the Cross of Christ, imagined as a living tree, that is, furnished with branches and leaves, flowers and fruit, as in the hymn *Vexilla Regis*: *Crux fidelis*.

The fundamental concept, already traceable in the Paleochristian era (Tertullian), was explicitly treated by St. Bonaventure in the *Lignum vitae* and later taken up by German mystics (Meister Eckhart, Tauler); among the various types of the Tree of the Cross in figurative art, the vine (already in the ancient East a symbol of the Tree of Life), the rosary (from a vision of the mystic Suso, 1295–1366), and the oak (symbol of strength) stand out. Already appearing in the initials of German miniatures of the 12th century, and contemporaneously in the Roman museum of the apse of S. Clemente in connection with other motifs of Paleochristian origin, it then becomes much more widely used in the 14th century in the realm of painting, sculpture, and graphic art, as well as in the decoration of vestments. Notable, for Italian art, is the panel by Pacino di Bonaguida (1310, Florence, Accademia) and various frescoes by Giotto. The great depiction in the Benedictine abbey of Sesto al Reghena in Friuli also belongs to the 14th century (cf. Mem. Stor. Forogiuliesi, 38 [1942], pl. 17). For German art, the wooden crucifixes at Zittau and Thorn, a chasuble at Vreden (Westphalia, 14th century), and two woodcuts in the book *Der Seelen* (Augsburg 1482).

XI. THE CRUCIFIXION IN ART

The earliest realistic representations of the scene of the Crucifixion date to the 5th century. Among these may be included the famous panel on the door of S. Sabina in Rome, although there Christ and the thieves have their hands and feet pierced by nails but the crosses are not represented. Also to the 5th century belongs an ivory in the British Museum in London where Christ, still alive, appears nailed to the cross, and the soldier is in the act of piercing His side with a lance; nearby are the Virgin and St. John; somewhat apart, Judas is hanging from a tree. A 6th-century miniature from the Rabbula Gospels, transcribed in Mesopotamia in 586 (Florence, Biblioteca Laurenziana, Cod. syr. 56), depicts the scene with aspects derived from Hellenistic painting, with equal realism and even greater vividness and detail. Here the Redeemer, between the thieves, still alive, is clearly affixed to the cross with four nails, wears the *colobium* (q.v.), a long sleeveless tunic, and below are, besides the Virgin and St. John, three holy women expressing their intense grief; then the soldiers with the lance and sponge, and at the foot of the cross the others who

Cimabue in the transept of the Upper Basilica of Assisi painted the two large crowded Crucifixions, where the pathetic accents of Byzantine art acquire unrestrained dramatic force and the drama explodes with a power hitherto unknown. Today little remains of those paintings, just enough to convey their lofty value, not only pictorial but also religious and human.

A few years later Giotto in Padua, in the Scrovegni Chapel, also depicted in the scene of the Crucifixion the great figure of the dead Christ nailed to the cross, to the left the group of the Maries and to the right that of the soldiers. The forms have become larger and more solemn, the emotions more intense even if apparently less dramatic and painful; what Giotto conveys seems like truths awaited for centuries; Christ has just exhaled His last breath, in heaven the angels give free vent to their sorrow, but on earth the Virgin, St. John, and the holy women are frozen in anguish and consternation; the soldiers, busy arguing and disputing, seem oblivious to the drama, and this detail too enhances the expressive power.

The followers of the master repeated his scheme or complicated it, as in the Crucifixion of the right transept in the Lower Church of S. Francesco in Assisi, but they never attained the simple and austere sense of his narrative. Nor did Pietro Lorenzetti in his Crucifixion, likewise in the transept of the Lower Church of S. Francesco in Assisi, despite its highly dramatic accents and the great crowd gathered at the foot of the cross, nor the Baronzio in that of S. Gimignano, also crowded and dramatic for the group of holy women near the fainting Virgin, the knights, the soldiers, and the executioners, nor Andrea da Firenze in the fresco of the Spanish Chapel at S. Maria Novella in Florence.

Similarly, with respect to the prototype of the master, had acted the sculptors who derived the scheme of their reliefs with the Crucifixion from that carved in relief by Nicola Pisano on the pulpit of the Baptistery of Pisa, which Giovanni Pisano had taken up with more vivid accents and exaggerated forms in the pulpits of Pistoia and the Cathedral of Pisa.

