Il volto santo – changing the sacred face
The Origins
In 1070 bishop Anselmo di Baggio of Lucca consecrated the newly built Romanesque Cathedral of San Martino. In connection with the consecration, a venerated relic was moved from another, older church in Lucca and placed in San Martino with great celebrations. This relic was the so called Il volto santo (The sacred face) – a crucifix which, according to legend, was crafted by the biblical Nicodemus, who in a vision received the order to carve the sculpture. Before the work was finished, Nicodemus fell asleep, and in a dream he saw angels and Christ himself descending from heaven, and carving the face of the sculpture. When Nicodemus awoke, the sculpture was completed and carried the true likeness of Christ.
Il Volto Santo – The Sacred Face from Lucca. Crucifix dating from the later part of the eleventh century.
According to the myth created around this crucifix, it had a long and turbulent life before it finally arrived in Lucca in 742. The cult surrounding the sculpture began to spread after its transfer to the newly built Cathedral of San Martino and still today the Il volto santo-crucifix is regarded as one of Italy’s most important relics.
The Cult of the Volto Santo Spreading
Interestingly the crucifix can be dated to the later part of the eleventh century on stylistic grounds, and it was without doubt produced in connection with the consecration of the new cathedral. But rather than carving a crucifix in the contemporary style, it was created in an archaic fashion copying the early Italo-Byzantine style of the seventh and early eighth centuries.
The Crucifixion. Italo-Byzantine mural painting, Rome. Dated 741–752. Example of the type of crucifixion the Volto Santo from Lucca is imitating.
The ancient looking crucifix became an enormously popular point of pilgrimage, and it even figures in Dante’s Commedia where demons cry out to the sinner “The Holy Face is not here for thee” (Qui non ha luogo il Santo Volto).
As the cult of Il santo volto in Lucca grew, sculptures imitating the sacred relic slowly began to spread to Southern European churches, finally reaching Great Britain and Northern Europe in the later Middle Ages. These crucifixes were also produced in an archaic style, with the interesting result that the original meaning of the motif from Lucca gradually changed as it travelled further away from its point of origin.
Transformation of the meaning
The Volto Santo-type crucifixes were associated with different names in different regions of Europe: it became known as Saint Helper in Northern Germany and Scandinavia, while in the Netherlands it became known as Saint Kümmernis (Saint Worried or Pained). With these new names new meanings were given to the image as well. Apparently the idea of the sculpture being sacred was generally accepted, but its identity was slowly transformed from a true representation of Christ into something very different.
St. Helper from the parish church of Nustrup, southern Jutland in Denmark. Wooden sculpture, late fifteenth century.
Late medieval pilgrimsbadges from Danish St. Helper shrines.
A new Saint was created – in Denmark, for example, pilgrims visited the shrine of Saint Helper in Kliplev and prayed to him as an individual in its own rights. The legend arose that these sculptures depicted a pious princess who was granted the gift of the Lord’s likeness. When her father saw this change, he had her crucified in anger. The legend of this princess increased in popularity, and in 1586 – by then known as Jungfrau von Lütthich (The Maiden of Lüttich) – she became accepted as an official Roman Catholic saint with her feast day on July 20th. Today this saint is still honoured in Southern Europe and Latin America, where she is now known under the name of Sainte Affligée – referring back to her late medieval name of Saint Kümmernis in the Netherlands.
Modern day interpretation of the saint. Sainte Affligée. Pascal Borel, painted photography, 1991.
Questions
The Il volto santo-motif is an example of how ideas are manipulated by concepts like centre/periphery and much more vague terms such as frames of thought. Obvious questions in this narrative are:
- Where was the original concept transformed into a recognisable motif, and how far are we willing to let the idea move away from its origin before we regard it as something new?
- A different question is whether what we perceive as motifs are inherently conservative, static in nature or if motifs can be innovative.
- A final question might be what dangers there lie in backtracking a motif stratigraphically like it was done here. Isn’t there an overwhelming danger of constructing anachronistic connections that only seem possible through our contemporary access to information?