¹ Levi, Doro, Antioch Mosaic Pavements, Princeton, 1947Google Scholar; Morey, C. R., The Mosaics of Antioch, London and New York, 1938Google Scholar.

² A recent and fundamental study is that of Morey, C.R., Early Christian Art, Princeton, 1942Google Scholar. A major point still in dispute is the extent to which the city of Alexandria continued to be the fertilising, as it had been the formative, centre for the ‘Alexandrian’ impressionist style. On this see notably review by Miss Der Nersessian, Art Bulletin XXV, 1943, 80–6; and reply by Morey, op. cit. pp. 160–6. See also section E, below, pp. 60–71.

³ See bibliography, p. 16; and section E, below, pp. 60–71.

⁴ The history and topography of the Maryût is well summarised by A. de Cosson, Mareotis, see bibliography, p. 26.

⁵ De Cosson, op. cit. pp. 19–23.

⁶ Ammianus (xxii. 15.10) in the late fourth century saw the Canopic (‘Heracleotic’) branch. The Arab writers, on the other hand, all speak of the Alexandria canal. The process was probably gradual and it seems to have been complete by the twelfth century. Prince Omar Toussoun, Mémoire sur les anciennes branches du Nil (Mémoires présentés à la Societe Archéologique d'Alexandrie, vol. I, fasc. 2, époque araie, pp. 195–7); De Cosson, op. cit. chapter XII.

⁷ Throughout the permeable sandstones of the coastal region to the west of Alexandria, the fresh-water table rests at sea-level directly upon a bed of salt water. At Mersa Matruh the Romans tapped this supply by an ingenious system of rock-cut channels sited just above sea-level, proving incidentally that here at any rate there has been no appreciable change of sea-level since Roman times (G. F. Walpole, An Ancient Subterranean Aqueduct West of Matruh, Survey of Egypt, Paper No. 42, 1932). In Alexandria detailed record of the water-level in the Kom el-Chogâfa catacomb, which has sunk slightly and is now partly water-logged, has revealed a periodic variation of level that is in direct relation to the level of the Nile flood (C. Audubeau Bey, ‘Note sur l'affaissement du Nord du Delta égyptien depuis l'empire romain', Bull. Inst. d'Egypte, vol. I, 1919, pp. 118, 134).

⁸ J. B. Ward Perkins, ‘The Monastery of Taposiris Magna’, B.S.R.A. Alex., No. 36, 1945, pp. 3–8.

⁹ Ev. Brecda in Municipalité d'Alexandrie: rapport sur la marche du service du musée, 1912.

¹⁰ Eilmann, R., Langsdorff, A., and Stier, H. E., ‘Bericht über die Voruntersuchungen auf den Kurûm el-Tuwâl bei Amrije’, Mitteilungen des deutschen Instituts für Aegyptische Altertumskunde in Kairo, Vol. I, 1930, pp. 106–29Google Scholar, he imagined.

¹¹ A. Adriani, Annuaire du Musée gréco-romain d'Alexandrie, 1935–9, p.151 ff. The second building, discovered in 1942 by Mr. C. Musgrave, awaits publication.

¹² De Cosson, op. cit. pp. 141–4.

¹³ See Cabrol, Dictionnaire, s.v. Ampoule and Ménas; and Kaufmann, Zur Ikonographie der Menasampullen. For Hungary, Atti III Congr. Arch. Crist, p. 303 and fig. 12.

¹⁴ Kaufmann, Menasstadt, abb. 32.

¹⁵ Ev. Breccia, Municipalité d'Alexandrie: le Musée gréco-romain 1931–2, pp. 23–4, pls. VIII–X. As will be seen from the present article, the new features then revealed were elements of a structure far more complex than he imagined.

¹⁶ F. W. Deichmann, ‘Zu den Bauten der Menasstadt’, Archäologischer Anzeiger, 1937, 75–86. Deichmann's observations are characteristically acute, but in the light of all the evidence (some of it only available since) his conclusions are not acceptable.

¹⁷ Drescher, James, Apa Mena (Publications de la Société Copte: Texteset Documents, No. 1), Cairo, 1946Google Scholar. Earlier articles by the same author are: ‘St. Menas's Camels once more’, Bulletin de la Société Copte VII, 1941, 19–32Google Scholar; and ‘More about St. Menas’, Annales du Service des Antiquites d'Egypte XII, 1942, 53–70Google Scholar. It will be obvious in the following paragraphs how much is owed to Dr. Mrescher's pains taking researches; and the writer is further indebted for the loan of portions of Mr. Drescher's manuscript before publication and for much helpful advice.

¹⁸ John III, 677–86, or perhaps more probably John IV, 775–89, who had been oeconomus of the Maryût shrine. P.O. X, p. 381; XI, p. 605.

¹⁹ Drescher, Apa Mena, p. 129.

