ECA 8 (2011), p. 29-48; doi: 10.2143 / ECA.8.0.2961364
Monuments of Christian Sinnuris (Fayyum, Egypt)
Peter GROSSMANN, Tomasz DERDA, and Jacques VAN DER VLIET
Following an earthquake in the early 1990s, the saint. Already in the seventeenth century, the early ancient sanctuary of the Archangel Michael (Kani- orientalist Vansleb (J.M. Wansleben) described it sat al-Malak, Dayr al-Malak Mikhail) in Sinnuris as a church dedicated to the Archangel Michael5. It (locally pronounced Sinauris), a district town about cannot, therefore, be identified out of hand with twelve kilometers north of Fayyum city, was demol- an-Nabulusi’s western monastery6. It seems more ished and replaced by a glittering new church. likely that it was a successor to one of the two town Today, hardly any remains of Sinnuris’ past survive churches mentioned by an-Nabulusi, but even this in situ, and very little is known about the Christian cannot be verified for lack of further information. history of the town, which boasts a flourishing In any case, in September 2003 nothing remained Coptic Orthodox parish as well as a protestant of the earlier churches of Sinnuris other than a church1. ruined altar screen with some Coptic and Arabic For Late Antique and Early Medieval Sinnuris inscriptions, dumped in a narrow corridor to the (CenÕriv, CineÕriv), a certain amount of papyro- east of the new church. In the literature only scarce logical documentation exists in Greek and Coptic, documentation is found about the church’s prede- which still awaits systematic study2. These sources cessors (see below). suggest that the town had its share in the consider- The present article may be described as a form able economic activity that characterized the of salvage archaeology on paper. The first part con- Fayyum in the Byzantine and Early Islamic periods. sists of Peter Grossmann’s notes on the Medieval It was, in fact, sufficiently well known in the fifth church of Sinnuris, elements of which were still and sixth centuries to be mentioned as an Aîguptía kÉmj in the Ethnica of Stephen of Byzantium (s.v. CenÕriv). This impression of prosperity is con- firmed by the beautiful stone monuments from this period that were preserved until recently in the 1 The Orthodox church is no. 19 in the list of churches of Church of St Michael: the Greek funerary stela of the (then) diocese of Fayyum and Giza published in Som- the baker (siligniarios) Damian, published earlier by ers Clarke 1912, 205; it is erroneously mentioned under one of the present authors3, and the votive relief of the lemma ‘Sînarû’ in Timm 1984-1992, V, 2354-2355. For the protestant church, see Meinardus 1977, 579 (under Phib and Phoibammon, republished below. Baptist Evangelical Church); Timm 1979, 135. For a somewhat later period, we have the 2 See Wessely 1904, 163-165, 167-168; Timm 1984-1992, description of the Fayyum written around the year IV, 2034-2035 (s.v. Psenyris); 5, 2355-2356 (s.v. Sinau- 1245 by a Muslim author known as Uthman an- ris); Derda 2008, 143, ad no. 27, l. 7, with full references that are not repeated here. Contrary to Wessely, we con- Nabulusi. He reports that the quite considerable sider both forms of the toponym to refer to the same place. town of Sinnuris numbered two churches, one of 3 Van der Vliet 2002-2003, 140-142, Tafel 22, right. In the which was functioning, whereas the other had 1980s, this stela could still be seen in the old church, see fallen into disuse, in addition to a monastery to the Fathy Khurshid 1998, Pl. 50; it has disappeared since then. 4 Ed. Moritz 1899, 107, l. 15-16; Salmon 1901, 50-51; cf. west of the town, which he designates as Dayr Sin- Keenan 2005. nuris4. Fathy Khurshid, writing in the 1980s, 5 Vansleb 1677, 265; we thank Gertrud van Loon for kindly applies the same name to the modern church com- providing copies of the corresponding pages from Vansleb’s plex. This complex, however, is situated in the Italian diary of 1676 (Bibliothèque nationale de France, ms. italien 435, 51-52); for Vansleb, see now Hamilton north-eastern part of the town centre and is other- 2006, 142-151. wise always referred to by the name of its patron 6 Pace van der Vliet 2002-2003, 140.
29
95300_ECA8(2011)_03.indd 29 27/02/13 15:17 visible in 1977, although much had been changed and some pillars in the nave appeared to represent and built over. In the second part, Tomasz Derda an earlier building phase (Fig. 1)9. It is unknown and Jacques van der Vliet republish the Late Antique when the church to which these older elements votive relief of Phib and Phoibammon, which they belonged was erected. Our discussion below sug- recorded in September 2003, adding an icono- gests that it may have been of medieval date, yet it graphical commentary by van der Vliet, who also may have replaced a Late Antique predecessor in acted as the general editor of the article7. In an this location10. The lateral outer walls of this ear- appendix, van der Vliet briefly presents the inscrip- lier, possibly Medieval church were demolished tions of the altar screen mentioned above. already in the nineteenth century, during recon- struction and enlargement works. The structure I. THE ANCIENT CHURCH OF was expanded on its south side with a three-aisled THE ARCHANGEL MICHAEL IN SINNURIS basilical church which had three altar rooms (haykals). A panel in this South Church, inscribed The Church of St Michael in Sinnuris, as it was in Arabic, recorded that it was built in 189011. The visible in the 1970s (Pl. 1), preserved only meagre one-aisled northern annex, with only one altar vestiges of its original architecture8. Merely the apse room, was not dated but may have been somewhat older than the South Church (Fig. 3). Nothing of all these constructions remains today. Fortunately, in 1977, before the church was demolished, those elements of its architecture that 7 The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Clara ten Hacken, Leiden, for the Arabic texts. The article prof- appeared to belong to its earlier, possibly Medieval ited from critical remarks by Gertrud van Loon, Zuzana building phase could be recorded. These seem to Skalova, and Ewa D. Zakrzewska. point to a basilical structure with rectangular pillars 8 Vansleb, who visited Sinnuris on 31 July 1672, must have that are placed in a strangely transversal alignment. seen more, but he was far from impressed. He characterized A western pair of such pillars, integrated into later the church as “fort pauvre”, without giving further details 12 (Vansleb 1677, 265); he showed more interest in the stone constructions, survived in situ . In the light of the relief, described below. general proportions of the church, it seems unlikely 9 Samuel al Syriani/Badii Habib 1990, 146-147, Fig. 190 that there were originally more of these pillars to (ground plan), Pl. 188, left; cf. Fathy Khurshid 1998, 135- 138, Pl. 8 (ground plan) and 46-58; a brief notice with a the west. The strong west wall that was incorpo- photo of the interior also in Leclant 1979, 364, Pl. XIII, rated into the more recent northern annex may Fig. 18 (here reproduced again as Pl. 1). have preserved parts of the original western outer 10 For the Late Antique and Early Medieval sources on Sin- wall. Only the situation of the entrance, placed out nuris, see the references given in the introduction. 11 The panel is reproduced in Fathy Khurshid 1998, Pl. 46; of the axis of the building, is a curious feature. The cf. Samuel al Syriani/Badii Habib 1990, 147. It situates the phenomenon is not without parallels elsewhere: in renovation of the church under the administration of a the Church of the Mother of God in the Monas- mu’allim Shihat Abd as-Sayyid and in the episcopacy of the tery of St Catherine in the Sinai, for instance, dat- famous Bishop Abraham, bishop of the Fayyum between 1881 and 1914, but does not provide further details. For ing from the reign of Justinian, where the displace- a plan of this South Church, see Samuel al Syriani/Badii ment of the main entrance is probably due to Habib 1990, ibid., and Fathy Khurshid 1998, Pl. 8. irregularities in the soil13. In the Sinnuris church, 12 Unwarrantedly considered modern by Samuel al Syriani/ however, this entrance does not seem to have been Badii Habib 1990, 147; that they had been integrated into the design of the modern South Church does not contra- part of the original plan. dict their original character. The next two pillars to the east To the east of this pair of transversal pillars, and are not original, however; their position corresponds situated at about the same distance as to the western exactly to that of the inner piers of the South Church and entrance wall, one finds another pillar belonging to they must have been inserted together with these. 13 See Grossmann 1990, 34, Fig. 3; also in the city church of this same building phase. This latter pillar shows a the Holy Anargyroi at Pharan (Sinai) the outer entrance to more or less westward oriented T-shaped profile, the narthex as well as the entrance to the nave are clearly but with legs of unequal length on all sides, as can placed out of the axis of the church, see Grossmann 1998, often be found in pillars of transeptal churches14. In 66-74, with Fig. 5. 14 For transeptal churches in the Mediterranean, see Lemerle the present case, however, the pillar is most proba- 1953, in particular 687-694, and recently Grossmann bly the remainder of an originally continuous trans- 2008, esp. 99-108, Figs 1-4. verse wall that separated the former khurus from the
30
95300_ECA8(2011)_03.indd 30 27/02/13 15:17 Pl. 1. Interior of the Church of St Michael in Sinnuris in 1977 (photograph P. Grossmann)
nave15. Its longest leg, which points towards the closed the great middle gate of the khurus and must north, has an irregular northern end, clearly indicat- therefore have been the first or primary triumphal ing that the masonry was broken through and, arch. The eastern arch, springing from the same therefore, must once have continued northwards. pillar, must have served to articulate the structure The very short legs projecting south and east, on the of the vaults above the khurus. other hand, may be original. They served as support Besides these three pillars and the remains of for arches stretching in a southern and eastern direc- the west wall, only parts of the apse of the earlier tion. At the time of our visit, these arches were no building phase survived. The apse had a stilted longer present, but the broken surface of the ground plan and was provided with several wall masonry on the south face still clearly shows at niches. Yet only the first niche on the left can be which height the southern arch sprang from the pil- considered original. It had smooth lateral jambs lar (Pl. 1). On the east side, the springing point of and was the only one to be suitably positioned in the original broad arch could still be recognized, but relation to the ground plan of the apse. All other the latter was replaced by a more modern narrow niches were inserted at a later stage, as is shown by arch that, moreover, did not run exactly parallel to their haphazard placement and mediocre work- the axis of the church (also visible on Pl. 1). manship. The vault of the apse also no longer Another arch that connected this remnant of the reflects the original situation. The frontal arch of partition wall of the khurus with the next pillar to the apse, which could be called the second trium- the west was likewise not original. It sprang from phal arch, shows a pointed shape, which has no an oddly narrow and shapeless console that had been inserted secondarily. It is doubtful whether there was originally a similar arch at this point. The 15 On the significance of the khurus in Egyptian church archi- southern arch that sprang from the T-shaped pillar tecture, see Grossmann 2002, 71-76.
