The mother of Constantine the Great, born about the middle of the third century, possibly inDrepanum (later known as Helenopolis) on the Nicomedian Gulf; died about 330. She was of humbleparentage; St. Ambrose, in his “Oratio de obitu Theodosii”, referred to her as a stabularia, or inn-keeper. Nevertheless, she became the lawful wife of Constantius Chlorus. Her first and only son,Constantine, was born in Naissus in Upper Moesia, in the year 274. The statement made by Englishchroniclers of the Middle Ages, according to which Helena was supposed to have been the daughter of a British prince, is entirely without historical foundation. It may arise from the misinterpretation of a term used in the fourth chapter of the panegyric on Constantine’s marriagewith Fausta, that Constantine, oriendo (i.e., “by his beginnings,” “from the outset”) had honouredBritain, which was taken as an allusion to his birth, whereas the reference was really to the beginning of his reign.
In the year 292 Constantius, having become co-Regent of the West, gave himself up to considerations of a political nature and forsook Helena in order to marry Theodora, the step-daughter of Emperor Maximinianus Herculius, his patron, and well-wisher. But her son remained faithful and loyal to her. On the death of Constantius Chlorus, in 308, Constantine, who succeeded him, summoned his mother to the imperial court, conferred on her the title of Augusta, ordered that all honour should be paid her as the mother of the sovereign, and had coins struck bearing her effigy. Her son’s influence caused her to embrace Christianity after his victory over Maxentius. This is directly attested by Eusebius (Vita Constantini, III, xlvii): “She (his mother) became under his (Constantine’s) influence such a devout servant of God, that one might believe her to have been from her very childhood a disciple of the Redeemer of mankind“. It is also clear from the declaration of the contemporary historian of the Church that Helena, from the time of her conversion had an earnestly Christian life and by her influence and liberality favoured the wider spread of Christianity.Tradition links her name with the building of Christian churches in the cities of the West, where the imperial court resided, notably at Rome and Trier, and there is no reason for rejecting this tradition, for we know positively through Eusebius that Helena erected churches on the hallowed spots of Palestine. Despite her advanced age she undertook a journey to Palestine when Constantine, through his victory over Licinius, had become sole master of the Roman Empire, subsequently, therefore, to the year 324. It was in Palestine, as we learn from Eusebius (loc. cit., xlii), that she had resolved to bring to God, the King of kings, the homage and tribute of her devotion. She lavished on that land her bounties and good deeds, she “explored it with remarkable discernment”, and “visited it with the care and solicitude of the emperor himself”. Then, when she “had shown due veneration to the footsteps of the Saviour”, she had two churches erected for the worship ofGod: one was raised in Bethlehem near the Grotto of the Nativity, the other on the Mount of theAscension, near Jerusalem. She also embellished the sacred grotto with rich ornaments. This sojourn in Jerusalem proved the starting-point of the legend first recorded by Rufinus as to the discovery of the Cross of Christ.
Her princely munificence was such that, according to Eusebius, she assisted not only individualsbut entire communities. The poor and destitute were the special objects of her charity. She visited the churches everywhere with pious zeal and made them rich donations. It was thus that, in fulfilment of the Saviour’s precept, she brought forth abundant fruit in word and deed. If Helenaconducted herself in this manner while in the Holy Land, which is indeed testified to by Eusebius,Bishop of Caesarea in Palestine, we should not doubt that she manifested the same piety and benevolence in those other cities of the empire in which she resided after her conversion. Hermemory in Rome is chiefly identified with the church of S. Croce in Gerusalemme. On the present location of this church formerly stood the Palatium Sessorianum, and near by were the Thermae Helenianae, which baths derived their name from the empress. Here two inscriptions were found composed in honour of Helena. The Sessorium, which was near the site of the Lateran, probably served as Helena’s residence when she stayed in Rome; so that it is quite possible for a Christianbasilica to have been erected on this spot by Constantine, at her suggestion and in honour of thetrue Cross.
Helena was still living in the year 326, when Constantine ordered the execution of his son Crispus. When, according to Socrates’ account (Church History I.17), the emperor in 327 improvedDrepanum, his mother’s native town, and decreed that it should be called Helenopolis, it is probable that the latter returned from Palestine to her son who was then residing in the Orient. Constantinewas with her when she died, at the advanced age of eighty years or thereabouts (Eusebius, Life of Constantine III.46). This must have been about the year 330, for the last coins which are known to have been stamped with her name bore this date. Her body was brought to Constantinople and laid to rest in the imperial vault of the church of the Apostles. It is presumed that her remains were transferred in 849 to the Abbey of Hautvillers, in the French Archdiocese of Reims, as recorded by the monk Altmann in his “Translatio”. She was revered as a saint, and the veneration spread, early in the ninth century, even to Western countries. Her feast falls on 18 August. Regarding the finding of the Holy Cross by St. Helena, see CROSS AND CRUCIFIX.
Constantine having declared war on Maxentius had invaded Italy. During the campaign which ensued he is said to have seen in the heavens one day a luminous cross together with the wordsEN-TOUTOI-NIKA(In this conquer.) During the night that followed that day, he saw again, in sleep the same cross, and Christ, appearing with it, admonished him to place it on his standards. Thus the Labarum took its origin, and under this glorious banner Constantine overcame his adversary near the Milvian Bridge, on 28 October, 312 (see CONSTANTINE THE GREAT).
The second event was of even greater importance. In the year 326 the mother of Constantine,Helena, then about 80 years old, having journeyed to Jerusalem, undertook to rid the Holy Sepulchre of the mound of earth heaped upon and around it, and to destroy the pagan buildings that profaned its site, Some revelations which she had received gave her confidence that she would discover the Saviour’s Tomb and His Cross. The work was carried on diligently, with the co-operation of St. Macarius, bishop of the city. The Jews had hidden the Cross in a ditch or well, and covered it over with stones, so that the faithful might not come and venerate it. Only a chosen few among the Jews knew the exact spot where it had been hidden, and one of them, namedJudas, touched by Divine inspiration, pointed it out to the excavators, for which act he was highly praised by St. Helena. Judas afterwards became a Christian saint, and is honoured under the name of Cyriacus. During the excavation three crosses were found, but because the titulus was detached from the Cross of Christ, there was no means of identifying it. Following an inspirationfrom on high, Macarius caused the three crosses to be carried, one after the other, to the bedside of a worthy woman who was at the point of death. The touch of the other two was of no avail; but on touching that upon which Christ had died the woman got suddenly well again. From a letter of St. Paulinus to Severus inserted in the Breviary of Paris it would appear that St. Helena. herself had sought by means of a miracle to discover which was the True Cross and that she caused a man already dead and buried to be carried to the spot, whereupon, by contact with the thirdcross, he came to life. From yet another tradition, related by St. Ambrose, it would seem that thetitulus, or inscription, had remained fastened to the Cross.
