¹ For the architecture see Krautheimer, R., Frankl, W., Corbett, S., ‘S. Maria Antiqua’, Corpus Basilicarum Christianarum Romae ii, fasc. iii (Vatican City 1962), 249–68Google Scholar; and Romanelli, Pietro, Nordhagen, Per Jonas, S. Maria Antiqua (Rome 1964), 7–28Google Scholar.

² Romanelli-Nordhagen, 19.

³ The principal bibliography for the murals in S. Maria Antiqua is as follows: Rushforth, G., ‘The church of S. Maria Antiqua’, PBSR 1 (1902), 1–123Google Scholar; Wilpert, J., ‘Sancta Maria Antiqua’, L'Arte 13 (1910), 1–20, 81–107Google Scholar; de Grüneisen, W. et al. , Sainte Marie Antique (Rome 1911)Google Scholar; Wilpert, J., Die römischen Mosaiken und Malereien der kirchlichen Bauten vom IV. bis XIII. Jahrhundert (Freiburg im Breisgau 1916), 653–726Google Scholar [hereafter cited as Wilpert, RMM]; Tea, Eva, La Basilica di Santa Maria Antiqua (Milan 1937)Google Scholar; Nordhagen, P. J., ‘The earliest decorations in S. Maria Antiqua and their date’, Acta ad Archaeologiam et Artium Historiam Pertinentia 1 (1962), 53–72Google Scholar; idem, ‘Le pitture’, in Romanelli-Nordhagen, 29–47; idem, ‘The frescoes of John VII (A.D. 705–7) in S. Maria Antiqua in Rome’, Acta ad Archaeologiam et Artium Historiam Pertinenta 3 (1968); and idem, ‘S. Maria Antiqua: the frescoes of the seventh century’, Acta ad Archaeologiam et Artium Historiam Pertinentia 8 (1978), 89–142.

⁴ Liber Pontificalis, ed. Duchesne, L. (Paris 1886), i, 385Google Scholar: ‘Basilicam itaque sanctae Dei genetricis qui Antiqua vocatur pictura decoravit’.

⁵ Codice Topografico delta Città di Roma, ed. Valentini, R. and Zucchetti, G., ii (Rome 1942), 121Google Scholar.

⁶ Ibid., 191, 195.

⁷ Liber Pontificalis ii, 145, 158.

⁸ Duchesne, L., ‘S. Maria Antiqua’, Mélanges d'Archéologie et d'Histoire 17 (1897), 13–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁹ Lanciani, R., L'itinerario di Einsiedeln e l'ordine di Benedetto Canonico (Rome 1891), 63–7Google Scholar.

¹⁰ For the levels on the palimpsest wall see Nordhagen (1962).

¹¹ The link with Justin II depends on a coin or coins of this emperor which may have been found beneath the column which replaced the south-east pier of the quadriporticus, see Tea, 19, 362, and Krautheimer, et al. , Corpus Basilicarum ii, 254–5Google Scholar. This evidence has been dismissed by Wright, David, ‘The shape of the seventh century in Byzantine art’, Byzantine Studies Conference. Abstracts of Papers 1 (1975), 9–28Google Scholar, esp. 16–17, in part because no trace of it could be discovered. An interesting solution to the problem of the missing coin(s) is suggested by Richard Reece's recent publication of the coins in the Palatine antiquarium which are marked as ‘monete provenienti della Fonte di Giuturna’, see Reece, R., ‘A collection of coins from the centre of Rome’, PBSR 50 (1982), 116–45Google Scholar. This group of just over 1,300 coins included two which were clearly identified as belonging to the reign of Justin II. In his report, Reece (p. 139) expresses some doubt whether all the coins did indeed come from the Lacus Juturnae, noting that Boni's excavation report, ‘Il sacrario di Juturna’, Notizie degli Scavi (1901), 41–144, esp. 79, records that only a single coin had been discovered there. (It should perhaps be pointed out that Boni was here referring specifically to the contents of the well. No mention is made of coins in his description of materials found in the ‘sacrario’.) While I do not share Reece's apparent trust in Boni's accuracy, it does seem possible that his statement and the label on the coins in the Palatine antiquarium can be reconciled. The exploration of the Lacus was but one segment of a larger excavation beneath the site of the demolished church of S. Maria Liberatrice, and of course included S. Maria Antiqua. It seems possible, indeed likely, that Boni, or whichever assistant was responsible for collecting the finds, did not make any clear distinction between the two parts of the one excavation, that is to say between the Lacus Juturnae and S. Maria Antiqua, with the result that all coins from the excavation were grouped together and labelled ‘Fonte de Giuturna’, this being the more important discovery in the minds of classical archaeologists. As David Whitehouse has recently commented: ‘Indeed, the more one looks into the circumstances of the discoveries at the Lacus, the more likely it appears that finds from virtually concurrent excavations may have been confused.’; see Whitehouse, D. et al. , ‘The Schola Praeconum II’, PBSR 53 (1985), 163–210Google Scholar, esp. 207 n.1. This would leave open the possibility that the coin (or coins) mentioned as having been discovered beneath the column in the church could be identified with those of Justin II published by Reece. Accepting that such a hypothesis is possible will also have important implications for the study of early medieval pottery in Rome, in particular for the sixth-century dating of ‘Forum ware’ which the Justin II coins are thought to have provided (for the current state of the question see Whitehouse, ibid., 206–7).