²⁰ Miedema, Notably R., De Heilige Menas, Rotterdam 1913, chapter VGoogle Scholar.

²¹ See below, p. 38.

²² Drescher, Apa Mena, p. 144.

²³ Flavius Eutolmius Tatianus, comes sacrarum largitionum in Egypt, c. 375–8, and later Praetorian Prefect, 388–92. Paully-Wissowa, IV. A 2, 2463–7.

²⁴ Drescher, Apa Mena, pp. 144–5.

²⁵ Drescher, Apa Mena, pp. 145–6.

²⁶ P.O. X, p. 132.

²⁷ Drescher, Apa Mena, pp. 146–7 and notes ad loc. The two Ethiopic versions give the figures of the garrison as 12,000 and as 123,000, figures which fairly mirror the relative reliability of these versions.

²⁸ In 407, 434, and 444. White II, pp. 154–5.

²⁹ Drescher, Apa Mena, p. 148.

³⁰ White II, p. 155.

³¹ P.O. X, p. 451.

³² P.O. X, pp. 467–8.

³³ White II, p. 268.

³⁴ P.O. X, p. 512 ff.

³⁵ History of the Patriarchs of the Egyptian Church, ed. al-Masîh, Yassâ'Aba and Burmester, O. H. E., vol. II, part I, Cairo 1943, p. 3Google Scholar.

³⁶ Op. cit. p. 56 ff. and p. 59 ff.

³⁷ The two places, El-Muna (or El-Mena) and Abu Mîna, are clearly distinguished, although the similarity of names has at times led to some confusion. For the identification of El-Muna, see A. de Cosson, B.S.R.A. Alex., No. 30, 1936, pp. 247–53.

³⁸ After the French version of de Slane, G., Description de l'Afrique septentrionale par El Bekri (second edition, Paris, 1913)Google Scholar. From Abu Mîna the next day's journey led to el-Hammam. The account of conditions in the Maryût is very valuable. Settled life had ceased, although there was evidently still water enough for agriculture where other conditions permitted. What was lacking was security. Kaufmann's excavations revealed the remains of winepresses.

³⁹ The Churches and Monasteries of Egypt … attributed to Abû Sâlih, the Armenian, ed. Evetts and Butler, p. 103.

⁴⁰ Drescher, Apa Mena, p. xxxi, n. 2.

⁴¹ See Cabrol, Dictionnaire, s.v. Alexandrie.

⁴² Kaufmann, Menasstadt, p. 66. The inscription of Father Paul contains the formula ΧΜΓ, for which see Lefebvre, G., Recueil des inscriptions grecques-chrétiennes d'Egypte, Cairo, 1907, p. xxxii and No. 32Google Scholar. It is common on papyri and ostraka of the fifth and sixth centuries. At Alexandria it occurs on dated inscriptions of A.D. 537 and 570.

⁴³ Cabrol, Dictionnaire, fig. 284.

⁴⁴ Miedema, R., De Heilige Menas, Rotterdam 1913, chapter VGoogle Scholar; Meta E. Williams ‘Whence came St. George?’, B.S.R.A. Alex., No. 30, 1936, pp. 79–109. The only specifically pagan objects quoted by Kaufmann are a terracotta figurine of Bes from the catacomb, and a small stele of Horus-Harpocrates (Menasstadt, fig. 24).

⁴⁵ Eilmann, R., Langsdorf, A., and Stier, K. E., ‘Bericht über die Voruntersuchungen auf den Kurum-el-tuwâl bei Amrije’, Mitteilungen des deutschen Insthuts für Aegyptische Altertumskunde in Kairo, Vol. I, 1930, pp. 106–29Google Scholar.

⁴⁶ E.g. the well-known tomb at Brad, Northern Syria, H. C. Butler, Ancient Architecture in Syria, 1920, pp. 299–300, ill. 329. See also Guyer, S. ‘Zwei spätantike Grabmonumente Nordmesopotamiens und der älteste Martyrgrabtypus der Christlichen Kunst’, Fünf Jahrtausend Morgenländischer Kultur: Festschrift Max Freiherrn von Oppenheim, Berlin, 1933, pp. 148–56Google Scholar.

⁴⁷ de Bock, W., Matériaux pour servir á l'archéologie de l'Egypte chrétien, St. Petersburg, 1901Google Scholar. The cemetery lies 5 km. north of el-Khargeh. De Bock's description is worth quoting: ‘La plupart des tombeaux sont Carre's a une porte, et ont une coupole. Des deux côtés de la porte, à l'intérieur, deux pilastres dont un est toujours plus grand que l'autre, se détachent à angle droi t du mur antérieur. Les Ooupoles reposent sur des arcs de soutènement adossés aux quatre murs, et leur hauteur dépend de Ja hauteur de ces arcs qui sont tantôt soubaissés, tantôt plein-cintre, ou même en ogive. Les coins entre les arcs sont remplis par les pendentifs des coupoles’.