After the happy discovery, St. Helena and Constantine erected a magnificent basilica over the Holy Sepulchre, and that is the reason why the church bore the name of St. Constantinus. The precise spot of the finding was covered by the atrium of the basilica, and there the Cross was set up in anoratory, as appears in the restoration executed by de Vogüé. When this noble basilica had been destroyed by the infidels, Arculfus, in the seventh century, enumerated four buildings upon the Holy Places around Golgotha, and one of them was the “Church of the Invention” or “of the Finding”. This church was attributed by him and by topographers of later times to Constantine. TheFrankish monks of Mount Olivet, writing to Leo III, style it St. Constantinus. Perhaps the oratorybuilt by Constantine suffered less at the hands of the Persians than the other buildings, and so could still retain the name and style of Martyrium Constantinianum. (See De Rossi, Bull. d’ arch. crist., 1865, 88.)
A portion of the True Cross remained at Jerusalem enclosed in a silver reliquary; the remainder, with the nails, must have been sent to Constantine, and it must have been this second portion that he caused to be enclosed in the statue of himself which was set on a porphyry column in theForum at Constantinople; Socrates, the historian, relates that this statue was to make the city impregnable. One of the nails was fastened to the emperor’s helmet, and one to his horse’s bridle, bringing to pass, according to many of the Fathers, what had been written by Zacharias theProphet: “In that day that which is upon the bridle of the horse shall be holy to the Lord” (Zechariah 14:20). Another of the nails was used later in the Iron Crown of Lombardy preserved in the treasury of the cathedral of Monza. Eusebius in his Life of Constantine, describing the work of excavating and building on the site of the Holy Sepulchre, does not speak of the True Cross. In the story of a journey to Jerusalem made in 333 (Itinerarium Burdigalense) the various tombs and thebasilica of Constantine are referred to, but no mention is made of the True Cross. The earliest reference to it is in the “Catecheses” of St. Cyril of Jerusalem (P.G., XXXIII, 468, 686, 776) written in the year 348, or at least twenty years after the supposed discovery.
In this tradition of the “Invention”, or discovery of the True Cross, not a word is said as to the smaller portions of it scattered up and down the world. The story, as it has reached us, has been admitted, since the beginning of the fifth century, by all ecclesiastical writers, with, however, many more or less important variations. By many critics the tradition of the finding of the Crossthrough the work of St. Helena. in the vicinity of Calvary has been held to be mere legend without any historical reality these critics relying chiefly upon the silence of Eusebius, who tells of all else that St. Helena did in Jerusalem, but says nothing about her finding the Cross. Still, however difficult it may be to explain this silence, it would be unsound to annihilate with a negative argument a universal tradition dating from the fifth century. The wonders related in the Syriacbook “Doctrina. Addai” (sixth century) and in the legend of the Jew Cyriacus, who is said to have been inspired to reveal to St. Helena, the place where the Cross was buried, are responsible at least in part for the common beliefs of the faithful on this matter. These beliefs are universally held to be apocryphal. (See Duchesne, Lib. Pont., I, p. cviii.) However that may be, the testimony ofCyril, Bishop of Jerusalem from 350 or 351, who was on the spot a very few years after the event took place, and was a contemporary of Eusebius of Cæsarea, is explicit and formal as to the finding of the Cross at Jerusalem during the reign of Constantine this testimony is contained in a letter to the Emperor Constantius (P.G. XXXIII, 52, 1167; and cf. 686, 687). It is true that the authenticityof this letter is questioned, but without solid grounds. St. Ambrose (De obit. Theod., 45-48 in P.L., XVI, 401) and Rufinus (Hist. eccl., I, viii in P.L., XXI, 476) bear witness to the fact of the finding.Silvia of Aquitaine (Peregrinatio ad loca sancta, ed. Gamurrini, Rome 1888. p. 76) assures us that in her time the feast of the Finding was commemorated on Calvary, that event having naturallybecome the occasion of a special feast under the name of “The Invention of the Holy Cross”. Thefeast dates from very early times at Jerusalem, and it was gradually introduced into otherChurches. Papebroch (Acta SS., 3 May) tells us that it did not become general until about the year 720. In the Latin Church it is kept on the 3rd of May; the Greek Church keeps it on the 14th of September the same day as the Exaltation, another feast of very remote origin, supposed to have been instituted at Jerusalem to commemorate the dedication of the basilica of the Holy Sepulchre(335) and thence introduced at Rome.
Constantine’s vision of the Cross, and perhaps another apparition which took place in Jerusalem in 346, would seem to have been commemorated in this same feast. But its chief glory is its connection with the restoration of the True Cross to the Church of Jerusalem, after it had been carried away by the Persian king, Chosroes (Khusrau) II, the conqueror of Phocas, when he captured and sacked the Holy City. This Chosroes was afterwards vanquished by the EmperorHeraclius II and in 628 was assassinated by his own son Siroes (Shirva), who restored the Cross toHeraclius. It was then carried in triumph to Constantinople and thence, in the Spring of the year 629, to Jerusalem. Heraclius, who wished to carry the Holy Cross upon his own shoulders on this occasion, found it extremely heavy, but when, upon the advice of the Patriarch Zacharias, he laid aside his crown and imperial robe of state, the sacred burden became light, and he was able to carry it to the church. In the following year Heraclius was conquered by the Mahommedans, and in 647 Jerusalem was taken by them.
