The Devil: A Mask without a Face

by Luther Link

Before he was imagined with horns, a tail and a pitchfork, the Devil was represented in a bewildering number of guises. From the 6th to the 16th century, in illuminated manuscripts, mosaics, paintings, carved capitals and sculptures, the Devil's pictorial form shifted depending on the Church's responses to heresies and the theological and political debates of the time. This fascinating study is the first comprehensive account of the arch-fiend in art.

Genres: Art, Nonfiction, History, Religion, Art History

208 pages, Hardcover

First published March 1, 1996

Reviews

[Steve Wiggins · Rating 4 out of 5]

I learned the hard way, by finding this book, that it has a different title in the United States. Having to research the Devil (if you look at my author page this will make sense), I saw that Luther Link had apparently written two books on the Devil in art. I found an inexpensive used copy of The Devil: The Archfiend in Art from the Sixth to the Sixteenth Century and then learned of The Devil: A Mask without a Face. It was considerably more expensive, even used. They are the same book with different publishers.

I explain more how this works elsewhere (Sects and Violence in the Ancient World). None of this is to take away from the achievement this book is. Heavily illustrated, it also has a great deal of informative text. It even grows theologically heavy at various points. And it has a thesis that is best captured in the British title. The Devil really is a hollow character. To reach that conclusion, you need to follow Link’s journey through a millennium of art.

The book is not full-color. Such volumes are quite expensive to produce. Quite a bit of the discussion reference the images—this is a book about art. But is’s also an informative book. I learned quite a bit about both the Devil and art from reading it. It’s insightful and astute. It’s also available under two different titles.

[David Veith · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.0 Reads more like a text book, but very interesting information for sure.

[FeNa SiKeRiM · Rating 1 out of 5]

Totally ridiculous and pointless book, waste of time.

[Giovanni García-Fenech · Rating 2 out of 5]

I actually read this sometime in the late '90s, but just like many things I did back then, I don’t remember it, so I tried it again. Like many other things I did back then, I don’t understand now why I did it – while undeniably there’s a lot of interesting material covered, the book is a disorganized mess. I probably only made it a fifth of the way through before I filed it away with my Chemical Brothers albums.