he fled along the
Appian Way, about two miles from the gates, he was met by a vision of
our Saviour, travelling towards the city. Struck with amazement, he
exclaimed, 'Lord! whither goest thou?' (_Domine, quo vadis?_) to which
the Saviour, looking upon him with a mild sadness, replied, 'I go to
Rome to be crucified a second time,' and vanished. Peter, taking
this for a sign that he was to submit himself to the sufferings
prepared for him, immediately turned back, and reentered the city."[17]

[Footnote 17: From Mrs. Jameson's _Sacred and Legendary Art_, pages
200, 201.]

[Illustration: CHRIST TRIUMPHANT. _Church of S. Maria sopra Minerva,
Rome._]

It is this visionary figure of the Christ, appearing and disappearing
before the eyes of Peter, that Michelangelo represents in the statue.
He carries a cross not large enough for an actual crucifixion, as that
would be out of place here, but tall enough to show its real purpose.
He has also the long reed and the sponge which the soldier used to
give him a drink of vinegar and gall when he thirsted on the cross. A
bit of rope is a reminder of the scourging given him by the governor.

All these things he carries with him to Rome for a fresh martyrdom. It
is as if in walking along the way he suddenly meets Peter, and, at the
apostle's astonished question, he pauses, leaning a moment on the
cross, as he turns gently to reply.

Now as this is the Christ risen, or triumphant, the Christ who has
conquered death and the grave, Michelangelo wanted to do all he could
to make a noble-looking figure. The face is of the handsome type, with
regular features, which the Italians like to give to their ideal of
Christ. The expression of reproach is so gentle that one deserving
rebuke may well feel ashamed before it.

The sorrow in the face is such as Jesus might have shown as he turned
to Judas at the Last Supper. The gentleness in it is of the quality so
attractive to children. There is, too, something of the sympathetic
element in it which Mary and Martha found.

The countenance is not without intellectuality, though it scarcely
shows the keenness which the lawyers found it hard to outwit. It has
rather the refinement of a lover of all that is beautiful. Nor is
there much in expression or attitude to suggest the more commanding
qualities of Jesus. These stronger elements the statue seems to lack.

It is rather puzzling to one who is trying to form standards of taste
to learn that