STUDI DI ANTICHIT CRISTIANA

PUBBLICATI A CURA DEL

PONTIFICIO ISTITUTO DI ARCHEOLOGIA CRISTIANA

LXVI

ACTA
XVI CONGRESSVS INTERNATIONALIS
ARCHAEOLOGIAE CHRISTIANAE
Romae
(22-28.9.2013)

COSTANTINO E I COSTANTINIDI
LINNOVAZIONE COSTANTINIANA,
LE SUE RADICI E I SUOI SVILUPPI
Pars I
Curatela scientifica
Olof BRANDT, Vincenzo FIOCCHI NICOLAI
Cura editoriale
Olof BRANDT, Gabriele CASTIGLIA

2016
CITT DEL VATICANO
PONTIFICIO ISTITUTO DI ARCHEOLOGIA CRISTIANA

ISBN 978 88 85911 65 1

STUDI DI ANTICHIT CRISTIANA
PUBBLICATI A CURA DEL

PONTIFICIO ISTITUTO DI ARCHEOLOGIA CRISTIANA

LXVI

ACTA
XVI CONGRESSVS INTERNATIONALIS
ARCHAEOLOGIAE CHRISTIANAE
Romae
(22-28.9.2013)

COSTANTINO E I COSTANTINIDI
LINNOVAZIONE COSTANTINIANA,
LE SUE RADICI E I SUOI SVILUPPI
Pars I
Curatela scientifica
Olof BRANDT, Vincenzo FIOCCHI NICOLAI
Cura editoriale
Olof BRANDT, Gabriele CASTIGLIA

2016
CITT DEL VATICANO
PONTIFICIO ISTITUTO DI ARCHEOLOGIA CRISTIANA
Oltre i curatori, hanno collaborato alla cura editoriale Sarah Berraho,
Chiara Cecalupo, Stefan Heid, Ivana Kvetanova, Philippe Pergola e Alessia Poggiani.
ISBN 978 88 85911 65 1
Pontificio Istituto di Archeologia Cristiana, 2016
I-00185 Roma, Via Napoleone III, 1
Tel 064465574 Fax 064469197
E-mail: piac.editrice@piac.it
www.piac.it
 INDICE

PERSONALIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pag. XV
PROGRAMMA DEL CONGRESSO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XVII

LISTA DEI PARTECIPANTI ISCRITTI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XXIX

APERTURA DEL CONGRESSO

Messaggio di Sua Santit Papa Francesco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XLI

Discorso inaugurale del Cardinal Zenon Grocholewski, Prefetto della Con-
gregazione per lEducazione Cattolica e Gran Cancelliere del Pontifi-
cio Istituto di Archeologia Cristiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XLIII
Saluto del Dott. Ignazio Marino, Sindaco di Roma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XLIX
Discorso inaugurale del Presidente del Comitato Promotore, Prof. Vincenzo
Fiocchi Nicolai . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LI
Prolusione del Prof. Timothy D. Barnes: Progress in Scholarship.
The Iterpretation of Constantine since the Reformation . . . . . . . . . LV

SESSIONI PLENARIE
LA PRESENZA CRISTIANA E LA SUA INCIDENZA TOPOGRAFICA
NELLE CITT E NELLE CAMPAGNE DELLOCCIDENTE COSTANTINIANO
Relazione
J. GUYON, F. BARATTE, G. CANTINO WATAGHIN, M. HEIJMANS, La diffusion du
christianisme et ses incidences topographiques sur les villes et les
campagnes de lOccident constantinien . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Comunicazione
C. EBANISTA, Eodem tempore fecit Constantinus Augustus basilicam in civi-
tatem Neapolim: nuovi dati sullorigine del gruppo episcopale parte-
nopeo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125

LA PRESENZA CRISTIANA E LA SUA INCIDENZA TOPOGRAFICA

NELLE CITT E NELLE CAMPAGNE DELLORIENTE COSTANTINIANO
Relazione
J.-P. SODINI, La diffusion du Christianisme en Syrie dans les villes et les
campagnes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
VI INDICE

Comunicazioni
V. GHICA, Vecteurs de la christianisation de lEgypte au IVe sicle la lu-
mire des sources archologiques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237
J. PATRICH, The Early Christianization of the Holy Land - The Archaeolog-
ical Evidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265
Ph. NIEWHNER, Church Building in Anatolia during the Reign of Con-
stantine and his Dynasty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295

MONUMENTI CRISTIANI E LORO RELAZIONE

CON I CENTRI DEL POTERE IMPERIALE
Relazione
L. SPERA, Monumenti cristiani e loro relazione con i centri del potere:
Roma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311
Comunicazioni
C. ANGELELLI, F. GUIDOBALDI, I primi tituli della chiesa romana: una pos-
sibile istituzione di et costantiniana? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 353
M. BARBERA, M. MAGNANI CIANETTI, Costantino allEsquilino: il Sessorium
e il cd. Tempio di Minerva Medica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 361
T. BAUMEISTER, Konstantin und die Mrtyrer. Die schriftlichen Zeugnisse
und ihre Bedeutung fr die Bauttigkeit des Kaisers in Rom und
Konstantinopel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 377
M. IVANOV, Two Early Christian Basilicas in Serdica: New Archaeological
Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 393
M. SANNAZARO, Milano e i Costantinidi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 405
W. WEBER, Die frhchristliche Kirchenanlage in Trier - von bescheidenem
Anfang zu imperialer Gre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 431
Discussione finale della prima giornata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449

INNOVAZIONE NELLARCHITETTURA COSTANTINIANA

Relazione
F. GUIDOBALDI, La formulazione progettuale della basilica cristiana come
ulteriore espressione dellinnovazione costantiniana nel campo del-
larchitettura . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 461
Comunicazioni
F. COARELLI, Mausolei imperiali tardoantichi: le origini di un tipo architet-
tonico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 493
E. JASTRZBOWSKA, Maxentius damnatio memoriae and Constantines in-
ventio basilicae in Rome . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 509
R. HIDALGO PRIETO, El complejo monumental de Cercadilla: las transfor-
maciones cristianas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 523
 INDICE VII

