Overpaints: Six Intervention Phases

The analysis distinguishes six intervention phases, proposed here as a working hypothesis. Their exact sequence and modes of execution cannot be established with certainty, except for phase 6, linked to the restoration of the 1960s. For a detailed study of the overpaints, see the full study (PDF).

Areas without visible overpaint on Christ Carrying the Cross

In blue: areas without visible overpaint

Excluding the black layer covering the Figure

Christ Carrying the Cross before removal of the old black overpaint

Image of The Painting, early 1960s

Before removal of the black layer covering the Figure

Issue

The overpaints affect both the present appearance of The Painting and our reading of its original state. They may conceal details, add others, or alter their interpretation.

The areas now best preserved — Christ’s face, back and arm, and the face of the Figure — correspond to flesh tones rich in lead white, a material whose stability may have limited certain alteration processes.

The paint-layer analyses conducted by the University of Bologna and the Seracini assessment suggest an extensive restoration campaign, probably in the sixteenth century, although the reports do not always clearly distinguish original paint from later interventions.

Summary: Six Main Phases

This chronology is a proposal based on imaging and expert assessments; by nature, it remains interpretative.

Phase 1

Localised interventions resulting from an aesthetic and devotional initiative, for example the addition of the halo, which emphasised the religious character of the image, and modifications to the tunic of the Figure. The overpaints often cover cracks that had already formed, indicating their age.

Enlargement

Phase 2

Major restoration of the paint layer

The Seracini report describes an extensive phase of overpainting, datable to “several centuries ago” on the basis of the ageing of the retouched areas. It concerns, in particular, the crown of thorns, the blood drops, the red robe, the cross and elements of the Figure.

Enlargement

Phase 3

Lead-white veil (Smudging)

After the preceding phase, and according to the Seracini report, a light paint veil based on lead white was spread manually, often with the finger, leaving fingerprints and reducing the visibility of the crack network.

Enlargement

Phase 4

Fillings with gesso and retouching linked to losses

Woodworm galleries and losses of material were filled with gesso and then retouched in paint.

Enlargement

Phase 5

Concealment of the Figure and covering of the background

At an unknown date, the Figure and the background were covered by a black layer. This layer passes over earlier overpaints, phases 1–3, and may cover filled areas, phase 4, confirming that it is later.

Enlargement

Phase 6

Partial removal of the black layer, 1960s

The restoration of the 1960s removed part of the black layer, without removing it everywhere, notably in the upper left corner. Alcohol-based varnish removal and the stripping operations damaged the paint layer; overpaints contemporary with this campaign are also reported, for example at the top of the hair.

Enlargement

What This Changes for the Study

The overpaints may have altered the reading of the image — subject, values, contours, details of the cross, background and attributes — to the point that original paint and later interventions are sometimes difficult to distinguish with the naked eye.

This superimposition of interventions complicates any attribution discussion based solely on the visible image. The analysis must therefore combine imaging, stratigraphy and a critical reading of the restored areas.