In reference to this feast the Paris Breviary associates with the memory of Heraclius that of St. Louis of France, who, on 14 September, 1241 barefoot and divested of his royal robes, carried the fragment of the Holy Cross sent to him by the Templars, who had received it as a pledge fromBaldwin. This fragment escaped destruction during the Revolution and is still preserved at Paris. There, also, is preserved the incombustible cross left to the abbey of Saint-Germain-des-Prés by the Princess Anna Gonzaga, together with two portions of the Nails. Very soon after the discovery of the True Cross its wood was cut up into small relics and quickly scattered throughout theChristian World. We know this from the writings of St. Ambrose, of St. Paulinus of Nola, of Sulpicius Severus, of Rufinus, and, among the Greeks, of Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret (cf. Duchesne, “Lib, Pont.”, I, p. cvii; Marucchi “Basiliquesde Rome”, 1902, 348 sq.; Pennacchi, “De Inventâ Ierosolymis Constantino magno Imp. Cruce D. N. I. C.”, Rome, 1892; Baronius, “Annales Eccl,”, ad an. 336, Lucca, 1739, IV, 178). Many portions of it are preserved in Santa Croce in Gerusalemme at Rome, and in Notre-Dame at Paris (cf. Rohault de Fleury, “Mémoire”, 45-163; Gosselin, Noticehistorique sur la Sainte Couronne et les autres Instruments de la Passion de Note-Dame de Paris”, Paris, 1828; Sauvage, “Documents sur les reliques de la, Vrai Croix”, Rouen, 1893). St. Paulinus in one of his letters refers to the redintegration of the Cross, i.e. that it never grew smaller in size, no matter how many pieces were detached from it. And the same St. Paulinus received fromJerusalem a relic of the Cross enclosed in a golden tube, but so small that it was almost an atom, “in segmento pene atomo hastulæ brevis munimentum præsentis et pignus æternæ salutis” (Epist. xxxi ad Severum).
The historical detail we have been considering sufficiently accounts for appearance of the cross on monuments dating from the end of the fourth century and the beginning of the fifth century. In anarcosolium in the Catacomb of St. Callistus a cross composed of flowers and foliage with two dovesat its base is still partially disguised, but begins to be more easily recognizable (cf. De Rossi, Rom.Sott., III, Pl. XII). Especially in Africa, where Christianity had made more rapid progress, the crossbegan to appear openly during the course of the fourth century; The most ancient text we have relating to a carved cross dates from later than A.D. 362. The cross was used on the coinage ofChristian princes and peoples with the superscription, Salus Mundi. The “adoration” of the Cross, which up to this time had been restricted to private cult, now began to assume a public andsolemn character. At the end of the fourth century Christian poets were already writing, “Flecte genu lignumque Crucis venerabile adora”. The second Council of Nicæa, among other precepts that deal with images, lays down that the Cross should receive an adoration of honour, “honorariam adorationem”. (See TRUE CROSS.) To the pagans who taunted them with being as much idolatersas they accused the pagans of being towards their gods, they replied that they took their stand on the nature of the cult they that it was not latria, but a relative worship, and the materialsymbol only served to raise their minds to the Divine Type, Jesus Christ Crucified (cf. Tert., “Apol”, xvi; Minucius Felix, “Octav.”, ix-xii). Wherefore St. Ambrose, speaking on the veneration of theCross, thought it opportune to explain the idea: “Let us adore Christ, our King, who hung upon the wood, and not the wood” (Regem Christum qui pependit in ligno . . . non lignum. — “In obit.Theodosii”, xlvi). The Western Church observes the solemn public veneration (called the “Adoration”) on Good Friday. In the Gregorian Sacramentary we read: “Venit Pontifexet et adoratam deosculatur”. In the Eastern Church the special veneration of the Cross is performed on the ThirdSunday in Lent (Kyriake tes stauroproskyneseos “Sunday of the Cross-veneration”) and during the week that follows it. The gradual spread of the devotion to the Cross incidentally occasioned abuses in the piety of the faithful. Indeed, we learn from the edicts of Valentinian and Theodosiusthat the cross was at times set up in very unseemly places. The evil-minded, the ignorant, and all those who practiced spells, charms, and other such superstitions perverted the widespreaddevotion to their own corrupt uses. To deceive the faithful and turn their piety into lucre, these people associated the sign of the cross with their superstitious and magical symbols, winning thereby the confidence and trust of their dupes. To all this corruption of the religious idea the teachers of the Church opposed themselves, exhorting the faithful to true piety and to beware ofsuperstitious talismans (cf. St. John Chrysostom, Hom. vii in Epist. ad Coloss., vii, and elsewhere;De Rossi, “Bull. d’archeol. crist.” 1869, 62-64).