¹² The property documents are published by Fedele, P., ‘Tabularium S. Mariae Novae ab an. 982 ad an. 1200’, Archivio della R. Società Romana di Storia Patria 23 (1900), 171–237Google Scholar, esp. 182, 187–8, 205, 213, 214–15, 218, 219, 225, 227 and 234.

¹³ Rushforth, 9. The earthquake of 847 is recorded in the Liber Pontificalis ii, 108: ‘Huius beati tempore praesulis terre motus in urbe Roma per indictionem factus est X, ita ut omnia elementa concussa viderentur ab omnibus.’

¹⁴ Krautheimer, R., ‘S. Francesca Romana’, Corpus Basilicarum Christianarum Romae i (Vatican City 1937), 220–43Google Scholar.

¹⁵ Kitzinger, E., ‘On some icons of the seventh century’, Late Classical and Medieval Studies in Honor of Albert Mathias Friend Jr. (Princeton 1955), 132–50Google Scholar.

¹⁶ Liber Pontificalis i, 419.

¹⁷ Kitzinger, 149–50; Romanelli-Nordhagen, 28.

¹⁸ Codice Topografico delta Città di Roma, ed. Valentini, R. and Zucchetti, G., iii (Rome 1946), 55–6Google Scholar.

¹⁹ Notizie degli Scavi (1883), 487–514; and Domenico Tesoroni, ‘The Anglo-Saxon coins discovered in the atrium Vestae in 1883’, Journal of the British and American Archaeological Society of Rome (1894–95), 262–81.

²⁰ For the alterations see Krautheimer, et al. , Corpus Basilicarum Christianarum Romae ii, 249–68Google Scholar; and Romanelli-Nordhagen, 11–28.

²¹ Romanelli-Nordhagen, 11.

²² The earlier structure, perhaps to be identified with the extension of the imperial palace undertaken by the emperor Caligula, is aligned with the Horrea Agrippiana and the vicus Tuscus. The present structure, and that adjoining it, are aligned with the adjacent buildings in the Forum, among them the Basilica Julia, the Temple of Castor and Pollux, and the Atrium of the Vestals; see Romanelli-Nordhagen, fig. 2.

²³ The atrium tombs, excavated in the summer of 1901, are described in detail by Rushforth, 104–6, and Tea, 115–17. None could be precisely dated, and no coins were found. However, none is likely to be earlier than the sixth century, the age which witnessed both the first burials within the perimeter of Rome's Aurelian walls and the transformation of this site for Christian use. For a photograph of the impluvium after excavation, see Romanelli-Nordhagen, pl. 3B.

²⁴ Photographs showing the pier in situ are published by Grüneisen, fig. 29, and Romanelli-Nordhagen, pl. 3A. Its demolition by Boni is severely criticized by Grüneisen, 56–7, who laments that this was done ‘sans aucune necéssité, ni raison plausible’.

²⁵ Rushforth, 107.

²⁶ It is to be hoped that the excavations currently being undertaken by Henry Hurst of the University of Cambridge will shed substantial light on this matter.

²⁷ Principal bibliography: Rushforth, 94–5; Grüneisen, 93; Wilpert, RMM, 715–16; Tea, 252–4. For a sketch of the wall showing the location of the niches see Tea, fig. 12.

²⁸ Cf. Wilpert, RMM, pl. 196, 3.

²⁹ Rushforth, 94; Grüneisen, 93, 438; Tea, 253.

³⁰ Cf. discussions of technique by Romanelli-Nordhagen, 39, and Nordhagen (1968), 117–19.

³¹ Cf. Wilpert, RMM, pl. 196, 1.

³² These are the two specifically Roman saints named in the Nobis quoque prayer of the Gregorian liturgy, and their cults were extremely popular in Rome from an early date: see Kennedy, V. L., The Saints of the Canon of the Mass (Vatican City 1938), 63, 173–82Google Scholar. Rushforth suggested that the missing saint may have been Anastasia, whose name follows those of Agnes and Cecilia in the Nobis quoque list. There are also other possibilities. For example, in the procession of female saints (eighth century?) which formerly decorated the church of S. Lorenzo fuori le mura, Agnes and Cecilia are followed by Eugenia. (The S. Lorenzo mural is known from a water-colour copy in the Raccolta Lanciani, published by Muñoz, Antonio, La Basilica di S. Lorenzo fuori le mura (Rome 1944)Google Scholar, pl. 89.) The monogram form of Agnes and Cecilia's titles (ἡ ἄγια) is paralleled in the interior of the church in the niche on the south face of the north-western pillar, cf. Wilpert, RMM, pl. 196, 2. The painting of the Madonna and Child in this niche belongs to the decorative campaign undertaken by pope John VII (705–7): see Nordhagen (1968), 75–6. The monogram was evidently still in use in the first half of the ninth century, when it appears in the decorations of S. Vincenzo al Volturno, datable to the time of abbot Epiphanius (826–43): Cf. Belting, H., Studien zur beneventanischen Malerei (Wiesbaden 1968), pl. xxvii, no. 49Google Scholar.

