You are on page 1of 40

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 - Comunicazione

OLOF BRANDT

CONSTANTINIAN BAPTISTERIES

Little is known about what baptisteries looked like in the Constantinian period
compared to what is known about Christian basilicas of the same period.
A number of well-dated basilicas provide abundant information of the first devel-
opment of the Christian basilica, especially in Rome and in the Holy Land. In Rome, the
Lateran basilica can be dated to after 312 and before 324 with the help of the Liber Pon-
tificalis: among Constantines donations to the basilica at its foundation during the pon-
tificate of Silvester (314-335), no possessions are mentioned in the eastern part of the
Empire, which was controlled by Constantine only after 3241. Also the building tech-
nique corresponds to a date in the first half of the fourth century2. In spite of some re-
cent discussions, also Old St. Peters3 can be dated to after 324 because of Oriental pos-
sessions among the donations listed in the Liber Pontificalis4, and before 330 by the latest
possible date of early burials in the basilica5. The U-shaped funerary basilicas in the Ro-
man suburb all seem to belong to the first half of the fourth century6. The basilicas built
by Constantine in Jerusalem and Bethlehem were both seen by the anonymous pilgrim
from Bordeaux in 333. Of all these basilicas, both their date and their shape are well
known.
Much less is known about contemporary baptisteries. It is very difficult even to de-
fine the material to consider in a survey on baptisteries of the Constantinian period.
Most structures identified as baptisteries of this period are difficult to date, or they may
not even be baptisteries. Only the Lateran baptistery in Rome can be dated with certain-
ty to the late Constantinian era. This paper will discuss that building together with a
number of structures identified by some scholars as baptisteries of this period in Trier,
Aquileia, Naples and Jerusalem. The survey will show to what extent uncertainty reigns
in the field of Constantinian baptisteries, but also that perhaps some useful observations
can be made.

AQUILEIA

In the cathedral complex of Aquileia7, three structures have been identified as bap-
tisteries belonging to different phases of the complex (fig. 1). One of them is believed to
belong to the first phase with the two parallel halls, famous for their mosaic floors with

1
LP I, p. 172-174.
2
For the chronology of the Lateran basilica, Richard Krautheimers observations in CBCR 5, pp. 89-90
are still valid.
3
On the chronology of Old St. Peters, see KRAUTHEIMER 1989, GEM 2013 and DRESKEN-WEILAND.
4
LP I, pp. 176-178.
5
DRESKEN-WEILAND.
6
FIOCCHI NICOLAI 1995-1996, p. 119 with bibliography in note 149.
584 OLOF BRANDT

dedications attributing the buildings to the bishop Theodorus, who participated in a


Synod in Arles in 314 and, according to tradition, died in 3198. A second font belongs
to the first reconstruction of the complex, usually dated around the middle of the fourth
century. These two structures, both found in the rooms between the two main halls, are
relevant for our survey. The baptistery of the first phase may well be the oldest among
the baptisteries considered here, which is why it seems convenient to begin the survey
with Aquileia.
We can leave outside this discussion the monumental, internally octagonal baptistery
in front of the south basilica, belonging to a later phase of the same reconstruction9. That
baptistery can be dated with the help of a coin of Valentinian II (375-391) found in the
foundations in excavations in the 1980-ies10, and also with recent excavations beneath an
annex of the baptistery, the Sdhalle, which can now be dated to between the end of the
fourth century and the beginning of the fifth11. This would fit well with the traditional
attribution of the baptistery to Chromatius, bishop of Aquileia from 388/389 to 407/408.
The oldest of the two relevant baptisteries of Aquileia may well be the oldest pre-
served baptistery in the world after that of Dura Europos. It was discovered in 1915,
when Anton Gnirs excavated the northern half of a round basin in the eastern part of
the complex (figs. 1-2)12. He interpreted it as part of a bath belonging to the last phase
before the construction of the Christian complex. The same basin was however identified
as the first baptistery of the complex by Luisa Bertacchi in 198013 and further explored
in 1986 by Gian Carlo Menis, who accepted the interpretation as a baptistery14. There
has been some confusion about the shape of this basin. According to Gnirs it was circu-
lar, but Menis reconstructed it as an oval. A recent review of the excavations has however
confirmed the circular shape of the basin15. Another question concerns the floor level of
this structure. The basin is related to a mosaic floor which is almost half a meter above
the level of the mosaic floor of the south hall, although it is supposed to belong to the
same phase. The geometric design of the mosaic floor related to the basin is almost iden-
tical to that of the north hall, which belongs to the phase of Theodorus just like the
south hall. This is interesting, because it shows that the floor levels of the rooms between
the two main halls were not always identical to that of the two halls. This circular basin
was placed near the centre of a rectangular hall, which is difficult to reconstruct in all
details, but has been reconstructed recently in what gives a general idea of how it must
have looked (fig. 2). Sebastian Ristow has expressed doubts concerning the identification
of this basin as a baptistery16, but his objection, that the oval shape is not typical for

7
CUSCITO, LEHMANN 2010, LEHMANN 2013a AND NOVELLO, SALVADORI, TIUSSI, VILLA 2013 with earlier bib-
liography.
8
For the chronology of Theodorus, see references in LEHMANN 2010, p. 167, note 19.
9
BRANDT 2010 and 2012, pp. 318-365 with earlier bibliography; now also MASELLI SCOTTI, TIUSSI, VILLA
2015.
10
LOPREATO 1989.
11
MASELLI SCOTTI, TIUSSI, VILLA 2015, pp. 80-81. These recent excavations indicate that the terminus post
quem given by the coin of Valentinian II cannot be far from the date of construction of the baptistery, which
should not be dated through the comparison with other complexes where an octagonal baptistery is surround-
ed by corridors on two sides, like those of Qalat Seman (late fifth century) and Abu Mina (sixth century), as
proposed in BRANDT 2010, pp. 363-364.
12
GNIRS 1915, pp. 163-165.
13
BERTACCHI 1980, pp. 198-199.
14
MENIS 1986.
15
Personal communication from Luca Villa, to whom I am indebted.
16
RISTOW 1994, p. 102 and note 38.
CONSTANTINIAN BAPTISTERIES 585

