-

BRICKSTAMPS OF
CONSTANTINOPLE

Volume I: Text

J onathan Bardill

BRITISH LIBRARY
DOCUMENT SUPPLY CENTRE
29 MAR 2005

mBS/ . 17756

Ernest Mamboury

OXFORD
UNIVERSITY PRESS

r
 OXFORD
UNIVERSITY
Great Clarendon
PRESS
Street, Oxford OX2 6DP
PREFACE
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide in
Oxford New York
Auckland Bangkok Buenos Aires Cape Town Chennai Modern interest in Byzantine brickstarnps can be traced back at least as far as 1828, when
Dar es Salaam Delhi Hong Kong Istanbul Karachi Kolkara Count A, F. Andreossy published his Constantinople et le Bosphore de Thrace,' There, he
Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Mumbai Nairobi
described bricks from the Binbirdirek Cistern that bore an inscription six inches long and
Sao Paulo Shanghai Taipei Tokyo Toronto
one and a half inches deep, and bricks from the Yerebatan Sarayi (Basilica Cistern) bearing
Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press
in the UK and in certain other countries two-inch square monogrammatic stamps. In neither case could he make sense of the marks'
Published in the United States In 1844, Timoni mentioned a single-line inscription that he had discovered along with many
by Oxford University Press Inc., New York other fragmentary examples in Beylerbeyi.' A decade later, Salzenberg was the first to
© J onathan Bardill 2004 publish drawings of three examples from the church of Hagia Sophia.' Not until 1871 did
The moral rights of the author have been asserted the first article devoted to the subject of Byzantine brickstamps appear. Its author, P. A.
Database righr jonathan Bardill (maker) Dethier, illustrated a large number of stamps on bricks from the suburb of the Hebdom"on
First published 2004 (modern Bakirkoy), and also made the first misguided attempts at dating the material."
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may he reproduced, Dethier's dating system was unfortunately adopted by A. Sorlin-Dorigny, who published
stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, in 1874 a number of stamps recovered during demolition work at Hagia Sophia, and, two
without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press,
or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate years later, a selection of published and unpublished examples from various locations."
reprographicsrights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction A, D. Mordtmann, another of the early brickstamp scholars, published few stamps, but his
outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department,
collection of 48 stamped bricks is fortunately preserved in the Museum fur Spatantike und
Oxford University Press, at the address above
Byzantinische Kunst in Berlin.' Brickstamps continued to be published in relatively small
You must not circulate this book in any other binding or cover
and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer numbers, but, owing to the lack of comparative material, scholars could only do their best
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data to make sense of the often highly abbreviated inscriptions. Thus, when W. S, George
Data available published brickstamps from the church of Hagia Eirene in 19I2, he commented, 'but until a
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data much larger series of similar brick stamps has been published, no very satisfactory con-
Data applied for clusions can be drawn from them'.'
ISBN <>-19-925522-9 (Vol. I-text) The Swiss archaeologist Ernest Mamboury appreciated the need for a larger collection of
ISBN <>-19-925523-7 (Vol. !I-illustrations) inscriptions, and began systematically recording Constantinopolitan bricks tamps in about
ISBN <>-19-925524-5 (set)
1914,9Amongst the earliest finds noted in his archive are bricks from the northern part ofthe
13579108642
Great Palace (areas Aa and Ab) and from a group of cisterns a short distance inside the
Typeset by Regent T ypeseuing, London
fortification wall of the 'I'opkapi Palace. In a paper given to the Greek Literary Assembly in
Printed in Great Britain
on acid-free paper by 1919, Mamboury spoke of the collection he had made and its potential:
St Edmundsbury Press
Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk I hasten to say, in passing, that Byzantine bricks have not yet been studied in a systematic manner,
primarily because we do not possess a sufficient number of inscriptions. Through patient research,
and thanks in part to the unfortunate destruction-by the authorities-of numerous Byzantine
remains during these last five years, I have managed to collect about 500 brick inscriptions coming

I I do not intend to outline the entire history of the publication of Constantinopoliran bricksramps. This may be traced by consult-
ing the chronological list in the <Index to the Published Brickstamps in the Catalogue' at the end of this volume.
1 Andreossy, Constantinople, 444 n. 1,445'
J Timoni, Promenades, 2.236. Timoni could make sense of only the name, and did not correctly inrerprecrhe preceding letters. His 'Ti

dhia Paulou' seems to reflect +I[N]aSIAnAYAOY. See the Catalogue (Part Ill) under entry number 10SO. la. Throughout the
following text, numerals in bold type refer to the Catalogue. For an explacation of the numbering system adopted in the Catalogue. see
Ch,14·
4 Salzecbcrg, Baudenkmale, 64.
! Dethier, 'Makrikoy'. On Dr. Dechier himself, see Mango, 'Notes d'cpigraphic', 343 wirh referenccs.
, SeeSorlin-Dorigny, 'Letter'; Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscripcions'; and Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Marque'
] See p. 158. 8 George, St Eirene, 58-,. ' For a biography and bibliography, see Eyice, 'Mamboury'.
Vlll PREFACE PREFACE IX

from at least thirty different sites. This large amount of material, which I have not yet had the time to
study thoroughly, has nevertheless provided me with much information. Next year, I hope to be able
to present to the Archaeological Committee of the Assembly as extensive a study as possible of these
modest ceramic monuments, which will, without a doubt, play a respectable role in future Byzantine
studies, either for discovering the date, or for discovering the builder of these numerous Byzantine
remains that one finds at every step.'?
I do not know whether Mamboury presented his proposed study, but his research con-
tinued, and his records were swelled by finds made during excavations and demolitions
in various parts of the city. Amongst the excavations at which he was present and which
yielded stamped bricks, the following are of particular importance: the excavation of the
hexagon in Giilhane in I921-23, of the Forum Tauri in 1928, of remains exposed in various
parts of the city during the laying of drains between 1925 and 1931, of the monumental
entrance to the atrium of Hagia Sophia in 193 j, of the Peristyle in the Great Palace in
1935-38, of the Palace of Antiochus in 1939, of a complex of three churches in Beyazit in
1943-46, of structures on the south flank of Hagia Eirene in I946-47, ofthe seating of the
Hippodrome in 1950, and of the Peristyle and Apsed Hall of the Great Palace in 1952-54. As
for the demolitions that Mamboury witnessed, the largest numbers of finds came from the
ruins north of Cemal Nadir Sokagr, destroyed in 1924, the Tokludede Mescidi, partially
knocked down in 1929, the Balaban Aga Mescidi, which disappeared in the following year,
and the cistern on Siraselviler Caddesi, which was partially demolished in 1940.
By I936, Mamboury's archive of brickstamps had grown to incorporate records of 'well
over 1000 published and unpublished examples from more than 70 different monuments,
both dated and undated'." But Mamboury's analysis of the material seems to have pro-
gressed slowly, and it was not until 1949 that his first-and, lamentably, his last-two
articles devoted to Byzantine brickstamps were published." The paper that he presented to
the Byzantine Congress in Brussels in 194913 was not so important for his proposed inter-
pretation of the inscriptions (the suggested restoration of the abbreviation ~a() is unlikely
to be correct}" as for the change that it represented in the approach to the problem of under-
standing brickstamps: the name on a stamp was clearly not that of an emperor, as had often
received by bequest a trunk-full of the archaeologist's notes. Most of these were later given
to the Deutsches Archaologisches Institut in Istanbul, 18 but Mango retained the majority of
the archive of bricks tamps. Some use was made of Mamboury' s bricks tamp notes by Mango
and Hawkins in their publication of stamped bricks from Fenari isa Camii, but otherwise
the material remained unexploited.l?
In October I989, I began the task of sorting out and interpreting Mamboury's brickstamp
notes, redrawing his illustrations, and supplementing his information with details of brick-
stamps from many other sources (publications, archives, and museums). Amongst the
material to be added were the stamped bricks discovered during excavations undertaken
after Mamboury's death, especially those from the church of St Polyeuktos, excavated in
I964-69, and those found during the restoration and excavation at Kalenderhane Camii in
I966-78. Having assembled an up-to-date corpus of material, I began extracting from it
whatever information there might be regarding the organization of the brickmaking indus-
try and the chronology of construction in Constantinople. The resulting thesis was sub-
mitted For the degree of Ph.D. to the University of Warwick in May I994. Thereafter, work
continued sporadically whilst holding a British Academy Post-doctoral Fellowship at the
Institute of Archaeology and Linacre College, Oxford. Much new material-particularly
from the collection in the Ayasofya Museum (catalogued by the author in 1994 and 1995),
from the part of Mamboury's brickstamp notes that had passed into the possession
of the Deutsches Archaologisches Institut in Istanbul, and from R. van Nice's records in
Dumbarton Oaks-was added, and both the text and catalogue were updated and com-
pletely rewritten for this publication. The catalogue contains all published material that had
come to the author's attention by October 200!. Some publications that appeared too late
for their bricks tamps to be included are nevertheless cited in the index of published stamps.
J. B.
I1 Mango, 'Porphyry Column', ro) with n. 2; Mango, Developpement, 10 n. 16.

I~ Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari isa Camii'. Some ofMamboury's other archaeological notes and plans have been published by Mango
been argued, but was probably that of an unknown brickmaker, and the dating of the brick- (Brazen HOIIse. 19-20, 182.-8;'Porphyry Column'; 'Pylae', 151-3), Mamews(Szn"Vey, 29), Miiller-Wiener(Bildlexikon. figs. 47. 50, 95,
stamp depended, therefore, on the archaeological context of the brtck and the indiction year 288,369,489), Peschlow (Eirenenkirche, plan 8), Bardill ('Lausus', 73, fig. 3), and Ousterhoucf'Later Churches', figs. 2-5).

indicated on the stamp. In the paper, Mamboury described an archive containing records of
about 2,500 brickstamps, assembled tirelessly over almost 40 years of his life."
Almost simultaneously, in the American Journal of Archaeology for January 1950, Cyril
Mango's first publication appeared. It explained the problems posed by Byzantine brick-
stamps, and included an almost exhaustive list of references to previously published
examples. 16 Mango repeated the plea that had been made by George in 1912: 'There is, above
all, the need for a corpus embodying all those [brickstamps] that have so far been published,
and I understand that this work has been undertaken by Mr. Mamboury, a person highly
qualified for the task. Perhaps one day this will lead to as detailed a knowledge of Byzantine
brick stamps as we have of the Roman' .17
Unfortunately, Ernest Mamboury died on 23 September 1953, leaving his extensive
bricks tamp record largely unpublished and unexploited. After Mamboury's death, Mango

10 Mamboury, 'Mara', 329. 11 Mamboury, 'Fouilles 1', 171.

12 See Ma~boury, 'Chrisme' and Mamboury, 'Nouvelle Lecture'.

1) Mamboury, 'Nouvelle Lecrure'. 14 See pp. 21-3

15 Note that the estimate was somewhat higher in Mamboury, 'Chrisrne', 449: 3,000 brickstamps.
16 Mango, 'Brick Stamps'. 17 Mango, 'Brick Stamps', 26.
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This project would have been impossible had it not been for the devotion of the Swiss
archaeologist Ernest Mamboury to the study of Byzantine Constantinople. By leaving us
his extensive records of bricks tamps and their findspots, assembled tirelessly over some
forty years, Mamboury has provided scholars of Early Byzantine Constantinople with
information of inestimable value. His notes present the possibility of solving at least some
of the many questions that brickstamps raise. It is a great pity that Mamboury did not live to
analyse and publish the material in full himself, and I can only hope that the following study
would have met with his approval.
Professor Cyril Mango, to whom Mamboury's notes were bequeathed, donated the
scholar's papers to the Deutsches Archaologisches Institut in Istanbul, but retained most of
the brickstamp material. The importance of that material, the product of Mamboury's
'longue et passionnante etude', serves to reflect the generosity of Professor Mango in
making the notes available to me.
The text, catalogue, and plates contain, in addition to Mamboury's material, details of
bricks tamps obtained from various archives and scholars, not least Cyril Mango. I would
like to express my thanks to him and to all the individuals and institutions who have
generously made their information available.
I am extremely grateful to Elizabeth Harrison, both for friendly support and for allowing
me to include here her excellent, but previously unpublished, photographs of brickstamps
from her late husband's excavations at Sarachane, Other notes relevant to the Sarachane
bricks were made available by Stephen Hill, who also introduced me to the Mamboury
archive.
Professor Urs Peschlow generously provided much material of his own, thereby allow-
ing me to make this catalogue as up-to-date as I could have hoped. The inclusion in this
corpus of all the details and drawings of the brickstarnps found at both Kalenderhane Camii
and St john of Stoudios is due to his kindness. Professor C. L. Striker consented to allow the
Kalenderhane material, which is due to appear in Professor Peschlow's contribution to the
second report on the Kalenderhane project, to appear here also.
The Deutsches Archaologisches Institut in Istanbul is to be thanked for permission to
reproduce the many unpublished photographs and drawings of brickstamps in its archive.
Professor Arne Effenberger of the Museum fur Spatantike und Byzantinische Kunst, Berlin
supplied photographs, inventory numbers, and dimensions of A. D. Mordtmanri's collec-
tion of 48 stamped bricks. His colleague took the trouble of locating the entry of a single
stamped brick in the inventory lists of the Christian Museum of Berlin University. Helene
Chew of the Musee des Antiquites Nationales, Saint-Gerrnain-en-Laye sent dimensions
and photographs of three stamped bricks donated to the Museum in 1874 by A. Sorlin-
Dorigny. I am grateful to Martin Maischberger of the Deutsches Archaologisches Institut in
Berlin for sending me copies of two bricks tamp notebooks assembled by K. Wulzinger. Liz
J ames and Professor Anthony Bryer generously allowed me to include copies of photo-
graphs and rubbings preserved in the D. Talbot Rice Archive housed in the Barber Institute
Xli ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

of Fine Arts, Birmingham University. For help with material concerning the excavations of
the Walker Trust in the Great Palace, I thank R. N. Smart, former Keeper of Archives and
Muniments at St Andrews University Library, and his successor, Norman Reid. Natalia CONTENTS
Teteriatnikov of the Dumbarton Oaks archives kindly granted permission for the publica-
tion of the stamped bricks from Hagia Sophia that were recorded by R. van Nice. Basil
Saffer, curator of the Museum of Ancient Brick,Johnson City, Tennessee, troubled to send
photographs of the stamped bricks in his collection. For providing a copy of unpublished
List of Plates XVI
statistical tables concerning Byzantine brickwork, I thank Professor Berge Aran. James
List of Tables XVll
Crow has kindly kept me updated on his researches in the vicinity of the Thracian
List of Figures XVU!
(,Anastasian') Long Walls and in Perinthus.
For permission to conduct research in Turkish museums, I am grateful to the Turkish Abbreviations and Bibliography XIX

Ministry of Culture. For their generous and friendly co-operation during my month-long
visits to the Istanbul Archaeological Museum (June 1992) and the Ayasofya Museum
(September 1994, December 1995), I would like to extend warm thanks to the following: PART I BRICKS AND
Feza Dernirkok, Hatice Kalkan, Giilcan Kongaz, Beriil Ozden, Alpay Pasinli, and Tahsin THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY
Sezer (all of the Istanbul Archaeological Museum); ismet Dernir, Suat Kongaz, Sabriye
Parlak, and Nilay Yilmaz (all of the Ayasofya Museum). I. Constantinopolitan bricks and bricks tamps 3
Photographers Alan Watson (University of Warwick), Graham Norrie (University of I. Geographical distribution of finds 3
Birmingham), Ian Cartwright, Susan Hurst, Jennie Lowe, Robert Wilkins (all of the 2. Location of brickyards 3
Institute of Archaeology, University of Oxford) produced excellent prints of many brick-
3· Bricks and brickstarnps 5
stamp photographs, and I am grateful to them all for their patient work.
During the writing of the original thesis Samuel N. C. Lieu arranged access to crucial 8
2. The interpretation and purpose of Constantinopolitan brickstamps
computer equipment. In the final stages, Doris Dance gave linguistic help, and Sophie
I. Earlier scholarship 8
. Currell, Annabel 'I'urpin, and Paul Whiteside helped with routine work. For encouraging
2. Provision of building materials in the Later Roman Empire 10
me to prepare my research for publication, I am particularly grateful to my thesis examiners,
Lyn Rodley and Michael Vickers. For helping to ensure that this monograph finally found 3. Brick production in Rome in the fifth and sixth centuries 13
a home with Oxford University Press, I am indebted to the series editors, especially a. The literary evidence 13
Margareta Steinby. During the revision process, I have benefited from the help and advice of b. The brickstamp evidence 14
Michael Ballance, Janet DeLaine, John Hayes, James Howard-Johnston, Marlia Mango, 4. Constantinopolitan brickstamps 16
John Nesbitt (who encouraged me to design my own fonts), julian Raby, Nicholas Talbot a. The status and role of the individuals named 16
Rice, and, in particular, Cyril Mango, Margareta Steinby, and Michael Vickers. My mother b. The function of the stamps 19
provided invaluable help assembling the indexes and organizing the illustrations for the c. Accessory letters 20
publisher. d. The style of the brickstamp dies 21
This project would never have been begun were it not for my parents, J anet and Philip 5. The abbreviation ~ap£( ) 21
Bardill, who helped to fund my first year of study, and thereafter did their best to have faith
in what seemed an endless esoteric enterprise. Subsequent financial support, during both 24
doctoral and post-doctoral research, came from the British Academy, which also gave a 3· Stamping, storage, and supply
I. Stamped and unstamped bricks 24
substantial grant towards the scanning of the illustrations. Photographic printing costs were
2. Storage and supply 24
met partially by grants from the Dover Fund (administered by the Society for the
3. Building site activity 26
Promotion of Hellenic Studies), and the Seven Pillars of Wisdom Trust. Research in the
Istanbul Museums was supported by awards from the British Institute of Archaeology at
Ankara and the Seven Pillars of Wisdom Trust. To all of these institutions I extend sincere 4· Construction in Constantinople, and the beginning and end of brickstamping 27
thanks. I. Fingermarking and the beginning of brickstamping 27
Finally, I would like to acknowledge with gratitude the efforts of the staff of Oxford 2, The intensity of construction in Constantinople 28
University Press, who worked hard with an exacting author on a complex typescript and a
'II 3. The decline of the brickmaking industry 39
mass of illustrations: Hilary O'Shea, Lucy Qureshi, Enid Barker, Sue Tipping, and Lavinia 4- Conclusion 42
Porter.
 CONTENTS
.~
• xv

CONTENTS III
2. Dating the samples in Group 2
III
PART II THE CHRONOLOGY a. St Polyeuktos Il6
OF CONSTANTINOPOLITAN BRICKSTAMPS b. The Justinianic Hagia Sopbia Il6
c. The Baths of Zeuxippos
Il7
d. Undated sites
5. Towards establishing a chronology
1. Determining samples of contemporaneous stamped bricks 1I8
10. Further stylistic analysis
a. Dating stamps from their content .•
b. Dating stamps from their context 122
I I. Analysis of brickstamps from selected remaining sites
c. Construction techniques 122
1. The Land Walls
125
2. Eudokia's church of St Polyeuktos
6. Dated sites 126
3. The hexagon in Giilhane 128
1. The pre- Justinianic Great Church
4. The Hippodrome 128
2. The Palace of Antiochus
5. The cistern on Diviiru Ali Sokagi
3. StJohnofStoudios 130
6. The monumental arch in the Forum Tauri
4. The cistern of Aspar 13'
7. The Beyazit churches
5. St Polyeuktos 134
8. The Great Palace: Peristyle and Apsed Hall
6. The Justinianic Hagia Sophia 147
9. The harbour of the Boukoleon
7. The Baths of Zeuxippos 147
10. The Great Palace: areas Aa, Ab, Ac
150
70 I I. Kalenderhane Camii
7. Undated sites
1. Balaban Aga Mescidi 70 'F
72 12. Conclusion
2. Remains on Cemal Nadir Sokagi
3. Cisterns in Gulhane 75
77
4. The Byzantine drains of the Mese PART III THE CATALOGUE
5. Remains on Ismetiye Caddesi 78
6. Remains near Mercan Caddesi 79 157
13. The sources of the information included in the catalogue
80
7. Cistern on Siraselviler Caddesi
81
8. Tokludede Mescidi 14. The organization of the catalogue

8. Analysis of bricks tamps and bricks from the sites discussed in Chapters 6-7 82
15. The catalogue
82
1. The names on the brickstarnps of the fifth and sixth centuries
2. The characteristics of brickstamps in the fifth and sixth centuries 94
a. Stylistic analysis of material in Group Section
I, 1 99 INDEXES
b. Stylistic analysis of material in Group 2, Section 1 99
100
c. Conclusions derived from a. and b. Index
3. The dimensions of bricks in the fifth and sixth centuries
102 Index to the main name headings in the catalogue
Index to the jindspots in the catalogue
9. Dating the sites discussed in Chapters 6-7 on the basis of the brickstamps 107 Index to the published brickstamps in the catalogue
107 Index to the monograms in the catalogue
1. Dating the samples in Group I
107
a. The pre-Justinianic Great Church
107
b. The Palace of Antiochus
109 PLATES
c. StJohn of Stoudios
109
d. The cistern of Aspar
IIO
. e. Undated sites
 "~
.<

LIST OF PLATES LIST OF TABLES

I. Upper side of a sixth-century Consrantinopolitan stamped brick (AM 230 with stamp 667.Iff) I. Dimensions of bricks bearing stamps of the reign of Maurice
(]. Bardill) 2. Indictions and corresponding years AD
II. Underside of brick in pl. I (J. Bardill) 3· Frequency of indictions on bricks from the Palace of Antiochus
HI. Land Walls (405-13), original construction technique, tower '7 (DAI, Istanbul neg. KBJ244) 4· Frequency of indictions on bricks from St john of Stoudios
IV. Palace of Antiochus (C.4I5-30), circular room attached to hexagon (P. Steyer, DAI, Istanbul 5· Frequency of indictions on bricks from St Polyeuktos
neg. 64/452) 6. Frequency of indictions on bricks from Balaban Aga Mescidi
V. Stoudios' basilica of St John (C450), interior, looking east (W. Schiele, DAI, Istanbul neg. 7· Frequency of indictions on bricks from the remains on Cemal Nadir Sokagl
~~ . 8. Frequency of indictions on bricks from the Giilhane cisterns
VI. Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia (probably q 57-74), interior, looking north-east (J. Bardill) 9· Frequency of indictions on bricks from the Byzantine drains of the Mese
VII. St Polyeuktos (c. 510--2 I), platform of church, looking west along the north passage beneath the 10. Frequency of indictions on bricks from the cistern on Siraselviler Caddesi
'north aisle (Sarachane Archive, Institute of Archaeology, University of Oxford) I!. Frequency of indictions on bricks from TokIudede Mescidi
VIII. SS Sergius and Bacchus (probably 530--36), exterior of apse (J. Bardill) 12. Names on the brickstamps from sites in Sections 1-3

IX. Theodosian Hagia Sophia (c.ar I-I 5), propylaeum and rear wall of atrium (DAI, Istanbul neg. '3· Correspondences of names between la of the samples listed in Table 12.
2384) . The la samples constitute Group I 9'
X. Theodosian Hagia Sophia, detail of masonry in the rear wall of the atrium (]. Bardill) '4· Correspondences of names between six of the samples listed in Table 12.
XI Baths of Zeuxippos (c. 532), exterior of the apse of Building 2, and the west wall of Room I The six samples constitute Group 2 93
(David Talbot Rice archive, Birmingham University) '5· Inscriptions on stamps in Group I, Section I (see Table 13) 95
XII. Plan and elevation of the Balaban Aga Mescidi (E. Mamboury, June '9,6, DAI, Istanbul neg. 16. Inscriptions on stamps in Group 2, Section I (see Table 14) 96
74"4) '7· Brick dimensions for material in Group I, Section I (sec Tables '3, r j ) 103
XIII. Facade of the substructures on the south side of Cemal Nadir Sokagl (R. Artamanoff, courtesy 18. Brick dimensionsfor material in Group 2, Section I (see Tables '4, 16) 104
Dumbarton Oaks Photograph Collection neg. RA 481 b) '9· Brick dimensions in the fifth and sixth centuries, based on the material in Group 1,
XIV. Room I of the substructures on the south side of Cemal Nadir Sokagr, looking south-west Section I and Group 2, Section I (see Tables '3, '4, '7, and IS) '05
(J. Bardill) 20. Suggested dates for selected sites in Group I IIO
XV. Room IV of the substructures on the southside of Cemal Nadir Sokagr (R. Artamanoff, cour- 21. Brickstamps from St Polyeuktos of known architectural context: substructures "3
tesy Dumbarton Oaks Photograph Collection neg. RA 4S,C) 22. Brickstamps from Sr Polyeuktos of known architectural context: superstructures II3
XVI. Impost capitals in Room IV of the substructures on the south side of Cemal Nadir SOkagl 23· Frequency of indictions on bricks assigned to the fifth century from the Land Walls 124
(J. Bardill) • 24. Frequency of indictions on bricks from the Giilhane hexagon 128
XVII. Ionic impost capital in Room IX of the substructures on the south side of Cemal Nadir SOkagl 25· Frequency of indictions on fifth-century stamps from area Ab,-s '50
(R. Artamanoff, courtesy Dumbarton Oaks Photograph Collection neg. RA 48 Id) 26. Frequency of indictions on fifth-century stamps from area Ac '50
XVIII. Vaulted structures found in Mercan Caddesi in 1968 (DAI, Istanbul neg. '744) 27· Index to the monograms in the Catalogue 435
XIX. Vaulted structures found in Mercan Caddesi in 1968 (DAI, Istanbul neg. 1745)
XX. The cistern on Siraselviler Caddesi (Von GalJ, DAI, Istanbul neg. R3733)
 ..
.'~

LIST OF FIGURES ABBREVIATIONS

AND BIBLIOGRAPHY
I. Geographical distribution of Constantinopolitan stamped bricks and possible kiln sites
2. Map of Constantinople, showing the location of many sites mentioned in the text 29

3· Cruciform monograms of Maurice and Heraclius 47

4. Monograms on architectural sculpture 49 1. PRIMARY SOURCES
5. Plan of the Palace of Antiochus and the remains of the north-west corner of the
Hippodrome (A. Wilkins after Miiller- Wie~er, Bildlexikon, 124) 57 ACO Schwartz, E. et at. (eds.),Acta Conciliorum Oecumenicorum (Berlin 19I4-)
6. Plan of Hagia Sophia, the Baths of Zeuxippos, and nearby structures (J. Bardill after Mango, Agachias, Histories Keydell, R. (ed.), Agathiae Myrinaei Historiarurn Libri Quinque, Corpus Fontium
Brazen House, fig. 38) 65 Histcriae Byzanrinae, 2 (Berlin 1967). Prendo, J. D. (trans.), Agathias, The Histories,
7. Plan of the excavated structures believed to belong to the Baths ofZeuxippos (J. Bardill, Corpus Fontium Historiae Byzantinae, za (Berlin 1975)
after Casson and Talbot Rice, Hippodrome Il) 68 Anecdota Cramer Cramer, J. A., Anecdota Graeca e Codd. Manuscriptis Bibliothecae Regiae Parisiensis, 2
8. Plan of the remains in the vicinity of Cemal Nadir Sokagi (J. Bardill, after Wulzinger, vols. (Oxford 1839)
Barbaro Cornet, E. (ed.), Giornale dell'assedio di Costantinopoli, 1453 (Vienna r856).J. R.Jones
Baudenkmaler,376-7) 72
(trans.], Diary of the Siege of Constantinople, r453 (New York I969)
9· Plan of the remains north of Cemal Nadir Sokagi (J. Bardill, after a sketch by E. Mamboury
Bazaar of H eracleides Driver, G. R. and Hodgson, L (trans.), The Bazaar of Heracleides (Oxford I925)
in the DAI, Istanbul) 72 Book of Ceremonies Reiske, J. J. (ed.), Constantini Porphyrogeniti De Cerimoniis Aulae Byzantinae, i. Corpus
10. Map showing the locations of the cisterns and the hexagonal strucrure in Giilhane Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae (Bonn 1829)
(J. Bardill, after Tezcan, Topkapi Saray', endpaper map, and a sketch by E. Mamboury in Cantacuzenus Schopen, L. (ed.), Ioannis Cantecuzeni Historierum Libri IV, 3 vols., Corpus Scriptorum
the DAI, Istanbul) 76 Hisroriae Byzantinae (Bonn 1828-32)
I I. Map showing the locations of the Byzantine remains near Ismetiye Caddesi and Mercan Cassiodorus, Variae Pridh, A. J. (ed.), Magni Aurelii Cassiodori Variarum Libri XII, Corpus Christianorum,
Caddesi (J. Bardill after a sketch of E. Mamboury) 79 Series Latina, 96 (Turnholt 1973). Mommsen, T. (ed.), Cassiodori Senatorisvariae, Monu-
12. Plan of the substrucrures beneath a house in Mercan Caddesi (J. Bardill after Forchheimer menta Germaniac Historica, Auctorum Antiquissimorum, 12 (Berlin 1894). Barnish, S.].

and Strzygowski, Wasserbehalter, 108 no. 37) 79 B. (trans.), The Vanae of Magnus Aurelius Cassiodorus Senator, Translated Texts for

13· Plan of the vaulted strucrures found in Mercan Caddesi in 1968 (J. Bardill after Firatli, Historians, 12 (Liverpool 1992). Hodgkin, T'. (rrans.), The Letters of Cas siod or us (London
[886)
'Important Finds', 195, fig. IQ) 79
Cedrenus Bekker, 1. (ed.), Cedrenns, Historiartcm Compendium,
Georgius 2 vcls., Corpus
14- Plan of the cistern on Siraselviler Caddesi (J. Bardill, after a sketch ofE. Mamboury in the
Scriptorum Byzantinae (Bonn 1838-39)
Historiae
DAI, Istanbul) 80
Chalcocondylas Bekker, L (ed.), Laonici Chalcocondylae Atheniensis Historiancm Libri Decem, Corpus
15. Histogram to show frequency of indictions on the brickstarnps from St Polyeuktos, with Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae (Bonn 1843)
old and new dates Ir r Chronicon Paschale Dindorf, L. (ed.), Cbronicon Paschale, Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae (Bonn
16. Histogram to show frequency of indictions on the brickstamps from St Polyeuktos with [8)2). Whitby, M. and Whitby, M. (trans.), Chronicon Paschale:284-628 AD, Translated
suggested dates and historical events affecting the progress of construction II 5 Texts for Historians, 7 (Liverpool 1989)
17· Plan of the Forum Tauri and environs, including the Diakonissa church (J. Bardill after CIC,C] Kriiger, P. (ed.), Corpus Juris Civilis, ii. Codex Iustinianus (Berlin 1829). Scott, S. P.
Muller- Wiener, Bildlexikon, figs. 50,290, and 294) 131 (trans.), The Civil Law, xii-xv (Cincinnati 1932)
18. Plan of the Great Palace area and surrounding Byzantine structures, including the CJC, Digest Mommsen, T. and Krueger, P. (eds.), Corpus Iuris Civilis, i.l)igesta (Berlin 1828). Scotr,

Hippodrome and Sea Walls (J. Bardill, after plans in Mamboury and Wiegand, s. P. (rrans.), The Civil Law, ii-xi (Cincinnati [932). Mommsen, T. and Krueger, P. (eds.),
Warson, A. (trans.), The Digest o!Justinian, 4 vols. (Pennsylvania [985)
Kaiserpaldste; GP I; GP Il etc.) 135
CIC,Noveis Schoell, R. and Kroll, G. (eds.), Corpus Juris Civilis, iii. Novellae (Berlin 1828).Scotr, S. P.
19· Plan of the Peristyle and Apsed Hall in the Great Palace (J. Bardill, after plans in GPI
(crans.), The Civil Law, xvi-xvii (Cincinnati 1932)
and yPIl) 137 ClL Corpus Lnscriptionum Latinaram (Berlin 1893-)
20. Plan of the Great Palace, areas Aa, Ab, Ac (J. Bardill, after Mamboury and Wiegand, CTh Mommsen, T. (ed.), Theodosiani Libri XVI mm Constitutionibus Sinnondianis, in
Kaiserpsldste, pis. 90-2) . 149 Mommsen, T. and Meyer, P. (eds.), Theodosiani Libri XVI cum Consututionibus
Sirrnondianis et Leges Novellae ad Theodosianum pertinentes, 1.1-1.2 (Berlin 1905)'
Pharr, C. (trans.}, The Theodosian Code and Novels, and the Sirmondian Constitutions
(Princeton [952)
Cyril of Skythopolis Schwartz, E. (ed.), Kyrillos von Skythopolis, Texce und Untersuchungen zur Geschicbte
der alrchristlichen Literatur, ser. 4, 4.2 (Leipzig 1939). Fesrugiere, A.-J. (trans.), Les
Moines d'Orient 3 (Paris 1962). Price, R. M. (trans.) and Binns,J. (annot.), CyrilofScytho-
polis: The Lives of the Monks of Palestine, Cisrercian Publications, 114 (Kalamazoo, Mich.
[99[)
 '.
"~

x ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY xxi

Diegesis Preger, Scriptores Originurn Constantinopoiisanamm,
T. (ed.), 2 vols. (Leipzig 1901- M ercati Anonymous Ciggaar, K. N., 'Une description de Constantinople traduite par un pelerin anglaia',
19°7),74-108. Dagron
{trans., comm.), Constantinople imaginaire, 196-}14 Revue des Ewdes Byzantines, 34 (1973), 21I--67
Ducas Grecc, V. (ed.), Istoria turco-bizantina (Bucharest 1958) Nicepborus, Short Mango, C. (ed., trans.), Nicephorus, Patriarch of Constantinople. Short History, Corpus
Evagrius, Church Bidez,J. and Parmentier, L. (eds.), The Ecclesiastical History of Evagriuswith the Scholia History Fontium Historiae Byzaminae, 13. Dumbarton Oaks Texts, 10 (Washington 1990)
History (London 1898). Whitby, M. [trans.), The Ecclesiastical History of Evagril<s Scholasucus, Nicephorus Callistus InPG 146-7
Translated Texts for Historians, 33 (Liverpool 2.000) Xanthopulus
Georgius Pachyrneres, Bckker.L Georgii Pachymeris De Michaele et Andronico Palaeologis Libri XII J, ii.
(ed.), Notuia Dignataucm Or. Seeck, O. (ed.), Notitia Dignitatum Omnium, Tam Civilium Quam Militarium, in
Description of the Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzancinae (Borfh [835), I217ff. Partibus Orientis, in O. Seeck (ed.), Notitia Digniiatum Accedunt Notitia Urbis
Augustaion Constantinopolitanae et Latercula Provincierum (1876 repr. Frankfurt 1962), 1-102
Great Chronographer Schreiner, P. (ed., trans.), Chronica Byzantina Breuiora, Die byzenunischen Klein- Notitia Urbis Seeck, O. (ed.),Notitia Urbis Constantinopolitanae, in O. Seeck (ed.), Notitia Dignitatum
chroniken, i (Vienna (975), 37-45; iii (Vienna (979), 12-15. Corpus Fontium Historiae Constantinopolitanae Accedunt Notitia Urbis Constantinopolitanae et Latercula Prouincierwm (1876 rcpr.
Byzantinae 12. Whitby, L. M. (ed.), 'The Great Chronographer and Theophanes', Franklurt 1962),227-43. German trans. in Berger, 'Regionen'
Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies, 8 (1982-83), 17-20 NovTh Mommsen, T. and Meyer, P. M. (eds.), Theodosiani Libri XVI cum Constitutionibus
Gregory of Tours, Krusch, B. (ed.), Liber in Gloria Martyrum. Gregorii Turonensis Opera, ii. Miracula et Sirmondianis et Leges Novellae ad Theodosianum Pertinentes, ii. Leges Novellae ad
Glory of the Martyrs Opera Minora. Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriprores Rerum Merovingicarum, Tbeodosianum Pertinentes (Berlin 1905), 1-68. Pharr, C. (trans.), The Theodosian Code
L2 (Hanover 1885),34-111. Van Darn, R. (rrans.), Gregorycf Tours: Glory of the Martyrs, and Novels, and the Sirmondian Constitutions (Princeton 1952),487-514
Translated Texts for Historians, 4 (Liverpool 1988) NovVal Mommsen, T. and Meyer, P. M. (eds.), Theodosiani
Libri XVI cum Constitutionibus
Hero of Alexandria, Heiberg, J. 1. (ed.), He-;onis Alexandrini Opera Qu.ae Svpersunt Omnia, iv. Heronis Sirmondianis et Leges Novellae ad Theodosianum Pertinerues, ii. Leges Novellae ad
. Geometrica Definitiones cum Variis Collecuonibns, Heronis QHae Ferwntur Geometrica, Bibliorheca Tbeodosianum Pertinentes (Berlin 1905), 69-1 54. Pharr, C. (trans.), The Theodosian Code
Scriptorum Graecorum et Romanorum Teubneriana (Leipzig 1912) and Novels, and the Sirmondian Constitutions [Princeton 1952), 515-50
Hero of Byzantium, Sullivan, D. F. (ed., rrens.), Siegecraft: Two Tenth-Century Instructional Manuals by Palatine Anthology Beckby, H. (ed.),Anthologia Graeca, 4 vols. (Munich 1965); Paton, W. R. (rrans.), Greek
Geodesia 'Heron of Byzantium', Dumbarton Oaks Studies, 36 (Washington 2000),114-51,249-81, Anthology, 5 vols. Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, Mass. and London 1916-18)
figs. 29-42 Parastaseis Carneron, Av. and Herrin, J. (eds), Constantinople in the Early Eighth Century: The
lE veuers, H. (ed.), Die Inschriften van Ephesos. Inschriften griechischer Sradre aus Parastaseis Syntomoi Chronikai. Introduction, Translation and Commentary, Columbia
Kleinasien, 1-(Bonn 1979-) I Studies in the Classical Tradition, 10 (Brill 1984)
L Kalch. Merkelbach, Dorner, F. K., and ~ahin, S. (eds.), Die lnschriften van Kalchedon,
R., Preger, T. (ed.), Scriptores Originum Constantinopolitarum, ii (Leipzig I907). German
Inschriften Griechischer Stadre aU5 Kleinasien, 20 (Bonn 1980) trans. and comm. in Berger, Patria
ILS Dessau, H. (ed.), Inscriptiones Latinae Selectae, i (Berlin 1892) Paul the Silentiary Priedlander, P.,johannes von Gaza und Paulus Silentarius (Leipzig and Berlin 1912),
I. Philae,ii Bemard, E. Les Inscriptions grecques et latines de Pbilae, ii. Haut: et Has-Empire (Paris 22 5--6 5. Partial English trans. in Mango, Art. 80--96; Italian trans, Veniero, A., Paulo
1969) Silenziario (Catania t916), 233-78
John of Antioch Muller, K. (ed.), Fragmenta Historicorum Graecomm, iv (Paris 1851), 535-622; v (Paris P. Cairo M asp. Maspero, J. (ed.), Papyrus grees d'epoque byzantine, Catalogue general des antiquites
1883),27-38 igyptiennes dSI-Mmee du Caire, 3 vols. (Cairo 1911-16)
John of Ephesus, Brooks, E. W. (ed., trans.), Iohannis Ephesini Historiae Ecclesiasucae, Pars Tertia, Corpus PG Migne, J. P. (ed.), Patrologiae Cursus Completes, Series Graeea, 161 vols. (Paris 1862-
Cbercb History Scriptorum Chriscianorum Orientalium, Scriptores Syri, ser. 3, iii (Louvain 1935-36). 19°4)
Payne Smith, R. (trans.), The Third Part of the Ecclesiastical History of John Bishop of PL Migne, J. P. (ed.), Patrologiae Cursus Completus, Series Latina, 222 vols. (Paris 1852-
Ephesl<s(Oxford 1860) 19°4)
julian, Orations Bidez, J. (ed., rrans.), L 'empereur [idien, oeuores complete;, i. I, Discours de [ulien Cesar P.Oxy. Grenfell, B. P., Hunt, A. S. et aI., The Oxyrhynchl<s Papyri (London 1898-)
(Paris 1932) P. Princ. Roll Kase, E. H.Jr.,A Papyrus Roll in the Princeton Collection (Baltimore 1933)
Krirovoulos of Reinsch, D. R., Criiobuli Irnbriotae Historiae, Corpus Fontium Historiae Byzantinae, 22 Procopius, Buildings Veh, 0. (ed.), Prokop, Werke V (Munich 1977). Dewing, H. B. and Downey, G. (trans.),
Imbros, History (Berlin and New York 1983). Riggs, C. T. (trans.), History of Mehmed the Conqueror Procopins, vii. Loeb Classical Library (London 1940)
(Princeton 1954) Procopius, Secret Veh, 0. (ed.), Prokop, Werke, i (Munich 1981). Dewing, H. B. (rrans.), Procopius, vi. Loeb
Lackner, Lackner, W., 'Ein byz.antinisches Marienmirakel', Bu~Ct.vnva, 13h (1985), 835-60 History Classical Library (London 1935)
'Marienmirakel' Procopius, Wars Veh,' O. (ed.), Prokop, Werke, ii-iv (Munich 196 I). Dewing, H. B. (crans.), Prccopius, i-v.
Leo Grammaticus, Bekker, 1. (ed.), Leonis Grammatici Chronographia, Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Loeb Classical Library (London 1914-28)
Cbronograpbia Byzantinae (Bonn 1842) SEG Supplementum Epigrapbicum Graecmn (1923-)
Life of St. Melania the Gorce, D. (ed., trans.), Vie de sainte Melanie. Sources chreriennes, 90 (Paris 1962). Clark, Socrates, Ecclesiastical Hansen, G. C., Sokrates, Kirchengeschicbte, Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller
Younger E. A. (rrans., comm.), The Life of Melania the Younger (New York 1984) History der ersten jahrhunderte, NS, 1 (Berlin 1995). Zenos, The Ecclesiastical
A. C. (trans.),
Lydus,D;' Wiinsch,R. (ed.),loannis LydiDe MagisLTatibus(Leipzig 1903). Bandy,A. C. (rrans.), On History of Socrates Scholasticus, A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of
Magistratibus the Powers or the Magistracies of the Roman State, American Philosophical Society the Christian Church, and ser. (Oxford t891)
Memoires, 149 (Philadelphia 1983) • Sozomen, Ecclesiastical Bidez,J. and Hansen, G. C., Sozomenus, Kirchengeschichte, Die griechischen christlichen
Malalas, Chronicle Thurn, J. (ed.), Ioannis Malalae Chronographia, Corpus Fontium Historiae Byzantinae, History Schriftsreller der ersten jahrhundertc, NS, 4 (Berlin 1995)' Hartranft, C. D. [trans.), The
35 (Berlin and New York 2000). Jeffreys, E. M. et al. (trans.), The Chronicle of [ohn Ecclesiastical History cf Sozomen, A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of
Malalas, Byzantina Australiensia, 4 (Melbourne 1986) the Christian Church, and ser. (Oxford 1891)
Marcellinus, Chronicle Mommsen, T. (ed.), Marcellini V. C. Comitis Cbronicon, Monumenta Germaniac Snda Adler, A. (ed.), Suidae Lexicon (Leipzig 1928-38)
Histories Auctorum Antiquissimorurn, 11, Chronica Minora, 2 (Berlin 1894),37-108, Synaxarion of Dclehaye, H. (ed.), Synaxarium. Ecclesiae Constantinopolitanae, in 1. de Backer et al.
rcpr. with trans. in Croke, B., The Chronicle of Marcellinus, Byzanrina Auscraliensia, 7 Constantinople (eds.), Propylaeum ad Acta Sonaornm Nooembris (Brussels 1902)
(Sydney 1995) Synesius of Cyrene, Garzya, A. (ed.), Synesii Cyrensensis Epistolae (Rome 1979)
Letters
 .,
"~

:X11 ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY ABBREVIA TIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY xxiii

Thcmisrius, Orations Downey, G.,Schenk1, H.,and Norman,A. F. (eds.), Tbemistii Orationes Quae Seperuou, Barsanti, Barsanti, C., 'Ccsrantinopoli e l'Egeo nei primi decenni del XV secolo: La testimonianza
J vols. (Leipzig [965-74) 'Buondelmcnti' di Cristoforo Buondelmonri', Rivista dell'Isututo Nazionale d'Archeologia e Storia dell'
Theodore Anagnostes, Hacsen, G. C. (ed.), Theodoros Allagnostes, Kirchengeschichte, Die griechischen Ane, 56 {ser. J, 24) (2001), 83-254
Ecclesiastical History christlichen Schriftsteller der erstenJahrhunderte, NS, J (Berlin (995) Bauer,5radt Bauer, F. A., Stadt, Platz und Denkmal in der Spiitantike: Uruersuchungen ZUT Aus-
and Epitome stattung des 6ffentlichen Raums in den spatan-tiken Stddten Rom, Konstantinopel und
Theophanes, Chronicle de Boor, C. (ed.), Tbeopbanis Cbronogrepbia, 2 vols. (Leipzig 188 J-188 5). Mango, C. and Ephesos(Mainz 1996)
Scort, R. (rrans. and comm.), The Chronicle of Theophanes Confessor: Byzantine and Baynes, <Virgin's Robe' Baynes, N. H., <The Finding of the Virgin's Robe',AnnuaiTe de i'Instiuu: de Philologie et
Near Eastern History AD 2 84-81 J (Oxford r997) d'Histoire Orienteles et Slaves, 9 (1949), 87-95 (repr. in N. H. Baynes, Byzantine Studies
Theophanes Niebuhr, B. (ed.), Theophanes Corniruratte, Corpus Scriptorum Hisroriae Byzantinae and Otber Essays (London 1955) 24<>-7) .
Continuatus (Bonn 18J8) Bendall and Roper, Bendall, S. and Roper, I. T., <Late Sixth-Century Monogram Penranummia', Spink's
Theophylact Simocatta, de Boor, C. (ed.) and Wirth, P. (rev.), Theophylacti Simocattae Historiae, Bibliotheca 'Monograms' Numismatic Circular, 83 (1975), 55 •
History Scriptorum Graecorum et Romanorum Teubneriana (Stuttgart 1972). \Vhitby, M. and Berger, Roman Law Berger, A., Encyclopedic Dictionary of Roman Law, Transactions of the American
Whitby, M. (trans.), The History ofTbeophylact Simocatta (Oxford 1986) Philosophical Society, NS, 43-2 (Philadelphia 195J)
Victor Tonnenensis, Mommsen, T. (ed.), Victor Tonnenensis Episcopi Cbronice, Monumenra Germaniae Berger, 'Chalkun Berger, A., 'Das Ghalkun Tetrapylon und Parastaseis, Kapirel 57', Byzantinische Zeis-
Chronica Historica Auctorum Anriquissimorurn, 11, Chrcnica Minora, 2, (Berlin 1894) 178-206 Tetrapylon' schrift, 90 (t997), 7-12
Vitruvius Granger, F. (ed. and trans.), On Architecture, 2 vols., Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, Berger, Patria Berger, A., Untersuchnngen zu den Patria Konstantinwpoleos, Poikila Byzantine 8 (Boon
Mass. 1931-34); Rowland, I. D. and Noble Howe, T. {trans., comm.), Ten Books of 1988)
Architecture (Cambridge 1999) Berger, 'Regicnec' Berger, A., 'Regionen und StraBen im friihen Konstantinopel', lstanbuler Miueilungen,
Zonaras, Epitome Biittner-Wobst, T., Ioannis Zonarae Epitomae Historiarum libri XVIII, iii, Corpus 47(1997),349"414
Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae (Bonn I897) Berger, 'Streets' Berger, A., 'Streets and Public Spaces in Constantinople', Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 54
Zosimus, New History Paschoud,F. (ed.), Zosime, Histoire nowvelle(Paris 1971-). Ridley, R. T. (trans.), Zosimus: (2000),161-72
New History, Byzantina Ausrraliensia, 2 (Sydney 1982) Berger, 'Tauros e Sigmo' Berger, A., 'Tauros e Sigma. Due piazze di Costanrinopoli', in C. Barsanti et al. (eds.),
Bisanzio e ['Occidente: arte, archeologia, storia. Studi in oxcre di Fernanda de' Maffei
(Rome 1996)
Berger, 'Topography' Berger, A., 'Historical Topography in the Roman, Byzantine, Latin, and Ottoman
2. SECONDARY SOURCES Periods: i. Roman, Byzantine arid Latin Periods', in Striker and Kuban, Kalenderhane I,
7-17
Ahunbay and Ahunbay, Ahunbay, M. and Ahunbay, Z., 'Recent Work on the Land \Valls of Istanbul: Tower 2 to Berger, <Translation' Berger, A., 'Die Reliquien der Heiligen Euphemia und ihre erste Translation nach
'Land Walls' Tower 5', Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 54 (2000), 227-)9 Konstantinopel', Hellenika, 39 (1988), 311-22
Alben, 'Antigoni' Alben, G., 'Die Prinzeninsel Antigoni und der Aidos-Berg', Miueilungen des Deutschen Berger, 'Ufergegend' Berger, A., 'Zur Topographie der Ufergegend am Goldenen Horn in der byzantinischen
Exleursions-Klubs in Konstantinopel, r st ser., ) (1891), 24-5 I Zeit',Istanbuler Miueiiungen, 45 (1995), 149'-65
Andermahr, Andermahr, A. M., Totus in Praediis. Senatoriscber Grundbesitz in Italien in der Friihen Berger, 'Vavassore' Berger, A., 'Zur sogenannten Stadtansichr des Vavassore', Istanbuler MitteiLungen, 44
Grundbesitz find Hohen Kaiserzeit, Antiquitas, jrd ser., 37 (Bonn 1998) (1994), J'9-5 5
Andreossy, Andreossy, A. F., Constantinople et le Bosphore de Tbrace, pendant les annees 1812, 181 J Besevliev, Inschriften Besevliev, V., Spatgriechische und spiulatiniscbe Inschriften aJH Bulgarien, Berliner
Constantinople et 1814, etpendant l'annie 1826 (Paris 1828) Byzantinische Arbeiten, JO (Berlin 1964)
Anroniades, Hagia Antoniades, E. M., "EKq>pacrl<;-tii<;•Ay("" LOq>(CX<;,
J vols. (Athens 1907-1909) Betsch, Capital Betsch, W. E., The History, Production and Distribution of the Late Antique Capital in
Sophia Constantinople (Ph.D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania 1977)
Aupert, 'Chronique' Auperr, P., 'Chronique des fouilles et decouvertes arcbeolcgiques en Grece en 1975', Bloch, 'Indices' Bloch, H., 'Indices to the Roman Brick-Stamps Publish~d in Volumes XV I of the Corpus
Bulletin de Correspondence Hellenique, 100 (1976), 591-745 Inscripdonum Latinarum and the LVI-LVII of the Harvard Studies in Classical
Avi-Yonah; Avi-Yonah, M., Abbreviations in Greek Inscriptions (the Near East, 200 BC-AD 1100), in Philology',HarvardStudies in Classical Philology, 58-59 (1948),1-104
Abbreviations A. N. Oikonomedes, A Manual of Abbreviations in Greek Inscriptions, Papyri, Manu- Bloch, 'Supplement' Bloch, H., <Supplement to Volume XV, 1 of the Corpus Inscriptionurn Latinarum,
scripts and Early Printed Books (Chicago 1974) Including Complete Indices to the Roman Brick-Stamps', Haruard Studies in Classical
Bagnall and Worp, Bagnall, R. S. and Worp, K. A., The Chronological Systems of Byzantine Egypt, Studia Philology, 56-57 (1947), l-I28
Chronological Amstelodamensia ad epigraphicam, ius antiquum et papyrologicam pertinentia, 8 Bloch, "Ziegelsrempel' Bloch, H., 'Ein datierter Ziegelstempel Theoderichs des Grossen', Mitieilungen des
Systems (Zutphen 1978) DeutschenArchiiologischen lnstiuus, Romiscbe Abteilung, 66 (1959),196-203
Bardill, 'Golden Gate' Bardill, J., 'The Golden Gate in Constantinople: A Triumphal Arch of Theodosius I', Blondal, Varangians Blondal, S., The Yarangians of Byzantium: An Aspect of Byzantine Military History
AmericanJoumalof Archaeology, 10J (1999), 671-<)6 Translated, Revised and Rewritten by Benedikt S. Benedikz (Cambridge 1978)
Bardiil, "Great Palace' Bardill, J., 'The Great Palace of the Byzantine Emperors and the Walker Trust Bobcev, 'Monogrammi' Bobcev, S. N., 'Dva monogrammi pedata viirchu tuchli ot krepostnite steni na Serdika',
Excavations' ,Journal of Roman Archaeology, 12 (1999),216-)0 with French resume entitled, <Deux sceaux a monogrammes sur des briques des murs
Bardill, 'Leusus' Bardill, J., <The Palace of Lausus and Nearby Monufnents in Constantinople: A Topo- d' enceinte de Serdica', Archeologija, 12.2 (1970), 64-9
graphicaISrudy',AmericanJoumalof Archaeology, 101 (1997), 67-<)5 Bedel, Brickstamps Bodel, J. P., Roman Brickstamps in the Kelsey Museum, University of Michigan. Kelsey
Bardill, 'Sts. Sergius Bardill,]., <The Church of Sts. Sergius and Bacchus in Constantinople and the Mono- Museum of Archaeology Srudies, 6 (Ann Arbor 1983)
and Bacchus' physite Refugees', Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 54 (2000), I-I I Bolognesi, 'Boukolcon' Bolognesi Recchi Franceschini, E., <The Seventh Year of the Survey of the Great Palace
Bardill and Greatrex, BardiU,]. and Greatrex, G., 'Antiochus iliePraepositu.s: A Persian Eunuch at the Court of The Second Year of the Preparatory Study for the Boukoleon Restoration Project', XVI
,Antiochus' Theodosius H', Dumbarton Oaks Papers 50 (1996),171-<)7 . Arasurma Sonuelari Toplanusi 1998,1 (1999), 278-286
Bardill and Hayes, Bardill, J. and Hares, J. W.) 'Excavations beneath the Peristyle Mosaic in the Great Palace Bolognesi, 'Gran Bolognesi Recchi Franceschini, E., 'Il Gran Palazzo', Bizantinistica: Rivista di Sucdi
<Pottery' of the Byzantine Emperors: The Pottery from Site D, 1936', Cebien Arcbeologiques, 50 Palazzo' Bizantini e Slavi, and ser., 2 (2000),197-242
('00').
 "~.,
XIV ABBREVIA TlONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY xxv

Bolognesi, 'Survey Ill' Bolognesi Recchi Franceschini, E., 'The Third Season of the Great Palace Survey (1994)', Coleman-Norton, Coleman-Norton, P. R., Roman State and Christian Church: A Collection of Legal
XIII Arastrma Sonuclari Toplanusi, 2 (1996),133-42 Roman State Documents toAD 535, 3 vols. (London 1966)
Bolognesi, '\Xfinter' Bolognesi Recchi Franceschini, E., 'Winter in the Great Palace: The Persistence of Pagan Corbo, Il Santo Corbo, V. C., If Santo Sepolao di Gerusalemme: Aspetu archeologici dalle origini al
Festivals-in Christian Byzantium', Byzantinische Forschungen, 21, 1995 (= Efrhyrniadis, Sepalcro periodo crociato, 3 vols., Studium Biblicum Frauciscanum, Collecrio Maior, 29 (Jerusalem
5., Rapp, C., and Tsougarakis, D. (eds.), Bosphorus: Essays in honour of Cyril Mango), 1981)
117-32 Cormack, 'Mosaics Cormack, R., 'Interpreting the Mosaics of S. Sophia at Istanbul', Art History, 4 (1981),
Bono et al. Bono, P., Crow, J., and Bayliss, R., 'The Water Supply of Constantinople: Archae- ofS. Sophia' 131-49 (repr. in R.·Cormack, Tbe Byzantine Eye: Studies in Art and Patronage (London
'Water Supply' ology and Hydrogcology of an Early Mcilieval City', Environmental Geology, 40 t989), art. VIII)
(2001),1)25-33 Coiiasnon, Holy Couasnon, c., The Church of the Holy Sepulchre,ferusalem (London 1974)
Brodribb, Brick and Brodribb, G., Roman Brick and Tile (Gloucester t987) Sepulchre
Tile Croke, Chronicles Croke, E., Christian Chronicles and Byzantine History, 5th-6t~ Centuries. Variorum
Browning, Greek Browning, R., Medieval and Modern Greek (London 1969) Collected Studies (Aldershot 1992)
Buckron, Byzantium Buckton, D. (ed.), Byzantium: Treasures of Byzantine Art and Culture (Frome and Croke, 'Earthquakes' Croke, E., 'Two Early Byzantine Earthquakes and their Liturgical Commemoration',
London 1994) Byzantion, 51 (1981), 122-47 (repr. in Croke, Chronicles, art. IX with addendum)
Butcher and Thorpe, Butcher, K. and Thorpe, R., 'A Note on Excavations in Central Beirut 1994-96'Journal Croke, 'Hormisdas' Croke, B., 'Hormisdas and the late Roman walls of Thessalonika', Greek, Roman and
'Beirut' of Roman Archaeology, la (1997), 291-306 Byzantine Studies, 19 (1978), 251-58 (repr. in Croke, Chronicles, art. xv)
Butler, Nave Cornices Butler, L., The Nave Cornices of Hagia Sophia in Istanbul (diss. University of Croke, 'Thessalonika' Croke, B., "Ihessalonika's Early Byzantine Palaces', Byzantion, jI (1981),475-83 (repr.
Pennsylvania 1989) in Croke, Chronicles, art. XVI)
Butler, 'Hagia Sophia's Butler, L. 'Hagia Sophia's Nave Cornices As Elements of Its Design and Structure', in Crow and Ricci, Crow, J. and Ricci, A., 'The Anastasian Wall Project 1996-1997', XVI Ara~ttrma
Nave Cornices' Mark and Cakmak, Hagia Sophia, 57-77 'Anastasian Wall' Sonuclan Toplanusi 1998, I (t999), 239-49
CAH.xiii Cameron, Av. and Garnsey, P. (eds.), The Cambridge Ancient History, xiii. The Late Crow and Ricci, Crow, J. and Ricci, A., 'Investigating the Hinterland of Constantinople: Interim Report
Empire A.D. 337-425 (Cambridge 1988) 'Long Wall' on the Anastasian Long Wall' ,journal of Roman Archaeology, IO (1997), 235-62
Cameron, Circus Cameron, AI., Circus Factions: Blues and Greens at Rome and Byzantium (Oxford 1976) Cruikshank Dodd, Cruikshank Dodd, E., Byzantine Silver Stamps with an Excursus on the comes sacrarum
Factions Silver Stamps largitionum by J. P. C. Kent (Washington 1961)
Cameron, Continuity Cameron, Av., Continuity and Change in Sixth-Century Byzantium (London 198 I) Cuiner, La Turquie, iv Cuinet, V., La Turquie d'Asie. Geogrephie administratioe, statistique, descriptive et
Cameron, 'Empress Cameron, Al., 'The Empress and the Poet: Paganism and Politics at the Court of raisonnee de chaque province de l'Asie-Mineure, iv. (Paris i894)
and Poet' Theodosius Il', Yale Classical Studies, 27 (1982), 217-89 (repr. with additional note in Curds, Broken Bits Curris, C. G. with Walker, M. A., Broken Bits of Byzantium, 2 vols. (n. p., c.r887-91)
Cameron, Literature and Society, art. Ill) Curtis and Aristarches, Curtis, C. G. and Aristarches, S., "AvE.Koo'tOt 'E1tl'Ypaq'JCXLBuscxv-iiou', '0 EV
Cameron, 'Empress Cameron, Av., 'The Empress Sophia', Byzantion, 45 (1975), 5-21 (repr. in Cameron, ,Anekdotoi' KoovO"'t<XV'ttvOU1tOAet 'EAAllVlKOC; <l>lAOAcrylKOC;LUAAOYOC;suppl. to vol. 16·, A.Pl<XlOAOYtK1l
Sophia' Continuity, an. XI) 'Emtponf (1885), 3-39
Cameron, Greek Cameron, AI., The Greek Anthology From Meleager to Planudes (Oxford 1993) DACL Cabrol, F. and Leclercq, H. (eds.), Dictionnaire 'd'archeologie chretienne et de liturgie, 15
Anthology vols. (Paris 1907-53)
Cameron, 'justin H' Cameron, Av., 'The Artistic Patronage of justin II', Byzontion, 50 (1980), 62-84 (repr. in Dagron, Dagron, G., Constantinople imaginaire: Etudes sur le recueil des Patria. Bibliotheque
Cameron, Continuity, art XII) Constantinople Byzantine, 8 (Paris t984)
Cameron, Literature Cameron, Al., Literature and Society in the Early Byzantine World, Variorum Collected imaginaire
and Society Studies (London 1985) Dagron, 'Courses' Dagron, G., 'L'Organisation et le deroulement des courses d'apres le Liore des
Cameron, Procopius Cameron, Av., Procopius and the Sixth Century (London ~98 5) Ceremonies', Traoaux et Memoires, 13 (2000), 1-200
Cameron, 'Sophiae' Cameron, Av., 'Notes on the Sophiae, the Sophianae, and the Harbour of Sophia', Dagron, 'Monachisme' Dagron, G., 'Les moines er la ville: Le monachisme a Constantinople jusqu'au concile de
Byzantion, 37 (1967), 11-20 (repr. in Cameron, Continuity, art. XIII) Chalcedoine (45')', Travaux et Mimoires, 4 (t970), 229-76
Cameron, 'St. Sophia' Cameron, Av., 'Procopius and the Church of St. Sophia', Harverd Theological Review, 58 Dagron, Naissance Dagron, G., Naissance d'une Capitale: Constantinople etses institutions dejjoa45 I (Paris

(1965), t61-3 t974)

Cameron, "Iheodorus' Cameron, AI., 'Theodorus 1:ptcE1tCXPXOC',Greek, Roman and Byzantine Stn dies, 17 (1976), Dagron, 'Sancruaires' Dagron, G., 'Constantinople: Les sancruaires et l'organisacion de la vie religieuse', in
269-86 (repr. with additional note in Cameron, Literature and Society, art. XV1) Actesdn XIe Congres International d'Archeologie Chretienne "r986, 2 (Rome I989)
Cameron and Long, Cameron, AI. and Long,J., Barbarians and Politics at the Covn o] Arcadius (Berkeley and Degeest et al., Degeesr, R., Ottenburgs, R., Kucha, H., Viaenc, W., Degryse, P., and Waelkens, M.,
Barbarians Los Angeles 1993) 'Unguentaria' 'The Late Roman Unguentaria of Sagalassos', Bulletin Antieke Beschaving, 74 (1999),
Cangova, 'Ceramique' Cangova.]., 'La ceramique recueillie dans la tour no. 2', in Ivanov, Nessebre 1,121-4 247-62
Capizzi, :Anastasio' Capizzi, C., 'L'imperarore Anastasio I (491-5 18): Studio sullasua vira, la sua opera e la sua Deichmann, Ravenna Deichmann, F. W., Ravenna: Hauptstadt des spatentileen Abendlandes. Kommentar, ii
personalita', Orientalia ChristianaAnalecta, 184 (Rome 1969) (Wiesbaden t 976)
Casson et sl., Casson, S. et al., Preliminary Report upon the Excavations Carried OHt in the Hippo- DeLaine, Caracalla Del aine, J., The Baths of Caracalla: A Study in the Design, Construction, and Economics
Hippodrome I drome of Constantinople in 1927 on Behalf of the Britiih Academy (London 1928) of Large-Scale Building Projects in Imperial Rome, Journal of Roman Archaeology
Casson and Talbot Casson, S. and Talbot Rice, D., Second Report upon the Excavations Carried Out in and Supplementary Series, 25 (Portsmouth, RI 1997)
Rice, Hippodrome II near the Hippodrome of Constantinople in 1928 on Behalf of the British Academy Delbrueck, Antike Delbrueck, R., Antike Porpbvnserke, Srudien zur sparantiken Kunstgeschichre,
(London 1929) Porphyrwerke (Leipzig 1932)
Cecen, Water Supply Cecen, K. (trans. G. Ozur), The Longest Roman Water Supply Line (Istanbul 1996) Demangel, Demangel, R., Contribution a la topographie de I'Hebdomon {Paris 1945)
Chapur, Voyages Chaput, E., Voyages d'etudes geologiqltesetgeom~rphogb2iqt(,esen Turquie. Memoires de L'Heb domon
l'Irutiua Francais d'Archeologie de Stnmboul, 2 (Paris 19)6) Demangel and Demangel, R. and Mamboury, E., Le Quartier des lvlanganes et la premiere region de
Clark, 'Bones' Clark, E. A., 'Claims on rhe Bones of Saint Stepben: The Partisans of Melania and Mamboury, Constantinople (Paris 1939)
Eudocia', Church History, 51 (1982), 141-56 Manganes
 ..
.'~

XXVll
ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY

de Maria,Archi de Maria, S., Gliarchi onorari di Roma e dell'Italia romana(Rome 1988) Eyice, 'Palais de Bryas' Eyice, S., 'Iseanbul'da Abbdsi Saraylanwn Benzeri Olarak Yapilan Bir Bizans Sarayi:
Dennerr, Kapitelle Dennert, M., Mittelbyzantinische KapiteIle: Sucdien zu Typologie nnd Chronologie, Asia Bryas Sarayr', and CUn Palais hyzantin construit d'apres les plans des palais abbasides: le
Minor Srudien, 25 (Bono 1997) palais de Bryas', TUrk Tarih Kurumu (Belleten), 23 (1959), 79-1I 1
Dcthier, 'Makrikoy' Dethier, P. A., Tlepi nvev £v£1tlypacprov 1tA.\v9wv 'tou Mcocponcploo', '0 EV Eyice, 'Quarre edifices' Eyice, S., 'Quatre edifices inedirs ou mal connus', Cahiers Arcbeologiques, IO (1959),
K",vomv<wounoAn 'EAA~V1KOC;<l>W>AO"flKOC;EuAAnYoC;,
4 (1871),161-8 245-58
Dirimtekin, Dirimtekin, F., 'The Church of Beylerbey', Ayasofya Miizesi Ydhg., 1(1959),27-<) Eyice, 'Remarques' Eyice, S., 'Remarques sur deux anciennes eglises byzanrines d'Istanbul: Koca Mustafa
'Beylerbey' Pap Camii et l'eglise de Yuja Tepesi', OrnpaYJ.l£va too e' l\.1.£e\lO~ B'\)~a\l'tlVOA.oylKOU
Dirimtekin, Dirimtekin, F., 'Les fouilles dans la region des Blachemes pour retrouver les substructions );UVEOplOU, I (1955), 184-91
'Blachemes' des palais des Comnenes', Tztrk Arkeoloji Dergisi; 9.2 (1959),18-2) {Turkish), 24-)1 Eyice, 'Sekbanbasr' Eyice, S., 'Sekbanbasr Ibrahim AgaMescidi ve jstanbul'un TarihiT opografyasl Hakkmda
(French), pis. 7-22 Bir Not (Kyra Martha Manasnn}', Fatih oe istanbul (1954),139-53
Dirimtekin, 'Fouilles' Dirimtekin, F., 'Les fouilles faites en 1946--1947 et en 1958-1960 entre Sainre-Sophie et Eyice, 'Tuzla' Eyice, S., "Tuzla'nin Degirmenalu Mevkiinde Bir Bizans KahnUSI', Sanat Taribi YdltgL, 5
Sainre-Irene, a Istanbul', Cahiers Archeologiques, 13 (I962), 161-85 (1972-13),27-78 •
Dirimrekin, <Room' Dirimrekin, F., <The Room on the South-West of the Atrium', Ayasofya Muzesi Ytlbg~)2 Feisse1, <Edifices' Feissel, D., 'Les edifices de jusrinien au remoignage de Procope et de l'epigraphie',
(1960), 14-16 (furkish),)9-4I (English) Anziquite Tardive; 8 (2000), 8I-I04
Dirimrekic, Dirimrekin, F., 'Finds from the Site of the Old Square West of the Town Hall at Feissel, <Inscriptions' Feissel, D., <De Cbalcedoine a Nicomedie: que1ques inscriptions negligees', Travaux et
'Sarachace'
Dirimtekin,
'Selymbria'
Sarachane',
Dirimrekin,
istanb ••IArkeolojiMuzeleri Yzlt.g~ Z (1960), 42-)
F., <TheByzantine Castle of Selymbria (Silivri)' istanbul Arkeoloji Miizeleri
Yzlt.g" 6 (r965), 19-34 {Turkish), )5-46 (English)
r Firarh,<Important
Finds'
Memoires, IO(1987), 405-36
Firath, N., 'Istanbul'dan
Istanbul', istanbul
Yeni
Arkeoloji
BazlOnemli Buluntular', and 'Recent Important Finds in
Miizeleri y,llzg', 15-16 (1969), 175-<) (Turkish), 191-6
Dirimrekin, ' Dirimtekin, F., 'Le Skevophylakion de Saicte-Sophie', Revue des etudes byzantines, 19 (English), 182-7
Skevophylakion'
Dirimtekin, 'Work
(1961),J9<>-400,pls.
Dirimtekin,
r-4
F., 'Work Done in St. Sophia and the Monuments Under the Same
.
[ Frrath, 'Short Report' Pirath, N., 'Muze dl~l Arkeolojik Faaliyet ve Buluntulara Dair Haberler', and 'Short
Report on Finds and Archaeological Activities Outside the Museum', istanbul Arkeoloji
Done' Administration', Ayasof:ya Miizesi Yzlt.g" I (1959), 3-5 (Turkish), 19-21 (English) Miaeleri y,l/.gz, 11-12 (s964) 104-12 (Turkish), 207-15 (English)
Dobson, Treatise

Downey, 'Apostles'
Celoria, F. (ed.), 'Edward Dobson's <CARudimentary Treatise on the Manufacture of
Bricks and Tiles" (1850) Edited
ournal of Ceramic History, 5 (s 971)
and Index',]
with an Introduction, Biography,

Downey, G., <The Builder of the Original Church of the Apostles at Constantinople',
Notes, Bibliography
I Firath,

Firach,
<Trois eglises'

"Tuglalar'
Pirath, N., 'Decouverte de trois eglises byzancines a Istanbul', Cahiers Archeologiques, 5
(1951),16)-78
Frrath, N., 'Bizans
(1948),12-1)
~agl Damgalr Tuglalan', Tiirkiye Turing ve Otomobil Kurumu, 83

Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 6 (195 1),51-80 1 Pirarh and Ergil, Firath, N. and Ergil, T., 'Divanyolu "Milion" sondaji', and 'The "Milion" sounding',
Downey, 'Byzantine Downey, G., 'Byzantine Architects: Their Training and Methods', Byzantion, 18 (1948), I '"Milion''' istanbul Arkeoloji Muze/eri Ydhg', 15-16 (r969), 199-207 (Turkish), 208-12 (English)
Architects' 99-Il8 Porabcschi, Foraboschi, D., Onomasticon Alierum Papyrologicum, Testi e Documenti per 10 Studio
Downey, 'Justinian Downey, G., 'Justinian as a Builder', The Art Bulletin, 32 (1950), 262-66 Onomasticon dell' Antichita, serie papirolcgica, 2,XVI (Milan C.1965) ,
as a Builder' Eorchheimer and Forchheimer, P. and Strzygowski, J., Die, byzantinischen Wasserbehiilter von
Downey, 'St. Sophia' Downey, G., <The Name of the Church of St. Sophia in Constantinople', Haruard Strzygowski, Konstantinopel: Beitrdge ztcr Geschichte der byzantinischen Baukunst und zur Topo-
Theological Review, 52 (1959), )7-41 Wasserbehiilter graphie von Konstantinopel, Byzantinische Denkrnaler, 2 (Vienna 1893)
Du Mesnil du Buisson Du Mesnil du Buisson, in Bulletin de la Societe Francaise des Fouilles Arcbeologiques, 6 Foss, "Constantinople' Foss, C., 'Constantinople', in C. Foss and D. Winf1eld, Byzantine Fortifications: An
(1924-25),92 (non vidi) Introduction (Pretoria 1986),41-77 and 180-4
Duyuran, 'Bayazir' Duyuran, R., 'Archaeological Researches in Bayazit and Some Observations', istanbu( Foss, Ephesus Foss, C., Ephesus After Antiquicy: A Late Antique, Byzantine and Turkish City
ArkeolojiMiizeleri Yzl/'g', 8 (1958), 71-3 and pis. 1-8 (Cambridge 1979)
Duyuran, 'Palace of Duyuran, R., 'First Report on the Excavations on the Site of-the New Palace of Justice at Foss, <Era' Foss, c., 'Three Apparent Early Examples of the Era of Creation', Zeitschrift fur Papyro-
JusticeI' Istanbul', istanbuLArkeoloji Mii.zeleri Ydbgl, 5 (I952), 22-38, figs. 2-18, plan I logie und Epigraphik)1 (s978), 241-6
Duyuran, 'Palace of Duyuran, R., 'Second Report o~ Excavations on the Site of the New Palace of Justice at Powden, 'Consraurine' Fowden, G., 'Consrantine, Silvester and the Church of s. Polyeuctus in Constantinople',
Justice Il' Istanbul', istanbulArkeoloji Muzeleri Yzlhg', 6 (t953), 74-80, figs. 1-17 [onmal of Roman Archaeology, 7 (1994), 275-84
Ebersolt and Macridy, Ebersolt, J. and Macridy, T., <Monuments funeraires de Constantinople', Bulletin de Praserand Matrhews, Fraser, P. M. and Matrhews, E.,A Lexicon of Greek Personal Names, i- (Oxford 1987-)
'Monuments' Correspondence Hellinique, 46 (1922),) 56-<)3 LGPN
Edmondson, 'Mining' Edmondson, J. C., 'Mining in the Later Roman Empire: Continuity or Disruption?', Gascou, <Grands Gascou, J., 'Les grands dornaines, la cite et l'erat en Egypte byzantine', Travaux et
jOllrnalof Roman Studies , 79 (1989), 84-102 Dcrnaines' MemoireS,9 (1985), 1-89
Emerson and van Emerson, W. and van Nice, R. L, 'Hagia Scphia: The Collapse of the First Dome', Gedeon, 'Engraphoi' Gedeon, M. 1., '''Eyypacpol A\8O\ Kal KEPCtf,lt(X', 'EIC1CA1lO'mO''tlKl,
'Al"OEla, 13·9 (I889),
Nice, 'Collapse' Archaeology, 4 (1951), 94-103 )80-4, )87-<)1, )94-400,402-7
Emerson and van Emerson, W. and van Nice, R. L., 'Hagia Sophia, Istanbul: Preliminary Report of a Recent George, St. Eirene George, W. S., The Church of St. Eirene at Constantinople (London 19 I 2)
Nice, 'Preliminary Examination of the Structurc',AmericanJournal of Archaeology, 47 (1943), 403-36 Gerola, Gerola, G., 'Le vedure di Cosrantinopcli di Cristoforo Buondelmonti', Studi Bizantini e
Report' 'Buondelmonti' Neoellenici,) (19)1), 247-79
Ersoy, Anadol et. al. Ersoy, S., Anadol.C. etal.,facques Peruititch Sigorta Haritalarmdajstanbul. Istanbul in Gignac, Grammar Gignac, F. T., A Grammar of the Greek Papyri of the Roman and Byzantine periods, 2
Peruiiitch the Insurance Maps ofJacqHes Peruizitch (Istanbul C.2001) vols. (Milan 1976-81)
Errug and Mango, Errug, A. and Mango, c., Hagia Sophia: A Vision for Empires (Istanbul 1997) Gilles, De topographia Gilles, P., De Topographia Constantinopoleos et De Illius Antiouitatibus Libri Quatuor
Hagia Sophia Constantinopoleos (Lyons 1561). Gilles, P., The Antiquities of Constantinople, Based on the Translation by
Eyice, 'Hagia Glykcria' Eyice, S., "Tuzla Oniindeki Hagia Glykcria Kilisc vc Manasnn', in Tanman and Tukel, [ohn Ball (New York 1988)
Demiriz'e Armagan, 67-79, 199-208 Goffart, Colonate Goffart, \V., Caput and Colonate: Towards a History of Lace Roman Taxation (Toronto
Eyice, 'Marnboury' Eyice, S., 'ErnestMaruboury (1878-1953)', Turk Tarib Kurnmu Belleteni, 17 (I953), 1974)
)9)-4Il
 ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY XXIX
XXVIll