⁴⁸ Bulletin of the Metropolitan Museum of Arts, New York, III, 1908, pp. 203–8Google Scholar.

⁴⁹ It has not seemed necessary to rebut in detail Kaufmann's many strange theories. It is perhaps well, however, to point out that the alleged existence of an octagonal Constantinian building is based upon nothing more than two of the column-bases of the Period IV columnar exedra above the confessio (see pp. 48–9).

⁵⁰ Visible in Plate VIII, 4, extreme left. The original masonry is now much obscured by the restoration, undertaken by Breccia in 1926–7.

⁵¹ Kaufmann, Menasstadt, p. 65.

⁵² R. Eilmann, A. Langsdorf, and K. E. Stier, op. cit. pp. 106–29.

⁵³ In addition there are possible traces of a range of column-bases immediately within the line of the intermediate pair of footings. One of these appears to be still in situ on the north side, and Kaufmann indicates, without comment, a second on his plan (Menasstadt, fig. 22). On the south side can be seen the matrix from which a similar base may have been removed.

⁵⁴ The peculiar structure of the vault is clearly visible in Plate V. The lower courses are laid flat and corbelled outwards, while the crown of the vault consists of bricks laid on edge. This method avoids the use of timber centering. Professor Monneret de Villard has pointed out to the the writer that the technique is exactly paralleled in the aqueduct of Basatln at Cairo, built by Ibn Tulûn; Creswell, K. A., Early Muslim Architecture, vol. II, Oxford, 1940, p. 330, pl. 95bGoogle Scholar. But the date of the vaults of Period IV crypt can hardly be questioned, and the similarity of technique must be taken as an instance of the long life of a local tradition of brickwork.

⁵⁵ Kaufmann, Menasstadt, fig. 16. From the character of the masonry it is certain that this mosaic surface was envisaged at the moment of construction.

⁵⁶ See Creswell, K. A., Early Muslim Architecture, I, p. 319 and fig. 394Google Scholar, illustrating the vault after restoration, The latter should be compared with Pl. VI, 3, after Kaufmann, Menasstadt, pl. 8. Creswell (p. 319) is mistaken in saying that dome and pendentives are of the same curvature.

⁵⁷ Kaufmann, Menasstadt, pl. 9. 6 and 8.

⁵⁸ For the surviving angle of the vault see Kaufmann, Menasstadt, pl. 9. 1.

⁵⁹ Kaufmann, Menasstadt, pl. 5.

⁶⁰ Now in the museum at Alexandria. See B.S.R.A. Alex., No. 9, 1907, pp. 3–12.

⁶¹ Ev. Breccia in Muncipalité d'Alexandrie: rapport sur la marche du service du museé, 1912; see also De Cosson, Mareotis pp. 147–9. The frescoes, which are now in the Museum at Alexandria, decorated a mud-brick building, which was later rebuilt in stone. They reveal certain analogies with the frescoes at Bawît.

⁶² An ivory pyxis in the British Museum, B.M. Catalogue of the Ivory Carvings of the Christian Era, p. II, pl. vii; a panel from the Bishop's throne at Grado, now in Milan Museum, Cabrol, Dictionnaire, vol.I, 1114, fig. 270.

⁶³ See below, section D, p. 55.

⁶⁴ The elements of the double order are summarily illustrated by Kaufmann (Menasstadt, p. 89, fig. 39), who removed the best of the surviving architectural detail to Frankfurt. Professor Monneret de Villard, who has inspected this material, questions the use of a flat architrave, of which there is now no trace. But perhaps the iniquitous Lazarus did his work too well. For the column-bases, see Pl. VII, 1, and p. 63.

⁶⁵ In the narthex, retained by the Period V builders (Pl. III, 1, and Fig. 4). Traces of coloured marble revetment were also found in the baptistry.

⁶⁶ Molajoli, B., La Basilica Eufrasiana di Parenzo, Padova, 1943, pp. 17–28Google Scholar; Verzone, P., L'architettura religiosa dell' alto medioevo nell'Italia Settentrionale, Milan, 1942, p. 49Google Scholar. Cf. also S. Croce, Ravenna, Verzone, op. cit. pp. 9–10.

⁶⁷ Kaufmann, Menasstadt, pl. 59. These tombs have nothing to do with the Period IV structure, as Kaufmann suggests, but precede it.

⁶⁸ de Villard, U. Monneret, Les Couvents près de Sohag, Milan, 1925, vol. I, fig.52(plan)Google Scholar. Atti IV Congr.Arch.Crist. p. 303, fig. 9.

⁶⁹ If indeed it be a confessio proper. The present semicircular shaft is a structural feature only, and was in visible when the tomb-chamber below was vaulted. There are, however, traces of a small shaft leading down into the tomb-chamber from the base of the columnar exedra above. For the significance of the semi-circular screen, see p. 59.