The distribution of portions of the wood of the Cross led to the making of a remarkable number ofcrosses from the fourth century onwards, many of which have come down to us. Known under the names of encolpia and pectoral crosses they often served to enclose fragments of the True Cross; they were merely crosses worn on the breast out of devotion—”To wear upon the breast a cross, hung from the neck, with the Sacred Wood, or with relics of saints, which is what they call anencolpium” (Anastasius Bibliothecarius on Act. V of VIII Dec. Counc.). On the origin and use ofpectoral crosses see Giovanni Scandella, “Considerazioni sopra un encolpio eneo rinvenuto in Corfu” (Trieste, 1854). St. John Chrysostom, in his polemic against Jews and Gentiles, wherein he panegyrizes the triumph of the Cross, testifies that whosoever, man or woman possessed a relic of it had it enclosed in gold and wore it around the neck (St. John Chrysostom, ed. Montfaucon, I, 571). St. Macrina (d. 379) sister of St. Gregory Nazianzen, wore an iron cross on her breast; we do not really know its shape; perhaps it was the monogrammatic one taken by her brother from her dead body. Among the belongings of Maria, the daughter of Stilicho and wife of Honorius, laid away together with her body in the Vatican basilica, and found there in 1544, there were counted no fewer than ten small crosses in gold adorned with emeralds and gems, as may be seen in the illustrations preserved by Lucio Fauno (Antich. Rom., V, x). In the Kircherian Museum there is a small gold cross, hollowed for relics, and dating from the fifth century. It has a ring attached to it for securing it around the neck, and it seems to have had grapevine ornamentation at the extremities. A very beautiful cross, described by De Rossi and by him attributed to the sixth century, was found in a tomb in the Agro Verano at Rome (Bull. d’arch. Crist., 1863, 33-38). The general characteristic of these more ancient crosses is their simplicity and lack of inscription, in contrast to those of the Byzantine era and times later than the sixth century. Among the most noteworthy is the staurotheca of St. Gregory the Great (590-604), preserved at Monza, which is really a pectoral cross (cf. Bugatti, “Memorie di S. Celso”, 174 sq.; Borgia, “De Cruce Veliternâ”, pp. cxxxiii sqq.). Scandella (op. cit.) points out that St. Gregory is the first to mention the cruciformshape given to these golden reliquaries. But, as we have seen, they date from much earlier times, as is proved by the one found in the Agro Verano, among others. Some writers go too far in wishing to push their antiquity back to the beginning of the fourth century. They base their opinion on documents in the acts of the martyrs under Diocletian. In those of the martyrdom of St. Procopius we read that he caused a gold pectoral cross to be made, and that there appeared on itmiraculously in Hebrew letters the names Emmanuel, Michael, Gabriel. The Bollandists, however, reject these acts, which they demonstrate to be of little authority (Acta SS., July, II, p. 554). In the history of St. Eustratius and other martyrs of Lesser Armenia, it is related that a soldier named Orestes was recognized to be a Christian because, during some military manœuvres, a certainmovement of his body displayed the fact that he wore a golden cross on his breast (cf. Aringhi,Rom. Subt., II, 545); but even this history is far from being entirely accurate.
The recent opening of the famous treasury of the Sancta Sanctorum near the Lateran has restored to our possession some objects of the highest value in connection with the wood of the Holy Cross, and bearing on our knowledge of crosses containing particles of the Holy Wood, and ofchurches built in the fifth and sixth centuries in its honour. Among the objects found in this treasury was a votive cross of about the fifth century, inlaid with large gems, a cruciform wooden box with a sliding lid bearing the words (light, life), and lastly, a gold cross ornamented withcloisonnés enamels. The first of these is most important because it belongs to the same period (if not to an even earlier one) as the famous cross of Justin II, of the sixth century, preserved in the treasury at St. Peter’s, and which contains a relic of the True Cross set in jewels. It was held, up to the present, to be the oldest cross extant in a precious metal (De Waal in “Römische Quartalschrift”, VII, 1893, 245 sq.; Molinier, “Hist. générale des arts; L’orfèvrerie religieuse et civile”, Paris, 1901, vol. IV, pt. I, p. 37). This cross, containing relics of the Holy Cross, was discovered by Pope Sergius I (687-701) in the sacristy of St. Peter’s basilica (cf. Duchesne, Lib.Pont., I, 347, s.v. Sergius) in a sealed silver case. It contained a jewelled cross enclosing a piece of the True Cross, and dates, perhaps, from the fifth century.
Enamelled crosses of this nature, an inheritance of Byzantine art, do not date earlier than the sixth century. The oldest example of this type we have is a fragment of the reliquary adorned withcloisonnés enamels in which a fragment of the cross was carried to Poitiers between 565 and 575 (cf. Molinier, op. cit.; Barbier de Montault, “Le trésor de la Sainte Croix de Poitiers”, 1883). Of laterdate are the Cross of Victory at Limburg near Aachen. Charlemagne’s cross, and that of St. Stephen at Vienna. Besides these we have in Italy the enamelled cross of Cosenza (eleventh century) the Gaeta cross, also in enamel, crosses in the Christian section of the Vatican Museum, and the celebrated cross of Velletri (eighth or tenth century) adorned with precious gems and enamel, and discussed by Cardinal Stefano Borgia in his work, “De Cruce Veliternâ”.
The world-wide devotion to the Cross and its relics during the fifth and succeeding centuries was so great that even the iconoclast Emperors of the East in their suppression of the cult of images had to respect that of the Cross (cf. Banduri, “Numism. imp.” II, p. 702 sq.; Niceph., “Hist. Eccl.”, XVIII, liv). This cult of the Cross called forth the building of many Churches and oratories wherein to treasure its precious relics. The church of S. Croce at Ravenna was built by Galla Placidia before the year 450 “in honorem sanctæ crucis Domini, a quâ habet et nomen et formam” (Muratori, Script. rer. ital., I, Pl. II, p. 544a). Pope Symmachus (498-514; cf. Duchesne, “Lib. Pont.”, 261 s.v.Symmachus, no. 79) built an oratory of the Holy Cross behind the baptistery at St. Peter’s, and placed in it a jewelled gold cross containing a relic of the True Cross. Pope Hilarius (461-468) did the like at the Lateran, building an oratory communicating with the baptistery, and placing in it a similar cross (Duchesne. op. cit., I, 242: “ubi lignum posuit dominicum, crucem auream cum gemmis quæ pens. lib. XX”).
The unvarying characteristic style of cross in the fifth and sixth centuries is for the most part decked with flowers, palms, and foliage, sometimes sprouting from the root of the cross itself, or adorned with gems and precious stones. Sometimes on two small chains hanging from the arms of the cross one sees the apocalyptic letters Alpha, Omega, and over them were hung small lamps orcandles. On the mosaics in the church of St. Felix at Nola, St. Paulinus caused to be written: “Cerne coronatam domini super atria Christi stare crucem” (Ep, xxxii, 12, ad Sever.). A flowered and jewelled cross is that painted on the baptistery of the Catacomb of Ponzianus on the ViaPortuensis (cf. Bottari, Rorn. Sott., P1. XLIV). The cross is also displayed on the mosaic in thebaptistery built by Galla Placidia, in the church of San Vitale, and in Sant’ Apollinare in Classe, atRavenna, and over a ciborium from St. Sophia at Constantinople. In 1867, at Berezov Islands, on the River Sosswa, in Siberia, there was found a silver plate, or liturgical paten, of Syrianworkmanship, which now belongs to Count Gregory Stroganov. In the centre of it is a crossstanding on a terrestrial globe studded with stars; on either side stands an angel with a staff in his left hand, the right being raised in adoration; four rivers flow from its base and indicate that the scene is in Paradise. Some learned Russians attribute the plate to the ninth century, but De Rossi, more correctly, places it in the seventh century. In these same centuries the cross was of frequent use in liturgical rites and processions of great solemnity. It was carried in the churcheswhere the stations were; the bearer of it was called draconarius, and the cross itself stationalis. These crosses were often very costly (cf. Bottari, Rom. Sott., Pl. XLIV), the most famous being the cross of Ravenna and that of Velletri.