31
95300_ECA8(2011)_03.indd 31 27/02/13 15:17 of the Medieval church (drawing P. Grossmann) Fig. 2. Reconstruction of the vaulting system (drawing P. Grossmann) Fig. 1. Reconstruction of the Medieval church Sinnuris
32
95300_ECA8(2011)_03.indd 32 27/02/13 15:17 Fig. 3. Plan of the church with its extensions in 1977 (drawing J. Kosciuk)
tradition in Medieval Christian architecture in whole may have been. The conjectural dotted lines Egypt. The few examples that are extant elsewhere added in our Fig. 1 are purely hypothetical and have a clearly more truncated profile16. based upon other similarly proportioned Medieval In the south wall of the apse, furthermore, a churches in Egypt17. Nevertheless, it can be wide door was inserted that connects the apse with assumed that the pair of transversally oriented rec- the northern haykal of the newly built South tangular pillars were positioned more or less in the Church of 1890. It is doubtful whether there was middle between the partition wall of the khurus and always a door at this place. The inner door open- ing, as visible thirty years ago, nowhere showed an area that could be considered original. The original 16 A characteristic example is the primary triumphal arch of southern pastophorium must have been accessible the so-called Upper Church of Dayr Abu Fana, cf. Buschhausen 1988, esp. 354-356; see also the large trium- only through the khurus. The same was true for the phal arch in the partition wall of the khurus of the Shen- northern pastophorium, which had no extant open- oute monastery near Sohag, cf. Grossmann 2002, 528-536, ing to the apse. Pl. Xb. Any further comments on the architecture of the 17 Examples include the church of Dayr al-Maymun, south of Atfih, ancient Aphroditopolis (see Grossmann 1982, 178- earlier church must be considered speculative. As 180, Fig. 58; Samuel al Syriani/Badii Habib 1990, 150- no remains of lateral outer walls survive, it is impos- 151, Fig. 198), and that of Dayr al-Hammam, Fayyum (see sible to say how wide the aisles and the church as a Samuel al Syriani/Badii Habib 1990, 142-143, Fig. 183).
33
95300_ECA8(2011)_03.indd 33 27/02/13 15:17 the west wall, and that the two bays of the nave had become common in Lower Egypt and in par- were of equal length. As was already pointed out ticular in the monasteries of the Wadi Natrun, the above, the west wall may have preserved parts of ancient Scetis. Unlike the church of Dayr Abu the original outer wall, even though the entrance Hennis, which was only secondarily transformed that was inserted into this wall, out of the axis of into an elongated domed church, the earlier church the building, does not seem to belong to the origi- in Sinnuris may have been conceived in this way nal plan. from the beginning. The lateral compartments of Typologically, the older building phase of the the bays may have been roofed with transversal bar- Sinnuris church to resembles some extent the Medi- rel vaults23, which did not rule out introducing a eval reconstruction phase of the church of Dayr hanging dome in the middle. Egyptian church Abu Hennis, south of Antinoopolis18. There, the architecture also knows spatial forms that can be middle of the building was marked by a series of qualified as single axis buildings with a central plan, domes, which may also have been the case in Sin- covered with domed vaults24. nuris (Fig. 2). The Sinnuris church would then Regrettably, nothing is known about the date of number among the classical examples of the Upper- this earlier building phase of the church of Sin- Egyptian elongated domed churches (‘Lang- nuris. No datable sculptural or tectonic elements hauskuppelkirchen’) that were developed in Egypt have survived – if they ever existed –, and an and are practically only found there19. This type of attempt at dating the church can only be based on church apparently arose when, after the Fatimids, considerations of a general nature. An important the size of newly built churches diminished, a phe- criterion is the evident presence of a khurus situated nomenon that can also be observed in the Byzan- between the nave and the actual sanctuary. tine Empire in about the same period20. As a result Although the introduction of the khurus may date of this development, the habit grew up of covering back as far as the seventh century, probably follow- churches with massive vaulted constructions instead ing a decision of Patriarch Benjamin I (627-665), of saddle roofs built of timber beams. Difficulties it was initially apparently limited to monastic in procuring the necessary wood may have played churches25. Its adoption in the architecture of secu- a minor role in this decision, though, in particular lar churches can hardly predate the ninth century26, for the poorer communities, such difficulties should and even then the church at Sinnuris would prob- not be underestimated21. Rather, as contemporary ably not have been among the first churches in authors already pointed out, the massive vaults which this innovation was introduced. The spatial were more resistant against fire and vermin than proportions of the khurus in Sinnuris also argue wooden roofed constructions22. At the time, build- against an early date, as its depth corresponds prac- ing with vaults was considered a more modern way tically to that of the individual bays of the nave, an of engineering. In the same period and for the same arrangement that can only be attributed to a later reasons, roofing churches with massive barrel vaults development. On the other hand, this earlier church of Sin- nuris very probably had no lateral altar rooms. The spatial proportions show that the rooms next to the 18 See Grossmann 2002, 522-523, Fig. 141. apse were almost certainly the normal pastophoria 19 Grossmann 1982, 165-169. demanded by the liturgy, and not secondary altar 20 Deichmann 1937, 49-53. 21 Grossmann 1982, 158-161; on the value of wood for rooms. The latter only appeared in the Mamluk building, in particular 159 n. 688. period, when, under the influence of a change in 22 Abu’l-Makarim, ed. Evetts 1895, 95-96 (fol. 27b), 106 religious politics, the previously prevailing tolerance (fol. 31a), 120-122 (fol. 37a-b), 127 (fol. 39a), 186 (fol. towards the Christian population was abandoned27. 63b). 23 In Dayr Abu Hennis, the lateral compartments bore trans- The first Mamluk rulers were al-Malik az-Zahir versal conchate vaults; see Grossmann 1982, 121, Fig. 50. Baybars (1260-1277) and Qalawun (1279-1290), 24 Grossmann 1982, 86-87, with Fig. 31, with reference to but the changing religious climate was perhaps not Chapel 25 in al-Bagawat. felt immediately. In the History of the Patriarchs, 25 For the development of the khurus, see Grossmann 2002, 72-76. the change becomes apparent for the first time in 26 Grossmann 2002, 78-79. the Life of Patriarch John VII (1262-1293), in an 27 Grossmann 1982, 229-230, 234-235. incident that took place already in 1264-65 but
34