⁷⁰ Kaufmann, Menasstadt, pl. 40.

⁷¹ ibid. pl. 38.

⁷² ibid. pl. 36.

⁷³ ibid. pl. 37.

⁷⁴ ibid. fig. 46.

⁷⁵ Capitals, see Kaufmann, Menasstadt, pl. 66, nos. 2, 4, and 6; the best preserved of these is in the Greco-Roman Museum at Alexandria (Inv. No. 17445). Pilaster-capitals, see p. 64, pl. ix. 4.

⁷⁶ This literature is well surveyed by Kirsch, J. P., ‘Il transetto nella basilica cristiana antica’, Scritti in onore di Bartolommeo Nogara, Rome, 1937, p. 205 ffGoogle Scholar.

⁷⁷ Krautheimer, R., ‘S. Pietro in Vincoli and the tripartite transept in the Early Christian Basilica’, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society LXXXIV, 1941, 353–429Google Scholar.

⁷⁸ The churches in question are churches A and B at Nikopolis; and the churches at Epidauros; at Arkitsa-Daphnousia, near Lokris; at Corinth; and by the Ilissos, near Athens. The church at Dodona also may probably be considered as a later (sixth-century) derivative. The evidence for these buildings is summarised by G. A. Soteriou, “ΑΙ παλαιοχριστιανικαὶ βασιλικαὶ τῆς Έλλάδος”, Arch. Eph., 1929, pp. 161–248; see also “Die altchristlichen Basiliken Griechenlands’, Atti IV Congr. Arch. Crist., pp. 355–80; and Krautheimer, op. cit. pp. 417–23. For Corinth, , see Hesperia, xii, 1943, pp. 166–189Google Scholar.

⁷⁸ Butler, H. C., Early Churches in Syria, Princeton, 1929, p. 118fGoogle Scholar.

⁸⁰ Soteriou, op. cit. passim; Krautheimer, op. cit. pp. 422–3.

⁸¹ Krautheimer, R., ‘The Carolingian Revival of Early Christian Architecture’, Art Bulletin, XXIV, 1942, pp. 1–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁸² Most recently and fully studied by A. Grabar, Martyrium, Paris, 1946 (available to the writer only when this article was in proof). See also Guyer, S., ‘Beiträge zur Frage nach dem Ursprung des Kreuzformig-basilikalen Kirchenbaus des Abendlandes’, Zeitschrift für Schwezerisches Archäologie und Kunstgeschichte, VII, 1945, pp. 73–104Google Scholar. This work is a preliminary study for a longer work which this author has in preparation. Guyer is followed by Krautheimer (‘S. Pietro in Vincoli etc.’, pp. 413–17), who strangely quotes the Theophilan church of St. Menas as the best example of the basilica with central tomb and radiating transepts.

⁸³ Early cruciform basilical churches:

Salona (490–540): Egger, R. and Gerber, W., Forschungen in Salona, I, Vienna, 1917, p. 13 ff.Google Scholar; Dyggve, Atti IV Congr. Arch. Crist., pp. 391–414.

Ephesus (not precisely dated, but pre-Justinian): Keil, J., ‘Vorläufiger Bericht über die Ausgrabung in Ephesos’, Jahreshefte d. Oesterreichischen Arch. Inst., Beiblatt XXVII, 1932Google Scholar; Guyer, Atti III Congr. Arch. Crist., p. 438, fig. 5.

Gerasa, ch. of the Martyrs and Apostles (464–465): Crowfoot, J. W., Gerasa, New Haven 1938, p. 256 ff.Google Scholar; and Early Churches in Palestine, London 1941, pp.85–8, fig. 8Google Scholar.

Salonica, H. Demetrios (?412–413): I follow Krautheimer, ‘S. Pietro in Vincoli’ etc., pp. 415–16 and footnote 216.

The group is discussed by Guyer, Atti III Congr. Arch. Crist., pp. 433 ff.; and by Crowfoot, Gerasa, pp. 190 ff.

⁸⁴ Lassus, J. and Downey, G. in Antioch-on-the-Orontes, vol. II, Princeton, 1938, pp. 5–48Google Scholar; Atti IV Congr. Arch. Crist., p. 340, fig. 4.

⁸⁵ Known from a seventh-century drawing by Arculf, reproduced in Migne, , Patrologia latina, LXXXVIII, col. 802Google Scholar; and Atti III Congr. Arch. Crist., p. 439, fig. 6.

⁸⁶ Most recently and convincingly studied, on the basis of excavation in the east church and octagon, by Krencker, O. and Naumann, R., Die Wallfahrtskirche des Simeon Stylites in Kala' ât Sim'ân (Abh. d. preuss. Akad. d. Wissenschaften, 1938, Phil.-Hist. Klasse, 41) Berlin, 1939Google Scholar. The central octagon almost certainly carried a wooden dome.