³³ Tea, 253, identifies the pigment as ‘Egyptian blue’. This compound of copper and calcium silicate was in use in Egypt at least as early as the Fourth Dynasty, hence its name, and was widely employed in classical antiquity. For a technical analysis of its composition see Schippa, Giovanni and Torraca, Giorgio, ‘Contribuito alla conoscenza del “blu egiziano”’, Bullettino dell' Istituto Centrale del Restauro 31–2 (1957), 97–107Google Scholar. Although once thought to have fallen into disuse in late antiquity, it has been recently demonstrated that this pigment was employed in the mural depicting the Ascension, located in the lower church of San Clemente, and datable to the reign of pope Leo IV (847–55): see Lazzarini, Lorenzo, ‘The discovery of Egyptian blue in a Roman fresco of the medieval period (ninth century A.D.)’, Studies in Conservation 27 (1982), 84–6Google Scholar. To my knowledge, the S. Maria Antiqua pigment has not been similarly subjected to X-ray diffraction analysis. If it did prove to be ‘Egyptian blue’, then the Greek inscriptions would serve to strengthen Lazzarini's hypothesis that the pigment was re-introduced to ninth-century Rome by ‘painter-monks of oriental provenance’.

³⁴ This type of diadem may be frequently found in Italian art of the eighth and ninth centuries: see the discussion by l'Orange, Hans Peter, ‘La scultura in stucco e in pietra del Tempietto di Cividale’, Acta ad Archaeologiam et Artium Historiam Pertinentia 7 pt. 3 (1979), 88–91Google Scholar.

³⁵ Wilpert in particular stresses the similarity to work of Paschal's pontificate (RMM, 716).

³⁶ Nordhagen (1978), 132–3, pl. lxvi, 16.

³⁷ Cf. Wilpert, RMM, pl. 195. Principal bibliography: Rushforth, 102–4; Wilpert (1910), 98–100; idem, RMM, 713–14; Tea, 258–60. For the location on the wall before removal see Tea, fig. 14.

³⁸ These guidelines are set 37 mm. apart at the left, 30 mm. apart beneath, and 38 mm. apart at the top. The width of the right border cannot be determined.

³⁹ For this motif see Osborne, J., ‘The portrait of pope Leo IV in San Clemente, Rome: a re-examination of the so-called square nimbus in medieval art’, PBSR 47 (1979), 58–65Google Scholar; and Ladner, Gerhart, ‘Der eckige Nimbus’, Die Papstbildnisse des Altertums und des Mittelalters iii (Vatican City 1984), 310–18Google Scholar.

⁴⁰ Rushforth recorded only the last five letters of the name (IANVS), and proposed the identification as Hadrian on the grounds that no other eighth-century pontiffs had names terminating in this combination. Wilpert confirmed this hypothesis by reading the two preceding letters: DR.

⁴¹ The Roman Senate House had been transformed into a church dedicated to Hadrian in the time of pope Honorius I (625–38), see Liber Pontificalis i, 324.

⁴² For other examples see Osborne, J., ‘Early medieval painting in San Clemente, Rome: the Madonna and Child in the niche’, Gesta 20 (1981), 299–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Nilgen, Ursula, ‘Maria Regina – Ein politischer Kultbildtypus’, Römisches Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte 19 (1981), 1–33Google Scholar.

⁴³ For a discussion of this question see Osborne, J., ‘The Roman Catacombs in the Middle Ages’, PBSR 53 (1985), 278–328Google Scholar, esp. 311. For the history of the pallium see also Ladner, , Papstbildnisse iii, 269–70Google Scholar.

⁴⁴ Cf. Wilpert, RMM, pl. 192–3, 1.

⁴⁵ Rushforth, 104. See Liber Pontificalis i, 512.

⁴⁶ Rushforth, 104; Tea, 259; but opposed by Wilpert, 714.

⁴⁷ See Bartolini, Domenico, Di S. Zaccaria papa e degli anni del suo pontificato (Ratisbon 1879), 261 n. 1Google Scholar.

⁴⁸ Cf. Wilpert, RMM, pls. 154 and 181.

⁴⁹ Rushforth, 102; Tea, 260. Grüneisen, 94, dismisses it as ‘un cadre complètement efface’.

⁵⁰ Cf. Wilpert, RMM, pl. 192–3, 2.

⁵¹ Grüneisen publishes a photograph (pl. IC IX) showing both paintings still in situ. It is not clear whether the plaster was continuous between them, but both were of approximately the same height and set at the same level on the wall.