LITURGIA E ARCHITETTURA
Relazione
S. DE BLAAUW, A Classic Question: The Origins of the Church Basilica and
Liturgy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 553
Comunicazioni
A. PARANOU, Hypothesen zur Entstehung und Funktion der Doppelbasili-
ka in Trier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 563
O. BRANDT, Constantinian Baptisteries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 583
Discussione . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 611

LE AREE FUNERARIE TRA PAGANESIMO E CRISTIANESIMO

Relazione
V. FIOCCHI NICOLAI, Le aree funerarie cristiane di et costantiniana e la na-
scita delle chiese con funzione sepolcrale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 619
Relazione
Ph. PERGOLA, Mise en valeur et amnagement des tombes de martyrs
avant Damase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 671
Comunicazioni
A. VELLA, Le sepolture dei non cristiani nel suburbio di Roma . . . . . . . 681
D. NUZZO, La conversione di Roma in et costantiniana attraverso lar-
cheologia funeraria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 711
N. ZIMMERMANN, Christliche Zmeterien konstantinischer Zeit in Kleina-
sien? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 745
C. PAPPALARDO, I santuari costantiniani nella Palestina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 763
Discussione . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 773

LA PLASTICA COSTANTINIANA
Relazione
M. BERGMANN, Zur Frage konstantinischer Porphyrarbeiten, zur Polychro-
mie von Porphyrskulptur und zur Entpaganisierung des Porphyr-
Tetrarchenportrts von Gamzigrad . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 779
Comunicazioni
P. PENSABENE, Arco di Costantino: esito di un compromesso . . . . . . . . . . . 821
C. JGGI, Konstantin und die Statuen, oder: vom Schweigen Eusebs und
den Folgen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 835
M. KOVACS, Das Portrt Konstantins als Modell des sptantiken Kaiserty-
pus: Programm oder Entwicklung? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 849
R. GIULIANI, Un ritratto ritrovato dellAugusta Elena dal complesso ad
duas lauros? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 879
Discussione . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895
VIII INDICE

LA PLASTICA COSTANTINIANA: LA PRODUZIONE FUNERARIA

Relazione
J. ENGEMANN, Segni dellimperializzazione del cristianesimo nellet di
Costantino e dei suoi figli nella decorazione dei sarcofagi romani . . 901
Comunicazioni
J. DRESKEN-WEILAND, Due sarcofagi sconosciuti e la storia delle sepolture
a San Pietro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 915
M. . GARCA GARCA, Relaciones de taller y comercio interprovincial en
la produccin de sarcfagos cristianos decorados. El tritn timonel y
otros motivos iconogrficos secundarios en la plstica funeraria con-
stantiniana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 923
U. UTRO, Radici e sviluppi della produzione urbana dei sarcofagi costan-
tiniani, fra committenza e officine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 935
Discussione . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 957

LA CULTURA FIGURATIVA TRA PITTURA E MOSAICO

Relazione
F. BISCONTI, Prolegomeni: larte di un secolo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 961
Comunicazioni
M. BRACONI, I mausolei, le cupole, le decorazioni: tra committenza impe-
riale ed emulazione privata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 987
R. M. CARRA BONACASA, G. CIPRIANO, La decorazione pittorica nella cata-
comba di Villagrazia di Carini nel contesto della cultura figurativa
costantiniana di area mediterranea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011
C. RIZZARDI, La pittura scomparsa del vestibolo del palazzo imperiale di
Costantinopoli tra retaggi biblici, segni ideologici cristiani e sviluppi
iconografici . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1035
Discussione . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1053

LE ALTRE ARTI: DAI MATERIALI DI LUSSO

AGLI OGGETTI DI USO QUOTIDIANO
Relazione
F. BARATTE, Les images chrtiennes, des objets de luxe ceux de la vie quo-
tidienne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1059
Comunicazioni
E. ARSLAN, Chrismon, labaro, monete, multipli e medaglie di IV secolo e
successivi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1085
C. METZGER, La bijouterie dor lpoque constantinienne . . . . . . . . . . . . 1107
Discussione . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121
 INDICE IX

CARATTERI DELLEPIGRAFIA CRISTIANA IN OCCIDENTE

Relazione
D. MAZZOLENI, Caratteri dellepigrafia cristiana a Roma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1125

Relazione
G. CUSCITO, Caratteri dellepigrafia costantiniana in Occidente: lItalia,
esclusa Roma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1137
Comunicazioni
A. E. FELLE, Una lunga svolta costantiniana: tradizione e mutamenti nella
prassi epigrafica dei cristiani di Roma prima e dopo Costantino
(260-320) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1159
E. MARIN, Lpigraphie de Salone au temps de Constantin et de ses suc-
cesseurs (313-363). Lpigraphie chrtienne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1179
H. MERTEN, Pausat in pace. Inschriften als frheste Zeugnisse des Chri-
stentums in Trier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1197
J. JANSSENS, Il significato cristologico dei monogrammi e simboli legati alla
persona dellimperatore Costantino . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1207
Discussione . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1215

VOLUME SECONDO
CARATTERI DELLEPIGRAFIA COSTANTINIANA IN ORIENTE

Relazione
D. FEISSEL, Lpigraphie dOrient, tmoin des mutations de lempire
constantinien . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1221
Comunicazioni
M. MOSER, Le concept de dynastie daprs les inscriptions de Constantin
et des Constantinides . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1235
S. DESTEPHEN, Lmergence de lglise dans les inscriptions dOrient . . . . 1245
Discussione . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1261

SESSIONI DEDICATE ALLE NOVIT (COORDINATORE STEFAN HEID)