The same Masaccio, at the dawn of the Renaissance, was to leave the deep mark of his formidable personality in two crucifixions; he in fact collaborated on the one painted by Masolino around 1423 in S. Clemente in Rome, still within the line of fourteenth-century compositions, and on the other that formed part of the polyptych in the Pisan church of S. Caterina and is now in the National Museum of Naples. Here, besides the image of the dead Christ on the cross, and to the left and right of the Virgin and St. John, is that of the blonde Magdalene dressed in red, who has thrown herself on her knees to embrace the wood of martyrdom. And that most human impulse, that desperate grief, contrasts with, and thus highlights, the majestic solemnity of the image of the Redeemer raised on the cross, His head as though sunk between His shoulder blades, and the mute anguish of the Madonna and St. John.

In those same years the Blessed Angelico in S. Marco was expressing the drama of the crucifixion with quite different intentions; against a flat, brown and livid horizon three crosses rise up, at whose feet are lined up, with the principal figures of the drama, saints and friars of the Order, who stand hesitant and sorrowful contemplating the dead Redeemer on the cross. It is a solemn celebration rather than a re-evocation of the drama.

These are two different orientations that reflect themselves according to the modes proper to fifteenth-century art. Thus, while in a group of works naturalistic elements are accentuated so that in the scene of the crucifixion the atrocious suffering of Christ may be essentially highlighted, along with the grief of the Mother, of St. John and that of the pious women, and in contrast to them the brutal cruelty of the executioners—according to a taste widely diffused in Northern art, which found an echo, though with different accents, even in Italy (Francesco di Giorgio Martini, relief in the Kaiser Friedrich Museum in Berlin), the soldiers cast lots for Christ’s garments. Above, in the sky, the sun and moon are darkened. The scene is completed below with that of the Resurrection.

In another group, the character of calm solemnity noted above with regard to the Angelico’s Crucifixion is maintained (Perugino, triptych in Leningrad, fresco in the chapter hall of S. Maria Maddalena de’ Pazzi in Florence, Giambellino in his numerous crucifixions), while the scene gradually empties out and the two thieves no longer appear, nor the soldiers or executioners.

With the early sixteenth century the treatment of the theme of the crucifixion seems to orient itself, among artists not lagging behind, more toward the second solution than the first, and Michelangelo himself leaves some drawings, mere ideas, later used by his followers (Marcello Venusti, Jacopo del Duca), in which the image of the crucified Redeemer dominates, flanked only by the Virgin and St. John. But then in the second half of the century new sentiments, linked to the great movement of the Catholic Reformation (v.), demand that the theme be taken up and expressed in all its dramatic power (Tintoretto, the great Crucifixion in the Scuola di S. Rocco in Venice in 1565), themselves paving the way for those seventeenth-century forms characterized by a complacent naturalistic representation of events (Lanfranco, Barberini collection in Rome). Along this path, naturally with the different accents determined by the different age and by new pictorial and plastic conquests, are also placed some memorable eighteenth-century representations of the drama of Golgotha (G. B. Tiepolo in the church of Burano; G. D. Tiepolo in the Crucifixion of the Via Crucis in the church of the Frari in Venice; G. B. Goya in the Crucifixion in the museum of the Prado in Madrid).

Nineteenth-century figurations, in the great majority of cases, do not go beyond the illustrative value of the drama, while the most modern ones aim, even by means of formal stylizations, to convey the sense of the absolute spiritual dominion of the dead Redeemer on the cross.

In medieval and fifteenth-century representations of the crucifixion, sometimes at the foot of the cross a skull is depicted; it is meant to recall that, according to a widespread medieval belief, Christ’s cross was planted over the tomb of Adam.

XII. THE CRUCIFIX IN ART

It is necessary to arrive at the Romanesque age to find a true diffusion in sculpture of the iconographic type of the isolated figure of Jesus on the cross, detached, that is, from the more complex scene of the crucifixion, about which see above (XI).

Among the oldest and most famous is the Crucifix known as the “Volto Santo” (v.) of Lucca of the twelfth century, which gathers around itself a very extensive series of sculptures in France, Spain and Germany (v. on the subject the ample work of Bréhier, cited in the bibliography). In Italy those adhering to the type of the *Volto Santo* are the Crucifix of S. Gimignano and that of S. Paragorio of Noli, while the other works repeat a different iconography also modeled on Byzantine examples that represent Christ already expired on the cross, no longer clothed in the *colobium* but in the simple *perizoma* (Crucifix of Archbishop Aribert in the cathedral of Milan). Another iconographic type of the Crucifix had established itself in the West with prevalence in the Northern countries: it depicted Jesus still living and with regal attributes that magnified the divine sacrifice, as had already been seen in the *Volto Santo* and in works akin to II. This type is found in the bronzes and goldsmith works of Limoges and in the Rhenish and Burgundian Crucifixes, of which a splendid example in Italy is that in the church of S. Anna in Pisa, derived from contemporary sculptures of Autun, Vézelay and Moissac. It differed profoundly from Byzantine forms in the different stylization and modeling of the body, spread throughout Romanesque art and reached Italy as well, though slightly modified by the coexistence of influences derived from the East. Thus in the Crucifixes of the cathedrals of Casale and Vercelli, in that of S. Antimo—which, however, of mediocre workmanship, is closer to the Burgundian type—in that of Perugia and in that of Castelnuovo dell’Abate, a grand eclectic product of the end of the twelfth century. Among the wooden crucifixes of the twelfth century, mention should also be made of that of S. Lorenzo Nuovo near Bolsena (1160-68) with the living Christ, as in the Crucifix in S. Pietro in Bologna, and in that of the Ferdinandeum in Innsbruck. Also very fine are the Crucifixes in the picture gallery of Turin, the one called Corujadol in the Louvre and the other in Cologne in the church of S. Giorgio, in which the Christ already dead hangs from the cross.