⁸⁷ Kaufmann, Menasstadt, fig. 46–7.

⁸⁸ J. B. Ward Perkins, ‘The Monastery of Taposiris Magna’, B.S.R.A. Alex., No. 36, 1945, pp. 3–8.

⁸⁹ P. Romanelli, Atti IV Congr. Arch. Crist., 1938, p. 274, fig. 23; Perkins, J. B. Ward, Bulletin de la Société d'Archéologie Copte IX, 1943, pp. 126–31Google Scholar.

⁹⁰ U. Monneret de Villard, Atti IV Congr. Arch. Crist., p. 315, lists all the Egyptian examples of this form and illustrates several, including the cemetery church at Abu Mîna (after Kaufmann, Menasstadt, fig. 46).

⁹¹ Since this article was prepared the writer learns that recent work in S. Pietro in Vincoli, Rome, has shown that the two small flanking apses are contemporary with the transept and are the work of Sixtus III (432–40). Riv. Arch. Crist. XXI, 1944–1945, p. 324Google Scholar.

⁹² Nikopolis, in Epirus, Basilicas A (fifth century) and B fig. 1. (second half of fifth century), Soteriou, Arch. Eph., 1929, figs. 33 and 37; Paramythia, in Epirus, ibid. fig. 36; Philippi, , second Basilica, Bull. Corr. Hell. LXI, 1937, 463 ff.Google Scholar; Atti IV Congr. Arch. Crist., p. 369, fig. 15; Marusinac, main church (mid first-half fifth century), Dyggve, E. and Egger, R., Forschungen in Salona, Vol. III, Vienna, 1939Google Scholar; Atti IV Congr. Arch. Crist., p. 402, fig. 15. The apse of the Basilica at Sabratha in Tripolitania is wrongly shown as of this form by Bartoccini, Guida di Sabratha, 1927, reproduced by Romanelli, Atti IV Congr. Arch. Crist., p. 247, fig. 1.

⁹³ Herzfeld, E. and Guyer, S., Meriamlik und Korykos (Monumenta Asiae Minoris Antiqua, Vol. II, Manchester, 1930), p. 14Google Scholar, figs. 8 and 14. The authors quote a second example at Miletus.

⁹⁴ See Perkins, J. B. Ward, The Italian Element in Late Roman and Early Medieval Architecture (British Academy Annual Italian Lecture, 1947), London, 1949, pp. 17–8Google Scholar.

⁹⁵ In rejecting this useful and generally accepted distinction, Creswell, (Early Muslim Architecture, II, 1940, p. 322Google Scholar) adds a quite unnecessary element of confusion to the controversy.

⁹⁶ Boak, A. E. R. and Peterson, E. E., Karânis 1924–28 (University of Michigan Studies, Humanistic Series, No. XXV, 1929), pl. XIV, fig. 28Google Scholar; cf. pp. 23–4, pls. XIII, XVIII. For the chronology see also D. B. Harden, Roman Glass from Karânis (Same series, No. XLI, 1936), pp. 24–34. The terminal date is not in dispute.

⁹⁷ The squinches of Firūzābād are well developed and betray a competent tradition (accessibly illustrated by Rivoira, G. T., Le Origini della Architettura Lombarda, Rome, 1901, fig. 124Google Scholar, and Lomiardic Architecture, 2nd edition, Oxford, 1933, vol. I, fig. 290Google Scholar). Their date, however, is far from certain. The palace is often assigned to the third century A.D. (e.g. by Dalton, O. M., East Christian Art, Oxford, 1925, p. 78, n. 1Google Scholar, and p. 82, n. 1; and by Creswell, K. A., Early Muslim Architecture, II, 1940, pp. 101–5Google Scholar); but the evidence is far from conclusive. It may well be two centuries later. The palace of Sarvistān is certainly not earlier than the fifth century. For bibliography on the squinch, see Creswell, op. cit., p. 101, n. 1.

⁹⁸ Bertaux, E., L'art dans l'Italie méridionale, Paris, 1901, p. 40Google Scholar; Rivoira, G. T., Roman Architecture, Oxford, 1925, fig. 311Google Scholar. It may not be without significance in this context that the rectangular form of this baptistry, familiar in the Eastern Mediterranean and North Africa, is unique in the Early Christian series of Italy (Sjöqvist, E., ‘Studi intorno alia piazza del Collegio Romano’, Acta Instituti Romani Regni Sueciae, XII, 1946, 138Google Scholar). Earlier than this baptistry or the chapel at Abu Mina is the small Caldarium, added c. A.D. 300 to the Hunting Baths at Lepcis Magna (Archaeologia XCII, 1949Google Scholar); and to the fourth century belong the well-developed squinches in the towers of the Aurelian Walls, noted by Dr. L. Cozza (Lecture at the Museo di Roma, 8 April, 1948).