TEMATICHE COSTANTINIANE
M. BUZOV, V. LALOEVI , The Picture of Early Christian Communities in
Pannonia during the pre-Constantine and the Constantine Time . . . 1265
A. CERRITO, Costantino, il Lupercale, il titulus Anastasiae: riflessioni sulla
fondazione della basilica alle pendici del Palatino (Roma) . . . . . . . . 1285
D. DE FRANCESCO, Nuove ricerche sulle donazioni costantiniane . . . . . . . . 1309
X INDICE

F. FRAUZEL, Epigrafia celebrativa e dapparato nellOccidente costantinia-

no: manufatti, testi e sottotesti di una propaganda lapidea . . . . . . . . 1323
S. GUGLIELMI, Un gruppo statuario di et costantiniana dal Sessorium . . . 1337
G. HERBERT DE LA PORTBARR-VIARD, Recherches sur les dnominations des
difices du culte chrtien dans les textes latins lpoque constanti-
nienne et post-constantinienne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1359
R. E. KOLARIK, Transitions in Mosaic in the Age of Constantine . . . . . . . . 1379
P. LIVERANI, Il monumento e la voce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1393
G. LNSTRUP DAL SANTO, The Different Faces of Power: Realism and Ide-
ology in the Competing Iconographies of Licinius and Constantine 1407
M. LX, Interazione tra immagine e legenda nella monetazione costanti-
niana: un caso di studio ermeneutico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1419
D. NICOLAOU, Testimonianze di architettura costantiniana nelle due grandi
metropoli di Cipro, Salamis/Constantia e Nea Pafos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1433
M. PIRANOMONTE, B. CIARROCCHI, Nuovi dati sulla battaglia di Ponte Mil-
vio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1447
I. ROMEO, Contemporaneit dellantico: ritratti tardoimperiali da Ostia . . 1471
S. SERRA, Fecit basilicam sub arenario cryptae. La basilica maior di s. Loren-
zo fuori le mura: nuove considerazioni sulla cronologia e larchitet-
tura . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1489
B. WEBER-DELLACROCE, Die konstantinischen Deckenmalereien unter dem
Trierer Dom eine Neubetrachtung . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1505

ARCHITETTURA
L. BARELLI, R. PUGLIESE, Il battistero dei Ss. Quattro Coronati a Roma: le
acquisizioni dellultima campagna di scavo (2011-2012) . . . . . . . . . . . 1521
J. BELTRN DE HEREDIA BERCERO, Nuevos datos sobre el cristianismo en
Barcino. Los orgenes de la baslica de los santos mrtires Just i Pas-
tor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1549
G. BIANCHI, S. CAMPANA, G. FICHERA, Archeologia dellarchitettura nella
basilica della Nativit a Betlemme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1567
A. CHOK, La basilique de Khirbet el-Libneh (sur la cote syrienne). Analyse
architecturale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1591
M. DAVID, Il palazzo imperiale di Mediolanum. Termini di un problema 1607
F. FONTANA, Late antique domus in Aquileia: the Casa dei Putti danzanti 1621
L. KHRUSHKOVA, Pityus en Abkhazie, centre piscopal de lpoque constan-
tinienne, et son dveloppement (daprs les fouilles de 2007-2009) 1641
A. MAILIS, Observations Concerning the Architectural Form and Function
of The Episcopal Complexes in the Early Christian Greece . . . . . . . . 1663
 INDICE XI

TOPOGRAFIA
F. BEJAOUI, Quelques nouvelles dcouvertes dpoque chrtienne en Tuni-
sie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1679
C. FELICI, Pava in Val dAsso. Da villa tardoantica a chiesa delle origini 1691
A. FRONDONI, Aggiornamenti e riflessioni su Genova cristiana in et tardo
antica e altomedievale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1723
G. JEREMI, A. FILIPOVI, Traces of early Christianity in Naissus . . . . . . . . . 1743
R. MICHAIL, Christian Footprints in the City of Nea Paphos (Cyprus) . . . 1759
A. V. RIBERA I LACOMBA, Valentia (Hispania) en el siglo IV: los inicios de
la primera ciudad cristiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1773
S. RISTOW, Frhchristliches Aachen vor dem Pfalzbau Karls des Grossen
Eine Bilanz von 150 Jahren Archologie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1793
A. SCHUHMANN, Die Sakrallandschaft von Resafa (Sergiupolis) - Liturgie
einer Pilgerstadt in der stlichen Peripherie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1805
U. SERIN, Late Antique and Byzantine Monuments, Sites and Settlements
in the Gulf of Mandalya (Caria) in the Light of Recent Archaeologi-
cal Evidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1821
C. SNIVELY, Ecclesiastical Topography of the Late Antique City at Golemo
Gradite, Konjuh, R. Macedonia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1843
I. TOPALILOV, The Impact of the Religious Policy of Theodosius the Great
on the Urbanization of Philippopolis, Thrace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1853
M. VALENCIANO, Recherches et dcouvertes nouvelles autour de la topogra-
phie chrtienne de lhabitat fortifi de Saint-Blaise (Ugium) com-
plexes cultuels et espaces funraires (Ve - Xe sicles) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1863

ICONOGRAFIA
S. CASARTELLI NOVELLI, Dalla scoperta della memoria di Schenute archi-
mandrita del Convento Bianco: una nuova luce sullampia eredit di
Costantino-Eusebio nellarte in parietibus del secolo V (e seguenti) 1889
E. CHALKIA, Lamina doro con il Trisagio nel Museo Bizantino di Atene 1903
E. IVANOV, Skulpturfragmente konstantinischer und nachkonstantinischer
Zeit aus Bulgarien: heutiger Stand der archologischen Forschung . 1915
B. MAZZEI, Il cubicolo dei fornai nelle catacombe di Domitilla alla luce
dei recenti restauri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1927
E. MURGIA, Luxury Glass from Aquileia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1943
A. PERGOLA, Le pitture del Cubicolo delle Colonne nella catacomba dei Ss.
Marco e Marcelliano. Il rapporto con larte megalografica det co-
stantiniana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1953
XII INDICE