95300_ECA8(2011)_03.indd 34 27/02/13 15:17 could still be settled without bloodshed28. On the recent). The outer rim bears traces of whitewash and basis of typological criteria, therefore, we would mortar that betray the stone’s former position, when propose a date for the construction of the earlier it was built into a wall. Whatever polychromy it church of Sinnuris somewhere before the thirteenth may have borne originally is lost now. century. A dedicatory text consisting of four short lines of Greek is incised between the feet of Michael and II. MARY AND THE ANGELS: AN INSCRIBED STONE the Virgin (l. 1-3) and below Gabriel (l. 3-4); l. 3 RELIEF FROM SINNURIS is interrupted by the feet of the Virgin and contin- ues on l. 4 for lack of space. A fifth line of text, The stone monument studied here has actually containing the legends, runs over the lower frame been known since the end of the seventeenth cen- of the stone. The letters are uncials of a Late tury. It was first described by Vansleb, who had Antique type, competently incised by a single hand. discovered it in the church of Sinnuris in July A is symmetrical, with a low-dropping broken bar; 1672. According to his account, the clergy of the M, three-stroke with a low saddle. The height of church had moved the relief some time before his the letters is approx. 2 cm. Palaeography suggests a visit from the khurus (“le Choeur”) to a more date between the sixth and the eighth centuries. remote part of the church (“dans un coin de Bibliography: Giamberardini 1974-1978, I, 197- l’Eglise”), in order to prevent the faithful from 198, no. 13, Fig. 21 (photo, brief description, partial 29 venerating the sculpted figures . This may explain reading of the text after the stone); briefly described or why, until quite recently, the relief was walled into mentioned: Vansleb 1677, 265-66; Timm 1984-1992, the northern wall of the haykal of the northern V, 2355-2356 (after Vansleb); Samuel al Syriani/Badii extension, a part of the church that was not pub- Habib 1990, 147; Fathy Khurshid 1998, 135-136. licly accessible. There it was found in February 1966 by Father G. Giamberardini30, who pub- Sinnuris (Fayyum) ca. sixth-eighth cent. lished the monument in a rather summary way in his monograph on the cult of the Virgin Mary in [pictorial field] Egypt. Its original location is likely to remain Eûxá- unknown. Since it is definitely not a funerary rion monument (see below), it can hardly have come, 3. F⁄b || (kaì) Foibámmwn- as Giamberardini was told, from “un vecchio cim- ov. itero”31. In 1977, it was spotted and photographed [lower frame] by Grossmann. In September 2003, Derda and Mixaßl, ™ äigía Maríav, Gabrißl. van der Vliet rediscovered the monument in one 3. (kaì): å, not read by Giamberardini || 4. Giamberardini do of the back rooms of the new church, where Father || 5. Giamberardini maria; l. ™ ägía María. Cherubim, the parish priest, kindly allowed them to record it. Regrettably, by their second visit, in Votive offering of Phib and Phoibammon. early February 2004, the stone had vanished. Michael, the Holy Mary, Gabriel.
THE INSCRIPTION 28 History of the Patriarchs III, 3, ed. Khater/Burmester 1970, 229-230 (fol. 237r). The monument consists of a rectangular slab of fine- 29 32 33 Vansleb 1677, 265; his Italian diary (p. 52; see n. 5, above) quality limestone or possibly marble (Pls 2-3) . gives a more roundabout version of the story than the The dimensions of the slab are 65.5 ≈ 57 ≈ 5-6.5 cm. printed French text, though without adding further details Its front side shows, in shallow relief, a standing fig- of interest. 30 Giamberardini 1974-1978, I, 197 (“infissa nella parete ure of the Virgin Mary with the Infant Jesus on her nord-ovest”); see also Samuel al Syriani/Badii Habib 1990, arm, flanked by the Archangels Michael (on her 147; Fathy Khurshid 1998, 136. right; left for the viewer) and Gabriel (on her left; 31 Giamberardini 1974-1978, I, 197, who consequently mis- right for the viewer). The pictorial field is sur- took it for a tombstone. 32 Thus also Giamberardini 1974-1978, I, 197. rounded on all sides by a raised frame. The piece is 33 According to Samuel al Syriani/Badii Habib 1990, 147. complete, though its surface is rather worn and in Our second (fruitless) visit to Sinnuris, in February 2004, places disfigured by chips and scratches (some very was made to verify the type of stone used.
35
95300_ECA8(2011)_03.indd 35 27/02/13 15:17 Pl. 2. The stone relief of Phib and Phoibammon in 1977 (photograph P. Grossmann)
36
95300_ECA8(2011)_03.indd 36 27/02/13 15:17 Pl. 3. The stone relief of Phib and Phoibammon in 2003 (photograph J. van der Vliet)
37
95300_ECA8(2011)_03.indd 37 27/02/13 15:17 The stone’s indubitable eûxárion (l. 1-2) is absent Moreover, since eûxárion occurs elsewhere, we pre- from the dictionaries34. At first sight, the format of fer to leave the word as it stands. the text could suggest an abbreviation of eûx- In addition to the present inscription, the word aristßrion, ‘thank-offering’. As in the present case, eûxárion appears in a similar context in two pre- Christian votive inscriptions with eûxaristßrion Christian inscriptions from present-day Bulgaria38. typically consist of proper names immediately fol- Both are dedications of marble sculptures of tradi- lowing the opening word eûxaristßrion35. Such tional gods: the Thracian horseman, and Zeus and inscriptions occur throughout Egypt and Nubia, Hera, respectively. A further occurrence in a Chris- even if they are not very common36. Yet the word tian stela from Pontus is more doubtful39. In each eûxárion on the Sinnuris relief is not marked as an of these cases, eûxárion can be interpreted as a abbreviation, whereas in a Nubian inscription that diminutive derived from eûxß, analogous to does abbreviate eûxaristßrion, the stone reads cuxárion from cuxß, for instance. The word eûxß euxarå, with an abbreviation mark37. The fairly itself is frequently found, in similar contexts, as a skillful workmanship of the stone from Sinnuris word for ‘votive offering’, on a par with prosƒorá argues against a spelling error (by haplography). or eûxaristßrion40; examples from Egypt are not very common, however41. The continuation of the inscription within the pictorial field identifies the two dedicators of the 34 Giamberardini 1974-1978, I, 198, who believed that piece. Their names, Phib and Phoibammon, are the inscription was funerary, took it for a proper name typically Egyptian. Phib (F⁄biv, ‘the Ibis’)42 has in (‘Eucarione’). 35 eûx- the past been considered a form of Phoibammon, ™ajtar 2004, 92; cf. Vikan 1995, 570-572. For 43 aristßrion in liturgical texts and diptychs, see Engberding but these are clearly two distinct names . Both were 1967. extremely common in the Fayyum in Byzantine and 36 Though less rare than ™atjar (2004, 92) suggests. 44 37 early-Islamic times . The genitival case ending of ™ajtar 2004, 89-94 (referring to the photo published by the second name, Phoibammon, in l. 4, was read by C.M. Firth in 1927; cf. SEG 54, no. 1773). do 38 IGBulg I2, 277; IGBulg III, 2, 1817. Giamberardini erroneously as , which he inter- 39 Studia Pontica III, 54. The editor, H. Grégoire, reads the preted as an abbreviation of dioklytianos. He word as a feminine proper name, formally neuter and accordingly proposed to read the group fib in l. 3 incorrectly in the nominative instead of the genitive. His as a Diocletian year 512, corresponding to A.D. interpretation is questionable, however. 45 40 See LSJ, Suppl., 66, s.v. eûxß; ™ajtar 2004, 92. 796 . The stone does not bear a date, however. 