Gottwald, Cottwald.j., 'Byzantinische Ziegelsrempel', Byzantinische Zeitschrift, I7 ('908), 485-6 Hayes,LRP Hayes,]. W., Late Roman Pottery (London '972)
'Ziegelstempel' Hayes, LRP Suppl. Hayes,]. W.,A Supplement to Late Roman Pottery (London '980)
GPI Brett, G., Martiny, G., and Stevenson, R. B. K., The Great Palace of the Byzantine Hayes, Sararhane II Hayes, J. W., Excavations at Sararhane in Istanbul, ii (Princeton 1992)
Emperors (London '947) Hebrard, 'Salcnique' Hebrard, E., 'Les travaux du service archeologiques de I'armee d'Orient a I'arc de
GPII Talbot Rice, D. (ed.), The Great Palace of the Byzantine Emperors. Second Report triomphe "de Galere" et a l'eglise St. Georges de Salonique', Bulletin de Correspondance
(Edinburgh t958) HelUnique, 44 ('920),5-40, pis. ,-8
Grabar, Sculptures Grabar, A., Sculptures byzantines de Constantinople (IVe-Xe siecie) (Paris '96) Helen, Organization Helen, T., Organization of Roman Brick Production in the FiTStand Second Centuries
Gray, 'Brickstamps' Gray, B., 'Brickstamps', in Casson and Talboduce, Hippodrome Il, 5I-56 A.D., Annales Academiae Scientiarum Fennicae. Dissertationes Humanarum Litterarum,
Greatrex, 'Riot' Greatrex, G., 'The Nika Riot: A Reappraisal', [curnal of Hellenic Studies, Il7 (1997), 5 (Helsinki 1975)
60-86 Hellenkemper Salies, Hellenkernper Salies, G., 'Die Datierung der Mosaiken im GroBen Palast zu
Grierson, Byzantine Grierson, P., Byzantine Coins (London 1982) 'GroBen Palast' Konstantinopel', Bonner Jahrbiicher, ,87 ('987),273-)08
Coins Hellenkemper Salies, Hellenkemper Salies, G., Review ofjobst and Verters, Mosaikenforschtmg, Byzantinische
Grierson, 'Monograms' Grierson, P., 'The Monograms on Late Sixth-Century Pentanummia of Anticch', Spink's 'Review' ZeitschriJt, 89 (1996), III-')
Numismatic Circular, 83 (1975), 5 Hendy, 'Coins' Hendy, M. F., 'The Coins', in Harrison, Sarechone I, 278-373
Grierson, 'Tombs and Grierson, P., 'The Tombs and Obirs of the Byzantine Emperors (3J7-I042)',Dumbarton Hill, 'Brickstamps' Hill, S. J., 'The Brickstamps', in Harrison, Sara~hane I, 207-25
Obits' Oaks papers, ,6('962), ,-60 Hill,'<;:ifclik' Hill, S., 'Rescue Excavations at Cifrlik (Sinop)', in R. Matthews (ed.), Ancient Anatolia:
Grumel, Chronologie Grumel, V., Traite d'etudes byzantines, i.La Chronologie (Paris 1958) Fifty Years' Work by the British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara, (London n.d.j czcor),
Guberti Basserr, Guberti Bassett, S., '"Excellent Offerings": The Lausos Collection in Constantinople', 285-)00
'Lausos Collection' Art Bulletin, 82 (2000), 6-25 Hormann, Hormann, H., DieJohanneskirche, Forschungen in Ephesos TV,3 (Vienna 1951)
Guberti Bassen, Guberti Bassett, S., 'Historiee custos:Sculpture and Tradition in the Baths of Zeuxippos', Johanneskirche
'Zeuxippos' AmericanJournalof Archaeology, '00 ('996), 49'-506 Holum, Empresses Holum, K., Theodosian Empresses: Women and imperial Dominion in Late Antiquity
Giinsenin, 'Ganos' Giinsenin, N., 'Ganos: Resultars des Campagnes de 1992 et 1993', Anatolia Antiqua, 3 (London, Berkeley, and Los Angeles '982)
(1995), t65-78 Holum and Vikan, Holum, K..and Vikan, G., 'The Trier Ivory, Advenrus Ceremonial, and the Relics of St.
Giinsenin, <Production' Gcnsenin, N., 'Genes. centre de production d'amphores a l'epoque byzantine',Anatolia 'Trier Ivory' Srephen', Dumbarton Oaks Papers,)) ('979), '1)-3)
Antique, 2 (1994), 193-201 Hunt, Pilgrimage Hunt, E. D., Holy Land Pilgrimage in the Later Roman- Empire, A.D. 3 [2-460 (Oxford
Guusenin, 'Shipwrecks' Giinsenin, N., 'Medieval Trade in the Sea of Marmara: The Evidence of Shipwrecks', in '98~)
R. Macrides (ed.), Travel in the Byzantine World, Papers from the Thirty-Fourth Spring Ism, 'Pcrinthos' I§Jn, M. A., 'Perinthos Amtsal Yapi Kurtarma Kazrsr', Vi. Miize Kurtarma Kazilan
Symposium of Byzantine Studies, Birmingham, April 2000, Society for the Promotion of Semineri (Ankara '996),)8)-97
Byzantine Studies Publications, 10 (Aldershot 2002),125-35 Ivanov, Nessebre I Ivanov, T. (cd.), Nessebre I (Sofia '969)
Gurlitr, Baukunsl Gurlitt, C., Die Bauleunst Konstantinopels, 2 vols. (Berlin 1907) Janin, CBo janin, R., Constantinople byzantine: Deoeloppement urbain et repertoire topographique2
Gutreridge et al., Gutteridge, A., Hoci, A., and Hurst, H. R., 'The Walled Town of Dyrrachium (Durres): (Paris '964) .
'Dyrrachium' Settlement and Dynamics', [ournal of Roman Archaeology, 14 (2001),390--410 Janin, 'Citemes' [anin, R., '~tudes de topographic byzanrine: Les citemes d' Aerius, d' Aspar et de Bonus',
Haldon, Seventh Haldon, J. F., Byzantium in the Seventh Century: The Transformation of a Culture (rev. Etudes Byzaruines, (194), 85-"5
Century Cambridge '997) [anin, Eglises janin, R., La geographie ecclesisstiqxe de l'empire byzantin, i. Le siege de Constantinople
Halkin, Epigraphie Halkin, F., Ewdes d'epigrapbie grecque et d'hagiographie byzantine, Variorurn Collected et le patriarcat oecumenique, 3, Les eglises et les monasteres2 (Paris 1969) .
Studies (London '97) janvier, Legislation janvier, Y., La legislation dn bos-empire remain sur les edificespublics (Aix-en-Provence
Halkic, 'N ouvelle Halkin, F., 'La nouvelle annee au 23 Scprembre', Analecta Bollandiano, 90 (1972), 36 '969)
annee' (repr. in Halkin, Epigraphie, art. xx) • Jobst, 'Archaologie' Jobst, W., 'Zur Archaologie des Kaiserpalasres van Konstantinopel', inJobstand Vetters,
Harley, 'Typology' Harley, L. S., 'A Typology of Brick with Numerical Coding of Brick Characteristics', Mosaikenforschung, 9-42
Journal of the British ArchaeologicaIAssociation,)8 ('974), 6)-87 and pis. 1)-,6 [obst, 'Grofien Palest' [obsr, W., 'Archaolcgie und Denkmalpflege im Bereich des "Groflen Palasres'' van
Harrison, 'Long Wall' Harrison, R. M., 'The Long Wall in Thrace',ArchaeologiaAeliana, 47 (1969), 33-8 Konstanrinopel', Xl Arasurma Sontulari Toplanust 1993 (1994),9-18, and in A. Iacobini
Harrison, 'Polyeuktos' Harrison, R. M., 'The Church of St. Polyeuktos in Constantinople: An Excavation and E. Zanini (eds.), Arte Profana e arte Sacra a Bisanzio, Milion 3 (Rome 1995),227-36
Report', Studi di Anticbite Cristiana, 27 ( ::::Aktendes VII. Intemationalen Kongressesfur Jobst, Erdal, and jobst, W., Erdal, B., and Gunner, C., Istanbul. Biiyuk Saray mozayigi: arasttrmalar,
Christliche Archiiologie, Trier 5-11 September 1965), 54)-9 Gurtner, Istanbul onarzm ve sergileme 1983-1997/ Istanbul. Das Grosse byzantinische Palastmosaik: seine
Harrison, Sararhane I Harrison, R. M., Excavations at Sararhane in Istanbul, i (New Jersey and Washington Erfoncbwng, Konseruierung und Presentation 1983-1997/ Istanbul. The Great Palace
'986) Mosaic: The Story of its Exploration, Preservation and Exhibition [983-[997, Arkeoloji ve
!
Harrison, emple Harrison, R. M., A Temple for Byzantium: The Discovery and Excavation of Anicia Sanat Yaymlan (Istanbul '997)
Juliana's Palace-Church in Istanbul (London '989) [obsr, Kastler, and [obst, W., Kastler, R., and Scheibelreiter, V., Neue Forschungen tend Resuuaierungen im
Harrison et al., Harrison, R. M. et al., 'Amorium Excavations 1991: The Fourth Preliminary Report', Scheibelreiter, Neue byzantinischen Kaiserpalast von Istanbul, Denkschrifren der philosophisch-historischen
'Amorium Iv' Anatolian Studies, 42 (1992), 207-22 '" Forschungen Klasse 273 (Vienna 1999)
Harrison, Christie et Harrison, R. M., Christie, N. et al., 'Excavations at Amorium: 1992 Interim Report', Jobst and Verrers, [obst, W. and Vetters, H. (eds.), Mosaikenforschung im Kaiserpalast von Konstantinopel:
al., 'Amorium' Anatolian Studies, 4) ('99), 147-62 M osaikenforschung Vorbericht iiber das Forschungs- und Restaurierungsprojekt am Palastmosaik in den
Harrison and Frrarh, Harrison, R. M. and Errath, N., 'Excavations at Sarachane in Istanbul: First Preliminary Jahren [983-1988, Denkschriften der philosophisch-hisrorischen Klasse 228 (Vienna
'Sarachane I' Report', Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 19 (1965), 2)0-6 '992)
Harrison and Firarh, Harrison, R. M. and Frratlt, N., 'Excavations at Sarachane in Istanbul: Fourth Preliminary . Jones, LRE jones, A. H. M., The Later Roman Empire 284-602: A Social, Economic and Administra-
'Sarachane IV' Report', Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 21 (1967), 272-8 tive Survey, 4 vols. (Oxford '964)
Hayes, 'Ampulla' Hayes, J. W., 'A New Type of Early Christian AmpuUa', Annual of the British School at Kahler, Hagia Sophia Kahler, H. [trans. Childs, E.), Hagia Sophia: With a Chapter on the Mosaics by C. Mango
Athens, 66 ('97'), 24)-8 (New York and Washington '967)
 .•
"~

xxx ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY XXXI

Kdhya, 'Mauerziegel' Kdhya, Y., 'Physikalische und mechanische Eigenschaften der Mauerziegel byzantin- verstandnissen als christlicber Kaiser, Arbeiten zur Kirchengeschichte, 58 (Berlin 1992)
ischer Bauten in Istanbul', in F. H. Wittmann, W. J. Barrz, and E. Wippler (eds.), Lernerle, Agrarian Lemer]e, P., The Agrarian History of Byzantium From the Origins to the Twelfth Century
Werkstoffwissenschaften nnd: Bausanierung: Tagungsbericht des driuen internationaien History (Galway 1979)
Kolloqniums zum Thema Werkstoffwissenschaften und Bausanierung, Kontakt und Lethaby and Swainscn, Lethaby, W. R. and Swainson, H., The Church o/Sancta Scphia (London 1894)
Studiurn, 420 (Ehingen bei Boblingen 1993), 3.3, 1878-95 Sancta Sophia
Kahya, 'Tugla Kihya, Y., 'istanbul Bizans Mimarisinde Tugla Boyurlan Uzerine', in Z. Ahunbay, D. Leval, 'Archaiologika' Leval, A., 'l\pXa.tOA.~YtJ('6:', 'Oev KrovO"'tavtlV01J1tOAEt 'EAAllVtJ('Or;<DtA.oAoytKOC;EuAA.oyO~
Boyurlan' Mazlum, andK. Eyiipgiller(eds.),Prof DoganKuban'aArmagan (Istanbul 1996), 171-82 suppi. to vol. 18, Eixoourevtrrerqpiq [861-1886 (1888), 615-20
Kaplan, La Terre Kaplan, M.) Les hommes et la terre a Byzan:e du VIe ati Xl e siecle: propriete et exploita- Liebeschuetz, Liebeschuelz,J. H. W. G., Barbarians and Bishops (Oxford 1990)
tion du sol (Paris I992) Barbarians and
Karayannopoulos, Karayannopoulos, ]., Das Finanzwesen des friihbyzantinischen Staates, Siidost- Bishops
Finanzwesen europaische Arbeiten, 52 (Munich I95 8) Liebeschuerz, 'Cover Liebeschuetz, J. H. W. G., 'Cover up at Constantinople: the Vainas Crisis and the
Kase, P, Princ. Roll Kase, E. H.,A Papyrus Roll in the Princeton Collection (Baltimore 1933) up' Column Arcadius', BAR International Series, 5 jJ(i) (1989) (=D. H. French and C. S.
of
Kassab T ezgor, Kassab Tezgor, D., 'Fouilles des ateliers d'amphores a Demirci pres de Sinope en 1994 et Lighrfoot (eds.), The Eastern Frontier of the Roman Empire: Proceedings of a Colloquium
'Demirci' 1995',Anatoli4Antiqua, 4 (1996), ))5-54 Held atAnkara in September I988, part I), 277-84
Kaurzsch, Kautzsch, R., Kapitellstudien: Beitrage zu einer Geschichte des spiitantike.n Kapiiells im Lightfoor et al., Lightfoot, C. S. et aI., 'The Amorium Project: The 1997 Study Season), Dumbarton Oaks
Kapitellstudien Osten vom vierten bis ins siebente [ebrbwndert, Srudien zur spatantiken Kunstgeschichre, 'Amorium' Papers, 5) (1999), 33)-49
9 (Berlin and Leipzig 19)6) Livingston'Materials Livingseoc, R. A., 'Materials Analysis of the Masonry of the Hagia Sophia Basilica,
Kleiss, 'Grabungen' Kleiss, W., 'Grabungen im Bereich der Chalkopratenkirche in Istanbul 1965', Istanbuler Analysis' Istanbul', in A. ~. Cakmak and C. A. Brebbia (eds.), Soil Dynamics and Earthquake
Mitteilungen, 16 (1966), 217-40 and pis. 45-8 Engineering, VI (Southampton and Boston 1993), 849-65
Kleiss, 'Neue Befunde' Kleiss, W., 'Neue Befunde zur Chalkopratenkirche in Istanbul', lstsnbnler ivlitteilungen, LTUR Steinby, E. M. (ed.), Lexicon Topographicum Urbis Romae, 6vols. (Rome 199)-2000)
15 (1965), 149-67 Lugli, Tecnica Lugli, G., La tecnica edilizia romana, 2 vols. (Rome 1957)
Kleiss, Plan Kleiss, W., Topographisch-archaologischer Planvon Istanbul: Verzeichnis der Denkmiiler edilizia romana
und Fundorte (Tiibingen 1965) Me Whirr and Viner, McWhirr, A. and Viner, D., 'The Production and Distribution of Tiles in Roman Britain
Kleiss, "I'aufer' Kleiss, W. 'Bemerkungen zur Kirche Johannis des Taufers in Istanbul-Bakirkoy 'Tiles' with Particular Reference to the Cirencester Region', Britannia, 9 (1978), 357-77
(Hebdomon)' in Manse!'e Armagan, Melanges Mansel, i (Ankara 1974), 207-19 Magdalino Magdalino, P., Constantinople medieuale: Etudes sur l'euolution. des structures urbaines,
Koethe, 'Konstantins- Koethe, H .• 'Das Konstantins-Mausoleum und verwandte Denkmaler', Jahrbuch des Constantinople Travaux et Memoires du Centre de Recherche d'Hisroire et Civilization de Byzance,
Mausoleum' Deutschen Archiiologischen Instituts, 48 (1933),185-203 College de France Monographies, 9 (Paris 1996)
Konrad, 'Arkcdios- Konrad, D. B., 'Beobachtungen und Stellung des Saulenmonumcntes
zur Architekrur in Magdalino, Magdalino, P., 'Constanrinopolitana', in 1. Sevcenko and 1. Hutter (eds.), 'AE:O~: Studies
saule' Istanbul-Cerrahpa~a-<'Arkadiossaule"', Istanbuler Mitteilungen, 5 I (2001),319-41 'Constantinopolitana' in honourofCyril Mango Presented to Him on April 14, 1998 (Stuttgart and Leipzig 1998),
Kouppas, 'Oikodome' Kouppas, P., 'Tlepl OIKOOO/Lne;B\)~o:vnv&v vo:rov Kat oe~a:f.l€v&v', '0 i» Kcov- l 220-32
<navnVotmOA.H 'EUllvl.Koe; cDtAoAoytKOe;.EUAAOYO~suppl. to vols. 20-2, 'ApXaloAoYUCJl Magdalino, 'Maritime Magdalino, P., 'Maritime Neighborhoods of Constantinople: Commercial and Resi-
'Emrponf (1891), 47-54 Neighborhoods' denrial Functions, Sixth to Twelfth Centuries', Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 54 (2000),
Krautheimer, Krautheimer, R., Early Christian and Byzantine Arcbitecturee, rev., The Pelican History 209-26
Arcbitecturer of Art (Harmondsworth 1981) Magdalino, 'Oikoi' Magdalino, P. <Aristocratic Oikoi in the Tenth and Eleventh Regions of Constantinople',
Krautheimer, Krautheimer, R., Early Christian and Byzantine Architectnre+, rev., The Pelican History in Necipoglu, Constantinople, 53--69
Arcbitecturev of Art, rev. R. Krautheimer and S. (;urcit (Harmondsworth 1986) Mainsrone, Hagia Mainstone, R. J., Hagia Sophia: Architecture, Structure and Liturgy of Justinian's Great
Krautheimer, Capitals Kraurheimer, R., Three Christian Capitals: Topography end Politics (Berkeley 198) Sophia Church (New York 1988)
Kuniholm, 'Tree-Ring Kuniholm, P. I., <New Tree-Ring Dates for Byzantine Buildings', Byzantine Studies Mainstone, <Letter' Mainstone, R., 'Letter to the Editor', Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, 55
Dates' Conference Abstracts o/Papers, 21 (1995),)5 (1996), )60-2, 491
Lampakis, 'Christian Lampakis, G., 'Tlepi -rtvo; Xptcrnavtlcnc; :Ecppaytoor;', ..6..eA-rlov Tile; l.utoptKilc; Kat Majeska, Russian Majeska, G. P., Russian Travelers to Constantinople in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth
Stamps' EBvoAOYlKii,hatpeiapij, 'EU,,!)o<;, r (1883), 508-17 Travelers Centuries, Dumbarton Oaks Studies, 19 (Washington I984)
Lampakis, Mimoire Lampakis, G., Memoire sur les antiquites cbretiennes de la Grece presente ate Congres Makaronas, 'To Makaronas, Ch. I., <To cHC'ra:yrovov TIlr; 8ecroo:A.oVtKllr;', ITpaK'ttKCt 't'ilr; €V 'A9iwCllr;
International d'Histoire Comparee (Athens I902) Oktagdnon' 'ApX<uoAoytlcii<; 'Ercipeicc (1950), )0)-21 .
Lampakis, Mane Lampakis, G., 'H Movij i\.a'llVlOU (Athens 1889) Maletskos, 'Plinthos' Maletskos, A. M., "H EVVOla'CcovEVEmypa.<pcovBu~av'tlvwv 1tAtv9rov', l1enpaY/lEVa 'CC)\)9'
Dapbniou i\.lESvoii<; Bul;avtlvoAoYlKoii LUVEOPlOU,i (1955), 264-73 and pls. jJ-4
Lauffray, 'Beryre' Lauffray, J., 'Forums et monuments de Beryte', Bulletin de M usee de Beyroutb, 7 Mamboury, 'Chnsme' Mamboury, E., 'Les briques byzantines marquees du chrisme',Annuaire de l'Institut de
(1944-45),1)-80 Philologie et d'Histoire Orientales, 9 (1949), 449-62
Laurent, 'Inscriptions' Laurent, V., 'Inscriptions grecques d'epoque romaine et byzanrine', Echos d'Grient, 35 Mamboury, 'Colonne Mamboury, E., 'Les mysteres de la Colonne Brulee', fIE1tpaYIlEvo; rou 8' l1u:.9vou<;
(19)6),220-33 • Brulee' But;aV'ClVOAoY1.KOU LUVE<lpiou, i (I95 5),275-80
Laurent, Sceaux Laurent, V., Les sceaux byzantins du medadlier Vatican. Medaglere della Biblioteca Mamboury, Mamboury, E., 'Contribution a la ropographie generate de Constantinople',Actes du VIe
byzantins Vaticana, i (Vatican City 1962) 'Contribution' Congres International d'ttudes Byzantines (Paris 27 JulY-2 Attgust [948), i(1950), 243-53
Lebek, 'Landmauer' Lebek, W. D., 'Die Landrnauer von Konstantinopel und ein neues Bauepigrarnm', Mamboury, 'Fouilles I' Mamboury, E., 'Les fouilles byzantines a Istanbul et dans sa banlieue immediate auxXIXe
EpigraphicaAnatolica, 25 (1995),107-53 et XXe siecles', Byzanticn, r 1(1936),229-83
Leclercq, 'Estampilles' Leclercq, H., 'Esrampilles Doliaires', inDACL, v (1922),534-46 Mamboury, 'Pouilles II' Mamboury, E., 'Les fouilles byzanrines a Istanbul et clans sa banlieue immediate en
Leeb, 'Kaiserbildes' Leeb, R., 'Zum Ursprung des Kaiscrbildes im Kreuz.', Jahrbuch der Ost"erreichischen 19)6-19)7', Byzantion, 13 (19)8) 301-10
Byzantinistik, 41 (1991), 1-14 Mamboury, 'Pouilles Mamboury, E., 'Les fouilles byzantines a Istanbul et SC5 environs et les trouvailles
Leeb, Konstantin I!I' archeologiques faites au COUfS de constructions ou de rravaux officiels et prives depuis
Leeb, R., Konstantin und Cbristus: Die Verchristlichung der imperialen Repriuernacion
wnter Konstantin dem Groflen als Spiegel seiner Kirchenpolitik und seines Selbst- 1936', Byzention, 21 (195 I), 425-59
om ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY
.~.. XXXl11

Mamboury, Guide2 Mamboury, E., Constantinople: Guide touristique, and edn. (Constantinople 1929) Mango, Image Mango, C., Byzantium and Its Image: History and Culture of the Byzantine Empire and
Mamboury, 'Mara' Mamboury, E., 'Ruines byzantines de Mara, entre Maltepe et Bostandjik', Echos d'Orient, its Heritage, Variorum Collected Studies (London 1984)
'9 (I920), 322-30 Mango, 'Notes' Mango, C., 'Notes on Byzantine Monuments', Dumbarton Oaks Papers. 23-4 (1970),
Mamboury, 'Nouvel Mamboury, E., 'Un nouvel element pour la topographie de I'antique Byzance', 369-75 (repr. in Mango, Studies, art. XVIwith addendum)
element' Archiiolagischer Anzeiger, 49 (I934), cols. 5<H>I Mango, 'Notes 'Notes d'epigraphie et d'archeologie: Constantinople, Nicee', Treusux et Mimoires, 12
Mamboury, 'Nouvelle Mamboury, E., 'Une nouvelle lecture raisonnee des inscriptions de briques byzantines et d'epigraphie' (I994),343-57
lecture' l'emploi de ces demieres dans la datation des monuments des Ve et VIe siecles', Byzantion, Mango, 'Porphyry Mango, c., 'Consrantine's Porphyry Column and the Chapel of St. Constantine',
I9 (I949), II3-25 .• Column' ftu.:ttOV 'til~XPlO''tUXVlKil~ 'ApxalOA..o-nICTt~
'E'talpEiUt;,4thser., 10(1981), roj-cofrepr.in
Mamboury, 'Prinkipo' Mamhoury, E., 'Le couvent byzanrin de femmes a Prinkipo', Echo! d'Orient, 19 (1920), Mango, Studies, art. IV)
200-8 Mango, 'Pylae' Mango, C., 'The Empress Helena, Helenopolis, Pylae', Travaux et Memoires. 12 (1994),
Mamboury, 'T chifte Mamboury, E., 'La nouvelle citerne byzantine de Tchifre Serail (Istanbul)" Byzantion, II '43-58
Serail' (I936), I67-80 Mango, 'Review I' Mango, c., review of GP !l,Art Bulletin, 42 (I960), 67-70
Mamboury, Tourists' Mamboury, E., The Tourists' Istanbul. trans. M. Burr (Istanbul 1953) Mango, 'Review Il' Mango, C., review of Striker and Kuban, Kalenderhane I, Byzantinische Zeitschrijt, 91
Istanbul (I999),586--90
Mamboury and Mamboury, E. and Wiegand, T .• Die Kaiserpaliiste von Konstantinopel: Zwischen Mango, <Russian Mango, C., 'The Date of the Anonymous Russian Description of Constantinople',
Wiegand, Hippodrom und Marmara-Meer (Berlin 1934) (Mamboury's map CO accompany this Description' Byzantinische Zeiucbrijt, 45 (I952), 380-5 (repr. in Mango, Studies, art. XXIwith addenda)
Kaiserpsldste work appears in Schneider, Byzanz, pl. 10) Mango, 'Sarcophagi' Mango, C., 'Three Imperial Byzantine Sarcophagi Discovered in 1750', Dumbarton Oaks
Mamegris, 'Hagia Mamegris, T., "H nap] "'Ayirov Ioqnwv" l51.(iA.c.~u;-cou KOU. Mou~a<p<pEp Pa.!la.savoyA.ou', Papers, 16 (1962), 397-402 (repr. in Mango, Studies, art. VI)
Sophia' 'OpeOOo~ta, 22 (I947), 289-94 Mango, 'Serglus and Mango, C., 'The Church of Srs. Sergius and Bacchus Once Again', Byzantinische
Manacorda, 'Bolli Manacorda, D., 'T diversi significati dei bolli larerizi', in P. Boucheron, H. Braise, and Bacchus !l' Zeitschri[t, 68 (I975), 385-92 (repr. in Mango, Studies, art. XIV)
larerizi' Y. Thebert (eds.), La brique antique et midiivale: production et co';'mercialisation d'un Mango, 'Shoreline' Mango, C., 'The Shoreline of Constantinople in the Fourth Century', in Necipojilu,
materiau (Paris 2000), 127-59 Constantinople, 1-28
Mango, Architecture Mango, C., Byzantine Architecture, History of World Architecture (Milan 1978) Mango, 'Spolia' Mango, C., 'Ancient Spolia in the Great Palace of Constantinople', in C. Moss and K.
Mango,Art Mango, C., The Art of the Byzantine Empire, 312-1453, Sources and Documents in the Kiefer (eds.), Byzantine East, Latin West: Art-Historical Su-dies in Honor of Kurt
History of Art (Englewood Cliffs I972) Weitzmann (Princeton 1995), 645-9
Mango, 'Blachernae' Mango, C., 'The Origins of the Blachernae Shrine at Constantinople', Acta XIII Mango, 'Strategicn' Mango, C. 'The Situation of the Strategion', Appendix to Mango, 'Triumphal Way', 187-8
Congressus Internationalis Archaeologiae Christianae 2 (1998), 61-76 Mango, Studies Mango, C., Studies on Constantinople, Variorum Collected Studies (Aldershot 1993)
Mango, 'Boukoleon' Mango, C., <ThePalace of the Boukoleon', Cahiers Arcbeologiques, 45 (1997),41-50 Mango, 'Studies' Mango. C., 'The Date of the Studius Basilica at Istanbul', Byzantine and Modern Greek
Mango, Brazen House Mango, C., The Brazen House: A Study of the Vestibule of the Imperial Palace of Studies, 4 (1978), 115-22 (repr. in Mango, Studies, art. XII with addendum)
Constantinople (Copenhagen '959) Mango, 'Templon' Mango, C., 'On the History of the Templon and the Martyrion of St. Artemius at
Mango, 'Brick Stamps' Mango, C., 'Byzantine Brick Stamps', AmericanJournal 0/ Archaeology. 54 (1950), 19-27 Constantinople', Zograf, 10 (1979),40-3 (repr. inMango, Studies, an. xv)
Mango, 'Chriscos Mango, C., "Where at Constantinople was the Monastery of Christos Paneepopres?', Mango, 'Triumphal Mango, C., 'The Triumphal Way of Constantinople and the Golden Gate', Dumbarton
Pantepoptes' aEA..-dov -ril~Xp1.cr'[\avuciit;
'ApxatoMYy1.ri)t; 'E't(updat;, 4th ser., 20 (1998), 87-8 Way' Oaks Papers, 54 (2000), I73-88
Mango, 'Columns' Mango, C., 'The Columns ofjustinian and His Successors', in Mango, Studies, art X Mango, 'Urban Centre' Mango, C., <The Development of Constantinople as an Urban Centre', The 17th Inter-
Mango, 'Constanrine's Mango, C., 'Constantine's Mausoleum and the Translation of Relics', Byzantinische national Byzantine Congress, Main Papers (1986), I I7-36 (repr. in Mango, Studies, an. I
Mausoleum'. Zeitschri/t 83 (1990), 51-62,434 (repr. in Mango, Studies. art. v) with addenda)
Mango, Mango, C., 'Constantinopolitana',Jahrbttch des Deutschen Archiiologischen Instituts, 80 Mango, 'Water Supply' Mango, c., 'The Water Supply of Constantinople', in C. Mango and G. Dagron (eds.),
'Constantinopolirana' (1965),305-36 (repr. in Mango, Studies, art. II with addenda) Constantinople and Its Hinterland (Aldershot I995), 9-r8
Mango, 'Cosmas Mango, C., 'On the Cult of Saints and Cosmas and Damian at Constantinople', in Mango and Hawkins, Mango, C. and Hawkins, E. J. W., 'Additional Finds at Fenari isa Camii, Istanbul',
and Damian' R. Andreadi, M. Basiliki et al. (eds.), eulltalla CJTI]1lv!,1l~TI]<;1\aCJKaptv<x<; Mnocpc I 'Fenari isa Camii' Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 22 (I968), I 77-84, figs. 39-40
(Athens '994) I 89-92 Mango and Scvcenko, Mango, C. and Sevcenko, I., 'Some Recently Acquired Byzantine Inscriptions at [he
Mango, 'Daily Life' Mango, C., 'Daily Life in Byzantium'Jahrbuch der Osterreichischen Byzantinistik 31.1 'Inscriptions' Istanbul Archaeological Museum', Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 32 (1978), 1-27, figs. 1-34
(198I), 337-53 (repr. in Mango, Image, art. IV) Mango and Sevcenko, Mango, C. and Scvcenko, 1., 'Remains of the Church of St. Polyeuktos at Constantinople',
Mango, Mango, C., Le Deueloppement urbain de Constantinople (IVe-VIle siecles), Travaux et 'Polyeuktos' Dumbarton Oaks Papers, '5 (I96I), 243-47
Deueloppement memoires du Centre de Recherche d'Histoirc et Civilisation de Byzance, College de Mark and Cakmak, Mark, R., and Cakmak, A. ;;, Hagia Sophia From the Age of Justinian to the Present
France monographies, 2 (Paris 1990) Hagia Sophia (Cambridge I992)
Mango, '~iippion' Mango, C., 'Le Diippion. Etude hiscorique et topographique', Revue des etudes byzan- Mark and Cakmak, Mark, R. and Cakmak, A.,s, 'Mechanical Tests of Material from the Hagia Sophia Dome',
tines, 8 (1950), 152-61 'Mechanical Tests' Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 48 (1994), 277-9
Mango, 'Euphemia' Mango, C., 'The Relics of St. Euphemia and the Synaxarion of Constantinople', Bolleuino Martin,] urists Martin, S. D., The Roman Jurists and the Organisation of Private Building in the Late
della Badia Greco di Grottaferrata, NS 53 (I999) (= S. Isuca and L. Perria (eds.), 'O",opa. Republic and Early Empire (Brussels I989)
Studi in onore di mgr Paul Canart per il LXX compleanno, iii), 79-S7 Marhews, Early Mathews, T. F., The Early Churches of Constantinople: Architecture and Liturgy
Mango, 'Fabric' Mango, C., 'Byzantine Writers on the Fabric of Hagia Sophia', in Mark and Cakmak, Churches (University Park, Pennsylvania 1971)
HagiaSophia,4I-56 Mathews, 'Eglises Mathews, T. F., <Architecture et liturgie dans les premieres eglises palatiales de
Mango, 'Grand Palais' Mango, C., 'Aueour du Grand Palais de Constantinople', Cabiers Archiologiques, 5 palatiales' Constantinople', Revue de l'Art, 24 (1974), 22-9
(I95I), '79-86 Mathews, Survey Mathews, T. F., The Byzantine Churches of Istanbul: A Photographic Survey (University
Mango, 'Helecopolis' Mango, C., 'The Empress Helena, Helencpolis, Pylae', Trauaux et IvJemoires, 12 (1994), Park, Pennsylvania I976)
I43-58 Mathewsand Mathews, T. F. and Daskalakis Mathews, A.-C., 'Islamic-Style Mansions in Byzantine
XXXIV ABBREVIA TIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY
ABBREVIATIONS A D BIBLIOGRAPHY xxxv
Daskalakis Cappadocia and the Development of the Inverted T-Plan" [oxmal of the Society of
Mathews, 'Mansions' Architectural Historians, 56 (t997), 294-3 I 5 Naumann and Belting, Naumann, R., and Belting, H., Die Eupbemia-Kirche am Hippodrom zu Istanbul und ihre

Meiggs, TTees Meiggs, R., Trees and Timber in the Ancient Mediterranean World (Oxford 1982) Euphemia-Kirche Freshen, Istanbuler Forschungen, 25 (Berlin 1966)
Meliopoulos, . Meliopoulos, 1.P., "EnrypCttpCt1. 'AVEKOOtOt', Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 14 (1905), 73-4 Necipoglu, Necipoglu, N., (ed.), Byzantine Constantinople: Monuments, Topography and Everyday
'Anekdotoi' Constantinople Life, The Medieval Mediterranean, J3 (Brill 200')
Meliopoulos, Meliopoulos,1. P., Bouvoq Au~evtiou-'Po\)<ptVtCt.vai.-Na.oc; 'A1tocnoA.ou ero~la £v 'tOte; Ncsbirt and Vikan, Nesbitt, J. W. and Vikan, G., Security in Byzantium: Locking, Sealing and Weighing

"Auxcntiou' Bopmdiou, Byzantinische Zeiucbrift, 9 (1900), 63-71 Security (Washington 1980)

Meliopoulos, Meliopoulos, 1.P., 'Apx,alOA.oyn;:al cru~ll'titcrfJ.C;(Constantinople 1921) Nordhagen, 'Great Nordhagen, P. J., 'The Mosaics of the Great Palace of the Byzantine Emperors',
Investigations Palace' Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 56 ([963),53-68
Meliopoulos, Meliopoulos, I. P., 'N1KYltl&'t:OV', '0 EV KOOvo'[(xvnVQ1.)i!OA.el'EAAllvlKO:; <l)tAOAoYlKO~ ODB Kazhdan, A. et al. (eds.), The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, 3 vols. (Oxford 1991)
'Niketiaroo' ruuoyo" 29 (1907), 283-8 Ognenova-Marinova, Ognenova-Marinova, L., 'Les briques a estampillcs de Nessebre', in Ivanov, Nenebre I,

Meliopoulos, Meliopoulos,1. P., Tleoi ITaV'tElxiou', Byzantinische Zeiucbrift, 22 (1913),456 'Briques' 109-20

'Panteichion' Onurkan, 'Damgalar' Onurkan, S. 'Perge Tugla Darngalan: Sanr ve Monogram', XII Tz'jrk Taw Kongresi,

Me!iopoulos, Meliopoulos,1. P., Tloii EKELV'tOat 'Pocewicvcf', 'OEv Krov(J'[cxvnvounoAEl 'EAATlVUCOe; Ankara, 12-16 Ey1Ul1994, Kongreye Swnulan Bildiriler, pt. 1(1999), 16l-93
'Rufinianai' <l>lAoAoylKO,rUA.Aoyo<;, 29 ([907), 274-83 broken, isa Kapz broken, s. Y., isa Kapi Mescidi und Medresesi in Istanbul, 2 vols. (diss, Boon University
Meliopoulos, 'Ta Meliopoulos, I. P., Tlof EKE1VtOtCt 'Ovepcrou', '0 i» KrovotCXVtlVOunOAE\ 'EA.A..T1VUCOC; Mescidi 1974) .
Honorarou' <D1AoAoYIKO, r"Uoyo" 30 (l908), ar 5-17 Ousterhour, 'Later Ousterhout, R., 'Conrexrualizing the Later Churches of Constantinople: Suggested

Me1iopoulos, Meliopoulos, 1. P., "E~CXl(pi~COO'te;6:PXairov 't01t08EcnroV', '0 EV KrovotavtlvounoA.et Churches' Methodologies and a Few Examples' ,Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 54 (2000),241-50

"Tcpothesia' 'EU~V1KO,<l>lAoAo"(lKO<;LUUoyO" 29 (1907), 222-3' Ousterhout, Master Ousterhout, R., Master Builders of Byzantium (Princeton 1999)

Mendel, Sculptures Mendel, G., Catalogue des sculptures grecqwes, romaines et byzantines (Musees Imperiawx Builders

grecques Ottomans), ii (l914) Ousrerhour, Ahunbay, Ousrerhout, R., Ahunbay, Z., and Ahunbay, M., 'Study and Restoration of the Zeyrek
Meyer-Plath and Meyer-Plath, B. and Schneider, A. M., Die Laruimauer flon Konstantinopel, ii (Berlin and Ahunbay, Camii in Istanbul: First Report 1997-98', Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 54 (2000), 265-9
Schneider, 'First Report'
1943)
Landmauer Ousrerhour and Ousterhour, R. and Akyiirek, E., 'Burgazada'daki Metamorphosis Kilisesi', in Tanman
Miranda, 'Palais Sacre' Miranda, S., 'Erode sur le Palais Sacre de Constantinople: Le W~lker Trust et le Palais de Akylirek, andTukel, Demiriz 'e Armagan (Istanbul zccr ), 93-105, 21 5-19
Daphne', Byzantinoslavica, 44 (1983), 41-9, r96-204 'Burgazada'
Micchell, Aran, and Mirchell, W. J.., Aran, B., and Liggetr, R. S., 'The application of statistical pattern- Paluka, 'Ruinen' Paluka, B., 'Ruinen eines byzanrinischen Baues aus dem Xjahrhundert', Mitteilzmgen des
Liggett, recognition techniques in dating ancient architectural construction', Environment and Deutschen Exleursions-Klubs in Konstsntinopel.tes, 1 (1895), 22-40
'Construction' Planning B, 9 (1982), 467-90 Paluka, 'Zisterne' Paluka, B., 'Eine unbekannte byzantinische Zisterne', Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 4 (1895),

Mordtmann, Mordtmann, A. D., '~lO~~O~, E.CLPXO, (566-574)', '0EVKwvcrmvtlVou.o1..£,

<ij, no1..£Ol<; , 594-600
'Diomedes' 'EU1]VIKO<; <l>W,AoytKO<; LUUoyO, supp!. to vol. xiii, 'APXCLlOAoytKi] 'Enrtponf (1880), Panchenko, 'imrahor Panchenko, B. A., 'Raboti v Imrakhcr-Dzhami', Fzoiestiia des Russkago Arkheo-
Camii' logicheskago I nstituta v Konstantinoplie, 15 (19 I 1), 150-258
23-4
Mordtmann, Esquisse Mordtmann, A. D., Esouisse topographique de Constantinople (Lille 1892) Papadopoulos, Papadopoulos,J. B., Le palais et I.,eglises des Blacbemes (Thessaloniki 1928)
Mordtmann, Mordtmann, A. D., Der Bosphor und Konstantinopel (Vienna 1873) Blachemes

Konstantinopel Papadopoulos, 'Letter' Papadopoulos, J. B., letter read by C. Diehl on 8 April '925, Comptes Rendus de

Morrisson, Morrisson, C., Catalogue des monnaies byzantines de la Bibliotheque Nationale (Paris l'Acadernie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres for 1925,11 5-r6
Monnaies byzantines Papadopoulos, 'Note' Papadopoulos, J. B., note read by C. Diehl on 18 Decembec '925, Comptes Rendus de
1970)
Mowat Mowat, R., Bulletin de la Societe Nationale desAntiquaireS de France (1891),137-8 l'Academie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres for 1925, 341-2
Mufid, 'Balaban' Mufid, A., 'The Excavation of the Balaban Agha Mesdjidi in Istanbul', Art Bulletin, '5 Papadopoulos Papadopolos Kerameus, A., "ApX,ato-n,'tE<; Kal Emypo:cpal tile; ep~1crlC;', '0 EV
Kerameus, "Ihrace' KroV(J'[ClY'tlVOU1tOMl'EUTtV1KOe; <lhA.oA.oytKOe;
LUUoyOC; suppl. to vol. xvii, 'ApxatOAoyllt.-,)
(1933),210-29
Miifid Manse!, Mufid Manse!, A., 'Les fouilles de Rhegion pres d'Istanbul', Actes du VIe Congres 'EmtpoitTj ([886), 65-1 '3
'Rhegion' International d' Etudes Byzantines, Paris 1948, i (r 950), 255-60 Pasadaios, Mnemeia Pasadaios, A., 'Enl Buo Bu~av'tlVrov jlvTHlelWV n;c; Krova-tav'tlvOU1tOt..eo>c; ciyvcixrtou
Muller- Wiener, Muller-Wiener, W., Bildlexikon zur Topographie Istanbuls (Tubingen '977) OVO~""iCL,(Athens 1965)
Bildlexikon Pasinli, 'Biiyiik Saray' Pasirili, A., '"Buylik Saray" Biilgesinde Sultanahmet Eski Ce;aevi Bahcesindeki 1997-98
Miiller-Wiener, Muller- Wiener; W., 'Eine Neuentdeckte Kirche aus der Griindzeirong Konstancinopels: Kaza Cahsmalan', istanbulArkeoloji Muzeleri ytlltg~ '7 (2001), 56-10l

'Hagios Hagios Agathonikos!', in O. Fe!d and U. Peschlow (eds.) Studien zur spiuantiken und Paspates, Byzantinai Paspates, A. G., Bu/;o:v'ttval jleA..et(l\ 'to1toypaqnKai KCtt lccoprccd jlE'tCt nuicr'to)v elKOVOlV
Agathonikos?' byzantinischen Kunst F. W. Deichmann gewidmet, i (Bonn 1986), 13-20 Meletai (Constantinople 1877)
MundellMango, Mundell Mango, M., review of Harrison, Temple, Apollo, 133/348 (February 1991), 136 Peschlow, 'Istanbul Peschlow, A., 'Recent Archaeological Research in Turkey: Istanbul 1979', Anatolian

'Review' 1979' Studies, 30 (1980), 218-19

Mundell Mango, Mundell Mango. M., 'Imperial Art in the Seventh Century', in P. Magdalino (ed.), New Peschlow, Pcschlow, U., 'Byzantine Brickscamps', in Striker and Kuban, Kalenderhane 11, ch. 6

'Seventh Century' Constantines: The Rhythm of Imperial Renewal in Byzantium, 4th-13th Centuries 'Brickstamps'

(Aldershot [994), 10~38 Peschlow, 'Gorensaule' Peschlow, U., 'Betrachrongen zur Gorensaule in Istanbul', in Tesserae: Festschrift fur josef

Naumann, Naumann, R., 'Vorbericht Iiber die Ausgrabungen zwischen Mese und Antiochus-Palast Engemann (Munster (991) (; Jahrbueb fur Antike und Christentum Erganzungsband
•Antiochus- Palest' [964 in Istanbul',Istanbuler Miueilengen, '5 (1965), 1)5-48 I8),2q-28
Naumann, 'Neue Naumann, R., 'NeueBeobachtungen am Thcodosiosbogen und Forum Tauri in Istanbul', Peschlow, Irenenkirche Peschlow, U., Die Irenenkirche in Istanbul. Uruersuchungen zur Arcbiteletur (I'iibingen

Beobachrungen' Istanbuler Mitteilungen, 26 (1976),117-41 1977)

Naumann, 'Rundbau' Naumann, R.) 'Der antike Rundbau beim Myrelaion', Istanbnler Miueilungen, J6 (1966), Peschlow, Peschlow, U., 'Die Johanneskirche des Studios in Istanbul: Bericht iiber die jiingsten

199-216
'Johanneskirche' Unrersuchungsergebnisse', [ahrbuch der Osterreichischen Byzantinistik, 32.4 (1982),
429-34 with one plate

.
 ..~
.•
XXXVI ABBREVIA TIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY xxxvii
Piamer and Ashby, Platner, S. B. and Ashby, T. A., A Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome, 2 vols. Schneider, Schneider, A. M., 'Grabung im Bereich des Euphemia-Marryrions zu Konstantinopel',
Dictionary (London 1929) 'Euphemia- Archiiologischer Anzeiger, 58 (1943), 255-89
PLRE,i Jones, A. H. M., Manindale,J. R., and Morris, J., The Prosopography of the Later Roman Martyrion'
Empire,i.A.D. 260-395 (Cambridge 1971) Schneider, 'Marryrion' Schneider, A. M., 'Das Martyrion der Hl. Euphemia beim Hippodrom zu
PLRE,ii Martindale, J. R. The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire, ii. A.D. 395-527 Konstantinopel', Byzentinische Zeitschrift, 42 (1943), 178-85
(Cambridge 1980) Schneider, <Review' Schneider, A. M., review of Ramazanoglu, Sainte Irene, Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 45
PLRE,iii Martindale, J. R. The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire, iii. A.D. 527-611 (I952),220-1
(Cambridge 1992) " Schneider, Schneider, A. M., 'Die vorjustinianische Sophienkirche', Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 36
Poulter, <Brick Poulter, A. G., 'The Brick Monograms', in A. G. Poulter, 'Field Survey at Louloudies: A 'Sophienkirche' (1936),77-85
Monograms' .New Late Roman Fortification in Pieria', Annual of the British School at Athens, 93 Schneider,IVesthof Schneider, A. M., Die Grabung im Westhof der Sophienkirche zu Istanbul, Istanbuler
(1998),494-500 Forschungen, 12 (Berlin I94I) •
Preisigke, Namenbuch Preisigke, F., Namenbuch (Heidelberg 1922) Schneider, Schneider, A. M., 'Ziegelstempel aus Konstanrinopel', Oriens Christianus, 34 (1937),
Rarnazanoglu, Ramazanoglu, M., 'Neue Forschungen zur Archirektur Geschichre der Irenen-Kirche 'Ziegelsrempel' 263--9
'Irenen-Kirche' und des Komplexes der Sophien-Kirche', Studi Bizantini e Neoellenici, 8 (1953), 232-5 Schuchhardt, Schuchhardt, C., 'Die Anastasius-Mauer bei Constantinopel und die Dobrudscha- Wal1e',
and pis. 64-73 'Anastasius-Mauer' Jahrbuch des Kaiserlich deutschenArchiiologischen Instuuts, I6 (I90I), I07-I5
Ramazanoglu, Ramazanoglu, M., Sentiren ve Ayasofyalar Manzumesi. Sainte-Irene et les Diverses Setala, Private Domini Setala, P., Private Domini in Brickstamps of the Empire: A Historical and Prosopo-
Sainte-Irene Sainte-Sophie (Istanbul 1946) graphical Study 0/ Landowners in the District 0/ Rome, Annales Academiae Scientiarum
Ramazanoglu, Rarnazanoglu, M., 'Die Baugeschichte der Sophien-Kirche justinians', Studi Bizantini e Fennicae, Dissertationes Humanarum Litterarum, IO (Helsinki I977)
'Sophien-Kirche' Neoellenici, 8 (=Atti dello VIII Congresso Intemezionale di Studi Bizantim) (1953), Seure, 'Antiquites' Seure, G., 'Antiquires thraces de la Propcntide', Bulletin de Correspondance Hellinique,
224-31 36(1912),534"";41
Remeai, Remezi, O. A., 'Funde byzantinischer Zeit. A. Forschungen und Fundc in Istanbul Sevcenko, <Note Sevcenko, 1.. 'Note addirionnelle', in J. Lafonraine, 'Fouilles et decouvertes byzantines a
'Sophienkirche' Arbeiten im Gebier der Sophienkirche: Grabung der Abteilung Istanbul', Archiiologischer additionnelle' Istanbul de '952 a 1960', Byzantion, 29/30 (1959-<>0), 339-86
Anzeiger 5P-2(1939), 176--8 Siderides, <Remarks' Siderides, X. A., 'lrU.lE:lcoou;', '0 EV Krov<YtavuVOU1tOA£t'Ellllvu.:a<; «I>tA.oA.oylKO<;
Ricci, 'Bryas' Ricci, A., 'The Road From Baghdad to Byzantium and the Case of the Bryas Palace in I:UAMrtO<;, 30 (1908), 217-19
Istanbul', in 1. Brubaker (ed.), Byzantium in the Ninth Century: Dead or Alive? Papers Sideropoulos, Sideropoulos, X. A., 'Ncoc rou iepoj..icpropo; Ai)'tovojlOU', '0 tv KrovcrtavuvOU1tOA.€.l
from the Thirtieth Spring Symposium of Byzantine Studies, Birmingham, March 1996, "Auconomos' 'EA.A.TlV1J(O<;
<IhAOAO,,(LICO<;
EuA.J..oyo<;,
sup p]. to vol. xvii, 'APXo:toAoYLKfl
'Emtporcf (1886),
Society for the Promotion of Byzantine Studies Publications, 5 (Aldershot 1998), I3 1-49 I22-4
Richardson, Dictionary Richardson, L., Jr., A New Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome (Baltimore and Sideropoulos, Sideropoulos, X. A., 'BuSav·nval £1ttypa<pai', '0 EV KooVO"'tQV'tlV01)1tOA.£t 'EUllvtKO<;
London 1992) 'Byzantinai :... <l>IAOAoytKO<;I:uUoyo<;, suppl. to vol. xix, 'APX<XlOAOYllclj 'Emtponf (1891),24-7
Rico 'Diffusion' Rico, C., 'La diffusion par mer des materiaux de constructio~ en terre cuire:un aspect mal Epigraphai'
connu de commerce antique en Medirerranee occidenrale', Melmlges de L 'Ecole Francaise Sirks, "Colonate' Sirks, B., "Reconsidering the Roman Cclonare', Zeiucbrijt der Savigny-Stiftung [t"i,T
de Rome, 107(1995),767-800 Rechtsgeschichte, 123 (1993), 33 1"";9
Righini, 'Felix Roma' Righini, V., 'Felix Roma-Fclix Ravenna: I bolli laterizi di Teoderico e I'anivitara edilizia Sirks, Food for Rome Sirks, B., Food for Rome: The Legal Structure of the Transportation and Processing
teodericana in Ravenna', XXXIII Corso di Cultura sull'Arte Ravennate e Bizantina of Supplies for the Imperial Distributions in Rome and Constantinople, Studia
(1986),371--98 Amsteldamensia ad Epigraphicam, Ius Antiquum et Papyrologicam Pertinentia, 3 r
Robinson, Agora Robinson, H. S., The Athenian Agora V: Pottery of the Roman Period, Chronology (Amsterdam 1991)
(Prineeton 1959) • Sodini, 'L'Artisanar' Sodini, J.-P., 'L'artisanar urbain a l'epoque paleochretienne (IVe-VIle S.)', Ktema, 4
Ruggieri, Architecture Ruggieri, V., Byzantine Religious Architecture (582-867): Its History and Structural; (1979),71-119
Elements, Orientalia Christiana Analecta, 237 (Rome I99I) Sorlin-Dorigny, Sorlin-Dorigny, A., 'Inscriptions ceramiques byzantines', Revue Archiologique, 32
Saffer, Bricks of History Saffer, B., In Search of the Bricks of History (Johnson City, Tenn. 1994) 'Inscriptions' (1876),82--95
Saffer, 'Museum of Saffer, B., 'The General Shale Museum of Ancient Brick', Archaeology, 26 (1973),64 Sorlin-Dorigny, Sorlin-Dorigny, A., Letter, Revue Arcbeologique, 28 (1874), 129-30
Ancient Brick' 'Letter'
Salzenberg, Salzenberg, W., Alt-christliche Baudenlemale 'Von Constantinopel vom 5 bis 12 Sorlin-Dorigny, Sorliii-Dorigny, A., 'Marque de brique d'un empereur francais de Constantinople' .Reuue
Baudenkmale Jahrhundert (Berlin 1854) 'Marque' Archeologique, 32 (1876), 3'5-'7
Sayar, Perintbos Sayar, M. H., Perinthos-Herakleia (Marmara EreffJisi) und Umgebung: Geschichte, Soteriou, Hagia Soteriou, G. A., 'Aria LQ(piaKoovO"'tav'tlVOlmOAEID<;
(Athens 1917)
Testimonien, griechische tend lateinische lnscbriften, Denkschriften der philosophisch- Sophia
historische Klasse, 269 (Vienna I998) Speck, 'Mauerbau' Speck, P., 'Der Mauerbau in 60 Tagcn', in H.-G. Beck (ed.), Stndien zur Friihgeschichte
Schneid~r, 'Brande' Schneider, A. M., 'Brande in Konstantinopel', Byzaruiniscbe Zeitschrift, 41 (1941), Korutantinopels, Miscellanea Byzantina Monacensia, I4 (I973), I3 5-78
382-403 Spieser, Tbessalonique Spieser,j.-M., Thessalonique et ses monuments dttIVeau VIe siecle: contribution a l'etude
Schneider, 'Aquaduke' Schneider, A. M., 'Aquadukt und Atatiirk Bulvan': in K. Bittel and A.M. Schneider, d'une ville paleochretienne, Bibliotheque des ecoles Irancaises d'Arhenes et de Rome, 254
'Fund- und ForschungsberichtTiirkei 194>', Archiiologischer Anzeiger, 59-60 (1944-45), (Paris 1984)
75""; Steinby, 'Anciquari' Steinby, M., '1 bolli laterizi degli antiquari del Foro e del Palatine', Atti dellaAccademia
Schneider, Schneider, A. M., review of Firatli, 'Trois eglises', Byzantinische Zeiuchrijt, 45 (r952), Nazionale dei Lincei, 37I, Classe diScienze Morali, Memorie, 8th ser., 17 (1974), 6-109
'Bibliographical 222-3 Steinby, 'Figlinae Steinby, M., 'La cronclogia delle figlinae rardoantiche', in M. Ceccelli (ed.), Materiali e
Note' tardoantiche' techniche dell'edilizia paleocristianaa Roma (Rome 200I), 127-50
Schneider, Byzanz Schneider, A. M., Byzanz: Vorarbeiten zur Topographie und Archaologie der Stadt, Steinby, Indici Steinby, E. M., Indici complementari ai bolli doliari urbani (CIL xv. r), Acta Instituti
Istanbuler Forschungen, 8 (Berlin 1936) Romani Finlandiae XI (Rome 1987)
XXXVlll ABBREVIATIONS AND ,BIBLIOGRAPHY ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY xxxix

Steinby.vl.tindusrria Sreinby, M., 'L'indusrria laterizia di Roma nel tardo impero', in A. Giardina, Societe Tissoni, Cristodoro Tissoni, F., Cristodoro: Un/introduzione e un commento, Hellenica, 6 (Alessandria 2000)
lareriaia' romanae impero tardoantico, ii. Roma:politica, economia.pnesaggio urbano (Rome 1986), Torp, 'Rotunda' Torp, H., 'The Date of the Conversion of the Rotunda at Thessaloniki into a Church", in
99-164 0. Andersen and H.Whittaker (eds.), The Norwegian Institute at Athens: The First Five
Steinby, 'New ClL Sreinby, M., 'Herbert Bloch and the New ClL xv. 1',Journal of Roman Archaeology, I) Lectures, Papers From the Norwegian Institute at Athens, I (Athens T99 1),13-28
xv. I' (2000),201-6 Trilling, 'Soul' Trilling, J., 'The Soul of the Empire: Style and Meaning in the Mosaic Pavement of the
Steinby, 'Senatori' Steinby, M., 'I senatori e l'industria laterizia urbana', Tiudi, 4 (1982), 227-37 Byzantine Imperial Palace in Constantinople', Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 43 (1989),27-72
Steinb y, Sreinby, M., 'Ziegelstempel von Rom und Umbegung', in G. Wissowa, W. Kroll, K. Tsakalof, 'Saryros' Tsakalof, A., 'Tlepi La1vpou', Byzantiniscbe Zeitschrift, 22 (1913), 122-6
'Ziegelsrempel' Mittelbaus, and K. Ziegler (eds.), Paulys R!alencydopiidie der classischen Aliertums- Turnovsky, Turnovsky, P., 'Fundbericht', in Jobst and Vetters, Mosaikenforschung, 43-61
wissenschaft (Stuttgart 1894-1978), suppl. 15 (1978), cols. 1489-1 l)1 'Fundbericht'
Stichel, 'Fortune Stichel, R. H. W., "Fortune Redux, Pompeius und die Goten: Bemerkungen zu einem Turnovsky, Tumovsky, P., "Typologic und Chronologie des Fundstoffes unter dem Palastmosaik", in
Redux' wenig beachteten Saulenmonument Konstantinopels', Istanbuler Mitteilungen, 49 'T ypologie' [obst, Kastler, and Scheibelreiter, Neue Forschungen, 55-62
(1999),467-<)2 Ulker, Proje iller, N., Arkeoloji M iaesi Ceoresi Komma Projesi (Istanbul 1987)
Stichel, 'Sechs Scichel, R. H. W.) 'Sechs kolossale Saulen nahe der Hagia Sophia und die Curia justinians Unger, 'Seraispirze' Unger, E., 'Grabungen an der Seraispitze von Konsrantinopel', Archaologiscber Anzeiger,
kolossale Saulen' am Augusteionin Konstantinopel',Architectura~ 30 (2000).1-25 )1 (1916), 1-48
Striker and Kuban, Striker, C. L. and Kuban, Y. D. (eds.), Kalenderhane in Istanbul. The Buildings, Their van Millingen, van Millingen, A., Byzantine Churches in Constantinople: Their History and Architecture
Kalenderhane I History, Architecture, and Decoration. Final Rep07!S on the Archaeological Exploration Churches (London 19I2)
and Restoration atKalenderhane Camii 1966-1978 (Mainz 1997) van Millingen, Walls van Millingen, A., Byzantine Constantinople: The Walls of the City and Adjoining
Striker and Kuban, Striker, C. L. and Kuban, Y. D. (eds.), Kalenderhane in Istanbul. The Excavations. Final Historical Sites (London 1899)
Kalenderhane II Reports on the Archaeological Exploration and Restoration at Kalenderhane Camii van Nice, Saint Sophia van Nice, R. L., Saint Sophia in Istanbul: An Architectural Survey (Washington 1965.
1966-1978 (Mainz, forthcoming) 1986)
Striker and Kuban, Striker, C. L. and Kuban, Y. D., 'Work at Kalenderhane Camii in Istanbul: First Vasiliev,j"stin the Vasiliev, A. A., [ustin the First: An Introduction to the Epoch of Justinian the Great,
'Report!' Preliminary Report', Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 21 (1967), 267-71 First Dumbarton Oaks Studies, I (Cambridge, Mass. 1950)
. Striker and Kuban, Striker, C. L. and Kuban, Y. D., 'Work at Kalenderhanc Camii in Istanbul: Second Velkov, 'Basilica' Velkov, V., <An Early Christian Basilica at Mesembria', Bulletin of the Byzantine
'Report Il' Preliminary Report', Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 22 (1968),185-<)) Institute, I (1946), 61-70
Striker and Kuban, Striker, C. L. and Kuban, Y. D., "Work at Kalenderhane Camii in Istanbul: Third and Velkov, Cities Velkov, V., Cities in Tbrace and Dacia in Late Antiquity (Studies and Materials),
'Report lII-IV' Fourth Preliminary Reports', Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 25 (1971),251-8 Publications of the HenriFrankfort Foundation, 3 (Amsterdam 1977)
Striker and Kuban, Striker, C. L. and Kuban, Y. D., 'Work at Kalenderhane Camii in Istanbul: Fifth Venedikov, Venedikov, 1., 'Hisroire der [sic] remparts romano-byzantins', in Ivanov, Nessebre I,
'Report V' Preliminary Report (1970-74)', Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 29 (1975), 306-18 'Remparts' 155-6)
Strube, Eingangsseite Strube, C., Die westliche Eingangsseite der Kirchen 'lion Konstantinopel in justinianischer Vickers, 'Bricksramps' Vickers, M., 'Fifth-Century Brickstamps from Thessaloniki', Annual of the British School
Zeit: Architektonische tcnd quellenkriiische Untersucbengen (Wiesbaden 1973) at Athens, 68 (1973), 285-94
Stud.PaL Wessel, C. (ed.),Studien zur Palaeograpbie und.Pspynakunde, 2) vols. (Leipzig 19°1-24) Vickers, "New" Vickers, M., 'A "New" Capital From St Polyeukros (Sarachane) in Venice', Oxford
Swainson, Swainson, H., 'Monograms of the Capitals ofS. Sergius at Constantinople', Byzantinische Capital' journal of Archaeology, 8 (1989) 227-<)
'Monograms' Zeitschrift, 4 (1895), 106-8 van Premerstein, von Prernerstein, A., "Anicia Iuliana im Wiener Dioskorides-Kodex', Jahrbuch der
Swift, Hagia Sopbia Swift, E. H., Hagia Sophia (New York 1940) 'Anicia Iuliana' Kunstbistorischen Sammlungen des allerbocbsten Kaiserhauses, 24 (19°3),105-24
Talbot Rice, 'Bodrum Talbot Rice, D., 'Excavations at Bodrum Camii 1930: The Messel expedition', Byzantion, Waage, 'Tableware' Waage, F. 0., 'Hellenistic and Roman Tableware of North Syria', in F. O. Waage (ed.),
Camii' 8(1933),151-74 Antioch-on-the-Orontes IV, i. Ceramics and Islamic Coins (Princeton 1948), 1-60
Talbor Rice, Talbot Rice, D.) The Byzantines, Ancient Peoples and Plac.cs(London 196.2) Ward-Perkins, Ward-Perkins, J. B., Roman Imperial Architecture, The Pelican History of Art
Byzantines Architecture (Harmondsworth 1981)
Talbot Rice, 'Mosaic Talbot Rice, D., <On the Date of the Mosaic Floor of the Great Palace of me Byzantine Ward-Perkins, Public Ward-Perkins, B., From Classical Antiquity to the Middle Ages: Urban public building in
Floor' Emperors at Constantinople', in Xcpio-rnpiov Ei<;'Avccrcciov K. 'OpM.v6ov, i(Athens Building northern and central Italy AD J00-8Jo (Oxford 1984)
1965),1-5 Weigand, 'Diptychon' Weigand, E., 'Ein bisher verkanntes Diptychon Symmachorum', [ahrbuch des Deutschen
T anman and Tiikel, Tanman, M. B. and Tiikel, U. (eds.), Ydda Demiriz'e Armagan, Arkeoloji ve SanatTarihi Archaologiscben Instituts, 52 (1937),121-38
Demiriz'e Annagan Arasnrmalan (Istanbul 2001) Weigand, 'GoldeneTor' Weig'and, E., "Neue Untersuchungen uber das Goldene .Tor in Konstantinopel',
Taylor, 'First Dome' Taylor, R., 'A Literary and Structural Analysis of the First Dome on Justinian's Hagia Miueilungen des deutschen Archiiologischen Instituts athenische Abteilung, 39 ([914),
Sopbia, Constantinople', Journal of the Society of Archuecucml Historians, 55 (1996), 1-64
66-78 Wenger, Assomption Wenger, A., L'Assomption de la t. S. Vierge dans la tradition byzantine du V/eau Xe sie-
Taylor, '!.:ettcr' Taylor, R., <Letter to the Editor', Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, 55 de (Paris '955)
(1996), )62-) Whitby, Emperor \Xlhitby, M., The Emperor Maurice and his Historian: Theophylact Simocatta on Persian
Tezcan, Topkapz Tezcan, H., Topkapz Sarayz 'lie Ceoresinin Bizans Deori Arkeolojisi (Istanbul C.1989) Maurice and Balkan Warfare (Oxford 1988)
Sarayz Whitby, 'Imperial' \Vhitby, M., 'Pride and Prejudice in Procopius' Buildings: Imperial Images In
Theocharidou, Theocharidou, K., 'LUJlPOA.Tl0"111IlEAi"t'l -rii~ napcxyW'(i)<; OiKOOOJllKroVK£pajlllcrov Images' Constantinople',Antiquite Tardive, 8 (2000), 59-66
'Symbole' npo'tov'tIDV o-re PUSO:V'tlVeX.
Kat. JlE'ta~u~avnva. XPovla', .6.el'ttOV -rile; XPlO"tlClVlKi)e; Whitby, 'Long WaUs' Whitby, M., 'The Long Walls of Constantinople', Byzantion, 55 (1985), 560-8)
'ApXa1ol..oyucij,'Erccpeloe; 4.13 (1988), 97-1 12 \Vilkinson, 'New Wi!kinson,J., 'New Beginnings and Church Dedications', in R. N. McMichael, Jr. (ed.),
Thomas, Foundations Thomas, J. P., Private Religious Foundations in the Byzantine Empire, Dumbarton Oaks Beginnings' Creation and Liturgy: Studies in Honorof H. Boone Porter (\'V'ashington 1993), 25 1-64
Studies, 24 (Washington 1987) Wipszycka, Renources \Vipszycka, E., Les ressources et les actiuites iconomiques des eglises en t.gypte du IVe all
Timoni, Promenades Timoni, A., Nowuelles promenades dans le Bosphore ou Meditations bosphoriques, 2 vols. VI/le siede, Papyrologica Bruxellensia, 10 (Brussels 1972)
(Constantinople 1844) Wordey, 'Trier Ivory' Wordey, J., 'The Trier Ivory Reconsidered', Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, 21
(1980),381-94

c
 "~
xl ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY
•
Wulff,Kunst
WuIH, 0., Altcbristlicbe «nd byzantinische Kunst, ii. Die byzantinische Kwnst von der
ersten Bliae his zu ihremAusgang (I9I8)
Wulzinger,
Wulzinger, K., 'Byzantinische Baudenkmaler zu Konsrantinope]: Auf der Seraispitze, die
Baudenlemdler
Nea, das Tekfur-Serai und das Zisternenproblem', Mittelmeer-Lander und Orient,
Sammlung Kunstwissenschaftlicber Srudien, I (Hanover 1925)
Wulzinger,
Wulzinger, K., 'Die Steinmetzzeichen der Bin-bir-direk', Byzantinische Zeitschrifr, 22
'Steirunetzzeichen' ('9'3),459-73
Wulzinger,
Wulzinger, K., 'Byzantinische Substrukgonsbauten Konstantinopels', Jahrbuch des
'Substruktions-
Kaiseriicb DeutschenArchdologischen Instiuas, 28 (r913), 370-95
bauten' PART I
Xenakes,
Xenakes, S. 1., <Bu~avna..Kat €~COcP1J3rocrE.tC;', Byzantinische ZeitschriJt, 19 (1910), r r 5-18
'Exakriboseie'
Yegiil, 'Capitals'
Yegiil, F. K., 'Early Byzantine Capitals from Sardis: A Study on the Ionic Impost Type',
Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 28 ('974), 265-74
Zheku, 'Durres' Zheku, K., 'Zublime Epigrafike ne Muret Rretheuse te Kalase se Durresit', Monumentet,

Zollt, Kapitellplastik
3 ('972), 35-46 Bricks and the
2011t, T., Kapitellplastik Konstantinopels vom 4. bis 6. [ahrbundert n. Chr. mit einem
Beitrag zur Untersuchung des ionischen KampJerkapitells,
,~~
Asia Minor Srudien, 14 (Bonn
. Construction Industry
 ..~
•