C. PROVERBIO, Le rappresentazioni di Cristo: lipogeo di via Dino Compa-

gni come spunto per una riflessione sulle radici e gli sviluppi di
unevoluzione iconografica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1975
N. ZIMMERMANN, Das Start-Projekt zur Domitilla-Katakombe. Neue Me-
thoden und neue Ergebnisse in Vorbereitung des Repertoriums der
Malereien . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1993

EPIGRAFIA, FONTI, STORIA

G. CIPRIANO, G. FALZONE, Epigrafi inedite dalla catacomba di Villagrazia
di Carini (PA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2013
C. LAMBERT, Il monogramma costantiniano e altri cristogrammi nelle epi-
grafi tardoantiche della Campania (IV-VII sec.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2041

AREE FUNERARIE
V. FIOCCHI NICOLAI, D. MASTRORILLI, A. VELLA, Le campagne di scavo 2007-
2012 nella basilica a deambulatorio della via Ardeatina (S. Marco).
Note preliminari . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2063
D. KOROL, P. BONNEKOH, M. WEGENER-RIECKESMANN, Klerikale Reprsenta-
tion und Stifterwesen vom 5. bis 10. Jahrhundert in den Kernberei-
chen der Neapeler Katakombe S. Gennaro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2091
F. TACCALITE, Dal sepolcreto dellArenario alla Memoria Apostolorum: oc-
cupazione funeraria e frequentazione cultuale nel cimitero ad cata-
cumbas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2109
E. VITALE, Nuovi dati sulla catacomba di Sabratha (Libia) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2133

POSTERS
C. ANGELELLI, Il tempio di Venere e Cupidine nel quadro delle testimo-
nianze dellarchitettura costantiniana a Roma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2147
G. BEVELACQUA, Lascesa della civitas Flavia Constantiniana Portuensis tra
liberalitas principis e munificentia privata. Lapporto delle fonti epi-
grafiche . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2155
D. CASCIANELLI, La nascita del fenomeno iconografico delle sostituzioni
zoomorfe: una questione aperta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2171
G. CONTE, Le Thermae Agrippae in via dellArco della Ciambella: una te-
stimonianza dellarchitettura di et tardocostantiniana a Roma . . . . 2187
L. DALESSANDRO, Su alcune terrecotte di soggetto cristiano da Magliano
Sabina (RI), localit Murella . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2199
D. G. ELIOPOULOS, Early Christian Elis. The Christian Presence in the
Cradle of the Olympic Games . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2207
 INDICE XIII

G. FERRI, Alcune riflessioni sullapparato decorativo del cimitero di Ciria-

ca. A proposito di due arcosoli superstiti . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2225
M. KAPLAREVI, Serbia as Bridge and Internal Border. The Topography of
Christianization between Orient und Occident Displayed on Several
Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2241
L. KLENINA, The Early-Christian Churches Architecture of Chersonesos
in Taurica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2255
A. KURILI, Z. SERVENTI, Mosaic inscriptions in the Basilica of Sv. Nikola
(St. Nicholas) on the island of Krk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2281
A. LAZZARA, Il sarcofago della Passione del Museo Pio Cristiano . . . . . . . . 2307
L. MAZZOCCO, Limago clipeata nei sarcofagi di et costantiniana . . . . . . . 2321
C. PAMPARARO, Alle origini di Albintimilium cristiana: Rilettura di dati ar-
cheologici . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2331
P. PENSABENE, J. . DOMINGO MAGAA, Un tentativo di calcolo dei costi
delle colonne della basilica costantiniana di San Pietro a Roma . . . 2347
J. A. PREZ, Gold-Glass Medallions and the Development of Early Marty-
rial Iconography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2373
I. SNCHEZ RAMOS, J. MORN DE PABLOS, Idanha-A-Velha (Portugal) duran-
te la Antigedad Tarda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2381
G. SCHIR, LEcclesia Agrigenti: nuovi dati per la cristianizzazione delle
campagne dal territorio compreso tra Agrigento ed il fiume Platani 2395
M. SPARAGNA, Le Terme di Costantino sul Quirinale: il contributo dei do-
cumenti grafici alla ricostruzione delle strutture architettoniche . . . 2405
M. SZYMASZEK, Lorigine delle cosidette gammadiae nellarte cristiana
antica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2415
Discussione finale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2427
Sessione Plenaria: Liturgia e architettura - Relazione

Sible DE BLAAUW

A CLASSIC QUESTION:
THE ORIGINS OF THE CHURCH BASILICA AND LITURGY

In memoriam Cornelii Peeters (1931-2013)

PRELIMINARY NOTE

The following essay is the slightly adapted text of the Introduction to the session
Liturgia e Architettura, which included papers from various perspectives by Olof Brandt,
Roberto Fusco and Anna Paranou, all published in this volume. The succinct character
of a general introduction to the topic has been maintained. Essential notes have been
added, but with only very selective bibliographical references.
The central question posed in the session was: What could a liturgical perspective
contribute to the old question concerning the origins of the Christian church building
and baptistery and the broader issue of the origins of something we might call Christian
architecture? Even with the highly discriminating circle of experts gathered at the Six-
teenth International Congress of Christian Archaeology, radical new views could hardly
be expected. However, various sessions did give evidence of the innovative character of
Late Antique architecture. Once or twice the question of the origins of the Christian
basilica was addressed. We even heard the suggestive expression inventio basilicae. Clear-
ly, the question continues to be high on the agenda of Late Antique archaeology, even
when it is recognised that substantial scholarly progress might not be achieved within
the present framework of knowledge.
In the meantime the extraordinary significance of liturgy in the identification of
Christian architecture is widely acknowledged. We are talking about the identity of
buildings based on their use for Christian worship. In the same way as when we speak
about Christian art only if it can be demonstrated that the content of the visual repre-
sentation is based on the Bible or its interpretation within the Christian tradition. Not
the exterior form, but the inner meaning, content or function is decisive for Early Chris-
tian art and architecture. This is an old and still effective rule from the discipline of
Christian archaeology.
Notwithstanding the limited ambition of this contribution, I deem it appropriate to
dedicate it to the memory of Cornelius Peeters, a pioneer scholar in the field of the re-
lationship between liturgy and church architecture. Although his outstanding studies
have barely crossed the borders of the Netherlandish-speaking regions, his monograph
on the liturgical disposition of the Early Christian church building, published 1969, is
still today extraordinary in its scope, method and erudition.1