Now universally accepted in worship, the iconography of the Crucifix nevertheless ceases to be a fixed model and becomes a mere index to the artist’s creation, who interprets with his personal vision the suffering figure of the Redeemer on the Cross. Thus Christ still appears alive and serene, triumphant over every human contingency, in the Crucifisso of Pratomagno (church of S. Pietro), which dates from the mid-13th century.

Giovanni Pisano in the Crucifisso of the Museo dell’Opera del Duomo in Siena, and Lorenzo Maitani in those of the church of S. Francesco and the sacristy of the Duomo in Orvieto, at the beginning of the 14th century open the series of admirable Crucifissi of which Italian art, in every age and in every kind of material—from wood to bronze, marble, ivory, and silver—was always the most notable producer. Of particular beauty is also the great wooden Crucifisso in the basilica of S. Paolo in Rome, considered by some scholars, following Vasari, to be the work of Pietro Cavallini. From it derives a notable series of Crucifissi existing in the churches of Rome.

At the beginning of the 15th century, Brunelleschi, still feeling the influences of 14th-century iconography, models his wooden Crucifisso for S. Maria Novella with the head inclined and the body inert, but he impresses upon it a new human realism, restrained and measured, which now belongs to Renaissance stylistics. Donatello achieves similar results in the wooden Crucifisso carved in opposition to Brunelleschi’s and in the other one he cast in bronze in 1447 for the high altar of the basilica of the Santo in Padua. A more subdued sentiment of sorrow asserts itself with the advance of the Renaissance and is already evident in works from the first half of the century (the Crucifisso by Michelozzo in S. Giorgio Maggiore in Venice, by Benedetto da Maiano in S. Maria Novella in Florence), after which the theme somewhat thins out in sculpture and finds greater place in painting, even for isolated figures.

In the not numerous examples of the 16th century, this humanity of the Crucifisso is nonetheless kept alive (the marble Crucifisso by Alfonso Lombardi in the church of the Servi in Bologna, the Crucifisso of Impruneta, attributed to Giambologna), and with the Counter-Reformation a conception tied to the Church’s regenerating work asserts itself, which aims to stimulate the piety and devotion of the faithful: thus the Crucifisso assumes a livid and convulsed aspect that accentuates the realism and pathos of agony. In fulfillment of the will of Leo X, Crucifissi are then produced for the altars of churches and spread into homes for devotional use, mostly works of customary art that model, according to current iconography, small sculptures in ivory or other precious material. Yet from artisanal production many artists detach themselves who create, even in the modest proportions of altar ornament, works of exquisite craftsmanship. Thus Alessandro Algardi in the Crucifisso of the chapel of the Palazzo del Governatorato in the Vatican, and Gian Lorenzo Bernini, who provides the clay models for a living and a dead Crucifisso for the series of Crucifissi for the altars of S. Pietro, executed, as documents confirm, with the collaboration of pupils, between 1657 and 1661. Also worthy of mention is the school established in Palermo by Gian Francesco Pintorno (fra’ Umile da Petralia) in the same Franciscan convent, which produced a vast number of Crucifissi, mostly wooden, imbued with devout feeling and inspired by a moving realism. Among the best are those in the church of S. Anna in Aidone, in the Franciscan convent of Milazzo, in the churches of S. Giuseppe and S. Antonino in Palermo, the latter completed by fra’ Innocenzo da Palermo who, having moved to Rome, spread the works of the Sicilian School in central Italy (his Crucifissi are in Pesaro and in the church of S. Damiano in Assisi).

Subsequently, more than the works of individual artists, the artisanal productions for ecclesiastical furnishings and a few significant works by modest craftsmen are to be cited, in which the expression of religious feeling outweighs mere artistic interest.