CHAPTER 1
50 100 150 km
BLACK SEA

Constantinopolitan bricks and brickstamps

........,

1. GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF FINDS Some stamped bricks reached as far as Mesembria (Nessebar)
on Bulgaria's Black Sea coast. They can be dated to the sixth
The Byzantine bricksramps that are the subject of this study century, and were reused in repairs to the city's fortifications.
appear on bricks discovered almost entirely in Constantinople Pottery finds indicate that a brick pavement in the fortifications,
and the suburbs of Bakirkoy (Hebdomon) and Kiicuk Cekmece in which many of the stamped bricks were found, was probably
(Rhegion) (Fig. I). They date from the fourth to the sixth laid in the ninth century or later.' There is no evidence to suggest
century AD.! A small number have been 'noted on the Princes' that in the sixth century Constantinopolitan bricks were
Islands of Biiyiikada (Prinkipo) (from the Kamares and St exported to Mesembria, so it is not certain that the bricks i:nthe
George Koudonas), and of Burgaz (Antigone) (from the Trans- fortifications were taken from sixth-century ruins in Mesembria
figuration Church), and occasional finds have been made along itself.' Perhaps they were shipped to Mesembria at the time of
both shores of the Sea of Marmara and the Bosphorus. On the the repair to the walls, having been salvaged from ruined or
European shore, in addition to the finds from Bakirkoy and demolished buildings in Constantinople.
Kiiciik Cekmece, examples have been recorded from Silivri and Considering that most of the stamped bricks included in
further west at Marmara Ereglisi (Perinrhosj.i On the Asiatic this catalogue have. been found within a short distance of
shore, examples have been noted at Beylerbeyi, Haydarpasa, Constantinople, the finds at Beirut are rather surprising. In the
Kadikoy (Chalcedon), Fenerbahce (Hiereia), Kozyatagl (west bath building there, a number of bricks bearing stamps familiar
of Erenkoy), Caddebostaru (Rufinianai), Kucukyah (possibly from fifth-century Constantinople have been discovered.
Bryas), Pendik (Panteichion), Degirmenalti (to the east of They demonstrate that in the first half of the fifth century
Tuzla), and Yusa Tepesi (the Hill of Joshua, to the south of the Constantinopolitan stamped bricks might be transported over
village of Anadolu Kavagi). On the south coast of the Sea of great distances. We do not know whether the bricks were
Marmara, examples have been noted at Yalova, to its east at shipped to Beirut as theprimary load or as ballast for a less dense
Karakilise (Pylae), and to its south at Samanli Dag. Inland, to the cargo,"
west of Constantinople, finds have been made along the
Thracian (,Anastasian') Long Walls. East of Constantinople, on
the southern shore of the Black Sea, a stamp of Constantino- 2. LOCATION OF BRICKYARDS
politan type has been noted in the wall of a basilica at Ciftlik
(Sinop);' Thin-section analysis of a fragment of old brick that had been
crushed for inclusion in the sixth-century mortar of the church
I The catalogue contains only stamps that appear, on the grounds of findspor and of Hagia Sophia revealed it to be almost identical in composition
style, to be of Constantinopoliran origin. Other material of the Early Byzantine to both a sixth-century brick and a Turkish brick fro~ the same
period that has received detailed attention (Steinby, 'L'industria
is from Rome
building. From this evidence it has been concluded that marine
laterizia') and Tbcssaloniki (vickers, 'Brickstamps'; Aupert, 'Chronique', 662 and
figs, 174-5; Croke, 'Hormisdas', Croke, 'Thessalouika': Spiesec, Thessalonique, IL7 clays-that is, deep, homogeneous clay beds that were laid
FIG. I. Geographical distribution of Constantinopoliran stamped bricks and possible kiln sites n. 5; Torp, 'Rotunda', 18-19). Note also the material from Perge (Onurkan, down under ancient seas over a wide area-were exploited for
'Damgalar'), Durres (Zheku, 'Durres': Gutteridgc at al., 'Dyrrachium', 397 with
figs 7-8), Amorium (Harrison, Chrisde at al., 'Amorium', 155; Lighdoot.at al., + Ognenova-Marinova, 'Briques', I 19-20. See p. 41.
'Amoriurn', H5-6), and Louloudies (Poulrer, 'Brick Monograms'). For further 5 Ognenova-Marinova, 'Briques', Il9 thinks they were. Admittedly, sixth-
references to provincial material, see Mango, 'Brick Stamps', 27; Sodini, century stamped bricks were also found in the Sea Basilica at Mesembria, but it is not
'L' Artisanat', 73-5; Manacorda, 'Bolli larerizi', 146-50. certain whether they came from the original construction phase or from a substan-
2 Stamp 567.la, found in the defences of the lower city at Pennthos, carries the tial rebuilding of uncertain date: see Velkov, 'Basilica', 67-8. Mescmbria may have
name abbreviation 'IaXl(). The name is to be equated with 'Iax(), which occurs on had more convenient local supplies of brick in the Early Byzantine period: see
stamps dated 456/7 in siuc in the Cistern of Aspnr (563.la,
found b), and possibly Velkov, Cities, 157-61 for finds in Thrace and Dacia, although they are mostly
also with 'I;«), found on stamps dated 448/9 from StJohn ofStoudios (594.la). This casual and therefore difficult to date.
suggests a roughly mid-fifth century date for the fortifications. Sec Crow and Ricci, 6 Butcher and Thorpe, 'Beirut', 304. For medium-distance and long-distance
'Anastasian Wall', 244. transport of brick and tile in the western Mediterranean in the first and second
, Hill,·<;:iltlik','97· centuries, sec Rico, 'Diffusion'.
 ..~
•
4 PART I: INDUSTRY BRICKS AND BRICKSTAMPS

brickmaking in the region of Constantinople over a long period bricks is equal to that of one of our bricks because that clay is very light, shipped morc than 80 km. to the city from their place of manu- to the south, particularly in the valleys west of Yenikoy, where
of time.' Nevertheless, a more extensive analysis of the fabric of spongy and of awhite color. Hence a popular tale has spreadabroadthat facture in the Sabina. That bricks and tiles were transported by thick deposits were once quarried, and on the shores of the
Byzantine bricks bearing different types of stamp might have the dome is made of pumice, but it is not so) except that it is light." With sea in the vicinity of Constantinople is clearly demonstrated by Black Sea."
some success in identifying particular production sires," since these bricks they built the four enormous arches. the discovery of two shipwrecks off the island of Marrnara, one Thus, in the Early Byzantine period, bricks destined for use in
bricks made from. different beds of the same terraces of rnarine No investigation appears to have been made into whether the of the seventh century carrying a cargo of water pipes, the other Constantinople and its hinterland are likely to have been made
clay do· have distinctive characteristics. For instance, the fabric allegedly Rhodian bricks in the arches are indeed especially possibly of the Roman period carrying a cargo ·of roof tiles." using sources of clay and wood that may have been some
of a brick from Hagia Sophia's second dome of 558-63 was light." It may be noted, however, that tbe bricksfrom the super- The forests around the Sea of Mar mar a and the Black Sea were .distance from the city, but which were not far from the shores of
distinct from that of one coming from the original structure of structures of the early sixth-century church of St Polyeuktos extensively exploited in antiquity,'! and even at the end of the the Sea of Marmara, the Golden Horn, the Bosphorus, and the
532-37, having less silt, more sand, many fine flakes of bleached (which carried typical sixth-century Constantinopolitan nineteenth century, much of the wood for Constantinople came Black Sea.
biotite, and concretionary lumps of carbonate.' To take another stamps) are said to have been noticeably thinner and lighter than from the forests at ~ile and Sinop on the southern shores of the
example, a brick from a tenth-century repair to the dome was those in the substrucrures." Black Sea." It is qardly surprising, then, that a number of Early
found to have a very much higher proportion of silt and sand Given the space required both for preparing the clay and for Byzantine amphora kilns have been discovered at Demirci, near 3. BRtCKS AND BRICKSTAMPS
than the two earlier bricks (and therefore to be less dense than laying out large numbers of bricks to dry, and bearing in mind Sinop," nor that brick and amphora kilns dating from the early
them), and to have different proportions of other grains, such as the pollution that would have resulted from the firing process, eleventh century onwards have been located on the northern Early Byzantine bricks from Constantinople (PIs. I and II)
quartz, feldspars, limestone, chert, and concretions.'? brickmaking is unlikely to have been undertaken on a large scale shores of the Sea of Marmara at Hoskoy and Gazikoy." Even were, it seems, moulded in a wooden frame without a bottom.
Only one of the 70 cm.-square sixth-century bricks from the within the city walls." The location of the production sites today, brickmaking is undertaken all along this coast." This would have been dipped in water and placed on a sand-
eastern arch supporting Hagia Sophia's dome was found to be of would have been dictated by the availability of raw materials We know that, in the fifteenth century, there was a potters' covered moulding table before the clay was dashed into it.35 The
a significantly different composition from the other bricks that and by considerations of transportation. A location close to a quarter to the north of the Golden Horn in Galata, although we sizes of mould are roughly indicated by an analysis of the
were examined. It seems likely, therefore, that the bricks of river, stream, spring, well, or cistern would have ensured the cannot be certain that bricks were produced there. Kritovoulos dimensions of surviving bricks. Byzantine bricks of the fifth
this size had been imported." In the light of this information, water supply necessary for saturating the clay. River valleys of Imbros and Chalcocondylas record that, when besieging century were typically 374 mm. square by 46 mm. thick." By the
it is interesting, although not necessarily significant, that a would often have been chosen, primarily because alluvium Constantinople in '453, Sultan Mehmet II ordered the con- early sixth century, the average length had decreased to 369 mm.
legendary account of the church's construction-the Diegesis qf- frequently contains deposits of plastic, secondary clays, which struction of a bridge from the Keramikos" or Keramareion" to and the average thickness to about 42 mm. The deviation from
the eighth to tenth centuries-alleges that the bricks for the are easily prepared for brickmaking. If a river was navigable, it the southern side of the Golden Horn. Ducas states that the these average dimensions was, however, great, even in bricks
arches of Justinian's cathedral were brought from the island of might also have served as a route for transporting the bricks to intention was to throw the bridge across to the region called used in a single building. Consequently, unless a brick is of
Rhodes. The relevant passage also contains the only reference to the coast, from where they could be shipped to storage and Kynegion," and Barbaro writes that it was to reach the Kinigo extreme dimensions these average values are of little use in
brickstamping in the Byzantine period of which I am aware:'? distribution centres in or close to the city." Bricks could have Gate." Since the quarter of K ynegon comprised the modern determining the date of an isolated piece." The bricks of the

The emperor despatched Troilus the chamberlain, Theodore the prefect been shipped to any of Constantinople's four harbours: the quarters of Ayvan Saray and Balata/o it follows that the fourth and later sixth century are, however, sufficiently smaller
Neorion or Prosphorion on the Golden Horn; the Harbour of Keramikos-where potteries, and perhaps brick factories, were than Justinianic material to allow their dimensions to be used as
and Basilides the quaestor to the island of Rhodes and there they made
out of clay enormous bricks of equal weight and size which they Julian or the Harbour of Theodosius I on the Sea of Marmara.!? located-was between modern Haskoy and Kasun Pasa. The clear indication of date." The sides of the mould would have
stamped with these words: <Godis in the midst of her, and she shall not As regards fuel, smaller production sites might have used dung, panorama of Constantinople produced by the Venetian carto- been worn down gradually by the repeated process of dashing
be moved. God shall help her, and that right early.'!' And counting their small branches, or brushwood, whereas the larger establish- grapherG. A. Vavassore around, po, on the basis of an original the clay into it and striking off the excess clay." It is likely, how-
number, they shipped them to the emperor. The weight of twelve such ments would have required more substantial timbers from of C.'480, has labels indicating the 'porta del chinico' and, on the ever, that the joints at the corners of the mould would have failed
forested areas. Thus, the valley'of a navigable river, close to the opposite side of the Golden Horn, 'chiramide cinarroni', which long before this had any significant impact on the thickness of
7 Emerson and van Nice, 'Preliminary Report', 422 n. 34. Emerson and van Nice,
the bricks. Variation in clay types and tempering would have
sea, and near a wooded area is likely to have been one of the most apparently refers to the pottery kilns.'!
'Collapse', 102. Full reports on the thin-section analyses are to be found amongst
R. van Nice's records in the Fieldwork Archive at Dumbarton Oaks. The sixth- suitable locations for brickmaking. These conditions may often Describing the inaugnration of a new brick and tile kiln near affected the extent to which bricks shrank during drying
century brick and mortar samples referred to in the publications appear to have
have been satisfied at some distance from Constantinople, and it Beykoz on the Asiatic shore of the Bosphorus in ,894, Cuinet and firing, and inconsistent firing conditions would also have
been, respectively, specimens M-25B and M~25 (from the foot of the stairwell in the
should be remembered that in ancient Rome, bricks were often observed that the clay there was considered to be the best that caused different degrees of shrinkage. Consistency in the size of
south-east buttress, therefore dating to 532-37)' Another interesting result i~that
brick M~25B and a brick dating to 1)46-54 (specimen Mc.Sb, from rib no. 2 of the could be obtained." In the same area in '936, Chaput noted the bricks was not, however, particularly important, owing
dome) appeared so similar, both under the hand lens and the microscope, that they H Cp. Vitruvius 2'3.4 concerning floating bricks of pumice-like clay fromPitane claypits that had formerly been exploited for brickmaking, to the freedom with which mortar was used in Byzantine
could have come from the same quarry. and elsewhere.
500 ill. to the east of Incirkoy." He also described active brick construction.
! Analysis of the fabric of Roman bricks has, however, had mixed results: 15 The assertions that they are not particularly lightweight seem to be intuitive:
Steinby, 'New CILXV.l', 206. Ward-Perkins in GP II 72; Mainstone, Hagia Sophia, 69; Livingston, 'Materials factories on the European shore of the Bosphorus, about Parallel striations over the upper surface of many bricks,
9 The comparison is between specimens M~25B and M-26B from rib no. 7 of the Analysis', 860-1. Tests on brick sample M-26B taken from what remains of the 20 km. north of Istanbul, and, km. west of Buyukdere. These either in straight or curving lines, suggest that the upper surface
dome. second dome erected in 558-62 showed brick density to be 154okg/m) and mortar
exploited white or yellow sandy clays, which also occur further of the wet clay was sometimes smoothed with a tool. On other
10 The specimen is M~:qB
•.from rib no. 21 of the dome., known to have been density to be 1430 kg/m): Mark and Cakmak, 'Mechanical Tests', 277-8. No com-
repaired over a four- to six-year period after me earthquake of 989. parisons with brick densities from elsewhere in the structure are made. For what the 10 Rome: DeLaine, Caracalla, 85)-9I. Constantinople: Gunsenin, 'Shipwrecks', HChapur, Voyages, 15~I.
11 The specimen is thin-section 'C' from a sixth-centurybrick reused in a repair information is worth, it may be noted that Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 83 129, fig. 8.2. In Roman Britain, the distribution.of bricks carrying similar scamps Dobson,
}5 Treatise, 1.1.7, 1.29.
made in the period 1346--54. Sec Emcrson and van Nice, 'Preliminary Report', 422 claimed that Byzantine bricks varied in density between 1.12 and 2.31. For further may mean either that the bricks were transported for 40-50 miles from the produc- J6 At St Pclyeuktos, half-bricks were noted in the superstructure pier that fell into
n. 34. It has been suggested that these large bricks may have been much older than details on the physical and mechanical characteristics of Byzantine bricks, see cion centre, or that the brickmakcrs were itinerant. See McWhirr and Viner, 'Tiles', the atrium (Harrison and Firach, 'SarachaneIV', 275), and bricks 220 mm. square x
the sixth century, possibly coming from Roman ruins: Emerson and van Nice, Kihya, 'Mauerziegel'. . 367-71. 21 Meiggs, Trees,J93-4. 25-30 mm. thick were used in the niches of the axial passage beneath the nave
'Collapse', 102; Mainstone, HagiaSophi~, 69. Note, however, that even the Roman 16 Hill, 'Brickstamps', 222. II Cuinet, La Turqeie, iv. 567 (Sinop), 61.1 and 61.3 (Sile). (Harrison, Sararbane I, 412).
bipedalis was considerably smaller, measuring 59 cm. square. 17 Compare how lime burning was forbidden along the shores of the city, having 1) Kassab Tezgor, 'Demirci', 344-51. 24 Gunscnin, 'Ganos'. J7 The statistics are discussed in detail below (see pp. 48, 102-6). KfhyaTugla
12 Diegesis 11 (cp. 28). Translation from Mango, Art, 98. been deemed harmful to public health (CTh 14.6.5 (419)). 15 Gunscnin, 'Production', 197. Boyudan' suggests that the bricks were meant to measure 19-20 Byzantioedakmloi
u Psalm 45(46): 5. Dagron, Constantinople imaginaire, 237 D. II4, pl. 4 has 18 In the tenth century in Greece, we know of kilns located on the seashore from 26 Krieovoulos of Imbros, History, (.27 (c-ans. Riggs, 4 I). (Idakwlos= 19.5 mm.) to a side. 20 daluuloi {fingers') = 5 palaislai (thands'), and it
published a brick in the Istanbul Archaeological Museum bearing the inscription the Acts of the Lavra and Iviron monasteries. See Theocbaridou, 'Symbols', 99 n. 9. 27 Cbalcocondylas,388. 11 Ducas, 279. may be relevant that in the second half of the first century BC the the Greeks used
(not a Stamp) + 0 8(£0)c EY IlEC!p o;u'tiic 1(0;1) oil CctAet)a~C£:'t(1t('God is in the midst 19 Magdalino, 'Maritime Neighborhoods', 211-12 observes that the harbours on 1'l Barbaro.trans.joncs.j j. ) )Il Van Millingen, Wa[[s,201-2. mud bricks called the lt€Y,cioropoY (tfive-hand') and ,e"tpCtompoY (four-band')
of her and she shall not be moved'). It is possible that it came from Hagia Sophia, but the Sea of Marmara are more likely to have received building materials since they )1 See Berger, 'Vavassorc', 351, no. 49, 35'2; no. 55. (Vitruvius 2.3.3.) )8 Sec pp. 105-6·
the style of the text precludes a sixth-century date. were not, unlike those on the Golden Horn, associated with extensive grain stores. aa Cuinct, La Twroeie, iv. 620. 33 Chaput, Voyages, 162. )9 Cp. Dobson, Treatise, 1.29, L70'
 ..,
.
BRICKS AND BRICKSTAMPS
.
7
6 PART I: INDUSTRY

The production process resulted in bricks having a rough, often it is clear that the inscription on the die has been altered structures that are still standing can unfortunately be seen only
occasions the hands were used for this purpose.'? Some marks
sandy underside, a smoothed upper surface (possibly displaying (particularly to change the indiction number); and narrow rarely. On the occasions when they can be seen in situ in stand-
made with the fingertips may have been created unintentionally
fingermarks, incised borders, animal and human footprints, and guidelines scored across the die to help set out the letters are ing structures, it is because the stamps coincide with a purlog
when smoothing the surface, whereas others are more promi-
a stamp), and rounded edges, somewhat thicker than the rest of sometimes visible as raised lines across the impression." Cruci- hole, or because bricks in a floor or in a recess, such as a window
nent or regular and were apparently made deliberately, either to
the brick (Pis. I and Il). After up to four weeks of drying, the form stamps were carved from a rectangular block by cutting sill, happen to have been laid with their stamped side upwards."
help the mortar adhere or as some kind of sign." Many bricks
bricks would have been transferred to the kiln for firing." Since away a shallow rectangular piece from each of the four corners Rarer still-simply because such work has seldom been under-
have an incised line parallel to, and about 3-4 cm. away from
the clays from which the bricks were made usually contained of the block, leaving a raised cruciform area into which the taken-are bricksramps found in situ as a result of deliberate
each edge of the upper surface, so as to intersect near the corners
iron oxide impurities, they generally fired to a brown-orange or letters- were cut. Had the entire wooden block been cut to a dismantling of walls during serious archaeological excavations.
of the brick. It appears that either the fingers or a tool could be
red colour. cruciform shape, the die would have been weaker, and the arms Generally, brickstarnps are known from ruined structures,
used to create these lines, which are of uncertain significance."
Brickstamps were made by impressing the brick with a of the cross might have broken off. Sometimes the cruciform die either on bricks scattered about following the collapse of a
The wet brick would have been transferred, on a board, to a
wooden or terracotta die into which a short inscription had been was impressed too deeply, so that not only the raised cruciform structure (so that itmay or may-nor be possible to associate them
straw- or sand-covered area, and placed beside orher bricks
cut, so that a negative impression of the die and inscription was area, but also rhe edges of the rectangular wooden block, with a particular part of the strucrure or even with a particular
arranged in orderly rows. After the board and mould had been
imparted on the surface of the clay. The care with which the marked the brick." building), or on bricks still in situ that have become visible as a
removed, the brick would have been left to dry." The edges of
inscriptions were laid out, spelled, and carved varied greatly. On As noted above, some bricks were deliberately marked wirh result of the partial collapse of a wall, arch, or vault. Also, mor-
the upper surface of a brick are often thicker than the centre.
occasion, the inscription was carved in mirror image, so as to various designs, created using different numbers of fingers. If tar-beds may be exposed in ruined buildings, and these some-
This is a result in part of unequal levelling of clay in rhe mould
ensure rhat the impression read correctly from left to right. At (here was a stamp in addition, sometimes it was impressed over times preserve negative imprints of stamps on bricks that were
and in part of the distortion caused when the frame was
other times, the die was carved to read correctly, with the result the fingermarks, at other times damaged by them. Since rhese once bonded to the mortar."
removed. The boot-prints and animal-prints that are visible on
that the impression appeared as a mirror image. It was, however, marks form distinct shapes or letters of rhe alphabet, it seems
the top of some bricks were clearly made while the bricks were
common for occasional letters to be carved in reverse or upside that they served as something more than a frog." number of stamps laid upwards was 32 : 3 (Harrison and Prrerh, 'Sarachane IV', 27 5;
laid out to dry.
down for no obvious reason. It was also not uncommon for an Stamped bricks were used in Byzantine constructions of all Hill, 'Brickseemps', 222).
Stamping would have been undertaken whilst the bricks were ~ Bricks with their stamped face laid upwards have been noted, for instance, in
inscription to be carved from bottom to top or for lines to be types-public and private, secular and religious, substructures
still laid out in the drying yard, and it is possible that only t~ose window sills (1.94.13, II45.la (Hagia Eirene), 203.2g, 817.m, 969.1h (see also a
carved in different directions (and even then not necessarily in a and superstructures, large and small. Since the bricks for walls photograph published by Emerson and van Nice, 'Collapse', 103, fig. r z}, 1363.1;1
at the ends of the rows were stamped, leaving a high proportion
regular alternation). Many letters occur in a variety of forms (a were laid with the large square faces in the horizontal plane .(Hagia Sophia); 49.la(Kalenderhene Camii)), in putlog holes (666.4bb, 667.IX,
without a mark." For the best results, brickstamps should have
(usually with any stamp on the lower face)," brickstamps in 674.IU, 1341..3e,r j yc.rb, I396.Id (Hagia Sophia); 291.la, 676·3k, 676'5c, 920.1b,
been impressed when the bricks had become leather hard," a few of which are very corrupt), and not infrequently the same 1420.1a, I553.Ia (Hagia Eirene); 66o.le (KalenderbaneCamii): 1715.la), in paving
state that they may have taken a week to reach, depending on letter is carved in different ways on the same stamp. Stamps (j.ra, 4.1a, a.rb, 229.Ia, 27o.Ia, 666.4W, 666.16a, 82I.Ig, u79.13 (Hagia Sophia),
~l 2.2.2.Id shows traces of horizontal scoring to help with the layout of letters I73.la, 177.Ia, Bp.la (St john of Sroudios) ). Outside Constantinople, they have
weather conditions. Occasionally a brick was stamped more bearing the name AuSO:(Vt(O\l), for example, display a wide
along the top row. See also r aj a.rb. The cruciform stamp 687.1:1 (which Hill, been found in pavement no. 5 of tower no. 2 in the Walls of Nessebdr (Ognenova-
than once, particularly if the first stamping had left a poor variety of forms of the letters upsilon and xi. The former may 'Bricks tamps', 223 believed to have been made by a metal'die) shows both horizontal Marinova, 'Briques').
impression. A brick from Nessebar, however, was stamped with appear as Y, -:(, ~ or even X, and the xi may appear in forms as an~ vertical scoring to aid the positioning of the letters: 57 9I•Ia, 840' la (St Polyeukros), 842.la (ruins on Cemal Nadir Sokagr), 567.1;1

four clear impressions of the same die." diverse as Z, 3, 3:, l!O, Z,2, 2, ~,E, 'i',~,:5:, S, 5, S, and s: In the See95J.la, 1339.1a, 1441.13.· (perinthos), and stamps from St John of Stoudios (see p. 61) have been recorded
~1 See below pp. 27-8. from mortar impressions. It is, of course, necessary to reverse illustrations of mortar
fifth-century, the 'letter~ ~n brickstamps ;"'e~e' usually plain, ss During the excavations at Se Polyeukros, certain sections of brickwork were impressions for publication so that they appear' as they would have done on the
40 Dobson refers to the 'strike' used to remove superfluous clay and the <plane'
whereas in the sixth, they were often given serifs. Ligatures were dismantled. The ratio of the total number of stamps hid downwards to the total brick.
used to compress the clay into the mould and smooth the surface (Treatise, I.27,
1.71). Planing evidently reduced the speed of production considerably (Treatise, common, particularly-in the sixth century.
I.98 footnote). Emerson and van Nice ('Preliminary Report', 418) believe that Constantinopolitan brickstamp dies created depressions of
Byzantine bricks were levelled by hand in an open mould.
various shapes (rectangular, circular, cruciform, triangular,
41 George (Se. Eirene, 60) held that the fingermarks 'were doubtless made so that
the mortar might obtain a better hold upon the bricks: they correspond exactly to
tabula ansata) containing raised letters. Durable metal dies
the "frog" in modern bricks'. Cp. Dobson, Treatise, 1'33-34: 'A point of some little would have been expensive, particularly given that they would
importance may he here adverted to, viz., is any advantage gained by forming a
have been usable for only one year in fifteen if rhey incorporated
hollow in the bed of the brick to form a key for the mortar. There are various
opinions on this point, but we think it may be laid down as a principle, that jf it is an indiction date." Since the surviving metal dies generally pro-
useful on one side it will be still better on both, so as to form a double key for the duced sunken rather than raised inscriptions, they would appear
mortar .... In slop moulding, the mould is simply laid on the moulding stool, or on
to have been used for purposes other than brickstamping.'
a moulding board much larger than the mould, and both sides of the brick arc flush
with the edges of the mould, no hollow being left unless the moulder think fit to There are several reasons to believe that brickstamp dies were
make one by scoring the brick with his fingers, which is sometimes done.' made from a softer, cheaper material such as hardwood: the
.2 For the surface treatment of bricks, see the photographs of 57.13, lX5.I3,
impression sometimes shows indications of cracks that had
166.1a, 387.la, 4°9.13, 500.13; 676.1b, 800.la, 8.2I.lf, 1736.1C, 1737.lb, 1737.IC,
1737·P, 1742.la, I746·P·
developed in the die;" occasionally a broken die has been used;"
4J Cp. Dobson, Treatise, t.17, 1.29; and Harley, 'Typology', 65 (Method 4(b)).ln
contrast, the moulds used in Thessaloniki and elsewhere in the Early Byzantine 47 The firing time would depend on the capacity of the kiln. Del.aine, Caracalla,
period often had a bottom. and any inscription or design might be incised into this, 117, suggesting a capacity of 65 rrr' of brick in Imperial Rome, allows three days for
of the brick: see Theocharidou,
so as to leave a relief upon the surface 'Symbole', 108 firing and five days for the kiln to cool. For estimates in the Middle and Late
with rya"; Vickcrs, 'Brickstcmps', 285 n. t (Thessaloniki): Poulter, 'Brick
fig. Byzantine periods, sec Oustcrbout, Master Builders, 130-l.
Monograms', 494 (Louloudies): Bobccv, 'Monograrnmi', figs. 2-3 (Serdica);Zhcku, U For an explanation of the system of dating by indictions, see pp. 50-I.

'Durres': Cuneridge et al., 'Dyrrachium', 397 with figs. 7-8 (Durres); Onurkan, H See Nesbin and Vikan, SCCltriLY, 25-6. It has been suggested that a surviving
'Damgalar', 169-88 (Perge). bronze die found at Smyma with the two-line inscription CTE$ANOY I
H The stamp on AM 345 (.2.21.la) must have been made whilst the brick was laid nPECBYT{EPOY)S was for stamping bricks, but this is by no means certain. See
out in the open to dry, since rwo animal prints were made after the stamp had been Lcclcrcq, 'Estampilles', cols. 544-5, fig. 4203.
applied. For the proportion of bricks that W3S stamped, see p. 24. ~o See, e.g. 31.2.la, 967.10, q.
~5 Brodribb, Brick and Tile, reo. ~~See 222.1b. 51 Sec 313.1, 333.1, p6.1a, 1.284.1, 672.1, 534.1, 1699.1, 1714.1.
 ·.~
•
THE PURPOSE OF BRICKSTAMPS
9
Charisios, demarch of the White faction')." Insoluble inscrip- the mosque built close to Constantine's mausoleum and
tions were assigned to the final, fourth section. In Sorlin- Constantius' church of the Holy Apostles-Dethier discovered
Dorigny's opinion, the name on a brickstamp--whether of an a brick apparently bearing the letters TI01\. Y. He suggested that
CHAPTER 2 emperor, cleric, or dignitary-was that of the donor of the this should be restored TIoA1l[uv8pwv l, since that was the name
brick" given to the church on account of the imperial tombs there."
Gedeon, like Sorlin-Dorigny, retained Dethier's views on Stamps with the formula Tiic vkac ('of the new') (with or with-
The interpretation and purpose of reading the inscriptions. However, he questioned the ascription
of names without titles to patriarchs or to churches in posses-
out afollowing
Meliopoulos
name in the genitive case) were associated by
with the Nea church of Basil I,'" and Mango,

Constantinopolitan brickstamps sion of brick factories, suggesting that some such names referred
to the brickmaker, and others to the church for whose construc-
although not committing himself regarding their precise
significance, classified such stamps as 'inscribed with the name
tion the bricks were made." Gedeon believed that stamps with of a building or a place'." <sedeon ascribed a brick bearing the
indictions bore the abbreviated name of an emperor and had inscription [-lABAC[-l, which had been found not far from
been'donated by the imperial or public treasury. Those without the supposed site ~f the Exokionion, to the church of the archi-
1. EARLIER SCHOLARSHIP for religious brick factories, Dethier adduced stamps from indictions were believed to give either the name of the brick- stracegos Abbakias." Clearly the inscription is incomplete; it
Hagia Sophia reading Mey(uATjc)s 'EKKA(Tjclac)s ('of the Great maker (when a name alone was given), or the name of a private should in fact be restored [iv(8,lC"t,Oivoc) la- ~a( ) q-l or
Previous attempts to understand the significance and purpose Church') and Mal'ii ('of Mamas'), which he believed to have donor (when the stamp bore a name with a tide). Mango con- [iv(6'KnOivoc) la' Bae]-]. Both Gedeon and George suggested
of Constantinopolitan brickstamps have-perhaps not sur- been made in brickyards owned by the Great Church and by the curred that only those stamps giving the rank or occupation of that bricks bearing the inscription MEY(uATjc)s 'EKKA(Tjdac)s
prisingly-tended to concentrate on the names that the stamps church of St Mamas in Eyup.' the individual named referred to a donor." Schneider, on the had been produced specifically for the construction of either
bear. Dethier's article of ,87', which concerned a large number Dethier's precepts were adopted by Sorlin-Dorigny, who other hand, had claimed that the name of the donor was given on Hagia Sophia or Hagia Eirene (rather than in brickyards owned
of stamps found in the suburb of Bakirkoy (the a~_cient published in 1876 a short catalogue of brickstamps classified those stamps when!-rhe abbreviation ~a( ) was not employed." by those churches, as Dethier had suggested), and that stamps
Hebdomon), set an unfortunate precedent that was to be into four main groups, the first of which concerned 'Briques Of the few stamps adduced by Gray, Schneider, and Mango with the inscription MallCx were intended for a church of St
followed, more or less closely, by later scholars. Dethier imperiales'. Sorlin-Dorigny summarized Dethier's dating to support the theory that the individuals named had donated Mamas or for building work in the region of Constantinople
believed that a number of stamps bore imperial names. The system for imperial stamps, making only two refinements (if the bricks for the building project, the most plausible candidate that bore that name." Van Millingen asserted that Yedikule was
earliest imperial stamps, he claimed, carried the abbreviation they may be so called).' He claimed that stamps with indictions beats the inscriptionTIETPOY MA EYTOIXIAN, which has the site of Basil I's church of St Diomedes, owing to the alleged
Krovcrcvi ), and were to be ascribed to the emperor Constantine and the abbreviation ~a() had superseded imperial monograms been interpreted Tlerpoo 6,& etH1lX1UV,'[Brick] of Peter on discovery there of stamped bricks bearing the name Diomedes
or to his son Constantius 11.1 Emperors from the time of in the reign of Justinian, but it is indicative of his lack of rigour account of [his 1wealth'." But the occurrence of the comparable and a monogram that was believed to refer to the Macedonian
Theodosius Il, he asserted-though without providing any that the only stamp that he ascribed to Justinian in fact carried a inscriptions TIe'P01l 6taK( OV01l) Eu,,~a81\ou and TIe<po1l dynasty." Although the monogram is indeed imperial, it refers
evidence-employed their monograms.' Stamps with a single monogram' Following Dethier in completing the abbreviation 8'UKO(V01l)A01lATjavoil19suggests that .the correct reading is in in fact to the emperor Maurice, and the bricks therefore belong
line of text, beginning with an indiction date and incorporating ~u() as Ba( c'AeOlc) or Ba( C'AlcCTjC),Sorlin- Dorigny restored the fact TIe<po1l 6,a(KoV01l) Eu<o,x,av(oil), and that the stamp is, to the late sixth century." Mamboury, in one of his earliest
the abbreviation ~a( ) were also said to be imperial, appearing abbreviated names following ~a( ) as imperial personalities." therefore, a binominal example (a type that will be further articles mentioning brickstamps, stated his belief that the
from the time of the emperor Phocas. Dethier restored ~a( ) as Since most of the names were abbreviated to two or three letters, discussed below).'" Gray suggested that the inscription Byzantine remains at Kuciikyali (between Bostanci and
~a(ctAiOlc) and believed the letters that followed to be the first the restorations were far from certain; and even if the name was Mey(uATjc)s 'EICKA(T]dac)s ('of the Great Church') might also Maltepe) were part of the monastery at Satyros, built between
letters of the imperial name. Thus he expanded +IN~I<J)OY as correctly completed, there was no guarantee that it referred indicate a donation by the Church," whereas Dethier had 873 and 877 by St Ignatius, son of Michael 1. He adduced in
+ iv8(uC'nOivoc) , <J)O[ICCx ~actAiOlcl3 Another brick was to an emperor rather than a private citizen. To Derhicr's conclu- earlier inferred from such stamps that Hagia Sophia possessed support of the identification a bricksramp with the name-
assigned to the Palaiologan period on the sole grounds that it sions, he added another: the Macedonian emperors had com- its own brick-kilns." The two suggestions are not mutually abbreviation La( ).31In fact, Mamboury had mistakenly read L
bore a cruciform stamp.' bined the title Batt""OlC with ,rupwc, using the abbreviation exclusive, but both are speculative. for ~, and the correct reading of the name was, in fact,
Since other names' that could not be associ~ted with known IC\J()or IC\Jp()." In fact, the letters K1l() or K1lp() are themselves Another theory is that some of the stamps give the name of the Au~a[(v<to1l)].32
emperors were preceded by a cross,. Derhier attempted to the abbreviated name." Following Dethier's lead, Sorlin- building in which the bricks were to be used, or the name of the Speculative completions of the enigmatic abbreviation ~pE()
identify them with either a patriarch of Constantinople or a Dorigny recognized a second group of stamps relating to builder. Again, numerous speculative readings and hypothetical (the discussion of which is better postponed)," led to the various
saint to whom a church, either at or close to Bakirkoy, had been the clergy, which carried the titles monachos, preshuteros, identifications of the individuals named on the stamps have been suggestions that the individuals named after it were emperors
dedicated. Thus he suggested that a stamp bearing the name hegoumenos, diakonos, or names that could be ascribed to proposed. Timoni, for instance, believed that a stamped brick (Dethier, Sorlin-Dorigny, Gedeon), overseers of construction
8e06ropo1l had been produced in the brick factories of the patriarchs. His third group was devoted to dignitaries, and con- bearing the name Paul, which he discovered in ruins at
Beylerbeyi, indicated that the building was to be associated with u 1606.la; Mordunann, Komtantinope/, 37; Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 89,
church of St Theodore in the suburb of Rhegion.! He also held tained several stamps whose abbreviated inscriptions were often no. 3 I. According to Sideropoulos (' Auronomos', 12.2.),Dethier identified the site of
that bricks for construction work in Bakirkoy had been ridiculously expanded to allow them to be assigned to indi- a church built by the Apostle of thatname."Near Fatih Carnii- the church of the martyr Autonomos at Erenkoy on the grounds of bricksramps and
supplied by a church of St John the Baptist (either that built other evidence. (I have not, however, been able to consult Dethier in The Leva711
viduals known from our historical sources. Thus the frag-
I) Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 80, no. 33. Herald, 3 March 1876.)
within the city by Stoudios, or that founded by Theodosius I in mentary stamp lAPA01\. pn a brick found near the Land 14 Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 83. 2S lilJ.la, 1416.13,Meliopoulos, 'Panreichion', 456.
the Hebdomon). This conclusion followed from his belief that a Walls was restored [X]ap(,crt01l) A(TjIlUPX)O(1l)A(e1lKOiv)('of I~ Gcdeon, 'Engraphoi', 381-2. 2' Mango, 'Brick Stamps', 24, 26. On the interpretation of this formula, see below
16 Mango, 'Brick Stamps', 25, referring to his types band c. p.2S·
fragmentary stamp bearing the Greek abbreviation ~ap( )
11 Schneider, 'Ziegelseempel', 2.6-4. . 2T 1619.la, Gedeon, 'Engraphoi', 382..
should be restored as the Latin Bap( tista),! In support of his case 7 Derhier, 'Makrikoy', 168. IS See 1118.1. Gray (,Brickstamps', p, SS no. 31), followed by Schneider 21 Gedeon, 'Engraphoi', 382; Georgc, 'St. Eirene', 59.
I Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 83. CZicgclstempel', 268 no. 88) and by Mango (,Brick Stamps', 2.5). 29 312.13, Van Millingen, 'Va/ls, 265. Cures, Broken Bits, ii, no. 80, puts the
1 Derhier, 'Makrikoy', 166, no. r~',168. 2 Dethier, 'Makrikcy', 162.. 9 Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 84, no. 2., pl. 14 no. I. 19 11 17.1, III9.I. 10 See p. 18. findspct near Silivri Kapi. )0 See pp. 47-8.
) Dethier, 'Makrikoy', r67, no. re', 168. 4 Derhier, 'Makrikoy', 162.. 10 Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 84-7. II Gray, 'Bricksramps', p. II 136.13,Mambcury, 'Mara', )28-9.
S Dcrhier, 'Makrikoy', 164-5, no. lA', r68. 11 Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 83. 2l Dcrhier, 'Makrikdy', 168, followed by Schneider, 'Ziegelsternpel', 269. J2 See also p.ar with nare.
6 Derhier, 'Makrikoy', 167,00. KA', r68. See below p. 20 with n. 159.
II
v rcjo.r aj Timoni, Promenades, 2..236. II For discussion, sec pp. 21-3.
 PART I: INDUSTRY
work (Schneider), imperial officials (Mango), or the makers
of the bricks (Mamboury). This last view, although never
idequately argued, has been generally welcomed," and most
-ecently Hill stated that 'they must be the names of officials in,
rr owners of, brickyards', on the grounds that large numbers of
nicks stamped with the same name had been laid together in a
.ingle architectural context at St Polyeuktos.' This evidence,
"bile suggesting that bricks stamped with the same name
sriginared from the same place, does not indicate the status of
he individual named, whether a brickmaker, the owner of the
irickyard, an official in it, or the owner of the land on which the
irickyard (or possibly several brickyards) was located. It is clear
hat, from the names alone, no firm conclusions can be drawn
.bout the purpose of the brickstamps.
Martiny looked beyond the names for a clue to the function of
he stamps. He suggested that the indiction date used on many
sricksramps might indicate that the practice of stamping was
:onnected with taxation." He did not explore the possibi\!.ty
urther, and the suggestion was later questioned by Mango,"
vho wondered why only a proportion of bricks beat stamps,
ince presumably all brick-kilns would have been liable to the
ax concerned. Such speculation is not very helpful without a
_pecific idea of the nature of the tax and its context in a model of
he organization of the brickmaking industry.
In an attempt to understand the meaning and purpose of
:onstantinopolitan bricks tamps, we may examine three types
,f evidence. First, there is the literary (mainly legal) evidence we
'assess concerning the provision of building materials in the,
.ater Roman Empire. Second, there are some shreds of evidence
.earing specifically on brick and tile production in Rome in the
.ate Empire. And third, we have brickstamps of the fourth to
ixth centuries from Rome, which may help in the interpretation
.f the contemporary examples from Constantinople.
2. PROVISION OF BUILDING MATERIALS
IN THE LATER ROMAN EMPIRE
n the Later Roman Empire, the provision of building materials
or public works was intimately connected with the system of
ixation, The collection and administration of revenues in the
eriod was organized by three departments: the res privata,
rhich managed the imperial estates; the comitiva sacrarum
trgitionum, which controlled the mints, mines, and state arms
ictories; and the praetorian prefecture, which was responsible
M Mango called it, 'a very sensible opinion, but unfortunately unsupported by
iy evidence' ('Brick Stamps', 25). Talbor Rice wrote, 'it is more or less generally
rreed that the name is probably that of a contractor or factory' (GP 11, 105).
~irimtekin commented, <itis to-day an acknowledged fact that such inscriptions on
yeantinc stamped bricks refer to the workshop' ('Beylerbey', 27). Ogneuova-
Iarinova writes of'estampilles portanr le nom de l'arclier dc fabrication' (Briques',
'9).
n Hill, 'Bricksmmps', 22 J.
36 GPI,28.
)7 Mango, 'Brick Stamps', 26.
for the calculation of the land-tax, called the indictio (indi-
crion)." The indiction raised corn for the capitals and certain
other cities, met the costs of shipping it (a duty performed by the
nauklero.), supplied the food and transport, either in kind or in
cash, for the army, the civil service, and related departments of
state, and raised fodder for the cavalry units. It also provided
labour and materials for certain public works: roads, bridges,
post stations, and granaries." In the provinces, other public
works were the care of the ciry councils, but in the capital cities
of Rome and Constantinople, these other projects were the
responsibility of the ciry prefects, who ranked immediately
below the praetorian prefects.'?
During the first and second centuries AD, the state had
normally made compulsory purchases (indictiones) of whatever
commodities it required) usually at a fair price. However) under
the Severan emperors, soldiers and officials had been regularly
allowed to help themselves to the goods and services of pro-
vincials, and the price they had paid had often been inadequate.
Diocletian (284-305) attempted to io:pose order on thrse
arbitrary practices by making the requisnon a regular annual
event, the indictio. A less frequent indiction would not have
been practical owing to the perishable nature of some of the
goods levied, limits on storage space, and limits on the tax-
payer's ability to provide. The praetorian prefecture was there-
fore required to estimate the total needs of the state each year.
By Diocletian's reign, the Roman currency had collapsed,
since previous emperors had failed to ensure that each province
was contributing its maximum to the state, and had resorted to
debasing the currency." Until this point, taxpayers' wealth had
been assessed in money, but owing to inflated values this must
have become difficult. Worried about error in apportioning tax
liabilities, Diocletian also introduced the iugum and caput-
abstract units for the measurement of wealth."
Each province possessed its own schedule (formula census),
which employed the units of measure familiar there. This
schedule gave the value in iuga of equal areas of various types of
land put to various types of use." Owners of large amounts of
land were required to make a detailed declaration (professio) of
their land and its features. From a passage of the jurist Ulpian
that is repeated in the Digest of Justinian, we gain a clear impres-
sion of the detail of professiones." The information collected
included the number of iugera of land used for crops, for vines,
JI Jones, LRE, 4tI H.
n Construction and repair of roads and bridges: CTh 15·3·5 (4U), 15·J·6 (42J)
both directed to the praetorian prefect. Construction and repair of post-stations and
granaries: CIC, Cl 10.26.2 (364).
40 Jones, LRE. 448-9, 689;10. Honcratus became Constantinople's first city
prefect on II December 359 (Dagron, Naissance, 215-17), and henceforth the city
stood outside tbe system of provincial. government. The laws concerning public
works in the capitals in CTh 15.1, 1503and CIC, C]8.ll arc generally addressed to
the city prefects (jones, LRE, J69 n. 14)'
41 Goffan, Colonate, 20.
41 It is likely, but not certain, that the capltt W3S introduced by Dioclctian
(Goffan, Coionate, 47, 48 D. 22.)
4) Goffart, Colonate, 33-4'
44 CIC,Digest 50.15+
THE PURPOSE
for olive trees, for making hay, for pasture, and for timber,
also the number of slaves, their nationality, age, function and
skills, details of coloni, and of lakes with fish and harbours. Of
particular interest is the knowledge that professiones included
details of naturally occurring deposits such as salt-pans. A
schedule, unfortunately of uncertain date and provenance, in
the Geometrica of Hero of Alexandria also demonstrates the
thoroughness of the surveys made for the purposes of tax
declaration: it encompasses black earth, red earth, hard earth,
sandy earth, earth containing saltpetre, and so on."
The name of the landowner, his professio, and his assessment
in iuga and capita were entered in the register, and the entry was
called a caput or 'heading'." The praetorian prefecture, which
had calculated the state's total annual requirements, had its
accountants (scriniarit.J calculate, for each commodity, the pro-
portion of the total amount that was required from each
province or city. There was a specific department (scrinium) of
the praetorian prefecture devoted to raising taxes for public
works in the Oriental, African, and Illyrican prefectures." The
local government would ca\culate the proportion of each
commodity that any individual was liable to provide per iugum
declared." On the basis of his liability (capitatio), the landowner
should have paid the tax.
The budget drawn up by the praetorian prefecture would
regularly fail to account for certain needs, and arbitrary
exactions on a prefecture, diocese, or province were therefore
necessary in addition. These requistions of payments or services
in addition to the fixed annual canon' of the indiction were
superindicta, otherwise called munera extraordinarta or munera
sordida (liturgies)" Privileged persons, such as senators, were
often granted immunity from these supplementary taxes, being
liable only for the fixed indiction." A law of 361, for instance,
states that senators should resist any attempts by provincial
governors to have them contribute towards superindictions for
the construction of public works, and reassures them that they
have imperial support." When laws were passed withdrawing
immunity from superin:dictions, in the West by Gratian in 382,"
and in the East by Theodosius I in 390," the privileged few were
still granted exemptions from certain kinds of superindicted
munera. Amongst the munera that these two laws define are: the
furnishing of artisans of any sort, the burning of lime, the supply
of wood and boards, the charcoal tax (illatio carbonis) (except if
4$ Hero of Alexandria, Geometrica, ed, Heiberg, 414.
~ Goffart, Colonate, 53-60.
47 Lydus,De Magistratibus, J.5 (Oriental Prefecture). CIC, C] I.q.1.36(Mrican
Prefecture). Notitia Dignitatum Or. 3.26, CIC, C] u.49.r2 (Illyrican Prefecture).
Jones, LRE, 371 n. r4. 449.
•• Goffart, Colonate, H with a. 8.
4~ On the equivalence of the first two terms, see Jones, LRE, _151-2 with D. tOO.
On the equivalence of the second two terms, see Goffut, Colonate, 136-7 n. 3 pace
[ones, LRE, 535-6. See also [ones, £RE, 462 with n. 115, 839 wirh n. 38.
so Jones, LRE, 466 with n. IJj, 535-6.
SI CTh !5.1.7 (J6r), on which scc jacvier, Legislation, J76, also CTh 15·1.5 (Jj8),
which mentions similar exemptions from the construction of public works.
52 CTh 1I.16.15(382).
5l CTh I1.I6.18 (J90).
OF BRICKSTAMPS II
required for the mints and arms factories), the construction and
repair of public and sacred buildings, the provision of lodgings
for state guests, and the care of roads and bridges.
In 387, 412, and 423, laws were passed preventing road build-
ing and repair being charged as munera sordida, ensuring that
the costs were met through the regular indiction so that no One
was exempted from contribution in proportion to his tax assess-
ment in ittga and capita." The third of these laws specifies that
even ecclesiastical and imperial properties were liable to these
charges. On occasion it was even decreed that an entire
superindiction should be considered as part of the regular indic-
tion, and that therefore the levy should fall on everybody with-
out excepcion." Laws concerning the restoration of ports)
aqueducts and fortifications in the late fourth and early fifth
centuries stress that there should be no persons exempted from
contributing materials and transportation in proportion to their
assessment."
Emperors Gratian, Valentinian, and Theodosius Augusti to Cynegius,
Praetorian Prefect. (Constantinople, 18 January 384.)
All men shall contribute their work and shall zealously urge forward
the restoration of the Port and the aqueduct, and no person shall be
exempted from such common duty by any privileges of rank.
Emperors Arcadius and Honorius Augusti to Caesarius, Praetorian
Prefect. (z4 March 396.)
All governors of provinces shall be admonished by letter that they must
know that the municipal senates and inhabitants of each city shall build
new walls or make the old walls stronger, and the expense thereof shall,
of course, be arranged in such a way that the tax assessment shall be
apportioned according to the ability of each man. An estimate shall be
made of the cost of the future work, and in accordance therewith the
land of the citizens shall be assessed, so that no more or less than neces-
sity requires shall be demanded, lest the urgent completion of such
work should be hindered. A definite sum must be assessed againsteach
taxable unit of land Uugum) so that the burden of defraying the expense
may be imposed equally on all.
Emperors Honorisa and Theodosius Augusti to Herculius, Praetorian
Prefect of Illyricum. (Constantinople, 9 April a r a; 407; 408.)
All persons, regardless of their privileges, shall be compelled to aid in
the construction of walls and in the purchase and transportation of
supplies, so that in these instances) at least, all shall be forced to perform
these compulsory services (mum) in proportion to their landholdings
(possessiones) and land tax units (iugationes).!'7 Since the burden thus
extends from the highest to the lowest, there will be provided by the
conunon labour not a slight relief for bearing the burden, but a benefit
S4 This interpretation of these laws relies on the assumption that munera .
sordida = seperindiaa, rather than that the former was a particular type of the latter.
CTh 15.3.3 (387), 15,),5 (4Jl., bearing on Bithynia), 15.3.6 (42J, bearing on all
provinces).
!5 CTh ILI.6(J5-4d46),l1.5.2{416).
5' CTh 15.1.23 (384) (port and aqueduct at Constantinople), J.4(J96) (provin~jal
forti6cations),49 (412) (fortifications of Illyricum), NovVal, ill. 5.5.J (440) (Fortifi-
cations of Rome). Translations: Pharr. . .
57 Note how che real land (possessio)is distinguished from the assessment mmga,
demonstrating that the i"gltm was not an area of cultivable land whose area we may
attempt to compute. See GoHart, Colonate, J3, 127 n. 7.
12 PART I: INDUSTRY
for the general welfare. Your Sublimity shall recognize that Our
Clemency has decreed these regulations for the regions of Illyricurn
only.
Emperor ValentinianAugustus (Rome, j March 440.)
[The city prefect's] regulation shall also restore the parts that have been
shattered in the walls, towers and gates, so that absolutely no person
shall be exempted from the repair of the walls and of all the structures
that have been mentioned above.
It would appear from such laws that the requirements for public
works, whether met through the regular indiction or through
superindictions, and whether met in kind or in money, generally
fell upon all taxpayers in proportion to their capitatioliugatio
assessment.
The law codes preserve valuable references to the requistion-
ing of specific building materials. Lime for Rome was levied
from the provinces of Tuscany and Campania, and a law of 365
suspended the annual indiction of lime from Tuscany and
limited the total yearly exaction to 3,000 loads. The same law
ordered that each of the lime-burners (calciscoctores) and carters
(vectuarii or vectores) should be paid one solidus per wagon
load, of which one-quarter would be paid by the area uinaria
(the state treasury for money raised from the sale of exacted
wine) and the remainder by the landowner obliged to supply the
lime." A law of 440 mentions caespites calcarii, caespites
arenenses and caespites vectuarii-estates designated to supply
Rome's lime, sand, and transport." In the case of this particular
decree, it seems that the estate owners had been paying their
taxes in monetary form, and that the law was intended to ensure
that they returned to meeting requirements in kind, as had once
been usual.
Other materials extracted from the earth-such as gold,
:::opper, and iron for use in the mints and arms factories-were
levied in the same way. The owners of ore-bearing estates with
mines could apply for permission to pay a propor~on of their
taxes in copper, gold, or iron, so that they became subject to the
corresponding copper tax (aeraria praestatio), gold tax (auraria
oraestatio), or iron tax iferaria praestatio), and would con-
sequently be granted relief (relevatio) from certain other contri-
butions to the annual indiction." In the Oriental Prefecture, the
state arms factories (jabricae) were administered by the scrinium
zrmorurri of the Praetorian Prefecture, and levies were imposed
cmestates to obtain the requisite iron, horn, and other necessary
materials." A particul:r law concerning the requisition of iron
58 See [ones, LRE, 704, 708-9. CTh 14.6.1 (359), 14.6.2 (364), I4·6·3 (365).
59 NovVa15'5.4(440).
60 CTh rI.20.6{4P), ILI.23 (393).]ones,LRE,435, plausibly suggests that these
taxes were paid by metalliferous estates. Edmondson, 'Mining', 98 writes that 'a
regulation of 424 states that with government permission a landowner could pay his
:axcs not in coin or kind, but commuted into metal (gold, copper or irony. This,
aowever, is a description of the law of 430 to which he has earlier referred. The law
of 424 (CTh II.2L3), as [ones, LRE, 838-9, explains, refers to 'a contribution of
;opper (eonlatio aeris), which might be commuted for gold at a rate of one solidus
'or 25Ib'. . texts: ClC, Digest 7.1.9.2, 7.1.13.5, 8.3.5-6 and Helen, Organization, 43.
6\ Lydus,De Magistratihus, 3.5.]ones, LRE, 369 n. 8, 449, 835·
states that the material itself, rather than money, should be
levied since provision in kind risked less theft." When the
regular indiction did not meet the needs of the mints and arms
factories for charcoal, all taxpayers were liable to contribute to
the superindiction demanded by the state."
It appears that the detail of the entries in the census was such
that deposits of salt, metal ores, sand, and limestone, were care-
fully recorded. Those estates where the substances occurred in
amounts making exploitation worthwhile might be designated
to supply them-hence the caespites calcarii and caespites
arenenses in Rome. We may imagine that clay deposits were also
included in the schedules, and that the lands with access to clay
of an acceptable quality were designated to supply bricks and
tiles. The state's total annual requistion of sand, lime, bricks, and
tiles would have been apportioned, on the basis of the number cif
iuga declared, to those whose lands possessed exploitable
deposits.
The laws we have examined concentrate on public works
funded through taxation, but they also provide a little informa-
tion on how the materials for a private building-project ,,(ere
obtained. Although the state had first claim on the limestone and
sand quarried on the estates that had been designated to supply
those materials, any excess could legally be sold privately/"
Similarly, it is clear that the owners of ore-bearing estates
who had applied to pay the copper, gold, or iron tax to the
state were also making profits from their mines, since a fifth of
those profits was claimed by the state, to be divided equally
between the praetorian prefecture and the cornitiua sacrarum
largitionurn= If, as was suggested above, the owners of some
clay-bearing estates were obliged to provide a quota of bricks
and tiles to the state each year, we may imagine that they were
permitted to sell aIJYsurplus commercially."
A private lndiviaual wishing to arrange for the construction
of a building on his land would have approached a builder and
have drawn up a form of contract called locatio conductio. In
such an agreement, the building contractor (conductorj agreed
to improve the landowner's (iocator's) property in return for an
agreed sum. Such a contract would stipulate which materials
were to be purchased by the contractor and which. by the
locator. The conductor would perhaps have purchased the more
common materials, such as bricks and rubble, and the employer
may have arranged for the provision of rarer elements, such as
precious marbles."
62 CTb 10.22.2 (388).
6J In 382, the burning of charcoal for the mints and arms factories was specifically
excluded from the list of those mune;asordida (supcrindictions) from which certain
high-ranking individuals were exempted. This supcrindictionwas therefore a
burden on all landowners. See CTh 1l.I6.15 (382), 1[,16.18 (390);jones, LRE, 435,
452·
6. CTh 14.6,4 (382).
65 CTh 11.20.6(430).
66 Clay is, in fact, often discussed together with limestone, sand, and stone in legal
67 See Martin,Jurists, 29-40.
THE PURPOSE
3. BRICK PRODUCTION IN ROME IN THE
FIFTH AND SIXTH CENTURIES
a. The literary evidence
There is a small amount of literary evidence concerning the pro-
vision of-roof-tiles in sixth-century Rome. Cassiodorus pre-
serves the following letter of King Theodoric (written around
507-12) to one Sabinianus:"
Dudum siquidem propter Romanae moenia civitatis, ubi studium nobis
semper impendere infatigabilis ambitus eru, portum Licini deputatis
reditibus reparari iussio nostra constiuds, ut XXV millia tegularum
annua illatione praestaret: simul etiam portubus iunctis, qui ad ilia loca
antiquiuu pertinebant, qui nunc diversorum usurpatione suggeruntur
irnrasi. Cuncta ergo ad statutam praestationem fades sine dilatione
reuocari: quia licetnostra iussapro sua reuerentia in nullo violanda sunt,
ea tamen oatodiri volumus maxime, quae urbis faciem oidentur ornare.
Now, some time ago, for the sake of Rome's public monuments, to
which it will be my unwearying aim ever to devote attention, I decreed
that the depot of Licinius should be repaired from the revenues
assigned, in order that 25,000 roof-tiles may be supplied as an annual
levy. This should also apply to the associated depots which once
belonged to that place, and which, it is reported, have now been illicitly
taken over by various persons. Therefore, without delay, you are to
have everything returned to supplying the statutory quantity; for,
although, out of reverence for them, my commands should be violated
in no matter, I especially want those which beautify the city to be
observed. .
The portus Licini and associated depots had fallen into dis-
repair, and had been taken over by unauthorized persons. These
depots were, in all likelihood, located on the Tiber; in the past,
bricks from the various brick-producing estates that they had
served had been gathered there before being shipped to Rome."
That they were in a state of disrepair is unsurprising given that
little building or reconstruction had taken place in Rome in the
preceding years." Theodoric orders Sabinianus to have the
depots repaired, and to arrange for the production of 2 5 ,000 tiles
annua illatione.
The meaning of illatio is crucial for the interpretation of this
passage." The term is associated with the annual land-tax, and
concerns payments to the state and state revenues. Thus the
Praetorian Prefect Liberius could be praised for administering
the tax collection with such integrity that, although the tax
burdens (tributa) were not increased, the revenues (illationes)
were." The term illatio was also applied to each of the four-
6! Cessiodorus, Variae, 1.25; trans. Bamish, 18 (adapted). On moenia meaning
'public monuments' in Late Antiquity, see [envier, Legislation, 72-3 and Ward-
Perkins, Public Building, 46 n. 39. On Sabinianus, sec PLRE, ii. s.v. Sabinianus 6.
69 See Bloch, 'Ziegelscempel', 200-1; Sreinby, 'Ziegelstempel', 1511-12; Del.aine,
Caraealla,90-1.
71J See Ward-Perkins, Public Building, 45-8.
71 Burnish does not translate illatione.
72 CTh 2.16. Sensimue auetas illationes, vos addita tribiua nescuis ('I realized that
the revenues were increased; you knew nothing of extra taxes').
OF BRICKSTAMPS 13
monthly instalments in which landowners paid the tripartite
indiction (trina illatio). For example, in an exhortation to
landowners to pay their dues in the indiction of 537/8, the
emperor wrote to the praetorian prefect:
I order you to advise the landowner (possessorem) in your province,
for the first indiction, that he must loyally pay his tax money (assem
tributariums, keeping to the three instalments (trina illatione) ...
Furthermore, you are to send my secretariat (scrinia), in regular form,
an accurate four-monthly record of the expenses of collection, so
that truth may shine out from the public accounts) with all error and
obscurity wiped away."
Theodoric's letter to Sabinianus shows that in sixth-century
Rome the quantities of tiles required for the upkeep of V.F· iUs
public monuments (moenia civitatis) were exacted as an annual
levy (annua illatione). This, incidentally, finds a parallel in the
state levy of carbon (illatio carbonis) mentioned in the Codex
Theodosianus." Since Theodoric orders Sabinianus to have
'everything returned to supplying the statutory quantity,' it
seems that the annual tile levy was not a new one; rather, it had
not been exacted for some time, and Theodoric was reinstituting
it.
From the letter we may deduce that Theodoric intended
Sabinianus to eject the unauthorized users from the depots,
which could then be used to store the tiles that were to be levied
annually from landowners. Unfortunately the text gives no idea
of the number of landowners on whom the levy fell, or of the
location of their estates." Those tiles produced in excess of the
annual levy would presumably have been sold for personal
profit by the landowner, or have been put towards meeting the
next year's levy."
Another letter, from Theodoric to the senators Ampelius,
Despotius, and Theodulus, seems to provide further evidence
that the state's requirement for bricks and tiles was met in kind
by taxpayers:"
Decet no;tri tempo-is disciplinam, ut, qui pub/icis utilitatibus seroiunt,
superfluis oneribus non graventur. nee dignum est, ut cuiusquam laedat
invidia nostris motibus ordinata. quapropter figulinis regia vobis
auctoritate concessisoperam navanter impendite, necvereamini ad alias
73 Cassiodorus, Variae, 12.16 (trans. Barnish 172-3). Compare similar exhorta-
tions in Yariae 11.7 (trans. Hodgkin 488-9) and 12.2. Note also, for example, the
references to various instalments at variae 11.15 (de prima illatione), r1.35 and 11.36
(ex illatione tertia).
7~ CTh ILr6.18(390).
7$ In his, commentary on Cassidorus, Yariae r8, Bamish suggests, far less
plausibly in my opinion, that the provision of the tiles may have been a tax on the
unauthorized users of the depot.
76 25,000 tiles represents less than the total output of a single, medium-sized kiln
during the brickmaking season (mid-April to mid-September). Following the
approximate calculations of Del.aine, Caraealla, r 17-1 8, we may suggest that a kiln
with a firing capacity of around 65 m' of clay would have held about 5,000 tiles
measuring about 0.49><0.66 ><0.04m. Thus the tiles made in five firings would have
met the state's requistion. It should be borne in mind however, that the production
of tiles would have required considerably more work than the production of the
same number of bricks.
77 Cassiodorus, Variae, 2.23 (not translated by Barnish,but a summary appears in
Hodgkin, ,8)).

14 PART
'VDS actiones posse traduci, a quibus iniuncta praesentia »ix credimus
explicari. cessabit improborum nefanda praesumptio et
ergo circa vos
obscuris dolis effectum nostra tollit auctoritas. in casstcm enim odii, cui se
dementia principalis obiecerit.
It accords with the practices of our times that those who serve the
public interest should not be weighed down with excessive burdens.
Nor is it fitting that anyone's formal jealousy should do harm to Our
activities. On account of this, work diligently in the brickyards con-
ceded to you by imperial authority; nor be afraid that you can be
subjected to legal actions brought by others (from which we can hardly
believe the present injunctions can he separaredj." Therefore the
wicked presumption of evil men towards you will cease, and Our
authority will relieve the effect of dirty tricks. For he who has been
shown imperialclemency has no reason to hate.
To begin, the emperor makes two general points: first, that it is
the custom (temporis disciplinam) that public servants (qui
Dub/iris utilitatibus serviunt) should not be forced to perform
further public duties (superjluis oneribus); and second, that
imperial instigations (nostris motibus) cannot be allowed to be
undermined by wicked individuals (improbomm) who are
envious of the benefits derived from performing public duties.
The context is clearly one of taxation. The phrase 'those
who serve the public welfare' refers to individuals who are meet-
ing an obligation to the state, as can be demonstrated from
numerous passages in the legal codes." For instance, it is the
oublic welfare that demands the services of the decurion;" lest
~he public welfare be impaired, decurions are not exempted
:rom lowly duties and extraordinary burdens;" those who
rarbour decurions who are shirking their public duties willlos~
:heir status and property for ignoring the public welfare;"
Iecurions neglecting their public duties must designate a subsri-
:ute who is capable of serving the public welfare" The postal
rystern, a public service, serves the public welfare." Shipping is a
rublic duty not to be evaded, for all men must serve the public
velfare:" all ships of a capacity above 2,000 measures are at
iublic disposal, and appeals are contrary to public welfare."
[here is no right of appeal in cases of debt to the fisc, since that
vould be contrary to public welfare." From these examples it
iecornes clear that, to a large degree, the public welfare was
'ealized through efficient taxation, and that those who dutifully
ierformed their obligations to the state were serving the public
velfare.
The two principles that the emperor has explained are then
.pplied to a specific case, which concerns the three senators
o whom the letter is· addressed. These senators are clearly
xamples of men serving the public welfare, and we learn that a
concession had been granted to them to exploit imperial figlinae
71 The Latin of the relative clause is problematical The sense seems to be that, in
'heodoric's opinion, me present laws have a positive bearing 00 the senators'
redicamenr.
7t Cp. Berger, Roman Law, ]56.
10 CTh 12.1.109(}8S). 11 CTh 12.6.} 1 (.4'2).
12 CTh 12..I.76(}71). Il CTh 12.1.91 (}82).
• CTh 8.7-7(3s8). 15 CTh l}12 (406).
86 NovTh 8 (439). 17 CTh Il.}6.12 (}55).
I: INDUSTRY
(clay-pits). By the reign of Caracalla (211-17), nearly all of the
figlinae had become the property of the emperor." In the sixth
century) some were privately owned, some were perhaps in the
hands of the church, but clearly most were still in imperial
possession, and their exploitation could be delegated to select
groups of wealthy individuals such as Ampelius, Despotius, and
Theodolus.! The senators would have paid contractors who
in turn wo"uld have hired brickmakers to work in the imperial
figlinae, moulding and firing the clay. Theodoric describes the
senators as performing a public service, and we must therefore
assume that the state exacted from them a certain number of
bricks or tiles each year. These concessions caused other, jealous
individuals (invidia, improborum) to attempt legal action
(actiones). This suggests that the concessions were particularly
valuable both financially and in terms of prestige. It may be that
the annual production of each of the figlinae far exceeded the
annual levy, and that the senators profited greatly from selling
the surplus. Furthermore, it seems that in return for the service
the senators were exempted from other public burdens.
These two passages from Cassiodorus suggest that in sixth-
century Rome the state imposed on particular landowners a levy
of a certain number of bricks and tiles per annum, and that
supplying them was considered a public duty. This is as we
might have expected, having studied the supply of other
materials for public works, the mints, and the arms factories in
the fourth and fifth centuries. The second passage also indicates
that brick production was a highly lucrative occupation, and
thereby alludes to the large-scale commercial activities of those
who owned or had been granted access to clay-bearing lands.
b. The brickstamp eoidence"
Some bricks" fro;' fifth-century Rome were, surprisingly,
stamped with the name of the Eastern Emperor Arcadius:
D(omino) n(ostro) Arcadio Aug(usto). Bricks so stamped were
apparently produced in imperially owned figlinae'l Many of
the imperialfiglinae had once been in private ownership, and in
this period we have bricks stamped Of(ftcina) Domitiana,
Of{icina) Fauriana, or Of{icina) Marciana, which refer to the
former figlinae Domitianae, Faurianae, and Marcianae." There
is, however) evidence that some figlinae were still in private
ownership in the fifth century: we possess stamps reading ex
f(iglinis) Donati(ani?) and ex Donatiani, which refer to the clay-
18 Steinby, 'Ziegelstempel', I SI S; Steicby, 'L'industria laterizia', 10}-9'
89 Steinby, 'L'industrialarerizia', 157-9.
References for Rorrian brickstarups are given to Cl L, xv and Bloch, 'Supple-
')C)
ment'. For references to further supplementary material, the reader should consult
Bloch, 'Indices' and Steinby, India. On the Late Antique bnckstamps of Rome, see
Steinby, 'L'industria latcrizia' and Sreinby, 'Figlinae tardoacticbe'.
'I ClL,xv. 166oa. Steicby, 'L'industrialarerizia'j rra.
n Bloch, 'Supplement', 600 var., CIL, xv. 1601, 1619. Sreinby, '('industria
lererizie', 127 series 27. For the difficulty dating Steinby's series }1 (mentioning
officinae of Benerius, Bonifatius, Exxupcrancius, Forrunatus, and Geminianus) and
}2 (with officinae of Benignus and Florus), which may belong to the fourth or fifth
century, see Steinby, 'L'indusrria larerizia', 129-}0, 145-6.
THE PURPOSE
pits of one Donatianus, and which are probably to be dated to
the second quarter of that century."
Other stamps bear just the name of an individual.
Occasionally the persons named are known to have been of high
status, so we can be sure that they were the owners of figlinae.
We possess, for instance, stamps mentioning Quintus Clodius
Hermogenianus Olybrius, consul of 379, who died between 384
and 395," and Quintus Anicius Hermogenianus Olybrius,
consul of 395, who is named with his wife, Anicia Juliana"
Stamps naming individuals who cannot be identified with cer-
tainty: however, cannot be interpreted clearly. Symmachus, for
instance, might have entered into a contract to organize brick-
making, but equally he might have possessed figlinae of his
own." The same can be said of bricks stamped with a monogram
that is apparently to be resolved V olusi or Volusiani."
A number of Roman stamps can be placed firmly in the early
sixth century, since they bear the name of the Ostrogothic
King Theodoric or Athalaric" The formulae d(omino) n(ostro)
rege TheodoricolAthalarico or reg(nante) d(omino) n(ostro)
Theodoricol AthakfTico give an indication of the date at which
the bricks were manufactured, but do not allow us to infer with
certainty that the bricks so stamped were made in imperially
owned figlinae rather than in private ones. Some bricks bearing
a stamp of Theodoric also carty a stamp with the formula de or
ex officina Iusti (Cl L, xv, ,664, I668). It is possible, therefore,
that the bricks were made on land belonging to Iustus, and
that the stamp of Theodoric was applied to the brick simply
to mdicate the date of manufacture. Alternatively, however)
Iusrus may have been an officinator operating on imperial
property, which might better explain the presence of the
imperial stamp. This second interpretation may find support in
Theodoric's letter to the senators Ampelius, Despotius, and
Theodulus, which was discussed above. The text shows that
in sixth-century Rome, the use of imperial figlinae might be
conceded to wealthy individuals, who were obliged to hand
over in return a quota of bricks and tiles to the state each year.
Stamps similar to those of Iustus carry inscriptions ex officina
Boniti(Cl I., xv, 1680) and [dJe officina [Mjetelli (elL, xv. 1703).
Probably of the same period are stamps reading de oficina
Abundanti (elL, xv. I676) and Laurentioficinatoris (elL, xv.
1697), on which the inscriptions are arranged in the four
quarters of a large cross. Bonitus, Metellus, Abundantius,
9) Bloch, 'Supplement', 610, CIL,:cv. 1686. Steinby, 'L'indusrria lacerizia', IF
classifies these stamps as referring to private landowners. Stamps with ex f(iglinis)
Gaudenti (Cl L, xv. 1691) and Gauderlti{lts) (Cl L, xv. I692a-b), which are similarly
classified, may be contemporary: Steinby, 'L'industrialererizia', 1}2, [34.
,.. Bloch, 'Supplement', 2S4 corr. (= N. 170+'S ?).
'" ClL, xv. 1705. Steinby, 'L'industria laterizia', t 33.
Wo ClL, xv. 171}-14. Sreinby, 'L'industria larenzia', 116, IB, 1}5. They might
refer to any individual of the fifth or sixth centuries from that prominent family, or
even to the Pope of 498-S14.
'7 ClL, xi. 6689, 267. Stein by, 'L'iadustria lacerizia', IJ 5.
,. See Bloch, 'Ziegelsrempel': Steinby, 'L'industria larerizia', II4, 11S; Righini,
'Felix Rcma', 377-8. Theodoric: Cl L,:cv. 166}-70 with Bloch, 'Supplement', 606-7.
Athalaric: Cl L, xv. r672; 167J with Bloch, 'Supplement', 608; 1674; 1675.
..~
OF BRICKSTAMPS
•
and Laurens may, like Iustus, have been operating either on
imperial lands or on their own property.
It is possible that some of tbe sixth-century Roman stamps
are to be connected with annual levies of bricks made by the
state, as alluded to in the two texts preserved in Cassiodorus. In
particular, we may note the formula Urbis Romae (elL, xv.
I 540), which occurs without any name on bricks ofTheodoric's
reign. This seems to be an indication that the bricks so marked
were manufactured for the state, rather than for commercial
purposes.
On some stamps naming 'theodoric or Athalaric, the formula
bono Rome or bono Romae occurs." Dressel rightly remarked
that bono Romae could be taken either with regnante
Theodoricol Athalarico, rrieaning 'When Theodoricl Athalaric
was reigning for the good of Rome', or independently, meaning,
'[this brick was made] for the good of Rome during the reign of
Theodoricl Athalaric'.'?? The first choice finds some support
from an inscription found near Terracina, which refers to
Theodoric as bono r(ei) p(ublicae) natlts.I•1 But the second
choice is preferable, since we possess bricks stamped with only
the words bono Romae, which suggests that the formula should
be taken to describe the bricks themselves.r" The formula
clearly refers to Theodoric's plan to restore Rome to its former
glory.l03 Although it would not have been out of place on bricks
manufactured for profit, its meaning would have been enhanced
if the manufacturer had produced the bricks for the state rather
than for his own benefit. Bono Romae may, therefore, be an
allusion to the maintenance of the public welfare in Rome
through the performance of public duties.
Three of the stamps naming Theodoric or Athalaric and bear-
ing the formula bono Romae or [elix Roma also carry an iridic-
tion date. I••Exactly why bricks should have been stamped with
the date of their manufacture is uncertain, and the problem has
caused much discussion in the context of earlier Roman bricks,
which were given consular dates with varying degrees of
frequency between I 2 3 and 164.105 The presence of an indiction
date on the sixth-century stamps is perhaps to be explained by
the fact that the unnamed officinator had contracted to work for
a number of years in the fig/inae concerned, and needed to
demonstrate that his hired workmen had produced the neces-
saty quota of bricks in each year of the contract. Another possi-
bility, bearing in mind that the indiction dating system had
originated in the context of taxation, is that the dated bricks, or
a proportion of them, were produced to meet the state's annual
levy.
"SeeBlocb, 'Ziegelscempel', 198,00. I and Steiaby, 'L'industria lereriaia'v r rs,
Iq. Theodoric: CIL, xv. 166-4; 1665 with Bloch, 'Supplement', 606;.1666; 1667.
Athalaric: 167} with Bloch, 'Supplement', 608; l674.
100 Commentary ro CIL,xv. I66~.
101 ILS,i(I892),no. 827.
lal ClL,xv. IS41.
IQJ Bloch, 'Ziegelsrempel', 20t-}.
104 Tbeodoric: ClL, xv. 1667 (r September 525-30 August 526). Athalaric: 1674,
1675 (both I September 526-} 1 August 527). See Bloch, 'Zicgelstempel', 196-7.
105 Sreinby, 'Ziegelstcmpcl', QOj-5.
 ...•..,
,6 PART I: INDUSTRY THE PURPOSE OF BRICKSTAMPS