⁵² Cf. Wilpert, RMM, pl. 198. Principal bibliography: Rushforth, 95; Grüneisen, 97–8, figs. 73, 74; Wilpert, RMM, 714; Tea, 254–5; and Nordhagen (1968), 83.

⁵³ Cf. Wilpert, RMM, pl. 197, 1.

⁵⁴ Ibid., pl. 184.

⁵⁵ Ibid., pl. 241.

⁵⁶ Nordhagen (1968), 83. Wilpert and Tea also ascribe this painting to the first half of the eighth century, primarily on the basis of its high quality. Needless to say, that methodological approach is hardly foolproof!

⁵⁷ Ibid., pl. xlvii.

⁵⁸ Nordhagen, P. J., ‘The mosaics of John VII (A.D. 705–707)’, Acta ad Archaeologiam et Artium Historiam Pertinentia 2 (1965), 121–66Google Scholar, exp. 127–9 and pl. V.

⁵⁹ Principal bibliography: Rushforth, 97; Grüneisen, 98; Wilpert, RMM, 714–5; and Tea, 256.

⁶⁰ Grüneisen, 98, alone believed them to be women.

⁶¹ Principal bibliography: Rushforth, 95; Grüneisen, 95–6; Wilpert, RMM, 717; Tea, 255; and Nordhagen (1968), 83.

⁶² The brickwork is assigned to the eighth century by Corbett, S. in Krautheimer, R. et al. , Corpus Basilicarum ii, pl. xviiiGoogle Scholar.

⁶³ Cf. Nordhagen (1968), pl. CVI, b.

⁶⁴ Cf. Wilpert, RMM, pl. 196, 4. Principal bibliography: Rushforth, 97–8; Grüneisen, 99–100, fig. 75; Wilpert, RMM, 713; Tea, 257–8; and Romanelli-Nordhagen, 38.

⁶⁵ For the identification of the medical box and scalpel, and for parallels elsewhere in the decorations of S. Maria Antiqua, see Nordhagen (1968), 58.

⁶⁶ The fragment is mentioned only by Rushforth, 95: ‘… a fragment of drapery belonging to some saint in classical costume’, but is shown in Wilpert, RMM, pl. 198. Its maximum extents are height: 69 cm., and width: 67 cm.

⁶⁷ Principal bibliography: Rushforth, 95; Wilpert (1910), 104–5; Grüneisen, 96–7; Wilpert, RMM, 717–8; and Tea, 255–6.

⁶⁸ For photographs showing the state of the wall at the time of its discovery see Romanelli-Nordhagen, pls. 2 and 3A.

⁶⁹ Cf. Wilpert, RMM, pl. 227, 3.

⁷⁰ The heads and beaks of the first and second birds do not survive, but may be presumed to have followed the pattern.

⁷¹ Wilpert, RMM, pl. 227, 1.

⁷² See Nordhagen (1968), 15–16.

⁷³ For the influence of Middle Eastern designs see Demus, Otto, Romanesque Mural Painting (London 1970), 21Google Scholar; Nordenfalk, Carl, Codex Caesareus Upsaliensis. An Echternach Gospel-Book of the Eleventh Century (Stockholm 1971), 97–102Google Scholar; and Altet, Xavier Barral I., ‘Un groupe de mosaiques romanes en Toscane: pavements d'Arezzo, Florence et Prato’, Mélanges de l'Ecole Française de Rome (Moyen Age-Temps Modernes) 91 (1979), 699–728, esp. 717–8Google Scholar. A fragment of an eighth-century Islamic textile with similar animal motifs is preserved in the church of S. Maria ad Rupes at Castel S. Elia near Rome, illustrated in Gabrieli, F., Scerrato, U., Gli Arabi in Italia (Milan 1985), pl. 518Google Scholar.

⁷⁴ See de Waal, Anton, ‘Figürliche Darstellungen auf Teppichen und Vorhängen in römischen Kirchen bis zur Mitte des IX Jahrhunderts nach dem Liber Pontificalis’, Römische Quartalschrift 2 (1888), 313–21Google Scholar.

⁷⁵ Liber Pontificalis ii, 75.

⁷⁶ For SS. Quirico e Giulitta see Giovannoni, Gustavo, ‘La chiesa dei Santi Quirico e Giulitta in Roma’, Atti del II Convegno Nazionale di Storia dell' Architettura (Assist, 1–4 ottobre 1937) (Rome 1939), 229–38Google Scholar; Corbett, Spencer, ‘The church of SS. Quirico e Giulitta in Rome’, PBSR 28 (1960), 33–50Google Scholar; Bosi, Mario, SS. Quirico e Giulitta (Rome, n.d. = Le Chiese di Roma Illustrate, vol. 60)Google Scholar; and Corbett, S., ‘SS. Quirico e Giulitta’, Corpus Basilicarum Christianarum Romae iv (Vatican City 1970), 37–50Google Scholar.

⁷⁷ Corbett (1970), fig. 39.