baptisteries, is irrelevant, as the basin is circular. On the other hand, he is right that it
is impossible to date the structure, because the published documentation does not prove
the connection between the basin and the well-dated mosaic pavement. Our understand-
ing of this structure may well be changed by future research and by a new revision of
the documentation of older excavations, but for the moment there seem to be no strong
reasons not to identify this as the baptistery of the first phase of the complex. Its high
chronology makes it extremely important to observe its shape. The font is rather big,
with a diameter between 2,5 and 3 m, but its circular shape is particularly simple. The
room seems to have been rather modest. The mosaic floor is a second choice, marble
being the most elegant and expensive choice in a floor. Little is known about the walls
of the room and nothing about how they were decorated or about the number, shape,
position and dimensions of the windows. One can only observe that already this very
early baptistery confirms the tendency in the West to place the font at the centre of a
room, leaving space on all sides. The choice of a rectangular room shows that the bap-
tistery, as the three halls of the first phase, had no monumental character: no central
plan, no columns, no deambulatory. This evident lack of monumentality fits well with
the shape of the twin halls of Theodorus which lack most important monumental ele-
ments which soon will become standard in Christian basilicas; a division in naves, the
use of columns and capitals and the Classical orders, and the apse. The only important
difference between this first baptistery of Aquileia and that of Dura Europos seems to be
the position of the font, which in Dura was built against one of the walls.
Compared to this first baptistery of Aquileia, interesting steps towards a higher re-
finement, both in the shape of the font and in the material of the floor, can be found
in a second font, which also was found in the complex between the two big halls, but
further to the west (figs. 1, 3-5)17. It is evident that it belongs to a second phase, because
at least two rooms of the first phase were demolished for its construction. The font was
built on top of the cocciopesto floor and demolished east wall of the smaller, west hall
which united the two main halls, and, east of that wall, on top of the mosaic floor of
the north-south corridor which lead to the only known entrance to the south hall. This
last fact seems to indicate that the south hall was not in use in the phase of the second
baptistery.
Excavations have uncovered the south half of what must have been an internally
hexagonal basin, which on the outside extended in six points as a star. The internal
shape of the font is rather complex: To the south there are two straight sides of a hexa-
gon, which must have been matched symmetrically to the north, but the east and west
sides of the hexagon were convex, following the concave curve on the outside. Those two
sides had no steps, while the two straight, completely preserved inner sides of the font,
which measure 124 and 130 cm, had two steps, around 25 cm high. Probably similar
steps were present also on the lost north part of the font. Above these steps, there are
small remains of an hexagonal rim built in bricks, with concave sides. The bottom, the
steps and the rim all show traces of revetment of cipollino and pavonazzetto marble.
First of all, some words must be said about the state of conservation of this font.
The southern half is rather well preserved, except for the upper part of the hexagonal
rim, while almost all the northern part has been completely destroyed by later excava-
tions, perhaps for the medieval reconstructions of the cathedral. However, it seems to
have passed unnoticed that there is still an important remain of the north point of the

17
BRUSIN, ZOVATTO 1957, pp. 160-166, plans VI and VIa, and figs. 59 e 67; FORLATI TAMARO 1963, figs. 6a
e 6b; VILLA 2003, p. 505-506.
586 OLOF BRANDT

font, as can be seen in the photo (fig. 5). This permits us to reconstruct the precise shape
of the font and its distance from the wall to the north, which is the south wall of the
second north basilica.
All earlier scholars18 believed that this font was built and used from the original,
lower floor level, but this is impossible, because its bottom is higher than that floor level,
and the bottom of a baptismal font was always lower than the surrounding floor. The
font must from the beginning have been related only to the higher floor level, of which
some fragments survive. This is also confirmed by the fact that there seem to be no
traces of marble revetment on the outside of the star-shaped structure, while there are
important remains of the marble revetment of the inside of the font (fig. 4). It is in-
evitable to conclude that the star-shaped structure was an invisible foundation wall, hid-
den, completely or at least for the most part, beneath the floor already from the begin-
ning. The doors at the earliest floor level in the south wall of the new north basilica
probably belong to the phase of construction and do not prove that this baptistery was
used from the original floor level. Perhaps the function of the star-shaped foundation
was to carry the weight of six columns in a ciborium. The rim of the font was an hexag-
onal wall with concave sides, of which there are some remains. The lost, upper part of
the rim was built in bricks and clad with marble slabs. As the star-shaped structure was
only a foundation, that and the hexagonal rim must belong to the same phase, not to
two different phases as supposed by earlier scholars. So there is no doubt that this font
was from the beginning related to that higher floor level, which can be seen in the basil-
ica which replaced the north hall in the second phase of the cathedral complex. This
higher level is all we know about the chronology of this second baptistery, and the
chronology of the first reconstruction of the cathedral complex of Aquileia all depends
on excavations in the portico in front of the new north basilica19. That portico can be
dated to the period 360-370, and is supposed to have been built after the north basilica,
which seems to have had a rather long construction, judging from the first plaster on its
walls which begins at the lower, original floor level, and from an intermediate floor lev-
el20. Many scholars admit the possibility to identify the second north basilica with the
church in construction in which Athanasius of Alexandria celebrated Easter in 345.
These dates permit us to include the font as probably the latest among the certainly
identified baptisteries in this survey of baptisteries from the Constantinian period in a
wide sense.
It would be interesting to know the position of the architecture of this second bap-
tistery compared to the lack of monumentality of the first one, but, while it is easy to
reconstruct the shape of the font and its floor level, it is unfortunately extremely difficult
to understand the shape of the surrounding hall. Probably new light will be thrown on
this problem by the revisions of the old excavations carried out by scholars like Tomas
Lehmann21 and Luca Villa22, but for the moment, it is only possible to observe that there
is a strangely short distance between the font and a wall to the north, which was the
south wall of the new north basilica. Remains of a floor, which corresponds to what
must have been the floor level of the baptistery, are preserved along this wall. Only one
slab of this floor is in direct contact with the font; it covers part of the partially pre-
served north point of the star-shaped foundation (figs. 4-5). The distance between this

18
From BRUSIN, ZOVATTO 1957, pp. 160-166 to BERTACCHI 1980 and VILLA 2003, pp. 505-506.
19
BERTACCHI 1972.
20
Cfr. LEHMANN 2010, p. 172.
21
LEHMANN 2009 and 2013.
22
NOVELLO, SALVADORI, TIUSSI, VILLA 2013.
CONSTANTINIAN BAPTISTERIES 587

north point of the star-shaped structure and the south wall of the north basilica is only
65 cm, while the hexagonal rim must have been about 1,2 m from the same wall. This
short distance between the font and the wall is quite odd and seems to contrast with the
tendency, at least in the West, to leave abundant free space around the font. Little can
be said about the other three walls of the room, which have been reconstructed in dif-
ferent positions by different scholars. As for the relationship between the preserved re-
mains of the floor and the font, it should be noted that the big, rectangular slab (63 x
104 cm) which covers part of the north point of the fonts foundation is quite different
from the smaller, rectangular slabs of white marble, only 20 cm wide, present in the rest
of the floor, where they form squares or rectangles filled with black hexagons united by
white triangles. This bigger slab on top of the north of the font could possibly belong
to a later reconstruction of the floor, perhaps in a phase when the font was demolished
after the construction of the external, octagonal baptistery. That would explain the ab-
sence of any trace of a base for a column of a ciborium on the floor slab.
Observing the plan, one would be tempted to guess that the font was built in that
position with the intention of putting it at the centre of a bigger room. It is possible that
the font was intended for a different project than what was actually built. The construc-
tion may even have begun before that of the bigger northern basilica. On the other hand,
it was completed only after the construction of the south wall of the new basilica, be-
cause the drain of the font passes through a door in that wall. The question, which
hopefully can be answered by future research, is if it would be possible to imagine at
least the beginning of the construction of the font as belonging to a reconstruction only
of this particular area, when the smaller hall and the corridor were replaced by a higher
floor level, but before the construction of the new north basilica on the same, higher lev-
el. It should be remembered that already the first baptistery of the complex had its floor
on a higher level than that of the two main halls. The floor levels in the area between
the two main halls may yet have much important information to reveal about the de-
velopment of the complex in its different phases. While the modest baptistery of the first
phase could fit well with the modest architecture of the original two halls, the monu-
mental character of the second north basilica would seem to require a more monumen-
tal baptistery. And this may be in some way the key to understand this second baptistery
of Aquileia. Compared to the first, the second font actually has a much more refined de-
sign, and the marble slabs and opus sectile of the floor show a higher level than the mo-
saic floor of the baptistery. The same can be said about the probable presence of
columns in a ciborium. But the dimensions are still quite modest, more fitting for the
first phase of the cathedral complex than for the much bigger dimensions of the second
north basilica. One possible explanation could perhaps be that it was conceived before
the second north basilica, to which it soon would belong, remaining surprisingly small
compared to that huge basilica. If the second north basilica is the church in which
Athanasius celebrated Easter in 345, then the second baptistery could belong to the very
first moment of that reconstruction, perhaps around 340. Another and perhaps better
explanation could be that, however the beginning of its construction should be dated, it
should be interpreted essentially as a temporary solution waiting for the construction of
the external baptistery to the south, which probably was planned from the beginning of
the monumental reconstruction and which, alone, has the same degree of monumental-
ity as the new north basilica. The external baptistery was however not built before the
end of the fourth century or in the beginning of the fifth. When that baptistery was
built, the temporary baptistery was probably demolished.
588 OLOF BRANDT