Also belonging to the reign of Theodoric are rectangular supplying the capital with grain and oil, the shippers had been cerned were the more entrepreneurial and richer ones.'!' Evi-
and circular stamps with a chi-rho monogram and the inscrip- 4. CONSTANTINOPOLITAN BRICKSTAMPS· granted certain privileges (such as immunity from munera),l24 dence from sixth-century Egypt concerning long-term leases on
tion Claudiana (ClL, xv. 1563)' These refer to the officina although they were not exempt from the indictio+" A notarios Church lands-an arrangement that became legal in 544!34-
Claudiana, which was clearly named after a Claudius, although a. The status and role of the individuals named was a palatine civil servant in dose contact with the emperor, indicates that tenants included, for example, Phoibammon, a
it is uncertain whether he was living or longsince deceased.!" and he was a senator or became so on retiremenr.!" The clarissimus comes and dejensor, and Victor, a tabularius, who
The majority of bricks tamps from Constantinople carry one
Circular stamps with the inscription XMf Kcccciou around a abbreviation CKp() or cxpu ) that occurs on some brickstamps is sub-let to two farmers. m
or two names, abbreviated to a greater or lesser extent, but
central chi-rho monogram (ClL, xv, 2415) are also ascribed to to be resolved either shribon or skriniarios. Skribones were The suggestion that Constantinopolitan brickstamps name
generally irfthe genitive case when complete. In the fifth ccntury
Theodoric since they resemble the circular Claudiana sramps.l'" imperial bodyguards with the status of vir magnificus (the post either the locator or conductor in a brickmaking COntract finds
the names on the stamps are often highly abbreviated and almost
Similar in style are stamps with lohannes around a central chi- is first mentioned in 545),127 and skriniarioi were clerks or further support from second-century Roman brickstamps. The
never provide any indication of the status of the individuals con-
rho monogram (ClL, xv, 1695).108Mention may also be made accountants for the state or the emperor. A sleriniarios who was stamps regularly include the formula ex figlinis (,From the clay-
cerned.!" On sixth-century stamps, the names are usually less
of a stamp, possibly of the sixth century, bearing a monogram a senior in the sacra scrinia of the emperor would be accorded pits') or ex praedis (,From the'estates') followed by the name of
abbreviated; and although the majority of names that appear in
that is apparently to be resolved Beronicianus (ClL,xv. 1724).109 the rank of clarissimus on reriremenr.!" Finally, a muriarchos an individual who owned the estate on which clay-pits were
full are those of males, in a very few cases the stamps refer to
It is unclear whether Cassius, J ohn, and Beronicianus were was a commander of 10,000 men. It is, of course, uncertain located (the dominus or domina). They also often bear thewords
women.!" Although the sixth-century names regularly stand
the owners of figlinae or contractors worj<ing on the la'iid of whether the individuals whose names are unaccompanied by ex officinis ('From the workshops') followed by the name of the
alone, they are occasionally accompanied by a title or pro-
another. such titles (which means almost all persons named on fifth- individual organizing brick production (the officinator).136 The
fession, a nickname) or surname. The nicknames, such as
A number of sixth-century stamps bear religious formulae: cenmry stamps) were of similar status. Roman stamps are thought to have represented a locatio con-
Kolokunthos ('Pumpkin') and Onoktetos (,Donkey-driver'),
one carries the words 8£oc ~0T]86c ('God my helper') (ClL, xv. Despite occasionally giving us some indication of the status of ductio contract that existed between the two named parties, in
indicate little about the status of the individuals named,!" but
1728), the other spes in Deo ('Hope in God') around a central the individuals named, Constantinopolitan brickstamps do not which the officinator agreed to employ a number of workmen to
the titles and professions are particularly helpful in this regard.
chi-rho monogram (ClL, xv. 1726-7). For the former, Kraut- in any way indicate the nature of their involvement in the brick- make bricks from the clay of the dominus in return for payment
heimer has suggested a date after 500.110The latter are similar in These include the secular (depoutatos, komes, koubikoularios,
making industry, Legal evidence, however, would suggest that on completion of the work.!" Using the stamps, it has been
nauleleros, notarios, skribon or skriniarios, and possibly
style to the circular stamps ofthe officina Claudiana+" Possibly they were either locatores or conductores. According to the possible to construct a prosopography of the owners of figlinae
muriarchos) and the clerical (diakonos, begoumenos, monachos,
but not certainly of this period are stamps with similar phrases, Justinianic Digest, the production of tiles could be organized in Rome, which reveals that increasingly from the first century
and presbuterosv'" A depoutatos was one of fifteen seniors
such as: in nomine Dei ('In the name of God') (ClL, xv. 1726); according to a private contract of either hire or sale.!" If, as must these domini were members of aristocratic families, often of
amongst the thirty Augustales (principal administrative clerks)
spes in Deo (without a monogram) icii; x. 8042, '39); vivas have been the usual case, the landowner provided the clay for the senatorial status. us The officinatores were independent entre-
of the praetorian prefecture.!" The office or title of komes
('May you live!') (ClL, xv. 1727); and bona vitae ('Blessings of contractor, then the contract was one of hire (locatio conductio). preneurs, including persons from the lowest ranks to the status
(count) was conferred upon senators, equestrians and others."?
life') (ClL, xv. '725 )y2 The stamps, however, bear no name that In such an agreement, the contractor (conductor) agreed to of equesP" It must be borne in mind, however, that there are
might indicate the landowner or contractor. Such religious A koubikoularios was a eunuch privileged to work in the
improve the landowner's (locator's) property (in this case the many domini and officinatores named on the Roman stamps
imperial bedchamber.P? Shippers (naukleroz) underook the
formulae were used in many contexts, and we cannot assume clay of ~he figlinae) in return for an agreed sum upon completion whose status cannot be established. Furthermore, when a stamp
construction, repair, and operation of ships (especially for
that bricks stamped with them were manufactured in figlin~e of the work. If, on the other hand, the contractor provided his gives only one name, it is often impossible to be sure whether the
transporting grain from Egypt to Constantinople). By the sixth-
owned by the Church.!" own raw material, then the contract was one of sale (emptio dominus or officinator is named.
century, when the title nauleleros first appears on brickstamps,
In the fifth and sixth centuries, then, Roman brickstamps venditio). As in the case of the Roman material, it is not a simple matter
the shippers were operating privately on contract to the fiSC.121
refer to figlinae under both imperial and private ownership. In the Early Byzantine period, farmers were free to market to decide whether Constantinopolitan brickstamps bearing a
Originally, however, their duties had been an obligation to the
Some stamps of the period may give the nameof a contractor, their own labour and would regularly enter into such locatio single name refer to the landowner or to the contractor. The
state determined by wealth assessment.!" and those enrolled
but this cannot be securely demonstrated from the available conductio contracts as conductores .DO The locator may have names on Constantinopolitan stamps are not accompanied by
into their ranks included senators, honorati, decurions, and
evidence. The content of some stamps, it has been argued, may owned the land himself or may have been the holder of a long- formulae such as exfiglinis, ex praedis, or ex officinis, HO but, since
indicate that the bricks so marked were manufactured to meet an primipilares.'" In return for performing the public service of
term (emphyteutic) lease on one of the rural estates owned by they are generally given in the genitive case, they might be inter-
annual levy imposed by the state, but in other cases it is not the emperor (domus divinae, 8£tOl O\K01), by the Church preted as meaning '[Clay-pits] of X', '[Estate] of X' or '[Work-
IH Only one type of fifth-century stamp is known to indicate an individual's
possible to determine whether the bricks were made to meet the status: e£.O() OlCl1CO(VOt). . (eDayete O(KOl),or by some wealthy private individual (£VOO~Ol shop) of X', although the meaning '[Brick] of X' is equally
demands of the state or of the market. 115 The names Bocaoplc, I1pocepio.. and Coccvvc occur. O(KOl)."1 Such long-term leaseholders, who paid a low, fixed likely. The titles that are preserved would be applicable to either
U6 See 'Icocvvou KOMK"Ilv8ou (for the nickname, compare Theodorus, city prefect
from 522 to 524: Cameron, "Iheodorus', 279. 280,.l86)and 'Io\Jav(v)ouovo~"[O\J. rent (canon, naK10v), were effectively the owners of the land and
IJ3 CIC, Cl 1.2.24.5, as noted by Gascou, 'Grands Domaines', 27 and Kaplan, La
117 The following names are accompanied by titles on the brickstamps. Diakonoi: any investments they made in it, and were liable to pay the taxes Terre, 168.
'AVOPEctC, Kcptcoccc. Aom,&c, Flerpoc. Higoemenoi: 'AvapEac, 'Ioxivvnc.
due on the property.!" Justinian restricted such leaseholding to lJ4 On long-term leases on Church property, see Kaplan, La Terre, 165-6.
Monacboi: ·o.,.~CIIlOC. Presinaeroi: 'ExiolOC, 'Epulcc,
Ko:A.a"tct"twv, Koctcxoc, m Gascou, 'Grands Domaines', 27 with n. 165; Kaplan, La Terre, 168. On the
Mcjvoc, Depoutatoi: 6eooropoc,
Flespoc. eEOOWtTlC. Komites: 'Hciccpoc. 'well-to-do' (£unopol) persons, so that the individuals con-
rural elite, see Banaji,Agrarian Change, 192-7.
8£000C10C, Nrcnecooc. Koubikoulorioi: monogram no. I I. Naweleroi: 'Iecvvnc, \36 For the various formulae on Roman stamps of all periods, see Steinby,
11)6 Sreinby, 'L'industria laterizia', 128, 153. TIC-Cpoc. Notarioi:'IwclvvTlc. Scribcnes/Scriniarioi: fErop,(tOc, 'Icccvvnc. Myriarchoi: 114 CIC, Digest 50.6.6(5), sections 3--9. 'Ziegelstempel', 15°0--3. It has be~n argued tbatfigiillae andpraedilJm were virtually
107 Sreinby, 'L'industria larerizia', 128--9, 134. Iraoc. 309.Ia refers to '!{I eparchos named Diomedes, although] wonder whether I1S CTh I3.5.14(,7I). synonymous terms used to refer to the district in which the clay was obtained:
108 Stcinby, 'L'industria latcrizia', 116. These have been very tentatively ascribed the object so stamped was a glass weight rather than a brick. ll~ lanes, LRE, 387 (on the proportion of palatine civil servants to dignities), 43 r, Helen, Organization, 37-83.
to either Pope John I (523-25) or Pope John II(533-36). 118 Jones, LRE, 587-8. The term was, however, applied to other occupations, for 5·1-7, 572-5. There were also ecclesiastical notaries: Jones, LRE, 91 I. ll7 Srcinby, 'Senatori'. Also Steinb y, 'L'industria laterizia', TOO, 106-7, 156. On
109 Sreinby, 'L'industria laterizia', I r6, 134. instance to the repairer of arms attached to each regiment of the army: Jones, LRE, l27 lanes, LRE, 658-9. waged labourers, see Banaji, Agrarian Change, 190-2.
1I0 Steinby, 'L'industria loreriaia', 131. 671. 1\9 Jones, LRE, 104-6, 516. III Jones,LRE, 412, 427, 449, sacra scrinia: 547, 577-8. 1)1 Scdila, Private Domini, 242-3, 250-6 (Appendix 2), which shows (p. 256) thee
111 Steicby, 'L'industria larerizia', 128-9,131. 120[ones, LRE, 566-70. l19 CIC,Digeu r8.z.65. out of a total of 162 domini of the second and early third centuries, 88 were senators
.112 Sreinby, 'L'industria latcrizia', 131. IIIBy the [uscinianic period (and perhaps as early as 46718 or 409) there were no l)0 CIC, Cl 11.48.8 with Sirks, 'Colonare', 362-4. Note also Kaplan, La Terre, or equites; Stcinby, 'Scnatori': Andermahr, Grendbesitx, 55--6, table 4·
ID Papal brickstamps are certainly attested from the beginning of the eighth longer corpora nauiculariorum transporting grain in fulfilment of their ml/lIera, but L3? Helen, Organization, 110-13, 130. Note especially ClL, xv. 527, of the end of
161-3·
century (Steinby, 'L'industria laterizia', 158), but that there were any as early as the only private naukleroi on contract to the fisc: see Sirks, Food for Rome, 34-5- m On the Kaplan, La Terre, 136-49. On the vast scale of imperial
O{K01, see and the second century, on which the officinator is lulius Theodotus eq(lles) R(omanus).
sixth century is as yet uncertain. The ascriptions to John I or II given by Sreinby, 2 ro-r r. 112 jones, LRE, nI, 827-30. Church estates, sec CAH, xiii. 30I; and for private estates, CAH, xiii. 300. 1.0 It is possible, however, that the unresolved abbreviation pctp() had some such
'L'industria laterizia', r r6 arc tentative. ID CTh 13.P4,sectioll4(371). m On the emphyreuric lease, see Kaplan, La Terre, 164-5. significance. See pp. 2I-3.
18 PART I: INDUSTRY
landowners or contractors, and it cannot be assumed that have shared a similar relationship with the deacon Peter. An
the solution is the same for all such stamps. Clergymen, for attractive possibiliry, particularly given the information pro-
example, are known to have engaged in commercial activities, vided on stamped bricks from Rome from the second century
and, whatever their rank, might have owned property that they onwards, is that the first individual named was the landowner
had obtained whilst in the clericate. Alternatively, however, (locator), and that the second named individual was one of
they might have rented land from a domi"':,.'(' several contractors iconductores) working on the clay-bearing
There are a number of binominal brickstamps of both the fifth lands owned or leased by the former. At present, stamps with
and sixth centuries. Double names on single-line brickstamps the same ptimary name but with different secondary names have
are not immediately obvious, since the inscriptions are often not been found together at the same site, and, consequently, we
highly abbreviated. The fifth-century examples have not, there- have no firm evidence that the secondary names refer to con-
fore, been previously noted, and are as follows: . tractors undertaking brick production for the same dominus at
the same time. The name TIE'tpOU Ihw<ovou appears not only
Eecrcf ) E""pO
'HA'O 'EK(K)A~O with a secondary name but also alone. Perhaps this means that,
8EO() 'EK(K):\. in some years, only one contractor was employed on Peter's
8uOEu() land, and, as a result, did not need to be named.
Iou() K1l() A small number of sixth-century stamps refer explicitly to
KuA.()Ku() landholdings of either the emperor or the Church. Stamps bear-
Ku()Eu() ing the name or the cruciform monogram of the Emperor
Ku() <Ih(), K1lp() <l1,() or Kup'() <1>'0 [ustinian,'? or naming the estate of Hormisdas, 1+4 pertain to the
K1lp() Mu() domus divina, the emperor's personal property;"! and stamps
Kup() Ne()
reading M"YaA.T]c'EKKAT]ct<XC refer to the extensive estates of the
IloO'Ay()
Great Church, 1<, Some of these bricks were perhaps donated by
IloOAEO
the emperor or by the Church to particular building projects. If
Ilu08EO
Cuv08,() so, the stamps bearing the name or monogram of Justinian that
Tu()Tp() were found in the excavations to the south of Hagia Eirene
<1>'0IluO might be taken to support Procopius' assertion that the emperor
was responsible for the reconstruction of the hospices in that
The multiple-line (sixth-century) examples are more easily
area after the Nika riots, ,<7 A group of distinctive stamps bearing
spotted:
the monogram of the emperor Maurice carry in addition the
Fuaiou 'Aucvoo name of a private individual. The imperial monogram was
rcfioo T coeluco perhaps simply a common feature on stamps carved during
'Iouav(v)ou QvO!CtTl'WU 'Av'tt(6)xou Maurice's reign. m Alternatively, it may have been used to indi-
NlKl~Op(OU)s K'poii (1) cate bricks rhanufactured on imperial land. If so, the individual
Fletpcu EUyev(lo)u named would presumably have been an officinator working on
Fletpou EUKUO() .
an imperial estate, We are reminded of the Roman bricks bear-
Iletpou O'UK(OVOU) EUe<u811ou
ing stamps of both Theodoric and Iusrus.
Fletpou Euc-«a)8,c
Heepoo SUX{KOVOU) Et)'rOlXHlvou Other stamps-all probably of the sixth century-give
Fletpoo ijl<XKO(VOU) AOUA~avoii neither a name nor refer to imperial or church property, Some
Il«pou TE~i(:\.ou).'" simply bear the word iVOtK1tiiivoc,with or without an indiction
date, and others only the words TIicVE<xC. There is also a group of
If we consider the interpretation of, for instance, the group of stamps that carry only a religious symbol (such as a cross, a
stamps reading Ku{) EU{), Kup,{) <Dt{),Kup{) <Dt{),Ku{) <Dt{), Christogram, or another religious monogram), or a formula,
Kup{ ) Mu{ ), and Kup{ ) Ne{ ), then we may suggest that the
143 f85-91,1.394.
name in the primary ,position refers to the same individual in 1023.
1~~
each case. If so, we may further suppose that E,;{), <Dt{),Mcq ), IU On the domes divina, sec Kaplan, La Terre, 140-2. That brick production in
and Nc{ ) all had a similar relationship with with Kupt{ ). Constantinople was in both imperial and private hands had been noted by
Ognenova-Mariaova, "Briques', 1..18. The reading 'IOUC't\VUIVOU v1lCll'tOUis
Similarly, AOUA.T]<Xvoc, E';10tXtuvoc, and E';01a9110C may all
questioned there (p. 1I7), but a clear photograph of such a stamp had already been
published by Ramazanoglu, 'Ircnen-Kirche', pl. 69, fig. 9.
141 CIC. Cl I.J.J3 ("7~)(Coleman-Nonon, Roman State 514) (cp. CIC, Cl H6 Similarly, stamps from Thessaly reading 'EKtU..{llGlClC)seqp(oov)s
presumably
1.3·49); CTh 5·}·[ (Coleman-Nortoc, Roman Stale, 42.1)=CIC, Cl 1.3.20. See indicate bricks manufactured on Church property. For references, see Mango,
Wipszycka, Renources, 161-1 (landowning clerics), 161-3 (tenant clerics), 163-4 'Brick Sumps', 24 with n. 63, 17.
(commercial activity) and jones, LRE, 771 (landowning clerics). 908 (stipends). U7 Procopius,Bltiidings, 1.2.14-16.
III In his notes, Mamboury referred to some of these sixth-century stamps and us This would seem to be suggested by the stamps on which the monogram of
suggested that they indicated associates in brickmaking. He did not recognize the Maurice is preceded by a monogram (no. 31) meaning Ibti (1372.1:1-£, I373.xa,
presence of fifth-century examples. '374·(01,[375·1~).
THE"PURPOSE
such as KUptE 130116{t)t('Lord, help!'), emu XaptC ('Grace of
God') and Xpicroc V11Ki;t (,Christ conquers!'), As in the case of
the similar Roman material, the place of production of the bricks
so marked is uncertain.
b. The function of the stamps
The proportion of bricks stamped is likely to have varied con-
siderably between batches." Nevertheless, there were pre-
sumably always enough stamped bricks in any batch to make it
possible both to establish its origin (that is, the name of either
the iocator or conductors, and to determine the year of its manu-
facture if the stamp used included an indiction.
Given that brickmaking involved a contract between the
dominus and officinator, it would not be surprising had the
officina tor ensured that his hired labourers stamped a pro-
portion of their work with the name of the dominus to whom the
bricks were to be handed over when the contract was complete.
If the contract were a long-term one, requiring the production
of a specific number of bricks per annum, then the officinator
may also have insisted that the stamps carry the indiction year,
so that there be no confusion between newly made batches of
bricks and stockpiled material made in earlier years. ISO In
some cases, as we have observed above, it is conceivable that a
stamp bearing a single name refers t~ an officinator; and it is very
likely that it is the officinatoT who is named in second place on
binominal stamps, ltwould have been useful for a stamp to carry
an officinator's name if several officinatores were operating in
close proximity on the same estate, since each would have
wished to prove (or to be able to prove, if necessary) that he had
met his contractual obligation to the dominus, As for accessory
letters (discussed below), if they refer to groups ofbrickmakers
in the employ of a single officinator-which is perhaps the more
likely of the two explanations proposed below-then those
letters would have helped each group to demonstrate to the
officinator that it had indeed produced the number of bricks it
had been hired to make,
It is likely that in Constantinople, as in Rome, the state levied
bricks annually for the maintenance of public works, and certain
sixth-century bricks tamps may provide some support for th.is
belief. The stamps concerned bear the word, or an abbreviation
for the word, iVOtK1tiiivoc ('of the indiction') without any indi-
cation of the year.!" Clearly, these stamps cannot refer to the
indicrion system of dating, and it is likely that they indicate that
the bricks so stamped were produced to meet tax liabilities
imposed by the annual indictio on the owners of clay-bearing
lands.'" Unfortunately, no examples of such stamps have yet
14' On stamping, see p. 14.
ISOFor stockpiling at the place of manufacture, see pp. 24-6.
151 1425-6, 142.~36.
m Note also that some brickstamps from Thessaloniki bear only the ENT mono-
gram, which has been tentatively resolved 'Ev'l'{o:tloovoc)(Vickers, 'Brickstamps',
Typc IA, especially Type lA, 1). Croke's objection to this resolution CHorrnisdas',
254)-on the grounds that ENT K and ENT T cannot be explained as dates-had
OF BRICKSTAMPS
been recorded in situ in sixth-century masonry, but we would
expect them to occur in public rather than in private Construc-
tions. If such stamps were found in private constructions, we
would have to conclude either that the proposed interpretation
is incorrect or that bricks requisitioned by the state that proved
to be surplus to its requirements were sold for private use,
The use of the indiction date on brickstamps might be
adequately explained by a contractor's need to demonstrate
that, in the year concerned, he had met his contractual obliga-
tions to the dominus (by arranging for the manufacture of a
specified number of bricks), I may also, however, have served a
purpose in the context of the annual requistions (indictiones)
made by the state. The dates on those batches of bricks that were
handed over to be used in public building projects may have
helped state officials to check that in any particular year a land-
owner had provided the number of bricks for which he was
liable according to his tax assessment, It cannot, however, be
argued that all bricks stamped with indiction dates were
intended to satisfy state demands, because, in both the fifth and
the sixth centuries, dated bricks were used not only in public but
also in private buildings.P'
Whether state officials would have checked the number of
bricks supplied by each dominus while they were still at the pro-
duction site or, as would seem more likely, upon delivery of the
bricks to central (and perhaps state-owned) Stores is uncertain.
If checking took place in a depot in which bricks from numerous
figlinae had been gathered together, it would have been
extremely useful had the stamps indicated each landowner's
name.!" In that case we could conclude that the individual
named on the stamp is much more likely to have been the
dominus than the officinator, If the number of domini whose
figiinae had been assigned to brick and tile production was not
very large, the officials checking the stamps would have been
able to match the abbreviated names on the stamps with the
declarants to the tax lists, and confirm that the necessary number
of bricks had been supplied, In the case of binominal stamps, the
second name, which is likely to be that of the officinator, would
probably have been of little interest to these accountants. They
are likely to have been concerned only with the total number of
bricks provided by the declarant (the dOniinus), rather than with
the productiviry of each of his contractors,
The chronological and srylistic analysis of Constantino-
politan brickstamps in Part II demonstrates that stamps of the
been anticipated by Vickers, who pointed OUtthat these and other letters occur
'either above or below the main legend', and 'might, perhaps, indicate different
workshops' ('Brickstamps', 292). For similar accessory letters on Consranrino-
politan stamps, see below pp. 10-1. Even if the stampS from Thessaloniki do give
indiction dates, great care musr be taken when attempting to use them 10 date
monuments, since the precise findspocs of very few stamped bricks have been
accurately recorded, making it impossible to determine to which phase of a
building they belong or whether they were reused. See Croke, 'Hormisdas'; Croke,
'Thessalouika': Spieser, Tbessalonique, 127 n. .s; Tcrp, 'Rotunda', 18-19, 1.2.
Ul It might be argued that the state levied far more bricks than it in fact required,
and that it sold the surplus to private individuals, bur that seems most unlikely.
15.4 Seep. 26.
 20 PART I: INDUSTRY THE PURPOSE OF BRICKSTA1![PS 2I

fifth century are highly Iormulaic.!" All those that can be Name Accessory letter(s) indicate the brickmaker, the workshop, or a workbench.l'" At
ascribed with certainty to the period from 4r 5 (the date of the ('f uncertain) Rome, a series of stamps with the name of a single dominus but d. The style of the brickstamp dies
dedication of the first Hagia Sophia) to 459 (the year in which ITo() '1,1<,1.. with an additional pair of letters exists. The additional letters are
the bricks for the cistern of Aspar were made), bear a single ITu() 'l,8,A,!,'" believed to be the initials of the various officinatores working The style of brickstamps can provide important chronological
line of text including both an indiction date and a more or less Ca() ~,'1,S, V, It, p, c*,' for the same dominusr" If this were also the meaning of the indications, which will be discussed later." They may also tell
abbreviated name. By the sixth century Constantinopolitan Xpictoii a,E, K,V Constantinopolitan stamps with accessory letters, then the us something about the organization of brickmaking, or the
bricks tamps no longer carried such strictly formulaic inscrip- stamps would simply be a variation on the binominal type, organization of die-carving. It is striking, for instance, that at the
tions, were of a wide variety of shapes, and carried dates far less Single accessory letter (one or fewer certain letters per name): the second name having been abbreviated to just its initial letter, Palace of Antiochus many stamps bearing different names but
frequently.!" It might be suggested that in the fifth century the Name Accessory letter(s) or a single letter of the alphabet having been assigned to each with the same indictionnumber (lE') also carry the abbreviation
state insisted that all stamps (whether on bricks manufactured r uncertain) officinator working for the dominus concerned. This interpreta- KE and a cross-in-leaf or c~oss-in-heart design.'" Similarly,
for the state or on those intended for private sale) should include 'AvopEou ota1<ovo1l e in the remains near Cemal Nadir Sokagi, stamps with many
tion would, however, be ruled out if a binominal stamp could be
the indiction date for purposes of accounting.!" But why this AU~a() t):~ different names and with several indictions are all circular and
found that bore an accessory letter, since the second individual
stipulation should have lapsed by the early sixth century is Bocnooicc named on a binominal stamp is likely to be the officinator. The carry the formula 8(eo)u XUptC (although there are other, con-
unclear. [u() tempor~ry stamps from the site that are cruciformj.!'" The evi-
only candidates for such stamps arc 739.ra and 74o.ra, but in
It is possible that brickstamps also served a purpose in the 1I.'l!,oc( ) these cases we cannot, unfortunately, be certain that the final dence from both sites suggests that there was a common model
context of private supply. If a private builder arranged to receive 1I.o!'vou OtUlCOVOU 1< for the dies, which presumably originated from a common
letter is an accessory; it may rather be the final letter of the
deliveries of bricks directly from several domini, then the stamps EtnuX'l() source. This would not be surprising if the named individuals
second abbreviated name.
may have been useful for checking that each of the domini had Zro() The evidence from the Palace of Antiochus shows that there were in fact domini who held long-term leases on plots located
provided the agreed number of batches. 8eo06pou on the same estate, since they may all have obtained their dies
l' were often several dies bearing the same name, the same indic-
8eo() c" from the same source. It might be argued, however, that any
tion, and the same accessory letter in use at the same time. For
'Iooavvou VOtUptOU 11" dominus would have wished to distinguish his stamps to a
c. Accessory letters example, the six stamps 730.1-2 all read iv(ot1<nrovoc) et' ~a( )
Koctcvtrivou) LatinD" greater extent from those of other domini, and that all these
Ku() c. On the basis of this evidence, we are probably justified
Accessory lettersl58-that is, letters that are apparently Ku()Eu() 1< similar stamps are, therefore, more likely to belong to officina-
in concluding that the accessory letter does not refer to an indi-
unrelated to the rest of the inscription-have previously been tores contracted to work for the same dominus.
KuptA() W',o" vidual brickmaker. Although wooden dies would have worn
recognized only on sixth-century material from St Polyeuktos. Krovctt nvrivou) a:~ out quickly, it seems unlikely that a single worker would have
It may also be observed that, in the sixth century, stamps
However, accessory letters also occur on fifth-century material, Ma1«e)o() 8* 0" bearing the same name and clearly made in the same indiction
used six different dies to stamp bricks that were produced not
although, like double names, they are more difficult to dis- Mo() t::' could be of various shapes.!" It is unclear whether the variety
only in a single season but also so closely in time that they
tinguish in a single line of unbroken text (where they generally 'Op!,tl;(oou) a of shapes has any significance for our understanding of the
were delivered to the same building site. The suggestion that an
follow the name abbreviation). The following are the rnam ITa() A"', v",," organization of the industry: perhaps stamps of different shapes.
accessory letter served as a batch indicator may also be rejected:
examples in catalogue: ITa,po() s it is most unlikely that six (or more) dies would have been used
were employed by different officinatores working for the same
ITe,() dominus or by different groups of brickmakers in the employ of
to stamp just a single kiln-load before being discarded and
Single accessory letter (two or more certain letters per name): Tt!'oK() asingle officinator.
replaced with a new set of dies bearing another letter.!" The
Name Accessory letter(s) iVOtKtlroVOC without name a, K, V most plausible explanation for the occurrence of six variant
(* uncertain) stamps each with the same accessory letter is that each die 5. THE ABBREVIATION ~apE()
1I.o() Multiple accessory l~tters:
t, K,A."U,TC belonged to a member of the same group of brickmakers. There
Ka() t'", 1<,A 1I.'l!''l'ptOU with both p and 1<(277) were perhaps nine individuals in a group serving a single kiln.'65 It is convenient at this point to turn to the question of the
K()1<() i,» 1I.tol'~00U with both a and A (JI2, 3r3) Although the accessory letter might, as we have seen, be enigmatic abbreviation that occurs on many stamped bricks,
KU()!59 ~,'1, s.n.B, i, 1<,A,V,1t, p' c 1I.tol'~001l with both a and? (3 r 6) explained as referring to the officinatorwho employed the group generally before the name or name-abbreviation:"? ~( ), 0a( ),
Kup() 8, t"V,c,' 'Icxrvvic with both 1<and 0 (604) of brickmakers concerned, it seems much more likely, in the ~ap() or ~ape(). The resolution of the abbreviation is uncertain.
ITE'POU a, 0,8,* 1<, A, v, 0, U, X ITa1tuAo1l with both ~ and e (r028) light of "the evidence from the Palace of Antiochus, that it Suggestions have been made, but it is important that theories
signified a group of brickmakers. Either way, the total number about the interpretation of Byzantine bricks tamps are not
m See pp. 99-102. 156 See pp. roc--roa. . Vickers noted such letters on fifth-century bricks tamps from founded on hypothetical solutions, as so often before. For this
of accessories recorded in association with a particular name
m We may compare the situation in Rome in AD 123. when it appears that all reason, the question of the resolution is treated in isolation here.
Thessaloniki (where they are clearly set apart from the rest of
manufacturers were obliged to
stamp their bricks and to include the consular date. provides some information about the scale of production.
See Steinby, 'Ziegelsrempel', Ij03-5. the design), and suggested that 'they might, perhaps, indicate The four abbreviations, being apparently interchangeable,'?'
158 The term is used to describe similar letters on coins: Grierson, Byzantine different workshcps'J" Commenting on the sixth-century 162 Brodribb, Brick and Tile, 118, 1)5. 166 See pp. 99-r02, 118-21.
Coins, 41.
examples from St Polyeuktos, Hill held that they were 'likely to 163 eIL,xv. 565 m compl., discussed by Steinby, 'Antiquari', 84-5. 167 28,237,)27,348,50),623,712,877,99°,1025,1029,1287,15°1.
159 Accessory letters commonly occur following the name-abbreviations KYand
In Imperial Rome, Dcl.ainc, Caracalla, 117, estimates a firing capacity of 65 168 )I.Ib, 47.Ia, r r z.ra, rca.ra, 193.IC, 194.la, )IO.Ia, j r r.r a, JIS.la, 319.13,
KYF. Sorlin-Dorigny resolved BAKYFas PO:(C1AEOlC)lCUp(iou), and believed that the have served as batch indicators' .161 Similar accessory letters are 1(,01

m) for an average kiln. If such large kilns were used in Early Byzantine Constan- 518.la, 777.ra, 842.13, 858.la, 908.13, 949.23,950.13, IIIl..IC, 1II2.23, I1I3·Ib,
following accessory was the initial of a Macedonian emperor (,Inscriptions', 83. found on Romano-British brickstamps, and their significance is tinople, they would have held up to IO,OOO bricks. The evidence from the Middle HI5.la, 1216.la, 1264.13.
85 no. 8, 86 no. 12, 87 no. 14). Despite having gathered several such examples
equally problematical: Brodribb has suggested that they may and Late Byzantine periods, however, suggests a capacity roughly half as great; 169 ScePartII,Ch.8,sect.2bno.(I).
together, Schneider failed to recognise the existence of accessory letters, and pro- Bcq ) sometimes 11>1A().
Ousrerhout, Master Builders, r jo-r. In Egypt in the sixth century, bricks were 170 follows the name-abbreviation
posed no solutions for inscriptions containing them ('Ziegelstempel', 264 nos. 14a,
counted in pa'UKCtA1a, which appear to have been batches of 3,000 (p.Oxy, xviii. 171 On different stamps bearing the same name or name-abbreviation a different
c, d, f). In the Mamboury archive, too, many stamps with accessories are left
one of the four abbreviations can oftene.g., both P() and pa() are
be found. Thus,
2197).
unresolved. 16(l Vickers, 'Brickstarnps', 292. 161 Hill, 'Brickstamps', 22). 16.S It has been calculated that about nine brickmakers would have been required "en with "ro( ), Euc<a( ), ee~( ). 'Ix( ), ITo( ). c« );
pa( ) and pap( ) with 'Ay( ),
to keep a kiln of average size in continuous operation during the manufacturing "<O(). Llo(). ee(). Ku(). K( )K(). Ku(). M(). N,(), ITo(). ITo() ·Ay(). $"a(); P().
season. See DeLaine, Caracalla, I I 7-18. pa( ) and pap( ) with Ausav«ou; P( ), pap( ) and pape( ) with Ll<O""Ie( ), ew( ),
 "~
•
THE PURPOSE OF BRICKSTAMPS
22 PART I: INDUSTRY 23

are presumably equivalent, which suggests that a single solution Pantikapaion (Kertch) on the Cimmerian Bosphorus, Mango proposed reading of the inscriptions terminating in BAPECA to have been a measure of 3,000 bricks.t'" Again, the solution for
should be sought for all of them. In Various solutions have been and BAPEC leaves them without any name; in fact, the former the optional word beginning pe() would remain to be found If
added another possibility to the list, suggesting that the same
should almost certainly be read ~ape( ) Car ) (II92.1a), and however, we divide the letters so as to give ~ap() eC) or not at'all'
proposed, and they and their inadequacies need be mentioned adjective could be taken to refer not to the following name,
only briefly. Derhier's long-accepted view was that ~a() should but to the brick itself, hence ~a(cL:\.tK:i]) [,,:\.(veoc], meaning the latter (which may not have been illustrated with absolute giving ~o:p£( ), then we. at least ha;e a clue as to the meaning:
be restored as ~a( CLAiroC)'"and that ~ap() should be taken as an 'imperial brick'.':" reliability by Seure, who published the stamp) should perhaps smce the stem ~ap- indicates physical or metaphorical weight.
abbreviation for two words, ~a( CLAiroC)'P( ro!!a(rov ).174 This led As Schneider had realized, however, the adjective ~aCt:\.tKOC be read ~ape() C() (1707.1a). The possibility that Mamboury The reference is most unlikely to be to the weight of the bricks,
had misinterpreted these two inscriptions was observed by since no numerical value accompanies the abbreviation. We
to attempts to identify the individual named after the abbrevia- would rrot on its own account for the occurrence of ~ap( ) or
tion ~a() or ~ap() with a known emperor. However, contem- ~ape( )..,,, In 1885, Curtis and Aristarches had completed the Maletskos.!" who in turn argued that the abbreviation ~ap() or may, however, be dealing with burdens of some kind. If the
porary stamps used in the same building carry a variery of ~ape( ) was to be completed Ilapa or ~apetc, terms which, he individuals named on the stamps are domini, then it is con-
latter as Bapi(yyou) ('of the Varangian'), having discovered a
names, whether or not preceded by the abbreviation ~a( ). This claimed, referred to the stamped bricks themselves. Yet the ceivable that the reference i\ to burdens of taxation. The neuter
bricks tamp from Fethiye Camii that they had interpreted as
indicates that the names do not refer to the emperor reigning at 'Ivy(:\.ivou) Bapi(yyou) ('of the English Varangian'),18' whereas single stamp adduced by Maletskos to support the reading ~apa noun ~apoc was certainly used, in the plural, of tax obliga-
the time the bricks were made, but to a larger group of indi- was itself misread by him, and is in fact to be resolved tions, t'JJ and since the word iVOt1C1:toovoc and the name of the
the correct reading is iv(oucnoovoc) y' ~o:pe( ). This misinter-
iv(otK"ttoovoc) ~'~o:p() A;,~o:( ).188Of all the suggestions, only individual are almost always given in the genitive case when they
viduals connected with the brickmaking industry. This, in pretation has resulted in the inscription reappearing in a
addition to the fact that in many cases it is impossible to find an Mamboury's unlikely ~apico:noc would account for ~ape(). appear in full on brickstamps, the genitive plural ~apErov (con-
more recent publication devoted to the Varangians, where it
imperial name beginning with the letters that occur after the masquerades as an inscription on stone bearing the Norse name I am unable to present a definitive solution to this problem. tracted to ~ap&v) might be proposed as a possible solution.
Ingvarl!" To begin, it is not entirely clear whether we are dealing with one However, bricks bearing the abbreviation ~a( ), ~ap( ), or
abbreviation ~a( ) or ~ap( ), suggests that the restorations
~acLAiroc and ~acL:\'iroc 'Pcouniorv should be rejected. Besides, word or more than one. B, BA, BAP, and BAPE are apparently ~ape( ) were used not only in public but also in private con-
Mamboury was next to suggest a possible solution to the
they leave the occurrence of ~ape( ) unexplained.!" problem. I"
Having examined far more examples of brickstamps
used interchangeably,'"
lent in meaning. 1911
and are, therefore, presumably equiva-
That would seem to suggest that we are deal-
struction projects, and in the context of private supply a term
In '937, Schneider suggested the restoration ~a(cv..11,6c) than any previous scholar, he noted stamps bearing the letters referring to state requisrions would have had no relevance.
('imperial officer', 'courrier'), and argued that the following ing with a single word beginning ~o:pe( ),191 although the Perhaps bricks that were surplus to state requirements were sold
BAPEC and BAPECA. This led him to propose that the
name indicated the overseer of construction work. He further conclusion need not necessarily follow. It is, for instance, con- for private use, or perhaps the names on some stamps are those
abbreviation came from the verb ~o:pf.ro, and that the form
ceivable that we are dealing with two words, one beginning of officinatores, in which case ~apirov (if the correct solution)
held that when a name or abbreviated name was not preceded by abbreviated on the brickstamps was the past participle in the
~o:(), and the other beginning pe(), since it is not impossible that might have been used to refer to contractual obligations.
~a() then the individual mentioned was simply the donor of the genitive, ~ap1\co:vtOC, which would become ~apicavtoc in
brick rather than the overseer."! But, again, if the names pre- the first word could, on occasion, have been used alone, leaving Another possibility is that the term ~apeo<; or ~ap"rov was used
koine. The genitive participle would form a genitive absolute
the second word to be understood. If ~a( ) is indeed the first of to refer not to financial or contractual burdens but to a load or
ceded by ~a() were those of the overseers, then we would expect construction with the following name. Mamboury further
the bricks from anyone building to carry only a very small two abbreviated words, then we might suggest that ~a(ct:\'iroc) loads of bricks: '[brick] of the load(s) of X'. I may finally add
argued that the verb ~apiro, which means 'to weigh down' or 'to
or a form of ~a(ct:\.tK6c) qualified an uncertain and optional that a consideration of the formulae on Roman bricks tamps,
number of different names preceded by ~a( ). This is clearly not depress', might have had the additional meaning 'to strike' or 'to
the case: several sites have yielded large numbers of contempo- word beginning pe(). Another possibility is ~"("lCa:\.tov), a term such as ex praedis, ex figlinis, ex officinis, and opus doliare, does
stamp', and that the abbreviation ~a() followed by a name in the
that appears in a sixth-century papyrus from Egypt, and appears not immediately suggest a solution.
rary stamps with many different names preceded by ~a( ). genitive would have meant, 'when X was stamping' .18J But, as
Furthermore, the abbreviation is not consistently present even Mango has observed, this meaning of ~apio> seems to occur only
on brickstamps bearing the same name, which suggests that its in modern demotic. I"
Talbot Rice added optimistically, 'But if 117 Maletskos, 'Plinrhos', 269. cutters, rather than to be taken as clear evidence that each letter abbreviates a
In Maletskos, 'Plinrhos', 271, pl. 54.2 (I fJ.lb). 'separate word.
presence is not entirely necessary, and hence that it is unlikely the stamping was done in a brickworks, it seems possible that a Seen. 171.
119 In P.Oxy, xviii. 2I97. Iam grateful to Jairus Banaji for this reference.
to make a distinction such as that proposed by Schneider. colloquialism might have been adopted and that it is merely by 190 See n. 172. m Sixth century papyri: P.Cair.Masp. i. 67°06'4; i. 67002.iii. 5; 0. 6715 I. 120, I40;
Although it seems unlikely that the term could have indicated chance that we do not know of the word's early usage.?" How- 19\ The rare occurrence of AA (483), AB (1037.1043), PBA (1490, 1166, 1167), or i. 67097.44; Stud.Pal. viii.r ayj. Sec also Karayannopoulos, Finanzwesen, 243 and
BP (887?) arc possibly to he explained by the carelessness or illiteracy of the die- Lemerle,Agrarian History, II7, 171, 225, 228.
that the individual named on the stamp was the overseer of the ever, there is probably no need to suppose that any verbs other
work, it could nevertheless have shown that he was connected than cq>pay(t;ro and "tlmoro were used to refer to the process of
with the imperial palace, and Mango pointed to the use of ~() or marking an object with a die.''' Furthermore, Mamboury's
~a() as an abbreviation for ~aCt:\.tKo1lon Byzantine lead seals. In
He also noted the use of this word in its complete form on brick- 171 Mango, 'Brick Stamps'. 23.
17'1 Schneider, 'Ziegelsrempel', 26.s no. 18.
stamps, but in fact such stamps simply give the genitive of the
ISO 1463.1:1. This ridiculous reading was corrected by Mango (,Brick Stamps', 25,
proper name Basilikos. Referring to many stamped tiles from although the broken stamp is not to be completed as he suggests in n. 74: the indic-
nons on the stamps differ). Even Schneider went so far as to suggest the reading
Kup()" ~() and ~ap£() with Tpo(): ~a() and ~apE() with KUPI«), Ao() and Ca(): Bcp] o:yyou] in one case ('Ziegclstempel', 266 no. 61).
~(), ~a() and ~apE() with I.ku(). IIIBlondal, Varangums, 188.
171 It would seem unlikely, given the formulaic nature of the inscriptions, that the 112 Mamboury, 'Nouvclle Lecture', 122-S.
abbreviation was used in several senses-a possibility suggested by Mango, 'Brick IV Notes in Mamboury's archive, taken from a letter received from Dcmangcl
Stamps'c a j. dated 2 February 194;, show that Demangel was not comfortable with Mamboury's
m Dethier, 'Makrikoy', 168. Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 83. Gcdeon, papEco.v'toc. He observed firstly that a verb would normally follow its subject
'Engraphoi'j j Sc. (whereas BA usually precedes the name), and secondly that the presence of .a verb
\74 Derhier, 'Makrikcy', 167 KB' no. 22. Gedeoa, 'Engraphoi', 381. meaning 'stamped' was not really necessary. Consequently, he preferred the adjec-
ItS The theory that the names are imperial was rejected by Schneider ('Ziege!- tive fXxcv..ucoU. 1I~ Mango, 'Brick Stamps', 13.
stempel', 263-4), Mamboury ('Nouvelle Lecture', 122-5), Mango ('Brick Stamps', IU GP 11, 106 n. I. Manacorda, 'Bolli Iateriai', 1..6 n. 169 also finds Mamboury's
22-3) and Hill {Brickstamps', 223). solution the most convincing.
17~ Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 264. . U6 In the Diegesis, the bricks used in the church's dome arc described as 'sealed',
l77 Mango, 'Brick Stamps', 23. Demangel and Mamboury also interpreted employing the verb ccppaYlsm: see Diegesis 14, 28 (discussed above p. 4). Similarly, a
INABAlcp (Manganes, 84 fig. 92) as "re ind. impdr. ateliers 'Ici' (Manganes, 78 late fourth-century bowl from Syria is stamped with the inscription ·A~a.Aa:tOC
n.l). C<jlpayi.eEv:sec Cruikshank Dodd, Silver Stamps, 4-5, 230-1 (no. $1).

CHAPTER
Stamping, storage, and supply
1. STAMPED AND UNSTAMPED BRICKS
On the basis of figures derived from the dismantling of small
amounts of brickwork in various parts of the church of St
Polyeuktos, it has been estimated that about 50 per cent of
bricks were stamped' Earlier studies, however, bad claimed-
without providing any supporting evidence-that the propor- _
cion was as low as one in a hundred.' For the sake of comparison,
it may be noted that it has been estimated (again, presumably on
the basis of a general impression) that 10 per cent of Roman
bricks were stamped in the late first century, and between 20 and
50 per cent during Hadrian's reign.' Helen has suggested two
explanations for bricks tamps appearing on only a proportion of
Roman bricks: either all producers stamped a proportion
their bricks, or a proportion of producers stamped all of their
of
bricks' Clearly, however, the situation may not have been quite
so simple: various producers may have stamped different pro-
portions of their bricks, and the proportion of bricks that they
stamped may not have been constant over time. It should at least
be possible, given adequate archaeological data, to assess the
ratio of stamped bricks to unstamped bricks for a single pro-
ducer at a particular time. This would, however, require the dis-
mantling of a wall containing bricks stamped with the same
name, indiction number, and, if possible, accessory letter."
The St Polyeuktos statistics are based on structural elements
in which a variety of stamps appeared, differing with regard to
I Hill, 'Brickstamps', 222 reports, 'The total numbers of stamped and unsremped
bricks in contexts where the ratio could be determined were 88 stamped bricks and
101 uustamped bricks', but incomplete support for this assertion is given in Hill's
Section I (pp. 221-2). Hill omits to mention in Section 1.9 that the dismantling of the
twelve courses of brickwork that had collapsed from the staircase vault during the
winter of 1967-68 revealed a top! of 41 stamped bricks and je unsramped bricks. Of
the stamped bricks, all but one was laid with the stamp on the underside. This cata-
logue and that of Hill includes 40 of these 4 t stamped bricks. Therefore, the ratios of
stamped bricks to unstamped bricks from various pans ofSt Polyeuktos are 25: 24
(1121, wall, north end), 12:4 (1121, wall, south end), 11: 37 (IOSl*, fallen pier), and
41: 36 (collapsed staircase vault). Consequently, it appears that the overall ratio was
89: 101. For the catalogue numbers of the stamped bricks from these locations,
consult Tables 2. r and 1.2 (which include associated debris in addition to pieces found
insitlt).
2 GP I, 28, and, probably following the claim made there, Pirath, 'Tuglalar', I}
and Mango, 'Brick Stamps', 26.
) Lugli, Tecnicaediliziaromana, S57·
4 Helen, Organization, 2-4.
S The number of bricks recovered from any single context during the Sr
Polyeuktos excavations is not large enough to be helpful.
.,
3 bricks recovered from the fallen vaults that had once supported
both names and indictions. This means, of course, that the data
concerned do not indicate the proportion of bricks that were
stamped in a single batch from a single workshop. Exactly what
can be deduced from the general ratio of 89 stamped bricks to
101 unstamped bricks is, therefore, difficult to assess. It might be
suggested that, despite the mixing of bricks from different
batches and workshops at St Polyeuktos, we can nevertheless
deduce that about half of any kiln-load of bricks was stamped.
This, however, is far from certain, since the basis on which
bricks were selected for stamping may not have been very
systematic. If, as has been suggested elsewhere,' it was the most
accessible bricks that were stamped whilst they were laid out to
dry, then the proportion of stamped bricks may have varied
considerably between batches and between workshops. On the
other hand, some support for the suggestion that about 50 per
cent of bricks were stamped comes from the excavations in the
Great Palace. Talbot Rice asserts that, in the late sixth-century
cistern beneath the Peristyle, about half of the bricks bore a
stamp. Numerous examples of only two kinds of stamp were
found in the structure, and both may refer to the same indi-
vidual, and were presumably manufactured at the same time.'
2. STORAGE AND SUPPLY
Brickstamps and the locations in which they are found provide
some clues about the location of brick stores and the supply
system between the place of manufacture and the building site.
First, we may note that there is often a predominance of stamps
bearing a single name in a single architectural element. At the
church of St Polyeuktos, the name 'Aya1tTl'ou predominated
on bricks from the vault under the staircase; in certain walls
of the substructures, brickstamps marked with the name
Kevcrcvtfvou were most common; and in some superstructure
elements, the name TIE'tpOU was frequent." During excavations
at the Great Palace in '953-5 j, large numbers of stamps bearing
the name Kccvcrcvcivou were found on reused bricks in situ in
the walls of a vaulted chamber to the south of the Apsed Hall,
and similar stamps appeared on the bricks in the rubble that had
6 Seep.6.
7 GP Il, 15 and 106 nos. 2-}. For the date of the cistern, see pp.
• See Tables 21 and 22.
STAMPING,
been used to fill the chamber. Presumably, many of the bricks
had come from a single, demolished structure.' Of the stamped
the floor of the Apsed Hall, some 90 per cent bore various
stamps with the inscription 'Ioxrvvou ClCpt().10 These examples
show that, whatever the precise stages in the progress of the
bricks from the manufactories to the building site, and despite
whatever mixing of the bricks may have occurred in storage or
during construction, large numbers of bricks bearing the same
name nevertheless ended up being used together in the same
building and in the same architectural elements.
Evidence that bricks were stored at the point of manufacture
comes from the excavations at St Polyeuktos. The majority of
bricks (39 in total) found in the debris of a collapsed barrel-vault
(levels 13 1,138, '40, and 143) bore the name Kccvcrcvrtvoo with
indiction y' (8p.l., 833.Ia 835.1a, 837.1a). However, seven
bricks bore stamp 834.1a with the same name but with the
previous indiction, /3'.11 In the 'wall west of the slip-road' were
found bricks with the name Kmvcruvrivou, two of which
carried indiction y' (84o.ra), and five of which bore indiction W
I (834.ra)-"The evidence would seem to suggest that bricks made
in consecutive indictions were stored close to their place of
manufacture, transported together, and then used together in
the same architectural element.
r Further evidence for stockpiling at the manufactory may be
provided by the accessory letters. Such letters occurred at St
Polyeuktoson stamps bearing the name Tlsrpou, and a large
number of bricks carrying such stamps were recovered from the
superstructure pier that had fallen into the atrium. Amongst
them were stamps with accessory letters K, A, and u-" Whether
the additional letters refer to officinatores contracted to the
same dominus or to workshops under the control of the same
officinator, H it would seem that bricks produced in various
locations on the same properry had been assembled and stored
together on that property, and had subsequently been trans-
ported to the building site as a group. The evidence is
insufficient to indicate whether each officinator possessed a
separate store, or whether all the bricks made on a single estate,
possibly by several officinatores, were assembled in one large
warehouse.
Some sixth-century stamps carry the formula 'tilc vEac ('of the
new')." The formula often stands alone, but in other cases it
, See below pp. 144-5. When Emerson and van Nice surveyed the south-east
buttress of Hagia Sophia they noted, 'The edges of the majority of bricks in some
areas are badly chipped, while those in areas above and below are uninjured. It
appears that their edges were damaged to this marked extent by removal from old
walls rather than by rough handling in transportation. That they are found together
in the wall came about in the natural course of building the church' (Emerson and
van Nice, 'Preliminary Report', -418).
10 See below pp. 14-4, 146, where it is explained that it is unclear whether these
bricks were newly made or reused.
II See below Table 21.
12 See below Table 21.
Il lo8~.I:1, 1096.1:1, 1097.la, 1100.13 (as listed in Table 22).
136-8, r45· 14 See above pp. 20-1.
I~ 2o,8I,338-9,34~-4, 141}-16.
.~
•
STORAGE, SUPPLY
is accompanied by a name in the genitive (or, occasionally,
nominative) case, which might refer either to a dominus or to a
contractor. Mango classified such stamps as 'inscribed with the
name of a building or a place', although, later in the same article,
he expressed uncertainty as to the correct interpretation.v Ir is
not clear whether the inscriptions including- a name in the
genitive should be taken to mean, 'Of the new [missing feminine
genitive] belonging to X' or '[Brick] of X [and] of the new [miss-
ing feminine genitive],. The sfirst possibility would seem to
receive support from the word order of the stamps, since, when-
ever a name is given, it is always placed after the formula 'tilc
VEf!.C. In either case, the missing feminine' noun might con-
ceivably refer to an estate or brickmaking establishment,
although exactly what the noun might be eludes me. Alterna-
tively, since Constantinopolitan brickstamps frequently carry
an indiction, and since no stamp carrying the formula 'tl1cVEf!.C
carries an indiction in addition, the possibiliry must be con-
sidered that the feminine genitive required to complete the sense
is ivolKnrovoc, giving the meaning, '[Brick] of X [and] of the
new [indiction],.
The word ivotK"tlrov is qualified by the adjective vEa in a large
number of papyri." Bagnall and Worp have shown that initially
the formula 'xth new indiction' was employed during the first
three or four years of a new fifteen-year cycle. After 347, how-
ever, the formula came to refer not to the first years of a new
cycle, but to any forthcoming indiction year (in contrast to the
year at the time of writing). Considering that the brickstamps on
which the words 'tilc vEac occur are to be dated to the sixth
century, it is surprising that papyri of the fifth and sixth
centuries rarely refer to a 'new indiction', occurrences of the
term being most common in the fourth century. There is, in fact,
only one reference to a 'new indiction' that has been dated,
tentatively, to the sixth century." It occurs in an inscription
from Philai. Because this dating is uncertain, and because by far
the majority of other references are dated to the fourth century,
Bagnall and Worp consider rejecting the proposed date. I.
It is, therefore, possible that stamps bearing the formula 'tilc
vEac were employed to mark bricks that had been made in excess
of the annual quota stated. in the locatio conductio contract, and
which were to be carried over to the accounts for the following
tax year. Alternatively, they may have been used to indicate
bricks that were to be handed over to the state in the following
tax year to meet the requirements of the next annual levy. Either
way, these stamps would suggest a degree of stockpiling at the
point of manufacture.
Although large numbers of bricks stamped with the same
name have been reported in the same architectural contexts,
there was frequently much more mixing of brick. A sample of
roughly contemporary brickstamps from a single site invariably
16 Mango, <Brick Stamps', 24, 26. .
17 Bagnall and Warp, Chronological Systems, 30-5 list examples with known
in~!ccion~ears.:mdprovide full discussion.
/. Pbilae, u. 22 5 .
I' Bagnall and Worp, Chronological Systems, } 5.

PART I: INDUSTRY
displays a large number of different names, even ill a single
architecrural element." This is true of borh public buildings
(such as the Land Walls and the Baths ofZeuxippos) and private
constructions (such as the Palace of Antiochus and St Poly-
euktos). Whcrhcr the names on the stamps refer to domini who
owned or leased lands in close proximity to one anorher, or to
officinatores operating on clay-bearing lands controlled by the
same dominus, this evidence suggests rhat bricks manufacrured
in different places had become mingled, perhaps in storage,
during transportation, or at the building site.
Evidence from St Polyeuktos illustrates not only the mingling
of stamps wirh different names but also rhe stockpiling of brick.
Debris from the eastern end of the fallen superstrucrure pier
contained seven bricks reading ITi.tpou with indiction lY', and
five older bricks carrying the name Tpoeiuoo with indiction
la'." The debris of a collapsed barrel vault (levels IF, 138, qo,
and 143) contained one brick bearing the name 'APIC'tEl.. with
indiction Ii' in addition to older bricks stamped Ktovcrcvrivou
with indictions Wand y'.'2 The 'wall west of the slip-road' con-
tained bricks stamped with the names 8EOOropO(u) and N(l)Kl(),
with indiction E', as well as older material stamped with
Kcvcrovrtvoo and indictions ~' and "'(.23 Mortar impressions in
the floor between levels I !I 8" and I II9" were of stamps reading
Kevcrcvrivoo with indiction y', and 'Aoicrei with indiction
W." In the case of each architectural context, rhe older bricks
must have been in storage for a time. It seems unlikely that
bricks would have been left standing for a year or more on rhe
building site; storage-either at the place of manufacture or in a
depot serving many figlinae-would seem a more plausible
explanation.
If the names on the stamps refer to officinatore" then the
occurrence of numerous names in a single structure might be
explained by rhe existence of warehouses serving the various
officinatores who worked on the estate of a particular dominus.
If, on the other hand, the names on the stamps refer to domini,
then we must posrulate the existence of depots to which huge
numbers of bricks from various estates were transported, and
from which bricks were withdrawn-with little or no regard for
the names they bore-to be delivered to the building site.
Warehouses for the storage of bricks are known in Rome at
various periods. We possess references to a port,,, Comeli(i),
portus Neapolitanus and portus Parrae." The portus Licini,
which is the subject of a letter preserved by Cassiodorus, has
already been mentioned." It was a harbour, presumably located
10 This is shown clearly by the table of names for each site (see Table 12, when:
stamps believed to be contemporary appear under the heading 'Included in the
sample'). On the methods used to deduce samples of contemporary material see
below pp. 46-P.
21 See below Table ZZ. 21 See below Table a r. 13 Scebelow Table z r.
1~ See below Table ZI.
2S For references to these warehouses, see: Platner and Ashby, Dictionary, 4)1;
Richardson, Dictionary, )20; LTUR, iv. I54, s.vv. Por(tus) Cor(nelii?), Pon{us)
Lic(inii) (L. Camilli), 155, s.vv. Por(tus) Ncapotlitanus) (L. Chioffi), Portus Parrae
(L. Cami11i). 2& See p. I}.
"~
•
on rhe Tiber, that served as a storage and redistribution depot
for bricks. Brickstamps indicate that it served a number of
figli/lae, which were probably located in the Sabina, along the
rivers Farfa and Nera." In the Baths of Caracalla (2II-I7) in
CHAPTER4
Rome, bricks from several figlinae were used in the construction
of a single architectural element. Although some mixing of brick
may have.occurred on the building site during the construction
of rhe barhs, it is likely that much of it occurred at the portus Construction in Constantinople, and the
Licini," It is certainly possible that such a depot existed in
Constantinople, where similar mixing may have occurred. beginning and end of brickstamping
3. BUILDING-SITE ACTIVITY
Related to the question of stockpiling is rhe problem of inter- ]. FINGERMARKING AND THE BEGINNING x 300 x 55--60 mm., and that repairs had been made wirh bricks
preting rhe distribution of indictions on the brickstamps found measuring 260 x 260 x 50 mm. (with fingermarks forming rhe
OF BRICKSTAMPING
in a particular building. At first sight, the obvious explanation letter X) and 350 x 340 x 50 mm. Since the piers themselves are
for a peak in the distribution of indictions is that it indicates an A small number of stamped bricks from Constantinople carry almost certainly to be ascribed to the Constantinian period, the
increase in on-site building activity to a point of maximum the formula DDDYlYlYl, i.e. (trium) diominorum} n(o,trorum). repairs were undertaken later, but presumably still in the fourth
intensity, followed by a decrease in activity as the finishing If we grant that this refers to Constantine and his sons the century, before brickstamping became prevalent.' Bricks used
touches were made (see, for example, Table 3)' But it seems Caesars Constantine and Constantius, the stamps are to be to repair one of the Hippodrome piers measured 370 x 3 50 x 60
unlikely that construction work would begin with small dated to 326-33, I and are the earliest known Constantinopolitan mm. and carried horseshoe-shaped fingermarks. Similarly
supplies of bricks that gradually increased in size each year, brickstamps. marked bricks were used in a drain to the west of the piers, and
rather than with a single large delivery which included a pro- Other early material-in this case unstamped-was dis- some of them bore a stamped cross in addition.'
portion of old stock. Indeed, it has been noted above that bricks covered during excavations conducted in '935 outside the On the basis of the evidence so far adduced, it would appear
laid at the same time, whether bearing a single name or several exonarthex of Justinian's Hagia Sophia. The work revealed the that in fourth-cenrury Constantinople stamping was rare, and
different ones, had not all been produced in the same year. remains of the monumental facade of the atrium of an earlier fingermarking much more common. Constantine planned to
Consequently the frequency of a particular indiction does not church built during the reign ofTheodosius 11.' A vaulted drain build a city with an area three and a hall times as great as that of
accurately indicate the intensity of construction in that year.' discovered below the paving of the street to the west of rhe Byzantium' during a single decade,' and the haste with which .
Bricks that were delivered to a construction site in one tax year atrium's remains yielded bricks measuring 280 x 280 x 33 mm., this massive construction programme was undertaken is
may have been manufactured one, two or three years earlier, and these were marked only with diagonal lines made with the reflected in claims that many of the emperor's new buildings
depending on how much stockpiled material a manufacrurer fingers.' Since the bricks were much smaller than the typical were unsound, necessitating repairs by his son and successor,
possessed. Thus, at St Polyeuktos, it is possible that construc- bricks produced in fifth-cenrury Constantinople,' the drain Constantius 11.10 The existing, relatively small-scale industry in
tion of the foundations began in indiction y' (the bricks stamped should perhaps be associated with the first Great Church, whicb Byzantium must have expanded to cope with demand, but there
with a' and W being old stock) and that construction of the was begun under Constantius II in about 350, and dedicated a was probably little time for it to be restrucrured according to the
superstrucrures began in indiction lY' (the bricks with ta' and ,W decade later. Roman model, and it may not have been very efficient. This may
being old stock)." The problem is an important one with respect Fingermarked bricks of a similar size (270-300 mm. square) explain wby bricks tamping was so rarely undertaken.
to the uncertain dating of the Palace of Antiochus and of were recovered by Mamboury from the substrucrures at the Both Schneider and Mamboury believed that bricks marked
Antiochus' praepositure, It is possible that construction of the northern end of the Great Palace (areas Aa and Ab) (I73S.Ib, only with the fingers antedated stamped material and were
palace began in the first indiction, The fact that the majority of typical of the fourth century." A progression from fingermarks
'743.2., '737·,a, '737.20, 1743.1a, I744.1a). Although the
bricks supplied to the site bore the previous, fifteenth, indiction structures themselves date to the sixth century and later,' it to the more sophisticated stamp would seem logical, and such a
could be explained by the delays in getting newly manufactured seems that the fingermarked bricks had been reused. It is not development can in fact be observed elsewhere. Fingermarked
bricks from the production sites to the building site. The bricks unlikely that they had been salvaged from demolished palatial bricks are known in the Tetrarchic period in Thessaloniki.
made in even earlier years would have had to have been in buildings of the original Constantinian phase. Hebrard recorded several from the earliest construction phase
storage for a time.'? If, as has been suggested, the basilica of St Further fingermarked bricks were found in 1950 in repairs of the Rorunda, which was built around the beginning of the
John of Stoudios was indeed built to house the head of the made to the piers of the Hippodrome. Mamboury records in his fourth cenrury. Later work, undertaken when the structure was
Baptist discovered in 453, then the material stamped with the notes that the majority of the bricks in the piers (that is, those converted into the church of St George, perhaps in the first half
latest indictions must represent the date construction began; all
relating to the original construction phase) measured about 3'0
earlier material must have been stockpiled."
, Seep. ItS.
v See Bloch, 'Zicgclstempel', 200-1; Stein by, 'Ziegelsrempcl', 1511-12; Del.aine, 1 Seep. r r S. 7 Seep. r rS.
Caracalla, 90-1. 1 For further details, see pp. 55-6. I Dagron, Naissance, }5.
z, See DeLainc, Caraca/la, 256-8. ) Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 264; Schneider, Wcsthof, )-4. , Dagron, Naissance, JJ.
29 Sec below pp. 111-%6. )0'See below pp. 107-9. )1 Scc below p.ucs. 4 See pp. 102-6. 10 julian, Orations, 1.)) (ed. Bidcz, 59); Zosimus, New History, z.p. J.
, Sec pp. 147-50. 11 Schneider, 'Ziegelstcmpel', 2.64. Mamboury.Touilles IJI',435'
 PART I: INDUSTRY THE BEGINNING AND END OF BRICKSTAMPING

of the fifth century, yielded bricks marked with mould-made simply because of the growing preference for brick over stone as
marks in relief." a construction material."
Some fingermarked bricks from Constantinople carry stamps During the demolition of the brick pillars of the southern
in addition. In his notes, Mamboury suggested that bricks so retaining wall of the Forum Tauri in June 1948, Mamboury
marked should be placed in a period of transition between the observed that none of the bricks discovered bore a stamp."
use of fingermarks and the use of stamps. It is, however, clear According to the Chronicon Paschale, the forum was inaugur-
01'
that fingermarking continued to be undertaken long after ated undef Theodosius I in 393.20 This negative evidence may
stamping had been introduced, since fingermarks appear in con- indicate that systematic brickstamping had still not begun in
junction with both fifth- and sixth-century stamps." It would, Constantinople at the end of the fourth century. Since the
therefore, be quite wrong to assign all bricks with both finger-
marks and stamps to such a transitional period."
Some fingermarks clearly take the form of letters, such as e,
archaeological record of these remains is, however, meagre, it is
difficult to exclude the possibility that the terracing had been
constructed before the forum was established, perhaps even /
(
Il>, and 'P, whereas others are just distinctive shapes, such as a under Constantine, when the Mese was laid out. Unfortunately,
figure-of-eight pattern. Fingermarks in the forms I, C, and X other monuments erected under Theodosius I have not yielded
could be explained as either letters or simply lines, semicircles, bricks that might help to clarify the situation, and at present the
and crosses. Such marks must have been intended to convey Land Walls and the second Great Church-both of the early
some sort of information; they are to be distinguished from fifth century-provide us with the first dated evidence for
fingermarks that were made either unintentionally when the
clay was smoothed in the mould, or deliberately to form a key
for the mortar." The significance of the letters and designs is
uncertain: they possibly indicate different brickmakers
different workshops. I6
or
systematic bricksramping-"

develop rapidly (Fig. 2).

Nevertheless, it cannot be doubted
that from the time of Theodosius I Constantinople began to

During Theodosius' reign a surprising number of triumphal

monuments were erected. Work on the Forum Tauri probably
j
started shortly after Promorus's victory over the Goths in 386,
since the campaign seems to have been the subject of the
2. THE INTENSITY OF CONSTRUCTION spiralling relief sculpture carved on the column erected there."
IN CONSTANTINOPLE If Theophanes is to be believed, the column was erected as early
as 385/6," therefore before the triumphal procession of
SEA OF MARMARA
The beginning of systematic brickstamping is to be associated Theodosius and his son Arcadius on 12 October 386.24 The
with the prolific building of the late fourth century, by which forum itself was not inaugurated until 393," apd in the follow- O~=========- .2Km
time the expanding brickmaking industry is likely to have ing year, a statue of Theodosius was set up there." The same
adapted its organization to the needs of a city that was growing victory over the Goths was perhaps the occasion of the erection
rapidly, and which was expected to continue to do SOl7 From of the Goths' Column, which was assembled on the acropolis
the late fourth century until the end of Justinian'S reign, we have (Saray Burnu) from architectural spoils, including a capital
FIG. 2. Map of Constantinople, showing the location of many sites mentioned in the text
evidence of a multitude of building projects; and even if we of the early third century." Shortly after the victory over the
imagine that the rate of construction remained steady from the 18 Seep. 53.