⁷⁸ There is no published photograph of this second SS. Quirico e Giulitta velum, perhaps because, as Corbett puts it, ‘the apse is too restricted for photography’ (1960, 38), apart from a detail of the central image, a lamb standing on an altar: see Bosi, fig. 9. At the time of the excavation in 1930, however, a watercolour copy was made by S. Ferretti, and this is published by Giovannoni, 231. I have not been able to verify its accuracy.

⁷⁹ For the vita Antonii see Patrologiae Cursus Completus, Series Graeca, ed. Migne, J. P., xxvi (Paris 1857)Google Scholar, cols. 835–976. For its date see Brennan, Brian, ‘Dating Athanasius' Vita Antonii’, Vigiliae Christianae 30 (1976), 52–4Google Scholar.

⁸⁰ See Brennan, Brian, ‘Athanasius' Vita Antonii: a sociological interpretation’, Vigiliae Christianae 39 (1985), 209–27Google Scholar.

⁸¹ Augustine, for example, recounts how he was told the story of Anthony by Ponticianus (Confessions viii, 6). Anthony also seems to have become particularly important in Anglo-Saxon England, where he appears on a number of carved stone crosses.

⁸² See Jounel, Pierre, La Culte des Saints dans les Basiliques du Latran et du Vatican au douzième siècle (Rome 1977), 214–15Google Scholar.

⁸³ Cf. vita Antonii, cap. 8–10 (Migne, , PG xxvi, 854–9Google Scholar). Rushforth, 95, incorrectly identifies the scene as depicting Anthony's burial.

⁸⁴ See Leroy, Jules, ‘Le programme décoratif de l'église de Saint-Antoine du désert de la Mer Rouge’, Bulletin de l'Institut Français d'Archéologie Orientale 76 (1976), 347–79Google Scholar.

⁸⁵ For depictions of Anthony see Ferrari, Guy, ‘Sources for the early iconography of St. Anthony’, Studia Anselmiana 38 (1956), 248–53Google Scholar.

⁸⁶ Principal bibliography: Rushforth, 98–9; Wilpert (1910), 105; Grüneisen, 100; Wilpert, RMM, 721–2; and Tea, 257.

⁸⁷ Cf. Wilpert, RMM, pl. 228, 1; Grüneisen, pl. IC XV, 1.

⁸⁸ This particular gesture is known from other early medieval examples, including a number in S. Maria Antiqua. See McClendon, Charles, ‘An early funerary portrait from the medieval abbey at Farfa’, Gesta 22 (1983), 13–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar, esp. 15–16.

⁸⁹ A virtually identical hood, although decorated with geometric designs, is worn by the eastern monk in a funerary portrait in the lower church of San Clemente, Rome, datable to c. A.D. 870. This similarity was first noticed by Wilpert (1910), 105 n.5. For the S. Clemente mural see Osborne, J., ‘The painting of the Anastasis in the lower church of San Clemente, Rome: a re-examination of the evidence for the location of the tomb of St. Cyril’, Byzantion 51 (1981), 255–87Google Scholar.

⁹⁰ A similar garment appears in an earlier depiction of this saint, in the chapel to the right of the apse, part of the decorative campaign of pope John VII (A.D. 705–707): see Nordhagen (1968), 61–2. Grüneisen, 100, identifies it as a woollen cape or manduas.

⁹¹ The suggestion was made by Wilpert (1910, 105), although he was later less certain about its identification (RMM, 721).

⁹² See Sinthern, P., ‘Der römische Abbacyrus in Geschichte, Legende und Kunst’, Römische Quartalschrift 22 (1908), 197–239Google Scholar; Delehaye, H., ‘Les saints d'Aboukir’, Analecta Bollandiana 30 (1911), 448–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Jounel, 220.

⁹³ Patrologiae Cursus Completus, Series Graeca, ed. Migne, J. P., lxxxvii, 3Google Scholar, cols. 3423–696.

⁹⁴ Or perhaps even earlier, during Sophronius's visit to Rome (c. 615–619), see Sansterre, J.-M., Les moines grecs et orientaux à Rome aux époques byzantine et carolingienne (Brussels 1983), 148Google Scholar. Relics of the two saints were deposited in S. Angelo in Pescheria in 755, as recorded in an inscription which still survives in the church; the complete text is published by Grisar, H., Analecta Romana (Rome 1899), 173Google Scholar.

⁹⁵ Anastasius's letter of 30 January 875 is published in Monumenta Germaniae Historica. Epistolae vii (Munich 1978), 426–7Google Scholar.

⁹⁶ This hypothesis is developed by Tea, 48–54.

⁹⁷ Wilpert, RMM, 722. The practice may be found in three ninth-century manuscripts for which an Italian, and possibly Roman, origin has been suggested: the Vatican Job (Bib. Vaticana, cod. gr. 749), the Paris Sacra Parallela (Bib. Nationale, cod. gr. 923), and the Milan copy of the Homilies of Gregory of Nazianzus (Bib. Ambrosiana, cod. 49–50). For their attribution to Italy see Grabar, André, Les manuscrits grecs enluminés de provenance italienne (IXe–XIe siècles) (Paris 1972)Google Scholar. It seems probable that this practice began in illuminated manuscripts, from which it later passed to monumental painting.