JERUSALEM: THE HOLY SEPULCHRE

Contemporary sources attest that there was a baptistery in the Constantinian com-
plex of the Holy Sepulchre, built soon after the Council of Nicaea of 325, but it has nev-
er been identified with certainty. Eusebius does not mention it, but it is mentioned ex-
plicitly by the anonymous pilgrim from Bordeaux, who in AD 333 stated that it was be-
hind the basilica (a tergo)23. The baptistery can thus be dated with great precision to the
years around 330: after 325 and before 333. It was mentioned again in the twelfth cen-
tury by the Anglo-Saxon monk Saewulf, who visited the complex in 1102-110324. In his
days, the baptistery was found in the central of the three, still existing, small chapels
which extend in a row towards south from the Anastasis (fig. 6). The modern visitor will
see the three polygonal apses of these chapels to the left of todays entrance to the Holy
Sepulchre. Before Saewulf, no source states the exact position of the early Christian bap-
tistery, which remains an open question. Two main hypotheses have been proposed.
One recent hypothesis, expressed by Cesare Tinelli25 and Virgilio Corbo26, identifies
the baptistery of the Holy Sepulchre in a small, monolithic font found north of the Ro-
tunda. The font is externally square and internally quadrilobed, and both its type and its
dimensions point to a much later date than the fourth century27. For this reason, this
hypothesis must be excluded. In spite of Corbos authority, many scholars prefer the oth-
er hypothesis: to consider the possibility that what Saewulf saw in the twelfth century
was the baptistery mentioned by the pilgrim from Bordeaux in the fourth. This opinion
was defended by Hugues Vincent in 191428 and again, in 1974, by Charles Coasnon,
who argued that in the context of the description of the pilgrim from Bordeaux, a tergo
must mean to the south of the basilica29. Even more recently this position has been de-
fended by Annabel Jane Wharton in 199230 and Joseph Patrich in 199331.
The chapel mentioned by Saewulf32 is almost square, being 9,15 m broad and 9,2 m
long (fig. 7). It was once covered by a dome, which has disappeared, leaving only the
lower part of an octagonal drum, which is adapted to the square building through
squinches in the four corners. When was this chapel built? Ousterhout stresses that the
drum has several Islamic elements: it follows Islamic prototypes. Construction is of
stone; arches are slightly pointed; and rather than trumpet squinches, expanded corner
conches are employed33 (fig. 8). Another element which is difficult to place in the
fourth century is the polygonal apse, which seems related to models in Constantinople
from the fifth century and is similar to other apses built in the complex of the Holy
Sepulchre in the 11th century Byzantine reconstruction. The baptistery, the chapel of St.

23
Itinerarium Burdigalense: balneum a tergo, ubi infantes lavantur (CCL 175, p. 17).
24
: Ex altera vero parte sancti Johannis ecclesiae est monasterium sanctae Trinitatis pulcherrimum, in quo est
locus baptisterii, cui adhaeret capella sancti Johannis apostoli, qui primam cathedram pontificalem Jerosolimis obt-
inuit; ita compositae et ordinatae omnes, ut quilibet in ultima stans ecclesia omnes quinque ecclesias perspicere
potest clarissime per ostium ad ostium (from VINCENT 1914, p. 257).
25
TINELLI 1973.
26
CORBO 1981, pp. 132-134.
27
Incidentally, the font discussed by Tinelli seems almost identical to one seen by Vincent in a different
position in 1914: VINCENT 1914, p. 141 e fig. 92.
28
VINCENT 1914, pp. 138-141, figg. 92-94. The chapter on the Constantinian baptistery is by Vincent.
29
COASNON 1974, pp. 46-50, Pl. VIII.
30
WHARTON 1992.
31
PATRICH 1993, p. 106 and 112.
32
Described extensively in VINCENT 1914, pp. 138-141, figg. 92-94 and in a much shorter paragraph in
CORBO 1981, p. 180.
33
OUSTERHOUT 1989, p. 75.
CONSTANTINIAN BAPTISTERIES 589

John the Apostle to the north, and that of St. James to the south, all have such internally
semicircular and externally polygonal apses protruding from their east wall. For clarity,
it should be stressed that a casual reader of Corbos volume could get the impression,
from his plan of the 11th century phase, that the three chapels had exactly the same
shape as three other chapels built in that period east of the courtyard to the east of the
Anastasis. But the truth is that nothing is known of the shape of those chapels, which
are known only from 12th century descriptions. Saewulf only states that they reminded
of three important moments of the Passion of the Lord: the division of his clothes, the
crowning with thorns, and the flagellation. Vincent reconstructed them with a simple
square plan just in order to indicate their position. Corbo chose instead to reconstruct
them as exact copies of the three preserved chapels south of the Anastasis.
In his short description, Corbo simply states that all three chapels seem to belong
to the 11th century reconstruction34, although he recognizes part of a fourth century wall
in the north-west part of the chapel of St. John (in black in fig. 9). This means that there
indeed was a fourth-century building on this place, which later was reconstructed, or,
possibly, that fourth-century blocks have been reused. Vincent, on the other hand, be-
lieved he could identify fourth-century walls in all the walls of the central chapel except
to the north (fig. 7). He believed that the polygonal apse of the central chapel belonged
to the original phase, but that the two other chapels with their apses were Byzantine re-
constructions. However, the polygonal apse and the pointed arches of the squinches are
clearly later features, which show that the chapel must be post-antique at least in its up-
per parts. It is inevitable to conclude that nothing is known of the shape of the fourth-
century baptistery except for its probable position.
Perhaps a new analysis of the structure of the central chapel could allow a better un-
derstanding of its phases, which are difficult to date exactly. The building technique does
not seem to have helped earlier scholars to solve the problem with certainty. The problem
is how to distinguish the fourth century walls from those of the 11th century. In both pe-
riods, the builders used big blocks of stone in slightly different techniques, but fourth cen-
tury blocks could also be reused in the 11th century35. The building technique in big
blocks of stone is of course more difficult to date exactly than the recessed brick tech-
nique, which appears in the Holy Sepulchre only in the 11th-century portions36.
If the central chapel where Saewulf saw the baptistery reflects anything of the shape
of the Constantinian baptistery of the Holy Sepulchre, it may seem surprisingly modest,
compared both to the rest of the complex and to many other monumental baptisteries.
One can only try to guess why. Perhaps in a cathedral complex as that at the Lateran,
the baptistery was the most important architectural showpiece, being also as a propa-
ganda monument which glorified the conversion of the masses, while the complex of the
Holy Sepulchre had its ideological focus in the complex architecture of the Rotunda of
the Anastasis, not in the baptistery.