!~ The demolition was p:m of extensive destruction of Byzantine remains in the

beginning to the end of the period, the output of Constan- Key: Cistern in Gclhaoe
area during the expansion of the University in 19'H-SO, and the archaeological 20 41 Ismetiye Caddcsi remains
tinople's brick-kilns must have doubled during that time, record was made hascily without detailed surveying. Sec Mamboury. 'COntri- I Amastrianon 21 Constanrinian \Vall 42 Kainopolis
bution'. 251-}: Mamboury. 'Nouvelle Lecture', HI; Mamboury, 'Fouilles Hl', 2 Aqueduct 22 Forum Bovis 43 Kalenderhane Camii
12 Hebrard, 'Saloaique', .11-4 with fig. 9 (fingermarks), and JI with fig. 15. 4 J }-4· The r-emains of the southern terrace wall demolished in 1948 are mapped by Augustaion 23 Forum of Arcadius 44 LandWaIls
Makaronas, 'Ta Oktagcoon', 309 fig. 6, records material similarly fingermarked Miiller-Wiener. Bildlexikon, 261, Pl.194, area D (the label D has been omitted from Balaban Aga Mescidi 24 Forum of Constantine 45 Mercan Caddesi remains
from the Octagon in Thessaloniki. For the "stamped' material from Thessalcniki, . the remains between A and E) with details on p. 260. 5 Basilica and Basilica Cistern 25 Forum of Marcian 46 Mese
see: Vickers, 'Brickstamps': Croke, 'Hormisdas', Croke, 'Thessalonika'; Spieser, Further remains of this southern terrace wall were exposed in 1953 (Miiller-
6 Bcyaztt Basilicas (Theotokos in the 26 Forum Tauri (Forumof Tbeodosius I) 47 Palace of Antiochus
Thessalonique, 127 n. s: Torp, 'Rotunda', 18-19. Wiener. Bildlexihon, 261, fig.l94 area E with details on p. 260). These arc described
by Ward-Pcrkins (GP Il, 64-5), who oddly ascribes the terrace wall to the period of
Diakonissa) 27 Golden Gate of Conseanrine 48 Palace of Lausus
13 e.g. 937.13 (AM 290), 83.13 (AM 343), 975.13 (Palace of Antiochus), Il61.xa
'its incorporation within the city by Theodosius 11 and the monumental develop- 7 Binbirdirek Cistern 28 Golden Gate of 'Ihecdosius I 49 Peristyle and Apsed Hall
(Hagia Eirene), 11.91.J3, 1}04.Ia, 1574.1:'1 (all fifth-century); 586.Ib (AM 2), 7P.lb
(AM III),969.1d (AM 128), 817.lh (AM 212) (all sixth-century). ment of the area'. The region was, of course, part of the city in Constantinc's day and 8 Blachernai 29 Goths' Column 50 Philadelphion
14 The dating of some stamps marked with both fingermarks and stamps is was monumentally devploped by Theodosius 1. 9 Bodrum Camii (Myrelaion) 30 Great Palace 51 Porticoes of Domninus
uncertain: 166.Ia (HagiaSophia), 474.1b (AM }),996.Ia (AM 184). 10 Cbronicon Paschak, 565. 10 Bronze Tetrapylon (Anemodoulion) 3[ Hagia Eirene 52 SeaWalls
IS Sec above pp. 5-6. 11 See pp. 54-6, 107. 12.2-5. I I Cemal Nadir Soka~ remains 32 Hagia Sophia (Great Church) 53 Stracegion
16 Besides the finger-marked bricks catalogued here, Mamboucy claims to have :u Cedrenus, i. 566 states tbat the reliefs commemorated victories over Scythians Cbalke 33 HarbourofJulian 54 St J obn of Stoudios
seen many fingermar-ked bricks in the baths at Ankara. and at the Kerko Porta in and barbarians. 13 Chrysotriklinos J4 Harbour of Necrion 55 St Polyeuktos
Constantinople. Note also. e.g. the bricks from Africa bearing finger-made chi-rho :u Tbeopbanes, Chronicle,A.\i 5878.
14 Cistern on Divaru Ali Soka~ 35 Harbour of Prosphorion 56 SS Sergius and Bacchus and SS Peter
monograms (VACL. fig. 171I) and the fingermarked material from Justinian's 2.4 Mango, Deoeloppemmt, 43 is cautious about Theophanes' dale.
15 Cistern of Aetius }6 Harbour of Theod os ius I and Paul
chur-ch of St John in Ephesus (Hormann,Johanneskirche, 156). Fingermarks are n ChronicouPaschale, 565.
Cbronicon Paschale, 565. It is unclear whether this was the statue on top of the 16 Cistern of Aspar 37 Hexagon in Giilhane 57 Theorokos in the Chalkoprareia
also frequent on Romano-British material, where their significance is equally 26

problematical (Brodribb, Brick and Tile, [0}-4. J 27). column orTheodosius' equestrian statue, which was placed on a rectangular marble 17 Cistern of Mocius 38 Hippodrome 58 Tokludede Mescidi
11 The city's development from the fourth to the seventh centuries is admirably base decorated with reliefs. 18 Cistern of Philoxenus 39 Holy Apostles 59 Trondesian Porticoes
sketched by Mango, Deoeloppement. We await his longer study. 21 Peschlow, 'Gotensaulc' ascribes the monument to Tbcodosius r, whereas 19 Cistern on Srraselviler Caddcsi 40 Hospice of Samson 60 Zeuxippos baths
 ..~
.<

30 PART I: INDUSTRY THE BEGINNING AND END OF BRICKSTAMPING

western usurper Magnus Maximus in 388, and before the
emperor's triumphal entrance into Constantinople on 10
November 39 I, the Golden Gate was erected as a triumphal arch
close to the Sea of Marmara, and about 'r .5 km. outside the
Constantinian walls." The same victory was commemorated by
the erection of an Egyptian obelisk on the euripos of the
Hippodrome;" and, at about the same time, a second obelisk
was set up in another new forum created at the Strategion."
The reign of Theodosius also saw the reclamation of land to
the south-west of the Forum Tauri in Region IX, thus creating
the quarter called Kainopolis." Here, two granaries were estab-
lished to store the grain imported from Egypt: the H orrea
4lexandrina and the Horreum TheodosianumP The bay
remaining to the west of this reclaimed area was dredged to
create a new port on the city's southern shore. This brought
Constantinople's harbour capacity to its maximum level, for it
was not increased in any later period." Under Theodosius, work
continued on the extensive programme of water supply, which
had been begun under Valens (364-78). New aqueducts and
underground channels were constructed to bring water to the
city from the area of Bizye (modern Vize), along the Istranca
mountains for a distance of over I20 km.," thus supplementing
the meagre supply brought in by the Hadrianic aqueduct. By the
end of Theodosius' reign, the system of water distribution, like
the city's harbour capacity, had reached its maximum develop-
ment."
Provision for the storage of water needed to be improved,
however-e-nct least to ensure that the city's huge bathing
establishments could remain open. In 407, under Theodosius'
successor, Arcadius (395-408), a huge subterranean cistern was
Mango, 'Triumphal Way' 177 associates it with Constantine's victory over the
Ooths in 332. Lydus claims that the column was erected to commemorate Pompey
the Great's recapture of Byzantium from Mirhridates, but such events never
occurred. The suggestion of Stichel, 'Fortuna Redux', 481--92, that the monument
was in fact built in honour of Pompey, the nephew of Anastasius, and that he was
involved in the victory over Vitalian's Thracian and Scythian troops in 5I 5>seems
unlikely, particularly given that there are historical events that approximate closely
to those that Lydus describes: the advance of Flaccus and Fimbria on Byzantium
from Thessaly in the winter of 86/85 BC, in the process driving out of Europe the
remaining Pontic garrisons of 1v1.ithridates.ltis not difficult to believe that Pompey
the Great might have become wrongly associated with these events, but why these
events should have become connected with the column is less easy to understand.
28 For the date, see Bardill, 'Golden Gate'.
2~ For the date of the erection of the obelisk, Marcellinus, Chronicle, 390.
)0 The Notitia Urbis Constantinopolitanae 6.11-12, ed. Seeck, 233, refers to
5trategium, in quo est forum Theodosiacum et obe/iseus Thebaeus quadrus. The
obelisk was seen by Pierre Gilles in 1544 in the gardens of the Topkepi palace:
P. Gilles, De topographia Constantinopoieos, 2. I I. See Mango, Deoeloppement, 43;
Mango, 'Columns', 19-20; Mango, 'Straregion".
31 Mango, Deoeloppement, 18,45,
'2 Mango, Deoeloppement, 40, 45.
)3 Mango, Deoeloppement, 39-40, 15; Mango, 'Shoreline', 25.
.H The source was to the north of the modem village of Pazarb, and the
channel probably entered the city south of Edirnckapr. Within the city, a channel
apparently relating to this system has been located at the foot of the so-called
Aqueduct of Valens. See Cecen, Water Supply, chs. 2-3; Crow and Ricci, 'Long
WaW,237-9. 253--9;Crow and Ricci, 'Anastasian Wall', 241-3; Bono etal., 'Water
Supply'.
)5 Mango, Deoeloppement, 40-2. Mango, 'Water Supply', 9-14.
built close to Constantine's forum," and the Arcadianai Baths
were constructed in Region I, either in honour of the emperor
himself or of his daughter Arcadia."
In the first year of Arcadius' reign, the Porticoes ofDomninus
were constructed along a main north-south street that inter-
sected the Mese between the Forum of Constantine and the
Forum Tatri" It is possible that the street had already been
planned under Theodosius I, who is said to have built the
monumental four-sided arch topped by a pyramidal weather-
vane (the the Bronze Tetrapylon or Anemodoulion) that doubt-
less stood at this intersection." In 402/3, yet another new public
forum, that of Arcadius, was established-this time along the
southern branch of the Mese in Region XII'O The monumental
column that stood within it, the base of which still survives,
closely resembled that of Theodosius 1,41 and was decorated
with military scenes, probably depicting the campaign against
Gainas in 400.42 Not until 10 July 42 I, under Theodosius II, was
it topped with Arcadius' statue."
In 404, the erection of a statue of the Empress Eudoxia at the
Pittakia provoked riots during which numerous public build-
ings were burned." Afterwards, both the Hippodrome and the
Great Church were repaired (the latter must have been attended
to before 406)," and it is possible, but not certain, that Arcadius
saw to the reconstruction of the Senate House and Augustaion,
which were also damaged. Following the fires, laws were passed
to ensure that the new colonnaded streets were built to
more exacting safety specifications." The creation of such long,
porticoed avenues helps to explain the vast number of column
capitals produced in Constantinople in this period."
Already under Theodosius I, if the orator Themistius is to be
believed, the city within the Walls of Constantine had expanded
to such an extent that there was an imminent need for new
circuit walls. Indeed, the Golden Gate had probably been built
to indicate the boundary that those future walls should define."
But it was left to Arcadius to begin construction of a new double
line offortifications, which were located about r. 5 km. west of
those of Constantine, stretching for 6.5 km. between the Sea of
36 Marcellinus, Chronicle, 407.
" Notitia Urbis Constantinopolitanac .2.13.
38 Theophanes, Chronicle, AM 5887. Berger, Pairia, 310, 319-21,442-4. Bergcr,
'Regionen',395·
39 Sec below, p. I29. The monument is ascribed to Thcodosius I by Constantine
the Rhodian (see Mango, Art, 44-5).
40 Muller- Wiener, Bildlexikon, 250-3. For the date, see Theophanes, Chronicle,
AM 5895. This date may be one year too late, since Theophanes places Gainas' defeat
in 400 under AM 5894 (aor/a},
41 Cedrenus, i. 567, qn the remains, see Konrad, 'Arkadiossaule'.
42 For this interpretation of the reliefs, sec Liebeschuetz, 'Cover up' and
Liebeschuetz, Barbarians and Bishops, ]20-2, 273-8.
U Marcellinus, Chronicle, 421; Cbronicon Pascbale, 579. his presumably because
Theodosius n completed this forum that the Notiria Urbis Constantinopolitanae
13.10 refers to it asforum Theodosiacum.
« Miiller-Wiener, Bildlexikon, 52-3; Socrates, Ecclesiastical History, 6.18;
Sozomen, Ecclesiastical History, 8..22;Zosimus, New History, 5.24.3-6.
45 Sec below pp. 54-S.
46 See CTh 15.1.44-6 (406). Betsch, Capital, 163-82. See p. 78.
H This thesis has been developed by Bersch, Capital, 166-82.
45 Themistius, Orations, 18.223b. Bardill, 'Golden Gate'.
31
Marmara and the Golden Horn. This massive undertaking, of Honorius and the construction of a colonnaded portico in
which was begun around 405 under the direction .of the front of them." The Baths of Constantius, which had been
Praetorian Prefect Anthemius, seems to have formed part of the begun in 345, were completed in 427 and inaugurated as the
emperor's plan to secure the succession of his young son, Baths of Theodosius." Work on another bathing complex was
Theodosius. In that it was successful, and Anthemius brought begun, and it was named after the emperor's wife, Athenais
the work to completion under Theodosius II in 4'3. The Eudokia." The storage system necessary for sustaining the
stamped bricks from these walls are, however, difficult to date, water-supply for these baths, as well as for drinking, and for
owing to the large number of occasions on which the industrial purposes, was also improved: in 421, Aetius con-
fortifications were repaired during their long history" structed a huge open cistern, in which the Karagiimriik stadium
The general impression is that Arcadius concentrated on the near Edirne Kapi is now Jocated;" and at about the same
streets and public spaces of the city, on the provision of public time, the magister officio rum Philoxenus constructed a similar
baths and water supply, and on protecting the inhabitants. But reservoir to the east of the Forum of Constantine, on the north
some private buildings are attested in Arcadius' reign, amongst side of the Mese."! Probably in 435, Theodosius had his own
the secular ones being the five domus belonging to the emperor's forum built outside the old Constantinian Golden Gate'2 The
daughters Marina, Arcadia, and Pulcheria." As for the founders T roadesian Porticoes, which extended along the southern
of religious establishments, mention may be made of Rufinus branch of the Mese from the Forum of Arcadius to the Walls of
and Caesarius. The former, the praetorian prefect of 392-95," Constantine were reconstructed following a fire in 448.63
possessed an estate near Chalcedon where he founded a The massive investment in public building during Thco-
martyrium to house relics of SS Peter and Paul brought from dosius' reign is evident from the tale of Cyrus of Panopolis,
Rome. He also built a monastery (which he staffed with protege of the empress. He was praised highly-far too highly
Egyptian monks) and a magnificent adjacent palace." Flavius for the emperor's liking-by the crowds in the Hippodrome,
Caesarius, formerly consul in 397,53 is said to have purchased a who chanted that he had practically rebuilt Constaruine's city.
monastery from followers of Macedonius, once patriarch of The emperor believed the threat to his authority to be so great
Constantinople. A certain Eusebia had bequeathed the property that, by 443, under the influence of the powerful eunuch
to tbe monks on condition that they secretly interred her there Chrysaphius, he had arranged for Cyrus to be exiled to
with the relics of the Forty Martyrs of Sebaste, which she kept in Cotyaeum in Phrygia."
her house. Caesarius wished to bury his own wife beside When the Notitia Urbis Constantinopolitanae (a semi-official
Eusebia, since both women had been' friends and partisans of region-by-region register of Constantinople's monuments) was
Macedonius. Having acquired the land, which lay just outside compiled around 425," there were apparently only fourteen'
the Constantinian walls, he demolished the monastery, buried churches in Constantinople. As Mango observes, however, the
his wife, and built a church dedicated to St Thyrsus above the rate of construction quickly increased, meeting the desire of
graves. He also constructed a tomb for himself close by." vainglorious patrons to house new relics, and far exceeding
Under Theodosius II (408-50) construction of the Land liturgical and pastoral requirements." The emperor's sister
Walls continued, until their completion C.4'3. The fortification Pulcheria and wife, Eudokia, played an important role in this
of part of the coast allegedly began in 439, but doubts have been process. Eudokia's prestige was greatly increased when, in 439,
expressed as to the accuracy of the information." The city she returned from a pilgrimage to the Holy Land, bringing
walls henceforth required regular attention, and following the precious relics, including some of St Stephen, and perhaps also
devastating earthquake of 447, the Land Walls (and possibly
also the Sea Walls) were extensively repaired in 60 days by the 57CTh 15.1.5°. PLRE, ii. 631-3, s.v. Fl. Anrhemius Isidorus 9.
Praetorian Prefect Constantine." 58Cbronicon Paschale, 534,580-1. Marcellinus, Chronicle, 427.
S~ Notitia Urbis Constantinopolitanae 6.10.
Like his father, Theodosius paid a great deal of attention to 60 Marcellinus, Chronicle, 421; Muller- Wiener, Bildlexikon, 278.
the adornment of the city, and to the provision of public spaces 61 Bardill, 'Lausus'.
6l Marcellinus, Chronicle, 435. Mango, Deoeloppement, 50 with O. 81. Berger,
and amenities. In 412, a decree was given to the city prefect of
'Tauros e Sigrna' doubts the equation of the forum with the Sigma, which he prefers
Constantinople, Isidorus, ordering the completion of the Baths to explain as the sigrna-plan portico of the palace of Helena, Constantine's mother.
6l Marcellinus, Chronicle, 448. For the remains of the porticoes, see Mango,
49 See bclowpp. 122-5. 'Triumphal Way', 180 with n. 50 and fig. 3.
so Notitia Urbis Conetantinopcluanae 2.12,4.8, 10.7, J 1,13, 12.9. 64 Holum, Empresses, r89-93. Theophanes, Chronicle, AM 5937 and other late
51 PLRE,i. s.v. Flavius Rufinus 18.
sources wrongly state that Cyrus built the Land Walls in 60 days. For the confusion,
52 Thomas, Foundations, 2I-3. see Speck, 'Mauerbau'. It is often suggested that this error may indicate that Cyrus
53 PLRE, i. S.v. Fl. Caesarius 6.
was in fact involved in the construction of the Sea Walls in 439. See:van Millingen,
Si Sozomen, EcclesiasticalHistory, 9.2. Thomas, Foundations, 16-17. Dagron, Walls, 51; Croke, 'Earthquakes', 135-6; Camcron, 'Empress and Poet', .240-2;
'Monachisme', 246-7.Janin, Eglises, .247-8. Caesarius can hardly have still been alive Mango, Developpement, 25 n. 12; Cbronicon Paschale, trans. Whitby and Whitby n.
at the time Pulcheria discovered the relics of the Forty Martyrs in his church of 243·
St Thyrsus, contrary to Cbronicon Paschale, 590 (see trans. and comm. Whitby and 65 For the date of the Notitia Urbis Constantinopolitanae, see Speck, 'Mauerbau',
Whitby n. 267). 55 See below p. Ilj n. 21. 144-50 and pp. 123-4.
~~ Sec pp. 122-j. 6(, Mango, Deoeloppement, 52.
 PART I: INDUSTRY THE BEGINNING AND END OF BRICKSTAMPING
•
32 33
,f St Polyeuktos, to whom she dedicated a church." After During the reign of Zeno, the public court of the Basilica entered the clergy and determined to devote all his wealth to the Patria's historical assertions." \Y/e may at least mention the
Eudokia bad been accused of adultery and exiled to Jerusalem, was splendidly rebuilt by the consul Illus three years after the the building and restoration of churches. Besides founding church of the Forerunner founded by lUus, consul of 478, beside
Pulcheria made the most of her absence, completing in 453 a devastating fire of 475.78 This large, open area frequented by churches of St Theodore, St Stratonikos, and St Isidore (where the Hippodrome," and the church of the Theotokos, founded
church of St Laurence to which Eudokia's relics of St Stephen lawyers was surrounded by porticoes on all four sides, those to he deposited the saint's relics), he negotiated the purchase of a near the Strategion in around 497 by U rbicius." In this period,
were transferred." The city's most important ecclesiastical the north-east and south-west being at least 150 rn.Iong." Con- Syrian widow's estate for 2,000 nomismata, with the intention too, the Egyptian monks Baras and Raboulas each founded a
foundation, with which Pulcheria seems to have been closely struction of the Baths of Dagistheus began under Anastasius, of founding his church of St Anastasia on it. In the event, how- monastery," and the parakoimomenos Amantius arranged for
involved, was the new cathedral, dedicated to the Holy Wisdom and it is sa.1dthat the open cistern of St Mocius (identified with ever, he chose the site of the Anastasis of Gregory of Nazianzus the restoration of a church of St Thomas in ta Amantiou during
of God. This was erected on a grand scale between 412 and 415, the Altunermer Cukurbostaru) was built during the same in the Porticoes of Domninus. Marcian also resumed the con- the reign of Anastasius I (491-5'8)." During the same reign, the
on the site of the church that had been repaired by Arcadius after reign.'o In 509, apparently as part of an extensive harbour struction of the church of St Eirene of Perama, which the wealthy patrician Anicia Juliana possibly transferred yet more
me fire of 404. The remains of the rear wall of the monumental improvement project, Anastasius had the Port of Julian cleared Patriarch Genuadius had left incomplete on his death in 471. relics of St Stephen from Jerusalem, for she founded a church
vestibule of this church have yielded a few closely dated of mud and a breakwater constructed there." The Long Walls of After Marcian's own death, the project was completed by the dedicated to the martyr in the Constantinianae region." It was
stamped bricks." Thrace were built (or extensively reconstructed), and hence- Empress Verina." perhaps also during Anastasius' reign, and in the same part of the
Naturally, the emperor, his family, and members of the court forth bore the emperor's name;" and the frequent riots that The patricians Galbius and Candidus, so the sixth-century city, that she and her husband, Areobindus, began to lay the
engaged in private building projects. The Great Palace, for broke out under Anastasius must have necessitated the recon- legend goes, discovered and stole the Virgin's robe from a small foundations of a magnificent new church of St Polyeuktos to
instance, may have seen some important developments in the struction of many monuments, including the Hippodrome and village in Galilee. For fear of being deprived of their treasure, replace Eudokia's earlier foundation. The excavation of this site
fifth century, and a large number of stamped bricks of this the city's colonnaded streets." however, they did not mention their acquisition upon returning in the 1960s produced a very large number of stamped bricks,
oeriod are recorded in Mamboury's notes." 'Within the very In the second half of the fifth century, churches continued to to Constantinople. Instead, they built a church to house the relic many of which can be precisely dated in the first decades of the
heart of the palace, Pulcheria founded the church of St Step hen . be built at a high rate under both private and imperial patronage. in the Blachernai region, and dedicated it not to the Virgin, but sixth century."
in Daphne, having managed to obtain the right arm of the saint In the reign of Leo, for instance, Cyrus (who had returned from to SS Peter and Mark. When the Virgin moved the patricians to These emperors of the second half of the fifth century did not,
from the archbishop of Jerusalem in 42O-2r.71 Other private exile after Theodosius' death) founded the famous church of the tell the imperial couple of their acquisition, the Empress Verina of course, neglect their own residences. Marcian, for instance, is
ouildings of the time include two huge palaces built beside the Theotokos K yriotissa close to the surviving Kalenderhane took possession of the relic and, in 468-70, founded the famous known to have constructed porticoes tperidromoii outside the
Mese by the powerful Grand Chamberlains (praepositi sacri Carnii." Many other private patrons-such as Stoudios, Holy Sores in Blachernai, where the robe was placed in a Great Palace;" and Leo established a small port and a portico at
",biculi) Antiochus and Lausus. Lausus' palace, which was Marcian, and Galbius and Candidus-followed the example set reliquary of silver and gold. Not long after, a Syrian lady named the Palace of St Mamas at Besiktas on the Bosphoros after a fire
famous for its owner's collection of antique statuary, has not yet by Eudokia and Pulcheria, and went to great lengths to secure Paulina established a church of SS Cosmas and Damian very had devastated Constantinople in 46+ 100The same emperor is
oeen discovered." Antiochus', however, was located in 1942 at the most potent relics for deposition and veneration in their new close by." known to have possessed another palace at the Forum Tauri.'?'
.he north-west corner of the Hippodrome, and a large and foundations. Besides completing the church of St Eirene in Perama, and Under Anastasius, some time after 498, the gilded vestibule of
important sample of stamped bricks was recovered from it." We know little about Stoudios, whose basilica of St John the founding the Soros of the Theotokos in Blachernai, Verina was the Great Palace, the Chalke, was rebuilt by one Aetherius.!"
Amongst the public works undertaken by Theodosius' Forerunner still stands a short distance east of the Theodosian responsible for two other shrines dedicated to the Virgin. Although the state had been on the verge of bankruptcy when
immediate successors-Marcian (450-57), Leo I (457-74), Zeno Golden Gate. The church, which has yielded a small sample Immediately to the west of Hagia Sophia, she founded the Anastasius'came to power in 49 I, its coffers are said to have been
:474-91), and Anastasius I (491-p8}--were the forum estab- of stamped bricks, was founded after 450, and it has been church of the Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia (Copper Market), bulging with over 23 million solidi by the time of his death. 10)
lished by Marcian on the northern branch of the Mese," and that suggested that it was established in the hope of obtaining the perhaps between the years 474 and 478'8 A small number of Much of this was spent on building work by [ustin I (p8-27)
founded by Leo at the Pittakia, near Hagia Eirene," in both of precious head of St John the Baptist that was discovered in stamped bricks have been recovered from the ruins of this and Justinian I (5274> 5). Procopius, the author of a panegyrical
which an imperial honorific column was set up. In 459, Leo also Emesa in 453. If so, Stoudios was to be disappointed, for he church, which was established to house the potent girdle of the work devoted to Justinian's construction projects,'?' states that
arranged for the restoration of part of the Augustaion," and for never received the relic; but soon after founding the church, he Virgin" Verina is also credited with the Theotokos of the the buildings erected under Justinmay reasonably be ascribed to
me construction of another huge open cistern by the Gothic was appointed consul in 454." Kourator near Beyazit. This possibly had some association with his nephew and successor Justinian, on the grounds that it was
5eneral Aspar. A number of stamped bricks found in situ in this Marcian, who was descended from a wealthy Roman family, the Balaban Aga Mescidi, during whose demolition in the 1930S the latter who had governed during his uncle's reign.l05 Indeed,
reservoir provide a small but important dated sample from the many stamped bricks were discovered.t? Verina's husband, Leo,
7J 211 inFHG, iv. 6[8.
John of Antiochfr. 91 For the works ascribed to Anasrasius, see Capizzi, Anast4sio. 196-201.
mid-fifth century." Brazen House, 49.
,., Mango, ordered the construction oCthe monastery of Sr Daniel beside ,} Patria 3.3J,2Il;Berger,Patria, 55?-62;MercatiAnoTlymoIH, ed. Ciggaar, 257
10 Deoeloppement, 49 with n. 76. The cistern's construction technique
Mango, the srylite's pillar at Sosthenion on the Bosphorus. He also {16}. Berger, 'Streets', 166 n, 28 supposes that Illus may also have been responsible
U See pp. 125'-6. deserves attention (see Forchheimer and Srraygowski, \Vasscrbehiiill!r, 45). The for the Binbirdirek cistern.
founded a church of St Symeon there, having obtained the
61 Marcellinus comes, Chronicle, 439. 45}. See Cameron, 'Empress and Peer', rnortared rubble core is faced. with small blocks of stone and shot through with ~ JOOn, Eglises. 207; Berger, Peuria, 404-6. Berger, 'Streets', 165 n. 26 supposes
z'78;Wortley, 'Trier [vary', 384-5; Holum, Empresses, 137. 196; Megdalino, <Oikoi', bands of five courses of brick. Were it nor for [he fact that the bands of brick are saint's relics from Antioch." that the ruins with a mosaic £loorthat were discovered in front of the Vilayer build-
5)-4' themselves faced with large stone blocks, we would have no hesitation in assigning The Patria ascribes a large number of churches to the reigns of ing in 19S8 (Miiller-Wiener, Bildlexikon, 46) may be identified with Urbicius'
" See below pp. 54-6, 107. the cistern to the fifth cenrury. A fifth-century date is also suggested by 175.1C, a church.
the Emperors Zeno and Anastasius; but although we may
111 See pp. 147-50. stamp of Group I style carrying the name Bac( ), which has also been noted in the !S Janin, £g/ues, 56, 445.
11 Theophaces, Chronicle; AM PG, lxiii, 933. Holum, Empresses, 10),
5920 and mid-fifth century church of St John of Sroudios (see Table 13 and commentsin Ch. believe that the churches existed, we must be cautious regarding 'J6 janin, Eglises, 248-50; Berger, Patria, 596--7.
108 (contrary to Wordey, 'Trier Ivory', Nevertheless, Wortley's doubt is
382-92. 10 (6). However, this may have been old stock, given the discovery, in siuc in the 97 Alternatively, the church may have been built to house the relics of the saint
also expressed also by Clark, <Bones', 143 and Magdalino, 'Oikoi', 61 n. 29). south wall of the cistcVl. of single-line stamps bearing the name AU~Cl( ) and an 16 Dagron, 'Sancruaires', 1076-7. that Anicia Juliana's grandmother. Eudokia, had earlier acquired. See also Janin,
n Its location has been established precisely, on the north side of the Mese, eighth indiction (not catalogued). This name is elsewhere assigned to the early sixth 17 Wenger, Assomption, 293-303' For the tale's basis in fact, see Mango, Eglises, 474-6.
between the Cistern of Philoxenus and the street connecting the Mese to the Copper century, which helps to support the ascription of the cistern to the reign of 'Blachemae', 70-5. For Paulina, see Mango, 'Cosmas and Damian'. '3 Secpp.62-4,III-16.
Market (Bardill, 'Lausus', 67-86). Some of the statuary was displayed in the Anasrasius. may date to 499/500 or 5 I ¥ 5.
The stamps •• CIC, Novels 3.1 (trans. Scott, xvi. 18) ascribes the church to Verina. A ninth- " For the relevant texts, see Mango, 'Grand Palais', 182-3 .
porticoes of the Mese (Bcrdill, 'Lcusus', 68). On the collection, see Guberti Bcsseu, 11 Marcellinus,Chronicle, 509 with the accompanying note of Croke. century miracle story alleges that it was built by Zcno (474-9J): Lackner, 'Marien- :: Chroniconp'aschal~.,. 598 with Whitby and Whitby n. 296.
'Lausos Collection'. 82 available sources on Anastasius' activity at the Long Walls, see Whitby,
For the mirakel', 843-4, 850, 856. For the rejection of the ascription to Pulcheria of the Zonuras, Epitome, Ill. 125.
1) See pp. ~6--60, I07-9: 'Long Walls', 578--9. For the remains, see Crow and Ricci, <Long Walls'. shrines of the Chalkoprareia, Blachernai, and Hodegerria, sec Mango, 'Blacbernai', 102 Mango, Brazen HOIHe, 26-)0.
7.• Mango, Deueloppement, 45-6. Il Marcellinus, Cbronide, 491, 493, SOl, 507, 509. John of Anrioch fr. 214b (491). 6s-6·Seealsop.lOI. ID.)Procopius.Secree History, 19.7. Downcy, 'Justinian as a Builder', 263, 266.
7~ Mango, Studies, addenda p. 3. Chronicon Paschale, 608 (giving the year 498). Victor Tonncncnsis, Cbronica, 513. " Mathews, Early Churches, 28-33; Mango, 'Notes', 369-72. 10+ Procopius, Buildings. On this text, see Cameron, Procopies, esp. 84-112, and
76 Chronicon Pnscbale, 593.Mango, Brazen House,4G. So4 Mango, 'Review 11', s87-9. 90 Sec pp. 70-2, I rO-I I. the papers collected inAntiqljite Tardive, 8 (acoc).
rr See pp. 61-2, J09. 85 Sce pp. 60-1, 109. 91 jauiu, /::glises, 86--7, 479. IQ~ Procopius, Buildings, 1.3.1.
 ..
..~

PART I: INDUSTRY THE BEGINNING AND END OF BRICKSTAMPING

34
the dedication in about j zo of a church to both the emperor
and Justinian (who was at the time only magister militurn
praesentalis) by the Prefect Theodore Teganistes indicates the
extent of Justinian's power while his uncle ruled.!"
Amongst the churches that Procopius assigns to [ustin's reign
is the basilica of the Theotokos in Blachernai (constructed
beside the Soros of Verina). Its nave and aisles were divided not
by columns, but by square marble piers, and these arcades seem
to have incorporated exedras.!" Such piers and exedras were
also a feature of AniciaJuliana's church of St Polyeuktos, whose
superstructure was erected soon after [ustin's accession in
jI8.'08 These two churches provide the first hints that the
designers of major ecclesiastical architecture in Constantinople
were breaking away from the traditional basilical form. The
tried-and-tested basilica persisted, however, alongside more
innovative designs. One such basilica was the church of the
Apostles Peter and Paul. This-although built during J ustin' s
reign-should certainly be credited to Justinian, since it was
located in his private residence, the Palace of Hormisdas, to the
south of the Great Palace proper.P" The church was apparently
well underway or complete when, on 29 June 5'9, a letter was
sent to Pope Hormisdas requesting relics of SS Peter, Paul, and
Laurence that might be deposited in the church."?
A large amount of the building that Justinian undertook after
he had ascended the throne and had moved into the Great Palace
was private. Procopius states that, after the Nika uprising of 5 J 2,
he rebuilt almost all of the palace. III But this is certainly an
exaggeration, and elsewhere Procopius writes more realistically
of the rebuilding of the propylaea of the palace from the Chalke
as far as the T rikJinos of the 19 Couches."! This must represent
the area devasted on the night of '4 January 532, or on the
following day, when the Chalke, the Augustaion, and the
nearby Senate House burned.!" The only palatial structure that
Procopius describes in detail is the new Chalke, which was
located at the east end of the Augustaion, and aligned with the
eastern wall of Hagia Sophia. Procopius' account suggests that it
had similarities with the earlier Anastasian edifice.'!' The floor
uprising.'" The substructures of the palace that survive in the
general area of the Chalke and the Senate House are indeed built
using a technique typical of the Justinianic period.?" There is,
however, some evidence that may suggest jusrinianic activity in
the more southerly parts of the palace: beneath the Peristyle and
Apsed Hall are some remains of an imperial chamber of the early
sixt~century, built using techniques similar to those in the sub-
structures in the north of the palace. III
Besides restoring the Palace of Hormisdas and connecting it
to the Great Palace, "' Justinian built other private palaces. In the
Buildings, Procopius mentions those at Hiereia (on the Asiatic
shore, not far from Chalcedon) and Iucundianae (in the
Hebdomon), commenting that 'The sum of money [spent]
indeed was so great that it cannot be computed with any
reckoning.'!" In his Secret History (a vindictive attack on the
emperor and his wife, which must be used with care as a
historical sourcej.P? Procopius complains that Justinian
'lavished money inexcusably on buildings along the shore and
other senseless erections, littering all the suburbs with them, as
if there was not room for him and his consort in the palaces in
which all his predecessors had been happy to spend thei.r whole
lives' .'21 He alleges that the emperor failed to maintain impor-
tant public facilities,'" and that his neglect of the aqueduct
resulted in the closure of all the city's bathing establishments.t-'
According to Procopius, these unnecessary building projects
were funded by confiscating senatorial property following the
Nika riots. Furthermore, the confiscated lands that were liable
to the greatest taxes were sold back to their aristocratic owners,
who were then reduced to poverty by the interest that further
increased their debts.!" It is tempting to see at least partial
corroboration of such allegations in Gregory of Tours' account
of how, following Justinian's request that she make a contribu-
tion to the treasury, Anicia Juliana promptly expended her
wealth by gilding the roof of her church of St Polyeuktos.'"
11) Malalas, Chronicle, 18.71 (ed. Thurn 400-1). Cbronicon Paschale 629.
See pp. '47-So (Great Palace, area. Ac).
116
Despite Procopius' claims in the Secret History, Justinian did
not wholly neglect the public welfare, as is clear from the same
author's Buildings. There, Procopius explains that the grain
ships from Alexandria could be prevented from entering the
Hellespont for weeks on end if the wind failed to blow from the
south. As a result, the grain would lie rotting in the ships, and
would reach Constantinople in an inedible condition. In order
to minimize the losses, Justinian arranged for the construction
of a huge warehouse on the island of Tenedos where the grain
could be unloaded and stored until favourable winds began to
blow.!" As far as we know, this represents the first increase in
the number of granaries for Constantinople since the end of the
fourth century.!"
In 528 the Aqueduct of Hadrian was restored and the Basilica
Cistern was constructed.l" Procopius states that the cistern's
purpose was to relieve the summer water shortage by storing the
surplus water brought into the city in the winter by the
Aqueduct of Hadrian.F' But we do not know whether the
public benefited from its construction, or whether the water was
piped only into the palace. This new cistern (identified with the
Yerebatan Sarayi) was massive, measuring about 140 x 70 x 8 m.,
and having a capacity of about 80,000 m'. But the open cisterns
of Aetius, Philoxenus, Aspar, and Mocius already provided a
total water storage capacity of about a million cubic metres.P?
so, despite its size, the Basilica cistern would have increased this
capacity by about only 8 per cent. When the aqueduct ran dry,
however, the water that this cistern provided is likely to have
been a cleaner alternative to that from the older reservoirs that
were open to the air. Its roof was supported by 12 rows of 28
columns, some with reused shafts and plinths, and most with
plain basket capitals. The 98 acanthus capitals may all have been
in storage since the fifth-cenrury.!" The use of old stock and the
reuse of materials cannot in this case be taken as a clear indicator
of declining standards: the cistern was a utilitarian structure, its
interior would not have been visible after its construction, and
the reuse of materials was perhaps simply pragmatic. The fact
35
Justinian also attended to the city's public spaces. A park O!
garden, which contained porticoes and a statue of Theodora.
was created on the shore of the Sea of Marmara, near th;
Arcadianae Baths, III and the square called the Augustaion, to the:
south of Hagia Sophia, was redeveloped. Following the I,.
demolition of acolumn bearing a silver statue ofTheodosius I D~
the square was paved,':" and a new column of Justinian was
erected.':" The column, however, was nothing like those set up
by the emperor's predecessors. Those in the fora of Theodosius
I and Arcadius, for exarflple, had been built of massive drums of
marble, given internal spiral staircases, and decorated with mili-
tary victories on the exterior. Justinian's column, on the other
hand, was built of brick with occasional levelling courses of
stone, and sheathed with bronze. us Procopius seems at pains to
hide the truth, claiming that the column was 'composed of large
stones in circular courses, cut so as to form angles on their inner
faces'; and he appears to be trying to justify the choice of
materials and the removal of the earlier statue when he says of
the bronze sheathing that 'its value is not much less than that of
an equal weight of silver' .139 Furthermore, the equestrian statue
that surmounted Justinian's monument was not new, but was a
reused statue of Theodosius I, Arcadius, or Theodosius II,
which had been taken from the Forum Tauri, and it is significant
that Procopius does not explicitly identify the emperor repre-
sented. "" Justinian was clearly not above desrroying the monu-
ments of his predecessors in order to save money when
promoting himself. On the eastern side of the same public
square, the Senate House was rebuilt, 'surpassing description',
we are told, 'by reason of its costliness' .1-41
Under Justinian, too, the Baths of Dagistheus, which had
been begun under Anastasius, were completed, ,<2 and the Baths
ofZeuxippos were reconstructed.!? Procopius fails to mention
the former, and barely discusses the latter, which were perhaps
not restored to their former glory.v" Excavations to the north-
east of the Hippodrome in 1927 and 1928 revealed a number of
circular rooms and a large, apsed structure built in typical

that two columns are both supported by a huge block decorated Justinianic style. The remains, which are almost certainly to be
117 Seep. 143.
and the walls were revered in precious marbles (verd antique and m Procopius, Buildings, 1+1-2 with Bardill, 'Sts. Sergius and Bacchus', 5 with with a gorgon-head may, however, be significant. It is possible associated with the Baths of Zeuxippos, yielded a large number
an orange-red stone), and, after 540, the ceilings were covered n.25· that the blocks were taken from the Forum of Cons tan tine, and, of stamped bricks, which were not, unfortunately, satisfactorily
11' Procopius, Buildings, 1.11.16-17.
with mosaics of Belisarius' victories. Justinian is also said to have if so, it would seem that by the justinianic period this public published. '" .
110 See Camercn, Pro cop ius, esp. 49-83.
built cisterns and a bakery close to the palace after the Nika 121 Procopius, Secret History, 26.23_ space had been allowed to fall into disrepair.P?
ll2 Procopius, Secret History, 8'7-8, 1 I.}, [9.6.
blocks from the cistern are similar, but not identical. See Mango, Developpemenr, 69

"Theodorus'. For other indications of Justinian's power in 518-20,

Cameron, III Procopius, Secret History, 26.23-4. Note also Zoaaras, Epitome, iii. 157, (Addenda, no. I).
106
126 Procopius, Buildings, 5.1.7-16. On problems with the grain supply, sec
see Vasiliev,Juslin the First, 163-4, 199-200. where Justinian is said to have destroyed a great lead conduit that had brought water m Procopius, Buildings, 1.1 I.I-9. .
Procopius, Secret History, 22.t4-21.
Procopius, Bui/diifgs, 1.3.1-5. into the city. The metal was to be used in the emperor's building projects. It may be 1.H On the Augustaion, the column of Justinian, and the Senate House, see Suchel, .•
101
l21 Mango, Developpement, 40, 45.
IOS Harrison, Sararhane I, 406-Jl. Harrison, Temple, 126-}4. Piers: Harrison, significant that no inscriptions have been found commemorating repairs to the
IZI Malalas, Chronicle, 435-6; Chronicon Paschale, 619. 'Sechs kolossale Saulen' with references.
Sararhane I, 133-5 (6a-b). Curving entablature blocks: Harrisoo, Sararha1le I, fortifications by Justinian. Earthquakes in 542 and 554 damaged the Golden Gate 12')Procopius, Bltildings, 1.11.10-15. us Zcnaras, Epitome, iii. 157. Mango, 'Columns', 7-8.
117-19 (u(i)-(vii».l intend to present a new reconstruction of the church else- and another in 557 severely dantaged the Land Walls between the Golden Gate and 1)0 Mango, 'Urban Centre', 122-3. Mango, 'Water Supply', 16. Cecen, \Vater m Procopius, Buildings, 1.2.LPatr;a 2.17. Mango, Brazen HOMe, 46.
where. Yeni Mevlcvihane Kapr. m Procopius.Secrec History, 12.12. Ul Procopius, Buildings, 1.2.1-12.
Supply, 4' estimates .900,000 rn'.
109 Procopius, Buildings, 1.4.1-8. us Gregory of Tours, Glory of the Martyrs, I,J02, cd. Krusch, 105-7, rrans. van 1)1 Mango, Arcbiiecuoe, 68. Contrast Betscb, Capital, 134, 2H-4. who believes UI Mango, 'Columns', 3-4.
no Vasiliev,jrHtin the First, 377-8; Bardill, 'Srs. Sergius and Bacchus', I. Dam I14-6. Procopius' assertion (Blliidings, 1.8.5) that churches could not be built Procopius, Bltildings, 1.2.2-4· . , . I
them justinianic. Bcrscb, Capital, 183-4 believes that there are only three
to be Il'

Procopius,Bllildings, 1:10.10.
III oc repaired except with imperial funds (which Cameron, Procopius, 104 n. 151 sees reused capitals in the cistern. For a founh-century columnshaft with lopped-branch
HO Mango, 'Equestrian Statue', 12-13. Mango, 'Column~', 7. ~hl~by, Impena
III Procopius, Buildings, 1.9.2-3. SceMango, Brazen Home, 36.Ft?ran indication as a reaction against Anicia julians's pretensions) is Ialse.In 538, however.justinian Images', 65-6. HI Pr~oplUs,BlIIldmgs. 1.10.6-9·
decoration, see Mango, Architecture, 123.
of the area affected, see Bardill, 'Great Palace', fig. 2. did pass a law requiring that founders of private churches obtained the permission of U2 Malalas, Chronicle, 18.17 (ed. Tbum, 364). Cbronicon Paschale, 61 S.
I)l In 1869, in the foundations of a. house to [he south of the Forum of
I\} Cbronicon Paschale,621-2. Bardill, 'Lausus', 84. Greatrex, 'Riot', 84-6. their local bishop before commencing construction, and provided sufficient funds 10 Procopius, Beildings, ).10.3.
Consrantine, was found a marble keystone decorated with rwc Medusa heads. It is
Procopius,Buildings, 1.10.12-15. For the location, see Mango, Brazen House,
114 rbe church and its clergy (CIC,NO'Vels
to maintain 67, rrans. Seen, xvi. 258"'9). See
now in the Istanbul Archaeological Museum. This presumably came from one of the H~ Mango, Brazen Hoese, 41.
97 and Bardill, 'Great Palace', 219. Thomas, Foundations, 'P-3. 47· two arches known to have straddled the Mesc on either side of the Forum. The two I~S See pp. 67--9, 116-7.
 PART I: INDUSTRY THE BEGINNING AND END OF BRICKSTAMPING
.
..~
37
Justinian's restorations of public spaces and amenities, such as dedicated by Theodosius I in 392)151 and of the Archangel but had made scaffold holes in the piers and constructed flying which were newly quarried for the project, and which stand at
the Augustaion, the Senate House, and the Baths of Zeuxippos, Michael at Anaplous (on the European shore of the Bosphorus centring.I6I Had they built centring from the nave floor, much of ground level to the north and south of the central square bay.
were undertaken out of necessity following the Nika riots; at modern Arnavutkoyj.!" the weight of the brickwork of the arch would have been These were cut to be taller than those in the exedras, and there-
and although Justinian rebuilt, he did not, as far as we know, After the Nika riots, Constantine's church of Hagia Eirene supported by the floor itself. The long wooden beams required fore did not require pedestals. They vary considerably, how-
remodel the city centre.':" Mango argues that if one ignores the was rebuilt by Justinian 'on a very large scale, so that, of practi- for flying centring) however} must have begun to fait and, ever, in diameter, and are inaccurately rounded.v" A third
civil and civic buildings that Justinian was obliged to repair after cally all the churches in Byzantium except that of Sophia, it was furthermore} the outward thrusts exerted on the piers must have indication of hasty work is the mosaic decoration, which was
the fires of 532, then there remains only a modest number to his second to..•.none'.15) Like its predecessor, the new church was been increased, causing them to lean outwards. 162 apparently completely non-figural, consisting of hundreds of
credit.!" These are the Basilica Cistern, the park near the basilical, but the eastern square bay was roofed by a dome, and The story of the construction of the arch is completed by crosses and ornamental designs. Although other explanations
Arcadianae Baths, the Baths of Dagistheus, which had been the western bay by two barrel vaults. This church, too, survives Procopius: 'Before the crown had been reached,' he writes, 'the for the omission of complex figural decoration have been
begun by Anastasius, the granary on Tenedos, a Horologion at to the present day, although its upper parts belong to an eighth- suppOrtS [pesso,], overburdened by the weight of the masonry suggested, the most likely is that the simpler designs could be
the Milion, and a bridge over the Golden Horn. The statistics, century restoration. ]54 they were carrying, began to break away. . The emperor, executed with speed."? •
Mango holds, show a change heralding the Middle Ages: the The neighbouring cathedral of Hagia Sophia was inaugurated inspired by God, ordered [the builders] to complete the arch, The Church of the Holy Apostles was dedicated on 28 June
number of new buildings for civil or civic use (baths, theatres, on 27 December 537, having been begun, if a late source is to be whereupon it stood of its own accord, no longer needing the 550.170 Downey has suggested that the revenue required for its
porticoes, basilicas, and public squares) was declining, whilst believed, only a month after the earlier church ofTheodosius II centring undcrncarh.t'<' Although the arch was successfully construction was provided by the treasure that Be/isarius
the number of new religious buildings and charitable institu- had been burned down.'? Procopius tells us that Justinian completed, it must have been distorted and weaker than brought back to Constantinople in 534 following his successful
tions was growing. employed Anthemius ofT ralles and Isidore ofMiletus as master intended. African campaign."! Procopius describes the edifice in some
Indeed, according to Procopius, six hospices were restored by builders, and that construction proceeded 'disregarding all Procopius also indicates that the north and south arches and detail, which is fortunate} since it no longer survives. Justinian
the emperor, and some thirty-three churches were built in the questions of expense'i!" The main dome, possibly resting on a the tympana beneath them were not allowed to dry out before demolished Constantius' cruciform church and replaced it with
city and its suburbs. Amongst the charitable institutions were drum pierced by windows, was supported by four arches with construction of the pendentives began. As a result, the columns a far larger one."? Although the rotunda of Constantine's
the Hospice of Samson (located between the churches of Hagia intervening pendentives, which were in turn raised upon four in the tympana or in the galleries below began to spall. It was a mausoleum was allowed to remain, all seven niches in it were by
Sophia and HagiaEirene), two others close by, another on Saray piers of ashlar blocks. It was intended to be 100 Byzantine feet clear case of more haste: less speed. The masonry above the this time occupied by sarcophagi, and Justinian attached a
Point, and two more on the Bosphorus: one for the poor and (31.2 m.) in diameter. I " Beneath the great arches that supported arches had to be demolished only to be rebuilt when the arches second mausoleum to the north flank of the new church,
incurably ill; the other-established in a luxurious palace the dome to the north and south there were originally large had finally set.16' with the purpose of housing the tombs of himself and his
close to the Black Sea-for reformed prostitutes.':" As for the windows.!" whereas the arches to the east and west opened out Given the problems described by Theophanes and Procopius, successors.V' The Holy Apostles closely resembled another
churches, those that survive, or which we can accurately recon- into huge semidomes. Procopius notes the beautiful colours the eventual collapse of the roof in 558 is perhaps not surprising. foundation of Justinian and Theodora, the church of StJohn in
struct, provide evidence that the early sixth century was a of the columns and revetment, and of the gold vault mosaics, The new dome that replaced it-for the construction of which Ephesus, the ruins of which do survive. I" In both churches, six
period of highly innovative architecture. Four of them are decorated with non-figural motifs. The walls and ceilings, he Justinian employed Isidore the Younger, nephew of the elder square bays with domes were juxtaposed to form a cruciform
.worthy of special mention. tells us, reflected the sun's rays and made the interior radiate Isidore-was considerably higher, and, although not as daring plan. The rhythmic division of the structure by the equally
SS Sergius and Bacchus, which still stands today, was built by light.!" as the original, exerted less lateral thrust.!" spaced piers created quite a different effect from the billowing ,
Justinian and Theodora in the Palace of Hormisdas sometime There are a number of indications that the cathedral was Some visible elements are also suggestive of haste and systems of exedras and vaults in SS Sergius and Bacchus, Hagia
after they had moved into the Great Palace in 527. It was erected with haste. Theophanes, for example, provides an declining standards. First we may note the reused columns of Sophia, and St John in the Hebdomon.l"
adjacent to, and shared a narthex and atrium with, the church of important insight into the construction of the eastern arch Egyptian porphyry (a material no longer quarried after the Considering his extensive building programme alone, it is
the Apostles Peter and Paul. The domed church was perhaps when he describes its collapse on 7 May 558. 'The engineers middle of the fifth century) in the ground-floor exedras.!" perhaps not surprising to hear that on his death Justinian left the
built between 530 and 533 to replace a temporary martyrium [mechaniko,J', he stales-and here I presume he is speaking of Although these were of unequal height, the architects decided state in a financial crisis. 176 Nevertheless, by careful management
established by a community of Monophysite refngees within the original master builders, Anthernius and Isidorus-'were not to reduce them to a uniform size, choosing instead the of the finances, and apparently by using funds of his own,Justin
one of the halls of the Palace of Hormisdas.!" As in St blamed because they had not made the susperision [kremasis] easier option of varying the heights of their pedestals.!" Second, II (565-78) was able to replenish the treasury to some extent,"?
Polyeuktos and the Theotokos in Blachernai, exedras were from underneath so as to avoid expense, but had bored the piers there are the eight columns of verd antique from Thessaly, and to undertake a considerable amount of construction in the
included; although here they were arranged, not in a linear that support the dome, for which reason these had not held.:"? city.
fashion, but at the corners of an octagonal core. Recalling The 'suspension' to which Theophanes refers is the wooden 161 On types of centring, see Mainstone, Hagia Sopbia, I7L Mainstone, Hagia Under justin, Tiberius, and Maurice, the concentration on
St Polyeuktos again, an inscription was carved upon the framework or centring by which the arch was supported until Sophia, 204 states that in the sixth century it would have been difficult to construct
ecclesiastical, charitable} and private imperial architecture was
adequate centring without support from the ground if the span was greater than 30
entablature over the nave colonnades. In plan, the inscription the mortar between the bricks had hardened. It seems from his yet more marked, none of them paying much attention to
m. Mango in Ertug and Mango, Hagia Sophia, pp. xxxv-xxxviii understands
was made to curve in and out around the octagonal core, follow- account that, in order to save wood, Anthemius and Isidorus Thcophancs' description of the piers as 'bored' to refer to the tunnels in the main public amenities.V" [ustin's civic works included only repairs to
ing the curve of the four exedras and the re-entrants of the piers; had decided not to build centring up from the floor of the nave, piers at gallery level, three of which were filled, probably in the Ottoman period (see
part of the outer wall of the Land Walls near Yeni Mevlevihane
Mainstone, Hogia Sopbia, r05--6). This interpretation does not, however, provide an
but in elevation, it was carried horizontally, not rising above See Mathews, Early Cbwrches, 55--61; Mathews, Survey, 140-2; Kleiss,
151 explanation for Thcophancs' reference to the 'suspension'.
arches and niches as in St Polyeuktos."? Similar in plan to SS "Taufcr'. 162 Theophnncs is, however, incorrect in stating that new piers were constructed. 16&Mango, Arcbiteaure, 64-5' Mainscone, Hagia Sophia, 189.
Sergius and Bacchus were Justinian's churches of St John the m Procopius, Buildings, 1.8.2-x6. 16) For problems in the interpretation of the word 'pessoi, see Mainstonc, Hagia 169Corrnack, 'Mosaics of S. Sophia', B-4.
1

\5) Proeopius,Buildings, I.2.1}. Sophia, 2°5. I take the word to refer to the raking beams of flying centring. Note also 170Theophancs, Chronicle, AM 604Z.
Forerunner in the Hebdomon (which replaced an earlier church 154 Pcschlow, Irenenleircbe. Mango, 'Fabric', 44. 111 Downey, 'jusrinian as a Builder', 263.
!SS Sce p.ea. lM Procopius, Buildings, 1.1.74-8. Mainstonc, Hagia Sopbia, 208. 172 Procopius, Buildings, 1+9-24.
1~6 Mango, 'Urban Centre', I1.6. 1~ Procopius, Buildings, 1.1.23. 16S Mainstone, Hagia Sophia, 89-10[, 213-17. Mango, 'Fabric', 51-3. !7l Mango, "Constanrine's Mausoleum', 54-5.
1~7 Mango, Developpement, 52. 1~1 On the plan, see Mainstone,Hagia Sopbia, 177-83' For discussion of the form 166 On the end of the quarrying of red porphyry, see: Delbrueck, Antike l74 Procopius, Buildings, 5.1.4-6.
lU Procopius, Buildings, 1.2.14-17; 1.11.23-7; 1.9.12-14; 1.8.20; Procopius, see Taylor, 'First Dome'; Mninstonc, 'Letter'; Taylor, 'Letter'.
of the first dome, Porphyrwerkc, 29; Mango, Architecture, 14; Mango, 'Sarcophagi', 399-400. !7S Krautheimer,Architectltre4, 242-4.
Secret History, 17.5--6. m Maiastone, fIagia Sopbio, 12). Mango, 'Fabric', 4}. 167 Mango,Architecmre, 64. It is unlikely that these columns were, as the Diegesis 176 Camcron, 'justin II', 63.
149 Sec Bardill, 'Sts. Sergius and Bacchus'. Procopius, Buildings, 1.1.29-}0. 2 (Dagron, Constantinople imaginaire, 197, 215-16) alleges, obtained !77 CIC, Novels [48, trans. SCNt, xvii. 174-75. Camcron, Sophia',
159
from 'Empress
1~ On tbe srructure, see Krautheimer,Architectltre
4, 222-5; Mango,Architecture, 1(,0Theophanes, Chronicle,AM 605 1. On the meaning of the term micbanikos, see Aurclian's temple of the Sun in Rome: see Mango, 'Fabric', 45, 49-50, but note ,6.
58""9. Downey, 'Byzantine Architects'. Mainstone, Hagia SopIJia, 189, 267 rt. 28. 178 SccCamcron, '[ustin 11', esp. 72-80, and \'{!h.itby, Emperor Maurice, J?-20.
 ...• ."
/

PART I: INDUSTRY THE BEGINNING AND END OF BRICKSTAMPING 39

Kap,'79 and to the Aqueduct of Valens;'" the restoration of a palace at Hiereia was restored.!" Under justin, too, a new exten-
public bath near the Forum Tauri;"! the construction of a clock sion was made to Constantine's original palace, the Daphne."?
at the Basilica;'" and the deepening and enlargement of the Port The new buildings were located in the area south of the Covered
ofJulian, which he then renamed after his wife, Sophia." justin Hippodrome on the slopes falling to the Sea of Marmara.!" In
is also reported to have begun the construction of a monumental this area the emperor arranged for the construction of the
masonry column with an internal staircase near the Baths of Chrysotriklinos, which became one of the most important cere-
Zeuxippos.t'" monial halls in the palace. I" Octagonal in plan, and roofed by a
Ecclesiastical and charitable foundations included an orphan- dome, it seems to have been similar in form to Justinian's
age of St Paul, where a church dedicated to SS Peter and Paul was churches of SS Sergius and Bacchus and St J ohn the Forerunner
built;'" probably a leper-house called the Zoricon;"! and the in the Hebdomon.P?
reconstruction of the Patriarchal Palace beside Hagia Sophia.t'" Our records of building works in Tiberius' short reign
Theophanes tells us of the church of SS Cosmas and Damian en (578-82) are not extensive. Not surprisingly, however, we read
tois Dareiau, and of the Holy Apostles; and the Patria refers to that he 'restored many churches and hospices', including the
several others. IS. Furthermore, [uscin attended to the two main church of the Forty Martyrs. He also began a public bath in the
shrines of the Theotokos, At Blachernai, Justin I's basilica was Blachernai.'?' His private undertakings included decoration of
transformed into a cruciform structure by the addition of a the Chrysorriklinos.i'" and, according to John of Ephesus, a
transept containing two inscribed arches.!" and next to the remodelling of the whole of the northern side of the Great
Chalkoprateia church, which was itself restored, a chapel of St Palace-presumably the original Constantinian Palace is
James and a reliquary chapel to house the Virgin's girdle were meant-in order to provide a home for his wife, Anastasia, and
founded.P' [ustin also adorned and decorated Justinian's their children. We are informed that Tiberius obtained the stone
churches of the Holy Apostles and Hagia Sophia.'?' necessary for his works in the palace by dismantling the pillar
Among justin's private building projects, we may mention that justin II had begun in the Zeuxippos.i"
several palaces. The first, that of Sophianae, was on the Asiatic Tiberius' extravagant charity, for which justin's widow
shore of the Bosphorus, and had been begun by Justin before his severely criticized him, resulted in Maurice (582-602) inheriting
accession. In Another was in the Deuteron, and possessed exten- a severely depleted treasury.P' Building nevertheless continued,
sive parks, a hippodrome, and a pair of monumental columns but perhaps at a slower rate.'O' The public baths that Tiberius
topped with statues of the imperial couple. I"
The third was the had begun in Blachernai were completed, although-if
Sophiae Palace, which was built at the same time as, or shortly Theophanes is to be believed-not until the fifth year of
after, the new Sophiae Harbour, which it overlcoked.!" A Maurice's reign206 Beside the baths, he built a portico in which
fourth was built on the island of Prinkipo.!" and, in addition, the the events of his early life were depicred.r" The aqueducts were
repaired.f" and an arsenal was built outside the city walls on the
\7'1 Camero», 'justin 11', 73. Meyer-Plarh and Schneider, Landmauer, 133. no. 34.
Golden Horn."" Other than these few projects, however,
Foss, 'Constantinople', 182 n. 50 has been unable to identify this repair.
and the monastery of Myroceraton. Philippicus founded a
monastery of the Virgin at Chalcedon; Maurice's sister Gordia
built a monastery of St Mamas at the Xylokerkos; Peter estab-
lished a church of the Virgin in ta Areobindau; the Grand
Chamberlain Stephen built an almshouse and bath in ta
Armatau; and the Patriarch Kyriakos built the church of the
Theotokos of the Diakonissa.'" This church, located to the west
of the Forum Tauri, was hastily excavated in the '940S and
yielded some of the latest firmly dated Constantinopolitan
brickstamps."!
Maurice's private building works included the completion of
two palaces begun by Tiberius: one at Bryas, the other at
Damatrys. He repaired [ustin II's Sophiae palace for the use of
his mother-in-law Anastasia; near the Magnaura (at the
northern end of the Great Palace) he built a circular terrace and
an arsenal; and he possibly adorned the Magnaura's central
court with a masonry colurnn.i"
Our sources contain only a very few references to building
works undertaken by Phocas (602-10) and his successor,
Heraclius (610-41). Phocas is credited with a cistern and a
masonry column to the east of the church of the Forty
Martyrs.i" and with a church of St Phocas close to the Milion
and St Sophia.i" Heraclius, we are told, secured Phocas' column
when it threatened to collapse.!" and completed the church that
Phocas had begun (although he dedicated it instead to St John
the Theologian)."? He also arranged for the extension of the
Land Walls in the Blachernai region, and restored the Magnaura
in the Great Palace."! After that, our sources are almost silent
about construction work in Constantinople for nearly two
centuries, with the exception of the descriptions of buildings
erected in the Great Palace during the first reign of Justinian II
(685-95). The jusrinianos (a hall named after the emperor) was,
archaeology adds little to the evidence for building in this
period. The upper storey and dome of Hagia Eirene were rebuilt
following their destruction in the earthquake of October 740,
but the fact that rebuilding did not take place until at least 753 is
highly significant.!"
When building work resumed in earnest under Theophilus
(829-42),222 there was no change from the concentration on
religious, charitable, and palatial building that had become
established during the reigns of Justinian and his successors:
Theophilus' only known public works are repairs to the Land
Walls and Sea Walls, and the foundation of a school near the
church of the Forty Martyrs, which was later transferred to the
Magnaura.223 On the other hand, two churches, dedicated to the
Archangel Michael and to the Theorokos, were founded in the
emperor's palace at Bryas.''' According to the Patria, his wife,
Theodora, founded the monastery of St Panteleimon in the
arsenal of Maurice near Hask6y, and the church of St Anne of
Degistheos. Alexius, the son-in-law of Theophilus, was allowed
to build his own monastery on the Asiatic shore of the
Bosphorus. In addition to that at Bryas, another palace was built
for the emperor's daughters in the quarter of Karianos:"" and
within the Great Palace itself, a series of pavilions were con-
strucred. Some of these overlooked the Sea of Marmara, where
the maritime facade of the palace, reminiscent of that of
Diocletian's palace at Split, was decorated with architectural
spoils.'26 But despite the revival in construction, the practice of
bricks tamping was not resurrected. The Eildarru cistern in the
suburb of Bakirkoy (the ancient Hebdomon) illustrates this
well. It appears to date from after the sixth century, judging by
the alternation of bands of brick (5 courses) with bands of stone
(2-5 courses), and before the eleventh century, given the absence
of recessed brickwork. The bricks, being consistently 320 mm.

ISO Cedrenus, i. 685; Zonaras 14.10. Maurice's remaining public works w.ere ecclesiastical and like Justin II's Chrysotriklinos, erected in the extension to the square (which is the typical size for the seventh century and
III Tbeophanes, Chronicle, AM 6062. south of Constantine's original Daphne Palace. Whether the later), were clearly manufactured specifically for the project,
182 Palatine Anthology 9.779-80.
charitable. Tiberius' church of the Forty Martyrs was com-
pleted in the eighth year of Maurice's reign;"O the church of St new circuit wall that was also erected at this time encircled the and their undersides (visible in large numbers) show no stamps
III Cameroc, 'Sophiae', 13-17. Camercn, 'Justin Jl', 72. Megdalino, 'Maritime
Neighborhoods'j as a-t j. entire palace or only the extension is unknown. If the latter, it at all.
Theodore of Sphoracius was repaired after a fire; in Blachernai
114 John of Ephesus, Chl4rch History, }.23. Cameron, 'Empress Sophia', 19. was the precursor of the massive fortification built by
he founded a church and a1mshouse. Other imperial founda-
M~go, ·Col~s·. I~. •
Nicephorus Phocas in the tenth century."? Admittedly, regular
Cameron, '[ustin U .73.77. tions included a church of St George, a leper hospital in Galata,
116 Cameron, 'Justin II', 73. repairs were made to the city's forrifications.t" but otherwise 3. THE DECLINE OF THE BRICKMAKING
117 Camcron, 'justin IT', 74-6. 196 Pat'fi4j.r69; Berger,Patria., 7[2-13. INDUSTRY
IU Carneron, 'jusrin Il', 76-7. 191 Gramrnacicus, Cbronogmpbia, 1}7-8; Mango, Art, 128.
Leo 111 Whitby, Emperor Mawice, 20.
119 Theophanes, Chronicle, AM 6064 (trans. Mango, Arr, 125). The two arches m Bardill, 'Grcar Palace'j aaa-c. m See pp. 131-4.
were perhaps those opening Ircm either side of the nave into the tt2nsept, Over them 1?9 Cameron, 'jusrin II',76. For the location, see Mango, 'Boukoleon', 43-5. m Thecphanes, Chronicle, AM 6088; Mango, 'Columns', 16. During the period between Maurice and Theophilus, many of
justin 11 placed inscriptions, which mention the foundation of the church under 200 Krautheimer, Architecture', 77-8, 23 I. ::: CIJro.nic?n Pasc?ale, 6,8-9, 703, See p. 129. the monuments of the fifth and sixth centuries were apparently
Justin I: Palatine Anthology 1.2-3. Kr:mtheimer,Architecture\ 266-7 compares the 101 Theophanes, Chronicle, AM 607} (AD 580/81); A.M 6082 (AD 589/90); Leo Bardill, Lausus', 92.
11' Chronicon Paschale, 703. Nicephorus Callisrus, 7.P. Mango, 'Columns', 15.
abandoned and left to fall into disrepair. The reasons for this are
trefoil transept in the Church of the Nativity at Bethlehem. Grammaticus, Chronographia, I}7-8.
1')0 Mango, 'Notes', 36?-72. 202 Leo Grammacicus, Chronograp1ia, 137-8. 217 Bardill, 'Lausus', 92. closely linked with the social and economic transformations
Cameron, H', 7?--8o.
'Justin ~ John of Epbesus, Cburcb History, 3.23 with trans. Mango, Art, 128; Mango, 211 Land Walls: Cbronicon Paschal~, 627. Magnaura: Palatine Antbology, 9.655.
191
See also Mango, Stlidies, Addenda 4. .
Leo rv and Constantine VI (eo-emperors 776-78) (inscriptions 19a, 29b, 32,
191 'Sophiac', 11-13. Mango suggests that the sixth-century
Cameron, ruins that 'Review 1', 69-70 (suggesting that the Peristyle and Apsed Hall excavated by the
style (C4); Leo V (8I3-20) (source 39, style (D));Michael Il and Theophilus (eo-
once stood in Beylerbeyi may have been a part of the palace (see Thcophanes, Walker Trust may have been pan of this building operation. On this, see p. 146 with 219 Tbeophanes, Cbronide, AM 6186. For the justinianos and Nicephorus' wall.
emperors 821-29) (inscriptions 643. 64b, style (E); inscription 81, style (F»).
Chronicle, rrans. and comm. Mango and Score 602 n. 13). n. 331); Cameron, 'Empress Sophia', 19; Mango, 'Columns', 14. see Bardill, 'Great Palace', 224-7.
19} Cameron, 'Sophiae', 17-18. Mango, 'Columns', 8--14 (but note that Berger, 201 Cameron, 'Empress Sophia',16. Whitby, Emperor Mallrice, 18. uo Inscriptions and sources in Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, raj ff. UI Kuniholm, 'Tree-Ring Dates'.

'Vavassore', 346 and 'Regionec', 408 gives a different explanation of the "Teatro' :ros Whitby, Emperor Mal/rice, 19-20. and lp.ff. Masonry styles in Foss, 'Constantinople'. Problems of attribution of m On Byzantine architecturebetween Justinian and Theophilus, see e.g. Mango,

shown on Vavassore's plan. I myself believe that it may represent the prominent 206 Theopbancs, Chronicle, A..'oi 6079. inscriptions in Foss, 'Inscriptions'.
are discussed The following additions and Architecture, 89-107 and Ruggieri, Architecture.
niched facade of the cistern on Atariirk Bulvan, below the Pantokrator monastery: 107 Leo Grammaticus, Cbronogmphia, 138.17-18. repairs cc the Land Walls from Hcraclius to 'Iheophilus are known: Heraclius Ul Land Walls: Mcycr-Plaeh and Schneider, Londmauer, 14'1 no. 62; Foss,
Mbller-Wiencr, Bildlcxikon, figs. 237 (E5/z), 244). 208 Tbccpbylecc Simocarta, History, 8. I 3.17. (610-41) (source 35); jusrinian II (685-95, 7°5-11) (inscription 26, style (C2)); 'Ccnsranrinoplc', 54-5, 76 style (F). Sea Walls: inscription in van Millingcn, Walls,
1••.• Cameron, 'Sophiae', J 3-17. Magdalino, 'Maritime Neighborboods'j ar j. 109 Patria 3.155; Berger,Ptltru:, 68,. Anastasius II (71}-15) (source 18, inscription }O, style (C2)); Leo III and 183; Foss, 'Constantinople', 70-1. 75 style (C8) .
.,5 Theophancs, Chronic/e, AM 6062. 210 Theophanes, Chronicle, AM 6082. Constantine V (eo-emperors 720-41) (source [9, inscriptions 7. 18, 24, style (C})); 124 Mango,Art. [60. m Mango, Art, 160. 126 Mango, 'Spolia'.
 PART I:
that occurred in this period throughout the Balkans and eastern
Mediterranean.i" By 618 grain was no longer shipped from
Egypt to Constantinople,'" and the reduced sea-traffic is
reflected in the abandonment of the Port of Theodosius (which
silted up and became used as a vegetable garden), andin the con-
version of the Neorion port into a naval dockyard at the end of
the seventh century. The harbour capacity available for purpos-
es of provisioning and commerce was therefore reduced to
about one-quarter of that of the fifth century.m By about 900, it
seems that there was only a single public granary in the city,
whereas there had' been five at the beginning of the fifth
century.P? The Aqueduct of Valens, the city's most important
water supply, was destroyed by the Avars in 626, but not
repaired for over '40 years until, in 768, Constantine V attended
to it during an exceptional drought. The emperor had to import
the workforce for the repair.P' Furthermore, plague srruck
Constantinople in 555-56,560--6',572-73,585-86,592,598"""99,
608-609,618,697-98, and 747, so that by the eighth century
Constantine V found it necessary to repopulare the city from
Greece and the Aegean islands.'" All this indicates a consider-
able reduction in the city's population, so great that the citizens
were capable of surviving on the. produce of the city and its
immediate vicinity, including fish from the Bosphorus and
Propontis, and without the water from a major aqueduct:
Mango estimates a maximum of 40,000.233 Important amongst
the buildings that were allowed to decay were the large public
bathing establishments, which were no longer viable consider-
ing the fall in the population and the failure to maintain the
water supply: the Baths of Zeuxippos may have been in use as
late as 713, but were converted into a prison shortly afterwards;
the Baths of Constantius were in ruins at the beginning of the
eighth century; those of Dagistheus were certainly no longer in
use by the beginning of the ninth century'"
The fall in the population, neglect of existing public buildings,
and dramatic reduction in new building would have. been
accompanied by a contraction of the brickmaking industry.'"
When Constantine V repaired the Aqueduct of Valens in 768,
amongst the imported workforce was a team of 200 brickmakers
from 'I'hrace.P" This clearly demonstrates that the brick supply
W On these changes, see Haldon, Seventh Century.
:U8 Mango, Deoeloppement, 53.
l29 Mango,D€vc/oppement, 55-6; Magdalino, Constantinople, 19-2 I.
230 Mango, Developpement, 54-5.
W Mango, Developpement, S6. For the suggestion that, after 626, the city relied
upon water from sources much closer to the city, see Bono et al., 'Water Supply',
IH2-3·
2ll Theopbanes, Chronicle, AM 6247; Nicephorus, ShOTtHistory, 68.1-}.
2H Mango, Deoeloppement; 54. See also Magdalino, Constantinople, t8.
D4 Mango, 'Daily Life', H?-4I. Mango, Diveloppement, 60. Magdalino,
Constontinoplec-u, The contraction of the city in the eighth century is well illus-
trated by the Parastaseis, which repeatedly speaks of the destruction of the city's
monuments (eds. Cameron and Herrin, 27-8).
us It is uncertain whether there was any economic reasoning behind the sub-
stantial decrease in brick dimensions, from c.368 x 368 x 42 mm. in the earlier sixth
century to just c.jjc x 330 )(45 mm. from at least the time of Maurice till the mid-
ninth century. For the sixth-century dimensions, see Table J 9. and for the reduced
dimensions of the Dark Ages. p. 106. 2)(0 Thcophancs, Chronicle, AM 62S8.
INDUSTRY
for the city, which had previously been able to provide for the
ambitious consrruction programmes of fifth and sixth centuries,
had shrunk to such a scale that it could not, without augmenta-
tion, sustain a single, albeit extensive, restoration project.
Similarly, the carving of column capitals almost ceased shortly
after 550,'" the latest securely dated material having been
exported to Euphrasius' basilica at Porec (Parenzo). Spolia cap-
itals wereilready being used in the construction of St Euphemia
at Grado, built between 57' and 579. On the grounds of adimin-
ished workforce and a lack of demand in both Constantinople
and the provinces, it has been suggested that the marble quarries
of Proconnesus were finally closed around 600.238
In Constantinople newly made and newly quarried building
materials had been regularly used from the fourth century
through to Justinian's day,'" and the reuse of brick in the period
should be seen as essentially pragmatic, rather than as a
reflection of economic necessity. For example, the fifth-century
bricks fo_und amongst the debris of Anicia Juliana's sixth-
century church of St Polyeuktos had probably come from
Eudokia's church on the same site and had in all likelihood been
reused simply because they were conveniently available."? The
batches of reused bricks noted by Emerson and van Nice in the
walls of the south-east buttress of Justinian's Hagia Sophia were
again perhaps used out of pragmatism (possibly having been
obtained during the demolition of the earlier Theodosian
church) rather than out of necessity."! Both fifth- and sixth-
century bricks were reused in the drain and apse of the North
Church at Kalenderhane Camii, which has been dated to the
reign of [uscin II (565-78) or somewhat later; but there is
evidence to suggest that, in addition, newly manufactured
stamped bricks were used there'" The sixth-century structures
at Beylerbeyi, which are perhaps to be associated withJustin II's
palace of Sophianae, appear to have yielded both fifth- and
sixth-century material.'" The inner Sea Wall near the so-called
'House of Justinian' contained a number of fragmentary bricks
bearing fifth-century stamps (27.IC, 1228.la, 1483.la, 1494.1.),
2J1 Only about 5% of capitals known in Constantinople seem to have been manu-
[actured after S50(Betsch, Capital. )5~J).
:Us Betsch, Capital PS-31. Mmgo,ArchitedllTe, 14.
ut Mango, Architecture, 34. There are only a small number of examples of reuse
in the capital in the Early Byzantine period. It is uncertain whether the capitals in.the
cistern beside the Stoudios basilica (which must predate the church of 4S0) were
newly carved or);eused (Betscb, Capital, 196-8, ~S 1 n. 470). The reused elements in
the justinianic Basilica Cistern have already been mentioned. Justinian's Hagia
Sophia COntains reused Egyptian porphyry in revetmenr and in the eight exedra
columns mentioned above. The remaining material in that church, even if not new.
was reworked to such an extent that its age is not discernible. On the preferential
use of new or newly carved marble in Constantinople and Ravenna into the sixth
century, see Ward-Perlcins, Public Building, 1I4-1J, and on the reuse of brick and
stone for convenience, not necessarily as an indicator of declining standards, 118.
240 See below pp. II6. lZS-6.
241 See below p. 50 n. 46.
m See pp. [SO-I.
W The structures described byTimoni,Promenades,ii 2) s-6 (22. paces long) and
Dirimrekin, 'Beylerbey' (TBm.long) are in alllikdihood identical, despite doubts
expressed by Dirimrekin, who does not cite the discussion of Meliopoulos, "Topo-
thesis', 229. For the proposed date and identification, see Theophanes, Chronicle,
trans. and comm. Mango and Scott 602 n. J 3.
THE BEGINNING
but a single complete piece found with them dates to the sixth
century (580. la) and perhaps gives an accurate indication of the
date of the construction of the wall."
By contrast, in the late seventh and early eighth centuries,
large amounts of brick and stone were reused when repairs were
made to the Land Walls by Justinian II (685-95> 705-11) and
Anastasius II (711-'5)' The material had probably been
salvaged from the damaged towers themselves." Such extensive
reuse of building materials became typical of most of the sub-
sequent building in the city. The Diegesis, a text of the eighth to
tenth centuries that provides a legendary account of the con-
struction of Justinian's Hagia Sophia.!" alleges that the eight
columns of Thessalian marble that are arranged between the
church's four main piers were sent from Ephesus. In fact, as we
have noted, these columns are sixth-century work.!" The same
source also states that the remaining columns were sent from
Cyzicus, Troas, and the Cyclades, which, by the time the text
was composed, had become junk yards for ancient architectural
elements. The author clearly believed that reuse of materials had
been as usual in Justinian's day as it was in his own, and seems
surprised that Justinian did not reuse any materials from the
earlier church on the site."
Given the extensive reuse of building materials from the
seventh century onwards,"? it is not surprising that many
examples of reused stamped bricks can be adduced. Some of the
earliest roughly dated examples come from a brick drain that
was cut into the mosaic in the north-west portico of the
Peristyle in the Great Palace. The mosaic phase (phase 2) is
probably to be placed after 583/4, which gives a terminus post
quem for the laying of the drain. An approximate terminus ante
quem of C.700 is suggested by the coins and pottery found in a
trench cut after a marble pavement (phase 3) had been set down
over the drain. The complete bricks found in the drain were
unstamped, which suggests that, by the time the drain was con-
structed-that is, between c.600 and C.7oo--the practice of
stamping had either ceased or had become less systematic. The
stamped pieces that were discovered were broken, and the
stamps themselves were similar to those from the vaults of the
Apsed Hall and the adjacent Chamber I, so there is little doubt
that these fragments had been salvaged from struerures of
phases I or 2.250
A single sixth-century stamp from the church at Yusa Tepesi
may come from Justinian's original structure (his church of St
Panteleimon) or from a reconstruction of the ninth-century or
2" Seep. 147.
m See Foss, 'Constantinople', S3, style C2.
246 For the date, see Dagron, Constantinople imaginaire, zz (where the text is
referred to as D).
147 Seeabove.p. 37.
14l Diegesis, 1. Dagron, Constantinople imaginaire, 197, ~16-17 M. 19-20. As
Dagron observes, the Diegesis does not specifically state that the temple of Artemis
was the source of the Thessalian columns (contrary to Mango, Arcbiseaure, 6J;
Mango, Developpemeru, 60).
24' On this theme, see briefly Ousterbour, Master Builders, 140-5.
lSO For dcrails.sec bclow p. 142.
AND END OF BRICKSTAMPING
.~.
earlier.!" The upper parts of the church of Hagia Eirene, which
were rebuilt following the earthquake of 740, incorporate
stamped bricks that appear to be reused material of the fifth
century."! Remains in area Ab of the Great Palace, which evi-
dently belong to the post-justinianic period, and are pre-
sumably to be assigned to the eighth to tenth centuries,
incorporated many fifth- and early sixth-century stamped
bricks."'Tbe remains on Biiyiikada (Prinkipo), which probably
relate to the convent enlarged under the Empress Eirene
(797-802),''' have yielded bricks with fifth- and sixth-century
stamps.s" In the substructures at Kuciikyali (between Bostanci
and Maltepe), which may relate ro part of Theophilus' palace
built after 830 at Bryas, a small number of stamps of the fifth and
sixth centuries have been discovered.P"
There is some evidence to suggest that, in the ninth-century,
bricks from ruined or demolished buildings in Constantinople
were being shipped elsewhere. A tower in the fortifications of
Mesembria (Nessebar) on the Black Sea coast of Bulgaria
contains a pavement of reused bricks, many bearing sixth-
century Constantinopolitan sramps.i" The terminal date of the
pottery found beneath the pavement is ninth-century,'" and it
seems likely that the floor is to be associated with repairs made
to the city by Basil I (867-86) after its conquest by the Bulgars
under Krum in 8 I 2'59 The so-called Sea Basilica at Mesembria,
which dates to the later fifth or to the sixth century, was exten-
sively repaired using a similar construction technique, and
therefore probably at the same time.'" It, too, yielded a number
of fragmentary stamped bricks that had been made in Constan-
tinople in the sixth cenrury.i"
Kazhdan has asserted that 'there are stamps of the roth-r rth
C.',''' but this is evidently an incorrect deduction from Mango's
observation that' quite a few have come from tenth and eleventh
cenrury ruins'.'" The evidence suggests that all the stamped
bricks found in such late strucrures are reused. Comparative
work on brickstamps found in Fenari isa Camii (north church
m 1101.13. Ruggieri, Architecture, 204 with n. 89.
Ul See below p. t02.
m See below pp. [47-50.
lS+ Theopbanes, Chronicle, AM 6295.
lS' Mamboury, 'Prinkipo', 206.
1S(, Mamboury, 'Mara', JZ8-9; Eyice, 'Palais de Bryas', 86; Eyice, 'Quarre edi-
fices', 245-50; Mango, 'Notes d'epigraphie', 347-50; Ricci, 'Bryas'. Mamboury's
article was produced before he had engaged in a serious analysis of the chronology
of bricksramps, and his ninth-century dating of the stamps that were found must be
rejected.
2S1 On the brickstamps, see Ognenova-Marinova, 'Briques', [09-10.
m Cangova, 'Ceramique', lZl-4.
25' Cangova, 'Ceramique', lZ4. On Basil's repairs. see Venedikov, 'Remparrs',
159. The pillars supporting a cross-vault in the same tower also contained stamped
bricks from Constantinople (Ognenove-Marinova, 'Briqucs', 109). Differences in
construction technique cause Venedikov to differentiate the cross-vault from those
walls reconstructed after 8 I 2. Hesuggcsts that the vault (and therefore the pavement
also) was built as pan of preparations made shortly before the Bulgar attack
(,R,mp""", 158).
260 Velkov, 'Basilica', 67-8. Venedikov, 'Remparts', 159.
UI Vclkov, 'Basilica' 69.
llol ODB, 322, s.v. Bricks (Kazbdan).
26J Mango, 'Brick Stamps', 21.
 ..~
•
PART I: INDUSTRY

dedicated in 907, south church built before 1282) shows that seventh century would have coincided with the drop in the
the stamped bricks had been manufactured in the fifth and city's population, with the decline in construction in the
sixth ccnruries.>' Other stamped bricks, all typical of the capital (which in turn suggests a shrinkage of the brickmaking
Early Byzantine period, have been recorded at the church industry), and with the increasing tendency to reuse building
at Dcgirmenaln (ro the east of Tuzla, ninth-twelfth centuries), rnaterials.F?
the Myrelaion church (Bodrum Carnii, 920), St George of Demands for building materials must have been incessant
Mangana (r042-54), Toklu Dede Mescidi (middle or second during the-fifth and the early sixth centuries; and it would have
half of eleventh century), Vefa Kilise Camii (eleventh been important for all involved in the industry to ensure that
century)," the monastery and church of the Transfiguration production and supply continued unhindered. The stamping of
PART II
at Antigoni on Burgaz (twelfth century?),266 Kariye Camii bricks is likely ro have played an important part in ensuring that
(Christ of the Chora, early twelfth century, early fourteenth brickmakers had met their obligations to their employer, that an
century restoration), Zeyrek Carnii (Christ Panrokrator, officinato~ had fulfilled his contract with the dominus, and that
twelfth century),'67 Fethiye Camii (St Mary Pamrnakaristos, the dominus had supplied the correct number of bricks to the
twelfth century), Kalenderhane Camii (Theorokos Kyriotissa,
twelfth century),26' the tower of Anemas (twelfth century),"?
state and to private building contracrors. Although it has been
suggested that the pattern of landownership changed markedly
The Chronology of
'and amongst the ruins of the orphanage of St Paul near the during the reign of Phocas, the evidence indicates that even into
Goths' Column on Saray Point, which was greatly enlarged
under Alexius I and his successor John II Cornnenus."?
the second half of the seventh century the state, the Church, and
the elite remained the major landowners."> The cessation of
Constantinopolitan
4, CONCLUSION
bricks tamping is presumably connected not with changes in
landownership, bur with the decline in building activity in the Brickstamps
seventh century. Orders for bricks for private building projects
would have declined, as would the state's annual requisition. As
The inception of systematic brickstamping roughly coincides a result, the brick levy was perhaps commuted into money, or
with the beginning, under Theodosius I, of two hundred years even removed from the annual indiction, and any occasional
of prolific building in Constantinople. Our latest firmly dated need might have been met by reversing the commutation or
stamps carry the monogram of the emperor Mauricc through an extraordinary levy (superindicrion).'?' With the
(582-602),271 and evidence from the Great Palace suggests that it reduction in the scale of the industry, checking of the brick
was at some point during the seventh century that the practice of supply by state officials or by manufacturers themselves may
stamping ceased. The cessation of brickstamping in the early have become a much simpler task, making bricks tamping
superfluous. The fact that brickstamping was not revived when
26< See Mango and Hawkins, 'Penari isa Camii', drawing on the notes of the building programmes of the ninth century were initiated
Mamboury for comparative material.
suggests that the brickmaking industry never regained its
265 The bricks, found during the laying of drains on 9 June 1935, may not have
come from the church's foundations, but from a structure earlier than the church. former scale, in large part because of the extensive use made of
See Mamboury, 'Fouilles III', 42.7-8. old bricks and because of the comparatively small scale of many
266 For the date, see Ruggieri, Architecture, 205 and Oustcrhour and Akyiirek,
of the building projects.
'Burgazada'.
267 Ousrerhout, Master Builders, 140. Ousterhout, Ahunbay, and Ahunbay,
'First Report', 268. 26S See pp.Yj o-r.