⁹⁸ Tea, 257. The murals of S. Sebastiano (also known as S. Maria in Pallara), and the evidence for their dating, are discussed by Fedele, P., ‘Una chiesa del Palatino: S. Maria in Pallara’, Archivio delta R. Società Romana di Storia Patria 26 (1903), 343–80Google Scholar, and Gigli, Laura, S. Sebastiano al Palatino (Rome 1975), 81–8Google Scholar. For a colour reproduction of the apse mural see Wilpert, RMM, pl. 224. For documents relating to the monastery and its foundation see Ferrari, Guy, Early Roman Monasteries (Vatican City 1957), 215–24Google Scholar.

⁹⁹ See Calosso, A. Bertini, ‘Gli affreschi della Grotta del Salvatore presso Vallerano’, Archivio della R. Società Romana di Storia Patria 30 (1907), 189–241Google Scholar. To my knowledge the plates accompanying this article constitute the only published photographs of the Vallerano murals.

¹⁰⁰ Grüneisen, 100, 378–9. Calosso, 201, notes that Grüneisen had accompanied him on a visit to this remote site, and thanks him for his advice on the iconography of the paintings.

¹⁰¹ Most recently by Matthiae, Guglielmo, Pittura Romana del Medioevo i (Rome 1965), 239Google Scholar, and Belting, Hans, Studien zur beneventanischen Malerei (Wiesbaden 1968), 242Google Scholar.

¹⁰² Antonelli, G., ‘L'opera di Odone di Cluny in Italia’, Benedictina 4 (1950), 19–40Google Scholar; Ferrari, 379–407; Hamilton, Bernard, ‘The monastic revival in tenth century Rome’, Studia Monastica 4 (1962), 35–68Google Scholar.

¹⁰³ Other examples of tenth-century painting around Rome which offer points of comparison include the crypt of S. Urbano alia Caffarella (cf. Wilpert, RMM, pl. 229, 1) and the apse of the Tempio della Tosse at Tivoli. For the latter see Brenk, Beat, ‘Die Wandmalereien im Tempio della Tosse bei Tivoli’, Frühmittelalterliche Studien 5 (1971), 401–12Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁴ Rushforth, 96.

¹⁰⁵ Grüneisen, 378.

¹⁰⁶ Wilpert, RMM, 719–720.

¹⁰⁷ Principal bibliography: Rushforth, 96–7; Wilpert (1910), 105; Grüneisen, 98–9; Wilpert, RMM, 719–20; and Tea, 256.

¹⁰⁸ Cf. Wilpert, RMM, pl. 198; Grüneisen, pl. ICXV, 1.

¹⁰⁹ Rushforth and Tea both give NA, having either missed or ignored the horizontal bar on the second vertical stroke of the N. In Vincenzo Federici's study of the painted inscriptions (Grüneisen, 432, and Album Epigraphique IV, 5), the horizontal stroke is shown above the N, and thus is presumably interpreted as a sign marking an abbreviation. In Wilpert's plate it touches the top of the N, but he makes no comment about it in his text.

¹¹⁰ See for example Gray, N., ‘The palaeography of Latin inscriptions in the eighth, ninth and tenth centuries in Italy’, PBSR 16 (1948), 38–167Google Scholar, esp. 141 nos. 141 and 148.

¹¹¹ Cf. Grüneisen, Album Epigraphique IV, 3 and XX, 1.

¹¹² The R seems clearly indicated, and in any event it seems unlikely that Leo would refer to himself as both abbot and monk.

¹¹³ Gray, 146 no. 148; Silvagni, A., Monumenta Epigraphica Christiana i (Rome 1943)Google Scholar, pl. xvii, 2.

¹¹⁴ For these portraits see Ladner, G. B., I Ritratti dei Papi nell' Antichità e nel Medioevo i (Vatican City 1941), 168–71Google Scholar. The murals are known from seventeenth-century drawings preserved in the Vatican Library, cod. Barb. lat. 4406, fol. 141, 142.

¹¹⁵ Wilpert, RMM, 720.

¹¹⁶ Ladner, Ritratti i, 172. He singles out in particular the Beneventan exultet roll now in the Vatican Library (Vat. lat. 9820). For the dating of this roll c. A.D. 985 see Belting (1968), 167–8.

¹¹⁷ See above, note 43.

¹¹⁸ Assuming of course that it is a Latin pallium which is intended here, and not a Greek omophorion. The form of the cross is most unusual for a pallium, but does have numerous parallels in the omophoria worn by Greek clergy in the decorations of the left aisle wall of S. Maria Antiqua, cf. Wilpert, RMM, pl. 192–3, 1.

¹¹⁹ See Wilpert, RMM, pl. 207, 4; and Osborne, J., Early mediaeval wall paintings in the lower church of San Clemente, Rome (New York 1984), 107Google Scholar.