41 A Jewish inscription, probably from Alexandria: Horbury/ The line of text on the frame below identifies Noy 1992, no. 19; üpèr eûx±v in a Christian inscription the saints represented. This manner of exhibiting from Panopolis: van der Vliet 2008, 153-155. 42 See Vergote 1954, 11, no. 44. the legends is strongly reminiscent of the well 43 For Phoibammon, see Crum, in Winlock/Crum 1926, known, possibly sixth-century tapestry from Egypt, 110; Vycichl 1983, 10 and 245. now in the Cleveland Museum of Art, which rep- 44 See Diethart 1980, nos 5262-5326 (Phib); 5481-5679 resents Mary enthroned with the Infant Jesus (Phoibammon). Given the commonness of the names and the absence of a link with Sinnuris, a Phib, son of Phoi- between Michael and Gabriel. There, an architrave bammon, from a place named Mouei (Diethart 1980, above the figures bears an almost identical inscrip- no. 5309, seventh cent.; for Mouei, see Timm 1984-1992, tion46. In the name of the Virgin, the spelling äigía IV, 1688), cannot be identified out of hand with the pre- for ägía is an example of a rarely attested inter- sent dedicators. 47 45 change of a and ai . In the present word it also Giamberardini 1974-1978, II, 198. p#aigios 46 See Rutschowscaya 1990, 134-137. For the persistance of occurs once in a Coptic environment: the designation of the Virgin as ‘Holy Mary’ in Egypt, see ïw#annys, ‘the Holy John’48. It is uncertain Papaconstantinou 2000, 92-93. whether these spellings could in some way be influ- 47 See Gignac 1976, 194-195. g 48 Crum 1902, no. 8328, a Sahidic funerary inscription, enced by the shift of the following to a fricative quoted in Förster 2002, 10. /j/ that had already occurred in antiquity (compare 49 For this shift, see Gignac 1976, 71-75. It is clearly apparent the modern Greek pronunciation: aya)49. The gen- on the Cleveland tapestry mentioned above, which spells: itival form Maríav must be a scribal slip, perhaps ™ äßa (for ägía) María. 50 For an example from the Fayyum, see Derda/Van der Vliet influenced by inscriptions where a covert noun 2006, 27-28 (‘[monument] of Papas’; cf. SEG 56, no. such as ‘picture, image’ or ‘tombstone’ demands a 1977). following genitive50. It may be noted, finally, that
38
95300_ECA8(2011)_03.indd 38 27/02/13 15:17 the angel on the left of the Virgin is not Raphael, legends above the figures, more or less as in the as was stated by Vansleb and some later authors Cleveland tapestry mentioned above. The only following him, but Gabriel51. differences are that in Kiti the Virgin is standing on a low dais and the angels are dressed differently. THE IMAGE Although contacts between Egypt and Cyprus were quite lively in the seventh century58, it seems far- Although strictly speaking four persons are depicted, fetched to postulate influence either way, as we are the composition follows an essentially triadic pat- simply dealing with an iconographic type that had tern. The central and most prominent element rapidly become popular in the entire Mediterra- is the standing Virgin Mary, who holds the Infant nean world. In any case, the Sinnuris relief is Jesus in an attitude corresponding to the type com- undoubtedly a product of local workmanship, as monly known as the Virgin Hodegetria52. Mary the native Egyptian names of the donors demon- carries Jesus on her left arm, holding him with her strate. other arm. The Child stretches out one hand in Compositions showing the Virgin with the Child a gesture of blessing, with two fingers raised; in – most often enthroned – between two angels have his other hand, he probably holds the traditional a long history in Christian Egypt, where they appear scroll, although this can no longer be established in various contexts and media59. A first group occurs with certainty. The asymmetry of the Hodegetria type is underlined by the position of the Virgin’s feet, which peep out from under her robe. In spite 51 Correct in Giamberardini 1974-1978, I, 197, and Samuel al Syriani/Badii Habib 1990, 147. of the flatness of the relief, the angels on either 52 The literature on the Virgin Hodegetria is immense, see side of Mary are both depicted as slightly turned e.g. Babic 1994; Bacci 1996; Angelidi/Papamastorakis towards the central group of the Virgin and the 2000, mainly focused on the Constantinopolitan icon; cf. Child. Asymmetrically, both angels carry a sceptre, Snelders/Immerzeel 2004, 119-122; for the early history of the type, also Wellen 1961, 176-178 (cf. 208-209). crowned by a knob inscribed with a cross, in their Recently, Bissera Pentcaeva (2006, 110-117) argued for a right hand, and an orb with a cross in their left distinction between pre-iconoclastic representations of the hand. They are winged and wear a tunic and a long Hodegetria type, which stress the intimacy between Mother cloak (himation), flowing from their right shoulder; and Child, and later images of the Hodegetria proper, which focus on the intercessory prayer of the Virgin. The their tunics are tucked up so as to end shortly below present representation would belong to the former group. the knee and are decorated with clavi and roundels. 53 Chapel no. XXVIII: Clédat 1904, Pls 96 and 98, cf. Their attire closely resembles that of the two angels p. 154; the angels are identified in Greek as ‘angel of God’ flanking the Virgin with Child in one of the better (left) and ‘angel of the Lord’ (right). Compare the angels 53 in similar scenes at Saqqara (see below note 62) and the known apse paintings from Bawit . All four figures relief Coptic Museum 7814 (Pahor Labib 1948-49, Pl. I; bear a nimbus, and in the case of Jesus, it is Beckwith 1963, Fig. 111; D. Bénazeth in Catalogue Paris inscribed with a cross. 2000, 187, no. 202). For the iconography of angels in gen- It is well known that the Egyptian tradition eral, see Leroy 1974, 205-207 (Egypt); Maguire 1995, esp. 65-66 (Byzantium). shows a marked preference for representing the 54 54 See e.g. Lazarev 1995 (originally 1938), 198-199 (on the Virgin Mary with the Child enthroned . The Galaktotrophousa), 229-230 (on the Hodegetria); Snelders/ Sinnuris relief, as well as examples from the Wadi Immerzeel 2004, 122-123 (Hodegetria); various examples Natrun55 and Dayr as-Shaykha (al-Qubbaniya)56, are quoted below. 55 A book illumination, a secondary addition to a ninth-tenth all of which show the standing Hodegetria type, century Bohairic manuscript; see Leroy 1974, 108-110, prove that this preference is by no means an abso- Pl. 98, 1. lute rule. Yet it is striking that the closest parallel 56 A much deteriorated wall painting, difficult to date; see for the general composition of the relief is the apse Junker 1922, 49-50, Pl. 6, Fig. 10. We owe this reference to Renate Dekker, Leiden. mosaic in the church of the Panagia Angeloktistos 57 57 See e.g. Volbach/Lafontaine-Dosogne 1963, Pl. 9. in Kiti on Cyprus . The mosaic, which is usually 58 Cf. Gascou 2008, 71-72. dated to the sixth or seventh century, is definitely 59 In the following, we do not intend to study the icono- more dynamic: the two archangels are depicted in graphy of the Virgin in Late Antique and Medieval Egypt in any detail; for further examples and references, see a symmetrical movement, offering their orbs to Giamberardini 1974-1978; Leroy 1974, 202-205; 1975, the Virgin and the Child. The overall composition 52-54; Rutschowscaya 2000; Snelders/Immerzeel 2004, is nearly identical, however, including identical 122-123; Bolman 2004 and 2005.