JERUSALEM: ELEONA

A survey of Constantinian baptisteries must also mention the structure interpreted


as a baptistery in the Eleona, the only other Constantinian building in Jerusalem men-

34
CORBO 1981, pp. 180-181; on this reconstruction, see OUSTERHOUT 1989.
35
The photo in fig. 129 in CORBO 1981 shows examples of both techniques.
36
OUSTERHOUT 1989, p. 73.
590 OLOF BRANDT

tioned by Eusebius37. In AD 333, the pilgrim from Bordeaux stated that Constantine had
built a basilica on the Mount of Olives, where the Lord taught his apostles before his
Passion38. Later in the fourth century, Egeria mentions it as Eleona, the ecclesia in the
Mount of Olives (the name Eleona comes from the Greek for olive trees), where there is
a cave, where the Lord taught39. In 1911 the remains of a three-aisled church with an atri-
um were discovered. The complex was identified by the excavators as the Eleona. No re-
cent study has yet replaced the detailed description and analysis published in 1914 by
Hugues Vincent40, and both the reconstruction and the exact date of the preserved struc-
tures of this complex still await a new study. The excavation plan published by Vincent
(fig. 10) explains well why his reconstruction41 of the zone of the apse has been criti-
cized42: very little survives of that part of a church, while the rest of the plan is rather
clear. The chronology of the structures depends essentially on the identification with the
Constantinian Eleona of the fourth century texts. The feature which is relevant for this
survey is a square basin in a square room (annexe D) found on the outside (to the
south of) the right aisle of the excavated church (fig. 11). The room measures 5 x 4,6 m.
The east wall has disappeared, while the south and west walls are preserved up to the
height of one meter. There is a door in the east part of the south wall. The south and
west walls preserve rests of painted plaster which imitates marble crustae with squares and
circles in a design which fits well in the fourth century43 (fig. 12). Fragments of a black
and white mosaic floor show that one part of the floor had a complex geometric design44,
while another part around the basin had black crosses on a white background. The basin
is a square, built structure which measures 1,65 m. on the outside, while the inside is rec-
tangular and measures only 0,98 x 0,61 m. This would indeed be an extremely narrow
basin for a baptistery, and although Vincent proposes to interpret the basin as a baptis-
tery, he admits that both the small size and the shape of the basin are surprising45. The
decoration is only geometric and does not help the identification of the basin as a struc-
ture for liturgy, but the context makes the interpretation as a baptistery at least highly
probable. If it is correct, this baptistery must be described as an extremely modest, square
baptistery with a surprisingly small, square font.

ROME: THE LATERAN BAPTISTERY

The Constantinian phase of the Lateran baptistery in Rome is now better know
through a project directed by Federico Guidobaldi and myself for the Pontifical Institute
in collaboration with the Vatican Museums and the Swedish National Heritage board46.

37
Eusebius, Vita Constantini 9,17. On the Eleona, see VINCENT 1914, pp. 337-360, tavv. XXXIV-XXXIX,
WEIGAND 1923; OVADIAH 1970, Nr. 71; BRENK 1995, pp. 95-96; BLOEDHORN 1995; KCHLER 2007, pp. 852-873.
38
Inde ascendis in montem Oliveti, ubi Dominus ante passionem apostolos docuit: ibi facta est basilica iussu
Constantini, in CCL 175, p. 18. For the importance of the site in the earliest Christian tradition, see KCHLER
2007, pp. 857-858.
39
Itinerarium Egeriae, 25,11, 31,1 and 3, in CCL 175, pp. 72 and 77.
40
VINCENT 1914, pp. 337-360, tavv. XXXIV-XXXIX.
41
VINCENT 1914, fig. 154.
42
MEISTERMANN 1923, pp. 283-287; WEIGAND 1915, pp. 132-135; WEIGAND 1923; KCHLER 2007, pp. 872.
43
VINCENT 1914, tav. XXXVIII.
44
VINCENT 1914, XXXIX, D.
45
VINCENT 1914, pp. 358-359.
46
BRANDT, GUIDOBALDI 2008; BRANDT 2012, pp. 33-85; APPETECCHIA et al. 2013.
CONSTANTINIAN BAPTISTERIES 591

The ancient baptistery is still standing, but the visible building is the result of a fifth-
century reconstruction. However, it preserves parts of the original building. Most impor-
tantly, the octagonal walls of the first baptistery are preserved to a height of around nine
meters, and show doors and small, low windows on all visible walls, which seem to in-
dicate that these outer walls were rather low in the first phase. Little is still known about
the inner arrangements and the roof. The low outer walls would fit well with a higher,
central part. This would also solve the problem than the thin outer walls do not seem
fit to carry the weight of a roof which covered the entire building, and they seem par-
ticularly unfit to carry a dome, which is what one would expect on an octagonal hall like
this. This visualization (fig. 13) of the preserved original parts shows that the wall con-
tinued for several meters above the window, making it possible that there was some kind
of vault inside.
The baptistery is attributed to Constantine by the sixth-century Roman Liber Pon-
tificalis47. The donations to the baptistery, documented in the same source, date its foun-
dation to after 324. A late Constantinian date is confirmed also by the early fourth cen-
tury date of the latest paintings in the buildings demolished for the construction48. The
brick work of this original phase is typical fourth century. All these considerations taken
together make a late Constantinian date almost certain. And this late Constantinian date
makes the building particularly interesting in the context of this survey.
It seems that it is only in this late Constantinian period that a more complex bap-
tistery architecture evolved. The architectural complexity can be noticed in two features.
On the one hand, the octagonal shape places this building in a very high cultural context
of Imperial constructions, where polygonal shapes were intended, in the first place, to
convey prestige without any religious connotations. On the other hand, it is possible, not
to say probably, that the inner space was divided by an octagonal colonnade which car-
ried a higher, central octagon. The Lateran baptistery would thus show the same inner
complexity as can be found, in the same period, in the Roman Imperial mausoleum
known as Santa Costanza, and in the Rotunda of the church of the Holy Sepulchre in
Rome, and should be dated to the same, late Constantinian years. The complexity and
the inner division are natural features especially in an Imperial context, as is the case
with all the mentioned buildings, but as was not the case, for example, in the earliest
baptistery of Aquileia.

NAPLES

A baptistery which has not yet been dated with certainty, and which sometimes has
been referred to the Constantinian period, is that in Naples. The early Christian church
of Santa in the cathedral complex of Naples is oriented with the apse to the north, and
has a small, square baptistery to the right/east of the apse49. The sides of this square
room are only about eight meters. A rather small, circular font is found at the centre of
the room. The building is still covered by an ancient, low dome on an octagonal drum
with has small, rectangular windows on four sides. The other four sides of the drum
have squinches, which adapt the octagonal drum to the square building and form the
most particular architectural feature of the architecture of this baptistery. The drum with

47
LP I, pp. 174-175.
48
BRANDT, GUIDOBALDI 2008.
49
BRANDT 2012, pp. 86-132, esp. note 136 with earlier bibliography; FERRI 2013; BRANDT, in print.
592 OLOF BRANDT

