From Dr S. Mercieca

I read with great interest the contribution made by Roberta de Angelis regarding the restoration of the oil painting on stone in the chapel of the Crucifix at Cospicua Parish Church. De Angelis took the occasion to make references to my name and comments, including the discussion I had with The Malta Independent journalist Bernard Busuttil about the history of this cupola.

My contribution on that occasion was of a historical nature and I discussed with him some of my finds about Cospicua as part of my Ph.D research. The records of the Curia (the Libri dei Conti of Cospicua) are very clear about the origins of the stone used for the construction of this cupola; it was quarried from Corradino. Geographically, this whole area is made up of globigerina limestone and is near the sea. Generally, the proximity of a quarry to the coast does not determine the quality of its stone: what determines the quality, that is the difference between a ‘good stone’ and a ‘bad one’ is the layer from where the stone is quarried.

Then, there can be other causes that could have a negative effect on a stone, some of which were referred to by De Angelis in her letter.

On my part, as a historian, my professional contribution to the discussion about Cospicua’s Crucifix chapel was and remains of a purely historical nature and in this case it was restricted to the place of origin of the stones. I will leave other issues regarding the level of salinity and origins in this particular dome to a real team of experts. It is up to them to evaluate the level and origins of the salt content and, most importantly, what type of restoration is needed to save this painting. What I am interested in is that this patrimony is saved and restored by professional and serious restorers. If no quick action is going to be taken, there is a big risk that all will be lost.

It was for this reason that serious restorers and experts from Italy were called to help the parish church of Cospicua with their advice on this matter. The Opificio di Pietre Dure sent a team of experts made up of its top restorers, who are professors in restoration. At that time, these restorers were working on restoration works in the Basilica of Santa Croce. They had to interrupt their work at Santa Croce in Florence to come and carry out research on a painting of very minor importance. Due to their high professional skills, these restorers normally work on art paintings of universal importance and rarely undertake low-key restoration studies. Just to give an example, among the experts there was even the person who carried out all the chemical tests on Caravaggio’s painting of the Beheading of Saint John.

Another institution involved in this project was the Accademia di Belle Arti of Florence, which was instrumental in bringing about the involvement of the Opificio di Pietre Dure. The former is also another State-run institution and has academic units that are extremely important for a complete and serious evaluation of the restoration work that needs to be undertaken in Cospicua.

I would like to conclude that the restorers and experts from these two very prestigious Italian institutions, in a truly professional spirit, compiled reports of their missions and gave a copy of their studies to the parish church of Cospicua for its perusal.

Simon Mercieca

Director

Mediterranean Institute

University of Malta