39
95300_ECA8(2011)_03.indd 39 27/02/13 15:17 in liturgical settings. The best known among these house68. A far later wall painting from the Fayyum representations are those that are part of a painted itself, in the monastery church of Naqlun (Dayr apse composition60. This tradition can be traced al-Malak, eleventh-century), can be usefully com- back to the Late Antique oratories of Bawit61 and pared to the Alexandrian painting because of its Saqqara62, and is found as well in the great ‘pro- liminal setting. Although situated within the church, grammes’ of the Medieval monastic churches63, it is not part of an apse composition, but one of such as the old church of the Monastery of a series of large-scale paintings on the west wall (i.e. St Antony on the Red Sea64. Not far from Egypt, the entrance wall) of the Church of St Gabriel. The on Cyprus, the mosaic at Kiti also adorns the apse scene occupies a large panel in the southern part of of a church. The possibly sixth-century Cleveland the upper register, next to a centrally located sym- tapestry has been compared to contemporary apse metrical pair of equestrian saints69. Even two late compositions with regard to its iconographical pro- ninth-century frontispieces in Coptic manuscripts gramme65. A Medieval icon beam from Old Cairo, from the scriptorium of Touton in the Fayyum may which shows the motif on its central panel, likewise be called liminal as they are situated at the begin- belongs in a liturgical context66. ning of a book70. A second group occurs in what may be called a In addition to these predominantly painted liminal context, marking the boundary between representations, a small series of stone reliefs from sacred and non-sacred space67. Thus a monumental Egypt show the same motif on various scales and version of the motif, which can be dated with con- with a number of variations71. They usually lack siderable certainty to the early sixth century, was a known provenance and survive isolated from found painted in the courtyard of an Alexandrian their original context. Although the loss of context seriously hampers the interpretation of these reliefs, they are certainly non-funerary in character and appear to belong to the greater class of Byzan- 72 60 For the place of the Virgin in such compositions, see Van tine sculptured icons . The Sinnuris stone must Moorsel 1989, 127-131 (reprint 2000, 188-191). be numbered among this latter group of rather 61 Most notably Chapel no. XXVIII, already quoted above neglected monuments. n. 53. The original architectural setting of the Sinnuris 62 See van Moorsel/Huijbers 1981, 129-131, 150-164; cf. Wietheger 1992, 50-54. relief is unknown. As Grossmann’s analysis shows, 63 See Van Loon 1999, 196-201. the khurus of the old church, where the stone was 64 Van Moorsel 1995-1997, vol. 1, 45-48; Bolman 2002, exhibited prior to Vansleb’s visit, was of much later 64-65, cf. 70-71. See also Esna (Dayr as-Shuhada): Leroy date than the stone itself. It can merely be assumed 1975, 6-10, cf. 53-54, and Coquin 1975, 245 (C). 65 Rutschowscaya 1990, 134-137; eadem 2000, 222-225. that the stone once adorned part of an ancient pre- 66 Skalova/Gabra 2003, 180-183. decessor of the Medieval church. This negative 67 Cf. Krueger 2011. observation leaves only two elements to provide a 68 Rodziewicz 1984, 194-206; a reconstruction of this very framework for the interpretation of the relief, the fragmentary painting: Fig. 236. 69 See Godlewski 1993, 190-193; idem 1997, 130, Figs 9-10. text and the iconography of the scene. The subject is identified (in Coptic) as tei[#]agia Whereas most other Egyptian stone icons that [maria mn] niarxangelos eto[ua]ab: this (image depict the Virgin between angels are anepigraphic, of the) Holy Mary (ägía María) and these Holy Archangels the inscription of the Sinnuris relief characterizes it (van der Vliet’s reconstruction of the dedicatory prayer provisionally published in Urbaniak-Walczak 1993, 166). as an ex-voto, offered in fulfilment of a vow, which 70 Depuydt 1993, II, Pl. 11 (M574, a liturgical collection) provides an immediate clue to its interpretation. and 12 (M612, Ps.-John Chrysostom, Encomium on the Texts such as the present one testify to a reciprocal Four Bodiless Creatures); cf. Leroy 1974, 94-97, Pls 31 and relationship between donors and saints73. The 34. 71 See Pahor Labib 1948-1949; Giamberardini 1974-1978, I, monument is an expression of gratitude felt by two 155-156, 196-197, Figs 3, 19-20; Beckwith 1963, 25-26; explicitly named individuals, Phib and Phoibam- D. Bénazeth in Catalogue Paris 2000, 186-187, nos 201- mon, towards the saints depicted in the relief and 202; cf. Loverdou-Tsigarida 2000, 238-239. An additional identified in the inscription below, for favors example is discussed below. 72 See, in general, Lange 1964; for the Virgin in relief icons, prayed for and received. The text, furthermore, for- Loverdou-Tsigarida 2000; Paribeni 2008. mally excludes a liturgical or funerary interpreta- 73 Compare Vikan 1995. tion. Given its votive nature, the monument must
40
95300_ECA8(2011)_03.indd 40 27/02/13 15:17 originally have occupied a position where it could the interchangeability of terrestrial and celestial be seen and – presumably – touched by everybody. visualizations of power79. The idea of a heavenly Its worn and glossy surface may bear witness to its court shaped after the imperial court on earth – or veneration as an icon through the centuries, as vice versa – is most clearly reflected in the visual indeed Vansleb’s report confirms. arts, where both Christ and the Mother of God, The presence of text links the Sinnuris relief to usually carrying the Infant Jesus, can be surrounded another sculpted icon from the Fayyum that like- by angels in courtly dress80. This is true for the wise shows a triple composition with the Virgin entire Mediterranean world, including Egypt. As Mary as its central character. The Greek inscription recent studies rightly emphasize, several of the of this more or less contemporary stone relief, aforementioned Egyptian compositions depicting sculpted in a far more provincial style, was recently the Virgin between two angels display a markedly republished by the late Georges Nachtergael74. The hieratic and courtly character81. What in its core stone was found in al-Lahun, ancient Ptolemais may seem an idyllic scene, a mother holding or Hormou, in 1961 and depicts the Virgin standing, even feeding her child, is in reality an icon of super- without the Child, in a praying pose (the Virgin natural power drawing upon images of the highest deomene, orans) between two anonymous winged authority on earth. angels, equally depicted in praying position75. The Documentary evidence is the best source from resulting triadic image is a powerful icon of inter- which to gauge the general impact that the visual cessory prayer, the message of which is reinforced motif of – specifically – the Virgin flanked by the by the written prayer that surrounds the Virgin: Archangels Michael and Gabriel may have had ‘Lord, help (boßqjson) Elias, administrator’. The on its Late Antique or Early Medieval Egyptian dedicatory formula below the scene identifies the beholder. Two significant examples may suffice Virgin as ‘Our Lady, the Mother of God’. To the here. Mainly in the monastic centres of Middle honour of the Virgin, the oikonomos Elias dedicated Egypt, a triad that links the Virgin with the arch- either the relief itself or – as seems more likely – its angels is a frequent and prominent ingredient of lost architectural setting: a church or chapel (or the common inscriptions of the so-called ‘litany part of one)76. The element of prayer connects both type’82. Such inscriptions open with the invocation icons, but the Sinnuris relief, besides being more sophisticated in style, shows a different iconogra- phy that conveys an altogether different range of associations. 74 Nachtergael 2006 (cf. SEG 56, no. 1985); the earlier pub- In interpreting the rather diverse compositions lication is Giamberardini 1963, 66-67, no. 15, Pl. VIII. Nachtergael dates the relief to the sixth-seventh centuries that depict the Virgin between two angels, scholars on palaeographical grounds. usually focus on the central figure of the Mother of 75 Probably under the influence of Giamberardini’s erroneous God, on the various ways in which she and the interpretation of the stone as a tombstone, Nachtergael Infant Jesus are represented, or on her place within (2006) identifies the central character of the scene as the (male) donor of the relief; it is clearly a woman, however. a larger iconographical programme. It is obvious, The Virgin is also the central character in the inscription however, that the triadic structure of the composi- below the scene; the angels remain unnamed. tion, far from being a casual arrangement, repre- 76 See the commentary by Nachtergael 2006, 12-13. sents an established iconographical motif in its own 77 See e.g. Testa 1983, in particular 286-289 and 290-291. For a triad with a plausible background in traditional right, with its own significance. Underlining the Egyptian religion, see van der Vliet 2000. triadic structure of the scene, the inscription of the 78 Cf. Maltese 1990, in particular 116-121. Sinnuris relief identifies only three saints: Michael, 79 See Maguire 1997. Mary, and Gabriel. Angelic beings, in particular 80 See Stuhlfauth 1897, 207-233 (‘Die Engel als repräsenta- tive Umgebung Christi’); 203-207 (‘Die Engel als Michael and Gabriel, situated to the right and left repräsentative Umgebung der Maria’); cf. Klauser 1962, of a central character, occur in very different Late 301-304; Maguire 1995, 65-66; Jolivet-Lévy 1998. Antique contexts. The two main sources cited for 81 Thus Godlewski 1993, 190 (on the Naqlun painting); this configuration are usually Judaeo-Christian D. Bénazeth in Catalogue Paris 2000, 186-187 (on the angelology, on the one hand77, and the Byzantine limestone reliefs, nos 201-202); Rutschowscaya 2000, 225 78 (on the Cleveland hanging); cf. Leroy 1975, 53. court, on the other . These two options are not 82 See Wietheger 1992, 210-242; Papaconstantinou 2001, mutually exclusive, however; rather they illustrate 22, 387-402.