The sign of the cross was made at liturgical functions over persons and things, sometimes with five fingers extended, to represent the Five Wounds of Christ, sometimes with three, in sign of thePersons of the Trinity, and sometimes with only one, symbolical of the unity of God. For theblessing of the chalice and oblations Leo IV prescribed that two fingers be extended and thumb placed beneath them. This is the only true sign of the Trinitarian Cross. The pope warmly recommended his clergy to make this sign with care, else their blessing would be fruitless. Theaction was accompanied by the solemn formula, “In nomine Patris, etc.” Another use of the crosswas in the solemn dedication of churches (see ALPHABET; CONSECRATION). The bishop who performed the ceremony wrote the alphabet in Latin and Greek on the floor of the church along two straight lines crossing in the form of the Roman decussis. The letter X, which in the land-plottings of the Roman augurs represented, with its two component lines, the cardo maximus and the decumanus maximus, was the same decussis used by the Roman agrimensores, in their surveys of farms, to indicate boundaries. This sign was appropriate to Christ by its cruciform shape and by its identity in shape with the initial letter of His name, Christos, in Greek. For this reason it was one of the genuine forms of the signum Christi.
The use of the cross became so widespread in the fifth and following centuries that anything like a complete enumeration of the monuments on which it appears is well nigh impossible. Suffice it to say that there is hardly a remnant of antiquity dating from this century, whether lowly and mean or noble and grand, which does not bear the sign. In proof of this we shall give here a cursory enumeration. It is quite frequent on sepulchral monuments, on the imperial urns at Constantinople, on the plaster of the loculi (resting-places) in the catacombs, especially of Rome, in a painting in aChristian cemetery at Alexandria in Egypt, on a mosaic at Boville near Rome, on an inscription for atomb made in the form of a cross and now in the museum at Marseilles, on the interior walls ofsepulchral chambers, on the front of marble sarcophagi dating from the fifth century. In these last instances it is common to see the cross surmounted by the monogram and surrounded by a laurel wreath (e.g. the sarcophagi at Arles, and in the Lateran Museum). A very fine specimen was found recently in excavations in St. Domitilla’s Catacomb on the Ostian Way; it is a symbolical picture ofsouls freed from the trammels of the body, and saved by means of the Cross, which has two doveson its arms, while armed guards are asleep at its base. Lastly, in England, crosses have been found on sepulchral monuments. So universal was its use by the faithful that they put it even on household utensils, on medals of devotion, on pottery lamps, spoons, cups, plates, glassware on clasps dating from Merovingian times, on inscriptions and votive offerings, on seals made in the form of a cross, on toys representing animals, on ivory combs, on the seals of wine-jars, onreliquary boxes, and even on water-pipes. In objects of liturgical use we meet it on Biblicalcodices, on vestments, pallia, on leaden thongs inscribed with exorcising formulæs and it was signed on the foreheads of catechumens and candidates for confirmation. The architectural details of churches and basilicas were ornamented with crosses; the façades, the marble slabs, the transoms, the pillars, the capitals, the keystones of arches, the altar-tables, the bishops’ thrones, the diptychs, and the bells were also ornamented in the same way. In the artistic monuments the so-called cruciform nimbus around Our Saviour’s head is well known. The cross appears over His head, and near that of the orante, as in the oil-stocks of Santo Menna. It is also to be met with on monuments of a symbolical nature: on the rocks whence flow the four celestial rivers the crossfinds its place; on the vase and on the symbolical ship, on the head of the tempting serpent, and even on the lion in Daniel’s den.
When Christianity had become the official religion of the empire, it was natural that the crossshould be carved on public monuments. In fact it was from the first used to purify and sanctify monuments and temples originally pagan; it was prefixed to signatures and to inscriptions placed on public work; it was borne by consuls on their sceptres, the first to do so being Basil the Younger (A.D. 541 — cf. Gori, Thes. diptych., II, Pl. XX). It was cut in marble quarries and in brickyards, and on the gates of cities (cf. de Vogüé, Syrie Centrale; Architecture du VII siécle).
At Rome there is still to be seen on the Gate of St. Sebastian the figure of a Greek crosssurrounded by a circle with the invocations: In and around Bologna it was usual to set the sign ofsalvation in the public streets. According to tradition, these crosses are very ancient, and four of them date from the time of St. Petronius. Some of them were restored in the ninth and tenth centuries (cf. Giovanni Gozzadini, Delle croci monumentali che erano nelle vie di Bologna nel secolo xiii).
The cross also played an important part in heraldry and diplomatic science. The former does not directly come within our scope; of the second we shall give the briefest outlines. Crosses are to be found on documents of early medieval times and, being placed at the head of a deed, were equivalent to an invocation of heaven, whether they were plain or ornamental. They were at times placed before signatures, and they have even been equivalent to signatures in themselves. Indeed, from the tenth century we find, under contracts, roughly-made crosses that have all the appearance of being intended as signatures. Thus did Hugh Capet, Robert Capet, Henry I, andPhilip I sign their official documents. This usage declined in the thirteenth century and appeared again in the fifteenth. In our own day the cross is reserved as the attestation-mark of illiterate people. A cross was characteristic of the signature of Apostolic notaries, but this was carefully designed, not rapidly written. In the early Middle Ages crosses were decorated with even greater magnifìcence. In the centre were to be seen medallions representing the Lamb of God, Christ, or the saints. Such is the case in the Velletri cross and that which Justin II gave to St. Peter’s, mentioned above, and again in the silver cross of Agnello at Ravenna (cf. Ciampini, Vet. mon., II, Pl. XIV). All this kind of decoration displays the substitution of some more or less complete symbolfor the figure of Christ on the cross, of which we are about to speak.