squinches may also be one of the most important features for the chronology of the
building.
This baptistery is extremely difficult to date; the proposed dates range from the
reign of Constantine to the sixth century. There are several relevant sources, but they are
all late and dangerously ambiguous. The Roman Liber Pontificalis, edited in the early
sixth century, mentions that Constantine built a basilica in Naples: fecit basilicam in
civitatem Neapolim50. This is usually referred to the ancient cathedral, todays Santa
Restituta, and to its baptistery, but the baptistery is not mentioned explicitly and the
source is late. The local sources are even later and even less clear. The ninth-century Ges-
ta episcoporum is believed to indicate the baptistery when it states that the bishop Soter
(465-492) plevem post sanctum Severum secundus instituit51.This is supposed to mean
that the baptistery was originally founded by bishop Severus (362-408) and restored or
reconstructed by Soter. This interpretation is followed by many scholars today and seems
to be the most common52. The monument itself contains little chronological informa-
tion. The building technique, with walls in tufa blocks and arches where tufa blocks are
mixed with bricks in a kind of opera listata, is common in Campania from the fourth
to the sixth century and offers little help. The chronological discussion has focussed
mainly on the style of the well-preserved and important mosaics of the dome. While in
the 19th century the baptistery was usually identified with that of Soter53, after the
restoration of the mosaics at the end of the 19th century their style was judged so clas-
sic that they were dated to the reign of Constantine54. In 1964, Maier dated the mosaics
to around AD 40055, while Klauser replied that, in his opinion, some features should be
dated no earlier than the middle of the fifth century, like the drapery, the monogram-
matic cross and the wide-open eyes of the Apostles56(few scholars take into account
Klausers objections, which rarely appear in bibliographies). Today, the mosaics are gen-
erally dated to the end of the fourth century, to the period of the emperor Theodosios
I (379-395) and of the bishop Severus57. A date between the end of the fourth century
and the beginning of the next century is accepted also in the recent monograph by Gio-
vanna Ferri58. However, it is inevitable to conclude that it is impossible to find a consen-
sus on the date of the baptistery relying only on the style and iconography of the mo-
saics.
This most accepted attribution of the baptistery to Severus (362-408) overlaps, if
only with a couple of years, the end of the period which is the object of this Congress,
that is from the from the beginning of the reign of Constantine to the end of the Con-
stantinian dynasty with the death of Julian in 363. This fact would force us to consider
the baptistery of Naples in this survey. It must however be stated clearly that the archi-
tecture points to a later date. The octagonal drum with almost square windows alternat-
ing with squinches, which resolve the problem of placing a dome on a square building,
finds parallels in Italy in the late fifth and early sixth century, few years before the same
problem is resolved differently in the second, mid sixth-century phase of Hagia Sophia

50
LP I, 186.
51
Gesta episcop. Neap. p. 408.
52
See, for example, DESMULLIEZ 1998.
53
GARRUCCI 1877, pp. 79-83; MNTZ 1883, pp. 21-27.
54
ASPRENO GALANTE 1900.
55
MAIER 1964.
56
KLAUSER 1965-1966
57
MAIER 1964, pp. 6-24; BISCONTI 1996, p. 736.
58
FERRI 2013, pp. 81-84.
CONSTANTINIAN BAPTISTERIES 593

in Constantinople, where the dome rests on pendentives. These other buildings with oc-
tagonal drums with squinches are rarely baptisteries, but offer surprisingly close paral-
lels. The most well-known of these is perhaps the church of San Saturnino in Cagliari59.
Other examples include the church of SantAntioco in Sulci60, the so-called Marcellianum
in Lucania61, the Oratory of San Prosdocimo in Padua62, and the Oratory of Santa Maria
Mater Domini in Vicenza63. They can all be dated between the late fifth and the early
sixth century. The chronological implications of these parallels are strong enough to
force us to exclude the baptistery of Naples from a survey of baptisteries from the Con-
stantinian period and to question a date in the fourth century.

TRIER

In the cathedral complex of Trier64, three different structures have been proposed
by different scholars as possible baptisteries belonging to different periods (fig. 14). The
first two phases of the cathedral complex of Trier are dated to the Constantinian period,
so any structures belonging to these two phases which can be identified as baptisteries
are relevant for this survey. In the first phase, 316-320, a smaller basilica is built in the
south-west part of the complex. In the second phase, around 335-340, the eastern basil-
ica is added together with the northern basilica. The three possible baptisteries have all
been found in the space between the north and the south basilica. Counting from west
to east, the first such structure is a square room with a square basin. The second is a
smaller, square room immediately to the east of the first, with a small, circular basin.
The third is a semi-elliptic structure further east, which has been interpreted as a rest of
an oval font. This last structure, discovered and destroyed in 1899, should be discarded
for several reasons. On the one hand, the preserved structure forms only one half of an
oval, and the remains can also be interpreted as an apse, as proposed in 1975 by Kempf
(fig. 15). On the other hand, it has no traces of a drain65.
Of the two remaining structures (fig. 16), Weber considers the small baptistery with
a circular font, discovered and destroyed in 1906, later than the square structure and dates
it to the sixth century, that is to the general sixth-century reconstruction after a destruc-
tion in the early fifth century, which leaves it far outside the Constantinian period.
This leads to the conclusion that the only structure in Trier which can be consid-
ered relevant for a survey of baptisteries of the Constantinian period is the square struc-
ture to the west. This structure, discovered by Theodor K. Kempf in 1950, can be dated
with coins beneath its floor to after 334, so it can be considered late-Constantinian and
clearly belongs to the second phase of the complex. It is a square hall of side length
around 16 meters, with a square, eight meters broad structure in its centre, clad with hy-
draulic plaster, interpreted as a baptismal font by Kempf and many after him. In this
broad, shallow basin, the water could not be more than 30 cm deep. There was a drain

59
JOHNSON 2013, pp. 27-38.
60
JOHNSON 2013, pp. 39-47.
61
BRACCO 1958; MARTORELLI 2001, pp. 1046-1054.
62
VERZONE 1942, pp. 25-26; COLECCHIA 2009, pp. 97-100; FOURLAS 2012, pp. 292-294.
63
NAPIONE 2009, pp. 256-260.
64
WEBER 2004 and 2010, RISTOW 2007, pp. 193-203 and BRANDENBURG 2009, pp. 168-185 with earlier
bibliography.
65
I owe this and many other detailed informations to Winfried Weber, to whom I am greatly indebted
for his generosity with yet unpublished informations.
594 OLOF BRANDT

in the north part of the basin, through a lead pipe down in the ground66. To the west of
this piscina there were three small, heated rooms, which blocked the circulation in the
square corridor around the central, square structure.
A new floor was created during a later reconstruction in the fifth century. At the
same time, the piscina was clad with slabs of limestone. This reconstruction is dated by
coins to after AD 402; Weber thinks that it took place as late as the sixth century. He
also believes that this big baptistery was abandoned in the same century and replaced by
the smaller, circular font to the east.
Sebastian Ristow has questioned the identification of this structure as a baptistery67.
He believes that the square basin is too big to be a baptismal font, and believes that the
room is an atrium belonging to an older structure. However, his objections have little
strength. The dimensions of the basin are similar to that of the font of the Lateran bap-
tistery. Fragments of a ceiling in painted plaster show that the room was covered and
not an open atrium. It is important to stress that the structure is well dated. The
chronology shows clearly that it belongs to the second phase of the Christian complex
and not to earlier, pre-Christian phases. While the shape of the structure could fit with
many different functions, the Christian context makes it highly probable that it really is
a baptistery. Its noteworthy dimensions and monumental character fit well in the second
phase with its probably Imperial reconstruction of the originally modest Christian com-
plex. But the shape and dimensions of the presumed font are truly puzzling: a square
font, of huge dimensions, and only around 40 cm deep compared to the surrounding
floor.
Some further considerations can be made observing carefully a recent and detailed
but unpublished plan of the excavation (fig. 16), which Winfried Weber kindly allows
me to publish. It is striking that the walls of the central, square structure are much thick-
er than those of the bigger, surrounding square structure. It is probable that the central,
square structure had a more important function in relation to the upper parts and roof
of the structure. The central structure seems, however, to be preserved only up to a very
low height. If this is so, it would be possible to interpret these thick walls not as the re-
mains of walls, but rather as the foundations for columns which carried the weight of
an emerging, central structure with windows. Such a structure would be quite similar to
those found in some important baptisteries in southern France, like Aix-en-Provence,
Marseille and Saint-Maximin. That comparison would also lead us to admit the possi-
bility that the upper, central structure was octagonal: the cases of Aix-en-Provence and
Marseille prove that a square foundation can carry eight columns, two on each side,
which can carry an octagonal structure. The presence of a central, emerging structure
would also solve the problem of how the room was illuminated. The north and south
basilica surrounded the square room on two sides, making it impossible to have win-
dows on the corresponding walls. The comparison with the later baptisteries in France,
mentioned above, also leads to the conclusion that the structure in Trier would be even
more similar to the French examples if the huge, central square was not the surprisingly
big font imagined by most scholars, but rather a space which contained a smaller, more
traditional font at its centre. According to the detailed plan of the excavations, the in-
vestigations have arrived only two meters from the centre. This could allow, hypotheti-
cally, for a central font with a diameter of around three meters without difficulty. But
on the other hand, if the central, square structure is the baptismal font, that would in-