41
95300_ECA8(2011)_03.indd 41 27/02/13 15:17 of a series of saints, in formulas of varying length impure spirits”86. The invocations of this prayer and composition. Often, the texts first invoke the emphatically bring out the unity of Christ under Holy Trinity, then Michael, Gabriel, and Mary, his double aspect, as God and Son of God and as usually in that order, only rarely with Mary preced- man, son of Mary: ing the angels83. That this configuration is actually meant to reflect a spatially conceived triadic Hail, firstborn of his father and firstborn of my arrangement is neatly demonstrated by the rela- womb! (… ) tively frequent cases where the ‘logical’ order, which Hail, mouth that drew milk from my virgin pairs the archangels, is replaced by the ‘illogical’ breasts! (marked) order Michael-Mary-Gabriel84. Here, the Hail, hand that created our father Adam! (… ) order of the names is undoubtedly ‘iconic’ and Then, as the Virgin said these things, she looked appears to be directly informed by the visual expe- to her right and, seeing Michael, and Gabriel to rience of a triad consisting of the Virgin flanked by her left, she was alarmed. the archangels. In all such inscriptions, the saints Immediately Gabriel said to her: invoked are expected to intercede either for the Do not be afraid, Mary. dead or for the living, and there can be no doubt I am Gabriel, who brought
42
95300_ECA8(2011)_03.indd 42 27/02/13 15:17 who appeal to them, and to heal and rescue them87. The text consists of two lines, inlaid in bone or Its inherent visual power explains the positioning ivory and symmetrically arranged above the central of the motif of the Virgin and Child enthroned doorway (Pl. 4-6). The upper line, in Arabic, is between angels in liminal contexts, such as the west divided over three panels; the lower line gives the wall of the church in Naqlun, close to the undoubt- same text twice within one panel: once in Arabic edly apotropaic double image of the equestrian (right), and once in Bohairic Coptic (left). saints above the entrance88. An overt example of the prophylactic use of the same motif is offered by [upper line] (middle) برسم الملاك ميخائيل بسنورس a gold medallion from Cyprus, dated to the seventh century, which bears the prayer “Christ our God, Intended for (the church of) the Angel Michael in Sin- help (boßqison) us”, inscribed around the triadic nuris. (right) عوض يا رب (left) من له تعب group of the Virgin with the Child and a pair of angels89. The image itself mediates divine assistance Remunerate, o Lord, him who toiled. and protection. In the case of the Sinnuris relief, [lower line] the monument is explicitly referred to as a ‘votive Arabic السلام لهيكل اﻟﻠﻪ .offering’, a token of gratitude for answered prayer There can be no doubt that Phib and Phoibam- Bohairic Coptic mon, two well-to-do citizens of Byzantine or Early xere pierfei nte f(nou)è Islamic Sinnuris, dedicated this monument to cel- Hail, temple of God! ebrate some profound experience of healing or deliverance. The upper line of text is a common prayer for the anonymous donor or donors of the screen, men- APPENDIX: THE OLD ALTAR-SCREEN tioning the name of the church for which it was destined92. The lower line of text, immediately During their first visit to Sinnuris, in September above the doorway, consists of an acclamation that 2003, Derda and van der Vliet came across a dis- brings out the character of the altar room as sacred carded altar screen with inlaid Coptic and Arabic space, God’s dwelling on earth. Other texts in inscriptions, lying exposed to the elements in a nar- a similar position are frequently quotations from row corridor at the east side of the present church. the Psalms that refer to the screen’s function as a Due to the awkward position in which the screen gate. The present text is found more often on was found, it could not be properly recorded. It Coptic altar screens, sometimes in the slightly was only possible to take some rather unsatisfactory expanded form ‘Hail, temple of God the Father!’93. photographs of the inscriptions; these are published The decoration of the screen, and the phrasing here, together with the text of the inscriptions and setting of the inscriptions, are reminiscent of themselves. In spite of the deficient state of our eighteenth-century examples from the Monastery documentation, the publication of this brief note of St Anthony near the Red Sea94. The Sinnuris seemed justified in view of the recent interest in screen bears no date but may likewise date to the similar Medieval and Post Medieval altar screens and their inscriptions90. The Sinnuris altar screen belongs to a wide- 87 A similar conclusion in Bolman 2005, 16-17. spread class of objects made of woodwork inlaid 88 For the apotropaic role of equestrian saints, see Snelders/ with crosses, decorative elements, and inscriptions Jeudy 2006. in bone or ivory. Such screens separate the altar 89 See Maguire 2005, 184 and 191 (Fig. 16.1). room (haykal) or altar rooms from the nave (or 90 See in particular Hunt 1987 (with MacCoull 1989); Rutschowscaya/Boutros 2004; Skalova 2004, 1529-1538; from the khurus, if there is one), while at the same Bolman 2006, esp. 93-103; Jeudy 2009, 53-61. time providing access to the sanctuary through the 91 For general descriptions that are not repeated here, see doorway at the centre of the screen91. They are still Butler 1884, I, 28-32; Burmester 1967, 19; Rutschowscaya/ produced in more or less the same style today and, Boutros 2004, 1502-1503. 92 For similar texts, see Rutschowscaya/Boutros 2004, 1504- though they may be crowned by epistyles carrying 1505. series of icons, such screens are not themselves an 93 See Rutschowscaya/Boutros 2004, 1503-1504. iconostasis in the modern Greek sense. 94 Illustrated in Rutschowscaya/Boutros 2004, Figs 15-21.
43
95300_ECA8(2011)_03.indd 43 27/02/13 15:17 Pl. 4. The inscriptions on the altar screen: middle (photograph J. van der Vliet)
Pl. 5. The inscriptions on the altar screen: right (photograph J. van der Vliet)
44
95300_ECA8(2011)_03.indd 44 27/02/13 15:17 Pl. 6. The inscriptions on the altar screen: left (photograph J. van der Vliet)
eighteenth century, when many Coptic churches and Theological Perspectives on Religious Screens, East and were refurbished95. It is not visible on the photo- West, Washington DC, 72-104. graph of Pl. 1, and must therefore have adorned Brogi, M. 1962, La santa Salmodia annuale della Chiesa copta the South Church, until this was demolished in (Studia orientalia christiana. Aegyptiaca), Cairo. Buschhausen, H. 1988, ‘Die Ausgrabungen von Dayr Abû the 1990s. Fâna in Mittelägypten im Jahre 1987’, Jahrbuch der öster- reichischen Byzantinistik 38, 353-362. BIBLIOGRAPHY Burmester, O.H.E. 1967, The Egyptian or Coptic Church: A detailed Description of Her Liturgical Services and the Rites Angelidi, Chr., T. Papamastorakis 2000, ‘The Veneration of and Ceremonies Observed in the Administration of Her Sac- the Virgin Hodegetria and the Hodegon Monastery’, in: raments (Textes et Documents), Cairo. Catalogue Athens 2000, 373-387. Butler, A.J. 1884, The Ancient Coptic Churches of Egypt, Oxford Babic, G. 1994, ‘Les images byzantines et leurs degrés de sig- [reprinted 1970]. nification: l’exemple de l’Hodigitria’, in: A. Guillou, Catalogue Athens 2000, Mother of God: Representations of the J. Durand (eds), Byzance et les images, Paris, 189-222. Virgin in Byzantine Art (M. Vassilaki, ed.), Milan. Bacci, M. 1996, ‘La Panayia Hodighitria e la Madonna de Catalogue Paris 2000, L’art copte en Égypte: 2000 ans de chris- Constantinopoli’, Arte cristiana 84, 3-12. tianisme, Paris. Beckwith, J. 1963, Coptic Sculpture, 300-1300, London. Clarke, S. 1912, Christian Antiquities in the Nile Valley: Bolman, E.S. 2002, Monastic Visions: Wall Paintings in the A Contribution Towards the Study of the Ancient Churches. Monastery of St. Antony at the Red Sea, Cairo/New Haven. Oxford. Bolman, E.S. 2004, ‘The Coptic Galaktotrophousa Revisited’, Clédat, J. 1904, Le monastère et la nécropole de Baouît in: CoptCongr. VII, Vol. II, 1173-1184. (Mémoires de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale 12), Bolman, E.S. 2005, ‘The Enigmatic Coptic Galaktotrophousa Cairo. and the Cult of the Virgin Mary in Egypt’, in: Vassilaki 2005, 13-22. Bolman, E.S. 2006, ‘Veiling Sanctity in Christian Egypt: Vis- ual and Spatial Solutions’, in: S.E.J. Gerstel (ed.), Thresh- olds of the Sacred: Architectural, Art Historical, Liturgical, 95 See Guirguis 2008, 39-44.