¹²⁰ See Wilpert, RMM, pls. 214 and 216, 1; and Osborne, J., ‘The “Particular Judgment”: an early medieval wall-painting in the lower church of San Clemente, Rome’, The Burlington Magazine 123 (1981), 335–41Google Scholar.

¹²¹ Fedele, ‘Una chiesa del Palatino’, 353; Wilpert, RMM, 1081 and pl. 224; Gigli, 89–92.

¹²² Cf. Wilpert, RMM, pls. 239–41. The most recent study of these murals and their date is by Toubert, Helene, ‘“Rome et le Mont-Cassin”: nouvelles remarques sur les fresques de l'eglise inférieure de Saint-Clément de Rome’, Dumbarton Oaks Papers 30 (1976), 1–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹²³ Wilpert, RMM, 719 n.3.

¹²⁴ For the carved inscriptions see Gray, 129. This form of G appears much earlier in inscriptions from northern Italy, and may first have been used in manuscripts.

¹²⁵ The San Crisogono murals have been convincingly placed in the mid eleventh century, see Brenk, Beat, ‘Die Benediktszenen in S. Crisogono und Montecassino’, Arte Medievale 2 (1984), 57–65Google Scholar.

¹²⁶ Cf. Nordhagen (1968), 64, 68–9, and pl. XC, a.

¹²⁷ A photograph of the wall at the time of the excavation is published by Grüneisen, pl. IC IX.

¹²⁸ Principal bibliography: Rushforth, 101; Wilpert (1910), 105; Grüneisen, 94; Wilpert, RMM, 720–1 and pl. 227, 2; and Tea, 260–1.

¹²⁹ Wilpert, RMM, 721, claims that the male figure has no halo. It is difficult to determine if this is the case, since the haloes and background were both painted the same colour. However, a tiny fragment of its red border is clearly visible in his colour plate.

¹³⁰ For the vita of Mary the Egyptian see Patrologiae Cursus Completes, Series Graeca, ed. Migne, J. P., lxxxvii, 3Google Scholar, cols. 3697–726; and Dictionnaire d'Archéologie Chrétienne et de Liturgie, ed. Cabrol, F. and Leclercq, H., X, 2 (Paris 1932), 2128–36Google Scholar.

¹³¹ For the murals see Lafontaine, Jacqueline, Peintures médiévales dans le temple dit de la Fortune Virile a Rome (Brussels 1959)Google Scholar, and Trimarchi, Michele, ‘Per una revisione iconografica del ciclo di affreschi nel Tempio della “Fortuna Virile”’, Studi Medievali 19 (1978), 653–79Google Scholar. Other depictions of Mary the Egyptian in medieval art are discussed by Lafontaine, 43–5.

¹³² In 1492, see Huelsen, C., Le Chiese di Roma nel Medio Evo (Florence 1927), 338Google Scholar. The original medieval dedication of the church remains a matter of dispute, but I now prefer Marchetti-Longhi's proposal of S. Maria de Secundicerio to Huelsen's proposal of S. Maria de Gradellis: see Marchetti-Longhi, G., ‘S. Maria “de Secundicerio”. Topografia medioevale di Roma’, Bullettino della Commissione Archeologica Comunale di Roma 54 (1927), 93–144Google Scholar, and Huelsen, C., ‘Di tre chiese medievali della Madonn a nel rione Ripa’, Bullettino della Commissione Archeologica Comunale di Roma 53 (1926), 55–81Google Scholar.

¹³³ Cf. Lafontaine, pl. XIV.

¹³⁴ See Wilpert, RMM, 721 and pl. 228, 2; Tea, 354.

¹³⁵ For the initial discovery see R. Lanciani and L. Borsari in Notizie degli Scavi (1885), 156; and O. Marucchi, ‘Conferenze della società di cultori della cristiana archaeologia in Roma’, Bullettino di Archeologia Cristiana (1884–85), 127–43, esp. 142–3.

¹³⁶ Wilpert, RMM, 722: ‘die grosste Verwilderung … Tiefer konnte die Kunst nicht mehr sinken.’ Cf. Grüneisen, 380, who comments that the faces seem ‘plus simiesque qu'humaine’.

¹³⁷ Principal bibliography: Rushforth, 100–1; Wilpert (1910), 106; Grüneisen, 94; Wilpert, RMM, 722; and Tea, 352–4.

¹³⁸ Cf. Wilpert, RMM, pl. 201, 2. For a detail of the second saint from the right see Romanelli-Nordhagen, pl. 47.

¹³⁹ This is a standard attribute of this saint in medieval art. Among the many known examples it shall suffice to mention the mosaic in the so-called Mausoleum of Galla Placidia in Ravenna (fifth century), and those on the triumphal arches of the Roman churches of S. Lorenzo fuori le mura (sixth century) and San Clemente (twelfth century). Perhaps closer in date to the S. Maria Antiqua figure is the example in the painted apse of S. Sebastiano al Palatino.