It may be well to give here a list of works bearing on the departments of the subject just treated, and containing illustrations which it has not been opportune to quote in the foregoing part of the article: STOCKBAUER, Kunstgeschichte des Kreuzes (Schaffhause, 1870); GRIMOUARD DE SAINT-LAURENT, Iconographie de la Croix et du Crucifix in Ann. archéol., XXVI, XXVII; MARTIGNY,Dictionnaire des antiquités chrétiennes, s.v. Crucifix; BAYET, Recherches pour savir à l’histoire de la peinture. . .en orient (Paris, 1879): MÜNZ, Les mosaïques chrétiennes de l’Italie (l’oratoire de Jeann VII) in Rev. archéol., 1877, II; LABARTE, Histoire des arts industriels, II; KRAUS, Real-Encyklopädie der christliche. Alterhümer (Freiburg, 1882).
Later development of the crucifix
We have seen the progressive steps — artistic, symbolical, and allegorical — through which the representation of the Cross passed from the first centuries down to the Middle Ages and we have seen some of the reasons which prevented Christian art from making an earlier display of the figure of the cross. Now the cross, as it was seen during all this time was only a symbol of the Divine Victim and not a direct representation. We can thus more easily understand, then how much more circumspection was necessary in proceeding to a direct portrayal of the Lord’s actual Crucifixion. Although in the fifth century the cross began to appear on public monuments, it was not for a century afterwards that the figure on the cross was shown; and not until the close of the fifth, or even the middle of the sixth century, did it appear without disguise. But from the sixth century onward we find many images — not allegorical, but historical and realistic of the crucified Saviour. To proceed in order, we will first examine the rare allusions, as it were, to the Crucifixion inChristian art down to the sixth century, and then look at the productions of that art in the later period.
Seeing that the cross was the symbol of an ignominious death, the repugnance of the earlyChristians to any representation of Christ’s torments and ignominy is easily understood. On a few sarcophagi of the fifth century (e.g. one in the Lateran, no. 171) scenes from the Passion are shown, but so treated as to show none of the shame and horror attaching to that instrument of death which was, as St. Paul says, “to the Jews a scandal, and to the Gentiles foolishness”. Yet, from the first ages Christians were loth to deprive themselves altogether of the image of their crucified Redeemer, though, for the reasons already stated and because of the “Discipline of the Secret”, they could not represent the scene openly. The Council of Elvira, c. 300, decreed that what was to be adored ought not to be used in mural decoration. Wherefore recourse was had to allegory and to veiled forms, as in the case of the cross itself, (Cf. Bréhier, Les origines du Crucifixdans l’art religieux, Paris, 1904.) One of the most ancient allegories of the Crucifixion is considered to be that of the lamb lying at the foot of the anchor — symbols respectively of the Cross and ofChrist. A very ancient inscription in the Crypt of Lucina, in the Catacombs of St. Callistus, shows this picture, which is otherwise somewhat rare (cf. De Rossi, Rom. Sott. Christ., I, Pl. XX). The same symbol was still in use at the end of the fourth and beginning of the fifth century. In the description of the mosaics in the basilica of St. Felix at Nola, St. Paulinus shows us the same crossin connection with the mystical lamb, evidently an allusion to the Crucifixion, and he adds the well-known verse: “Sub cruce sanguineâ niveus stat Christus in agno.”
We saw above that the trident was a veiled image of the cross. In the Catacomb of St. Callistuswe have a more complicated study; the mystical dolphin is twined around the trident — very expressive symbol of the Crucifixion. The early Christians in their artistic labours did not disdain to draw upon the symbols and allegories of pagan mythology, as long as these were not contrary toChristian faith and morals. In the Catacomb of St. Callistus a sarcophagus, dating from the third century, was found, the front of which shows Ulysses tied to the mast while he listens to the song of the Sirens; near him are his companions, who with ears filled with wax, cannot hear the alluring song. All this is symbolical of the Cross, and of the Crucified, who has closed against the seductions of evil the ears of the faithful during their voyage over the treacherous sea of life in the ship which will bring them to the harbour of salvation. Such is the interpretation given by St. Maximus of Turin in the homily read on Good Friday (S. Maximi opera, Rome, 1874, 151. Cf. De Rossi, Rom. Sott., I, 344-345 Pl. XXX, 5). A very important monument belonging to the beginning of the third century shows the Crucifixion openly. This would seem to contradict what we have said above, but it should be remembered that this is the work of pagan, and not of Christian, hands (cf.De Rossi, Bull, d’arch, crist., 1863, 72, and 1867, 75), and therefore it has no real value as a proofamong purely Christian works. On a beam in the Pædagogioum on the Palatine there was discovered a graffito on the plaster, showing a man with an ass’s head, and clad in a perizoma (or short loin-cloth) and fastened to a crux immissa (regular Latin cross). Near by there is anotherman in an attitude of prayer with the legend Alexamenos sebetai theon, i.e., “Alexamenos adoresGod.” This graffito is now to be seen in the Kircherian Museum in Rome, and is but an impious caricature in mockery of the Christian Alexamenos, drawn by one of his pagan comrades of thePædagogioum. (See the article entitled Ass.) In fact Tertullian tells us that in his day, i.e. precisely at the time when this caricature was made, Christians were accused of adoring an ass’s head, “Somniatis caput asininum esse Deum nostrum” (Apol., xvi; Ad Nat., I, ii). And Minucius Felixconfirms this (Octav., ix). The Palatine graffito is also important as showing that the Christiansused the crucifix in their private devotions at least as early as the third century. It would not have been possible for Alexamenos’ companion to trace the graffito of a crucified person clad in theperizoma (which was contrary to Roman usage) if he had not seen some such figure made use of by the Christians. Professor Haupt sought to identify it as a caricature of a worshipper of theEgyptian god Seth, the Typho of the Greeks, but his explanation was refuted by Kraus. Recently, a similar opinion has been put forth by Wünsch, who takes his stand on the letter Y which is placed near the crucified figure, and which has also been found on a tablet relating to the worship of Seth; he therefore concludes that Alexamenos of the graffito belonged to the Sethian sect. (With reference to the Alexamenos graffito, which certainly has a bearing on the crucifix and its use by the early Christians, see Raffaele Garucci, “Un crocifisso graffito da mano pagana nella casa dei Cesari sul Palatino”, Rome, 1857; Ferdinand Becker, “Das Spott-Crucifix der römischen Kaiserpaläste”, Breslau, 1866; Kraus, “Das Spott-Crucifix vom Palatin”, Freiburg im Breisgau, 1872; Visconti, “Di un nuovo graffito palatino relativo al cristiano Alessameno”, Rome, 1870; Visconti andLanciani, “Guida del Palatino”, 1873, p. 86; De Rossi, “Rom. Sott. Crist.”, 1877, pp. 353-354;Wünsch, ed., “Setianische Verfluchungstafeln aus Rom”, Leipzig, 1898, p. 110 sqq.; Vigouroux, “Les livres saints et la critique rationaliste”, I, 94-102.)