26~ Information courtesy P. Hatlie. m Mamboury, 'Chrisme', 462 puts the cessation of stamping at the end of the
270 For the identification of the remains, see Mango, Deoeloppemeru, H. sixth century.
271 There are, possibly, some stamps from the reign of Heraclius (6ro-4r), and, 27) Haldon, Seventh Century, uS-p.
just conceivably, some from the reign of'Constancine V (741, 743-75). See pp. I21 m See Thcophanes, Chronicle. AM62)2 for the special monetary tax levied by
(no. 12), 102. Leo III after the earthquake of 740 to pay for the repair of the city walls.
 CHAPTER 5

Towards establishing a chronology

The real value of Constantinopolitan bricks tamps lies in their at the Cistern of Mocius that read INHEAEA C, interpreted it
potential for dating, or refining the dating of, the monuments in as iv(onm&voc} l)' {3et(clAeuoVloc} Bac(tAetou}, and suggested
which they were used. But when he optimistically wrote that that it indicated that the cistern had been repaired in 875 under
'early Byzantine bricks were frequently stamped with distinc- Basil I' On the basis of similar readings, Paluka dated the
tive names or monograms, thus enabling them to be closely ruins on Cemal Nadir Sokag, to the tenth or eleventh century
dated', I Harrison was somewhat premarurc, since no criteria for under Romanus I or II, and suggested that there had been a
dating the stamps had then been established. To a great extent, repair under Andronicus II or III.' The structures are shown
this has been because of the absence, until now, of a large corpus below to belong to the sixth century.'? He also dated a mid-fifth
of material that contains a substantial number of stamps from century cistern near Yerebatan Sarayi to the reign of Heraclius
buildings whose construction can be dated fairly accurately. (6I0-4I) on the basis of a brickstamp reading INABAHIOY,
Early efforts at dating Consrantinopolitan scamps were which he interpreted as iv(ol1m.&voc} et' {3et(c,IJ.coc}
misguided, with scholars generally attempting to date the 'H(pct1CA}iou."
material they published on the basis of speculative and Many scholars-Dethier and Sorlin-Dorigny in particular-
erroneous interpretations of the inscriptions. In particular, the have attempted to identify the individuals named on brick-
individuals named on the stamps were commonly identified stamps with persons attested in our sources who share the same
with emperors-a practice encouraged by the regular appear- name. Rarely, however, have they adduced any convincing
ance of the abbreviation {3et(}on the scamps, which it was tempt- corroborative evidence. Thus the material recovered from the
ing to complete as {3et(CtIJ.coc}' Dethier and Sorlin-Dorigny demolition of the south wing of the Justinianic atrium of Hagia ,
believed that the stamps bearing the complete name Sophia in November I873 was wrongly dated to 547/8 by
Krovcruvtivoo had to refer to the Emperor Constantine I or to Sorlin-Dorigny. Without providing any justification for his
his son Constantius II.' This view was later adopted by conclusion, this scholar stated that a particular (poorly pre-
Ramazanoglu, who-in what has been described as 'one of the served) stamp naming one Martyrios must refer to the archi-
most fanciful chapters in the story of Byzantine archaeo- mandrite of the monastery of St Peter near the Holy Apostles
logy"-anno}lnced that he had uncovered Constantius' Great who signed the acts of the Council of 536-an event that Sodin-
Church to the south of Hagia Eirene, having found 'several Dorigny wrongly dated to 547/8.12 Similarly, but somewhat
bricks bearing the names of Constantius II, founder of the first more understandably, Gottwald ascribed a stamp from the
St Sophia [... ] and of his father'.' The remains, however, are Land Walls reading AAN8 to the Praetorian Prefect
much more likely to have belonged to the hospices (such as that Anthemius, who was responsible for the construction of the
of Samson) which are known to have been in this area, and fortificarions." But there is no guarantee that that particular
which were restored by the Emperor Justinian after the Nika Anthernius is meant: indeed, as Schneider observed, the
riots of 532' As for the stamps, they could clearly refer to any completion of the abbreviated name might equally be
individual bearing the common name Constantine, and they Anthimus." Even if its conclusions cannot be wholly accepted,
are, in fact, to be dated to the sixth century.' Other forced Mamboury's eminently sensible paper of '949 exposed such
imperial interpretations are not hard to find in the literature. unsubstantiated interpretations for what they were. In a post-
Forchheimer and Strzygowski, for example, discovered a stamp script to the article, H. Gregoire praised its author for bringing

I Harrison, Temple, 45. 8 I75.TC. Fcrchhcimer and Strzygowski, Wasserbehiilter, 45,160.

1 On this abbreviation, sec pp. 21-3. 9 Sec below p. 73.
) Dethier, 'Makrikcy', 166 no. 1<;'. Sorlia-Dorigny, 'Marque', 83. 92 nos. 42, 45. 10 See pp. 90, 117.
48. 11 t62.7.Ia. Paluka, 'Zisreme', 599. For the correct date, see Betsch, Capital,
Early Church~s.99 n. 5.
~ Mathews, 2.74-.5'
5 Ramazanoglu, Sainte-lrine, 7-8. 12 Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Letter'. On the church. see jaain, tglises, 40}.
, Procopius, Buildings, t .1.14-16; Dirimtckin, 'Pouilles', 182. I) 77.la. Gouwald, 'Ziegclstempel', 485, no. I.
, See below p. 101. Cp. Mamboury, 'Nouvelle lecture', I24-h Mango, 'Brick 14 Schneider, 'Ziegelsccmpcl', 26). Mcycr-Pleth and Schneider, Landmauer, 148

Stamps', 24-S. e
no. 1. AA N nevertheless appears in A vi- Yonah, Abbreviations, 45 dated CO 4 I 2.

PART
:0 an end 'a truly humiliating period of readings as false as they
ire impossible' .15
If we are to establish a reliable chronology of Constantino-
aoliran bricks tamps, we must examine as much material as
oossible, and set aside such speculative readings. The analysis
:hat follows is based on the largest catalogue of material yet
issembled. Taking into account the findspots of the bricks and
our knowledge of the structures from which they came, it
explores the possibility that the characteristics of bricks tamps
iltered over time. It has been pessimistically claimed that 'brick
;tamps are of much less use in dating Byzantine construction
.han they are in dating Roman construction, since the practice of
:tamping was less systematically followed, and since confusion
-esults from the re-use of older materia!"" Admittedly, the
ivailable material poses a number of difficulties of interpreta-
:ion and analysis; but these are not, as I hope to demonstrate,
wholly insurmountable.
1. DETERMINING SAMPLES OF
CONTEMPORANEOUS STAMPED BRICKS
a. Dating stamps from their content
.n order to use bricks tamps for dating undated structures, it is
lecessary to assemble a large number that can be reliably dated.
Jnfortunately, only a very few Constantinopolitan brick-
:tamps carry information that allows them to be dated inde-
iendently. Amongst the few are those that refer explicitly to the
omperor Justinian I (527-65) (nos. 585-91). They bear the
nscriptions: + 'Ioucnviovou, + 'Ioocnvievoo 'tOU qH.I..OK'ttc'tO'U
both of which can be dated to Justinian's reign), or +
Ioucnviovoii vtK"ll"oil ivo(tKn&voc) to' + (which can be dated
o 53 5/6, 5501r, or 565). The last type of stamp is known to
iave been discovered during excavations undertaken by
,amazanoglu to the south of Hagia Eirene, and several
:xamples in the Hagia Sophia collection may have come from
he excavation." The area concerned is known to have burned
luring the Nika riots, when a fire spread south-westwards from
he Praetorium of the Prefects to the porch of the Basilica on
-riday, 16 January 532." According to Procopius, the Hospice
II: CHRONOLOGY
Another distinctive stamp from the same excavation
(I394·Ia) carries a cruciform monogram (Table 27, no. 54).
Again, a number of examples are to be found in the Hagia Sophia
collection, and they too may have come from the site. The cruci-
form style of monogram does not seem to have come into
fashion until after 518 (as will be shown below). The very same
monogram is to be found on Justinianic coins, some of which
have a profile bust on the obverse and can therefore be dated to
before 539.20It can be resolved to give the name Justinian in the
genitive case (Toocnviuvou), Surprisingly, the stamp appears to
carry a date according to a system that is generally believed to
have been introduced only in the seventh century. This system is
the so-called 'Byzantine' era of creation, in which years (anni
mundi) were calculated on the basis that the world had been
created on I September 5509 BC. The earliest certain use of this
era is in a graffito on the Parthenon dated to AD 693.21 In the
'Proto-Byzantine' and 'Alexandrian' eras of creation, each
annus mundi began on or near the spring equinox. These eras
were therefore unsuitable for civil use, being used only by
Christian chronographers and writers concerned with calcu-
lating the date of Easter. The Byzantine era, on the other hand,
began on the same day as the tax year, and could therefore be
used in all sorts of documents. Foss holds that this dating system
could not have evolved until the seventh century, when 'the
Empire lost its richest provinces, civic life virtually came to an
end, and the Church assumed an importance in civil administra-
tion similar to that which it had in the West'." Having dismissed
two alleged examples of sixth-century dates in the Byzantine
era," he concludes, 'In sum, there is no certain evidence of the
use of the era of creation in documents before the late seventh
century AD, nor, considering the circumstances outlined above,
is it probable that any will appear. If apparent instances occur,
they should be examined with great care, and all possible alter-
natives considered.'?" The bricks tamps carrying the cruciform
monogram of Justinian incorporate the additional letters sand
M', and their readings are in no doubt. These indicate the
number 6040, which, assuming that a date according to the
Byzantine era is meant, would correspond to the tax year of
~~ See G~jers,on, Byzantine Coins, 34, table
,,~
•
ESTABLISHING A CHRONOLOGY
47
I September 5)I-3 I August 5F. Again, we may suggest that the Type I Type 2 Type) Typq
+ bricks were used in buildings repaired immediately after the
Nika riots, which occurred in January of 5F. Bricks bearing
these stamps were found not only in the excavations to the south Maurice
++ + +
++ + +
of I-Iagia Eirene but also in the northern substructures of the
Great Palace at area Ac. This part of the city, too, was damaged
Heraclius
in the riots; and here J ustininian is known to have rebuilt the
Senate House and the Chalke (the palace vestibule)." The
stamps apparently carry the earliest annus mundi date according FIG. 3. Cruciform monograms of Maurice and Heraclius
to the Byzantine era, being 9ver 160 years earlier than the
Parthenon graffito." capital reused in elevenrhj-ccnrury repairs to the Anastasis
Other stamps carry one of two slightly different cruciform Rotunda in jerusalern." There is no doubt that the monogram
monograms (Fig. 3, upper row, types I and 2). Of the two on the capital refers to Maurice, since another from the same
monograms, type I (Table 27, no. 55) clearly includes the letters location can be resolved Tt~BptoU (Maurice's other name).'3
M, A, K, 0, and Y. Mango suggested the resolution Mcpxo» or Type 4 is known on coins and on lead seals." The resolution of
Moxopiou." Type 2 (monogram no. 56) is similar, but includes the monograms on the seals is certain, since the reverse carries
a P in addition. Monograms of type 2 have, as yet, been noted on the inscription MAURICII.
only one particular variety of stamp (1372), where they are pre- The monograms just discussed (types 3 and 4) are similar, but
ceded by two other monograms: the first names an individual not identical, to those on the brickstamps (types I and 2). Type
(presumably the landowner), and the second, Em (monogram no. I (monogram no. 55) is similar to type 3, except that the P is
F), is clearly to be resolved as Ent ('in the time of). The meaning entirely missing; and type 2 (monogram no. 56) is similar to type
of the second monogram suggests that the third gives the name 4, except that a complete 15 ligature sits upon the P. Despite the
of an official or the emperor who held power when the brick was slight differences, there is no reason why the monograms on the
manufactured. If the third monogram is imperial, then, since it is brickstamps (types I and 2) could not refer to Maurice. In fact,
cruciform, it would have to refer to an emperor who ruled after the emperor Heraclius (610-41) had four different types of
5 1828 The most likely candidate is the Emperor Maurice (582- cruciform monogram, and these correspond to all four types
602), in which case the reading would be Mccuptxiou. of the proposed monograms of Maurice, an H standing in place
Monograms of Maurice are known in several other media. of the M in each case (Fig. 3, lower row). Stamps of Heraclius on
Stamps on silverware have yielded only box monograms of the silverware correspond to types I, 2, and 3 of the proposed ...
emperor." A similar monogram of the box type was found on a monograms of Maurice." Heraclius' equivalent of type 4 is
porphyry column from Samandrra, the location of Tiberius and known from both silvers tamps and coins." Besides types I and
Maurice's palace at Damarrys." However, two types of cruci- 2, there are also two incompletely preserved types of monogram
form monogram that can be resolved MaUptKlOU are known that refer to Maurice (monogram nos. 57, 58).
from coins, lead seals, and sculpture (Fig. 3, upper row, types 3 Those stamps that bear an indiction in addition to a mono-
and 4). Both have the letters M, A, and K attached to the ends of gram of Maurice refer to a fifteenth, first, or second year in an
the left, lower, and right arms of a cross respectively. But neither indiction cycle, and can therefore be dated to 582 or 582/3 or
is identical to either of the two types found on bricksramps. In 583/4 or, in the following indiction cycle, to 596/7 or 597/8 or
type 3, a P is attached to the right-hand upright of the M and an 598/9. That the reading of the monogram and the dating of the
15 ligature surmounts the upper arm, whereas in type 4, the P stamps is correct is strongly supported by the discovery of a
surmounts the upper arm and the Y sits upon it. In type 4, there- number of such stamps during the excavation of a church whose
I.

Foss, Era, 242 n. 2. fore, the loop of the P also serves as the O. Type 3 occurs on location corresponds to that of a church known to have been
)f Samson, which was to the south of Hagia Eirene, was 22 Foss, 'Era', 242. sixth-century pentanummia minted in Antioch" and on a built under Maurice in the year 597/8.37
plendidly restored by Justinian." Whether the surviving struc- 2J Foss, 'Era', 243-6. The rejected dates are AM 6012=AD 504 on a marble plaque
ures relate to this institution or to neighbouring buildings, the in the exonarthex of the basilica of the Olympus of Laurium in A ttica, and A..'1 1S Procopius, Buildings, LIO.)-20. For the destruction of this area on the night of )2 See Corbo, Il Santo Sepolcro, ii. p]. 21 and Codasnon, Holy Sepulchre, 74-7,
6080-89=AD 572-81 on a marble plaque found near the south entrance of the 14 January or on 15 January 532, see Cbronicon Pescbole, 621-2, Bardill, 'Lausus', pl. '4b.
tamps should probably be dated to 535/6. In that case the
narthcx of Stjohn at Ephesus. For the latter, see now lE 7.2, 470, nos. 4302-3, where 84, and above p- 31. 33 Carbo, Il Santo Sepolcro, ii. 21, ill. photos 41-2.
nscription 'Icucrtviovoii vtK"ll"oil should be understood as a Foss' reading is adopted. An apparent occurrence of the Byzantine Era in the sixth ~6 The number is most unlikely to be explained as an isopsephism (that is, the J.I Morrison, Monnaies byzontines, nos. 203, 208. Laurenr, Les sceaux byzantins,
etort to the cry of the rioters-s-Nixu! century that is omitted by Foss may be mentioned. Cures and Aristarcbes numerical value of the letters in a name, prayer, or blessing): isopsephisms are nos. 222 (catalogued as a private seal), 279 (catalogued as a monogrammatic seal).
('Anekdotoi', r 5, pl. I", no. 8) once suggested that the inscription on the nave face of unattested brtckscamps, whereas dates (in indiccions) are regularly used.
on 35 Type 1 equivalent: Cruikshank Dodd, Silver Stamps, I4 type c with table 2,
a capital of a porphyry column on the ground floor in the south-west excdra of 21 Mango, 'Brick Stamps', fig.). 18 See below pp. 48-9. square stamps on nos. 69-70. Type 2 equivalent: Cruikshank Dodd, Siiuer Stamps,
Hagia Sophia the date AM 6042 CFMB' = };ME,) and possibly the twelfth
indicates 2~ See Cruikshank Dodd, Silver Stamps, 14 and table 2, nos. 30-1 (square and I4 type a, table 2, square stamps on nos. 47-8, 50-2, 54b, 55b-59, 61, 64-5, 67-8;
15 Gregoirc in Mamboury, 'Nouvclle lecture', 125: 'Ellc met fin a une periode indiction withwhich that year corresponds. See also: Canis, Broken Bits, ii. 15; hexagonal stamps), cable 3, nos. jo-r (long stamps). By combining the defaced hexagonal stamps on nos. 37-9, 55")' Type 3 equivalent: Cruikshank-Dodd, Siloer
critablement humiliantc de lectures aussi fausses qu'impossibles.' Lethaby Swaicson, Sancta Sopbia, 296; Anroniades, Hagia Sophia, ii. 29;
and stamps, Dodd has identified twO types, see table I. Stamps, 14 type b, table 2, square stamps on nos. 37-9,41,44-6; hexagonal stamp on
16 Mitchcll, Aran, and Liggetr, 'Construction', 4G8. Kahler, HagiaSophia, 14 and pl. 75; Mainstone, HagiaSophia, 185. The interpreta- )0 See Mcliopoulos, "Topothcsia', 230; Fcissel, 'Inscriptions', 424, no. 4o;SEG, 37 no. 57.
17 586.ra, h. Sec also p. 160. but if correct, it would suggest that construction
tion is doubtful, had reached the (1987) 1065. )6 Cruikshank Dodd, Siloer Stamps, table 2, square and hexagonal stamps on [lOS.
U Cbronicon Pascbole, 622. Bardill, 'Lacsus', 84_ Grcatrex, 'Riot', 84-6. fir~; storeY,bc,:",een 1 September 533 and 31 August 534. )1 See C. Morrison, Monllllies byzantines, no. 199; Grierson, 'Monograms', 5; 72-J. Cruikshank Dodd, Siluer Stamps, 14 does not mention this type. Gricrson,
19 Procopius, Buildings, l.2.r4-16. Foss, Era, 246. Bendall and Roper, 'Monograms', 55. Byzentine Coins, H. )7 Sec pp. 131-4'
 PART II: CHRONOLOGY ESTABLISHING A CHRONOLOGY
.
..~
49
The catalogue contains details of a large number of bricks
tamped with monograms of Maurice. It is therefore possible to
Stamp type and number Length 1 Length 2 Thickness
.. ST. POLYEUKTOS
Unlike those in SS Sergius and Bacchus, the monograms of
Theodora in Hagia Eirene and St John at Ephesus are all of the
tudy the average dimensions of bricks made during his reign. Missing Dame (triple monogram type?) cruciform type, and the majority at Hagia Sophia are too (Fig.
[able I lists all ofthe stamped bricks that can reliably be dated to 1376.r a (AM '94) 4). The letters attached to the cross are e, E, (J), P, and A. As in
he time of Maurice. the box monogram, the e
incorporates 0, and the .6.. is formed
Uncertain name (triple monogram type)
either by adding. bar beneath the A or by using a lozenge-
[ABLE I. Dimensions of bricks bearing stamps of the reign of 17'7." (AM 87) (150) 44 shaped theta placed at the intersection of the cross. Theodora's
.-laurice (mm.) cruciform monograms in Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene are
Note: aja.ra, although lacking a monogram of Maurice, bears the same name and
tide as other stamps with the monogram. 1114.1a, although a tabula amaCa, earned apparently the earliest dated examples of the type (C533), and
'tamp type and number Length I Length 2 Thickness a monogram (no. 59. only partially preserved) that does not appear to refer to
may have been the very first. Similarly, the earliest dated cruci-
Mauricc. This is perhaps the result of poor carving or recording, however.
STS. SERGIUS AND BACCHUS form monogram of Justinian occurs on stamped bricks that can
'eopyioo(tabula ansata)
be dated to 532.41
226.1' (AM 73) (248) 40 The data in Table 1 reveal that the minimum brick length is 314 Although the negative evidence from SS Sergius and Bacchus
',oopyiou CKp() (central monogram type) mrn., the maximum 350 mm., and the mean 334 mm. Allowing cannot be taken to put the introduction of the cruciform type
230.Ib (AM 134) (227) (190) 37-40
one standard deviation to either side of the mean, we may state securely after 527, it seems certain that it was not introduced till
230.,. (AM 201) (285) (255) 35-40 that brick lengths in this period were typically within the range after 5 I 8, since all of the intact monograms on the surviving
230.20 (AM 67) 329 (270) 37 of 323 to )44 mm. The lengths are quite distinct from those of sculpture and bricks tamps from St Polyeuktos are of the box
230.Ja (AM 68) (337) (295) 42 the fifth and early sixth centuries, since the fifth-centuty mean type (Fig. 4)42 The sculpture must date to after 5 I 8 (when work
230.). (AM 120) (185) (175) 43 length was 374 mm., and the early sixth-century mean length on the church's superstructure began)" Consequently, the first
23I.Ja 345 320 47 was somewhat less at 369 mm." Thus, the bricks with which we appearance of the cruciform monogram may be placed securely
~1.th 3~ ? 45 are dealing are consistently and considerably smaller. This helps in the period 5,8-33," and we may date all brickstamps bearing
232.1• (245) (157) 43 to confirm that the bricks bearing the proposed monograms of cruciform monograms to after 518.
230.13 ? ? 40 Maurice do indeed form a distinct group. HAGIA EIRENE HAGIA SOPHIA
The box monogram continued to be used alongside the cruci-
233·Ia 340 337 45
The cruciform monogram does not seem to have appeared form monogram for some time. Jointly, Justin II (565-78) and
'375'" (AM 200) ? ? 38-40
until after 5I8. This observation is important in indicating a Sophia used a box monogram, but the emperor alone used both
'PTryOptOU (tabula ansata) terminus post quem for the manufacture of the many bricks cruciform monograms and a box monogram." The Emperor
259.20 (AM 59) 332 (232) 39 (and, indeed, other objects) bearing such monograms; it there- Maurice (582-602), as we have seen, used only a cruciform
fore requires demonstration. The cruciforrn monogram is to be monogram on his coins, but on silverstamps a box monogram
l\O~1\6ou (tabula ansata)
distinguished from the box monogram (otherwise called a was used. After the reign of Phocas (602-10), it appears that the
312.1a 37
312.1. (AM 129) (245) (190) 'block', 'double-bar' or 'square' monogram). Monograms of the box monogram was hardly used.
42
312.1. (AM 167) 340 box type are often based around a letter with rwo verticals or
327 38-42 FIG. 4- Monograms on architectural sculpture
3I3.Ib (AM 344) (260) (220) 50 rwo horizontals-such as N, M, or Z-or around rwo letters
each with a single vertical. Those of cruciform type are based and a C (square Cl attached to the right-hand upright, with the
b. Dating stamps from their context
313·Ib(AM 130) 335 320 36
313·IC ? ? ? around across. To the central cross Of, in the case of box mono- A inse~ted beneath the diagonal of the N in one of several ways, The stamps I have just discussed, which can be dated fairly
314.1. (AM 195) ? 30-35 grams, to the major leher or letters, are fused the other letters and with the ay diphthong crowning the uprights. The letter I accurately on the basis of their inscriptions alone, represent a
that appear in the name, word, or phrase that the monogram is, of course, contained within the uprights of the N. small proportion of the whole corpus of Constantinopolitan
~,060dou K6~(~<oc) (tabula ansata)
represents. In the case of the cruciform monogram the letters are The monograms of the Empress Theodora (eEo8ropac) in SS bricks tamps. Other datable stamped bricks have to be obtained
513.1. (AM 164) 337 )14 35-40
placed at the end of the arms and sometimes at the intersection. Sergius and Bacchus are also of the box type (Fig. 4). They are from the fabric of more or less accurately dated buildings. But
IU1tUAoU (tabula ansata) It is rarely easy to solve these monograms, and often impossible based around rwo letters with single uprights (Pand E), since no bricks found in situ in the fabric of a structure may not, of
1028.1. (AM 4) 337 325 48 to do so with certainty, particularly given that letters are some- letter in her name has rwo uprights. The <i> rests atop the rwo course, be contemporary with the main construction period. A
Ioz8.IC 350 350 50 times omitted. verticals, the e (which incorporates the 0, and, if lozenge- building might have been repaired once or many times, and the
I«uA.ou (tabula ansata) Box monograms of the Emperor Justinian I, which are to be shaped, the A also) is between them as the central letter, and the stamped bricks it yields may relate to the original construction
I056.lb (AM 19) 335 37 42 solved as 'Ioucnvinvoii, are common on the capitals of SS A is below the e. In some cases, the A is created by adding a phase or to any later repair. Furthermore, the bricks used for
I056.Ib (AM ror ) ? ' ? Sergius and Bacchus (527-36, probably 530-36), Hagia Eirene
44 horizontal bar below the A. The monograms of BactMroc (in construction or repair may have been manufactured and
I056.Ib (AM 441) (210) (205) 43 and Hagia Sophia (both 532-37), and St john at Ephesus (535/ . SS Sergius and Bacchus, Hagia Eirene, and Hagia Sophia) are stamped many years before they were used, either because they
6-41) (Fig. 4)." They are based around the letter N, with both T similarly built up, using Band E with (J) above. It is possible that were stockpiled or because they were salvaged from another
(triple monogram type)
~eo<p6.vou
1372.Ia(AM4I) (180) 38 Seep. 105. Theodora's cruciform monogram had not yet been developed .1
HO 38 n Fig.4 shows selected examples. See Harrison, Sarashane I, 162, fig. L, Vickcrs,
Sec pp. 46-7.

1372.Ia(AM72) (290) (214) 42 when the capitals of SS Sergius and Bacchus were carved, '2 The bricksramps arc 1356.13., 1378.le, 1386.la,2a,zb, 139X,I:t, 1393.Ta.Forthc
'A "New" Capital' (St Polycukros): Swainson, 'Monograms' (SS Sergius and
monograms in Fig. 4, see above fl. 39.
'372.'. (AM '51) HO 320 37-40 Bucchus), Gcorgc, St Eirene, pl. 16 (Hagia Eirene); Curtis and Aristarches, 'Anek-
between 527 and 536. It may even be that the cruciform type
4J For the dating, on the basis of the bricksramps, see below pp. 62~4, 111-6.
I372.IC ? ? 45 dotoi', 13-15 (Hagia Sophia): Anroniadcs, Hagia Sopbia, ii. 2). z9. 31, 34.) 5. 68, 69, itself had not yet emerged, and only appeared after 532 in Hagia H Weigand, 'Diprychon', 130 placed the introduction of the cruciform type
1372.Id (25) (220) z05, 209, 213, 225, 231, 2)2, 2}6, 297,309, )26, ns. 343. }56 (Hagia Sophia), lE, Eirene and Hagia Sophia, but this cannot be proved beyond
40 'zwischcn .')30 und 540.' See also the discussion of Cruikshank Dodd, Silver Stamps,
xviii/z, vii/a, no. 4363 (St john at Ephcsus). For the date of SS Scrgius and Bacchus, ,6.
1374-la ? ? 50 doubt."
see Bardill, 'Sts. Scrgius and Bacchus', 2-4, ro. For the date of St John's, see Foss, 'S See Grierscn, Byzantine Coins, 34 table I. Cruikshank Dodd, Silver Stamps,
Ephesue, 88 with D. 88. _0 Sec Bardill, 'Sts. Sergius and Bccchus', 2-} for further discussion. table 2, nos. 20-7.
 PART II: CHRONOLOGY
ESTABLISHING A CHRONOLOGY 51
building. Pessimistically, therefore, the date of a building's years within a cycle. When it is necessary to draw a distinction,
TABLE 2. Indictions and corresponding years AD
original construction gives neither a reliable terminus ante nor Ishall refer either to an 'indiction cycle' or to an 'indiccion year'.
terminus post quem for the production of the bricks used in it. The system of dating by indictions was first introduced in
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15
The main building period may be accepted as a terminus ante V 4, but the beginning of the first fifteen-year indiction cycle A' B' r- t:,: E' <; Z' H' e' I' LA' IB' rr' lA' lE'
quem for the manufacture of a stamped brick if a point was made was backdated, so that its first year spanned our years AD jr z
of checking that the masonry in which it was discovered and 313.50 The indiction year originally began on 23 September )14/5 3'5/6 )22/) )25/6
312/3 313/4 3I6/7 3I7/8 3I8/9 319120 32O/T 32112 323/4 )24/5 )2617
appeared to belong to the original structure, rather than to a later in the East"jn Empire, but later, in the second half of the fifth )27/8 )28/9 )29/)0 3)OiI j j r/z »2/) 3»/4 )34/5 »5/6 »617 3)7/8 3)8/9 »9/40 340/r )411z
repair or alteration. That a brick had been reused might be clear century (sometime after 452), the beginning of the year was )42/) 34)/4 )4415 345/6 346/7 347/8 348/9 349150 )5o/r 351h ) 52/) )53/4 )54/5 )55/6 )5617
from its fragmentary state, from signs of different types of changed to I September," Each indiction year therefore spans )5718 )58/9 359160 )60iI )61h )62/) )6)/4 )64/5 )65/6 )6617 )67/8 368/9 )69/70 370/r )7,h
adhering mortar or from attempts to chisel away the old mortar two of our own AD years (the last three or four months of one )72/) )7)/4 )74/5 )75/6 )7617 )77/8 )78/9 )79/80 )801r )8Ih )82/) )83/4 )84/5 )85/6 38617
before the brick was relaid." )87/8 )88/9 )89190 )9o/r )9,h )92/) )93/4 )94/5 395/6 )9617 )97/8 ,398/9 399/400 400/1 401h
year and the first eight or nine of the following year).
Since few bricks are in fact found in situ, the material selected To calculate the indictions corresponding to any AD year, add
402/) 40)/4 404/5 405/6 406/7 407/8 408/9 409/ro 4101r 41112 412/) 4I3/4 4I4/5 415/6 416/7
417/8 4,8/9 419120 420/r 42112 422/) 42)/4 424/5 425/6 426/7 427/8 428/9 429/)0 4)0/r 4)IIz
as the basis for a chronological analysis cannot realistically be three and divide the total by fifteen. The remainder gives the
4)2/) 4)3/4 434/5 4)5/6 ,4)6/7 4)7/8 4)8/9 439/40 4401r 44Ih 442/) 44)/4 444/5 445/6 44617
restricted to such bricks. Loose bricks, which form a large pro- main indiction of that year (that is, from I January to 3 I August
447/8 448/9 449/50 450/r 45112 452/) 45)/4 454/5 455/6 456/7 457/8 458/9 459/60 4601r 46IIz
portion of the material in the catalogue, can be associated with a or 22 September). The following indiction corresponds to the 462/) 463/4 464/5 465/6 466/7 467/8 468/9 469/70 4701r 47Ih 472/) 473/4 474/5 475/6 476/7
particular structural period-and sometimes at best with a last three or four months of the same year (from I September or 477/8 478/9 479/80 4801r 48112 482/) 48)/4 484/5 485/6 486/7 487/8 488/9 489/90 490lr 49IIz
particular building-with varying degrees of probability. It is 23 September to 3 I December). A remainder of zero indicates 49z/) 49)/4 500/r 502/) 50)/4
494/5 495/6 496/7 497/8 498/99 499/500 50112 504/5 505/6 50617
by assessing these probabilities that we must approach the the fifteenth indiction, For example, the two indictions that 507/8 508/9 509/ro 5IO/r 5IIh 512/) 51)/4 5I4/5 5'5/6 5'6/7 5I7/8 5I8/9 519ho 520/1 521h
chronological analysis of Constantinopolitan brickstamps. correspond to AD 542 are the fifth (E, and the sixth (S'), since 522/) 523/4 524/5 525/6 p6/7 5'7/8 528/9 529/)0 5301r 53Ih 532/) 5)3/4 534/5 535/6 5)617
Amongst the stamped bricks recovered at a particular site, it is (542+3)-i-I5=36r.5· 537/8 5)8/9 5)9/40 H°/r 54Ih 542/) 54)/4 544/5 545/6 546/7 547/8 548/9 549/50 550/r 55'12
not always easy to determine a sample of contemporaneous To work out the years AD to which a particular indiction 552/) 55)/4 554/5 555/6 556/7 557/8 558/9 559/60 5601r 56Ih 562/) 56)/4 564/5 565/6 566/7
material. By excluding certain stamps from the sample, we can corresponds, add 3' I to the indiction. This gives the earliest 567/8 568/9 569/70 5701r 57Ih 572/) 573/4 574/5 575/6 576/7 577/8 578/9 579/80 5801r 58Ih
reduce the likelihood that the remaining sample is contaminated 582/) 58)/4 584/5 585/6 586/7 587/8 588/9 589/90 590/r 59Ih 592/) 593/4 594/5 595/6 596/7
AD year to which that indiction corresponds (from I September
597/8 598/9 599/600 600/1 601/2 602/) 60)/4 604/5 605/6 606/7 607/8 608/9 609lro 6roiI 611h
by bricks of a much earlier or later date. Stamped bricks found in or 23 September to 3' December). The same indiction corres-
parts of a building that are suspected to be additions or repairs to ponded to the first eight or nine months of the following year
the main construction should generally be excluded from a (from: I January to 3' August or 22 September). By adding indiction (although fortunately the difference is not too great), indictions that fall outside the cluster are likely to relate to other
sample, although in a few cases it is possible to demonstrate multiples of fifteen, the subsequent years corresponding to that or even as an S-shaped abbreviation sign or space-filler. periods of construction, or to indicate reused or stockpiled
that bricks used to make a repair were in fact obtained from the indiction may be ascertained." Thus the first indiction (A') There seems to be no good reason to doubt that an indiction material. Such stamps may therefore be omitted from the sample
original damaged fabric." Stray bricks found some distance occurred in }I2ir3, 327/8, 342/3 and so on, where 3 '3,328, and number on a brickstamp accurately indicates the year in which selected for chronological analysis.
from the main construction area, or which cannot be said with 343 are the years corresponding to the majority of the indiction. the brick was manufactured. Indeed, the accuracy of the dates is It is possible-particularly if a structure has undergone
certainry to relate to the site, may also be excluded. Table 2 shows the indiction numbers corresponding to the suggested by the fact that on certain dies care has been taken to regular restoration (such as the Land Walls )-that the indictions
The main consideration when establishing the samples, how- AD years with which this study is concerned. alter the indiction number from the preceding year.'3 If it is on material relating to a construction phase earlier or later than
ever, is the indiction dates on the stamps. Many brickstamps The inscriptions on a significant number of stamps present correct to suggest that the brickstamps served to prove that the the main phase will coincide with the dates in the main cluster.
(particularly those of the fifth century) include a numeral ambiguities in the reading of indicrions, but some of these are requisite number of bricks had been made in a given year," it As a result, there is always the possibiliry that a sample of
between one and fifteen that refers to a year in an indiction only apparent. Thre~ common causes of ambi~iry may be would clearly have been in both the contractor's and the supposedly contemporary material is contaminated with pieces
cycle." The Greek numerals from one to fifteen are as follows: noted. First, there are many fifth-century stamps whose inscrip- landowner's interests to ensure that the bricks were stamped of other periods.
A' (I), B' (2), r-(3),.6.' (4), E' (5), S' (6), Z' (7), H' (8),8' (9), I' tions begin IN.6.1. It will be demonstrated below that these are with the correct date. In several cases, the indiction dates on the Indiction clusters are particularly useful for establishing
(la), lA' or Ar(I I), IB' or BI'(I2), If' orfI'(I3), 1.6.' or .6.I'(I4), almost certainly to be interpreted as iV(OlK1liOvoc) 01', rather bricks tamps found at a particular site are concentrated within samples of contemporary stamps at fifth-century sites. In the
lE' or El' (I5)'9 The numeral is often preceded by an abbrevia- than as iVO(t1<:niOvoc)1', Second, the similarity of the letter spans of about four or five years. This clustering is a further indi- sixth century, however, the use of indictions became less
tion for tVOlKnrovoc or EVOtK'ttOOVOC. The term 'indiction' was stigma, S (which is used to indicate the number six), to the cation that the dates on the stamps give a broadly accurate indi- frequent, and undated stamp; can constitute large proportions
used to refer both to a cycle of fifteen years and to the individual abbreviation sign or space-filler, S, often results in ambiguiry. cation of the year of manufacture. of the material recovered at sites of the period. It would be
Third, a reversed Z (i.e. S) is also found, and it is sometimes Clusters of indictions are crucial for our purposes, since we unrealistic to exclude them all from the sample, although retain-
46 The majority of the stamped bricks found in thepavementofTower no. 2 in the
uncertain whether this is to be taken as a sixth or seventh may reasonably infer that the bricks in such clusters were manu- ing them may mean that the sample is contaminated with reused
walls of Nessebdr were covered with mortar, indicating that they had come from
demolished structures (Ogncncva-Marinova, 'Briques', J 19). Emerson and van factured in consecutive years, and that they belong to a single bricks or bricks from later periods of repair. 56 Other stamps are
Nice noted that badly chipped bricks occurred together in walls of the south-east W The Cbronicon Paschale, AD 3 12 states, 'From here is the start ofConstant~nian period of construction at the site concerned. In many cases, this fragmentary, and have indictions that are not certainly com-
buttress of Hagia Sophia (,Preliminary Report'. 4r 8). indictions', and, under AD 562, records, 'the first indiction was established in the is probably the original construction period, although it is con- plete. If the complete indiction could possibly have fallen with-
47 See e.g. on Srjohn of Stoudios P: 61. consulship ofVolusianus and Anianus ~.e. in 314J'. The papyrological evidence for
41 Sorlin-Dorigny's assertion (Tnscriptions',83) that indicticns did nor appear on backdating was first presented by Kase, P.Princ.Roll, 25-}1, and is accepted by ceivable that a large number of contemporary bricks might have in the indiction cluster, it has seemed best, considering the
bricks tamps until the reign of Justinian is quite wrong: the first firmly dated indic- Bagnall and Worp, Chronological Systems, 4-5. In their commentary on the been salvaged from a single demolished structure." Stamps with paucity of available material, to include such stamps within the
rions on bricks come from the second Great Church, dedicated in 415- Talboe Rice's Cbronicon Pnscbnle, Whitby and Whitby (c. 386) wrongly allege rhar there is no sample.
(GP IJ, IOS) that 'the count refers to the issue of bricks rather than to a
SJ See e.g. HO.I:1Ol'to'Y);1.Io.la(t;'W Z'); 470.1:1, (ito tll'); 311.13, 319.1:1, (tWto
statement evidence to support the backdating.
date' is equally false. Neither Mamboury ('Nouvelle lecture') nor Mango ('Brick 5] Grumel, Cbronologie, 199. That the year had once begun on 23 September is
lY'); 1.7.1, 1006.1:1, 1153.1, 1174.1 (lY' to to'); 99I.Ja (le' to ?). There are many cases
(1' There follows in Chapters 6 and 7 a series of discussions con-
of the third or thirteenth indicrion being changed to the fourth or fourteenth by the
Stamps"), to whom Talbot Rice referred in support of this assertion, said any such also indicated in manuscripts of the r rrh and r arh centuries: see Halkin, 'Nouvcllc cerning the dating of sites that have yielded important groups of
.hing, and Mango protested in a review {Review 1', 68 n. 2). annce'. addition of a single diagonal stroke to the gamma, such as 18.ra, )2.13, 1242.1a,
1294.la. Where a square theta is used to indicate a ninth indicrion, it may have been stamped bricks. The evidence adduced for the dating of the sites
, 49On the frequency of the inversion of two-letter indictions, see Mango and 52 There is no justification for the statement that "indictions float' (Fowden,
icvcenko, 'Inscriptions', 14 (commentary to inscription no. 17). altered from an eta: e.g. 85.1,114.1. s-I See pp.up--ao.
'Consrantinc', 275).
H This was in fact the case atTokludcde Mescidi: sec pp. 81, 90,117. S6 Sec pp. 100-10'.

PARTII: CHRONOLOGY
is literary and archaeological. The brickstamps, however, have
not been taken into account in order to avoid circular argu-
mentation: they are considered in Chapters 8-10. For con-
venience, the discussions have been treated in two distinct
chapters, according to the degree to which the evidence from a
site allows a date to be assigned to it: the more closely dated sites
are to be found in Chapter 6, and the less closely dated ones in
Chapter 7. In Chapter 7, in particular, there is often a lack of
information regarding the structures from which the bricks .
were recovered, and I have done my best to assemble relevant
details. For instance, in the cases of the ruins on Cemal Nadir
Sokagi, the cisterns in Giilhane, and the remains near Mercan
Caddesi (structures which are now lost), it has also been neces-
sary to discuss adjacent structures in case they should provide a
clue as to the dating of the lost buildings. For each site discussed
in Chapters 6-7 I have attempted to establish a sample of stamps
that were apparently used within a few years of one another.
These samples are compared in Chapter 8 in an analysis of the.
dates of both the bricks tamps and the sites from which they
came.
c. Construction techniques
Owing to the importance of construction techniques for distin-
guishing between Byzantine masonry of the fifth and sixth
centuries in Constantinople, a
brief overview of the styles will
make repetition unnecessary below. Typical work may be
characterized by the following dated cases: (in the fifth century)
the Land Walls (405-13), the Palace of Anriochus ('-415 or
C.430), St John of Stoudios ('-45°), and the church of the
Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia (probably C.457-74); (in the
sixth-century) St Polyeuktos (between 510 and 527), SS Sergius
and Bacchus (probably 53<r-36), and Hagia Sophia (532-37)"
Although the Land Walls show great variation in the detail of
the original structure, typical fifth-century work consists of a
core of rubble bonded together with a lime mortar," and faced
with limestone blocks. After between 7 and 10 courses of stone
(about 1.5 m. high), a brick band 5 courses deep (about 0.42 m.
high) penetrates right through the wall (PI. Ill)." At the Palace
of Antiochus, the lower part of the walls of the main, fifth-
century construction is of large carefully cut blocks of grey
limestone from 0.35 to 0.50 m. in height. These are bound
together with iron cramps encased in lead. Upon this, the super-
structure consists of ;tone-faced mortared rubble with brick
bands, in a style similar to that seen in the Land Walls. Here,
S7 The dates given are discussed elsewhere: pp. 122-5 (Land Walls), pp. 56-60,
107-9 (Palace of Antiocbus), pp. 60-1,109 (Srjohn of Stoudios), P.}3 n. 88 (Thee-
rokos in the Chalkoprateia), pp. 62-4, 111-16 (St Polyeukros), pp. 64-7, 116 (Hagia
Sophia). For SS Scrgius and Bacchus, see Bardill, 'Sts. Sergius and Bacchus', 2-4, 10.
sa An aggregate of fine sand and coarse brick fragments was added to the mortar.
Emcrson and van Nice, <Preliminary Report', 422 n. 34 report that sea sand was used
in Hagia Sophia. This was apparently the case at St Polyeuktos also: Harrison,
)arafhanc I, 27.
Si Ward-Perkins in GP 1I, 66, Foss, 'Constantinople', 52-3, 75, styles A, B, and
Cl. See conveniently Mango,Architecture, 10,p!. I.
however, the proportion of stone is much smaller: the small
stone facing-blocks are arranged in bands of 4 courses, about
0.90 m. high; the brick bands are 9-13 courses deep and around
o. 8<r-I. I 5 m. high (PI. IV)." Slightly more stone is employed in
the banded masonry of Stoudios' basilica of St John, where
bands of 3 courses of stone, 0.60 m, high, alternate with bands of
5 courses of brick, 0.43-<>.44 m. high (PI. V).61Thefoundations,
which extend downwards for about 2.6 m., are of large reused
blocks of limestone, joined together with dovetail cramps." The
church of the Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia is constructed
purely of brick (mortar beds 5.5 cm. thick, 10 brick courses
0.91 m. high) upon two levelling courses of greenstone blocks,
which are now about 2.50 m. below ground level (PI. VI)."
Although it is tempting to see in this evidence a general trend
towards using less stone and more brick as the fifth century pro-
gressed, it is difficult to generalize on the basis of so few closely
dated monumenrs.s'
By the sixth century, pure brick construction with occasional
single courses of limestone or greenstone blocks had become the
norm. In addition, average brick dimensions had declined
slightly, while mortar beds had increased in depth." Of the
superstructure of the church of St Polyeuktos, only two sections
of a single pier from the west wall of the church survived; never-
theless these give an impression of the construction technique
employed. The lower section consisted of 5 courses of brick-
work, a length of cornice, then 30 courses of brickwork. The
upper section was of fourteen brick courses between two pro-
jecting cornices." The extensive use of brickwork was also
reflected in the substructures. At ground level was a broad
levelling course of large dovetail-cramped blocks." Above this,
in the west wall of the narthex, was pure brickwork interrupted
by a single course of greenstone blocks. after every ten courses."
In the west wall of the church, the cramped blocks supported
masonry of 5 courses of brick, 5 courses of carefully dressed
stone, 10 or 1 I courses of brick, a course of rougher stone, and
I I more courses of brick (PI. VII)." At SS Sergius and Bacchus,
~ Ward-Perkins in GP Il, 69, Naumann and Belting, Euphemiakirche, 35--6, 40,
fig. 8. 61 Ward-Perlcins in GP II, 70-1.
U See Pescblcw, 'Istanbul 1979' and Peschlow, '[ohanneskirchc'.
" Mathews, Early Ch"rches, 18 with pls. 17 (apse) and 19-20 (north wall). See
Mango, Architecture, (0, pl. 3 (north wall with scale), Miiller-Wiener. Bildlexikon,
77, pl. 57 (apse), Kleiss, 'Neue Befunde', 151 and pl. 41.2 (apse). The greensrone
foundations were noted by Dirimtekin, 'Skevophylakioo', 399. Ward-Perkins does
not discuss the church in GP II.
64 Such a trend was suggested by Naumann, 'Rundbau', 1.06-7.
ll5 Mitcbell, Ann. and Liggett, 'Construction', ~74 cable 3. 475 fig. 4. Fordetiiled
discussion of brick dimensions, see pp. 48, 102--6.
" Harrisou, Sarafhane I, pls. 69, 71-3; Harrison, Temple, pl. 50.
&7 In the 7 m-wide nave foundatio~ walls and in the walls of the passages beneath
the north aisle, the course of cramped blocks was 3 m. higher than in the uarthcx
because the ground sloped steeply from rhe north (Harrison, Sarar:hane I, 413).
ltI Harrison,Sarafhane 1.12-3, pls. 39, 47; Harrison, Temple, 54 fig. 49, 66 fig. 65.
The cramped blocks in the huge nave foundations were topped by four courses
of blocks and a brick band five courses deep; above this, the rnortared rubble core
survived for about 0.5 m. (Harrison,Sarar:hane I, 11, pis. 18-r9; Harrison, Temple,
P,fig·46).
~9 Harrison, Sarar:hane 1, za, 1.3 fig. F, pls. 30, F, 37. 38; Harrison, Temple, p
fig. 51,61 fig. 59, 62 fig. 62 (west wall of church). The rough course of stone in the
...
ESTABLISHING
in the sixth-century masonry of the east, north, and west wails,
single courses of stone appear with a similar frequency, after 10
or '5 courses of brick (Pi. VIII).'o Similarly, in Hagia Sophia,
the walls are of solid brick with a stone course 0.4-<>.5 m. high
after every 14 or '5 courses of brick." The outer wall of the
cathedral's south-west buttress pier is constructed of I 5 courses
of limestone, 20 courses of brick, a single course of greens tone, a
further 20 courses of brick, and another of greenstone." Only
the main piers bearing the dome were built of ashlar. These con-
sisted of limestone blocks, measuring on average 0.45 m. deep
and up to I m. long," which were apparently joined together
using iron cramps sealed with lead." Pure brickwork with
occasional stone courses was also used to construct the shaft of
Justinian's equestrian column in the Augustaion. By the time the
historian Pachymeres was writing in the thirteenth century, the
column had been stripped of its original bronze cladding,
revealing pure brick masonry divided at intervals by just ten
courses of white stone." The apse of the North Church at
Kalenderhane Camii, which appears to have been built under
west wall corresponded with ground level to the north of the church. Above this
stone course in the north wall survived five courses of brick, four of carefully
dressed stone and five more of brick: Harrison, Sarafhane I, 22, pl. 28; Harrison,
Temple, fig. 78.
10 Sec Marhcws, Early Churches, pl. 26 (apsc). This church is not considered by
Ward-Perkins in GP II.
71 Ward-Perkins in GPII, 71-2, Mainsrone, HagiaSophia, 67-70.
n See Mainstonc, H agia Sophia, 68, pI. 84.
7l Mamboury, 'Fouilles 1II',437. Ramazanoglu, 'Sophien-Kirche', figs. 11.23-4.
Emerson and van Nice, 'Collapse', 101, 102 fig. 10. Mainstone, Hagia Sopbia, 67.
7~ Procopius' assertion that these blocks were joined together by pouring molten
lead into the interstices must be a misunderstanding of the sealing of iron cramps
(Buildings, 1.I.jl-3, trans. Mango, Art, 76). Sheets of lead used for cushioning.
which have been found at the springing of arches in Hagia Sophia (Emerson and van
Nice, <Collapse', rco-r , fig. la; Butler,Nave Cornices, 36), were described accurate-
ly by Paul the Silentiary (Description of Hagia Sophia,lines 476--80, trans. Mango,
Art, 83). Scholarly consensus (mistaken in my opinion) is that Procopius is making
a confused reference to such sheets: see Procopius, Buildings, ed. Dewing 24-5 n. 1;
Dagron, Constantinople imaginaire, 237; Mainstone, Hagia Sophia, 186; Mango,
Art,76 n. 100; Mango, 'Fabric',44; Butler, 'Hagia Scpbia's Nave Cornices', 69, n. 37.
Cramps in the piers are also mentioned in the largely fictional Diegesis, 13 (trans.
Dagron, Constantinople imaginaire, 203). Hellenkemper Salies, 'GroBen Palast',
28.2-3 was therefore wrong to assert that cramping made its last appearance in the
Palace of Antiochus. Cramps were also used to join the cornice blocks in Hagia
Sophia: see Butler, 'Hagia Sophia's Nave Cornices', 61-6,.
75 Georgius Pachymeres, Description of the AugttScaion, rrans. Mango, Art,
tU-H.
A CHRONOLOGY
53
jusrin II (565-78) or slightly later, was of brick with three level-
ling courses of greens tone at intervals of 12, 12, and 24 Courses.
The superstructure of this church stood upon a foundation
course of reused, roughly squared greenstone blocks joined by
dovetail cramps."
The masonry of the first half of the fifth century, faced with
small stone blocks and shot through with regular brick bands, is
therefore quite distinct from that after the beginning of the sixth,
which is of pure brick with an occasional course of limestone or
greenstone blocks. However, where necessary, in foundation
courses and load-bearing piers, sixth-century builders did
continue to employ large stone blocks, and, as in the fifth
century, these were often joined using dovetail cramps. Owing
to the lack of dated structures from the later fifth century we
cannot be certain about when single greenstone or limestone
courses began to be set into brickwork. Although the first dated
example is in the platform of the church of St Polyeuktos (q rc--
2I), the technique may have been introduced somewhat earlier.
Besides giving chronological indications, these changes in
structural technique provide information about changes in the
demand for, and hence the supply of, various materials. It is clear
that in St John of Stoudios and Justinian's Hagia Sophia, there
was, respectively, ahout 40 per cent and 100 per cent more brick
than in the equivalent volume of masonry in the Land Walls.
This marked increase in the use of brick would have necessitated
a corresponding growth in the scale and efficiency of the brick-
making industry." The increasing preference for brick would
seem to indicate a desire to economize on stone; and economic
considerations are probably also the reason for the great thick-
ness of mortar courses, which helped to reduce the number of
bricks required in a structure. Adding coarse fragments (up to
10 mm. across) of old (and therefore cheap) brick to the mortar
not only helped to improve its strength, but also reduced the
quantity of lime-and hence limestone-required to make it!'
76 Striker and Kuban, Kalenderhane I, 39.
77 I ignore changes in the amounts of reused material, which cannot be estimated
easily.
11 Mainstone, Hagia Sophia, 70; Livicgsron, 'Materials Analysis', 850-61. A
porous substance such as brick helps absorb excess water, allows the lime to pene-
rrate its pores thereby reducing the tendency of the mortar to bleed and honeycomb,
and improves the mortar's density.

I. THE PRE-JUSTINIANIC GREAT
Two churches previously stood on the site of the surviving,
essentially justinianic, church of Hagia Sophia (Holy Wisdom).
The Chronicon Paschale tells how, under Constantius II, in
AD 360, 'not many days after the enthronement of Eudoxius as
Bishop of Constantinople, the inauguration of the Great
Church of the same city was celebrated after a little more th;n
34 years since Constantine, victorious and venerable, laid the
foundations." Generally, this has been taken to mean that the
foundations of the first church were laid by Consrantine I as
early as 326, and that 34 years later, under his son and successor,
Constantius 11, the monument was consecrated.
Dagron, however, suggests that the reference to <foundations'
relates not to the founding of the church, but to the founding of
the city of Constantinople, which did, in fact, take place about
34 years before 360, in 328.' Interpreting the text in this way, the
Chronicon Paschale provides no evidence as to who began the
first Great Church or when. Those accounts of later authors that
attribute its foundation to Constantine may, Dagron argues,
result from a similar misunderstanding of the ambiguous
Cbronicon Paschale passage, and from a desire to attribute the
original construction of Constantinople's greatest church to the
. city's founder.' Dagron thus reconciles the Cbronicon Paschale
with the account of Socrates,' which states that the Great
Church was begun under Constantius in 350 or 35 I, and that it
was dedicated on 15 February )60 by Eudoxius. This would also
provide an explanation for the lack of any mention of the
church's foundation in Eusebius' Life of Constantine, an
omission which is difficult to understand if construction of the
CHAPTER 6 creation of his forum) which contained an imposing monu-
Dated sites
CHURCH Constanrius." It is, however, the interpretation, not the relia-
bility, of the Chronicon Paschale that Dagron is questioning.
The first Great Church is therefore to be ascribed to
Constantius, Constantine, it seems, founded only three
churches in Constantinople: the martyria of St Akakios and
St Mocius, and the cathedral of Hagia Eirene.' Tbere was in
addition his mausoleum, in which he ordered services to be held,
but it was only under Constantius that the cruciform church of
the Holy Apostles was attached to it.'
The first Great Church together with the adjacent Senate
House was damaged by fire on 20 June 404.' Tbe EyKuivt(x or
inauguration ceremony of the second Great Churcb, which
culminated in the deposition (emoeec,c) of the relics of SS J oseph
and Zacharias, did not take place until 10 October 41 5.10This is
a span of eleven years and four months, 'which suggests', writes
Mainstone, 'either alengrhy major reconstruction or a consider-
able delay before the real work commenced'." Krautheimer
ascribes the reconstruction to the general period 404-I5,12
Miiller- Wiener suggests that work may have begun under
Arcadius (395-408)," Betsch dates the capitals of the second
church's monumental portico to C.405o when he believes they
were ordered from the Proconnesian quarries, 14 whereas Grabar
simply ascribes the sculprure to 415.1S Since this monument
is one of the few early strucrures in Constantinople that is
closely dated, the wealth of architectural sculpture recovered
from it has been used for the comparative dating of much other
sculpture of Constanrinopbliran origin. The church's exact date
is therefore of some importance.
6 Kraurheimer, Arcbiiecture-, SO n. 27, and Capitals, 50-5 with 135 n.7.
DATED SITES
Arcadius ()95-408) is known to have initiated a number of
major construction projects in the ciry. These included the
mental column, the building of the Arcadianae Baths, and the
erection of colonnaded streets and other public buildings after
the fire of 404." The main project initiated by Arcadius was the
construction of the Land Walls, which were begun in 405 when
Anthemius was appointed Praetorian Prefect of the East. The
project formed part of Arcadius' plans to ensure the safe succes-
sion of his young son upon his own death. Given his interest in
building, it is not impossible that Arcadius arranged for the
reconstruction of the Great Churcb. This has been argued by
Janin" on the grounds that the Chronicon Paschale mentions
that the relics of the prophet Samuel were deposited in the
church in 406." Although it is not impossible that a complete
reconstruction could have been undertaken in just two years,
berween june 404 and 406, Janin's suggestion provides no expla-
nation as to wby the inauguration did not take place until 4 I 5. It
would therefore seem that, whatever the extent of the damage
done to Constantius' church in the fire of 404, only repairs (of an
uncertain extent) were undertaken before Samuel's relics were
deposited there."
There is, however, some unexploited evidence of importance
for dating the construction of the second Great Church. First,
the Chronicon Paschale tells us that Samuel's relics, which had
been deposited in the church under Arcadius on 19 May 406,
were removed from there five years later, under Theodosius Il,
on 5 October 4II, to a new church of St Samuel near St john in
the Hebdomon.' If we assume the continued presence of the
relics in the church during this period, then their removal in
October 4' I provides a terminus post q"em for any major
rebuilding."
Second, Sozomen describes how Pulcheria, sister of
Theodosius Il, dedicated an altar of gold and precious stones in
the Great Church, and had her vow of perperual virginity
inscribed on the front of it." This vow was taken, according to
Sozomen, before her fifteenth birthday, which would have
fallen on 19 January 414." Although there is no good reason to
think Sozomen's date unreliable, Cameron and Long have
suggested that Pulcheria may have taken bervow as late as 4 July
55
to the Holy Wisdom of God may suggest that the entire edifice,
not only the altar, was intended as a monument to Pulcheria's
vow." The vow, which was intended to prevent ambitious men
from attempting to usurp her power by marrying into the
Tbeodosian house, depended for its efficacy on its religious
basis." Atticus, who was Bishop of Constantinople from 406 to
425 (hence whilst the new church was under construction), and
who is known to have dedicated to Pulcheria and her sisters a
treatise entitled On Faith and Virginity, probably advised the
three princesses that a vow of chastity would ensure that
Christ-the Divine Wisdom or Divine Word-would take root
in them just as He had done in the womb of the Virgin Mary" It
seems likely, therefore, that the decision to dedicate the church
to Holy Wisdom was intimately connected with the vow that
the sisters had taken. Pulcheria may, in fact, have masterminded
the rebuilding of the city's cathedral, intending it to be a monu-
ment not just to God's Wisdom, but more specifically to God's
Wisdom residing within her and her sisters.
The dedication of a church's altar was conducted when COI1-
.struccion of the church approached completion." If we accept
Sozomen's date for Pulcheria's vow, the altar of the second
Great Church of Hagia Sophia must have been dedicated after
19 January 413.This is not at odds with the information pro-
vided by the Cbronicon Paschale that the cburch was dedicated
on 10 October 4'5. We may therefore accept that construction
of the church began after 5 October 4", and that the edifice was
complete enougb to be dedicated on 10 October 4' 5.
In this same period, a new double line of city fortifications
was approaching completion. It might be suggested, therefore,
that work on the second Great Church began only after the
I
Praetorian Prefect Anthernius had brought construction of the
Land Walls to an end. To accept such a suggestion, however,
we would have to believe that construction of the church was
achieved in just two and a half years, since the Land WaIls were
I
finished, after nine years of toil, only shortly before 4 April
413." Perhaps that is too short a period for the construction of
so large a basilica, and work on the two projects may well have
overlapped.
I
During excavations in 1935 at the west end of Hagia Sophia,
beneath wbat was once the atrium of Justinian's church,

church was indeed begun by that emperor.' Krautheimer, Architect/~re4, 69 n. 4, and Capitals, 56-60 similarly rejects the
persuasive case set forth by Downey ('Apostles') for attributing of me Holy
4'4, when Theodosius proclaimed her Augusta." Sozomen's
information suggests a strong link between Pulcheria and the
A. M. Schneider discovered a fligbt of six steps leading up to a
I
Krautheimer does not accept Dagron's tbeory, pointing Apostles to Consranrius instead of Consranrine. Mango (,Constantine's second Great Church, and, in fact, the dedication of the church
II According Ecclesiastical History, 8+ I I, Constancius'
to Socrates, church
to the 'overall reliability' of the Chronicon Paschale. He Mausoleum') has now argued in detail that Constantine built only the mauso-
16 See above pp. 30-1. was known as the Great but by the time he was writing (not long after
Church,
leum, and that Consrantius built the church.
argues that Constantine did indeed lay the foundations of the
Great Church, but that construction was so protracted that
7 Mango,

1 Mango,
Deoeloppement, 34-6.
'Consranrine's Mausoleum'.
17

11

I'
[anin, Eglises, 457.
Cbronicon Paschale, 569 ."
Mainstone, Hagia Sophia, 134 has also suggested that Arcadius made only
439), it was already
therefore, have been
called
associated
Sophia
(Wisdom).
with
The change in nomencl~ture may,
the church's reconstruction
Theodosius II and Pulcheria. Those authors of the ninth century and later who
under; I
Socrates was justified in ascribing the church's foundation to 9 Socrates, Ecclesiastical History, 6.18; Sozomcn, Ecdesiaszical History, 8.22;
found it necessary to explain the significance of the name, a~reed that it a1lude~ to
MarceJlinus,
5.24; Theophanes,
Chronicle, 404; Chronicon Paschale, 568; Zosimus, New History,
Chronicle, AM j 898. I
I
temporary
belief
repairs
that Arcadius
Cbronicon
to the church. His conclusion
had little inclination
Pascbole,
rests,
for initiating
Scc janin, Egliscs, 449-50.
however, on me incorrect
new building projects. the Divine Wisdom or Divine Word of God, i.e. to Christ (see Downey,
Sophia': Camcron, 'St. Sopbia').
St.
Cbronicon Pascbale 544, trans. Whitby and Wluthy. Marccllinus, Chronicle, 415. Cbronicon Pascbale, 572-3. On the IlnoOeclc, 20 pO-I.

I
I

2 Dagron, Naissance, }2-3, 397-9.

10

see Holum and Vikan, 'Trier Ivory', 120. I 21 During the period of reconstruction, the church of Hagia Eircne may have 26 On the political and religious significance of the vow, see !i0lum,
l e.g. Theophanes, Chronicle, AM 5816; Diegesis, r with Dagron, Conuan- 11 Mainstcne, Hagia Sopbia, 134. served as the principal church: Meinstoae, Hagia Sophia, 134. Empresses, 93-6 (political), 139-42 (religious). On the portrait ofPuJchena above
tinople imaginaire, 196, 2 I 1-12. 11 Krautheimer,Architecture",103. 22 Sozomen, Ecclesiastical History, 9.1.3-4. the altar and her robe that covered it, see Holum, Empresses. l44-5. J 53·
~ Socrates, Ecclesiastical History, 2.16, 2.4j, reproduced by Zonaras, Epitome, I) Muller- Wiener, Bildiexikon, 84. 2J PLRE, ii. 929-30, s.v. Aelia Pulcheria. . 17 Compare the comments of Holum, Empresses. 139·
14·6.
J As observed by janin, Eglises, 457.
H

I~
Bctscb, Capital 10, 199n. 368.
Grabar, Sculptures, 55. I
1
24 Camcron and Long, Barbarians, 401 n. 15. For the date at which Pulcheria
bccam·c Augusta, see Marccllinus, Chronicle, 414 and Chronicon Pascbole, 5]1.
28

1~
Wilkinson,
Sec p, 122.
'New Beginnings'.