1
PEETERS 1969. For an obituary (in Dutch) Levensberichten en herdenkingen Koninklijke Nederlandse Aka-
demie van Wetenschappen 2014 (Amsterdam 2014), G. VAN GEMERT, 45-54: see: https://www.knaw.nl/nl/ac-
tueel/publicaties/levensberichten-en-herdenkingen-2014.
554 SIBLE DE BLAAUW

IN SEARCH OF A METHOD

If the church basilica was a new invention in Constantinian times, the liturgy cele-
brated in it was certainly not at all new. As a basic tool in any approach, the essential
features of Early Christian worship may be synthesized in a simplified outline:
The assembly of the congregation in a hierarchical order;
The proclamation and preaching of the Word of God;
The dispensation of grace in the sacraments: the non-repeatable initiation in baptism
and the continuous participation in the Eucharistic sacrifice and meal.
With regard to the church building, the spatial and material implications of these
liturgical essentials are:
1. A hierarchical spatial disposition according to ranks and functions within the congre-
gation;
2. A focus on the seat of the presiding authority and assisting officials;
3. A locus altior for the lectures from Scripture;
4. A table / altar for the Eucharistic sacrifice and meal;
5. A font for baptism as the centre of a separate spatial unit.
This basic scheme was taught half a century ago by Frederik van der Meer in Nij-
megen.2 It is still the most simple and adequate formula for understanding the dynamics
between liturgy and architecture.
We may assume that liturgy stood at the beginning of the process. Ritualized wor-
ship could take place in every flexible interior. Only after the main, but very elementary
liturgical requirements had been complied with in a correspondingly basic room type,
could some reciprocal dynamic process between liturgy and architecture start. A random
example indicative of this phase is the sole Christian house of worship that we have se-
curely identified and dated from pre-Constantinian times. In the so-called domus eccle-
siae of Dura Europos, an average Roman courtyard-house, we notice separate spatial
units for baptism and for the synaxis. The relatively large room for the synaxis has a lon-
gitudinal shape, is on the west-east axis and has some traces of a platform against its
eastern wall.3 This supposed assembly hall may have contained some 70 persons, accord-
ing to Carl Herman Kraeling. Thus the spatial essentials of the later church basilica can
already be detected in a modest domestic building at the remote eastern frontier of the
Roman Empire in the second quarter of the third century. However the question as to
whether the Dura house-church constitutes a unique testimony to an evolutionary
process that would necessarily end in the Christian basilica of the fourth century, re-
mains to be answered.
In earlier scholarship, liturgy played only a marginal role in the debate about the
origins of the church basilica. Its development was mostly described in formal terms,
and several categories of building type in Roman public and private architecture were
used as possible models for the standard Christian church.4 This morphological and ty-
pological story is well known and needs no repetition. It can be, acknowledged that, as
long as it is not exclusive, it is still a valid approach to the question. In the dominant
formal approach, it must be said, the functional aspects of architectural space and the

2
VAN DER MEER, MOHRMANN 1958, pp. 135-139; PEETERS 1969.
3
KRAELING 1967.
4
See the helpful overview in GUIDOBALDI 2004.
 A CLASSIC QUESTION: THE ORIGINS OF THE CHURCH BASILICA AND LITURGY 555

specific character of Christian worship compared to other ancient religions and cults
have often been greatly neglected. Neither did the alternative approach, that also has its
roots in the nineteenth century, do justice to possible formative potentials of liturgical
requirements. This is the iconological interpretation model, viewing the Early Christian
church as an image of the Heavenly Jerusalem, usually with arguments post factum.
In this light, August Zestermanns magnum opus on the basilica from 1847 was a pi-
oneering study. Zestermann stressed the internal Christian origins of the church basilica,
which was, according to him, largely shaped by liturgical necessities.5 This approach was
not translated into a consistent method and hence, failed to generate a school. Other in-
teresting studies were sometimes emphatic next steps, but with the same fragmentary re-
sult. The most precious contributions were those that proposed no method at all, but
simply provided an integral study of Early Christian architecture including its liturgical
features. These empirical studies are above all monuments of late nineteenth century
erudition, namely Charles Rohault de Fleurys opus La Messe and Heinrich Holtzingers
survey: both demonstrate a strong sensibility for the new spatial conditions of Christian
worship in comparison to those of the pagan cults.6 It may be a telling sign that Kurt
Liesenbergs study Einfluss der Liturgie (1928) turns out to be so disappointing. The aus-
picious title notwithstanding, the author examines forms unquestioningly, without inves-
tigating their function and the result is therefore remarkably superficial.7
More useful, and to a certain extent in the tradition of Rohault de Fleury and
Holtzinger, are twentieth century archaeological studies that regard liturgical furnishing
and arrangements as an integral part of the buildings under examination. The inclusion
of liturgical features in archaeological publications and studies started concerning the
Eastern Mediterranean with Orlandos, Sotiriou and Lemerle for the Greek world, Lassus
and Tchalenko for Syria, and the Dominican friars Vincent and Abel for the Holy Land.8
Richard Krautheimer certainly had the ambition and the interest to develop such a litur-
gy-inclusive approach in his work on Early Christian architecture in Rome, but was not
always successful in realizing it. In the last decades, however, a general tendency to in-
clude liturgical features in archaeological research is apparent such as in the work of
Noel Duval, to mention but one authoritative scholar who has proven to be extremely
influential in this sense.
This practice, regardless of how important and productive it certainly is, does not
compensate for a theoretical model that could serve to develop a consistent method for
examining the relationship between architecture and liturgy.9 Focussing on the design
process of churches from scratch, Friedrich Wilhelm Deichmann provided the most im-
portant material for such a method, in a stimulating lecture, fortunately published in his
volume of collected articles in 1982.10 In this miniature treatise, Deichmann argues that
form and functional designation, Form und Zweck, are relatively independent factors in
the design process of a building, in particular of an Early Christian church, and thus
should always be considered separately in the analysis of that building.
Working with this model, the intuition in the greater part of modern scholarship,
that liturgical practice and needs did not generate the decisive conditions for the devel-

