St Francis of Assisi Cross

[mardukm]

There are a lot of Franciscans in Egypt, but I have never had the time to approach one on this topic.

I read somewhere a long time ago that the cross of St Francis is an icon with influences from “the East,” which I assume actually refers to “the Orient” (i.e., Oriental, not Eastern). I do know that St. Francis worked with the monks of St, Anthony.

Does anyone have any info on the history of that cross, or perhaps a picture of it? It had a name other than “cross of St. Francis” but I forget what it is (otherwise I’d google it myself).

Thanks

 

[scapularkid8]

You might be referring to the San Damiano crucifix? Here’s an image: http://www.monasteryicons.com/products/large/207HC.jpg

Is that it?

 

[ronyodish]

This crucifix icon of San Damiano is very beautiful!

I attend a university named after St. Francis. Interestingly, on the first day of my first class, after the professor found out that I was an Eastern Catholic, he asked us to look at this icon on the wall. If I remember correctly, he asked us to say what is the first thing that caught our attention about this icon, the thing in the icon that stood out the most for us. I said that the face and head of Jesus stood out the most for me.

I think this icon is one of the best of Latin/Western Christian iconography. I’m not sure, though, if it is of Greek origin. Maybe someone can clarify this question for us.

God bless,

Rony

 

[Nicholas82]

I’m almost positive I once heard someone more knowledgable than myself mention that it looked Syriac in origin…

 

[PazFeAmor]

Here are excerpts about the San Damiano Crucifix from two Franciscan websites (visit the websites for a longer description on its history):

poorclarestmd.org/cross.htm

This icon crucifix is in what artists call the Umbro-Byzantine style. It was painted by an unknown artist probably in the 11th century; the time when the little church of San Damiano was built. It was already a time-honoured object of veneration when Francis was struggling to find the Lord. This is an icon which tells the whole story of salvation. It starts before creation, with the hand of the Father - and its story will only end with the ending of time and space.

An unknown Umbrian artist painted the Crucifix Icon in the 12th Century. There is strong Syrian influence, and history tells us that there had been some Syrian monks in the area.

franciscanfriarstor.com/stfrancis/stf_san_damiano_cross.htm

Peace.

 

[mardukm]

Thank you all. Given the Syrian influence, no wonder brother Rony found it attractive! I wonder what about it is peculiarly Syrian. Any comments from our brethren from the Syrian Traditions (e.g., Maronite, Antiochene, Melkite, Chaldeans, etc.) would be appreciated?

St. Francis is near and dear to my heart, not only because I have exposure to Franciscans in Egypt, but also because of his adoption of St. Anthony of Egypt’s Tau Cross. I really like the story of how St. Francis held up his arms to his brethren and exclaimed that their robes form the shape of the Tau Cross!

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[ronyodish]

Thank you all. Given the Syrian influence, no wonder brother Rony found it attractive!

I wonder what about it is peculiarly Syrian. Any comments from our brethren from the Syrian Traditions (e.g., Maronite, Antiochene, Melkite, Chaldeans, etc.) would be appreciated?

You know brother Marduk, I’m not really sure how it is influenced by Syrian iconography. Traditional Syrian figures tend to be less exact in the way a human body is shaped; the scenery more hazy and less exact details. At least, this is how this icon in the The Rabbula Gospels is portrayed:

http://www.mari.org/JMS/july97/coverstoryfig4.jpg

But maybe Syrian iconography became more exact in the middle ages, I’m not sure.

There is also the possibility that when the article mentions the “Syrian influence” and “Syrian monks in the area”, then they may be referring to Melkite monks, who are of Syriac origin but having adopted the Greek tradition.

I’m puzzled

God bless,

Rony

 

[Alexius]

You know, I really don’t want to get off topic here, but I don’t think this is. In most of these depictions, Christ’s feet are separated with a nail in each one. Most of the present-day Latin crucifixes; however, only have one nail going through both feet. When/why did the depictions in the West change? I know this has been discussed before on the old forums, but I don’t remember what the answer was…

San Damiano’s cross is so beautiful and clearly Eastern, at least in comparison to most of the Latin crucifixes…

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Alexius,

You know, I really don’t want to get off topic here, but I don’t think this is. In most of these depictions, Christ’s feet are separated with a nail in each one. Most of the present-day Latin crucifixes; however, only have one nail going through both feet. When/why did the depictions in the West change? I know this has been discussed before on the old forums, but I don’t remember what the answer was…

San Damiano’s cross is so beautiful and clearly Eastern, at least in comparison to most of the Latin crucifixes…

That is an interesting observation. I have heard that MOST Western depictions of the crucifixion have the feet right over left; MOST Eastern depictions of the crucifixion have the feet left over right. Is the depiction of the feet side by side peculiar to Oriental (as distinct from Eastern) Christianity?

I have seen all three positions in Coptic iconography - i.e., right over left, left over right, side by side.

I have heard (not from any official sources, but here and there) that the right over left symbolizes victory of life over death; that left over right means the raising up of humanity to divinity; I am not sure what, if any, symbolism side by side has. Other comments?