66
See WEBER, in this volume.
67
RISTOW 1998, pp. 55-56; 2009, p. 32.
CONSTANTINIAN BAPTISTERIES 595

deed be a surprising and interesting parallel to the extraordinarily big font of the Lateran
baptistery. Both were around ten meters across, one was square and the other round, and
in both cases the rim may have had columns which carried an elevated, central part of
the building.
The comparison with the French baptisteries may seem irrelevant because of the
different chronology, as the French monuments can not be dated before the fifth century.
But in the field of architecture, different chronology does not always make a comparison
irrelevant, as may be the case in painting. Antique architecture did not always develop
gradually according to a Darwinistic evolutionary pattern. Many solutions depend most
of all on fundamental, structural choices. This is evident, for example, when we consider
that the two most well-known circular colonnades of double columns can be found in
the mausoleum known as Santa Costanza in Rome, built towards the middle of the
fourth century, and in the baptistery built two centuries later in Nocera Superiore. The
choice of letting the columns carry a heavy dome instead of a lighter structure explains
why these two buildings needed the strength of the double columns, which, on the other
hand, was not needed in the circular colonnade of Santo Stefano Rotondo, chronologi-
cally half way between the two other buildings.
To sum up, the square baptistery of the cathedral complex of Trier was built after
334, in the last part of the Constantinian period. It belongs clearly to the category of not
only monumental but also Imperial architecture, together with the Lateran baptistery,
built more or less in the same period. Both have a huge baptismal font, around ten me-
ters across, which probably had columns on the rim to carry the weight of a central, el-
evated part of the building. It is possible that in both cases, this central, elevated part
may have been octagonal. The Lateran baptistery and that in Trier seem to have much
in common. In spite of the fact that one has a square plan and the other an octagonal
one, they both probably had an inner division and a degree of complexity which seems
to fit particularly well in an Imperial context, which is what the second phase of the Tri-
er complex seems to be.
Interestingly, this survey of Constantinian baptisteries seems to indicate that this el-
evated architectural complexity belongs to the later Constantinian period. It seems to be-
long exactly to the same years when Timothy Barnes states that Constantine seriously
attacked paganism68. This period, beginning with the Council of Niceaea in 325, is also
a period when Constantine stresses the importance of the sanctuaries of the most im-
portant martyrs and of biblical places through a more complex architecture, as shown
by the introduction of the transept in the late Constantinian basilica of St. Peters in
Rome and by the extreme complexity of the Rotunda in the church of the Holy Sepul-
chre in Jerusalem. These are the same years when we find the first Constantinian bap-
tisteries. The Lateran baptistery was built after 324, later than the Lateran basilica. The
baptistery of the church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem is from after 325. The square
baptistery in Trier is from after 334. Only the modest, first baptistery of Aquileia belongs
or at least, could belong to the early Constantinian period. Where were Christians
baptized in the first year of the reign of Constantine? Little is known of these first struc-
tures, and it cannot be excluded that baptism was still celebrated in baths and other sim-
ilar structures while basilicas were already built for the Eucharistic celebrations.

68
BARNES, in this volume.
596 OLOF BRANDT

BIBLIOGRAPHY

APPETECCHIA et al. 2013 = A. APPETECCHIA, O. BRANDT, G. GARDELIN, H. MENANDER, H. THORN, Archaeological


Building Documentation. New Methods for Building Archaeological Documentation and Analysis Process.
Report of Work 2012. UV rapport 2013:106 (pdf report on the web site of Riksantikvariembetet)
ASPRENO GALANTE 1900 = G. ASPRENO GALANTE, I musaici del battistero di Napoli, in NBACr, 6 (1900), pp. 99-
106.
BARNES, in this volume = T. BARNES, Progress in Scholarship. The Interpretation of Constantine since the Refor-
mation, in Atti del XVI Congresso Internazionale di Archeologia Cristiana (2013), in this volume.
BERTACCHI 1972 = L. BERTACCHI, La basilica postteodoriana di Aquileia, in AquilNost, 43 (1972), cc. 61-88.
BERTACCHI 1980 = L. BERTACCHI, Architettura e mosaico, in Da Aquileia a Venezia, Milano 1980, pp. 181-234.
BISCONTI 1996 = F. BISCONTI, Imprese musive paleocristiane negli edifici di culto dellItalia meridionale: documenti
e monumenti dellarea campana, in Atti del IV colloquio dellassociazione italiana per lo studio e la conser-
vazione del mosaico, Palermo 1996, pp. 733-746.
BLOEDHORN 1995 = H. BLOEDHORN, Die Eleona und das Imbomon in Jerusalem: eine Doppelkirchenanlage auf
dem lberg?, in Akten des XII. Internationalen Kongresses fr christliche Archologie. Bonn 22.-28. Septem-
ber 1991, Citt del Vaticano 1995, pp. 568-571.
BOVINI 1967 = G. BOVINI, Mosaici paleocristiani scomparsi di Napoli, in CorsiRavenna, 14 (1967), pp. 21-34.
BRACCO 1958 = V. BRACCO, Marcellianum e il suo battistero, in RACr, 34 (1958) pp. 193-207.
BRANDENBURG 2009 = H. BRANDENBURG, Die Basilika von Sankt Paul vor den Mauern in Rom und der Dom zu
Trier, in Bonner Jahrbcher, 209 (2009), pp. 147-188.
BRANDT 2010 = O. BRANDT, Il battistero cromaziano, in CUSCITO, LEHMANN 2010, pp. 323-354.
BRANDT 2012 = O. BRANDT, Battisteri oltre la pianta. Gli alzati di nove battisteri paleocristiani in Italia, Citt del
Vaticano 2012.
BRANDT, in print = O. BRANDT, Tra Napoli, Cimitile e Nocera Superiore: Nuovi dati sullorizzonte architettonico
e cronologico del battistero di s. Giovanni in Fonte, in Luoghi di culto, necropoli e prassi funeraria fra tarda
antichit e medioevo. Atti del Convegno Cimitile e Santa Maria Capua Vetere, 19-20 giugno 2014, in print.
BRENK 1995 = B. BRENK, Die Kultort, seine Zugnglichkeit und seine Besucher, in Akten des XII. Internationalen
Kongresses fr christliche Archologie. Bonn 22.-28. September 1991, Citt del Vaticano 1995, pp. 69-122.
BRUSIN, ZOVATTO 1957 = G. BRUSIN, P. L. ZOVATTO, Monumenti paleocristiani di Aquileia e di Grado, Udine 1957.
Catalogus episcoporum = Catalogus episcoporum neapolitanorum, in Monumenta Germaniae historica. Scrip-
tores rerum langobardicarum et italicarum saec. VI-IX, Hannoverae 1878, pp. 436-439.
CBCR 5 = R. Krautheimer et al., Corpus basilicarum christianarum Romae. The early Christian basilicas of
Rome (IV-IX Cent.) 5, Citt del Vaticano 1977.
CESARINI 2008 = Chiara CESARINI, Frammenti musivi inediti da scavi nellambito della basilica paleocristiana di
S. Restituta a Napoli, in C. Angelelli, F. Rinaldi (ed.), Atti del XIII colloquio AISCOM, Tivoli 2008, pp.
187-194.
COLECCHIA 2009 = A. COLECCHIA, S. Giustina, in M. JURKOVI , G. P. BROGIOLO (ed.), Corpus Architecturae Reli-
giosae Europeae (saec. IV-X). II. Italia. I. Province di Belluno, Treviso, Padova, Vicenza, Zagreb 2009, pp.
94-102.
CORBO 1981 = V. CORBO, Il santo sepolcro di Gerusalemme. Aspetti archeologici dalle origini al periodo crociato,
Gerusalemme, 1981-1983.
COASNON 1974 = Ch. COASNON, The church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem, London 1974.
CUSCITO, LEHMANN 2010 = G. CUSCITO, T. LEHMANN (ed.), La basilica di Aquileia. Storia, archeologia ed arte (=
AAA, 69), Trieste 2010.
DESMULLIEZ 1998 = J. DESMULLIEZ, Le dossier du groupe piscopal de Naples. tat actuel des recherches, in AnTard,
6 (1998), pp. 345-354.
DRESKEN-WEILAND = J. DRESKEN-WEILAND, Due sarcofagi sconosciuti e la storia delle sepolture a San Pietro, in
Atti del XVI Congresso Internazionale di Archeologia Cristiana (2013), in this volume.
EBANISTA 2009 = C. EBANISTA, Latrio dellinsula episcopalis di Napoli. Problemi di architettura e topografia pa-
leocristiana e medievale, in M. ROTILI (ed.), Tardo antico e alto Medioevo. Filologia, storia, archeologia, arte,
Napoli 2009, pp. 307-375.
CONSTANTINIAN BAPTISTERIES 597