¹⁴⁰ Dalmatics with decorations of this type appear to be characteristic of the tenth century. For example, the Pontifical Rotulus from Benevento (Rome, Bib. Casanatense cod. 724 BI 13) depicts various clergy, and particularly deacons, with sleeves decorated by crosses composed of four segmenta. For this manuscript see H. Belting (1968), 144–52, and pls. 179–90; and Reynolds, Roger, ‘Image and text: the liturgy of clerical ordination in early medieval art’, Gesta 22 (1983), 27–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Even closer to the S. Maria Antiqua figures are the depictions of the deacons Lawrence and Stephen in the apse of S. Sebastiano al Palatino (cf. Wilpert, RMM, pl. 224). The sleeve of Stephen's dalmatic also has crosses of Maltese type, although still composed of four segmenta like those in the manuscript.

¹⁴¹ Cf. Wilpert, RMM, pl. 215, 5.

¹⁴² The inscriptions in the lower church of San Clemente, at the bottom of the mural depicting the story of Sisinnius, Theodora and St. Clement, are usually considered to be the earliest to have been written in the Italian vernacular; see Monteverdi, A., ‘L'iscrizione volgare di San Clemente’, Studi Romanzi 24 (1934), 5–18Google Scholar, and Pellegrini, S., ‘Ancora l'iscrizione di S. Clemente’, Cultura Neolatina 8 (1948), 77–82Google Scholar.

¹⁴³ See Hamilton, Bernard, ‘The city of Rome and the eastern churches in the tenth century’, Orientalia Christiana Periodica 27 (1961), 5–26Google Scholar, esp. 11. The first mention of a Roman church dedicated to Blaise occurs in A.D. 955, see Huelsen, Chiese, 221, and Jounel, 223.

¹⁴⁴ Cf. Wilpert, RMM, pl. 239.

¹⁴⁵ See Hamilton, Bernard, ‘The monastery of S. Alessio and the religious and intellectual renaissance in tenth-century Rome’, Studies in Medieval and Renaissance History 2 (1965), 265–310Google Scholar, esp. 267.

¹⁴⁶ Liber Pontificalis ii, 145.

¹⁴⁷ Ibid., ii, 158.

¹⁴⁸ See above, note 12.

¹⁴⁹ See above, note 14. Previously it had been argued that the transfer to the new site could have taken place as late as the twelfth century, see Federici, V., ‘Santa Maria Antiqua e gli ultimi scavi del Foro Romano’, Archivio delta R. Società Romana di Storia Patria 23 (1900), 517–62Google Scholar. This view was also held by Grüneisen, 17–30.

¹⁵⁰ For the earliest version of the Mirabilia see Codice Topografico delta Città di Roma, ed. Valentini, R. and Zucchetti, G., iii (Rome 1946), 3–65Google Scholar. The case for the authorship is made by Duchesne, L., ‘L'auteur des Mirabilia’, Mélanges d' Archéologie et d'Histoire 24 (1904), 479–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁵¹ Codice Topografico iii, 55.

¹⁵² Rushforth, 10. Orazio Marucchi had earlier linked the Mirabilia passage with the site, but seems not to have appreciated the important confirmation offered by the Anthony cycle; see Marucchi, O., ‘La chiesa di S. Maria Antiqua nel Foro Romano’, Nuovo Bullettino di Archeologia Cristiana 6 (1900), 285–320Google Scholar.

¹⁵³ Huelsen, Chiese di Roma, 199.

¹⁵⁴ Codice Topografico iii, 56.

¹⁵⁵ Ibid., iii, 148.

¹⁵⁶ For the date and circumstances of the Graphia see Bloch, H., ‘Der Autor der “Graphia aureae urbis Romae”’, Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters 40 (1984), 55–175Google Scholar.

¹⁵⁷ Codice Topografico iii, 90.

¹⁵⁸ For an analysis of this and other legends associated with the area see Pohlkamp, Wilhelm, ‘Tradition und Topographie: Papst Silvester I (314–335) und der Drache vom Forum Romanum’, Römische Quartalschrift 78 (1983), 1–100Google Scholar.

¹⁵⁹ See Huelsen, Chiese di Roma, 339, for bibliography. The earliest reference to S. Maria de Inferno occurs in the fourteenth-century Turin catalogue (Codice Topografico iii, 304).

¹⁶⁰ The argument is precarious, since the version in the slightly later Graphia aureae urbis Romae uses the present tense: ‘ubi est ecclesia Sancti Antonii’.

¹⁶¹ Rushforth, 9; Wilpert, RMM, 726. The suggestion was probably in circulation from the moment of the excavation, since it is dismissed as unlikely by Lanciani, R., ‘Le escavazioni del foro. S. Maria Antiqua’, Bullettino delta Commissione Archeologica Comunale di Roma 28 (1900), 299–320Google Scholar, esp. 307.

¹⁶² It can only be hoped that the excavations currently being carried out by the University of Cambridge in the large structure adjoining the atrium will shed further light on the medieval use of the site. The two areas were connected by the painted passage, and it would come as no surprise to discover that this adjacent building also formed a part of the monastic complex.