⁹⁹ Recently well surveyed by Stettler, , Roemische Mitteilungen LVIII, 1943, pp. 76–86Google Scholar; for the most recent bibliography see Sjöqvist, op. cit. p. 144, n. 3.

¹⁰⁰ G. B. Giovenale, Il Battistero Lateranense (Studi di Antichità pubblicati per cura del Pontificio Istituto di Archeologià Cristiana, No. 1, 1929).

¹⁰¹ Verzone, P., L'architettura religiosa dell'alto medioevo nell'Italia Settentrionale, Milan, 1942, pp. 79–90Google Scholar. Chierici, G., in Palladio II, 1938, 3Google Scholar, illustrates a similar feature in the narthex of S. Lorenzo at Milan, but this would appear to be a paper-restoration unwarranted by the known facts.

¹⁰² Bartoccini, R., Felix Ravenna, n.s. III, 1934, 158, fig. 1Google Scholar.

¹⁰³ Caraffa, G., La cupola delta sala decagona degli Horti Liciniani: restauri 1942, Rome, 1944Google Scholar. The (as yet unpublished) survey, undertaken shortly before the war by Dr. F. W. Deichmann, has shown that the original construction of this building dates from the second decade of the fourth century; and that the porch belongs to a third structural period.

¹⁰⁴ Koethe, H., Roemische Mitteilungen XLVI, 1931, 9–26Google Scholar, and plan, abb. 2; reproduced also by Cecchelli, C., Atti III Convegno nazionale di Storia dell'Architettura, Rome, 1940, p. 149Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁵ Gulbağdsche, near Smyrna: Michel, Karl, ‘Die altchristliche Kirchenanlage von Gülboghdsche’, Forschungen zur Kirchengeschichte und zur christlichen Kunst (Festschrift Ficker), Leipzig, 1931, pp. 180–200Google Scholar, probably second half of the fifth century; see also G. Weber, ‘Basilika und Baptisterium in Gülboghdsche’, Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 1901, pp. 568–73; and Strzygowski, J., Kleinasien ein Neuland der Kunstgeschichte, Leipzig, 1903, p. 49Google Scholar, fig. 35 (the plan wrongly indicates a transept). Aphrodisias, church in the temple of Aphrodite: Crema, L., Monumenti Antichi XXXVIII, 1939, 179, fig. 34Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁶ de Villard, U. Monneret, Les Couvents près de Sohag, Milan, 1925–1926, vol. I, figs. 3 and 18Google Scholar; and Atti IV Congr. Arch. Crist., p. 300, fig. 7.

¹⁰⁷ U. Monneret de Villard, op. cit. pp. 47–8, fig. 52; and Atti IV Congr. Arch. Crist., p. 303, fig. 9.

¹⁰⁸ Deyr Abu Hennis: Clarke, Somers, Christian Antiquities in the Nile Valley, Oxford, 1912, pp. 181–7Google Scholar, fig. 4. Atti IV Congr. Arch. Crist., p. 297, fig. 4. Medamûd: de la Roque, M. F. Bisson, Rapport sur les fouilles de Médamoud (1931–1932), Cairo, 1933, pp. 13–20Google Scholar. Atti IV Congr. Arch. Crist., p. 312, fig. 19. Abu Sargeh: Atti IV Congr. Arch. Crist., p. 313, fig. 21.

¹⁰⁹ Lugli, G., Atti del III Convegno Nazionale di Storia dell'architettura, Rome, 1940, p. 97Google Scholar; sketch-plan in G. T. Rivoira, Architettura Romana, 1921, fig. 120.

¹¹⁰ The Italian development has been well studied by G. De Angelis d'Ossat, whose work, with earlier bibliography, is summarised in two articles: ‘Sugli edifici ottagonali a cupola nell'antichità e nel medio evo’, Atti del I Convegno Nazionale di storia dell'architettura, Rome, 1938, pp. 14–;24Google Scholar and Romanità delle Cupole Paleocristiane, Rome (Istituto di Studi Romani), 1946, p. 13, fig. 3Google Scholar. See also Verzone, P., L'Architettura religiosa dell'alto medioevo nell’Italia Settentrionale, Milan, 1942Google Scholar.

¹¹¹ Antioch-on-the-Orontes, I, excavations of 1932, Princeon, 1934: Fisher, C. S., ‘Bath C, pp. 19–31, plan pl. VGoogle Scholar. Morey, C. R., The Mosaics of Antioch, London and New York, 1938, plan p. 12Google Scholar. The bath was built after the earth-quake of 115, and rebuilt, on the same lines, in the fourth century.