5
ZESTERMANN 1847.
6
HOLTZINGER 1889; Cf. PEETERS 1969, pp. 8-9.
7
LIESENBERG 1928.
8
PEETERS 1969, pp. 11-12.
9
The The problem has been discussed recently in a study using the above-mentioned integral approach
and including a theoretical framework VERSTEGEN 2010.
10
DEICHMANN 1982.
556 SIBLE DE BLAAUW

opment of the Christian basilica, seems to be confirmed.11 Yet, we should not all to easily
discard the potentials of a dynamic interrelationship between the two factors, particular-
ly in view of the fact that the church basilica presents itself as an extremely plain and
innocent category of architecture. In other words, it is not a building type in which for-
mal ideals and iconological ambitions predominate over functional requirements.12 With
all these cautionary considerations, it may still be useful to revisit the earliest design
processes of the Early Christian basilica under Constantines reign.13

THE LATERAN BASILICA AS A PROTOTYPE

Not preserved in its original state, but well documented with archaeological and
written evidence, Constantines bishops church in Rome can be reliably envisaged and
reconstructed (fig. 1-2).14 Indeed, the Basilica Constantiniana, with its central function
for the regular liturgy of the Roman bishop and his congregation, may be considered to
have been the prototype for church basilica. Not designed for particular functions related
to martyrs graves, burials and pilgrimage - which may be held to generate complica-
tions or distractions to the standard church -, this building was conceived directly and
exclusively for regular Christian worship under the leadership of the bishop.
Krautheimers 1977 reconstruction has proved itself to be convincing. In summary, the
building is a basilica, a rectangular unit of generous dimensions, with a central nave and
two side aisles flanking it at both long sides. There is a clear longitudinal axis, running
from the entrance in the eastern faade towards the apse at the opposite short side at
the west. Other features, such as the separation of nave and aisles by colonnades, the
clerestory of the central nave and the low wings at the western end of the aisles, may al-
ready be considered to belong to the category of secondary characteristics.
Of the liturgical elements referred to above, the cathedra can only be expected to
have stood in the centre of the apse, the altar at a fair distance in front of it and the
place for the readings somewhere in the nave. Not all these elements can be verified,
but the existence of a fixed arrangement of liturgical elements is implied in the list of
Constantines donations, which is fortunately well preserved in the Liber Pontificalis.15
Additional elements of the original liturgical arrangement can also be established. A
processional pathway from the entrance to the sanctuary has been excavated in frag-
ments. The monumental imperial fastigium, mentioned in the Liber Pontificalis, seems
to have been a screen separating the sanctuary / presbytery from the nave. In its phys-
ical appearance absolutely alien to the Christian tradition, but in its function as a hier-
archical marker and glorifying framework for the sanctuary, it was a natural conse-
quence of the nature of Christian liturgy. In the near past the main liturgical compo-
nents in Constantinian times were imagined to have been portable pieces of furni-
ture.16 It needs however to be stressed that, even when not fixed physically, these ele-
ments were integrated into the interior in a monumental, architectonic way. Finally, the
baptistery was an integral part of the Constantinian church complex, but it was a sep-

11
Cf. my earlier contribution on this topic: DE BLAAUW 1991.
12
PEETERS 1969, p. 4.
13
For conveniences sake, I refer to my earlier publications with regard to this issue, also for detailed bi-
bliographical references: 2008; DE BLAAUW 2010.
14
KRAUTHEIMER 1977, pp. 1-92; BRANDENBURG 2004, pp. 16-37.
15
LP vol 1, pp. 172-175 (LP 34. 9-15); cf. R. Fusco in this volume.
16
PEETERS 1969, p. 309.
 A CLASSIC QUESTION: THE ORIGINS OF THE CHURCH BASILICA AND LITURGY 557

arate architectural unit, located at about 60 meters northwest of the basilica. It will be
discussed in another paper.17
From these scanty but secure data, the main lines of the design process of the basil-
ica can be recreated. The imperial founder and donor, the imperial authorities for public
building and the leaders of the Christian congregation must have been the key parties
in the procedure, each with their own objectives. The emperors agenda included a mon-
umental building with rich materials such as marble columns, floors and wall facings,
sculptures and gold revetments, as well as utensils of a high material value. The public
building authorities aimed to adopt a well-known type of building from their repertoire
allowing them to use standard procedures of construction and procurement of materials.
The most intriguing agenda is that of the Christian congregation, the privileged recipi-
ent, the owner and intended user of the new building. What requirements did the con-
gregation have?
First of all, the delegates of the church must have expounded that Christian worship
was an indoor rite and a congregational event. In the eyes of the imperial apparatus and
the majority of the population, it was a radical new type of worship compared to pagan
cults: no fire, no bloody sacrifice. In their place, communal reading, listening, acclama-
tion, singing and using bread and wine as symbols, all of it in an indoor room all in an
indoor room controlled access. Unfortunately, we are missing a lot of information on the
development of Christian liturgy in Constantines times. However, it may safely be as-
sumed that Christian worship had long since lost its intimate character, that of private
gatherings in small communities. The Eucharist was no mere communal meal but a
highly symbolic sacrifice. The hierarchy of the church organization well-developed in
Rome - supposes that solemn, differentiated rituals were already present in the third cen-
tury. More than a century ago, Flix Witting rightly observed that the church basilica
presupposes a liturgy that had evolved from the initial spontaneous domestic atmos-
phere to a mix of relatively fixed formulas, stylized forms and abstract symbols and ref-
erences.18 Also the status and material value of the liturgical utensils donated by Con-
stantine to the churches he founded the most direct link, in the donation programme
to the expected liturgical practice betrays an evolution of Christian worship towards a
strongly ritualized, hierarchical and solemn complex and which was already in place at
the time of the emperors religious shift.
This direct and indirect evidence seems enough to permit the reconstruction of the
design brief of the Christian users at the start of the building process. It aimed to pro-
vide a structure that would fulfil the following basic requirements:
Appropriate for the sizable indoor gatherings of a growing community;
Suitable for a hierarchical inner disposition and for ritual communication;
A longitudinal axis that corresponds to the cosmic west-east alignment.
This programme was clearly focussed on the synaxis, the core of Christian liturgy,
but would also allow a flexible use of the church interior including councils, audiences,
elections etc. In this light, the answer give by the imperial building experts, namely the
unambiguous choice of the basilica building type as the point of departure for the de-
sign, is only natural. That their choice was effective is demonstrated by the further de-
velopment of ecclesiastical architecture and, more importantly for our question, the si-
multaneous processes of church design in Constantines reign.