The crucifix and representations of the Crucifixion became general after the sixth century, onmanuscripts, then on private monuments, and finally even on public monuments. But its appearance on monuments up to about the eighth century surely indicates such monuments to be works of private zeal and devotion, or, at least, not clearly and decidedly public. As a matter of fact, it is noteworthy that, in the year 692, i.e. at the end of the seventh century the Quinisext Council of Constantinople, called the Trullan, ordered the symbolical and allegorical treatment to be laid aside. The earliest manuscript bearing a representation of Christ crucified is in a miniature of aSyriac codex of the Gospels dating from A.D. 586 (Codex Syriacus, 56), written by the scribeRabula, and which is in the Laurentian Library at Florence. Therein the figure of Christ is robed (Assemani, Biblioth. Laurent. Medic. catalog., Pl. XXIII, p. 194). Other images of the crucifix belong to the sixth century. Gregory of Tours, in his work “De Gloriâ Martyrum”, I, xxv, speaks of a crucifixrobed in a colobium, or tunic, which in his day was publicly venerated at Narbonne in the church of St. Genesius, and which he considered a profanation — so far was the public cult of the crucifixfrom having become general up to that time. A cross belonging to the sixth century is to be found in the treasury at Monza, on which the image of the Saviour is wrought in enamel (cf. Mozzoni, “Tavole cronologiche-critiche della stor. eccl: secolo VII”, 79), and which seems to be identical with that given by St. Gregory the Great to Theodolinda, Queen of the Lombards. We know also that he gave a cross to Recared, King of the Visigoths, and to others (cf. S. Gregorii Lib. III, Epist. xxxii; Lib. IX, Epist. cxxii; Lib. XIII, Epist. xlii; Lib. XIV, Epist. xii).
It is certain, then, that the custom of displaying the Redeemer on the Cross began with the close of the sixth century, especially on encolpia, yet such examples of the crucifix are rare. As an example, we have a Byzantine encolpion, with a Greek inscription, which was erroneously thought to have been discovered in the Roman Catacombs in 1662, and about which the renowned Leo Allatius has written learnedly (cf. “Codice Chigiano”, VI; Fea, “Miscellanea filol. critica”, 282). The little metal vases at Monza, in which was carried to Queen Theodolinda the oil from the Holy Places, show clearly how the repugnance to effigies of Christ lasted well into the sixth century. In the scene of the Crucifixion thereon depicted, the two thieves alone are seen with arms extended, in the attitude of crucifixion, but without a cross, while Christ appears as an orante, with a nimbus,ascending among the clouds, and in all the majesty of glory, above a cross under a decoration of flowers. (Cf. Mozzoni, op. cit., 77, 84.) In the same manner, on another monument, we see thecross between two archangels while the bust of Christ is shown above. Another very important monument of this century, and perhaps dating even from the preceding one, is the Crucifixioncarved on the wooden doors at S. Sabina on the Aventine Hill, at Rome. The Crucified Christ, stripped of His garments, and on a, cross, but not nailed to the cross, and between two thieves, is shown as an orante, and the scene of the Crucifixion is, to a, certain extent, artistically veiled. The carving is roughly done, but the work has become of great importance, owing to recent studies thereon, wherefore we shall briefly indicate the various writings dealing with it: Grisar, “Analecta Romana”, 427 sqq.; Berthier, “La Porte de Sainte-Sabine à Rome; Etude archéologique” (Fribourg, Switzerland, 1892); Pératé, “L’Archéologie chrétienne” in “Bibliothèque de l’ensiegnement des beaux arts” (Paris, 1892, pp. 330-36); Bertram, “Die Thüren von Sta. Sabina in Rom: das Vorbild der Bernwards Thüren am Dom zu Hildesheim” (Fribourg, Switzerland, 1892); Ehrhard, “Die altchristliche Prachtthüre der Basilika Sta. Sabina in Rom” in “Der Katholik”, LXXIX (1892), 444 sqq., 538 sqq.; “Civiltà Cattolica”, IV (1892), 68-89; “‘Römische Quartalschrift”, VII (1893), 102; “Analecta Bollandiana”, XIII (1894), 53; Forret and Müller, “Kreuz und Kreuzigung Christi in ihrer Kunstentwicklung” (Strasburg, 1894), 15, Pl. II and Pl, III; Strzygowski, “Das Berliner Moses-relief und die Thüren von Sta. Sabina. in Rom” in “Jahrbuch der königl. preussischen Kunstsammlungen”, XVI (1893), 65-81; Ehrhard, “Prachtthüre von S. Sabina in Rom und die Domthüre von Spalato” in “Ephemeris Spalatensis” (1894), 9 sqq.: Grisar, “Kreuz und Kreuzigung auf der altchristl. Thüre von S. Sabina in Rom (Rome, 1894); Dobbert, “Zur Entstehungsgeschichte des Crucifixes” in “Jahrb. der preuss. Kunstsammlungen”, I (1880), 41-50.