¹¹² The church which Gregory of Nyssa, c, 335–95, built at Nyssa, was certainly of this general form, somewhat elaborated (Gregory of Nyssa, Letter to Amphilochius (Migne, , Patrologia Graeca, XLVI, 1093–1100Google Scholar); see reconstruction in Strzygowski, J., Kleinasien ein Neuland des Kunstgeschichte, Leipzig, 1903, pp. 74–90Google Scholar; for later bibliography see Guyer, S., Byzantinische Zeitschrift XXXIII, 89–90Google Scholar). Surviving examples from the early sixth century are the well-known churches at Esra and Bosra, and the church of St. John the Baptist at Gerasa.

¹¹³ De Vogüé, Syrie Centrale, pl. 149; reproduced by Cabrol, , Dictionnaire, II, fig. 1363Google Scholar.

¹¹⁴ White, III, p. 15 ff.

¹¹⁵ Gerasa, City of the Decapolis, ed. Kraeling, , New Haven, 1938Google Scholar.

¹¹⁶ Kaufmann, Menasstadt, plan fig. 46 (reproduced by Cabrol, Dictionnaire, s.v. Ménas, fig. 7964).

¹¹⁷ Kaufmann, Menasstadt, plan fig. 49 (reproduced by Cabrol, Dictionnaire, s.v. Ménas, fig. 7955). Krencker, D. and Krüger, E., Die Trierer Kaiserthermen, Augsburg, 1929, p. 235Google Scholar.

¹¹⁸ Kitzinger, E., ‘Notes on Early Coptic Sculpture’, Archaeologia LXXXVII, 1938, pp. 181–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹¹⁹ Previously studied by de Villard, U. Monneret, La Scultura ad Ahnâs, Milan, 1923Google Scholar.

¹²⁰ For the late survival of paganism in Egypt see Monneret de Villard, op. cit. p. 52, n. 1, citing the earlier bibliography. See also Cambridge Medieval History, vol. I, 1911, p. 112 ffGoogle Scholar.

¹²¹ Chassinat, E., Fouilles à Baouît(Mémoires de l'Institut français d'Archéologie orientale du Caire, vol. 13, 1911)Google Scholar.

¹²² Quibell, J. E., Excavations at Saqqara, vol. III, 1909Google Scholar, and vol. IV, 1912.

¹²³ Ev. Breccia, Municipalité d'Alexandria: le Musée gréco-romain 1925–31, p. 60 ff; and 1931–2, p. 36 ff. For scattered sculpture from Oxyrhyncus see Kitzinger, op. cit. p. 200, n. 1.

¹²⁴ For a contrary opinion see Monneret de Villard, op. cit. passim, who stresses the parallels with the art of Syria, Mesopotamia, and India.

¹²⁵ Kitzinger, p. 200.

¹²⁶ Menasstadt, pls. 66–71.

¹²⁷ Kautzsch, , Kapitellstudien (Studien zür spätantiken Kunstgeschichte, No. 9), Berlin, 1936, nos. 50, 60, 73, 79, 82, 83, 100, 108, 109, 112, 122, 128, 129, 133, 138, 152, 153; pls. 6–9Google Scholar. These examples embrace his types 2, 3, 5–7, 9–13, 16.

¹²⁸ Kitzinger, pp. 187–8, pl. lxviii, 1, 2, 4; recently and more fully illustrated by Drioton, E., Les sculptures coptes du Nilomètre de Rodah, Cairo, 1942Google Scholar. Drioton accepts Kitzinger's main conclusion and chronology. See also Strzygowski, J., Koptische Kunst (Catalogue général des antiquités égyptiennes du Musée du Caire, vol. XII), Vienna, 1904, no. 7348, fig. 101Google Scholar.

¹²⁹ Strzygowski, op. cit. no. 7350, fig. 102; cf. no. 7351, from Aschmunein.

¹³⁰ Kaufmann, Menasstadt, pl. 66. i and 68.8; Kautzsch, no. 79; cf. Kaufmann, Menasstadt, pl. 68. 5, and 70. 1 and 5.

¹³¹ Kautzsch, no. 753, pl. 44; see also Kaufmann, Menasstadt, Pl. 69.6.

¹³² Quibell, J. E., Excavations at Saqqara III, 1909, Pl. xxii. 4–6Google Scholar; IV, 1912, Pl. xl, 1–2; Pl. xliii. 3; Duthuit, L'art copte, Pl. xliv. b; cf. Pl. xlv. a, from Cairo. The specimen illustrated in Pl. ix. 3, from the site of the Coptic patriar chate in Alexandria, is now in the Greco-Roman Museum, inv. no. 13583.

¹³³ Kaufmann, Menasstadt, Pl. 68. 2. Kautzsch illus trates one in the Alexandria Museum, no. 737, pl. 44. See also Kaufmann, pl. 69. 6.

¹³⁴ Kautzsch, op. cit. no. 536, pl. 33.

¹³⁵ Kaufmann, Menasstadt, pl. 69.2; cf. pl. 69. 1 and 5; pl. 71. 3 and 4.