17
Cf. O. Brandt in this volume.
18
WITTING 1902.
558 SIBLE DE BLAAUW

Independently from local building traditions and from local parties in the building
process, in other regions of the empire obviously similar formulas appeared that are rec-
ognizable as the church basilica. The most conspicuous is the cathedral of Tyre in
Lebanon, only known from the Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius, who provides the first
complete description and interpretation of a public Christian church building.19 The
concept for this bishops church must have been developed in the same years as that of
the Lateran Basilica, but in the Lebanese case quite probably without any imperial inter-
ference. Eusebius describes a building with the same axial, spatial, and hierarchical orga-
nizational characteristics as those inherent in the Lateran Basilica, which he had never
seen. The architectural and liturgical features as mentioned by Eusebius suggest a high
level of similarity to the Lateran. The essential features of liturgy must have been singu-
larly uniform in the Christian world. Egeria observed later in the century that the Eu-
charist she experienced in Jerusalem was very much like everywhere in the empire.20
Any attempt at concrete reconstruction of the cathedral that disappeared without a trace
is doomed to be highly speculative and open to debate. However, nothing hinders the
assumption that Eusebius saw in Tyre a basilica with particular qualities, which defined
it as a Christian church, just as in the far-away Lateran Basilica.

THE INNOVATIVE BASILICA

It is appropriate to conclude with a brief review of the formal solutions incorporat-

ed into the design of the Church basilica in order to comply with the central liturgical
necessities. The arguments as such are widely known, and all typological and formal an-
tecedents have played a role in the earlier debate, be it often in a mutually exclusive way.
The function of gathering together is clearly satisfied by the general choice for the
basilica forensis as the basic typology for the Christian church. The hierarchical inner
disposition could be derived from building types like the palace aula, in which a meet-
ing could take place between the authority and his audience, arranged facing each other
with the official seat of the emperor or magistrate opposite to the section of space re-
served for the public. The longitudinal main axis is already implied in this setting. The
alignment towards a sacred inner focus and on a cosmic axis adds to the longitudinal
spatiality in a visual and symbolic way. This feature could only be derived from sacred
architecture, probably predominately from Roman temples with a spacious cella ending
in an apse.
The fusion of these different features within the flexible genus of basilica shaped the
church basilica. All the features are of a formal nature, whilst their selection and fusion
was determined by liturgical demands. According to Deichmanns formula, the Zweck
was new, derived neither from the market basilica, nor from the palace aula and the pa-
gan temple. Eusebius could, therefore, ignore these formal antecedents in the first literary
assessment of a church basilica. In order to do justice to the novel character of the build-
ing compared to other generally familiar building types, he interprets Tyres basilica as
an image of the Biblical temple of Jerusalem. This was clearly a rhetorical device, which

19
Eus., h. e., X. 4. 37-45 (= OULTON 1932); cf. SMITH 1989.
20
Aegeria, Itinerarium 25. 1: omnia secundum consuetudinem, qua et ubique fit die dominica (=
FRANCHESCHINI, WEBER 1958); Liturgical variety certainly developed, maybe more quickly in the course of the
fourth century. The differences of liturgical disposition between, for instance North African and North Syrian
churches in the fifth century give evidence of this.
 A CLASSIC QUESTION: THE ORIGINS OF THE CHURCH BASILICA AND LITURGY 559

strictly speaking - worked adequately only for the cosmic axis and the sacred character
of the new church and not for its liturgical use.
There remains only a limited role in this narrative for the synagogue, another type
of building frequently mentioned in the debate on the origins of the Christian basilica.21
Regarding Zweck, the relationship certainly exists. But this functional relationship be-
tween church and synagogue only occurs with regard to the liturgy of the word, and is
not valid for the liturgy of sacrifice and meal. The inner arrangement of a church with
an altar and a cathedra is more complicated than that of a synagogue; similarly the num-
ber of liturgical movements and shifts of attention in the Christian synaxis. Regarding
Form, it is important to observe that the early known synagogues do not have a corre-
sponding architectural and liturgical axis. All basilica-type synagogues in which the ar-
chitectural and liturgical axis coincide, seem to date from much later than the first gen-
eration of Christian basilicas, so that the most plausible direction of the relationship is
from the church to the synagogue.22
Bearing in mind the great variety of local building styles and typological variants
over the enormous area of the Mediterranean basin, the high degree of conformity in
church building is astonishing. Notwithstanding the great variety of planning for Chris-
tian buildings under Constantine, including a centralized plan for a regular bishops
church in Antioch, the preponderance of the basilica for regular churches is obvious. The
basilica was the dominant type from the times of Constantine and the Constantinidi on-
wards and would even influence the axiality and lay-out of centralized churches.
Basically, Emil Gause found the appropriate words already in 1901, when he con-
cluded Nicht rein erfindend, wohl aber spezifisch gestaltend hat hier der Kultus gewirkt.23
Future debates will benefit from the notion that the innovative qualities of the Christian
basilica are to a large extent inspired by liturgical requirements, even if they are based
on a creative use of existing forms.