I
 PARTII:CHRONOLOGY DATED SITES 57
colonnaded portico floored with a mosaic pavement of which conservative character of Byzantine building techniques would
fragments survived (PI. IX)." This portico was 8 m. west of the prohably make it very difficult to decide between two dates
Justinianic exonarthex, was misaligned by about three degrees that are only fifty years apart.' Seven brickstamps have been
FIG. 5. Plan of the Palace of
with the present west wall of the church, and extended at least recorded as coming from this wall. One stamped roof tile"
Antiochus and the remains of
3 m. further north than the northernmost parts of Justinian's was also discovered. A further three stamps from the wall are
the north-west corner of the
narthexes and atrium. The style of the sculpture tliscoveredindi- recorded in van Nice's notes in Dumbarton Oaks.
Hippodrome
cates that the remains relate to the second Great Church, that of By 1941, Schneider had changed his mind concerning the date
Theodosius II and Pulcheria, rather than to the earlier church of of the retr wall of the propylaeum, and had decided that it
Key'
Constantius. Although Schneider identified the portlco as should be ascribed to the Theodosian church." This date had A Conduit beneath marble
belonging to the church's narthex," Mathews has demonstrated also been adopted by Schneider in his brickstamp study of '937, pavement in sigma-plan portico.
that it must have formed a monumental propylaeum leading in which he had stated his belief that the single-line stamps on Channel under the foundation
wall of the sigma-plan colonnade
into the west side of the atrium." the bricks found in the wall were of the fifth century." But
from the Binbirdirek cistern.
The excavation also revealed a section of wall about a m. to the Schneider presented no evidence to rule out an earlier date for C Circular room with a chapel
east of, and parallel to, the colonnade (Pis. IX and X, Fig. 6 V). In the stamps, and Krautheimer commented, 'the fifth-century attached.
1936, Schneider was of the opinion that the wall behind the date assigned to the brick stamps found in the rear wall seems D Pentagonal room.
portico related to Constantius' church," and both Ward- quite uncertain .... I think it possible that the wall belongs to E Hippodrome staircase.
F Hippodrome ambulatory.
Perkins" and Krautheirner" came to the same conclusion, the Constantine's [sic] atrium rather than to Theodosius lI's
G Hippodrome seating.
former clearly influenced by the careless nature of the construc- rebuilding."!
tion. Mathews remained undecided, but wrote, 'Clearly the
pure brick masonry is quite different from the alternation of
Sample
brick and stone in the Land Walls which we have come to accept
as characteristically Theodosian.''' In fact, the wall, as both All the recorded stamped bricks relate to the pre-Justinianic
Schneider" and Ward-Perkins" correctly described it, consists wall discovered by Schneider, and therefore none are excluded
of four courses of brick (370-90 mm. square X4°-50 mm. thick), on the basis of where they were found. Only four of the stamps
topped by three courses of stone (o.52"m. high), topped by slx recovered from the wall bear certain indictions. These are
courses of brick (0.56 m. high). Contrary to Mathews' assertion, the consecutive indictions IB' (254.", 899.3a) and H" (86.1a,
therefore, the construction, although rather careless, is clearly 456.1a). 548.la possibly carried indiction lJ'..', and 980.13
very similar to that of other Theodosian work." Nevertheless, possibly bore IB'. Since these indicrions form a cluster, no stamp
Mathews correctly states that 'we have too few dated examples is excluded from the sample on the basis of the date it bears. All
of Byzantine builtling in Constantinople from the fourth or fifth the stamps (86.la, 1I I.Ia, 254.1a, 286.Ia, 456.", 548.1a, 899.3a,
century to support a firm decision. Even if we had more, the 959.1a, 980.13, II91.I3) are therefore considered in the sample,
except for the stamped roof tile (1730.13). 0E~==E:~==:e==,,5<:O=========:::;100Metres
}O Schneider, Westhof
)1 Schneider, 'Sophienkirche': Schneider, Westhof
32 Macbews, Early Churches, 14-15' Mainstone, HagiaSophia, 141-3, fig. 165 St Euphemia was later established," probably when relics of the mention John, the comes sacrarum iargitionum "of 404-405,
2. THE P'ALACE OF ANTIOCHUS
has attempted a reconstruction of the church, based on Schneider's propylaeum saint were transferred to Constantinople from Chalcedon in 680 refers to an Antiochus who 'can do whatever he wishes'." If,
and on walls found by Ramezanoglu beneath the west end of the nave of
Justinian'S church (Ramazanoglu, 'Sophien-Kirche', figs. 15-17). He neglects. or when they were recovered from Lemnos in 796:6 even before Arcadius' death, the cubicularius Antiochus was as
In 1939, frescoes depicting the life and martyrdom of St
however, to take into account the fact that the portico discovered by Schneider Procopius describes how the Emperor Arcadius "(395-408) powerful as Synesius suggests, then the agreement must have
Euphernia were discovered to the north-west of the Hippo-
extended further north than the nonh wall of the Juscinianic atrium (see arranged that, upon his death, the Persian king Yazdgerd I been drawn up several years before 408. Theophanes, although
Schneider, 'Sophienkirche', 8}; Remezi, 'Sophienkirche', fig. 41; Schneider. drome in Istanbul. When A. M. Schneider conducted excava-
WesthoJ, }8; Mathcws, Early Churches, 14, 150 fig. i). Note a further wall, tions there in the summer and autumn of 1942, a hexagonal hall (399-420) should become the guardian of his young son placing the events under the year of Arcadius' death, states that
possibly of relevance, found by Ramazanoglu below ground level outside the Theodosius." It seems unlikely that the emperor made this the emperor made his will after appointing Theodosius as
middle door of the north aisle of the Justinianic church {Ramazanoglu, Sainte-
with a semicircular (sigma-plan) portico was revealed (Fig" 5)."
arrangement on his deathbed, as Procopius alleges, since Augustus. Since Theodosius became Augustus on 10 January
Irene, 12, fig. XVI; Ward-Perkins in GP Il, 76 n. 2). During later excavations by R. Duyuran in 195'-52, a column
Arcadius died suddenly," and since the Persian eun;'ch 402,51 Antiochus may have arrived in Constantinople soon
" Schneider, 'Sophienkirche', 85. base bearing the inscription 'Of Antiochus the praepositus' was
H Ward-Perkins in GP Il, 64. Antiochus, who was probably sent to the Constantinopoliran after."
found in situ in the portico" This discovery securely identified
rs Kraucheimcr, Arcbuecturev, 486 n. 27. court as a direct result of this agreement, raised Theodosius The course of Antiochus' career is outlined clearly by
,~ Mathews, Early Churches, 16. the monument as the Palace of Antiochus, in which a church of
37 Schneider, Westhof, 6,
whilst Arcadius was "still alive" A letter of Synesius of Cyrene, Malalas." At some point after Arcadius' death, the eunuch
l8 Ward-Perkins in GP Il,64. if) Schneider, Westho/, 7. which seems to predate Arcadius' death, and which may attained the post of praepositus, or Grand Chamberlain. When
19 Mathews, Early Churches, 16-17, following Dirimtekin, 'Skevophylakion', 41 Schneider, 'Ziegelsrempel', 269. he stepped down from the post, he was made patricius. He
}99, compounds this error by assigning the pure brick of the upper storey of ~1 Krautheimcr, Arcbiteaurev, 486 n. 27. For discussion of Schneider's dating -IS The church of St Euphemia is said to have been in.eX 'AVllOXOU, according to
Hagia Sophia's Skeuophylakion ro the late founh or early fifth century on tbe criterion, see below p. 102 with n. 16. the Synaxarion oj Constanunople, 47-9, 811-13. 50 Synesius, Letters, 110. On the date Bardill and Greatrex, 'A.ntiochus',
basis of a false comparison with the rear wall of the propylaeum. The interior of 4l See Schneider, 'Euphemia-Marryrion' and Miiller-Wiener, Bi/d/exikon, 46 On the date of me translation of the relics, see Berger, 'Translation' and 174-76.
the lowest scorey of the Skeuophylakion was cleared in 1979 revealing stonework I22-5· Mango, 'Euphcmia', 85-6. The latter postulates that the translation of 680 never SI Tbeophanes, Chronicle, AM ~9°O.
articulated by occasional brick bands, a construction technique that compares H Duyuran, 'Palace of Justice H', 75. A similar base, with the unabbrevinred occurred. Sl On Amiochus' arrival in Constantinople, see Bardill and Greatrcx,
much better with the propylaeum wall. It seems that the two lower storeys are to inscription ANTIOXOY nPEnOCITOY had been found a considerable 47 Procopius, Wars, 1.2.7-10. 'Antiochus', 171-80.
be assigned to the period of Consrantius or Theodosius, and that the third storey distance to the south-west. of the site, in DIY!erSokagl, many years before: see -18 Malalas, Chronicle, I3.46 (ed. Thurn 270). ~l Malalas, Chronicle, 14.15 (ed. Thurn 281). On this text, see Bardill and
Clfpure brick represents justinianic work. See Mainsronc, I-/agia Sophia, 1}6-9. Sideropoulos, 'Byzantinai Epigrapbai', 24-5. 49 Malalas, Chronicle, 14.15 (ed. Thurn l81). Grenrrex, 'Anciochus', 180-2.
58 PARTII: CHRONOLOGY
continued, as ex-praepositus and patricius, to meddle in affairs of
state, until the emperor became angry and forced him to become
a priest of the Great Church. A law was then passed preventing
future ex-praepositi from becomingpatricii. In both Malalas and
Theophanes the story of Antiochus' disgrace immediately
precedes the story ofCyrus' rise to power in 439." Both authors
ultimately derived their details of Cyrus' career from the lost
fifth-century history of Priscus of Panium: Malalas found the
material in Eustathius of Epiphania; Theophanes apparently
consulted a different, unknown source that drew on Priscus.
Since both Malalas and Theophanes juxtapose Antiochus'
disgrace with Cyrus' fall, it would seem likely that the juxta-
position originated in Priscus and therefore reflects chrono-
logical reality." If they are indeed derived from Priscus, these
accounts would suggest that Antiochus fell from power after
:.434 (when Priscus' history began) and shortly before 439." At
my rate, little weight should be given to the late account of
uncertain origin preserved in the twelfth-century text of
Zonaras, which places the eunuch's fall after Theodosius' . Antiochus' departure and Pulcheria's assumption of power that
marriage to Eudokia in 421.57
The only other evidence bearing on Antiochus' career comes
from Theophanes. At AM 5905 we read, 'Antiochus the Persian
departed, and the blessed Pulcheria controlled affairs entirely.'
I'heophanes' date for these events (4'21r3) may not be entirely
reliable: Sozomen records that when Pulcheria came to power
md took her vow of perpetual virginity, she was not yet' 5 years
of age, which suggests a date in her fourteenth year (between '9
fanuary 4'3 and '9 January 4'4).58 It has, however, been pro-
oosed that Sozomen himself may not be completely reliable, and
.har Pulcheria may have taken her vow and come to power as
late as 4 July 4' 4, when Theodosius proclaimed her Augusta"
Theophanes' main source at this point was Theodore
Anagnostes' sixth-century Ecclesiastical History, a text known
.s.l Malalas, Chronicle, 14.1 5-r6 (ed. Thum 281-2). Theophanes, Chronicle,
m~ . Prefect Anthernius, who is known to have disappeared at about
U Bardill and Greatrex, 'Anciochus', 180-8. Score (Tbeophenes, Chronicle,
.rans. and comm. Mango and Seen I SIn. I) suggests that Thecpbanes (at AM
i936-7) may simply have been following Malalas, Chronicle, 14.15-16 (ed. Thurn
t81-2). The date of Antiochus' fall would then rest only upon the position of the
recount in Malalas; and that account-being unparalleled in the Cbroniom
Pa5chale and Nicephorus Callisrus, and lacking independent corroboration from
fheophanes-could not then be said with certainty to have been derived from
Priscus byway of Eustarhius. The date of Antiochus' fall from power would then
)e uncertain.
~ It is not inconceivable that the influential eunuch Chrysaphius played some
-ole in Antiochus' entry into the clergy C.439, as he did later in Pulcheria's with-
irawal to the Hebdomon in·HI, and in the exiles of Cyrus and Eudokia in 443.
On Chrysaphius' victims, see Holum, Empresses, 19J-4. U Anciochus' property
came into imperial.hands C.439, following (he eunuch's disgrace, then, given that
:heNotitia was compiled between 423 and 427 (Speck, 'Mauerbau', 144-50, and
?p. 123-4), it seems unlikely that the domum Pulcberiae Augustae listed by the
Notitia. 4.8 in Region III refers to the Palace of Antiochus (contrary to Bcrger,
Regionen', 361. Also contrary to Berger, see Magdalino, 'Maritime Ncighbor-
loads', 216 n. 51).
to us only from an Epitome. This summary, however, has no
details about Antiochus's departure. Indeed, the Ecclesiastical
History itself cannot have contained any, since Theodore's own
source, Sozornen (as Theodore explicitly states at Epitome 302),
deliberately suppressed any mention of Antiochus, of the
Praetorian Prefect Anthemius, and of the Empress Eudokia,
presumably because he was writing after Pulcheria's return to
power in 450.60 From where, therefore, did Theophanes obtain
his information at A..>.! 5905?
Theophanes gives several details in this period that he is
unlikely to have obtained from Theodorc's Ecclesiastical
History, judging by the surviving Epitome. These include the
date of the capture of Rome and the death of the usurper
Constantine at A:."v! 5903, and the executions of Iovinus,
Sallustius, Sebasrianus, and Heraclianus at AM 5904. It is not
unlikely that these facts were derived from the history of
Olympiodorus of Thebes." That work covered the years 407 to
425, and may, therefore, have contained the information about
is given by Theophanes at AM 5905. The likelihood that
Theophanes' source was Olympiodorus is increased by the fact
that Sozomen, who made considerable use of Olympiodorus in
the ninth book of his Ecclesiastical History, also refers to
Pulcheria taking control of affairs." It seems likely, therefore,
that Olympicdorus described bothAntiochus' departure and
Pulcheria's rise to power, and that Sozornen chose to report
only the details about Pulcheria, whereas Theophanes chose to
report both."
If Antiochus did indeed depart in 4'3 or 414, he was presum-
ably not disgraced, since Pulcheria must have allowed him to
return to the palace some time before his entry into the clergy
C.439. It may be suggested that when Pulcheria took control of
affairs, she had to be seen to be able to act independently, and
therefore dismissed not only Antiochus but also the Praetorian
AM
the same time. Antiochus might then have been allowed to
return to the court when Pulcheria's independence had been
secured." It is unclear whether Antiochus, who was a cubicu-
larius before 408, bad risen to the rank of praepositus before his
departure in 4'} or 414: at AM 5905> Tbeophanes calls him
simply 'the Persian'. Antiochus may have been appointed to the
post only upon his return to the palace some years after his
departure.
Since Theophanes' information about Pulcheria taking
control of affairs may well have come from the fifth-century
history of Olympiodorus, it would seem surprising if the
reference to Anriochus' dismissal, with which it is intimately
600 Holum, Empresses, 95-6; Cameron, 'The Empress and the Poet', 265-6.
61 Bardill and Greatrcx, Anriocbus', 189-90.
<
DATED SITES
59
linked, were inaccurate. But Malalas, who provides us with our
best account of Antiochus' career, makes no mention of Sample
Antiochus leaving the palace in 4' 3 or 4 '4, os and there are,
Although they constitute evidence crucial for the dating of the
perhaps, some grounds for doubting Theophanes' statement.
palace, the majority of brickstamps from this most important
We know that, at abour this time, the Praetorian Prefect
excavation have not previously been published. Naumann and
Anthemius stepped down, died, or was removed from power.
Belting devote six lines of text to them," and their importance
He is last attested in the pOSt on ,8 April 4'4," having been
has been overlooked in both Martindale's and Holum's con-
appointed between July and November 405. Such a long tenure
sideration of the chronology of Antiochus' career.
suggests that Anthemius was indispensable. Indeed, Socrates,
Schneider states that about 300 stamped bricks were
who wrote not long after 439 and enjoyed Eudokia's patronage,
gives full credit to him for practically ruling the Eastern Empire recovered," and Mainboury found 82.'0 Duyuran writes that
at the time." It is not inconceivable that Olympiodorus in fact during his excavations at the end of '950, 'More than '00 brick
accurately described how Pulcheria had taken control of the stamps were found singly among the rubble, others in situ. Some
are very unusual."! It is not clear bow many of the bricks
state upon Anthemius' disappearance, and that Theophanes
altered the name, writing instead that Antiochus the Persian had discovered in these excavations came from the Hippodrome
rather man the palace-ball.
departed. Such an alteration could hardly have been accidental,
All of. the catalogued stamps from the Palace of Antiochus are
and it is not, in fact, difficult to suggest a possible reason why
included in the sample, except for the following: 992.",
Theophanes might have determined to change the name. Given
that Theophanes' main source for this period was Theodore 1003.la, I402.rb, 1I82.Ia, which cannot certainly be associated
with the palace or its main period of construction (note also that
Anagnostes, and that Theodore's own source was Sozomen,
the indictions on 992.,. and '003.r. fall outside the main
who suppressed any mention of both Antiochus and
cluster); 29}.1. and II8!.ra, which Mamboury assigns to
Anrhernius, Theophanes would have had no idea that, in the
repaired sections of the structure; and 17I.Ia, 2IO.la, 360,la,
early fifth century, the administration was under Anthemius'
49!.2a, 653·ta, 745.", 899·2a, '024.1 a, II49·Ia, "54.",
control. On the other hand, Theophanes had learned much
about Antiochus from his other sources-as is clear from his ,639.,a, ,64'.ta, ,658.,..since their indictions fall outside the
main Ir'-A' cluster.
descriptions of the eunuch's arrival at court (A},I5900) and of his
fall from imperial favour in 439 (AM 5936). If Theophanes had
Locations
consulted Olympiodorus, and had read that Pulcheria had taken
It is known only that the bricks come from the Palace of
total control of affairs upon Anthemius' departure, he may have
assumed that an error had been made, and that Anrhemius had
Antiochus, but for the following some additional details should
be noted:
been written in error for Antiochus, since Anciochus was the
only individual known to Theophanes who might have held the Within the limits of the excavations undertaken at the end of
. r950: rooy.r a, I402.rb.
power that Pulcheria later assumed. It is therefore not unlikely
that, at kV! 5905> Theophanes wrongly refers to Antiochus' Conduit beneath marble pavement, running .parallel to the
departure instead of Anthernius'. If Antiochus was not in fact foundation walls of the sigma-plan portico (Fig. 5 A): 992 .ra.
dismissed in 413 or 4'4, his career presumably continued with-
Vault of channel extending under the foundation wall of the
out interruption until C.439. But even if this hypothesis were
sigma-plan colonnade from the Binbirdirek cistern (Fig. 5 B):
accepted, it would nevertheless be unclear when Antiochus-
II82.ra.
who was apparently cubicularius until 408-<>btained the rank
Restored part to the left of tbe circular room with a chapel
of praepositus.
attached (Fig. 5 C): 293.,a, r r Sr.r a.
Whether or not Antiochus' career was interrupted for a short
time from 4I} or 4'4, his palace must have been consrructed Pentagonal room beside the Hippodrome (Fig. 5 D): Il8!.I'.
wben he obtained the post of praeposiuts at some point between The following stamps are said to have occurred on trapezial
q08 and C439. bricks, which are probably to be associated with vaults or the
dome of the structure: 37.,a, 268.ra, H2.,b, 627.,a-b, 653·",
730.ra--c, e, 877.2a, 991.1a, 1061.la, za.

)7 Zonaras, Epitome, 13.22.14-16. See Bardill and Oreacrex, 'Auriochus' 61 Sozomen, Ecclesiastical History, 9.J.
185-6. 6) Besides his reference 10 Pulchcria's assumption of power at AM 59050
Si Sozomen, Ecclesiastical History.sui, Theophancs makes another at AM 5901, which comes from Sozomen by way of
6. Naumann and Belting, Euphemia-Kirche, 20 with n. 50.
65 Malalas, Chronicle, 14.15 (cd. Thurn 281). 69 Schneider, 'Euphemia-Marryrion', 256.
~? Camcron and Long, Barbarians, 401 n. '5' For the date at which Pulcheria TheodoreAnagnostes, Epitome, 302: Bardill and Grearrcx, 'Aruiochus', 190.
iecame Augusta, see Marcellinus, Chronicle, 414, and Cbronicon Pascbale, 571. l.4 Bnrdill and Greatrex, 'Antiochus', 191-2. " CTh 9.40.22. 10 Mamboury, 'FouillcsIlI',431-3.
" Socrates, Ecclesiastical History, 7.1,1-3. See Holum, Empresses, 84, 9j-6. 71 Duyuran, 'Palace ofjusticc I', 38.
 -----------

60 PART II: CHRONOLOGY

DATED SITES 61
Indictions account of the late fourteenth century states that it was on the In 1979, a number of soundings were made in and near the
TABLE3. Frequency of indictions on bricks from the left-hand side of the road as ooe travelled from St Mary church, Below the east end of the south aisle, foundation walls 4. THE CISTERN OF ASPAR
Palace of Antiochus Peribleptos to Kalojan's Castle (at the Golden Gate)." The road of an earlier building were once again found, running north-
concerned is the triumphal route that left the southern branch of west-south-east. Remains of a wall-painting, which possibly In the year 459, according to the Cbronicon Paschale, 'Aspar the
Indiction Catalogue numbers and quantity of bricks the Mese just outside the Walls of Constantine. It headed sea- belonged to the building, showed secular decoration. In the magister militum began to build the very large cistern near the
wards to the Sigma (known to have been located above the same sounding, foundations of the church's east wall and of the old wall.' Flavius Ardabur Aspar probably bore the title of
A~ 235.Ia, 268.la-b, Jp. la (many), rb (numerous), 333.ra, Peribleptes monastery) and then west, through the Golden magister militum by 43', and perhaps even as early as 424. He
srylobate of the nave colonnade were revealed. These extended
496.13 (4), 542.13, 624.13, 7JJ·la, 713·Ia, 975·Ia-b, Gate to the Hebdomon.? Such a street would have passed just retained it until his death in 471." His cistern is known to have
downwards for about 2.6 m. and consisted of large reused lime-
991.13,1061.13,2a, 1182.la, 1I86.ra (2), [l96.la (several) to the north of the irnrahor Camii. It is this mosque that was stone blocks, which were joined with dovetail cramps. To the been close to the monastery of Manuel and a number of other
B'
identified with the church of Stjohn by Pierre Gilles, the French south of the narthex, the foundations of a staircase tower were religious foundations: the monastery of St Matrona, the
['
zoologist and classicist who explored Constantinople between discovered, and a further sounding located the west wall of the monastery of Eurychius of the Lycaonians, the church of St
A' 491.2a, 745.,a, 753·la, 992.la
1544 and '547." atrium. Laurence in Pulcherianai, and St Euphemia in Petrion or in
E' 6n.u, 1I49.Ia
<;'
An epigram in the Palatine Anthology, which, the lemma During the survey, U. Peschlow noted that impressions of Dexiokratianai (later St Theodosia)." This last church can be
Z' 210.13,1641.la states, was located 'In the church of the Forerunner [of Christ] brickstamps in the mortar beds of the wall of the synthronon located on the shores of the Golden Horn, somewhere between
H' "54.13 in the quarter of Stoudios' gives a terminus ante quem for the referred to a fifth indiction. Although no stamped bricks were the monastery of Christ Panrokrator (Zeyrek Camii) and the
8' 171.1a, rcoj.r a church's construction. The epigram reads: 'Stoudios built this recovered from the originalfabric of the building, those found in church of the Theotokos Pammakaristos (Fethiye Carnii)."
r 1024.13 splendid house to John, great servant of Christ, and swiftly repairs to the nave floor and elsewhere not only bore the same Consequently, there can be little doubt that the cistern of Aspar
lA' 360.ra, 864.Ia, 1639.Ia, 1658.la gained the reward for his toils by obtaining the consular is the open cistern on the hill immediately to the south of Sultan
abbrevi~ted names as appeared on the mortar impressions, but
IB' 899.20 fasces. '79 Since we know that Stoudios was consul of the East in Selim Camii" Indeed, a fifteenth-century. list of the Seven
also referred to a third, fourth, or fifth indiction. They would
1[' 236.la 454 with Flavius Aetius," the church of St john must have been Wonders of Constantinople suggests that the cistern was beside
therefore appear to have come from the original fifth-century
l..Ll.' r Svr a, 293.13, 328.13, rb (2), 361.1a, 362.13,6.22.13, 627.Ia
built prior to that date, and perhaps very shortly before, since he structure of the church" the lost monastery of Christ Pantepoptes, which derived its
(numerous), tb, 754.13, 755.1a, 900.IC, 954.Ia, 973.la
gained the rank of consul 'swiftly'. Mango suggested that the name ('All-Seeing') from its position on the hilltop 'Where the
(frequent), 994.ra-h, II8I.Ia, 1275.la (2), 1294.la
church was constructed in the hope of securing the head of St Sultan Selim Camii now stands." The cistern measures '52 m.
IE' 28.la, 37.la (2), 108.1a, aa, 237.la, 272.13, 23, 327.1a
John, which was unearthed in a cave at Ernesa by monks from Sample square and c. Io-II m. deep," and its identification is further
(numerous), rb (very numerous), "348.la, 363.13, 23, 33
(3), 384·ra, 503·1a (2), 623.la (numerous), 625.la, 712.13, the Spelaion monastery on 24 February 453." Since most of the indictions cluster between B' and E', stamp confirmed by the fact that in the Geodesia ascribed to Hero
nO.la, rb (numerous), le, Id (3), le, aa, 733.Ia, 7S8.Ia, Between '907 and 1909, the Russian Archaeological Institute 1246. I a, which carries indiction e', has been excluded from the of Byzantium, the cistern of Aspar is said to be square." The
no. la, rb, 855.Ia, 877.Ia, aa, 990.13, I02.5.la, loz9.Ia of Constantinople excavated the crypt of the church, and sample. reference in the Chronicon Paschale to the 'old wall' near the
(numerous), le, aa (numerous), II85.Ia, Il87.Ia (2.), uncovered the nave's fine opus sectile pavement, which pre- cistern clearly concerns Constantine's fortification wall, which
I 533.ra, 164o.Ia sumably dates to the eleventh century. Excavations at the east Indictions is known to have reached the Golden Horn in Petrion."
end of the south aisle also revealed the foundations of an earlier The masonry of this cistern is similar to that of other struc-
building below the church. The walls ran north-west to south- TAJJLE4. Frequency of indictions on bricks from StJohn of tures of the early fifth century. Forchheimer and Strzygowski
Schneider reported that of the 300 stamped bricks recovered, 78
east, and were parallel to those of the cistern to the south-west of Stoudios state that the bricks measure 380 mm. square x 54 mm. thick.
bore either indiction IlI.' or A', and 190 bore indiction lE'!' Of
the 82 stamped bricks that Mamboury recovered (which must the church." Unfortunately, no drawings or photographs of the They are laid in bands of 5 courses, o. 50 m. high. The brick bands
Indiction Catalogue numbers and quantity of bricks
represent a proportion of those noted by Schneider), 20 bore discoveries were publjshed. Amongst the finds were about one are separated by 1.2 m.-thick bands of mortared rubble faced
indiction IlI.', 35 bore lE', and 17 bore A'n The analysis hundred stamped bricks, of which no details were recorded." A' with 6 courses of limestone blocks."
presented in Table 3, which relies on the information in the cata- Other stamped bricks from the church are said to have been B' 594.Ia (2)
added to the collection in the Hagia Sophia Museum shortly I" Sp.1a (2), I308.la
logue, shows a similar distribution of indictions. Sample
before 1958 .•.• A' 173.la (2), 177.13,491.1a
E' 24.la (2), 174.la, I206.!a, 1468.13 All of the bricks (10 in total) were found in situ in the fifth-
<;' century walls of the cistern, and therefore none are excluded on
3. ST JOH OF STOUDIOS l' See Majeska, Russian Trauelers, 183-8, §26. For Kalojan, see Mango,
'Russian Description'. Z' the grounds of where they were found (266.la, 563,r. (3), b,
77 On this street, see Bardill, <Golden Gate', 694. H'
There is little doubt that the church of St Joho of Stoudios is to 16 See PLRE, ii. J64-9, s.v. Fl. Ardabur Aspar.
,. GiBes, De topogrepbia Constantinopoleos, 4.9. 9" 1246.Ia See janin, 'Citernes', 101-10.
be identified with the.Byzantine basilica near the Golden Gate n Palatine Anthology L4: Eic eov vccv 'tou np05pO}.lO'U ev eo'ic Cecofiloo- I r: 11

11 See Majeska, Russian Traoelers, 346-9.

that was converted into theIrnrahor Camii under Sultan Beyazit Toinov 'IoxivVfl. XPU:fOU J.1e"f~ gepanoy'tl, 1CtOUOlOC a:YAaoy OIKOV iSdJ.1(l'to·
lA' It See also Berger.Paew.rir r-r j.
KClP1'[(lAt)lWC Sk I 'tOOvxcpev eiipero l.llc86v, EMlV unauil&:r. P<ipoov.
II." The Chronicon Paschale indicates that the church was near IB' 90 Mango, 'Chrisros Pantepoptes'.
80 PLRE, ii. 1°37: s.v. Studius 2.
91 For the cistern, see Miiller-Wiener, Biidlexikon, 279.
the Golden Gate," and an anonymous Russian pilgrim's 11 Mango, 'Srudius', 121-2. The sources mentioning the discovery are If'
t2 Mango, 'Water Supply',17 n. 41. The sides are said to be 70 orgyai in length
Marcellinus Comes, Chronicle, 453 and Chronicon Paschale, 591. For the correct lA' (i.e. C.I)1 m.): see Hero of Byzantium, Geodesia, 9: ro-r a, cd. Sullivan 140-1,
date, see Marcellinus, Chronicle, 45J.t, trans. Croke 91-2. Mango also argues lE' with 2.66.
(fromSuda r 1147 and Theodore Anagnostes, Epitome, 384) that, having failed to
91Chronicon Poscbale, 494. The only fixed point along the length of the wall is
obtain the relics, Stoudios was persuaded by Marcellus to convert the church into
the Isa Kapr mescidi, on which see van Millingen, Walls, 21-2.. See also Mango,
Schneider, 'Euphemia-Marryrion',
72 256. a monastery for the Akoimetoi whilst Gcnnadius was patriarch of Constan-
. Dsveloppcmem, 2.4-50 plans I and 11. The wall probably came much closer to the
n Mamboury, 'Pouilles Ill', 43I-3. tinople (August or September 458-20 November 471).
n For the work in 1979, see Peschlow, 'Istanbul 1979' and Pcschlow, cistern than indicated in plan 11.
See the arguments of van Millingen, Cbnrcbes, 35-6. For the church, see
J~ U On the cistern and its capitals, sec Betsch, Capital, 196-8.
'johanneskirche'. For the bricks tamps, see Peschlow, 'johanneskirche', 431-2. I 9~ Forchheimer and Strzygowski, Wasserbehiiltcr, 46-7. Similar brick dimen-
Miiller-Wiener, Bildlexihon, 147-52. Il Panchenko, 'imrahor Camii', 257.
am extremely grateful to Professor Pcschlow for allowing me to consult and sions are given by Kdhya, "Tugla Boyutlan', r72, table I: 365-400 mm. long x
75 Cbronicon Paschnlc, 72.7. 14 Dirimtekin, 'Work Done" 3, I9.
exploit his notes on the brickstamps from chis church. 40-54 mm. thick, most frequently 380 x46 or 50 mm.
 PART II: CHRONOLOGY
1208.1a (2), 1220.1a, 1306.za, 1636.1a). Since each of the 8 bricks
that carries an indiction refers to a tenth year .in an indiction
cycle, none need be excluded from the sample. Therefore, all of
the stamps noted in the cistern have been retained in the sample.
5. ST POLYEUKTOS
In April and May '960, an inscribed niche-head of Procon-
nesian marble, an inscribed rectangular block, and fragments of
cornice were discovered in the Sarachane quarter of Istanbul
near the ~ehzade mosque." I. Sevcenko realized that the
inscribed words were part of a poem that is preserved in its
entirety in the Palatine Anthology" and that was carved inside
Anicia Juliana's church of St Polyeuktos. Indeed, the spot in
which the sculpture was found agrees with the evidence for the
location of the church provided by the tenth-century Book of
Ceremonies." Excavation of the church was undertaken under
the direction of R. M. Harrison and N. Firatli in six campaigns
between August 1964 and July 1969.98
A date for the construction of Juliana's church was estab-
lished by A. von Premerstein in '903 on rhe basis of three main
pieces of textual evidence." In the De Gloria Martyrum of
Gregory of Tours, which was composed between c. 584 and
'.594, it is said that the Emperor Justinian, having heard of rhe
sreatwealth of AniciaJuliana, visited her, and requested that she
make a contribution to the treasury. The old lady agreed, but
said that she needed time to assemble her riches, and suggested
:hat the emperor return at a later date. Juliana then shrewdly
oroceeded to expend all her gold by gilding the roof of her
church of St Polyeuktos, knowing rhat the emperor would not
:lace remove it. 100 Von Prernerstein argued that these events
must have occurred in 527 or 528, pointing out rhat Justinian
came to the throne in 527, and thatjuliana must have died in that
{Cry year or the next, since, in the Life of St Sabas her death is
olaced between the death of Justin I (I or 2 August 527) and
,abas' ninety-first year (529)'!0I Furthermore, von Premerstein
observed that a marginal note beside verses 46-7 of the dedica-
:ory epigram preserved in the Palatine Anthology stated that the
:hurch was under construction for three years.192 He concluded,
:herefore, that the church was built in rhe period c. 524-C. 527.
Dirimtekin, 'Sarachans', 42-}.
95
96 Sevcenko, 'Note addicionnelle', 386. Palatine Anthology 1.10, quoted and
translated by Harrison, Sararhane I, 5-7 (a). Mango, Deueloppement; 44 n. 40
ruggests that an inscribed block found by Dethier near Beyazu square in r865
carried part of verse 54, but the proposal has now rightly been withdrawn:
Mango, 'Notes d'epigraphie', 345-7. . Sararhane I, 8, however, has suggested that verses 41-76 may have been com-
97 Janin, Eglises, 406; Mango and Sevcenko, 'Polyeuktos', 244.
98 See Miiller-Wiener, Bildlexikon, 190-1; Harrison, Sararhane I; Hayes,
r;ara~hane11;Harrison, Temple.
9'.1 VonPremerstein, 'Anicia Iuliana'rtoy.
100 Gregory of Tours, Glory of the Martyrs, 1.102, ed. Krusch, 1°5-7, trans. van
Dam, 124-6.
101 Cyril.of Skyrhopolis, Life ofStSabas, 171.
102 Text and translation in Harrison, Sararhane I, 7.
In '96" following the discovery of the inscribed blocks
at Sarachane, Professors Mango and Sevcenko produced a
collaborative article in which they presented similar arguments
regarding the date of the church's construction. Assuming, as
had von Premerstein, that Gregory of Tours' story could be
used to date the year in which the church was completed, and
accepting-the scholiast's statement that the church was built
in three years (in preference to the claim in the notoriously
unreliable Patria that work lasted for four and a half years),'?'
Mango and Sevcenko again suggested the construction period
524-27104
This dating may be criticized on two grounds. First, even if
we accept that the roof of the church was gilded in 527 or 528, as
Gregory of Tours suggests, we should not conclude that this act
signified the completion of the church, since the story alleges
that the gilding was additional, unplanned adornment. There-
fore, the tale tells us no more than rhat the church had been com-
pleted before 527 or 528. It may be added that the story is
perhaps nothing more than a prepossessing tale invented both to
explain the extravagantly gilded roof of the church and to illus-
trate Justinian's greed. If so, the gilding may in reality have been
undertaken as soon as the construction of the church had been
finished, at an unknown date before Juliana's death in 527 or
528, and quite possibly not during Justinian's reign at all.IO'
Second, the marginal note beside verses 46-47 of the dedicatory
poem was written in about 940, and it is likely that the scholiast
obtained his historical information from rhe highly unreliable
patriographic tradition.'?"
Consequently, only two firm conclusions can be drawn on
the. basis of the literary evidence. First, the church was finished
in or before 527 or 528, when Gregory of Tours' tale is set and
when Anicia Juliana died. Second, the entablature inscription
within the church of St Polyeuktos was carved after the dis-
appearance of Areobindus in 512,1°7 since, as Mango and
Sevcenko observed, he is not mentioned in v. 39 of the epigram,
where the poet invokes on Juliana, her son, and rhe latter's
daughters the protection of the various saints to whom Juliana
had dedicated churches.l'"
The earliest concentration of coins found during the excava-
tions related to the reigns of Anastasius I (491-518) and jusrin I
(518-27).109 Of these, the most important was a pentanummium
of Justin I, found in the make-up of the nave floor.!" This
Patria }.57. Text and translation in Harrison, Sararhane I, 10.
10)
lot Mango and Sevcenko, 'Polyeuktos', 244-5.
105 Palatine Anthology 1.10.57 refers to the gilded roof. If verses 42-76 (which
were displayed outside the church) were composed at the same time as verses
1-41 (in rhe nave), then the gilded roof was, in fact, planned early on. Harrison,
posed separately and at a later date.
106 Cameron, Greek Anthology II4.
107 On Areobindus, see PLRE, ii. 143-4, s.v. Fl. Areobindus Dagalaiphus
Areobindus I. .
109 Mango and Sevcenko, 'Polyeukros', 244-5'
109 Harrison, Sararhane I, Ill. Hendy, 'Coins', 278, 285-8, nos. 36-67
(Anastasius I), 288-94, nos. 68-1 50 (Iustin 1).
110 Harrison, Saracbane I. 1 I 1 (where some doubt over the identification is
DATED SITES
provides a terminus post quem of 5 I 8 for the laying of the pave- Indictions
ment in the nave. Although Bendy claimed rhat a pre-reform
TABLE 5. Frequency of indictions on bricks from St Polyeukros
follis of Justinian I (dated to 527-38/9) was found in the make-
up of the atrium floor,'!' thereby proving that work continued Indiction Catalogue numbers and quantity of bricks Totals
into the early years of Justinian's reign, the evidence is
unreliable. It is notable that such a significant discovery is not A' 1247.Ia (I)
discussed by Harrison himself with regard to the date of the B' 694.ra (I), 834.ra (26), z a (I), 1263.ra (2) 30
church. Furthermore, Harrison associates the coin with a layer f' 54o.Ia (I), 687.ra (6), 8p.Ia (30), 835·1a (3),
of 'dark brown earth' that contained pottery of the eleventh 837·ra (17), 84o.Ia (7), '417·ra (3), I709.ra (2) 69
s:
century."! This suggests that the find is probably to be asso- 90.ra (7), I03·Ia (I), 660.Ib (40)," 2. (I) 49
E' I009·Ib (41) 47
ciated with other eleventh-century levels that overlaid the
<;
atrium pavement and that are believed to have related to a Z' 216.Ia(I), I427.Ia (2)
period of squatter occupation.i" This second coin cannot, H' 633·Ia (3), 938.ra (I), 120I.Ia (I), 126z. ra (3),
therefore, be reliably used to determine anything about the date I391.Ia (7) 15
of the construction of the church. 0' 340.Ia (9), 347.ra (2) II
By the time the excavations had been completed, over 1,200 r 21.Ia (I), 469.ra (I), 885.ra (I) 3
stamped bricks had been recovered. The brickstamps were lA' 558.Ia (I), 976.ra (I 5), 1249·ra (7), 125o.Ia ()3)" 56
studied during post-excavation work in 1975 by S. Hill, and a IB' 187.1a (5), 98).1a (I), l075.ra (4), ,088.1a (8),
catalogue and brief analysis of the material appeared in a contri- tb (8), I089·Ia (3) 29
bution to the first volume of the excavation report.!" The
]f' I077.1a (6),.a (21), 4a (I)), I080.Ia (IS), I08I.Ia
(6), 108a. ra (17), I083.Ia (I I) 92
stamped bricks recovered during the excavations are stored
1ft.' )68.Ia (), 471.Ia (16), 946.ra (3), I087.ra (2) 24
on-site in a depository constructed in the substructures of the
lE' Il9.ra (2)
church's north aisle."
* One duplicated brick number.
Note also the following catalogue entries that include several types or variants:
Sample 838.I.a (35), which probably all bore B' or I"; Ion.3a (4), which probably all bore
If'; I085.Ia (13), which probably all bore IB'/IT'IIA'; I088.IC (9), which probably
All of the stamped bricks from the excavation of the church all bore m'; I09I.Ia (224), which probably all boreIB'IIT'IIA'/no indiction.
are included in the sample. Stamps known only to have been It may be helpful to indicate the points at which Table 5 differs from the analysis of
found in the area are, however, not considered, since they indictions presented in Hill, 'Brickseamps', 223, 225. table 2: (I) The style of885.13
cannot certainly be associated with the church. Some of them (AI9) is typical of Group 1. The indiction must, therefore, be I" (see p. 99). (2.)The
indiction on stamp 8S.la (A4) is not certainly A'; the final letter is JUSt as likely to be
are likely to have been found during the construction of the A. (3) Hill lists 694.Ia (B27) and u6).ra (CIa) under both B" and IB'; they read B'.
underpass. They are: ro.ra, 95.ra, r43.Ia, 'H.ra, 407.Ia, (4) Against indicrion I" Hill inserts group-entry D6-S. D6 and D8 bear indiction I",
but D7 in fact bears B', and is very similar to D14. The group (8)8.la) contains 35 .
57o.1h, 6'3.ra, 614·1a, 743·1a, 782.la, 783·Ia, 988.ra, '392.,a,
stamped bricks (not three, as stated by Hill). (5) A3 and A30 represent the very same
1406.la, 1407·la, 1437.Id, 1578.13, 1579.la, 1580.la, 1581.la, die (eo.ra). In his table 2, Hill counts only 1 example of A30: there were four. (6)
'582.ra, 1583.1a, r584·Ia, r585.1a, '586.1a, r587.ra, 1682.ra, rccc.rb (D2) bears indiction E'. This shifts 47 bricks from indiction A' to indicrion
1701.1a. E'. (7) There arc 33 examples of U5o.Ia (A26) to be counted against indiction LA';
Hill counts only two. (8) The indiction on 89.Ia (A25) is lost. Comparing 91.la
(An), it appears that the name was APICfEI. (9) Hill omits from 11\'the seven
examples stamped with I2.49.la (A2.S). (la) Hill omits from I.A' the two bricks
stamped with 1087.Ia (E8). (1 r ) Indiccion lE' appears on two bricks bearing the
fragmentary stamp I I9.Ia (Cl). (12) Die 54o.la (AI3) has apparently been altered so
that the indiction reads I" rather than B'. (13) The indiction on 558.la (D}")is now
read ~'. (14) 6n.Ja (DI) is considered to have an uncertain indicrion.
suggested; cp. Harrison, Temple, 71); Hendy, 'Coins', 278-9, 289, no. 76 (where
the identification is treated as secure).
The indictions form two prominent clusters (A'-E', IA'-IEj
111 I-Iendy, 'Coins', 2.78--9,294, no. 153.
112 Harrison, Saracbane I, Levels List in chapter },level84i~. In the 'Register and there is possibly a minor cluster Z'-I'. Owing to the broad
of Small Finds and Pottery Batches' (Sarachane Archive, Institute of Archaeo- spread of indictions, no stamp has been excluded from the •
logy, Oxford), the pottery was entered on 15 July 1967 as coming from V/17/x; sample on the grounds of the date it carries.
the coin (no. 507) was entered on the following day from V/17/2. In notebook Q
for 1967, V117/1 is described as 'Topsoil (Dk. brown earth) as left from 1966', and
V117/2. as 'Masonry of drain' (without any mention of the discovery of the coin).
On the drains at V117, see Harrison, Saracbane I, 26. Notes on the St Polyeuletos brickstamps
1lJ Harrison, Sorachane I, Il2-I3. Hayes, Saradrane II, 12I-4 (Deposits
41-2). The pottery from V/17h (formerly AJU), which was recorded in Hayes' Brick numbers applied to the bricks from St Polyeuktos range
card index on 2.5July 1967, was not included in Haves, Sara~han'e II on the from I to '434, and several numbers are repeated with the suffix
grounds that it came from topsoil (personal communication,]. W. Hayes).
114 Hill, 'Bricksramps', 207-25. 'A'. Many numbers in the sequence do not appear in the cata-
115 Harrison, Sararhane I, 3. logue, and may never have been allocated to bricks. Numbers
 PARTlI: CHRONOLOGY DATED SITES

1432 (91.13, A33) and 1434 (84°.1', DIl) were allocated not to
bricks but to mortar impressions.
Three photographs in the Sarachane archive show unpub-
lished stamps (14°7.1., '0. la, 1437.ld); but the bricks that
.ppear in the photographs (nos. 1323, 1328, I 329) were included
in the totals given by Hill, 'Brickstarnps', under the entries A26
:1250.1a}, B20 (666.13a) and B22 (660.Ib) respectively. I have
not been able to ascertain whether Hill has accidentally ascribed
these three bricks to the wrong entries or whether these
numbers were assigned in error to more than one brick.
In the first line of Hill's Table I, A22-3 and EI-22 should
total 4'4 (not 412). In the last line of the table, D'4 is listed,
having already been included in the second line. Correction
increases the total in his Table I by I to 1208. When the four tiles
,earing stamps FI, F2, and F3 are added, a grand total of 1212
finds is reached. (Note, incidentally, that the figures given in
footnote 'a' to Table I were incorrect even by Hill's figures.)
Hill's catalogue entry for El should refer to one brick (no. 51)
.rom level 13 [ (Hill has given the brick number as the level
aumber). Under the group-entry E,-22, two bricks (nos. 1199
ind 1200) from level 1357 are omitted, although the total
aurnber of bricks for EI-22 is given correctly as 224. Two
oricks, one bearing D9 (837.Ia), the other D6-8 (838.Ia), were
wrongly ascribed to level '40 in Hill's catalogue. They came, in
'act, from the conduit in the south-east corner of the church
"Building A').
6. THE JUSTINIANIC HAGIA SOPHIA
I'he second Great Church, that of Theodosius Il, burned during
he Nika riots of 532. It was destroyed together with the Chalke,
he portico of the scholarii, protectores, and candidati, the
o,ugustaion, and the nearby Senate House in the evening of '4
fanuary, or on the following dayll6 The Chronicon Paschale
.tates that 'the whole of the Great Church together with its awe-
.orne and marvellous columns was completely demolished on
,11four sides.'!" If the late chronicle of Leo Grammaticus is to be
:rusted, construction of the new Justinianic cathedral began
ittle more than a month later, on 23 February 532."8 It was
iedicated on 27 December 537, '" but the church was not neces-
.arily complete when the ceremony took place.
intended vertical position. )20 As a result, the dome-which was
daringly low, having a curvature similar to that of the penden-
tivesl2l-turned out to be elliptical in plan, with a greater span 0102030-40
from north to south than from east to west. Earthquakes on 16
April, [9 October, and '4-23 December 55T exploited this
weakness, and cracked the dome. Isaurians were undertaking
repairs whej.l disaster struck on 7 May 558: the eastern arch
and eastern semi-dome collapsed, together with much of the
dome."! Reconstruction work was overseen by Isidore the
Younger, nephew of the original engineer. What remained of
the dome was demolished, and the upper parts of the north and
south arches were widened, presumably to make their faces ver-
tical, and to make the central bay approximate more closely to a
square.'" A new dome, which rose about 6 m. higher than the
original.':" was constructed, and the church was reconsecrated
on 24 December 562.125The only other work documented in
the period with which we are concerned is a remodelling of
the south-west corner of the building in connection with the
construction of the Patriarchal Palace by Patriarch John III
Scholasticus (565-77}.126
Most of the stamped bricks recorded in Mamboury's notes
come from the substructures of the destroyed J ustinianic atrium
excavated by Schneider in 1935.'" On the other hand, the
stamped bricks recorded in van Nice's dossier in Dumbarton
Oaks come from the fabric of the church itself. Many of these
are associated with repairs made to the flooring in the Turkish
period, but a few found in scaffold holes in various parts of the
structure appear to be securely associated with original
jusrinianic work."! .' /~"""
' ..
....
Sample
Very few of the stamps can certainly be said to come from parts
of the original structure. We may retain in the sample: those
found during the demolirion of the superstructure of the
[ustinianic atrium in 1873 (223.1b, 337.Id, 674.IP, 203.3a,
574.1.,665.6., 666.IZ, 667.Iii, 676.6d, 8S0.Id, 831.IC, 932.13,
967.2., 969.IP, I023.IC, II24.I., I2p.lb, 1342.7a) (I281.Ib is
excluded on the ground of its indiction); those found in the wall
in Caferiye Sokag; in 1931 (337.33, 440.Ia, 663.1., 674.It, rw,
120 See pp. 36-7.

121 Mainstone, Hagia Sophia, l09-I2.j Taylor, 'First Dome'; Mainsrone, FIG. 6. Plan of Hagia Sophia, the Baths of Zeuxippos, and nearby structures.
The new church was crowned by a brick dome supported on
<Letter'; Taylor, <Letter'.
:our huge arches springiag from massive piers. The eastern arch, m The major sources concerning the collapse and reconstruction are listed by Key:
vhich had been inadequately supported during its construction, Mango, <Fabric', 5l-}: MalaJas, Chronicle, 18.128 (ed. Thurn 410), 18.14} (ed. Hagia Sophia: T Porch at the east end of Hagia Sophia. T Narthex.
iad pushed the north and south arches outwards from their Thurn 429); Agathias, Histories, S.9.1-4; Anecdote Cramer ii, 114; Paul the A Ruins in front of the west doors of Hagia J Washing fountains. U Horologion.
Silentiary lOO-lj Theophanes, Chronicle, AM 60j I; Cedrenus, i. 676-7; Zonaras, K Baptistery. V Theodosian facade.
Sophia, demolished in November 1873.
116 Chrcnicon Paschale, 621-2. Malalas, Chronicle, I8.7I (ed. Thurn 396) Epitome ill, 170-1.
III Mainstone, Hagia.Sophia, 21j.
B Wall with niches in Caferiye Soka~. L North-west ramp.
wrongly mentions these buiJdings on I} January (when only the Praetorium of
124 Mainsrone, Hagia Sophia, 216-17.
C Stuccoed pillar. M North-west buttress. Baths of Zeuxippos:
:he City Prefect burned). Tbeophanes, Chronicle, AM 6024 apparently links the
Iestruction of Hagia Sophia with the fire of Friday, 16 January: see Bardill, m Malalas, Chronicle, 18.143 (ed. Thurn 429); Anecdota Cramerii, 114.26-27; D Wall with hollow pillar-like block. N North-east ramp. a Building 1-

Lausus', 84. Note also Procopius, Buildings, 1.1.20-2, Wars, 1.24.9. Cbronicon Paschale, 687; Theophanes, Chronicle, A.\.{ 605 j. E Collapsed barrel-vault of the substructures. o North-east buttress. Building 2.

117 Cbroniam Pascbale, 622. 124 John of Ephesus, Church History, }.1.3 I; Mango, 'Fabric', B. F Remains of walls behind the Director's office. P South-west ramp. c Structures recorded by Mum boury and
m Leo Grammacicus, Cbronographia, [26. m Schneider, \Vestho/,22-8. G Alley between the medrcse and the imaret of Q South-west buttress. \Viegand in 1934·
m Marcellinus, Chronicle, AD 537. Theophanes, Chronicle, AM 60}0 (= AD In Note that the illustrations in Bobcev, 'Monogrammi', 67, fig. 4 show not Ayasofya Camii. R South-east buttress. Spiral stair recorded by Mamboury in 1934·
;)7/8). a
'Sceaux monogrammes sur briques', as alleged, but masons' marks. H Court between the baptistery and the church. S Exonarchcx. e Structures recorded by Mamboury in 1952·
----------------------------------- -------- -~--- -----------------------------~-------------------------------------------------~----.

66 PART II: CHRONOLOGY

696.] a, 822.1b, 965.Ib, 969.", 1365.Ia); those discovered during
Schneider's excavation of '935 (228.Ia, 337.1C, 355.1a, 603.Ia,
606.Ia, 666.", 4z, ff, ii, 5a, 667.ld, h, 668.Ib, e, 674.1b, j, 675.Ia,
676·3h, 5c, 690.1a, 779.Ia, 817.If, h, k, 92T.Ia, 934.1a, 966.la,
967.rg, k, 0, r, 969.Ia, b, I, 97I.Ib, 1253.la, 1267.la, 1272.Ie,
1342.3d, 1677.Ia); and those found in pudog holes (666.4bb,
667·IX, 674·IU, 1342.3C, '35o.lb, 1396.Id). The remainder
were found loose or are likely to relate to repairs, and have been
omitted from the sample.
Locations (Fig. 6)
Ruins in front of the west doors of Hagia Sophia, demolished
November 1873: 223.1b, 337.Id, 674.IP, 203.3a, 574.Ia, 665.6a,
666.IZ, 667.Iii, 676.6d, 880.Id, 83'.IC, 932.Ia, 967.20, 969.IP,
1023.IC, II24 -r a, I252.Ib, I28I.Ib, I342.7a:
In November 1873, some Byzantine ruins in front of the west
doors of Hagia Sophia were demolished." Although Sorlin-
Dorigny, who published the brickstamps that were dis-
covered, adopted Dethier's identification of the structures as
the remains of a gallery linking Hagia Sophia with Hagia
Eirene,'?? no such gallery is known to have existed. Since the
last remains of the Justinianic atrium (two columns and two
piers of the colonnade of the south wing, Fig. 6 A) are known
to have been demolished in the early I 870S,"I it is practically
certain that Sorlin-Dorigny recovered the bricks from them.
These structures appear in various drawings made by Texier
(in 1833-35),''' Fossati (in 1847-49),'" Hubsch (in 1862),134
Walker (in 1873, after the demolition)," and in a small photo-
graph published by WulffD6
Wall with niches in Caferiye Sokagi: 337.3a, 440.Ia,
674.lt, rw, 696.Ia, 822.Ib, 965.Ib, 969.11, '365.Ia:
During the laying of drains in Caferiye Sokag1 in 1931, a wall
containing five niches was discovered, aligned with the west
wall of Hagia Sophia (Fig. 6 B).137Mamboury records finding
the stamped bricks on 26 December '93 T.
r ustinianic atrium:
Schneider's excavations in 1935 revealed parts of the sub-
structures tbat once supported the atrium in front of the west
129 Three bricks from this demolition were sent by Sorlin-Dorigny to the
Musee des Antiquites Nationales, Sainr-Germain-en-Laye, Paris, France in 1874
[inv. 21 103). . light when drains were laid in 1934 and '9 p. The earlier excava-
HO Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Letter', 129; Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 92.
1)1 Wulli,Kumt,ii.3S0 .•
m Charles Texier album I, sheet 7 in the Drawings Collection of the Royal
Institute of British Architects (as noted by Mango, 'Consranrinopolitana',
17)·
m Reproduced in Mathcws, Early Cburcbes, pl. 73. . north, with cupola to the right and, to the left, a walled-up arch, appears in
IJt Reproduced in Strobe, Eingangsseite, 27 (where 'Nordhalle' appears in
error), pls. 24-5.
us Drawings by Mary Walker in the Van Millingen Collection, Burrows
Library of Byzantine and Modern Greek, King's College, University of London
[reproduced in Mathews, Survey, 279, figs. 31-[ 8, 31-19).
us Wulff,Kunst, ii. 38o, pl. )27.
1)7 Mamboury, 'Fouilles 1', 252. See Mamboury's plan in Schneider, Byzanz,
!,11O or Miiller-Wiener, Bildlexileon, 90.
DATED SITES
entrance of the church. D' The numerous stamped bricks
recovered from the debris of these foundations, which were South-west corner (washing fountains, Fig. 6 J): Exterior hole in east wall (of south-west room?), loose
sketched by Mamboury, can certainly be ascribed to the main East wall above washing [ountains, brick built into wall and fragments: 56I.Ia, 771.Ib.
period of the church's construction in 5 )2-37. visible in roof of hole of former wooden tie: 667.Ix.Loose Exonarthex (Fig. 6 S), repairs to paving beside second door-from
Details of findspors are given as: stuccoed pillar (I253.Ia) brick on vault exposed when roof of washing fountains was north leading to narthex:
(located at the northern end of a wall joining at a right angle to removed: 666·4u, 674.IX, 8'7.1d.
3.1a, 4.Ia, 8.Ib (opposite south jamb of door), 666.4W,. ,6a,
the north wall of the atrium, Fig. 6 C);139 wall with hollow
Floor of tunnel outside west window. Brick possibly inserted in 82I.lg (opposite north jamb of door)
pillar-like block (676.5c) (to the north of the north wall of the
Turkish period: 893.3".
Justinianic atrium, Fig. 6 D);14°collapsed barrel vault of the Narthex (Fig. 6 T), repairs to paving beside threshold of central
substructures (228.Ia, 337.IC, 603.Ia, 674.Ib, j, 676.3h, North-west pendentive, stair opening. Loose fragment: 128.Ia. door leading to exonarthex: .
92I.Ia, 969.Ib, 97I.Ib, 1272.Ie, 1677.Ia) (from debris asso-
North tympanum, east hole at foot of central recessed panel: II.Ia, 618.2a, 666.4C, y, 1298.1a
ciated with the barrel vault of the substructures of the west
666.4bb. Horologion (Fig. 6 U): 1689.1. (lower part of window on the
wing of the atrium, Fig. 6 E);I" constructions of the north-
North gallery, east bay, east window, external patch in south south-west side), 676.6b, 817.Ij.
west court (3 55.Ia, 606.]a, 666.Ii, 4z, ff, ii, 5a, 667.Id, 668.Ie,
675.1., 817.If, k, 966.1a, 967.Ig, k, 0, r, 969.Ia, I, '342.3d); end of sill: 667.rr.
Indictions
constructions of the north-west court, large surrounding wall
Atrium, south wing, space below gallery: 819.Ih. Very few of the bricks tamps from Hagia Sophia carry dates. The
of Hagia Sophia (667.Ih, 668.Ib, 690. la, 779.Ia, 8I7.Ih,
stamps selected for the sample have indictions clustering
934.1a, 1267·Ia). Baptistery (Fig. 6 K), under sarcophagus: 666.40.
between eleven and thirteen (lA'-ITj: 932.1., 965.1b, 12p.lb
Remains of walls behind the Director's office: 666. If, 4j, 667.It, North-west ramp (Fig.6 L): carry lA'; 228.Ia, 696.Ia carry IB'; and 606.1a and 1253.1. carry
Ill, 668.Id, 674.1C, 676.Ia, j c, 692.Ia, 967.1C, II34.Ib: Hole in wall of second landing below the north gallery: Il", The indictions on II24.ra and r023.IC are uncertain, and
In '939, when the office for the Director of the Hagia Sophia 1350.Ib. 128I.Ib (from the demolitions in 1873) carries Z', which may
Museum was built close to the baptistery, two short sections indicate that the brick so marked was old stock when used. Of
North-west buttress (Fig. 6 M):
of wall were discovered, between which was a tiny apse of the the excluded stamps, those with indictions generally do not fall
Loose brick at gallery roof level: 203.2d, e, 666.14d, 967.Ii,
fourteenth or fifteenth century (Fig. 6 F). Mamboury's notes within the IA'-If' cluster: r r r a.ra (A'), 979.1a, 1"279.1. (B),
968.Ib, h. Vertical face of hole for-timber in east jamb of open-
relating to the discovery have been published by Mango.!? 1.1., 166.Ia, 56I.Ia, 77I.Ib, 893.3a, 981.1a (f), 533.1. (E), 3.1.
ing into upper room above gallery roof: 967.1i.
Mamboury recorded the stamped bricks on 4 December (Z), 4.1a (Z), 1284.1. (Z), 8.Ib (H'), 608.13(1' (?)), 270.1a(lf).
'939· North-east ramp (Fig. 6 N):
Turkish wall in alley leading from north vestibule: 205.Ia, Paving probably laid in Turkish period: 270.Ia, 979.Ia,
7. THE BATHS OF ZEUXIPPOS
675·50, III4·Ia, '342·9a: 1279.1 a,
663.Ia,
In '94 I, when the annexes to the north of the church were North-east buttress (Fig. 6 0): Most of the structures that appear to relate to the Baths of
demolished, four stamped bricks were discovered by Sami Gallery roof, passage through west wall: 981.1a. In the Zeuxippos were excavated in '927 and 1928 under the direction
Boyar. In Mamboury's notes, dated 29 April '941, the bricks threshold of the entrance towards the west of the north-east of S. Casson, with the assistance of D. Talbot Rice and others;
are said to have been found in the Turkish wall of the alley that buttress: 166.Ia. Brick spanning narrow slit at second landing just to the east of the Hippodrome and to the north-east of the
led from the church's north vestibule to Soguk Cesme Sokagi, above gallery roof: 1396.Id. Brick spanning upper opening in tomb of Ahmet I (Fig. 7). The excavated structures included a
passing between the medrese and the imaret of Ayasofya north wall of room at gallery roof: '342.3e. circular chamber, called Building I, and, to the east of it, a semi-
Camii (Fig. 6 G ).141 circular apse with adjoining rooms, called Building 2 (Figs. 6
South-west ramp (Fig. 6 P):
Little court between the baptistery and Hagia Sophia: 206.Ia: a-b, 7).144Further walls and a pier of another circular chamber
South landing, second below gallery: 229.1a. found to the south of the apse, were published by Mamboury
In '942-43, the court between the baptistery and the church
South-west buttress (Fig. 6 Q): and Wiegand in 1934 (Fig. 6 C).14.'To the north of the 1927-28
was restored (Fig. 6 H). Mamboury recorded one stamped
excavations, some apparently related structures were brought to
brick on 3 November '942. Fill of chapel: 604.Ia. Top of stair in vaulted room at top of
well: I342.3f.
Ruins by the porch at the east end of Hagia Sophia (Fig. 6 I): tion revealed a spiral stair (Fig. 6 d),146 and the later work
674·IV, 969·Ig, 1284.1 a. South-east buttress (Fig. 6 R): brought to light two, possibly three, apsidal structures, a barrel-
317 n. lJ8 See Schneider, Wcsthof, 22-30. Lying around in the approaches to, or room of, the buttress: vaulted water conduit (brick dimensions: 370 x 380 x 45 rnm.),
ns For plans, see Schneider, We$thof, pIs. 1-2. The pillar, viewed from the 1.1a, 8I7.In, 969.1C. Upper room, loose: 6°5.1., 674.Id, and the wall of a cistern (Fig. 6 e).147
II 58.Ia. In putlog hole in east wall, at level 2: 674.Ill. Third The excavations in 1928 yielded three large statue-bases, two
Mathews (Early Churches, pl. 75) and Mainstone (Hagia Sophia, 28, pl. 23). Since
the projecting wall is linked to the atrium wall, it is most probably [ustinianic. window sill below the top sill, work of either Sinan or the of which, identical in form, were inscribed with the names of
uo As indicated on Schneider, \YIeHhof, pl. 1, the wall incorporating this Fossari brothers: 203.2g, 969.Ih, IJ63.Ia. Second window sill Aeschines and Hecuba.!" In addition, a fragment of the head of
hollow pillar was probably linked to the wall that projects at right angles to the
surviving section of the north wall of the atrium.
below the top sill: 817.111. Others: 203.2h, 666.4a., 8'7.Im,
IH Casson et ai., Hippodrome I; Casson and Talboc Rice, Hippodrome Il.
HI Schneider, Westhof, 24-6. IU Mango, Brazen House, 43. 970.Ia. HS Mamboury and Wiegand, Kaiserpaliiste, 45:"'7,area Ea.pls. xcv, CH.
HJ For the alley, see Mamboury's plan in Schneider, Byzanz, pl. 10 or Muller- H6 Mamboury, 'Nouvel elemecr'.
Wiener, Bildlexikon, 90. South-west room: 147 Mamboury inMango, Brazen House, 184-8.
North wall, gallery roof, hole in exterior wall: 561.] a. Ha Casson and Talboc Rice,Hippodrome H, 18-21, figs. 8-12 (stante bases).
---------------------------- --------------- ----- ----------------------------------------------------------~--~~-~~------~-------,,--------

68 PARTII: CHRONOLOGY DATED SITES

FIG. 7. Plan of the excavated structures believed to belong to
the Baths of Zeuxippos.
an early Greek statue of Pentelic marble was found amongst the
debris in Room I of Building 2. H9 Christodorus of Coptus
describes eighty antique statues that stood in the gymnasium of
the Baths of Zeuxippos in the reign of Anastasius; and statues of
Aeschines and Hecuba are, in fact, mentioned among them. ISO
Although the statue-bases were not found in situ, it seems likely
that Building 2 is to be identified as a part of the gymnasium of
under [usrioian.!" Justinian'S baths presumably survived,
more or less intact, until the facility fell out of use in the eighth
century.!"
During the first season of excavation in 1927, three pillars of
brick with occasional courses of stone were found.':" Two of
these had curved sides, and a third pier of similar plan and con-,
structionwas discovered in r928. The circular chamber to which
they belonged had an internal diameter of 1l.5 m.158 It was
reported that the construction technique (is characterized by a
number of courses of brick, after which comes a single stone
course, usually of large blocks about I m. long and 40 cm. in
thickness. Courses of brick, about fifteen in number, occur
again before the next stone.?" At first it was assumed that the
structures were to be dated to the Roman period, and that the
ash layer found at the foot of the piers had been formed in
the fire of 532.160But in the later report such an early date was
rejected since this would have meant that no trace of the sub-
sequent justinianic reconstruction had survived:
On technical grounds it is still hard to date this type of work exactly, but
it is certainly not earlier than Justinian or later than the ninth
The chief evidence provided here by excavation is that of the coins,
which were profusely scattered outside the main east wall, in the lower
levels. These would most narurally have been dropped there when the
building was in constant use, or shortly after it had been destroyed,
They belong mostly to the eighth, ninth, and tenth centuries."!
In fact, pure brickwork with occasional courses of stone is a
technique that may also be observed at St Polyeuktos, SS Sergius
and Bacchus, and in the justinianic Hagia Sophia.l62It certainly
belongs to the sixth century, and may here be safely associated
with the reconstruction after the fire of 532,163
The majority of the excavated structures had been built using
this distinctive Justinianic masonry style.l" In particular, the
apse in Building 2 was 'built of bricks of the usual Byzantine
type, 35 cm. square, 'reinforced by occasional layers of large
excavators realized in the report on the second season of work in
1928) a [ustinianic date for these structures was indicated by the
coin finds:
The work of the square bricks which characterizes
belong to a period of reconstruction which closely
The evidence of coins is useful here, for the building
majority of those found in the filling. They date from the sixth to the
eleventh centuries, those of the ninth being most plentiful.
may conclude that this work belongs in the main to the sixth
The excavations also revealed some evidence for pre-Justinianic
structures on the site. The southern part of the apse in Build-
ing 2 formed the north wall of an adjacent room (Room I).
This north wall, and the room's west wall stood upon earlier
masonry composed of small bricks (measuring 310 x 175 x 25
mm.) mixed with small squared stones (PI. Xl)l" It may be
suggested, in the light of the textual evidence, that this phase is to
be ascribed to the Constantinian period.
In 1927, a pier of ashlar blocks was found to the west of
Building 1.168An ashlar wall found to the south-east of the same
century. building in 1928 perhaps belonged to the same period.!" There
appears to have been no clear indication of the relationship
between these structures and the Justinianic phases. Although
the excavators were inclined to attribute this style to the Roman
period,"? it may perhaps be Constantinian.
Structural evidence of post-Justinianic phases was also
revealed. Three ashlar piers standing upon a platform of rough
stones built against the apse of Building 2 must post-date.the
Justinianic phase, although their date is uncertain and they may
have been built using material from much earlier. structures on
the site."! Buttresses along the east wall of Building I showed an
166 Casson and Talbot Ricc, Hippodrome U, 15.
167 Casson and Talbot Rice, Hippodrome II, 12.. figs. 5,7.
IU Casson et al., Hippodrome I, 20, fig, 3 I.
'.
alternation of five courses of brick with five of stone) and were
tentatively ascribed to a ninth- or tenth-century restoration. In
the walls must Sample
followed the fire.
must antedate the Precise numbers of the different types of bricks tamp discovered
are not recorded) but we are informed in a footnote to the
Thus one report on the 1928 excavations that, 'The brick-stamps in the
cenrury.!" walls mostly bear the inscriptions Nicephoros, Photinou, or
Diomedou.?? This apparently refers to stamp numbers
roca.ra, 1313.Ia, 315.Ia. stamp 315.Ia, however, like 313.Ia
found by Mamboury, is not justinianic, but belongs to the reign
of the emperor Maurice (582-602).t" This suggests that a repair
was undertaken in the baths sometime after 5 82. The indictions
that occur on a few of the stamps do not form any cle~r cluster,
which is a further indication that the material found does not all
relate to a single construction phase (64.Ia (IB), Ip,Ia (B),
313-'a (E), 607.ra (I), 1229.I~ (H), 1269.Ia (H'), 1422.Ia (lE),
1423.1a (lE)).
The findspots of very few bricks are known, so it is generally
not clear whether the bricks were found loose or in situ, or if
they came from Justinianic masonry or from later repairs. Only
six stamps are recorded as coming from walls known to be
Justinianic: 698.1a, ror r.ra, I05I.Ia, II23·Ia, 1342.5£, 1434.Ia
(all from the apse of Building 2). For the purposes of this study,
it must be assumed that the majority of the bricks from the site
relate to the Justinianic strucrures, but we must bear in mind that
there is no doubt that this sample is contaminated.!" All the
stamps except 313.la and 3I5.la are, therefore, included in the
sample.
l72 Casson and Talbot Rice, Hippodrome II, 7, 9 (where early Turkish work is
also noted).
173 Casson and Talbot Rice, Hippodrome II, 15 n. I.
17~ See above p. 47.

the Zeuxippos complex!" The various circular structures found 1~~ Casson and Talbot Rice, Hippodrome 11, 7-8. 175 Talbot Rice's original notes relating to the Hippodrome excavations have
ashlar blocks recurring every 14 or 15 courses' (PI. XI).I" As the 170 Casson and Talbot Rice, Hippodrome 11, 7-8. been found neither in the Courtauld Institute (London) nor in the Barber.
in the area would certainly have been appropriate in a bathing 171 Casson and Talbot Rice, Hippodrome 1I, IO. Institute (Birmingham University).
establishment. lS5 Procopius, Wan, 1.24.9. Procopius, Buildings, LIO.).
Several sources ascribe the foundation of the Baths of 156 Sec Mango, 'Daily Life', )40; Mango, Brazen HOMe, 37ff.
Zeuxippos to the Emperor Septimius Severus (193-2 I I ).151This 1~7 Casson et al., Hippodrome I, 20, fig. 30.
158 Casson et al., Hippodrome J, 21. Casson and Talbor Rice, Hippodrome.II, 6.
information, coming from sources no earlier than the sixth 159 Casson and Talbot Rice, Hippodrome 11, 6.
century, is suspect, since the baths were not inaugurated until I I 160 Casson et al., Hippodrome I, 22..Casson and TalbotRice,Hippodrome 11, 9.
161 Casson and Talbot Rice,Hippodrome II, 9. Despite the denial in the text, a
May 330, under Constantine.P' Furthermore, the coins found to
table in the same report, p. 17, assigns the burning to the Nika riots.
the south and west af Building I provided no evidence for 1(,2 See above pp. 52-3.

activity on the site earlier than the period 330-491.154 The baths 16J Two pieces of a relief of Proconnesian marble showing anereid and dolphin
were destroyed in the Nika riots of 532, and reconstructed clearly came from the justinianic phase, since they were discovered in a half-
metre-thick layer of decomposed brick, which had come from the upper part of
the piers in Building I. On stylistic grounds. the sculpture can be dated to the
149 Casson and Talbot Rice, Hippodrome 1I, 14, 41-2, figs. 48-9. mid-second to early third century, and this originally encouraged the excavators
I~O Palatine Anthology, book 2. On the collection of statuary, see Cuberti to date the structures themselves to the Severan period. The frieze appears, how-
Bassetr, 'Zeuxippos'. ever, to have been cut into sections, which were then reused for some unknown
151 Casson and Talboc Rice, Hippodrome 11, 14-17 and earlier Casson et al., purpose in thejustinianic phase. See Casson et ai., Hippodrome I, 21-2., 27-8, fig.
Hippodrome I, 22. Mango, Brazen House, 57-8. 36 and Casson and Talbor Rice, Hippodrome 11, 42., fig. 50B. Other pieces of
m Malalas, Chronicle, 12.20 (ed. Thurn 221). Cbronicon Paschale, 494-5. classical sculpture were found, including a cornice fragment of the late first or
Lydus, De Magistnuibus, 3.70. See Mango, Developpement, 19 n. 36. early second century: Cassou and Talbot Rice, Hippodrome Il, 42-3, fig. soA.
\SJ Malalas, Chronicle, 13.8 (ed. Thurn 24-6).Cbronicon Poschale, 52.9-30. 1&4 CaSSOlland T albot Rice, Hippodrome Il, 6 and plan.
15~ Cusson et al., Hippodrome I, 48-50, Class I in trenches V and Va. 165 Casson and Talbor Rice, Hippodrome 11, IO, figs 5-6.

