Egypt Exploration Fund   [Hrsg.]
Archaeological report: comprising the work of the Egypt Exploration Fund and the progress of egyptology during the year ... — 1903-1904

Seite: 84
DOI Artikel: 10.11588/diglit.12053.8
DOI Seite: 10.11588/diglit.12053#0100
Zitierlink: i
http://digi.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/diglit/archaeological_report1903_1904/0100
Lizenz: Creative Commons - Namensnennung - Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungen
facsimile
84

Progress of Egyptology.

unaltered, in view of the promised Chrestomathy. An instructive index
to the Greek words occurring in these is supplied by Leipoldt.

Spiegelberg lias dealt with, the hieroglyphic origins of various Coptic
words.00

With reference to the influence claimed for the Coptic syntax upon
the Arabic of Egypt, Galtier ranges himself on the side of Spitta, in
unwillingness to regard that influence as demonstrated.07

7. Art and Archaeology. Not merely to the student of the art of later
Egypt will the volume be of value wherein Strzygowski has catalogued all
the Christian material in the Cairo Museum excluded from Crum's volume
in the same series.08 Students of other aspects of Byzantine art will find
much to interest them among the 850 objects described. Stone sculptures,
woodwork, an unrivalled series of bronze vessels, carved bone and ivories,
many remains of worked leather, are among the groups comprised in the
volume, which is generously illustrated with photographs, not only of the
objects catalogued, but also of parallel examples from other collections.
The absence—not by S.'s choice—of the earthenware lamps is to be
regretted. The book has been usefully analyzed by Diez08,1 and has been
reviewed by Crum.00

In criticizing the recent restorations in the cathedral of Aachen, Strzy-
gowski70 has occasion (pp. 42, 78) to speak of the Armenian builders and
artists whose work can be traced in the west, and so refers to the frescoes
in Shenoute's " White Monastery," which bear the name of Theodore, an
Armenian painter of the 12th century. Eeber, in a review, holds that S.
overestimates the influence of these oriental craftsmen.70'1

Strzygowski's views upon Byzantine and oriental art history naturally
meet with opposition. Some of his recent critics are noticed sympatheti-
cally by Stuhlfauth.71 Conspicuous among the opponents of his main
thesis—an oriental, Syro-Egyptian, renaissance which overwhelmed classic
tradition, and thus produced the art of triumphant Christianity—is
Eurtwangler, whose criticism of S.'s Rellenische u. Koptisclie Kunst72 is
chiefly concerned with the ivory and bone carvings, which are, for the
most part, purely classic and by no means as late as S. regards them. The
mere recrudescence of primitive clumsiness must not be mistaken for a
return to a local (Egyptian) style. Coptic art is merely " depraved
hellenism."

The first instalment of Cledat's Baouit72* is occupied with the better-
preserved of a score of the so-called " chapels," whose remains are
scattered over the square half-mile once occupied by the great monastery
of Apollo (v. last Report, 64). The churches and cemeteries are to be
loading ...