21
Cf. brief discussion in DE BLAAUW 2008, pp. 249-261.
22
Cf. MILSON 2007, pp. 236-242.
23
GAUSE 1901, p. 27.
560 SIBLE DE BLAAUW

BIBLIOGRAPHY

DE BLAAUW 1991 = S. de Blaauw, Architecture and Liturgy in Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages. Traditions and
Trends in Modern Scholarship, in Archiv fr Liturgiewissenschaft, 33 (1991), pp. 1-34.
DE BLAAUW 2008 = S. de Blaauw, Kultgebude, in RAC, Stuttgart 2008, pp. 227-393.
DE BLAAUW 2010 = S. de Blaauw, Le origini e gli inizi dellarchitettura Cristiana, in S. de Blaauw 2010a (ed.),
Storia dellarchitettura italiana: Da Costantino a Carlo Magno, Milano 2010, pp. 22-53.
DE BLAAUW 2010a = S. de Blaauw (ed.), Storia dellarchitettura italiana: Da Costantino a Carlo Magno, Milano
2010.
BRANDENBURG 2004 = H. Brandenburg, Die frhchristlichen Kirchen Roms vom 4. bis zum 7. Jahrhundert: Der
Beginn der abendlndischen Kirchenbaukunst, Regensburg 2004.
DEICHMANN 1982 = F.W. Deichmann, Entstehung der christlichen Basilika und Entstehung des Kirchengebudes:
Zum Verhltnis von Zweck und Form in der frhchristlichen Architektur, in F.W. Deichmann 1982a (ed.),
Rom, Ravenna, Konstantinopel, Naher Osten. Gesammelte Studien zur sptantiken Architektur, Kunst und
Geschichte, Wiesbaden 1982, pp. 35-46.
DEICHMANN 1982a = F.W. Deichmann (ed.), Rom, Ravenna, Konstantinopel, Naher Osten. Gesammelte Studien
zur sptantiken Architektur, Kunst und Geschichte, Wiesbaden 1982.
FRANCHESCHINI, Weber 1958 = A. Francheschini, R. Weber (ed). Itineraria et alia geographica I, 35-90, Turnhout
1958.
GAUSE 1901 = E. Gause, Der Einfluss des christlichen Kultus auf den Kirchenbau, besonders auf die Anlage des
Kirchengebudes, Jena 1901.
GUIDOBALDI 2004 = F. Guidobaldi, Caratteri e contenuti della nuova architettura dellet costantiniana, in RACr,
80 (2004), pp. 233-276.
HOLTZINGER 1889 = H. Holtzinger, Die altchristliche Architektur in systematischer Darstellung, Stuttgart 1889.
KRAELING 1967 = C.H. Kraeling, The excavations at Dura-Europos: final report. Part 2: The Christian building.
With a contribution by C. Bradford Welles, New Haven 1967.
KRAUTHEIMER 1977 = R. Krautheimer, Corpus Basilicarum Christianarum Romae. The Early Christian Basilicas
of Rome (IV-IX Cent.), vol 5, Citt del Vaticano 1977.
LIESENBERG 1928 = K. Liesenberg, Der Einfluss der Liturgie auf die frhchristliche Basilika, Neustadt an der
Haardt 1928.
LP = L. Duchesne (ed.), Le Liber Pontificalis. Texte, introduction et commentaire. 2 vols. Paris 1886-1892.
MILSON 2007 = D. Milson, Art and Architecture of the Synagogue in Late Antique Palestine. In the Shadow of the
Church, Leiden 2007.
OULTON 1932 = J. E. L. Oulton (ed.), Eusebius: The Ecclesiastical History Books VIX, vol. 2, Cambridge 1932,
pp. 421-429.
PEETERS 1969 = C. J. A. C. Peeters, De liturgische dispositie van het vroegchristelijk kerkgebouw: plaats en samen-
hang van de cathedra, de leesplaats en het altaar in de basiliek van de vierde tot de zevende eeuw, Assen
1969.
SMITH 1989 = C. Smith, Christian rhetoric in Eusebius panegyric at Tyre, in Vigiliae Christianae, 43 (1989),
pp. 226-247.
VAN DER MEER, MOHRMANN 1958 = F. van der Meer, Chr. Mohrmann, Atlas van de oudchristelijke wereld (with
translations in English, German and French 1958 / 1959 / 1960), Amsterdam 1958.
VERSTEGEN 2010 = U. Verstegen, Die symbolische Raumordnung frhchristlicher Basiliken des 4. bis 6. Jahrhun-
derts: zur Interdependenz von Architektur, Liturgie und Raumausstattung, in RACr, 85 (2009) [2010], pp.
567-600.
WITTING 1902 = F. Witting, Die Anfnge christlicher Architektur: Gedanken ber Wesen und Entstehung der
christlichen Basilika, Strassburg 1902.
ZESTERMANN 1847 = A.C.A. Zestermann, Die antiken und die christlichen Basiliken: nach ihrer Entstehung, Aus-
bildung und Beziehung zu einander dargestellt; mit sieben lithographirten Tafeln, Leipzig 1847.
 A CLASSIC QUESTION: THE ORIGINS OF THE CHURCH BASILICA AND LITURGY 561

Fig. 1 - Rome, Basilica Constantiniana (Lateran Basilica), ground plan, reconstruction as in fourth century.
1. Altar; 2. Cathedra; 3. Subsellia; 4. Altaria / Offertory tables; 5. Fastigium; 6. Solea.
 562
SIBLE DE BLAAUW

Fig. 2 - Rome, Basilica Constantiniana (Lateran Basilica), isometric reconstruction as in fourth century.