Gero Vs. The Crucifixion

The Gero Crucifix (ca. 970) sculpture of Cologne cathedral, Germany, and The Crucifixion (11 CE.) mosaic at the Church of Dormition, Daphni in Greece, are two of the earliest examples of crucifixion within a Christian framework that will be examined and analyzed in this essay. Both the Gero and the Dormition depictions both question the Iconoclastic controversy, the intimate depiction of Christ’s crucifixion, and show the relatively new achievements in depicting the Passion of Christ where before it had not been common within artwork of these respective periods.

The Gero Crucifix and The Crucifixion, while both different mediums of artwork, are both very similar as depictions of the Christ of Passion. Both of these pieces depict Jesus Christ

In the Gero Crucifix, which is both similar to and inspired by The Crucifixion of Dormition, Christ is seen intimately for the first times within the societies frameworks as suffering for bearing the weight of his divine task and ultimate sacrificial death. Unlike other images of Christ, The Crucifixion of Dormition is one of the first depictions of the Passion of Jesus appealing to the emotions of the viewers, in a compassionate manner. Like the Gero Crucifix of Germany, this sympathetic view of the suffering of Christ was a bold new achievement and paved the way for a myriad of artworks depicting the Son of God afterwards. The Passion of Jesus, or the Christ of Passion, was an art movement that began in Middle Byzantine art depicting Christ in the final stages of his life, including his execution by crucifixion and the events leading up to it. This quality was almost nonexistent in artwork before The Crucifixion of Dormition piece, and both pieces are bold accomplishments for their challenging and controversial depictions. According to Linda Woodhead’s book “An Introduction to Christianity”1, as a description of the Gero Crucifix, “It was in the early medieval period that Christ began to be depicted as suffering and dying on the cross; before then it was his triumph over death that was emphasized. This innovative

According to the academic journal article “What Was The Iconoclastic Controversy About?”2 by Patrick Henry, regarding the argument of the iconodules (those who supported depictions of Christ) against the iconoclasts (those against depicting Christ), “If painting a picture of Christ either confuses his natures or divides them, then the very incarnation itself confused or divided them…From his Mother he received the characteristic of circumscribability; that is, he can be pictured same way as his Mother…To say it is improper for us to see images of Christ is the same as to say it was improper for his disciples to see him.” In Patrick Henry’s retelling of the debate, which was based on a prohibition within Biblical texts discouraging the worshiping and creation of graven images depicting divine figures, another similarity between both pieces compared in this essay becomes known. He argues that by Christ being both the Son of God and the Son of the Virgin human Mary, he exists in a state of both humanity and divinity, and the duality of his nature is no longer considered insulting to the biblical prohibition, regarding images of Christ before his resurrection and divine realization. By the existence of both The Crucifixion mosaic and the Gero Crucifix statue, it is inferred that both artists, and pieces, were produced despite or in rejection of this prohibition, and that