Two unusual paintings depicting Christ’s Passion conserved

Senglea basilica possesses two unusual paintings linked to the Passion of Christ. They are mentioned in a list entitled ‘Quadri che si ritrovarono nella sala’ compiled in 1723 upon the death of Rev. Simone Schembri, founder of St Philip’s oratory in Senglea. The paintings are listed as “Un quadro … con la figura di Cristo legato alla Colonna con la cornice nera profilata d’oro” and “Un quadro con la figura di Gesù Cristo posto nel torchio … con la cornice profilata con oro”. Neither of the two subjects is very common in Malta and this might indicate that both paintings were imported from another country.

Description

When depicting the scene of the flagellation of Christ, the unknown artist chose to follow some contemporary popular traits rather than the biblical details of Christ being whipped. Christ is represented unchained from the pillar, trying to stand up after having been harshly flogged, while reaching out for his garment. The gore on his back and the large drops of blood on the ground testify that the scourging had been violent.

Behind Christ is the figure of a man with oriental features who seems to be writing something; this strange figure might be a reference to the turbulences the Church had to endure in Japan and China in the 17th and early 18th century until the ban on missionaries in China in 1721.

The upper register of the painting presents two figures, one of whom is the Virgin and the other could be the Magdalene due to her long, uncovered hair, who seem to be floating in the air, looking down at Christ with gestures of prayer and compassion. This unusual inclusion of Mary in the flagellation scene is not reported in the gospels or the apocrypha; it does, however, feature in medieval passion plays and in the visions of the Spanish mystic

Mary of Agreda (1602-1665), who wrote that Christ’s mother was spiritually present during her son’s scourging, feeling in her body the same pains beset on his. This detail might imply that the artist had some Spanish connections – not a novelty when speaking of the oratorians of Senglea.

The painting of Christ in a wine press (before) and after conservation and restoration treatments. Photos: Manuel Ciantar and Suzanne Ciantar Ferrito obo ASC Conservation Centre Ltd

The depiction of the ‘Mystic Winepress’ emerged in the second half of the 15th century as a Christian iconographic subject of a devotional nature. Christ is crucified to a winepress in the shape of a cross, symbolising how the blood from his wounds, inflicted by the crucifixion, flows like wine and is collected in chalices. The body of Christ becomes the fruit to be pressed, so the juice collected in the chalice is the drink that redeems humanity from sin.

A curious feature in this iconography is that the press is usually manhandled by God the Father. Some motifs usually present, but which do not feature in the Senglea paintings, are Mary seated below the cross/press with a dagger in her breast, people being led to the vat carrying baskets of grapes (i.e. their sins), and angels drawing wine from the vat. In some of the representations, words are included in the painting in order to make the message clearer.

The Senglea version presents the press with two spindles, each one screwed by the Father and the Spirit, underlining the role of both, together with Christ’s, in redemption. Instead of the figure of Mary, the people with baskets and the angels drawing wine, the only other three figures in this painting are an angel leading a female figure holding a burning heart towards the vat and a skeleton being sprinkled with the wine/blood coming out of the vat’s taps. The lack of people carrying grapes seems to do away completely with the theme of the wine… what is being pressed out of Christ is his blood, and this is what is filling the vat and pouring from the taps.

Mistakes in the inscriptions might indicate that the artist had some shortcomings when it came to spelling

The painting does not lack words, neatly written around the figures, giving necessary details to anyone admiring it; the copious number of mistakes in most of the inscriptions might indicate that the artist, albeit talented in art, had some shortcomings when it came to spelling.

At the very top, the words Liber eternae sapientiae appear, then, each of the persons of the Holy Trinity has a short definition written around their heads, pointing to their particular characteristics according to Christian tradition: the Father is omnipotence (omnipotentia Patris aeterni), the Son is wisdom (sapientia unigeniti fili Dei) while the Spirit is love (amor immensus Spiritus sancti). Next to Christ’s head are the words torcular calcavi solus (Is 63:3a) and ego sum iistium, si qui per me ettarverit salus erit (Jn 10:9).

The angel leading the female figure to the vat is pointed to Christ’s wounded side, whence the words nemo posset ad patrem nisi per filium, reminiscing Jn 14:6. Close to the female figure’s face and leading to Christ are the words non est qui recogitet cored, taken from Jer 12:11, lamenting that there is no one who cares about the suffering of Christ for humanity’s salvation.

Below the Crucified there are words referring to the sacraments around the vat: sacramenta sacratissima: penitentia, aeucharistia, ordo, extrema untio. The message this painting delivers is that salvation comes from participation in the sacraments that gushed out of Christ’s body during his Passion.