45
95300_ECA8(2011)_03.indd 45 27/02/13 15:17 Coquin, R.-G. 1975, ‘Les inscriptions pariétales des monastères des Deutschen archäologischen Instituts in Kairo, kop- d’Esna: Dayr al-Suhadâ’ – Dayr al-FaÌûrî’, BIFAO 75, tische Reihe 3). 241-284. Grossmann, P. 1990, ‘Architecture’, in: K.A. Manafis (ed.), Crum, W.E. 1897, ‘A Coptic Palimpsest. I. Prayer of the Vir- Sinai. Treasures of the Monastery of Saint Catherine, Athens, gin in “Bartos”. II. Fragment of a patriarchal history’, Pro- 29-39. ceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology 19, 210-222. Grossmann, P. 1998, Die antike Stadt Pharan: ein archäologis- Crum, W.E. 1902, Coptic Monuments (Catalogue général des cher Führer, Cairo. antiquités égyptiennes du Musée du Caire, nos. 8001- Grossmann, P. 2002, Christliche Architektur in Ägypten, Leiden 8741), Cairo [reprinted Osnabrück 1975]. (Handbuch der Orientalistik I, 62). Crum, W.E. 1905, Catalogue of the Coptic Manuscripts in the Grossmann, P. 2008, ‘Zur Typologie des Transepts im früh- British Museum, London. christlichen Kirchenbau’, JbAChr 51, 97-136. Deichmann, F.W. 1937, Versuch einer Darstellung der Grun- Guirguis, M. 2008, An Armenian Artist in Ottoman Egypt: drisstypen des Kirchenbaues in frühchristlicher und byzanti- Yuhanna al-Armani and His Coptic Icons, Cairo/New York. nischer Zeit im Morgenlande auf kunstgeographischer Grund- Hamilton, A. 2006, The Copts and the West, 1439-1822: lage, Ph.D. dissertation Halle. the European discovery of the Egyptian Church, Oxford Depuydt, L. 1993, Catalogue of Coptic manuscripts in the Pier- (Oxford-Warburg Studies). pont Morgan Library, Leuven (Corpus van verluchte hand- Horbury, W., D. Noy 1992, Jewish Inscriptions of Graeco- schriften 4-5). Roman Egypt, Cambridge. Derda, T. 2008, Deir el-Naqlun. The Greek papyri, II, Warsaw Hunt, L.-A. 1987, ‘Iconic and Aniconic: Unknown Thirteenth (P. Naqlun II; JJP Supplements 9). and Fourteenth Century Byzantine Icons from Cairo in Derda, T., J. van der Vliet 2006, ‘Four Christian Funerary Their Woodwork Settings’, in: A. Berger et al., Varia II Inscriptions from the Fayum (I. Deir al-‘Azab 1-4)’, JJP 36, Bonn, 31-48 (POIKILA BUHANTINA 6). 21-33. Jeudy, A. 2006, ‘Elite civil et ‘mécénat’: le rôle du commandi- Diethart, J.M. 1980, Prosopographia arsinoitica I, Vienna (Mit- taire dans le développement des arts et des lettres en Egypte teilungen aus der Papyrussammlung der österreichischen chez les coptes du Xe au XIVe siècle’, ECA 6, 51-65. Nationalbibliothek in Wien n.s. 12). Jolivet-Lévy, C. 1998, ‘Note sur la représentation des arch- Engberding, H. 1967, ‘Eucharisterion in ägyptischen liturgis- anges en costume impérial dans l’iconographie byzantine’, chen Texten’, in: P. Wirth (ed.), Polychordia: Festschrift CArch 199, 121-128. Franz Dölger, II, Amsterdam, 148-161 (Byzantinische Junker, H. 1922, Das Kloster am Isisberg: Bericht über die Forschungen 2). Grabungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien bei Evetts, B.T.A. (ed.) 1895, The Churches and Monasteries of El-Kubanieh, Winter 1910-1911, III. Vienna/Leipzig (Denk- Egypt and Some Neighbouring Countries attributed to Abû schriften der Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil.-hist. Sâlih, the Armenian, Oxford [reprinted: 1969; Piscataway Klasse 66, 1. Abhandlung). 2001]. Keenan, J.G. 2005, ‘Landscape and Memory: al-Nabulsi’s Förster, H. 2002, Wörterbuch der griechischen Wörter in den Ta’rikh al-Fayyum’, BASP 42, 203-212. koptischen dokumentarischen Texten, Berlin/New York Khater, A., O.H.E. Burmester (eds) 1970, The History of the (Texte und Untersuchungen 148). Patriarchs of the Egyptian Church, Vol. III, 3, Cairo (Textes Gascou, J. 2008, ‘Religion et identité communautaire à Alex- et documents 13). andrie à la fin de l’époque byzantine d’après les Miracles des Khurshid, Fathy 1998, The Churches and Monasteries of the saints Cyr et Jean’, in: J.-Y. Empereur, Chr. Décobert (eds), Fayyum Province, from the spread of Christianity Until the Alexandrie médiévale 3, Le Caire, 69-88 (Études alexan- End of the Ottoman Period [in Arabic], Cairo. drines 16). Klauser, Th. 1962, ‘Engel X (in der Kunst)’, Reallexikon für Giamberardini, G. 1963, ‘La preghiera nella Chiesa copta’, Antike und Christentum 5, 258-322. Studia Orientalia Christiana. Collectanea 8, 3-77. Kropp, A.M. 1930-31, Ausgewählte koptische Zaubertexte, Giamberardini, G. 1974-1978, Il culto mariano in Egitto I-III, Brussels. Jerusalem. Krueger, D. 2011, ‘Mary at the Threshold: The Mother of God Gignac, F.Th. 1976, A Grammar of the Greek Papyri of the as Guardian in Seventh-century Palestinian Miracle Roman and Byzantine Periods, Vol. I: Phonology Milan Accounts’, in: L. Brubaker, M.B. Cunningham (eds), The (Testi e documenti per lo studio dell’antichità 55). Cult of the Mother of God in Byzantium: Texts and Images, Godlewski, W. 1993, ‘Deir el Naqlun 1989-1992’, in: D.W. Farnham/Burlington VT, 31-38. Johnson (ed.), Acts of the Fifth International Congress of Labib, P. 1948-1949, ‘The Virgin and Child Jesus: Reliefs in Coptic Studies, Washington, 12-15 August 1992, Vol. II, the Coptic Museum’, BSAC 13, 191-192. part 1, Rome, 183-195. ™ajtar, A. 2004, ‘Varia Nubica VIII-IX’, JJP 34, 87-94. Godlewski, W. 1997, ‘Deir el Naqlun: Topography and Ten- Lange, R. 1964, Die byzantinische Reliefikone, Recklinghausen. tative History’, in: Archeologia e papiri nel Fayyum: storia Lazarev, V. 1995, ‘Studies in the Iconography of the Virgin’, in: della ricerca, problemi e prospettive, Siracusa, 123-145. Studies in Byzantine Painting, London, 196-248 [published Grossmann, P. 1982, Mittelalterliche Langhauskuppelkirchen originally, with author’s name V. Lasareff, in ArtB 20 und verwandte Typen in Oberägypten, Kairo (Abhandlungen (1938), 26-65].