To this same period belongs a crucifix at Mount Athos (see Smith’s “Dictionary of Christian Antiquities”, London, 1875, I, 514), as well as an ivory in the British Museum. Christ is shown wearing only a loin-cloth: He appears as if alive; and not suffering physical pain. To the left, Judasis seen hanged; and below is the purse of money. In the following century the Crucifixion is still sometimes represented with the restrictions we have noticed, for instance, in the mosaic made in 642 by Pope Theodore in S. Stefano Rotondo, Rome. There, between Sts. Primas and Felician, thecross is to be seen, with the bust of the Saviour just above it. In the same seventh century, also, the scene of the Crucifixion is shown in all its historic reality in the crypt of St. Valentine’sCatacomb on the Via Flaminia (cf. Marucchi, La cripta sepolcrale di S. Valentino, Rome, 1878).Bosio saw it in the sixteenth century, and it was then in a better state of preservation than it is today (Bosio, Roma Sott., III, lxv). Christ crucified appears between Our Lady and St. John and is clad in a long, flowing tunic (colobium), and fastened by four nails, as was the ancient tradition, and as Gregory of Tours teaches: “Clavorum ergo dominicorum gratiâ quod quatuor fuerint hæc est ratio: duo sunt affixi in palmis, et duo in plantis” (“De Gloriâ Martyrum”, I, vi, in P.L., XXI, 710).
The last objections and obstacles to the realistic reproduction of the Crucifixion disappeared in the beginning of the eighth century. In the oratory built by Pope John VII in the Vatican, A.D. 705, thecrucifix was represented realistically in mosaic. But the figure was robed, as we may learn from the drawings made by Grimaldi in the time of Paul V, when the oratory was pulled down to make room for the modern façade. Part of such a mosaic still exists in the grottoes at the Vatican similar in treatment to that of John VII. Belonging to the same century, though dating a little later, is the image of the Crucified discovered a few years ago in the apse of the old church of S. Maria Antiqua in the Roman Forum. This remarkable picture, now happily recovered, was visible for a little while in the month of May, 1702, and is mentioned in the diary of Valesio. It dates from the time of Pope St. Paul I (757-768), and stands in a niche above the altar. The figure is draped in a long tunic of a greyish-blue colour, is very lifelike, and has wide-open eyes. The soldier Longinus is in the act of wounding the side of Christ with the lance. On either hand are Mary and John; between them and the Cross stands a soldier with a sponge and a vessel filled with vinegar; above the Cross the sun and moon dim their rays.
Another interesting picture is that in the crypt of SS. Giovanni e Paolo at Rome, in their dwellinghouse on the Celian Hill. It is Byzantine in style and shows the crucifix. In the ninth century the crucifix of Leo IV is of importance (840-847). It is a stripped figure with a perizoma and four nails are used. A similar figure is in the paintings of S. Stefano alla Cappella. To the same century belongs a diptych from the monastery of Rambona of about the year 898, and now in the Vatican Library (Buonarroti, “Osservazioni sopra alcune frammenti di vetro”, Florence, 1716, 257-283, and P. Germano da s. Stanislao, “La casa celimontana, dei SS. Giovanni e Paolo”, Rome, 1895). To bring this list to a close we may mention an eleventh-century diptych in the cathedral of Tournai, a twelfth-century Roman cross preserved at the Porte de Halle, at Brussels, and an enameled crucifixin the Spitzer collection.
Here we bring our researches to an end, the field of Christian archæology not extending further. In the artistic treatment of the crucifix there are two periods: the first, which dates from the sixth to the twelfth and thirteenth centuries; and the second, dating from that time to our own day. We shall here treat only of the former, touching lightly on the latter. In the first period the Crucified is shown adhering to the cross, not hanging forward from it; He is alive and shows no sign of physical suffering; He is clad in a long, flowing, sleeveless tunic (colobium), which reaches the knees. The head is erect, and surrounded by a nimbus, and bears a royal crown. The figure is fastened to the wood with four nails (cf. Garrucci, “Storia dell’ arte crist.”, III, fig. 139 and p. 61; Marucchi, op. cit., and “Il cimitero e la basilica di S. Valentino”, Rome, 1890; Forrer and Müller, op. cit., 20, Pl, III, fig. 6). In a word, it is not Christ suffering, but Christ triumphing and glorious on the Cross. Moreover, Christian art for a long time objected to stripping Christ of his garments, and thetraditional colobium, or tunic, remained until the ninth century. In the East the robed Christ was preserved to a much later date. Again in miniatures from the ninth century the figure is robed, and stands erect on the cross and on the suppedaneum.
The scene of the Crucifixion, especially after the eighth century, includes the presence of the two thieves, the centurion who pierced Christ’s side, the soldier with the sponge, the Blessed Virgin andSt. John. Mary is never shown weeping and afflicted, as became the custom in later ages, but standing erect near the cross, as St. Ambrose says, in his funeral oration on Valentinian: “I read of her standing; I do not read of her weeping.” Moreover, on either side of the Cross the sun and the moon, often with human faces, veil their brightness, being placed there to typify the two natures of Christ, the sun, the Divine, and the moon, the human (cf. St. Gregory the Great, Homily ii in Evang.). At the foot of the Cross the female figures are symbolical of the Church and theSynagogue, the one receiving the Saviour’s blood in a cup, the other veiled and discrowned, holding in her hand a torn banner. With the tenth century realism began to play a part in Christian art, and the colobium becomes a shorter garment, reaching from the waist to the knees(perizoma). In the “Hortus deliciarum” in the “album” belonging to the Abbess Herrada of Landsbergin the twelfth the colobium is short, and approaches the form of the perizoma. From the eleventh century in the East, and from the Gothic period in the West, the head droops onto the breast (cf.Borgia, De Cruce Veliternâ, 191), the crown of thorns is introduced, the arms are bent back, the body is twisted, the face is wrung with agony, and blood flows from the wounds. In the thirteenth century complete realism is reached by the substitution of one nail in the feet, instead of two, as in the old tradition, and the resulting crossing of the legs. All this was done from artistic motives, to bring about a more moving and devotional pose. The living and triumphant Christ gives place to a Christ dead, in all the humiliation of His Passion, the agony of His death being even accentuated. This manner of treatment was afterwards generalized by the schools of Cimabue and Giotto. In conclusion it may be noted that the custom of placing the crucifix over the altar does not date from earlier than the eleventh century. (See CROSS AND CRUCIFIX IN LITURGY.)
Leave a Reply