During the thinning down of overpaint found under the aged varnish layers and over the original painting. Photo: ASC Conservation Centre Ltd

Restoration

The two paintings and their decorative frames were in dire need of conservation, not only due to the passage of time and the natural ageing of their constituent materials but mostly due to hefty past interventions. Both paintings seem to have gone through the same pair of hands, as evidenced by the similar or rather identical past restoration interventions found on both paintings.

Upon the two artifacts’ arrival at ASC Conservation Centre Ltd’s laboratory, non-invasive scientific examinations were conducted. This included their study under different wavelengths of light so as to learn about the way each painting was executed, and what the artifacts had endured through time. The latter revealed their physical history, including the identification of different forms of decay each was experiencing, and the various past restoration interventions. This documentation was accomplished with the support of technical art photographers Manuel Ciantar and Suzanne Ciantar Ferrito.

Photos taken during the removal of gesso that was concealing various areas of the original painting. Photo: ASC Conservation Centre Ltd

Something peculiar, not generally seen in other case studies, was how the two paintings had been enclosed in their decorative frames not only from the verso but also from the front. Due to the paintings being slightly smaller than their decorative frames, in a past intervention someone had put wooden inserts and then infilled the gap from the front with stucco/gesso. The stucco from the front created a bridge between the paintings and their decorative frames. Unfortunately, this bridge of painted stucco significantly overlapped onto the original paint layer as well. Hence, detaching the two paintings from their decorative frames was a delicate operation in itself.

Cleaning treatments involved three different phases. During the first phase, the conservators, under the present author Sciberras’s direction, cleaned the immediate darkened and oxidised varnish layers, together with retouchings found on top of the varnish layers. Their removal exposed further retouchings that were found beneath the varnish layers and directly onto the original paint layer.

Details taken during the course of the conservation. Photo: ASC Conservation Centre Ltd

This overpaint was thicker and harder to remove. In fact, apart from the use of cleaning agents applied in the liquid state and in gel form, it was also necessary to use surgical blades to thin down the thicker overpaint. One such area was the face of the female figure in the painting of Christ in a Wine Press.

Then, the final phase involved the removal of past infills/stuccature that were found covering around 15 per cent of the original paint in each painting. Past infills were not only overlapping the original around the edges but also covered different areas of the paint layer that had endured damage in the past. The removal of all these non-original strata and applications revealed numerous details that were barely visible – both of the figures and of the background, as well as the various inscriptions that we can see today.

During the removal of the old lining canvases (left) and of the uncovered old glues applied by past restorers. Photo: ASC Conservation Centre Ltd

Both paintings had been lined to stabilise and conceal tears and damage in the original canvases. However, these past linings were no longer serving their purpose of reinforcing the original. For this reason, the past linings were removed and old organic glues that also attract biodeteriogens, cleaned. The removal of glue applied in past treatments uncovered tears in the original canvases and this allowed the conservators to mend and reinforce these tears using current methods and materials. Structural treatments to attain full stability included lining treatments.

The verso of the two paintings, before and after treatments. Photos: Manuel Ciantar and Suzanne Ciantar Ferrito obo ASC Conservation Centre Ltd

.

New stretcher frames were also made, allowing the proper tensioning of the paintings since the previous ones were not adequate. Losses in the original preparation layers were infilled, levelled, textured according to the original surface texture and chromatically integrated to reinstate the legibility of the two paintings. Their decorative frames also required extensive work involving consolidation and stabilisation treatments, cleaning and uncovering of gilt areas, as well as integration of losses.

Acknowledgements

This project, entrusted to ASC Conservation Centre Ltd by Archpriest Rev. Can. Chev. Robin Camilleri, was carried out over a six-month period and the two paintings were returned to the Nativity of Mary basilica in Senglea in December 2024.

The project was made possible thanks to Fondazzjoni Kottonera. Special thanks to Michael Pace Ross, administrative secretary of the Malta archdiocese, to Dame Kirby Attard Gilford for her archival research on the paintings and to Gino Parnis who installed the paintings back in the sacristy following their conservation.

Amy Sciberras directs a team of conservators and has been entrusted with restoration projects of national and international importance. She is also the founder and director of the fine arts restoration company ASC Conservation Centre Ltd and may be contacted via www.amysciberras.com or e-mail info@amysciberras.com.

Rev Dr Jonathan Farrugia is head of department at the Faculty of Theology and a researcher in ecclesiastical artifacts.