FARIOLI 1978 = R. FARIOLI, Gli scavi nellinsula episcopalis di Napoli paleocristiana: tentativo di lettura, in Atti
del IX Congresso Internazionale di Archeologia Cristiana, Roma 21-27 settembre 1975, vol. 2, Citt del Vat-
icano 1978, pp. 275-288.
FERRI 2013 = Giovanna FERRI, I mosaici del battistero di San Giovanni in Fonte a Napoli, Todi 2013.
FIOCCHI NICOLAI 1995-1996 = V. FIOCCHI NICOLAI, La nuova basilica circiforme della Via Ardeatina, in RendPon-
tAc, 68 (1995-1996), pp. 69-233.
FORLATI TAMARO 1963 = B. FORLATI TAMARO, Ricerche sullaula teodoriana nord e sui battisteri di Aquileia, in
AquilNost, 34 (1963), cc. 85-100.
FOURLAS 2012 = B. FOURLAS, Die Mosaiken der Acheiropoietos-Basilika in Thessaloniki. Eine vergleichende Analyse
dekorativer Mosaiken des 5. und 6. Jahrhunderts, Berlin 2012.
GARRUCCI 1877 = R. GARRUCCI, Storia dellarte cristiana nei primi otto secoli della Chiesa. 4. Musaici cimiteriali
e non cimiteriali, Prato 1877.
GEM 2013 = R. GEM, From Constantine to Constans. The chronology of the construction of Saint Peters basilica,
in R. MCKITTERICK, J. OSBORNE, C. M. RICHARDSON, J. STORY (ed), Old St Peters, Rome, Cambridge 2013,
pp. 35-64.
Gesta episcoporum = Gesta episcoporum neapolitanorum, in Monumenta Germaniae historica. Scriptores rerum
langobardicarum et italicarum saec. VI-IX, Hannoverae 1878, pp. 402-436.
GNIRS 1915 = A. GNIRS, Die christliche Kultanlage aus konstantinischer Zeit am Platze des Domes in Aquileia, in
Jahrbuch des Kunsthistorischen Institutes der K. K. Zentralkommission fr Denkmalpflege, 9 (1915), pp.
140-172.
JOHNSON 2013 = M. J. JOHNSON, The Byzantine Churches of Sardinia, Wiesbaden 2013.
KEMPF 1975 = Th. K. KEMPF, Die ottonische Bauperiode der Trierer Bischofkirche, in Das Mnster, 28 (1975), pp.
8-20.
KLAUSER 1965-1966 = T. KLAUSER, rec a MAIER 1964 in JbAChr, 8-9 (1965-1966), pp. 217-226.
KRAUTHEIMER 1989 = R. KRAUTHEIMER, The building inscriptions and the dates of construction of Old St. Peters.
A reconsideration, in Rmisches Jahrbuch fr Kunstgeschichte 25 (1989), pp. 3-22.
KCHLER 2007 = M. KCHLER, Jerusalem. Ein Handbuch und Studienreisefhrer zur heiligen Stadt, Gttingen
2007.
LEHMANN 2009 = T. LEHMANN, Die ltesten erhaltenen Bilder in einem Kirchenbau. Zu den frchristlichen
Kirchenbauten und ihren Mosaiken unter dem Dom von Aquileia, in Das Altertum, 54 (2009), pp. 91-122.
LEHMANN 2010 = T. Lehmann, Die frhchristlichen Mosaiken im Dombereich von Aquileia, in CUSCITO, LEHMANN
2010, pp. 157-185.
LEHMANN 2013 = T. LEHMANN, Il primo nucleo episcopale di Aquileia: scavi e ricerche, in C. TIUSSI, L. VILLA, M.
NOVELLO (ed.), Costantino e Teodoro. Aquileia nel IV secolo, Milano 2013, pp. 138-142
LOPREATO 1989 = P. LOPREATO, Il battistero cromaziano di Aquileia. Relazione preliminare degli scavi 1984-1988,
in Chromatius Episcopus, 388-1988 = AAA, 34 (1989), pp. 209-218.
LP I = Le Liber Pontificalis. Texte, introduction et commentaire par lAbb L. Duchesne, Paris 1886.
MAIER 1964 = J.-L. MAIER, Le baptistre de Naples et ses Mosaques. tude historique et iconographique, Fribourg
1964.
MARTORELLI 2001 = C. MARTORELLI, Larchitettura dei battisteri di Napoli, Capua e Marcellianum, in Ledificio
battesimale in Italia. Aspetti e problemi. Atti dellVIII Congresso Nazionale di Archeologia Cristiana. Genova,
Sarzana, Albenga, Finale Ligure, Ventimiglia 21-26 settembre 1998, Bordighera 2001, pp. 1037-1056.
MASELLI SCOTTI, TIUSSI, VILLA 2015 = F. MASELLI SCOTTI, C. TIUSSI, L. VILLA, La ricerca archeologica: le recenti
indagini della Soprintendenza, in L. FOZZATI (ed.), Laula meridionale del battistero di Aquileia. Contesto,
scoperta, valorizzazione, Milano 2015, pp. 75-85.
MEISTERMANN 1923 = B. MEISTERMANN, Guide de Terre Sainte, Paris 1923.
MENIS 1989 = G. C. MENIS, Il complesso episcopae teodoriano di Aquileia e il suo battistero, Udine 1986.
MNTZ 1883 = E. MNTZ, Notes sur les mosaques chrtiennes de l Italie. VIII. Lesmosaques de Naples, in Revue
archeologique 1 (1883), pp. 16-30.
NAPIONE 2009 = E. NAPIONE, Santi Felice e Fortunato, in M. JURKOVI , G. P. BROGIOLO (ed.), Corpus Architecturae
Religiosae Europeae (saec. IV-X). II. Italia. I. Province di Belluno, Treviso, Padova, Vicenza, Zagreb,
pp.248-263.
598 OLOF BRANDT