46
95300_ECA8(2011)_03.indd 46 27/02/13 15:17 Leclant, J. 1979, ‘Fouilles et travaux en Égypte et au Soudan, Nachtergael, G. 2006, ‘Dédicace d’un monument à la Vierge 1977-1978’, Orientalia 48, 340-412. Marie’, Ricerche di egittologia e di antichità copte 8, 11-14. Lefebvre, G. 1907, Recueil des inscriptions grecques-chrétiennes Papaconstantinou, A. 2000, ‘Les sanctuaires de la Vierge dans d’Égypte, Le Caire [reprinted Chicago 1978]. l’Égypte byzantine et omeyyade: l’apport des textes docu- Lemerle, P. 1953, ‘Saint Démétrius de Thessalonique et mentaires’, JJP 30, 81-94. les problèmes du martyrion et du transept’, BCH 77, 660- Papaconstantinou, A. 2001, Le culte des saints en Égypte des 694. Byzantins aux Abbasides: l’apport des inscriptions et des papy- Leroy, J. 1974, Les manuscrits coptes et coptes-arabes illustrés, rus grecs et coptes, Paris. Paris. Paribeni, A. 2008, ‘I relievi in marmo rappresentanti la Vergine Leroy J. 1975, Les peintures des couvents du désert d’Esna, Le e altri personaggi religiosi: considerazione sulla cronologia Caire (La peinture murale chez les Coptes 1. Mémoires de e sul loro ruolo nella liturgia’, in: C. Pennas, C. Vander- l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale 94). heyde (eds), La sculpture byzantine, VIIe-XIIe siècles: actes du Loon, G.J.M. van 1999, The Gate of Heaven: Wall Paintings colloque international, 6-8 septembre 2000, Athens, 561-575 with Old Testament Scenes in the Altar Room and the Hûrus (BCH Supplément 49). of Coptic Churches, Leiden (Uitgaven van het Nederlands Pentcheva, B.V. 2006, Icons and Power: The Mother of God in Historisch–Archaeologisch Instituut te Istanbul 85). Byzantium, University Park, PA. Loverdou-Tsigarida, K. 2000, ‘The Mother of God in Sculp- Rodziewicz, M. 1984, Les habitations romaines tardives ture’, in: Catalogue Athens 2000, 237-249. d’Alexandrie à la lumière des fouilles polonaises à Kôm MacCoull, L.S.B. 1989, ‘An Inscription in Haret Zuwaila’, el-Dikka (Alexandrie III), Warsaw. ZPE 79, 270. Rutschowscaya, M.-H. 1990, Tissus coptes, Paris. Maguire, H. 1995, ‘A Murderer among the Angels: The Fron- Rutschowscaya, M.-H. 2000, ‘The Mother of God in Coptic tispiece Miniatures of Paris Gr. 510 and the Iconography textiles’, in: Catalogue Athens 2000, 219-225. of the Archangels in Byzantine Art’, in: R. Ousterhout, Rutschowscaya, M.-H., R.W. Boutros 2004, ‘Deux arcatures L. Brubaker (eds), The Sacred Image: East and West, en bois de l’époque ottomane au musée du Louvre’, in: Urbana/Chicago, 63-71 (Illinois Byzantine Studies 4). CoptCongr. VII, Vol. II, 1499-1524. Maguire, H. 1997, ‘The Heavenly Court’, in: H. Maguire Salmon, G. 1901, ‘Répertoire géographique de la province (ed.), Byzantine Court Culture from 829 to 1204, Washing- du Fayyoûm d’après le Kitâb târîkh al-Fayyoûm d’an- ton DC, 247-258. Nâboulsî’, BIFAO 1, 29-77 [reprinted in Sezgin 1992]. Maguire, H. 2005, ‘Byzantine Domestic Art as Evidence for Samuel al Syriani, Badii Habib 1990, Guide to Ancient Coptic the Early Cult of the Virgin’, in: Vassilaki 2005, 183- Churches & Monasteries in Upper Egypt, [Cairo]. 193. Sezgin, F. (ed.) 1992, Studies on the Faiyûm together with Târîh Maltese, E.V. 1990, ‘Gli angeli in terra: sull’immaginario al-Faiyûm wa-bilâdihî by Abû ‘Utmân an-Nâbulusî dell’angelo bizantino’, Materiali e discussioni per l’analisi dei (d. 1261), Frankfurt am Main (Islamic Geography 54). testi classici 24, 111-132 [reprinted in: Maltese, E.V. 1995, Skalova, Z., Gawdat Gabra 2003, Icons of the Nile Valley, Dimensioni bizantine: donne, angeli e demoni nel medievo Cairo. greco, Turin, 69-92]. Skalova, Z. 2004, ‘Five 13th-century Great Deesis portraits Meinardus, O.F.A. 1977, Christian Egypt, Ancient and Modern, in the Wadi Natrun: Their Origin’, in: CoptCongr. VII, Cairo (2nd ed). Vol. II, 1525-1550. Meyer, M. 1996, The Magical Book of Mary and the Angels Snelders, B., M. Immerzeel 2004, ‘The Thirteenth–century (P. Heid. Inv. Kopt. 685), Heidelberg (Veröffentlichungen Flabellum from Deir al-Surian in the Musée Royal de aus der Heidelberger Papyrussammlung N.F. 9). Mariemont (Morlanwelz, Belgium)’, ECA 1, 113-139. Moorsel, P.P.V. van 1989, ‘Forerunners of the Lord: Saints of Snelders, B., A. Jeudy 2006, ‘Guarding the Entrances: Eques- the Old Testament in Medieval Coptic Church Decoration’, trian Saints in Egypt and North Mesopotamia’, ECA 3, CArch 37, 119-133 [reprinted in Moorsel, P.P.V. van 2000, 105-142. Called to Egypt: collected studies on painting in Christian Stuhlfauth, G. 1897, Die Engel in der altchristlichen Kunst, Egypt (Publications of the ‘De Goeje Fund’ 30), Leiden, Freiburg (Archäologische Studien zum christlichen Alter- 179-202]. tum und Mitttelalter 3). Moorsel, P.P.V. van 1995-1997, Les peintures du monastère de Testa, E. 1983, ‘L’angelologia dei giudeo-cristiani’, Liber Ann- Saint-Antoine près de la mer Rouge, Le Caire (La peinture uus 33, 273-302. murale chez les Coptes 3. MIFAO 112/1-2). Timm, S. 1979, Christliche Stätten in Ägypten, Wiesbaden Moorsel, P. van, M. Huijbers 1981, ‘Repertory of the Pre- (TAVO Beihefte, Reihe B 36). served Wallpaintings from the Monastery of Apa Jeremiah Timm, S. 1984-1992, Das christlich-koptische Ägypten in ara- at Saqqara’, Acta ad archaeologiam et artium historiam per- bischer Zeit, Wiesbaden (TAVO Beihefte, Reihe B 41/1-6). tinentia 9, 125-186. Urbaniak-Walczak, K. 1993, ‘Drei Inschriften aus der Kirche Moritz, B. (ed.) 1899, Description du Faiyoum au VIIme siècle de des Erzengels Gabriel in Deir an-Naqlun im Faijum’, l’hégire par Abou ‘Osmân il Naboulsi il Safadi, le Caire BSAC 32, 161-169. (Publications de la Bibliothèque khédiviale 11) [reprinted Vansleb, [J.M.] 1677, Nouvelle relation en forme de journal d’un in Sezgin 1992]. voyage fait en Egypte… en 1672 & 1673, Paris.
47
95300_ECA8(2011)_03.indd 47 27/02/13 15:17 Vassilaki, M. (ed.) 2005, Images of the Mother of God: Percep- Wietheger, C. 1992, Das Jeremias-Kloster zu Saqqara unter tions of the Theotokos in Byzantium, Aldershot/Burlington. besonderer Berücksichtigung der Inschriften, Altenberge Vergote, J. 1954, Les noms propres du P. Bruxelles inv. E. 7616: (Arbeiten zum spätantiken und koptischen Ägypten 1). essai d’interprétation, Leiden (Papyrologica lugduno-batava Winlock, H.E., W.E. Crum 1926, The Monastery of Epipha- 7). nius at Thebes, New York. Vliet, J. van der 2000, ‘Les anges du Soleil: à propos d’un texte magique copte récemment découvert à Deir en-Naqloun Abbreviations used (N. 45/95)’, in: N. Bosson (ed.), Études coptes VII: neu- vième Journée d’études, Montpellier 3-4 juin 1999, Paris/ CoptCongr. VII Leuven, 319-338 (Cahiers de la bibliothèque copte 12). Immerzeel, M., J. van der Vliet (eds), Coptic Studies on the Vliet, J. van der 2002-2003, ‘Monumenta fayumica’, Enchoria Threshold of a New Millennium: Proceedings of the Seventh 28, 137-146. International Congress of Coptic Studies, Leiden 27 August- Vliet, J. van der 2008, ‘Parerga: Notes on Christian Inscrip- 2 September 2000, Leuven/Paris (OLA 133). tions from Egypt and Nubia’, ZPE 164, 153-158. IGBulg. Vycichl, W. 1983, Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue copte, Mihailov, G. 1956-1966 (ed.), Inscriptiones graecae in Bul- Leuven. garia repertae. Sofia. Vikan, G. 1995, ‘Icons and Icon Piety in Early Byzantium’, LSJ in: Chr. Moss, K. Kieffer (eds), Byzantine East, Latin West: Liddell, H.G., R. Scott, H.S. Jones 1968, A Greek-English Art-historical Studies in Honor of Kurt Weitzmann, Prince- lexicon, Oxford [and later impressions]. ton, 569-578. SEG Volbach, W.F., J. Lafontaine-Dosogne (eds) 1963, Byzanz und Hondius, J.E. et al. (eds.) 1923-, Supplementum epigraphi- der christliche Osten, Berlin (Propyläen Kunstgeschichte, cum graecum, Leiden. Bd. 3). Studia Pontica III Wellen, G.A. 1961, Theotokos: eine ikonographische Abhand- Anderson, J.G.C., F. Cumont, H. Grégoire 1910, Studia lung über das Gottesmutterbild in frühchristlicher Zeit, Pontica, t. III: Recueil des inscriptions grecques et latines du Utrecht/Antwerpen. Pont et de l’Arménie, Bruxelles. Wessely, C. 1904, Topographie des Faijûm (Arsinoites Nomus) in griechischer Zeit, Wien (Denkschriften der kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften 50) [reprinted Milan 1975].
48
95300_ECA8(2011)_03.indd 48 27/02/13 15:17