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Alexius]

It seems then that the depictions are to be taken more symbolic than one being literally the correct way Christ died? I’ve read of differing descriptions even within the Early Church…Obviously, there is one correct way, but I guess we really don’t know what way that was…

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Alexius,

Here is a 5th century relief depicting side-by-side configuration:
usask.ca/antiquities/Collection/Death_Judas.html

According to the Old Catholic Encyclopedia, the representations of the legs being crossed did not come about until the 13th century, for reverential reasons.

However, here is an ancient Coptic icon with the right over left configuration (same as the Western Church):
st-mary-mons.org/english/ancient_icon_of_crucifixion.htm

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[scapularkid8]

This simple question about the San Damiano Crucifix is becoming a huge discussion on historical Iconography! You would only find that on CAF… I love it!!

 

[antgaria]

This simple question about the San Damiano Crucifix is becoming a huge discussion on historical Iconography! You would only find that on CAF… I love it!!

Indeed! I am with you Scapularkid… waiting for more insight from posters… Decided to chime in to encourage people to keep posting.

Peace,
Ant

 

[damiettaproject]

There are a lot of Franciscans in Egypt, but I have never had the time to approach one on this topic.

I was posting on another thread when this comment caught my eye. So please forgive me if this is a little off-topic. Does anyone know when the Franciscan friars established a convent and hospice in Damietta? I believe it was during Louis IX’s occupation but I was wondering why it wasn’t earlier since Francis was there in 1219 and the Crusaders occupied the walled city 1219-1221. Any first-hand knowledge of the Franciscans in Egypt would be very helpful–I’ve read of their support of the Coptic Catholics and the Franciscan Center for Catholic Oriental Studies in Cairo.

Thanks

 

[bpbasilphx]

MOST Eastern depictions of the crucifixion have the feet left over right. Is the depiction of the feet side by side peculiar to Oriental (as distinct from Eastern) Christianity?

---

**If by “Eastern” you mean “Byzantine”, showing the Lord’s feet separated is VERY typical, almost distinctive, of Byzantine/Eastern iconography.

I’ve never seen an Eastern/Byzantine depiction showing the Lord’s feet nailed together.**

 

[Wesley7]

yes, I have a crucifix.

 

[Katrina5]

I have these crucifixes everywhere. It was my favorite because when St Francis went to San Damiano the Church and the chapel were a mess…both figuratively and spiritually. This is the crucifix at San Damiano that “spoke” to him and said, “Francis, rebuild my church.”

I have also seen two different depictions of it. One is very clearly painted, which I guess is the “icon” and one has the corpus apart from the background. There is yet another painted version of it I have seen.

The fact that Christ is looking at us, not drooping, eyes closed, must have some meaning, and perhaps that is the icon style, also. It looks Italian in some versions.
I have visited Europe but have yet to get to Assisi to see this. The cathedrals in Europe are “an experience” that made me feel so deeply connected to my faith in a way that is quite different from what I experience at home. (Not better or worse, just different. Wonderful.)

As usual, going on CAF makes me want to dig deeper into whatever subject is being discussed!

I just left another thread about building Cathedrals with someone who wrote very well in a subject I love, art and architecture.

 

[jimmy]

There are a lot of Franciscans in Egypt, but I have never had the time to approach one on this topic.

I read somewhere a long time ago that the cross of St Francis is an icon with influences from “the East,” which I assume actually refers to “the Orient” (i.e., Oriental, not Eastern). I do know that St. Francis worked with the monks of St, Anthony.

Does anyone have any info on the history of that cross, or perhaps a picture of it? It had a name other than “cross of St. Francis” but I forget what it is (otherwise I’d google it myself).

Thanks

The San Damiano Cross

siena.edu/uploadedImages/Home/About_Siena/Mission_and_Heritage/Siena_College_Friary/San%20Damiano%20Cross.jpg

 

[jam070406]

Mardukm,

You can purchase a necklace of it here:

monkrock.com/index.cfm?load=page&page=36&group=10&view=details&product=20

 

[patrick457]

You know, I really don’t want to get off topic here, but I don’t think this is. In most of these depictions, Christ’s feet are separated with a nail in each one. Most of the present-day Latin crucifixes; however, only have one nail going through both feet. When/why did the depictions in the West change? I know this has been discussed before on the old forums, but I don’t remember what the answer was…

If I might be of interest here, the depiction of having the feet side-by-side is actually supported by the oldest depictions of the crucifixion we have - a few of them dating from the time when crucifixions are still performed: the Alexamenos graffito (late 1st-3rd century AD), a 2nd-century amulet probably from Syria, a graffito from Puzzuoli, another amulet (4th century?), and still another 4th-6th century gem. Some 5th century examples are a panel from an ivory casket (ca. 420-430 AD) and the carved door of the Santa Sabina in Rome (ca. 430-432 AD). The depiction of Jesus being pierced by three nails itself can only be traced to the late Middle Ages in the West, finally becoming predominant by the 13th century AD. It was very controversial when it was introduced, with some even attacking it. Some suggest that this was done for symbolic/theological reasons: the number three apparently represents the Trinity.