NOVELLO, SALVADORI, TIUSSI, VILLA 2013 = M. NOVELLO, M. SALVADORI, C. TIUSSI, L. Villa, Il primo nucleo epis-
copale di Aquileia: struttura e decorazione, in C. TIUSSI, L. VILLA, M. NOVELLO (ed.), Costantino e Teodoro.
Aquileia nel IV secolo, Milano 2013, pp. 143-151.
OUSTERHOUT 1989 = R. OUSTERHOUT, Rebuilding the Temple: Constantine Monomachus and the Holy Sepulchre,
in Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 48 (1989), pp. 66-78.
OVADIAH 1970 = A. OVADIAH, Corpus of the Byzantine churches in the Holy Land, Bonn 1970.
PATRICH 1993 = J. PATRICH, The Early Church of the Holy Sepulchre in the Light of Excavations and Restoration,
in Yoram TSAFRIR (ed.), Ancient Churches revealed, Jerusalem 1993, pp. 101-117.
RISTOW 1994 = S. RISTOW, Zur Problematik der sptrmischen Reste auf dem Gelnde der Domkirche zu Aquileia,
in JbAChr, 37 (1994), pp. 97109.
RISTOW 1998 = S. RISTOW, Frhchristliche Baptisterien, Mnster 1998.
RISTOW 2007 = S. RISTOW, Frhes Christentum im Rheinland. Die Zeugnisse der archologischen und historischen
Quellen an Rhein, Maas und Mosel, Kln, Mnster 2007.
RISTOW 2009 = S. RISTOW, Das Klner Baptisterium am Dom und die frhchristlichen Tauforte nrdlich der Alpen,
in U. KRINGS, R. WILL, Das Baptisterium am Dom Klns erster Taufort, Kln 2009, pp. 23-44.
TINELLI 1973 = C. TINELLI, Il battistero del S. Sepolcro in Gerusalemme, in StBiFranc, 23 (1973), pp. 95-104
VERZONE 1942 = P. VERZONE, Larchitettura religiosa dellalto medioevo nellItalia settentrionale, Milano 1942.
VILLA 2003 = L. VILLA, Edifici di culto in Friuli tra let paleocristiana e laltomedioevo, in H.R. SENNHAUSER (ed.),
Frhe Kirchen im stlichen Alpengebiet von der Sptantike bis in ottonische Zeit, Mnchen 2003, 2, pp. 501-
579, part. 501-510.
VINCENT 1914 = H. VINCENT, F.-M. ABEL, Jrusalem. Recherches de topographie, darchologie e dhistoire, vol. 2,
Jrusalem nuovelle, Paris 1914.
WEBER 2004 = W. WEBER, Neue Forschungen zur Trierer Domgrabung. Die archologischen Ausgrabungen im
Garten der Kurie von der Leyen, in S. RISTOW (ed.), Neue Forschungen zu den Anfngen des Christentums
im Rheinland, Mnchen 2004, pp. 225-234.
WEBER 2010 = W. WEBER, Gli affreschi delle basiliche paleocristiane di Treviri (IV secolo), in CUSCITO, LEHMANN
2010, pp. 205-216.
WEBER in this volume = W. WEBER, Die frhchristliche Kirchenanlage in Trier. Von Bescheidenem Anfang zu im-
perialer Grsse, in Atti del XVI Congresso Internazionale di Archeologia Cristiana.
WEIGAND 1915 = E. WEIGAND, Die konstantinische Geburtskirche von Bethlehem, in ZDPV, 38 (1915), pp. 89-
135.
WEIGAND 1923 = E. WEIGAND, Nochmals die konstantinische Geburtskirche in Bethlehem und die Eleonakirche, in
ZDPV, 46 (1923), pp. 193-220.
WHARTON 1992 = A. J. WHARTON, The Baptistery of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem and the Politics of Sacred
Landscape, in DOP, 46 (1992), pp. 313-325.
CONSTANTINIAN BAPTISTERIES 599

Fig. 1 - Aquileia. Plan of the second phase of the cathedral complex. The font of the first baptistery can be
seen as a half circle in the upper (east) part of the complex between the two churches. The hexagonal font of
the second baptistery can be seen further west (below) (by author, based on BERTACCHI 1980, tav. XII).
600 OLOF BRANDT

Fig. 2 - Aquileia. Reconstruction of the first baptistery of the cathedral complex (from NOVELLO, SALVADORI,
TIUSSI, VILLA 2013).

Fig. 3 - Aquileia. The position of the star-shaped font on top of the east wall of the middle hall and on top
of the mosaic floor of the first phase (BRUSIN, ZOVATTO 1957, pianta VI).
CONSTANTINIAN BAPTISTERIES 601

Fig. 4 - Aquileia. The second baptistery of the cathedral complex from above. To the right one can see the mo-
saic floor of the corridor which lead to the entrance of the south hall. To the left, the cocciopesto floor of he
smaller, middle hall, which was demolished for the construction of the second baptistery. In the upper, right
part of image, there are important remains of a floor in marble slabs and opus sectile, belonging to the same
phase as the baptistery. In the upper, central part of the image, a different, bigger slab covers the north point
of the font. (3d elaboration with Agisoft Photoscan, by author).

Fig. 5 - Aquileia. The north point of the star-shaped font (center), partially covered by a marble slab of the
floor. Beneath the marble slab, a lead tube is visible. To the left is visible the south wall of the second north
basilica (photo by author).
602 OLOF BRANDT

Fig. 6 - The 11th century reconstruction according to Virgilio Corbo (CORBO 1981, tav. IV).
CONSTANTINIAN BAPTISTERIES 603

Fig. 7 - Jerusalem, Holy Sepulchre: Hugues Vincents plan of the three chapels (VINCENT, ABEL 1914, fig. 93).

Fig. 8 - Jerusalem,
Holy Sepulchre: inside
of the medieval baptistery
(OUSTERHOUT 1989 fig 22).
604 OLOF BRANDT

Fig. 9 - Jerusalem, Holy Sepulchre: Virgilio Corbos general plan. The walls in black are identified as belonging
to the fourth century (CORBO 1981, tav. I).
CONSTANTINIAN BAPTISTERIES 605

Fig. 10 - Jerusalem, Eleona (VINCENT 1914, Planche XXXIV).


606 OLOF BRANDT

Fig. 11 - Jerusalem, Eleona (VINCENT 1914, detail of Planche XXXIV).


Fig. 12 - Jerusalem, Eleona (VINCENT 1914, tav. XXXVIII).
CONSTANTINIAN BAPTISTERIES
607
608 OLOF BRANDT

Fig. 13 - The surviving parts of the first phase of the Lateran baptistery (by author, based on 3D documenta-
tion gathered and elaborated in the project mentioned in the paper).

Fig. 14 - Trier: the cathedral complex in the sixth century (WEBER 2004).
CONSTANTINIAN BAPTISTERIES

Fig. 15 The oval font (?) (KEMPF 1975).


609
610 OLOF BRANDT

Fig. 16 - Detail of an unpublished plan of the excavations of the cathedral complex of Trier: the square and
the round fonts (drawing: A. Hill, Bischfliches Dom- und Dizesanmuseum Trier).