¹³⁶ See Perkins, J. B. Ward, J.R.S. XXXVIII, 1948, p. 70Google Scholar.

¹³⁷ At Bawît, for example, the column-bases are raised as a regular practice. Quibell, op. cit. pl. XVIII, illustrates a pilaster with a pedestal reminiscent of the Abu Mîna form, The majority of the under-bases are, however,of plain rectangular shape (e.g. pl. LXVI), in one case elaborated into a crouching animal (pl. XXIV).

¹³⁸ Quibell, , op. cit. vol. III, Pl. VGoogle Scholar. For its use elsewhere see Crema, L., ‘I monumenti architettonici afrodisiensi’, Monumenti Antichi, XXXVIII, 1939, col. 223, figs. 57, 58, and 60Google Scholar (Aphrodisias, in Caria, a later modification to the Tiberian portico of the agora); von Gerkan, A., Das Stadion (Milet, ed. Wiegand, Th., vol. II. 1Google Scholar), Pl. Ill and V (Miletus, the late third-century east entrance to the stadium); Krencker, D. and Zschietzmann, W., Römische Tempel in Syrien, Berlin-Leipzig, 1938, p. 245 ffGoogle Scholar. (Ain Hersha, Syria, third-century temple in antis).

¹³⁹ After Kaufmann, Menasstadt, pl. 65. 8. The other two are illustrated op. cit. pls. 65. 9 and 68. 7. Cf. notably, Duthuit, L'art copte, pl. lx. b, panel from Deir el-Ganadla, near Aboutig; Peirce, H. and Tylor, R., L'art byzantin, vol. I, Paris, 1932, no. 139Google Scholar.

¹⁴⁰ Kitzinger, pp. 195–6; pls. lxxi–lxxii.

¹⁴¹ Kitzinger, p. 188, pl. lxviii. 1.

¹⁴² After Kaufmann, Menasstadt, pl. 68. 6.

¹⁴³ Kautzsch, no. 536, Pl. 33.

¹¹⁴ Kautzsch, no. 762, Pl. 45; Breccia, Ev., Alexandrea ad Aegyptum, Bergamo, 1922, p. 289, fig. 200 (above)Google Scholar.

¹⁴⁵ G. Lefebvre, ‘Epitaphes de moines alexandrins’, B.S.R.A. Alex. No. 8, 1905, pp. 11–19.

¹⁴⁶ Ev. Breccia, ‘D'un édifice d'époque chrétienne à el Dekhèla et l'emplacement du Enaton’, B.S.R.A. Alex. No. 9, 1907, pp. 3–12.

¹⁴⁷ Alexandria, Greco-Roman Museum, inv. nos. 3, 5, and 17013; Kautzsch, no.632, pl. 38; Breccia, E., Alexandria ad Aegyptum, Bergamo, 1921, p. 289, fig. 200 (below)Google Scholar. B.S.R.A. Alex., No. 9, 1907, pp. 108–9; No. 10, pp. 232–3, fig. 34. Cairo, from Alexandria, J. Strzygowsky, Koptische Kunst., no. 7352, fig. 105; Duthuit, L'art copze, pl. xlvii. c. Cairo, en-Nasir Mosque; Kautzsch, no. 630, pl. 38.

¹⁴⁸ Volbach, W. F., ‘Intorno ai capitelli a foglia di loto in S. Vitale a Ravenna’, Felix Ravenna, n.s. fasc. II, 1934, pp. 124–9Google Scholar.

¹⁴⁹ Kautzsch, pp. 232–4; Kitzinger, p. 190. Strzygowsky's tacit assumption that in Egypt these forms could precede the Byzantine prototypes will not bear examination; see Wulff, O., Byzantinische Zeitschrift XIII, 1904, p. 564 ffGoogle Scholar.

¹⁵⁰ Pacha, Marcus H. Simaika, Guide Sommaire du Musée Copte, Cairo, 1937, p. 16, no. 32, Pl. xliiiGoogle Scholar.

¹⁵¹ Kitzinger pp. 210–15.

¹⁵² For a concise, up-to-date exposition of this view, with earlier bibliography, see Morey, C. R., Early Christian Art, Princeton. 1942, pp. 89–97Google Scholar.

¹⁵³ Patricolo, A. and de Villard, U. Monneret, La chiesa di Santa Barbara al Vecchio Cairo, Firenze, 1922Google Scholar. Illustrated by Kitzinger, Pl. lxxvi, 1; and by Creswell, K. A., Early Muslim Architecture, II, 1940, fig. 483Google Scholar.

¹⁵⁴ Kitzinger, pl. lxxvii, 1.

¹⁵⁵ Kitzinger, p. 215.

¹⁵⁶ Of particular interest in the present context are the representations of the Menas cycle cited on p. 46.

¹⁵⁷ de Villard, U. Monneret, Les couvents près de Sohag, Milan, 1925, chapter IIIGoogle Scholar.