CHAPTER
Undated sites
I. BALABAN AGA MESciDi
Whilst still intact, the Balaban Aga Mescidi had been seen by
Paspares' and van Millingen.' But when Gurlitt described it in
his 1907 publication it was already lacking its vault,' and in I9"
it was a victim of the fire that swept through the district.' In
1930, the mosque was due to be destroyed to make way for the
construction of Harikzadeler Sokai';>. Unfortunately, the
museum authorities were not informed until entrepreneurs had
purchased the materials and razed the structure to its founda-
tions. Before the remaios of the mosque were completely
destroyed, however, the Byzantine Institute and the Istanbul
Archaeological Museum spent three weeks excavating the sub-
structure in April and May of 1930.
I reproduce here a plan and elevations of the Balaban Aga
Mescidi that were made by Mamboury in June 1916 (PI. XII). In
plan, the building had a circular exterior (diameter 10.50 m.),
and a hexagonal interior (with sides 3.50 m.long). Each side of
the hexagon contained a rectangular niche about 2-7 m. wide.
These niches were 1.25 rn. deep, except for the western one,
which was 1.82 m. deep and which opened on to the exterior
through a door 1.57 m. wide. The other niches contained
windows 1.60 m. wide, which Gurlitt believed not to be
original." The projectiog piers between the niches preserved the
corners of the hexagon as re-entrants. These piers rose to a
height of about 2.15 m., and carried six arches supporting a
vault. At the springing of the arches was a single course of stone
that penetrated the piers from the front to the back of the
niches, but which did not pass right through the shell of the
structure. Other than this siogle string course, the super-
structure was almost entirely of brick, as can be seen from a
photograph showing the roofless mosque after the fire of
19II, and from Mamboury's elevations' Only the lowest
parts of the wails, to a height of about I m., were built of stone
blocks, which were regularly cut and set in a reddish gravelly
I Paspates, Byzantinai Meleta;" 385.
2 Vu Millingen, Churches, 265-7. pl, 55 (interior view).
J Gurlitt, Baukunst, i. 42.
, Schneider, 'Brande', 401.
S Gurlin, Baukztnst. i. 42.
6 Mamboury, 'Pouilles 1', 267 (,toute en briques'). Schneider (Byzanz, 54)
incorrectly states 'Obcrbau aus Hausrcinen mit Itinfbandrigen Ziegeldurchschuss',
and is followed by Miiller-Wiener (Bildlexikon, 98: 'Oberbau in Wcrkstein mic
Ziegeldurcbschuii'), whose photograph blatcntly contradicts him (98, fig. 78).
UNDATED
the mausoleum of Helena on the Via Labicana ail possess
circular interiors with seven recesses, alternately rectangular
7 and curved in plan.!6The mausoleum of Constantine's daughter,
Constantina, on the Via Nomentana (C.3P-52) is mucb more
sophisticated, containing numerous niches, again alternating
between rectangular and circular, and also an internal colon-
nade." In Thessaloniki, the Rotunda, which was perhaps
originally intended as the mausoleum of Galerius (293-31 I), has
a circular exterior and seven large, rectangular, barrel-vaulted
niches." A fourth-century Constantinopolitan parallel for the
Balaban Aga Mescidi, is to be found in descriptions of the
mortar.' Holes discovered in the interior walls indicated that lost mausoleum of Constantine (307-37)," which was later
marble revetment had once been attached. Indeed, fragments incorporated into Constantius II's church of the Holy
of coloured marble veneer were discovered, in addition to Apostles" This was a rotunda with seven radiating niches for
moulded sections of skirting.' the burials, and an entrance on the eighth side."
The foundations excavated in 1930 were up to 3 m. deep and Miifid compared the plan of the Balaban Aga Mescidi with
built of both large and small blocks of stone. They were wider that of the hypogeum discovered by Ebersolt and Macridy in
than the walls above them, and contained six irregular niches, Bakirkoy (the ancient Hebdomon), whicb was assigned by them
which broadly corresponded to those of the building above. A to the fifth century." This tomb had a circular exterior (15·35 m.
burial was found in each of them, which suggests that the struc- in diameter) and a square interior with four deep rectangular
ture was originally designed as a mausoleum' The foundation niches projecting from each side of the square. The four piers
walls of three of the niches possessed openings that must between the niches preserved the angles of the square interior as
originally have connected with a subterranean channel, thereby re-entrants. A small rectangular chamber for the reception of a
ensuring that the crypt was well ventilated and dry." sarcophagus was attached to either side of each niche.
In the fourteenth century, a rectangular chamber covered by Belting made a comparison between the Balaban Aga Mescidi
a dome with a central oculus was sunk into the middle of the and two of the four mausolea that were added to the hexagonal
substructure.'! The large number of bones found within the hall of the Palace of Antiochus after its conversion into the
chamber suggested to Miifid, who published the excavation, church of St Euphernia." Like the Balaban Aga Mescidi, the two
that it was an ossuary in which the bones from the niches hid mausolea concerned (M II and M m) had six rectangular niches,
been deposited so that new burials could be made in those but unlike it, the exteriors were dodecagonal, and the projecting
niches." A slab covering one of the new graves was inscribed piers between the niches did not preserve the angles of the
with the date 134 5." It was presumably at the same time that the internal hexagon as re-entrants, but were wedge-shaped in plan
wails of the superstructure, by now stripped of their marble (Fig. 5). The two other mausolea attached to the hexagon of
revetrnent, were covered with stucco and painted. '" Antiochus' palace (M I and M IV) had octagonal exteriors, and
After the Turkish conquest, the building was converted into a interiors similar to that of the hypogeum in the Hebdomon
mosque. A minaret was erected between the west and south- (although lacking the side-chambers on either side of each
west niches, and its staircase was put in the west niche, so th~ niche). These four mausolea were presumably attached to the
the entrance had to be moved; it was put in the north-west niche. hexagon either when the relics of St Euphemia were brought
The piers between the niches were altered-to conceal the angles from Chalcedon to Constantinople in 680 or when they were
of the hexagon." recovered from Lemnos in 796.24 As Naumann and Belting
The design of the mausoleum is not itself sufficiently distinc-
tive to allow a close date to be ascribed to the structure. Several 16 See Ward-Perkins, Architecture, 424.
mausolea with circular exteriors, and with niches contained 17 See Ward-Perkins.Architect'~re, 431.
n See Ward-Perkins, Architecture, 451-4.
within the thickness of the walls were constructed io early
It As observed by Koethe, 'Konsrantins-Mausoleum', 191.
fourth-century Rome. Tbe tomb of Maxentius on the Via Appia :!(IMango, 'Consrantine's Mausoleum', has argued in detail that Constantine built
only a circular mausoleum and that the basilica was built by Ccastanrius II (as
(307-12), the Tor de' Schiavi (c.3°O) on the Via Praenestina, and
earlier suggested by Koethe, 'Konstantins-Mausoleum', and Grierson, 'Tombs and
7 Miifid, 'Balaban', 2.13and 6g. 9. Obirs', 5). However, Leeb, 'Kaiserbildes', 7-14 and Konuantin, 9)-103 argucs that'
• Mii6d, 'Balaban', 214 and 6g. 5. Constancine built a cruciform church. which served also as his mausoleum .
9 Mii6d., 'Balaban', 213-14. Mordtmann, Esqeisse, 70 had suggested identifying 11 Gricrson, Tombs and Obies', 21--9. Mango, 'Consranrinc'sMausoleum', 54-8.
the structure with the church of St Mary of the Kourator (on which, see below), a 21 Mii6d, 'Balaban', 21.1-2, figs. 14-15. Ebersolt and Macridy, 'Monuments',
view questioned by van Millingen (Chtlrches, 265), who suggested that it may have 389-93.
been the library of a monastic establishment. 2J Naumann and Belting, Eupbemia-Kircbe, 52-).
24 For their construction at the time of the arrival of the relics, see Naumann and
1(1 Miifid, 'Balaban', 214. 11 Miifid, 'Bnlaban', 214-18.
Belting, Ewpbemia-Kircbe, 53. For the date of the arrival of the relics, see Berger,
12 Miifid, 'Balabcn', 217. 1) Mufid, 'Balaban', 218, 222, 2~9
14 Miifid, 'Balaban', Zl8, 222-5. 15 Mufid, 'Balaban', 218. 'Translation' and Mango, 'Euphemin', 85-6.
SITES 71
observe, the mausolea were built on a plan that by then had a
very long history."
Buildings on a plan similar to that of the Balaban Aga Mescidi
are therefore known from the beginning of the fourth to the late
seventh or late eighth century, so that the plan bas little chrono-
logical significance. Mufid dated the original construction of the
Balaban Aga Mescidi to the fifth or sixth century on the basis of
the stonework, whicb resembled that io the lower parts of the
walls of the hypogeum at Bakirkoy." The masonry of the super-
structure may, however, be more instructive. Schneider's fifth-
century date was perhaps based on his mistaken belief that the
walls of the superstructure had been built of alternating bands of
brick and stone." As I have pointed out above, however, the
superstructure was, in fact, of pure brickwork. Our first dated
exampleofthat technique occurs in the basilica of the Theotokos
io the Chalkoprateia, which is probably to be ascribed to Verina
(457-84).28 Pure brick continued to beused in the first half of the
sixth century, although with the addition of occasional courses
of greenhone. The structural evidence might therefore be taken
to suggest a date in the second half of the fifth century.
Unfortunately the moulded skirting does not appear to provide
any firm clues regarding the date of the original structure."
The mausoleum, which cannot be identified with any of those
mentioned in the Catologus Sepulcbrorurn.ci the Necrologium
Imperatorum, presumably belonged to a wealthy family." It is
possible that it was associated with a nearby church, and one
fifth-century candidate in this area is the Theotokos of the
Kourator. This church is said by the Patria to have been built in
the time ofVerina (457-84), wife of Leo I, by the Kourator, who
designed it in the image of the tomb of Christ inJ erusalem." The
relics of St Lazarus and his sisters were removed from there by
Leo when the monastery of St Lazarus was established." In the
topographical recension of the Patria, the church is placed after
the Forum Tauri and the Theotokos of the Diakonissa, but
before the Philadelphion." The Theotokos of the Diakonissa
has been located on the site of the University buildings to the
west of the excavated arch in rhe Forum Tauri," and the
Philadelphion was at the bifurcation of the Mese, just to
the north of the Myrelaion." Thus the Theorokos of the
Kourator was probably very close to the Balaban Aga Mescidi,
although perhaps somewhat nearer than the latter to the Mese."
It is, therefore, not impossible that the Balaban Aga Mescidi was
somehow associated with the church of the Kourator.
2' Naumann and Belting, Eephemia-Kircbe, 53. 16 Miifid, 'Balaban', 222.
v Schneider, Byzanz, 54. n See p. p..
29 The base moulding in the narthex of-St john of Stoudios, for instance, is quite
different. See Mamews,Survey, 158, no. 15-26.
)0 Schneider, Byzanz, 54. For the texts listing imperial mausolea in Constan-
tinople, see Gricrson, 'Tombs and Obits'.
). Patria }.IOI, ed. Preger, 250.
)2 Patria 4.33 (G), ed. Prcger, 288-9 (G). . . .
31 Patria, ed. Pregcr, 293-4. Bcrger, Patria, 329. 347 (where la Diakomsses IS
wrongly shown to the west of la Kuratoros). J4 See pp. 131-4.
15 Mango, Deoeloppement, 28-30. Bcrgcr, Patria, }3Q-l.
J& On the Kourator, see janin, Eglises, 191-2.
 '.~
•
PART rr: CHRONOLOGY UNDATED SITES
73
The bricks recovered during the excavation were deposited in Further remains were found a little higher up the hill (on the suggested by the fact that stamps found by Paluka (l21 pal
the Istanbul Archaeological Museum, and the reference north side of Cemal Nadir Sokagi, west of its junction with and Wulzinger (194.1a, 842.1a) in the southerly complex are
"""'OFFICE
numbers recorded in the notes of Mamboury and Mango arc Hoca Kasim Kiiprii Sokagi) in the course of the construction of circular and carry the same formula as those from the structures
given in the catalogue. These numbers may be useful for identifi- an office building in 1924. The only published description of the demolished in 1924.
cation of the bricks from this site when the vast number of ruins appears to be that of Papadopoulos." He saw cross- and The complex of substructures on the south side of Cemal
stamped bricks retained in the Cukurbostan of the Archaeo- barrel-vaulted substructures with water-channels, and argued Nadir Sokagi was first published in detail by Paluka in 1895."
logical Museum is catalogued. that these must have been the hypocaust system of a bath build- He assigned the ruins to the tenth century 011 the basis of a
ing." Above these substructures were 70 ern-thick paving slabs forced and implausible interpretation of a bricks tamp that he
Sample that formed the seating for four large pillars, 12 m. apart, had discovered at the site: 8(£0)u Xo:pt[c] CCI.(tCCl.)p01J
arranged about a north-eastern axis. These pillars, he believed, 'p(mf1C1.v)ouiV(OlK'tt&VOC)tW (rz r c.ra). The stamp was dated by
No details concerning the architectural contexts of the bricks
had supported a dome." Mamboury records that he made plans him either to 939/40, under the Emperor Romanus I, or to
are known, and all but one of the indictions falls into a clear
during the demolition. He also recovered a large sample of 1029/30, under Romanus Ill. In fact, it refers not to an Emperor
cluster (IA'-r) Hence all of the stamps have been retained in
stamped bricks, many of which were circular and carried the Romanus, but reads CCI.7tOUpou(Paluka read P incorrectly
the sample, except for 883.1a, whose indiction is uncertain, but
formula 8(£0)u xO:ptc." Mamboury's description and sketch- instead of IT)." Another stamp, cruciform in shape, was
appears to be <;' or Z'. plans are preserved in the Deutsches Archaologisches Instirut, ascribed by Paluka to the Emperor Andronicus II or Ill, and
Istanbul, and a version of his plan is reproduced here (Fig. 9). On was assumed to indicate a Palaiologan repair to the structure;
Indictions
the north side of Cemal Nadir Sokagi, where the ground was but the reliability of the transcription and the interpretation are
TABLE6. Frequency of indictions on bricks from Balaban Aga excavated to a depth of 6 m. below street level, there was a 4 m.- both very doubtful (I713.1a)'7 In 1913, Wulzinger produced a
Mescidi widc barrel vault running parallel with the street for a distance of new' plan of the substrucrures and republished the stamps
about 20 m. At its east end, this vault joined with a 2 m.-wide mentioned by Paluka, repeating the same readings. He also
Indiccion Catalogue numbers and quantity of bricks Totals
corridor running at right angles. This appears to have served as a attempted to date other bricks tamps on the basis of their letter
A' 410.la (2), 1289.la (I) cistern, judging by the Turkish channels that flowed into it. styles." One example with heavy, thick script he ascribed to the
B- 159.la(l) Parallel to the 4 m.-wide vault, and separated from it by a 2 m.- eighth century," and another with regular letters was dated to
f- 593.la (2) thick wall pierced by several doors, was a system of chambers, in the Early Byzantine period 01' the tenth century." These inter-
b,- 0 the middle of which stood four massive piers. Mamboury pretations and Late Byzantine datings have been accepted
E' 0 FIG. 8. Plan of the remains in the vicinity of Cemal Nadir I observed that there was a well partly intersecting one of the uncritically both by Betsch and by Mathews and Daskalakis
( 0 Sokagl. piers and still containing water. He commented that this was Mathews ."
Z- 0
probably of Turkish origin. Above the tops of the vaults of the The only clues to dating the substructures are their orienta-
H' 0
lower storey, a course of large stone blocks 50-60 cm. high ran tion, the construction techniques employed, and style of the
e- 0
through all the walls, apparently to serve as the footing for the capitals used. The alignment of the substructures, being perpen-
r 0
piers of the upper storey. dicular to the north-east-south-west axis of the Hippodrome
IA' 1241.la (2)
According to Papadopoulos, a conduit linked these ruins and the streets that must have flanked it, has led Cyril Mango to
rn- 26.1a (3)
If' 876.la (3), b (I), II77.lb (6), II 13." (I) II with a huge complex of Byzantine remains located still further suggest that the complex was built according to. the Early
lb.- 27.ra (5), 52·lb (22), C (I), 419.ra (62), 436.1• (5), up the slope, on the south side of Cemal Nadir Sokagi, in the Byzantine street system, possibly in the fifth century." In
597." (3), 2. (I), 863.la (12), 86pb (5), C (3), area bounded by Hoca Ham SOkagl, Hakkr Tank Us SOkagl, particular, it may be noted that Cemal Nadir Sokag. is perpen-
941.1. (7), 1026.la (2), II74·lb (4),1242.13 (I), and Hanim Eli Sokagi (Fig. 8)." Papadopoulos believed that this dicular to Alaykoskii Caddesi, which apparently still follows
1276.1. (6), 1644.la (I) 140 complex constituted a cistern, and that it supplied the proposed the course of the Early Byzantine street that linked the Mese to
IE' 53.la (2),1642.1. (I) bathing establishment lower down the slope" That the groups the Chalkoprateia (Copper Market)."
of structures on either side of Cemal Nadir Sokagl were related,
~5 The street was then named Acimusluk Sokagi: Paluka, 'Ruincn'. Unlike
as was proposed by both Wulzinger and Papadopoulos," is also
Paluka, Forchheimer and Stryzygowski were unable to gain access ro the sub-
2. REMAINS ON CEMAL NADiR SOKAGI )S Papadopoulos, 'Letter', structures (Wasserbehiilur, 91 no. 24).
J9 Papadopoulos, 'Letter', 116 ('clans les substructions decouvertes, on voit des " Paluka, 'Ruincn',
coulcirs qui ne peuveot cue autre chose que l'hypocausre des bains remains et 41 Paluka, 'Ruinen'. The ascription to Andronicus is rightly rejected by Mango,
In 19", on a building site berween Asir Efendi Caddesi and
byzantins'}.Janin, CB, 2.14 classifies the remains destroyed in 1924 as a cistern. <Brick Stamps', II (but note that Paluka's reading does not show the ~C1() abbrevia-
Cemal Nadir Sokagl, ~ number of vaulted chambers on a south- <+0 Papadopoulos, 'Letter', IIj. tion as Mango suggests).
south-west-north-north-east axis were discovered. These 41 Mamboury, 'Fouillcs 1', 248. In his notes, Mamboury refers (0 the structure U WuJzingcr, 'Subsrrukcionsbauten', 318-19. Wulz.inger's plan of the substruc-
rooms were partly divided by columns and were attached to a built over the Byzantine remains as both 'Afrika Ham' (compare Mamboury, tures is reprinted in Schneider, Byzanz, fig. 45 (with text pp. 91-2) and in Miiller-
'Chrisme', 454) and 'Bakarham'. One sheet of Mamboury's brickstamp drawings Weincr. Bildlexikon.41.
perpendicular wall about 20 m. south of Asir Efendi Caddesi. relating to the site carries the date 26 March 1925- 4' Wulzinger. 'Substrukrionsbauten', 382, no. 7.
Architectural fragments, including column-shafts and impost 41 The sire is indicated by Kleiss, Plan, Pundortnummer 7. See also Miiller- 50 Wulz.inger, 'Subserukrioasbauren', 382, no. 4 (with the suggestion that the
blocks decorated with crosses were also found. Wulzinger Wicner, Bildlexikon, 41. Constantine named on the stamp might be Consrantinc VII).
4} Papadopoulos, 'Letter', lIS believed that the cistern was part of the Palace of SI Betsch, Capitol, 2.63. Mathews and Daskalakis Mathews, 'Mansions', 310. .
published a brief description of the structures and a sketch map Nicephorus Boraneiates. Mamboury, 'Fouilles 1', 248 also referred to the higher SI Mango, Deoeloppement, 71 (accepted by Berger, 'Regionen', 393-4, no, 2. with
of their location in 1913 (Fig. 8)." structures as a cistern annexed to the palace of Bctaneiates (the Cistern of Jesus). The fig·4)·
two possible locations for the palace arc discussed by Bcrger, 'Ufergcgend', 162, Sl For the discoveries in Alaykosktl Caddesi that suggest that the modern street
with fig.l. Sec also janin, CB,2So-I, 326, }6}-4. follows chc Byzantine one, see Bardill, 'Leusus', 7?-83 (tacitly accepted in Bcrgcr,
J7 Wulzingcr. 'Substrukriccsbaurcn', 376-7- FIG. 9. Plan of the remains north of Cemal Nadir Sokagi. oM Wulzinger, 'Substruktionsbauten', 377;PapadopouJos, 'Letter', 115. 'Regionen', 391 (street C, with fig. 4) and Berger, 'Streets', 164 (street C»).
-.-----.--.------.--~-.--.---------
74 PART rr: CHRONOLOGY
As Paluka observed, the lower half of the visible facade of the
substructure is built purely of bricks, about 36 cm. square by
5.5 cm. thick. Above this, the technique changes, with 3 courses
of brick alternating with 3--6 courses of ashlar, The fa~ade was
later disfigured by the insertion of doors and windows (PI.
XIII)" The construction technique on the interior is difficult to
examine, since, at the time of writing. the building serves as a
store for crates of bottled drinks. The impression is, however,
that both the walls and vaults are, like the lower part of the
facade, of pure brick, the bricks in the vaults being laid radially
with large patches of pitched work. In the south-east wall of
Room I, however, the brickwork is interrupted by a single
course of large limestone blocks (PI. XIV). Pure brickwork with
an occasional course ·of stone has been noted in sixth-century
buildings such as St Polyeuktos, Hagia Sophia, and the Baths of
Zeuxippos. ss
The capitals in the building have not been closely studied and
it is, therefore, impossible to be certain whether they were part
of the original structure or related to a later repair, and whether
they were newly carved or spolia. Two rows of six columns
divide the main hall of the substructures (Room IV) into three
aisles, each covered by a barrel vault. The west row consists of
plain columns of red granite, whilst that to the east has columns
of whitish marble with an oval moulding at the top. All of the
columns are surmounted by plain impost (basket) capitals (Pis.
XV and XVI)." Forchheimer and Strzygowski ascribed the
capitals to the Early Byzantine, but post-justinianic, period,"
whereas Wulzinger gave the terminus post quem for these .'very
flat' capitals as the end of the seventh century." Admittedly,
some of these basket capitals are rather shallow, but they are
clearly of a rype that makes its first dated appearance in
Constantinople (in highly decorated form) about 520 at St
Polyeuktos." Wulzinger believed that the difference between
the column shafts in this room indicated that they wes« spolia,
and inferred that the capitals, too, were reused.
A room at the south-west of the complex (Room IX) contains
two marble columns with Ionic impost capitals. The imposts,
which overhang the large triple-coiled volutes slightly, are plain,
the decoration being restricted to the echinus and pulvinus.
Between the volutes is a very prominent tripartite central leaf
reminiscent of egg-and-dart moulding, and the long sides of the
volutes are covered by neatly worked acanthus (PI. XVII)."
S4 The phases are also.shown clearly in Muller-Wiener, Bildlexikon, 41 6g. 15.
Paluka, 'Ruinen' ~4-5. Forchheimer and Stnygowski (Wasserbehiilcer, HI) and
Wulzinger (,Substruktionsbauten', 377) mention only the second phase of alter-
nating brick and stone. Curiously, Demangel and Mamboucy, Manganes 73 with
n. 5, compared the second phase with a similar technique in the Sea Walls, which
they ascribed to the second half of the fifth or the sixth century.
ss Sce above pp. 52-).
)(, Forchheimer and Scrzygcwski, Wasserbehiilter, 91, 222 (who observed me
capitals through the windows); Paluke, 'Ruinen', 28; Wulzinger, 'Substruktions-
bauten', 378, p]. 5 (capital from eastern colonnade), and )80, fig. 6 (bottom) for
cross-section of Room IV.
51 Forchhcimcr and Strzygowski, Wasserbehiilrer, 222.
S8 Wulzinger, 'Substruktionsbautca', 381, 59 Betsch, Capital, 244-5.
60 Paluka, 'Ruinen', 30-1. Wulzinger, 'Substruktionsbauten', 379, 38r-2and )80,
UNDATED
Wulzinger believed that these capitals were carved specifically Indictions
for the construction of the building, and the style of the acanthus
TABLE 7· Frequency of indictions on bricks from the remains
suggested to him a tenth-century date. In fact, the Ionic impost
00 Cemal Nadir Sokag;
capital, which began to appear at the very beginning of the fifth
century, was produced only in very mo-dest numbers after the
Indiction Catalogue numbers
sixth century." Examples with a plain impost block occur both
in the ~st half of the fifth century, with large projecting volutes, A' j r.ra
and in the Justinianic period (at Hagia Eirene and St John of B'
Ephesus), with a shallower block and smaller volutes beneath r- r705·ta
the block." .6: r39.ra
E'
The pure brickwork and occasional stone course in the
0;'
original phase of construction, taken together with the align-
ment of the structures, suggests a date in the later fifth or in the Z'
H'
sixth century. If it is assumed that the capitals in Rooms IV and
IX relate to the original construction and are not reused, then a
e'
I' 148.za
date in the early sixth century for the complex would seem most
IA' Sa.ra, 126.ra, I49.rb, c, 765-'a, r057.ra
likely. Given that the structures that were demolished in 1924
IB' j r.rb, 47.Ia, I Ipa, 192.ra, r aa.rb, 3 IO.Ia, 318.ra, 508.Ia,
were adjacent to this complex, were linked to it by a conduit, p8.la, 842.la, 90S.1a, 949.2a, roeo.ra, 11 I2.IC, aa,
were on a similar alignment, and yielded many brickstamps of a 1215·la
sryle similar to the few known to have been found in it, we may IT" 3II.la,JI9.Ia, III3.Ib, 1216.Ia
lh'
suggest that they are very likely to have been contemporary
lE' IIlO.Ia
with it.
The indictions clearly cluster between I' and If'.
Sample
All of the stamps from this site are included in the sample, except
for p.ra, '39.ra, II 10. la, 1705.1a which have been excluded on 3· CISTERNS IN GULHANE
the grounds of the indiction that they carly.
Just within the fortification wall of the Topkapr palace, a little to
Locations
the right of the road leading from Bab-i Hiimayiin (the Imperial
The stamps published by Paluka and Wulzinger come from Gate) to Orta Kapi (the entrance to the second court of the
the main substructures south of Cemal Nadir Sokagt, except Seraglio), and at the top of the street leading downhill towards
for 765-"; which Wulzingerfound on a brick from the building the remains of the Turkish military hospital, there was once a
site opposite the main post office." Mamboury's stamps were complex of cisterns (Fig. ID)" Mamboury records having
all found in the structures destroyed in 1924, and the findspors counted at least four cisterns in the complex, each separated by
thick walls, and he notes that the two most easterly cisterns were
of four examples are described thus: 'dans les murs situes le
plus au nord et en contrebas' (602.1a and lo49.ra); 'piles dans supported by foundations built with large stone blocks divided
la rue Hoca Kasun Koprii Sokagl' (81.1a), and, 'piles dans la by perpendicular corridors. Mamboury writes that during the
rue Acunusluk Sokagl' (95o.ra). No stamps have been excluded FIrst World War, the authorities widened the street leading to
from the sample on the grounds of their findspots, since the the sea, and that the southern part of the complex was destroyed,
various structures are in all likelihood contemporary. leaving only the eastern facade partially visible." He followed
the demolition work daily and discovered a large number of
stamped bricks in the debris. The bricks from the demolished
structures came from three locations, to which Mamboury
refers in his notes as (cistern', (structures above cistern' and
'large vaults, and portico between th~m and St Eirene'-' The
bricks from all three locations have been treated together, since
fig. 6 (top) for cross-section through Room IX. The width of the impost block, from the close clustering of indictions suggests that the structures
the front. is given as r ro cm. at the top, and 85 cm. at the bottom.
comprise a single undertaking.
u Dcnncrt, Kapitelle, 28-)4.
U See the survey of this type by Yegul, 'Capitals', with figs. 17-20 (mid-fifth-
Two cisterns located inside the Bab-i Hiimay11u and 80 to 100
century) and figs. 31-2 (justinianic). For Constantinople, sec Betsch, Capitals, 239-
40; Zollt, Kapuellplastih, .9-46 (nos. 1-9.9), 24 I-)66.
~ The description of the location is taken from Mamboury's notes. Cp. also
~l The building site is shown on the map in Wulzinger, 'Substruktionsbauten',
janin, CB, 214-I 5.
377, fig. 3 ('Neubau'). Sec here Fig. 8.
n See Demcngel and Mamboury, Mangancs, 86, figs. 94-5.
"
•
SITES
7
paces down the slope were surveyed by Forchheimer an,
Strzygowski m September 1890.66 The two were close to eac.
other and were both aligned on a north-west-SOuth_east axis
They had evidently served as the substructure for so I .
build' "Th' . I - me arg
.lflg. err precise .0catIons were not indicated by Forcb
heirner and Strzygowski, and, although they were describe,
separately by S~zygowski, Wulzinger argued that the tw.
were III fact contiguous, and that the structure they had one
supported was the Nea church of Basil I" Not only must rh
ea ~hurch havebeen ~uch further to the south," but also th
locations of the cisterns proposed by Wulzinger are incorrect'
A ~ore recent survey has shown that the two cisterns wer
beside one another, but quite separate (Fig. 10).71
The north-west-south-east alignment of the cisterns whi I
Wulzinger took to be indicative of a religious structure,"
merely suggests that they were erected according to the Earl,
Byzantine street plan, which should perhaps be taken to favo';
a date in the fifth or sixth century." In Cistern I there were si;
columns: four with inverted bases instead of capitals; one with,
low Ionic impost ~apital (the main block being o. 3 m. deep); anc
another WIth a plain Impost capital." In Cistern 2, further to th.
north, the three surviving columns carried low impost capitals.'
The low Ioni~ and plain impost capitals in both cisterns sugges
a date In the SIxth century, or possibly in the later fifth century.'
About 100 m. to the south-east of Cistern I are some furthe
minor structures that may also have belonged to a cistern.'
Whether any of these cisterns were associated and conrern '
porary with those whose destruction Mamboury followec
remains to be determined.
66 Forchbeimer and Strzygowski, Wasserbehiilter, 94-5, no. 26 (Cistern 1),98-9
no. 29 (Cistern 2).
61 Forchheirner and Straygowski, Wasserbehiilrer. 236.
" Wulzinger, Baudenkmiikr. 52-03, fig. 19.
" Bardill, 'Great Palace', 227 n, 57.
70 Wulz.inger seems not to have visited the cisterns. His account is totally depeu-
dent on Strzygowski's description regarding e.g. information on other Byzantine
remains in front of Cistern I (Baudenkmala, 52). Wulzinger admits that he had not
himself examined the brick pier in Cistern z for remains of pipes (Baudenkmiiler.
56)· The erroneous locations proposed by Wulzinger were adopted by Kleiss, Plan,
Fundortnummer 65 and Miiller-Wiener, Bildle:cikon, -497, 6g. 601 (cisterns G 71t
and G7'7).
71 See Teecan, TopkaplSarayJ, 212-1], no. 11. pis. 25~(Cis[ern 2). 220-2, no.
r6, pIS. 27)-83 (Cistern r), and, for the exact locations, the endpaper map.
n Wulz.ioger, Baudenkmiiler, 53.
n For further discussion of the early street plan, see above p. 73.
74 Forchheimer and Strzygowslci, Wanerbehiilter, 95. Tezcan, Topkapl Saray~,
pls. 279-80, 282.
15 Forchheimer and Strzygowski, Wasserbehiilter, 99. Tezcan, Topkapt Sarayt,
pls. 259-60.
71. The low Ionic impost capital belongs to the early sixth century, and the plain
~ impost capital makes its first dated appearance in Constantinople (~n highly
decorated form) C.520 at Se Polyeuktcs: see above, P' 74. Porchheimcr and
Strzygowski, Wasserbehalter, 2)6 believed these capitals indicated a pOSt-
Justinianic or Macedonian date (7th-loth centuries).
77 Tezcan, Topkapt Sarayt, 206 with pis. 243-4 and figs. 7 (no. 6) and IO.
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~------------------------------~---------------------------------.

..~
•
6 PART r r: CHRONOLOGY UNDATED SITES
77
senators whom Constantine I brought to Constantinople:
Indiction Catalogue numbers Addas, Protasius, Scombrus, and Philoxenus (four magistri),
rn' and Domninus, Probus, Dareius, Maurus, Rhodanus, Salluscius
rr- the prefect, Modesrus, and Eubulus (eight patricii)83 It then goes
lA' 1563.Ia on to detail the construction work that they undertook in the
lE' ciry, with the aid of various architects charged with designing
Cons tan tine's New Rome. Amongst the works attributed to the
The stamps generally carry consecutive indictions Z~)H~,S" or patricius Sallustius, the praepositus Urbicius, and others are."
1'. the colonnaded ways extending eastwards from either end of the
Walls of Constantine along ~he coast; the Mese from the Chalke
Gate to the Exokionion at the Walls of Constantine:" tbe aque-
/ 4. THE BYZANTINE DRAINS OF THE MESE ducts bringing water from the Bulgaria region; and deep drains
throughout the city, which countered disease and pollution by
Various excavations close to Divan Y olu have revealed stretches conveying foul water beneath the colonnaded streets towards
of the two parallel conduits that ran down the centre of the city'S

J
main avenue, the Mese. Some sections were found during the
WATER
~SOUACE construction of modern drains between '925 and '93', and
Mamboury recorded numerous stamped bricks from the vaults
of the conduits." He grouped the finds under five locations: 'A
little higher up Divan Y olu than Seftali Sokagi', 'Opposite Firuz
Aila Camii', 'Higher up Divan Yolu than Firuz Aga Camii' (all
dated 20 November '925), 'Forum of Constantine' (Autumn
'930 and June 193 I), and 'Opposite the fountain of Atik Ali
Pasa Camii' (20 April 1931). So';'e of these sections of drain are
indicated on Mamboury's maps," but those opposite Atik Ali
Pap Camii do not seem to have been published."
Two parallel channels built ofstone each measure 1.5-1.6 m.
wide and 1.8-2.0 m. deep. The channels are covered by brick
vaults, bringing the height of the conduits to about 3 m. The tops
of the vaults are about I m. below the Byzantine ground level."
F,G. 10. Map showing the locations of the cisterns and the hexagonal structure in Giilhane. In '949, Mamboury discussed the brickstarnps recovered
from the Mese drains, and pointed to the reference to their con-
struction given in the Patria of C.995." The text lists the twelve
711 Mamboury, 'Fouilles I', 2.53-4.
Sample Indictions
See Mamboury's map showing the east end of the Mese in Schneider, Byzanz,
J<!
the sea.
Such lists of senators and 4igh-ranking civil servants in the
time of Constantine appear only in late authors, and are clearly
legendary." In all likelihood, the names belong to various
personalities of the fourth, fifth, and sixth centuries. Modestus is
perhaps the city prefect who built a large cistern in Region XI
between 363 and 369." Philoxenus, to whom the Patria ascribes
a cistern near the Forum of Constantine, was probably a
magister officiorum of the early fifth century." Domninus may
be the individual who gave his name to the famous porticoes
built in 395.89 An Urbicius is known to have beenpraepositus
C.449-50, C-470-81, and in 491.90 The patricius Probus is
probably the nephew of Anastasius, whose house near the
Harbour of Julian was burned in the Nika riots." A Eubulus,
who is mentioned elsewhere in the Patria, was patricius under
J ustin I and owner of properry in Constantinople."
From the textual evidence, Mamboury attempted to argue
that the drains were built in the early or mid-fifth century." But
even if we have correctly determined the historical context of
the individuals named in the Patria, it seems likely that the
constructions associated with these individuals have been

TAJlLE 8. Frequency of indictions on bricks from the Giilhane pl. 10 with Mamboury, 'Nouvel element', 57-8, fig. 2. and Bardill, 'Lausus', fig. 2.. randomly assigned to them. As Mango has stated, the Patria
All of the stamps have been included in the sample, except for For Mamboury's plan of the excavations in the Forum of Constancinc, sec: M~go,
cisterns 'may be trusted when it says that a given building or monument
4'1.,a (f), 243.1. (.6..,), ljI6.Ia (.6..' or M,), and 1563-'. (.6..I) 'Porphyry Column', pl. I8; Muller-Wiencr, Bildlexikon, fig. 2.88; Bcrdill, 'Lausus',
fig. J. For the excavations opposite Firuz Aga Camii, see Schneider, 'Euphemia- was there and had certain visible features, but all the historical
which do not fall within the cluster of indiction dates displayed
Indicrion Catalogue numbers Marryrion', fig. r; Mango, 'Diippion', plan opposite P: 160; Miiller-Wiencr, Bild- information it offers is extremely dubious and should not be
by the majority of stamps. lexihon, fig. 489. accepted without corroboration from more reliable sources';"
A' Further drains were recorded by Mamboury in the Forum of The ado sius in 1929
Locations B' (Casson and Talbor Rice, Hippodrome Il, 40 with Mamboury's plan (on which
north is wrongly indicated, but corrected ill Naumann, 'Neue Bcobechruogen', fig. Il Patria r.6) (Preger, 146). 81 Patria 1.68-70 (Preger, 148-9).
Cistern: 85.Ib, cl, 151.1a, 176.13, 178.13, b, 184.13, 234.13, r' 4II.la I)), in 1949 (Naumano, 'Neuc Beobachrungcn',12.7 and fig. 2), and in 1953 (Miiller- 8S On the Exokionion see Mango, Deoeloppemeni, 47.
243.13, 246.1a, za, 411.1a, 455.2a, 482.13, b, 483.la, 484.13, 1;.' .243·la Wiener, Bildiexikon, 261, pl. 294 E). The excavations in 1952. at the 'Milion' did not '6 Dagron, Naissance, 36, 122 n. I .
E' reveal the Byzantine drains (Mamboury in Mango, Brazen Hot/se, 184) but the 17 PLRE,i. s.v. Domicius Modestus 2. Berger,Pacria,222..janin, CB, 209-IO, )93·
485.1a, 509.1d, 578.Ia, 654.1a, 70L1a, 706.1a, 726.1a, 750.1a,
excavations there in 1967-68 did reveal a single drain, dated (although it is not dear IS PLRE, ii. s.v. Philoxenus 1. Bardill, 'Lcusus', 69-75. Contrast Berger, Patria,
895.1a, z a, 895.3a, 896.la, 1007.1a, 1239.la, 124°.1<1, 1478.13,
'5'6.,a, 1649·1a, 1650.1a. "
Z'
H'
509·rd
454.la, 48l.Ia, b, 895.13 (numerous), aa, 33, 1239.1a
on what basis) to the sixth century: Firath and Ergil, '''Milion'' '; MiiUer-Wiener,
Bildlexikon, p]. 24 S. Two parallel drains exposed in 196) during the construction of
616-18.
8? Thcophanes, Chronicle, AM 588;7:]anin, CB, 346, )86-7. Mango, Developpe-
ment,)I. Berger,Patria, 310, )19-2.1, 442.-4. FLRE, ii. s.v. Vrbicivs 1.
a subway under Yeniccriler Caddcsi at the junction with Gedikpasa Caddesi (Fcadr, 90

Large vaults, and portico between them and Hagia Eirene: S' T 5.13, 85.Ia, b. d, 176.Ia, 178.13, rb, 184.13,234.13, l45·Ia 'Short Report', 20?-10; Muller-Wicner, Bildlexikon, pis. JO), 305) yielded several il FLRE, ii. s.v. Fl.Probus 8. Berger, Patria, 74s-6.Jarun, CB. 416. .
(large numbers), 483.Ia, 484.Ia, 578.13, 654·Ia, bricks stamped with 25.2b (notes of W. Klciss in the DAI, Istanbul). 91 PLRE, iii. s.v, Eubulus. Patyia ).12.0-1 (eel. Prcger, ii. 254-5)' Berger, Patna,
'79.ra, 482.1a, b, 556.1a.
Mamboury, 'Tchiftc Serail', pl. 17 shows remains near the fountain of Atik Ali J79-99. Janin, CB, )48. Other identifications are more speculative: PLRE, i. s.v.
70I.Ia, 896.13, rooy.ra, 1477.Ia, 1478.Ia 10

Structures above cistern: 85.la, 245.1a, 454·la, 455·la, 459·la, Pap Camii, which may relate to the porticoes on either side of the Mese, but Addaeus (Berger, Patria, 578-80); PLRE, i. s.v. Prorasius I (Bergcr, Patria, 40)-~);
I79.Ia, l46.Ia, 23 (large numbers), 45 5.Ja, la, 485.13, PLRE, i. s.v. Maurus 2. (Berger,Patria, 2.22); PLRE,i. s.v. Rhodanus (Bcrger, PaLna,
Mamboury's notes explicitly state that all the bricks found came from the drains in
IIr5.1a, 1477.;a, 1563·1a. 556.13 (large numbers), 75°.13, 124o.Ia this area. 422-3); PLRE, i. s.v. Flavius Sallusdus 5; PLRE, U. s.v. Sallvsrivs 4, Sallvsrivs 5
lA' 11 Sec Muller- Wiener, Bildlexikon, 269-70. Cp. Casson and Talbcr Rice, Hippo- (Bergcr, Patria, 22.2).
drome 11, 40. 12 Mamboury, 'Chrismc', 459--6r. ?J Mamboury, 'Chrismc', aeo-r. ?i Mango, 'Boukolcon', 41.
 UNDATED SITES 79
PART II: CHRONOLOGY

Perhaps the only clues as to when the drains may have been Indictions
laid are to be found in the references to the construction, TABLE9. Frequency of indictions on bricks from the Byzantine FIG. I";. Map showing the
destruction, and reconstruction of the stretch of the Mese with drains of the Mese " locations of the Byzantine
which we arc concerned. The porticoes adjacent to the carceres remains near Isrnetiye
of the Hippodrome were burned in 406, and are known to have Indiccion Catalogue numbers Caddesi and Mercan
been repaired using stone in order to reduce the risk of future Caddesi.
fires." In 475, a blaze spread south-westwards from the A'
B' 202.la
Chalkoprateia, and burned the Mese between the Basilica and Key'
the Forum of Constantine." A number of riots occurred during
r- A Remains on Ismeciye
n.' Caddesi.
Anastasius' reign, and on one occasion the Mese was engulfed
E' B Remains on Mercan Caddesi.
between the Hexahippion (Diippion) and the Forum of <;'
Constantine." On another occasion in 509, both porticoes were Z'
destroyed from the Forum of Constantine as far as a statue of H' 12)1.1', Hp. la, r z j y.aa, 12J4.Ia
Perdix near the church of St [ulian;" and in 513 the Mese was 8' 641.la
burned from the Chalke to the Forum of Constantine, for a ]'
lA' 25.2b (several), 211.13, 388.xa, 631.1a, 1 194.la, I1.02.Ia Cross-section A·B
distance of 94 intercolumniations" The Nika riots under
Justinian in 532 devastated the buildings and colonnades on IB' 42.1a (numerous), 502.Ia, 576.IC, 577.1a, b (numerous),
7p.la, 939.13 (numerous), 1205·la
both sides of the Mese:"? on Tuesday 13 January, the
1['
Praetorium on the south side of the Mese burned; and on
In.'
Saturday 17, fire spread along the north side of the Mese from
lE' Sample
the Octagon in the east as far as the Forum of Constantine.!"
All of the stamps have been included in the sample, except for
875.Ia, which does not fall within the indiction cluster.
Mamboury recorded 26 stamps from the vaults of the Mese's
Sample
drains. Nineteen of these bore single-line inscriptions with
Locations
All of the stamps are included in the sample, except for 202.Ia, indictions. Of these, as Mamboury explained.l'" four bore the
Northern gTOUp:125.3a, 4a, 126.2a, jb, 4a, 7a, 127.ra, 13 5·1a, FIG. 12. Plan of the substructures beneath a house in Mercan
which bears indiction B', and therefore falls outside the cluster eighth indiction (HI, one the ninth (81, five the eleventh (lA I,
I48.6a, 656.Ia, 657.Ia, 897.4a, 898.Ia, 899.2b, 952.Ia, III2.la, Caddesi.
of indictions recorded on the majority of stamps from the and eight (not nine, as Mamboury stated) the twelfth (IB').
13z6.1a, 1611.la.
drains. Mamboury's choice of the dates 442/3-44 3/4, which corre-
spond to the eleventh and twelfth indictions, relies on his inter- Southern group: IZI.IC, 125.la, zb, 126.8e, 148.la, 875·ra.
Locations pretation of the untrustworthy account of the construction of
A little higher up Divan Yolu than Seftali Sokagi: 957·Ia. the drains given in the Patria. Indictions
The stamps from both the north and south groups have been
Opposite Firuz Aga Camii: 2II.Ia, 388.Ia, II94.Ia, 13 58.Ia.
treated together, since they bear similar name abbreviations and
Higher up Divan Yolu than Firuz Aga Camii: 631.Ia. 5. REMAINS ON iSMETiYE CADDESi indictions. Seven stamps bear indiction I' (125.la, zb, ya, 4a,
I48.Ia, 6a, 897.4a), six carry lA' (126.2a, jb, 4a, 7a, 8e, 898.Ia),
Forum of Constantine: 42.Ia, 202.Ia, 666.Iq, 1377·Ib, 1395·Ia
(all Autumn 1930), 42.Ia, 502.Ia, 576.IC, 577·Ia, 641.Ia, 7p·Ia,
The discovety of Byzantine remains on Ismetiye Caddesi five carry IB' (I21.IC, I27.Ia, 899.2b, 952.Ia, IlI2.Ia), and one
.'
""'
0
<
<I>
during the laying of drains between 1925 and 1936 is briefly carries lE' (875.Ia). ." -c
939.Ia, I2D2.Ia, I205.Ia, 123 1.Ia, 1233.Ia (all June 193 I). 11.

Opposite the fountain of Atik Ali Pasa Camii: 420.Ia, 577·Ib,

mentioned in one of Mamboury's summaries of archaeological
discoveries in Iscanbul.I'" A sketch map in Mamboury's notes
indicates that structural remains were found on either side of the 6.
z
""wer:« 1
75~.Ia, 939.Ia, I2p.Ia, 1234·Ia, 1397·IC. REMAINS NEAR MERCAN CADDESi 0
er:
street, between Fuat Pasa Caddesi and Oriiciiler Caddesi (which o
Subway at junction of Yeniceriler Caddesi and Gedikpasa : :t:
is linked to Uzun Carsi Caddesi and follows the alignment of The discovery of Byzantine remains on Mercan Caddesi during 0
:a
Caddesi: 2pb. the ancient Porticoes of Dornninus) (Fig. II A).l!14Most of the the laying of drains between 1925 and 1936 is briefly mentioned
stamped bricks seem to have been found in the structures on the in one of Mamboury's summaries of archaeological discoveries
9S Chronicon Paschale, 569. CTh 15-1.45. north side of the street. The remains on the south side were in Istanbul.l'" A sketch map in Mamboury's notes indicates that
96 Cedrenus, [. 616. Zonaras, Epitome, 130-1. Bardill, 'Lausus', 79, 83-4, 85- apparently discovered underneatb a Turkish fountain that was remains were found in Mercan Caddesi (between Fuat Pasa
97 Mango, Brazen House, 17-9. Cbronicon Paschale, 608 (giving the year 498).
98 Marcellinus, Chronicle, 509. destroyed on 18 December 1923. Caddesi and Oriiciiler Caddesi), and also further south in both
99 Victor Tonnenensis, Chronica, 195. Mango, Brazen House, 79· Betscb, Miihiirdar Emin Pasa Sokagi and Seker Ahmet Pasa Sokag: (Fig. FIG. '3. Plan of the vaulted structures found in Mercan
Capital,173-4· II B). Marnboury recovered a number of stamped bricks from Caddesi in 1968.
\00 Procopius, Wars, 1.24.9 and Lydus, De Magistratibus, 3.70 (both conflacing
the various fires). the area.
101 Bardill, 'Leusus', 85; Greatrex, 'Riot', 84-6. It may be noted that the remains
102 Marnboury, 'Chrismc', 460-l.
of the shops flanking the Mese near the hexagon of Anciochus appcar, from the style res Mamboury.tfouillcs I'v at s.
of the masonry, to relate to the [ustinianic period: Naumann, 'Anciochus-Palast', 10] Mamboury, 'Fouillcs 1', 255.
I~ Janin, CB, 89-90, 344-5. Mango, Developpemeru, 31.
145-6,136, fig. 1.
 -
80 PART II: CHRONOLOGY
UNDATED SITES
81
Byzantine remains had been recorded in the vicinity many Indictions
evidence, that the fifth-century material had been recovered
years prior to the discovery of the structures described by
TABLE 10. Frequency of indictions on bricks from the cistern from the rums .of jusrin I's nearby basilica of the Theotokos in
Mamboury, and more were found later. Whether they are to be
on Siraselviler Caddesi Blachernai, which was destroyed by fire in I070.'IS
identified with the buildings Mamboury describes is, unfortu-
nately, uncertain. At the end of the nineteenth century, sub- Indicrion Catalogue numbers
structures were found beneath a Turkish house in Mercan Sample
Caddesi by Forchheimer and Strzygowski.!" Their plan and A'
brief description of the structures, which consisted of at least The analysis of indicrions reveals two clusters, which will be
B'
treated as two separate samples: IB'-IE' (sample I), and fl'-H'
three barrel-vaulted rooms, is insufficently detailed to allow a r'
date to be suggested (Fig. 12).107In 1968, foundations were laid 1:,' r a.ra, Il.38.la (sample 2). Stamps Il09.1e, '319.13, and lo48.r. with indic-
for an office block to the south-east of the junction ofMiihiirdar E' nons A', A' and B' respeptively, belong to neither cluster and
Emin Pap Sokagl and Mercan Caddesi (Fig. lIB). A system of (,'/Z' 35.13,84.13, rb, 35o.l3, 481.13, b, c, 700. r a, 764.13, have been omitted fromeither sample. Because of the presence
barrel-vaulted substructures of two distinct phases were found I32I.13 of two clusters of indictions, all stamps lacking indictions have
Z' rj.ra, i30.Ia, 452.]3, 453.13, 509·lb, Il.I3.l3, b, c been excluded from the samples.
(Fig. '3, PIs. XVIII and XIX). The structures of the first phase,
H'
located to the west of the site, were dated by the excavators to
e' Indictions
the sixth century on the basis of brickstamp finds. Since the
bricks tamps were not published, this dating is unverifiable.
I'
TAIlLE I r. Frequency
• of indictions on bricks from Tokludede
lA'
Mescidi
The second phase consisted of two barrel vaults running m'
north-south and three running east-west. The building that IT'
J.t,.' Indiction Catalogue numbers Totals
these substructures had once supported had completely I,
vanished.!" lE'
1319.13(1),1109.1«1)
Sample 1048.1a (16) 16
The indictions form a clear cluster between fl' and Z'.
All of the stamps are included in the sample.
FIG. 14. Plan of the cistern on Siraselviler Caddesi, 856.1a (3), 814.1. (2), 66I.Ib (4) 9
Locations 739.Ia (2), 828.1' (I), 538.rb (I) 4
8. TOKLUDEDE MEsciDI 532.1a (I)
Most of the stamped bricks were found in Miihiirdar Emin Pasa intervals of 7 or 8 metres across Oba Sokagl. Mamboury 521.1a (I)
Sokagi (25.2., 46.1', 18r.l', s02.lb, 793.1., 80s.la, 877.IC, recorded that the interior measurements of the cistern were The little Byzantine church that was transformed after 1453 into 8.1a (3)
124}.1', 1453.1.), only one being found in Mercan Caddesi 35.20 m. x 31.10 m., and that it had originally contained 42 the mosque of Toklu ibrahinI Dede was located just within the
(1I99.1.) and in Seker Ahmet Pasa Sokagl (1I65.la). pillars, of which the remains of six were visible. The structure Land Walls, between the Ayvansaray gate and the Blachernai
was built entirely of bricks (generally 385 mm. square); five gate."! In June 1929, the building was largely demolished,
Indictions brick-courses and their mortar-beds measured 480 mm. The leaving only part of the apse and the south wall. During the 99.ra.(I), r93.la (1)
Ten of the stamps carry consecutive indictions: I' (1453.la), lA' Deutsches Archiiologisches Instirut in Istanbul possesses demolition, Mamboury recovered a large number of stamped 1177.1a (1)
1277.13 (8), 27.rh (6), "74·1. (3), 867·ld (5),
(25.za), IB' (46.la, 181.1a, 502.lb, 793.la, 805.1a, 877.1C), If' Mamboury's notebook containing a sketch plan of the site, and bricks, III most of which were taken to the Istanbul Archaeo-
also a later photograph (Fig. 14 and PI. XX).110 All the stamped 863·lb (5), 418.1C(7), 494.1. (I), 1026.2a (2),
(II65·Ia), [£..' (II99·1.). logical Museum. The construction techniques suggest that the
1276.lb (6), 52.1a (12) 55
bricks that Mamboury recorded came from the walls of the church was built in the eleventh century, but the stamped bricks lE' 942•Ia (,), 53·lb (3) 5
cistern, which was partially demolished in 1940. Mamboury were evidently reused materials of me fifth and sixth centuries.
7. CISTERN ON SIRASELViLER CADDESi suggested that the cistern was built in the mid-fifth century, Mamboury suggested,'!' although without any corroborative
and proposed the dates 437-39 or 452-54 on the basis of the
In the summer of 1939, a garagc was constructed in Beyoglu to indictions.!"
the south of the German hospital, in the area bounded by 112 See Miillcr-Wiener, Bildlexikon, 206-7; Kraueheimer, Architecuoe-, 365. In The church was reconstructed, and finally destroyed, again by fire, in J 434.
Mamboury, 'Fouillcs 1', 265-6. Mamboury, 'Chrisme',461- On the Blachernaisbrine, see Mango, 'Blachernae' and janin, Eglises, 161-71.
Siraselviler Caddesi, SogancI Sokag" Oba Sokagi, and Bakrac III IH 2.

Sokagl.109 The imposing ruin of a covered Byzantioe cistern was Sample

discovered. It was recorded by Mamboury, who suggested that All the brickstarnps have been retained in the sample, except
remains of associated buildings might exist further to the east, for IlI7.1a, since its indiction cannot have fallen within the
since deep fissures parallel to the cistern regularly opened up at cluster.

106 Forchheimcr and Strzygowski, Wasserbehalter. 108-9, no. 37.

107 Forchheimer and Strzygowski, Wasscrbehi£lter, 244 make no ancmpt to date
the structures.
SOl Firath, 'Important Finds', I95. fig. 10. The excavated structures appear in 3.
number of photographs in the Deutsches Arcbaologisches Instirut, Abteilung
Istanbul, negs. R1743-S, K.B385J-8.
109 This work and the discoveries made are described by Mamboury, 'Fouilles

1II'.43o-r. 110 Negative numbers R3732-5. 111 Mamboury, 'Fouilles Hl'j ajc.
 ANALYSIS OF BRICKSTAMPS AND BRICKS

Thus two bricks bearing the same name are unlikely to have
been made much more than 30 years apart.
CHAPTER 8 If samples from rwo different sites have several names in
common, all the bricks in those samples are likely to have been
manufactured within the same 3o-year period. In many cases, it
Analysis of brickstamps and bricks from the will also be true that the structures at the sites concerned were
erected within that 3o-year period. The temporal proximity of
the rwo samples may be assessed according to the number of
sites discussed in Chapters 6-7 names that they have in common: the greater the number of
correspondences, the more closely dated the two samples. The
reverse need nor, of course, be true: the absence of corres-
pondences may not be significant if the sample from one or both
of the two sites is particularly small.
1. THE NAMES ON THE BRICKSTAMPS OF can be said with certainty to be contemporary. I Variant dies, on
Let us imagine that site A is known to be earlier than site B,
THE FIFTH AND SIXTH CENTURIES the other hand, may have been in use over a considerable period.
and that stamps in the samples from sites A and B have no names
For instance, variants of the same type occur in the samples from
in common, whereas stamps in the sample from site C have
In an attempt to establish a reliable chronology of Constantino- both St Polyeuktos (c.j 10-22) and Hagia Sophia (532-37), and
appeared at site B. The material from site C wo;
have to be dated later than the material from si tc
than the material from site B. Furthermore, aSSUIl
samples from each of the three sites were reasonnhl
the number of correspondences could be taken as It
of temporal proximity. If, for instance, the matcri.i]
were to have significantly more names in eo 111III
sample from site B than with the sample from sill
sample from site C might reasonably be assumed
what closer in date to the sample from site B than I
from site A. The fact that site A had no names in '(
site B would suggest that these two samples wer '
rather more than 30 years.
The names 011 all the bricks tamps from the sit s
Chapters 6-7 are give. in Table 12. When the eo
names in the samples from various sites are tabulate

(
names in common with both sites A and B. It would follow that and 14), rwo groupings of samples, each with mutu.i
politan brickstamps, our efforts have so far concentrated on were therefore manufactured about a decade apart'
the material from site C was manufactured fairly late in the sets of corresponding names, emerge. These two "'
assembling, from various sites, samples of bricks that are likely As a result of the paucity of certainly identical stamps, the
careers of the individuals whose names also appeared at site A, referred to as Group I and Group 2.
to be contemporary. In many cases the bricks in such samples similarities between samples must generally be assessed accord-
but quite early in the careers of the individuals whose names also
would have been manufactured shortly before the building con- ing to the names that the stamps bear. The individuals whose
cerned began to be built. If a stamp in the sample from one site is names appear, in a more or less abbreviated form, on the stamps
identical to a stamp in the sample from another, then the rwo in anyone sample are likely to have been involved in the bric~- TAIlLE H. Names on the brickstamps from sites in Sections 1-3
samples, and hence probably the rwo buildings, may be said making industry simultaneously. Furthermore, bricks stamped
to be contemporary-assuming, of course, that each of the with the same name, whatever their origin, were possibly made Included in the sample: iV(OIK"tlIi>VOC)
10' 'EAnl()
identical stamps does indeed belong to its respective sample, and during the lifetime of the same individual. Consequently, if two [v(OtK"tlli>voc)
yt. P"'() 'Apt() 86.la iV(OlK"tlIi>VOC)
(yH51'·P",() ·Hm()
is not in fact reused or from a repair. Unfortunately. however) samples contain stamps bearing the name of the same individual, ·AcK[ III.Ia iVO(IK"tlli>vOC)
£1' 'ENU()
the catalogue contains relatively few certain examples of both samples were possibly manufactured within the lifetime of ]t~T[p]",[ 254·la iv5(IlC"ttli>vOC)
£1' 'EAnt()
1t;VE"Tl~O 286.1a ivo(tK'tu)}voc) El.' 'EJ..1t1.()
identical stamps from more than one site. There are two main that individual. That assumes that the crucial stamps are not
[i]v(OtK"ttli>voc)
yt' 'HAt() 456.1a [V(OIK"tlli>vOC)
El' P"'() Eu()
reasons for this: first, even when examining bricks at first hand, contaminants in the samples concerned, and that they do indeed
+ iV(OtK"tl"'VOC)' 10' P"'() s eEl 54S.1a ~]",O EU-ru(Xtou)
it is often not possible to be certain that two stamps were made refer to the same individual, which is sometimes open to doubt,
iV(~IK"tlli>vOC)
1~'·M~()s 899·P iV(OIK"tlli>vOC)
",' P"'( ) e<~()
by exactly the same die, particularly if the stamps were not particularly where abbreviated names are concerned. The ]M",[ 959·ra [V(OIK"tlIi>VOC)
Et' + (in leaf or heart) K(Upl)EP"'() ew( )
preserved in their entirety or were poorly impressed. Second, greater the number of cross-sample correspondences with I]P"M",[ 980.1a iV(OIK"tlIi>VOC)
o" P",() ewc()
the preserved records are often not accurate enough to deter- regard to the names, the greater the likelihood that the bricks ]P",[O II9I.Ia [V(OIK"tlIi>VOC)
01' ~",() K",()
mine whether rwo stamps are identical or just variants. Had from both sites do indeed refer to the same individuals, and Excluded from the sample: er" + (in leaf or heart) K(Upl)E~a() Ka() ,
iV(OI1<tlIi>VOC)
Mamboury been able to make accurate drawings, rather than hence that the samples are contemporary. + K~( )c H.[ (1) 173o.1a [V(OIK"tlIi>VOC)
a' j3aO K",O K .
sketches, of the bricks tamps he found, we would perhaps have Although a study of the names of officinatores on Roman [V(OllC1:lIi>VOC)
£1'j3a() Ka() K
been able to confirm the exact contemporaneity of the fifth- brickstarnps shows that a certain Statius Marcius Lucifer Palace of Antiochus iv(ol1C"tlli>voc)
to· P"'() K",( ) A
century material us ed at Balaban Aga Mescidi with that used at operated for at least 45 years, from before 79 to H3-27, this is Included in the sample: + Ko(v)ctav(nvou)s
Tokludedc Mescidi, and of the material in the remains near clearly exceptional. More typical are: Lucius Lanius Festus, who [rH Ot'P"'O 'AyO
iV(OtK"tlli>vOC) IS.ra . l-" P",()] Ku()
iV(OIK"tlIi>VOC)
[V(OIK"tlIi>VOC)
El' + (in heart or leaf) K(upt)< j3a() ·AyoO 28.la ]t'KuO
Mercan Caddesi with that in the Byzantine drains of the Mese. produced bricks for at least 27 years, from before 176 to
[V(OllctlIi>VOC)
Et' 'AICll() 37.la i~(ol1<tlli>voc)
c" P"'() Ku() y
Stamps at these sites, which, as far as can be judged from the 203-205; Marcus Ulpius Anicetianus, whose name appears on
iv(ol1cttrovoc) er" 'AcKAT\(mou) 108.1a [V(OIK"tlli>vOC)
El' + (in leaf or heart) K(upt)< P"'() Ku() e
preserved illustrations, may have been formed by identical dies stamps for a minimum of 22 years, from at least '34 to '5 j or iV(Ot'K'ttrovoc)Et' 'ACKAll(mou) 108.2a [v(ollmli>voc)c" P"'() Ku() tl
(although equally possibly by variants), are as follows (see later; and Caius Nunnidius Forrunatus, who operated for at iv(OtlC"ttli>voc)
",·~aO [to 135,1' P"'O] KuOTl
Table Ij):IN·.6.I·BA+ANlI.P€ (p.Ib,c= p.Ia);INlI.IBAAO least 20 years, from 123 to 142' For the purposes of this study, it [V(OtK"tlIi>VOC)
yt' P"'O [to 236.1a [V(OtK"tlIi>VOC)
El'P"'O K"O c
(863-1a = 863-1b);· IN.6.IBA YD (1276.,. = H76.Ib); has been assumed that the name of an individual is unlikely to [v(ouC"nli>voc)
£1'+ (in leaf or heart) K(upt)< ~"'O [pO 237.10
INIB·BlfbE8EO (502.Ia = 50~.Ib); INllIBAIOA[ (577.Ia = have been stamped on bricks for a period exceeding 30 years. ] ~"'O Tpcf ) 249,1> [v(Ollmli>voc)El' j3a( ) Ku() c
577.rc). Only identical stamps, impressed ·by the very same die, Pre-Justinianic Great Church [V(OtK"tlIi>VOC)
c" P"'() ~"'v() 268.Ia, b [v(O""",tli>voc)
[...~",()] Ku() c
iv(ol1C"ttrovoc)tt' .il:l1() 272.13,2:1 iV(OllCUIi>VOC)
El' ~",() Ku[()
I Mamboury recognized the importance of recording every variant, but the con-
estampiIles absolument scmblables, absolument igales devrais-je plulot dire' Et' + (in leaf or heart) K(upt)< P"'O ~oO I 327.10, b
[V(OtK"tlli>vOC) hD Ot·~",() Kup( )/Ku()
iv(Ot<"tlli>voc) p
ditions under which he generally worked did not allow him (0 record them with
(Mamboury, 'Nouvelle lecture', I I )-11. italics added). iV(OllC1:lIi>VOC)
hHl· P"'O ~OO K 328.Ia, b h! ot' Kup( )/Ku() p
iV(OllCtlIi>VOC)
sufficient accuracy: '11 n'echappera 3. aucuo savant qu'avec les estampilles des 1 + Ko{v)ctCtv(tlvou) (666.11, r, Zj 666.4:1, b, z, bb, H, ii]; + Ko{v)c-tuv(tivou)s «" P"'p() ~o() rt
[V(OIK"ttli>vOC) 332.Ia, b [v(Ollmli>voc)fl1B s,: Kup( )/Ku() p
briques d'un monument dflment date par l'Hisroirc, on puisse datcr a son tour un (667.1d, h, x, bb, ii)j Kcvcccveivoro) (831.1:1, c). [V(OIK"ttIi>VOC)
a' P"'O ~OO 1t 333·Ia iv(Ol1C"tlli>voc)
El'P"'() KupO/Ku() p
monument, unc ruine, un mur, qui portcrait dans les flancs des briques :LUX l See Helcn, Organization, 118-19.
iV(OIK"ttli>vOC)
£1.+ (in leaf or heart) K(Upl)EP"'() ~Q)() 34S." iV(OtK"tlli>vOC)
El' P"'( ) Kup() -r
 PART II: CHRONOLOGY ANALYSIS OF BRICKSTAMPS AND BRICKS

TABLE 12 continued TABLE 12 continued

+ iv(ouC'tlWVOC) Et" Am() 855," Included in the sample ] ~a()TpoO iv(o,"",",voc) a' Ba() Fpcf ) 245.13
iv(511cnOOvoc) m" ~a() Aoyo() 864·1a iV(OtK'tI&voc) e' pal ) 'Ayo() 24.13 XpTtC'tO(u) iV(OlK"tlroVOC) t" VOU~£pl iv(o'KTtoovoc) ITpa() 246.13
iv(511<tlOOvoc)~I' + (in leaf or heart) K(upl)e pa Ao[u( )] 877'xa iv(lhK'tIOOvoc) B' pa() Bac( ) 17l)' iv(otlC"t'uovoc) t" rpo,() 246.23
iv(511"'IOOvoc) tt' + (in leaf or hean) K(upl)e ~a() Aou() 877.23 iV(OIK'tlOOVOC)
e' pa() fuc() 174·1a Balaban Aga Mescidi i]v(o'Kn&voc) a' ~a() E[ 434·,a
iv(Bl1<tlOOvoc) 51'Ma()s 9OO.IC iv(olK't,&voc) o'pa() Bccq ) 177·Ta Included in the sample: i]~(o,K't,&voc) 1]"HA'() 454·1a
iv(BucnOOvoc) nyDBt'Maup() 954.1• iv(otKnctvoC) 0' paO ee() 491.Ia iv(otm&voc) p,'paO 'Ayo() 26.13 + iv(olK't,&voc) ,"HAt( ) 455·"
Mey(aA'lC)s 'EKKA('lctac)s 968.d iV(OIK'[I&VOC)P' pa 'Ix() 594.13 (V(O'K'ttOOVoc)MOl' paO 'Ayo() 27.13 + iv(ol<noovoc),' 'HA'() 455.2•
+ Mey(aA1]C)s 'EuA.(1]ctac)s 969.1; iV(OIK'[I&VOC)y' pa() Ae( ) 8p.la iv(o'KTt&voc)· 0,'· pa() + 'Avope(a) j a.rb, C + iv(OlKnrovoc) . 'HAt()s 459·Ia
iv(5tK'tt&voc) M s,: paO MoO 97)." [i]v(otm&voc) e" pa() Ca() c 1206.ra iV(OIKT'&VOC)et' pape() 'Avopea 53·ta iv(olmoovoc) 'Hcof )
1]' pa() 482.1a, b
iv(BtK'tt&voc) a' pap() Mou() 97p·,b i]V(OIK"OOvoch'paO <J)ro() . 1308.la + 'Avfipeou Ev[(ollcn&voc) , 63·1b (V(OIK<I&VOC)9' uc 'Hcot ) 483·Ia
iv(BtK'ttOOvoc) ei" + (in a leaf or heart) pa() Ne() 990.13 ] i~(BtK'tt&voc) E' pap( )~ 1468.Ia iv(Bm,oovoc) W 'A. [ 159·la iv(Btmoovoc) a' ~a() 'Hcu() 484.13
iv(5lm&voc) ItD a' nen pa() Ne() 99I.la uncertain 1624.13 la' paO dtoyeO 30J.la iV(OIK'ttOOVOC)
t" ~a() 'Hcot ) 485.13
iv(511('[I&voc) IB' pa() Nee() 994.Ia, b Excluded from the sample: + 'E1tT\(J>CtvtoU 37o.la + (V(OtK'tI&VOC)S1;' eeo( ) olaKo(vo,,) 509·1d
hNtKa() rcor.ra ] a'Tpo<pi(l!ou) 'Ep]l!la 376.ra iV(OIKT'OOVOC)"~a() e[ 556.1a
iv(Bl1cn&voc) et" + (in leaf or hean) K(upt)e pa() TI( ) I025'xa i.v(ol~·n&voc) a" Ein( ) 410.13 [i]V(OIK"OOVOC)9' Bcp'() 'Iou( ) 578.1a
iv(BtK'tI&voc) et" + (in leaf or heart) K(upl)e pa() Byzantine drains along the Mese iv(om,oovoc) 0,' pa() E,,«) 4)8.1', b, d iv(Blxuoovoc) 9' + Ko~() . 654·)a
TIa« )/TIa( ) < 1029.la, c Included in the sample: Similar to previous 419·la iv(olmoovoc) a' Pa() Ku() 701. la
iv(5tK'tI&voc) tt: + (in leaf or heart) K(upt)e ~a() iv(olK't,&voc)a,'pa() 'Ayo() 2pb iv(olm&voc) Km
01' ~a( ) E[ 436.1• ]PaOKuO 706.13
TIa« )/TIa( ) < 1029·2a [ilv(o'~"'mvoc) p,'pa() 'Mu() 42.13 iv(o'KTloovoc) y' ~ap() '!c,o() 593.1• ]t'KuOn 726.la
+ iv(BtK'tt&voc) ty' TIau() 1039·1a iv(olm&voc) at' pa() Tef ) 2II.la iv(olKn&voc) 0,' ~a() '[Ol(<XvVOU) 597·,a i~(o,K'ttoovoc) I' PaO K"p()1 Ku( ) p 750.1a
iv(BIK'tI&voc) a' pa() TI«() 1061.1a [i]v(o,K'tI&voc) la' Eti()s 388.)a iV(O'K"OOVOC)01' ~a() '!ro(avvou) 597·2a iv(olK't'oovoc) 1]'Ma()s 895·Ia
iv(BtK'tIOOvoc) a' pa() TI«() 1061.2a ]1' pa() Eln( ) 420.13 + Kotvjcccvrrtvoc) 666.rn iv(BIKTIOOVOC)
1]'Ma()s 89p',3a
iv(BtK'tt&voc) et" pa() po,,( ) 1185·1a iv(olK'tI&voc) tP'· pape() eeo() 502.la + Kotvjccovrrtvoo) 666'4n, cc iV(OIK"OOVOC)9'Ma()s 896.[a
iv(BIK'[I&VOC) a' pa() POle) 1186.Ia iv(oIK"oovoc) PI' pall 'Ioct ) 576.IC + Korvjcccvtetvoc) 666.14C iv(o""toovoc) 8'N(t)X11[(<P0PO,,)] Io07·la
iv(BtK'tt&voc) a' pa( ) Ca() p 1196.13 iv(olmoovoc) Pt' pa() 'Ioa()] 577·1.,b + Ko(v)«av«ivou)s 66p. Fleep . ola[(Kovo,,)]C· 1] 1IJ5·la
iV(OtK«&VOC) Bt'T[ 1275.13 iv(otK't'oovoc) re" KaAaYPo(,,) 63 rvr a + Kotvjcccvretvoo)c 669·[b ivo(;K<,&voc)1]'Tp~( ) 1.239.13
iv(BIK'tI&voc) «';' (in leaf or heart) K(upt)e pa() <J)t() I287·xa iv(o,m&voc) 9' pa() K( )K()" 641.13 + Kopicxcii 1tPE(C~U'tEPOU)S 785·1b + (v(olxn&voc) I'Tpo() 1240.13
iv(BIK'tI&voc) hD ot' ~aO <J)IAO 1294.13 + Kotvjcrcvrrtvco) 666.)q iv(ollm&voc) 01' pa() Ao( ) 86p. Wpap[ 1477·la
i]v(BIK'tt&voc) ie" [ 1533·1a iv(BIK'[IOOVOC)'P' pal ) Kup( ) I Ku() p 751.13 iv(o,«t&voc) Ot' pa() Aov() 86pb,c + iv(o'K<'&voc) 9' [ 1478.13
iv(li1.1C'tlOOVOC) et" [ 164o.Ia iv(o,K'tt&voc) Bt' Ba() Map() 939.13 (v(OtK'tt&voc) ,y' Ba( ) Aou() 876.,a, b + iV(OllCtlrovOC)S [ 1649·ra
+ KaAaAta (?) 1728.13 + Ma[I;]'l!ou 957," + 1\0,\HC&;OlCtJc6v(ou)s 88o.1b + iV(OlK'tlroVOC)S [ 1650.la
j~ . 1734.13 iV(O'K"OOVOC)eo" pa() Ca() II94·13 iv(otKTt&voc) Ot' pa() Map() 941.13 Excluded from the sample:
Fingermarks 1736.Ib, C, iv(olK't'oovoc) m" pa() Ca() n 1202.la iv(otK'tt&voc) 0,' pa() TIa() 1026.la iv(o,«,oovoc)s oTpa() 243.13
1738.23, iv(o,,'''oovoc) p,' pa() Ca( ) P 12°5·la 8(£0)UXaplC Flerpou iv(cSuC'tlrovoc) l)'" 1I13·la iv(o'KT'oovoc) y' ~a() Eti«) 4TI.Ja
174o.1b, C iV(OIK"OOVOC)1]' P( ) Ttl!ox() T231.13 iv(BtKn&voc) t[yJ 0' TI,,() a Il74·[b iv(otK'tloovoc) 0C- 1516.Ia
Excluded from the sample iv(olm&voc) 1]' ~() TII!~x() p r aj r.r a ivo('«I&voc) ty' TIuO A Il77·1b iv(olK't'oovoc) 0,' ~[ 1563·la
iv(otK'tIOOvoc) 9'Bac() I71•la iv(olm&voc) 1]'P() T'(~)OK() B 12B·la ] al'.Tpo() 1241.13
iV(OtK"OOVOC)n,lIl;' pa() re() 210.1a (i)v(otK'tI&voc) 1]' P() TI(~)o[x().l 1234·r3 tv(otm&voc) tMo'pape() Tpo() 1242.la Cistern on Srraselviler Caddesi
iV(OtK'[I&VOC)Bt' pa() lit() 293·1:1 Monogram no. 24 . 1358.la iv(omt&voc) 01' pa() 'Yn() 1276. la Included in the sample:
{v(Ol1o::nwvoc) re" 'EA1n() 360.13 Monogram no. 29. + OauAou + 1377·1b iv(OtKnOOVOC)a'<J)IA.[() pa()] 1289·la ivo(tKnoovoc)s l;' 'APt() 13·1a
iv(otK'tI&voc) B' pal ) ee( ) 491.23 Monogram no. 34 I380.la Monogram no. 2 KUPlWCOU (?) without border 1342.23 tV(BtK"&VOC) 0' 'APlp() 14·la
iV(OtK"&VOC) e' pa() Koc( ) 653·1a Monogram no. 60 1395," Monogram no. 2 KUPlCtKOU (?) with border '342·3c iV(OIKTIOOVOC),'11;' 'AKaKi(ou) 35·ra
iv(otmmvoc) 0' pap K"p( )/K,,() p 745.1• Christogram, eight arms with dots between them 1397·1C (Trium) d(ominomm) n(ostromm) [ 1448.la iv(olK'tloovo<) ,'11;' 'Apee() 84.1a, b
iv(otK'ttOOvoc) tp'·M~()s 899·2a Excluded from the sample: l~a()K(.] 1609·la iV(OIKT'&VOC) 1;' Ati~ev«io,,) rjo.ra
iv(olmOOvoc) o'pa() ~() 992.la + Fceiou EVOUttlOUVOC W 202.la iv(cSlIcnrovoc) er" [ 1642.13 iv(o,Ktloovoc) ,'11;' pa() 1l.[ 350.la
iv(otK't,oovoc) a'NtKav() IOOJ.la iV(OtK'tI&voc) M 0[' ,644·1a iv(olmoovoc) 1;' Ba() '£A,() 452.13
iv(olKnOOvoc) ,'~a() '0( 1024·la Remains near Mercan Caddcsi Excluded from the sample: + (V(BIK"OOVOC)1;' 'ffi,() 453·1a
iv(olm&voc) e'pap() TIo() 'Ay() 1149·la Included in the sample ],'11;' pa() Au( ) 883·[a 'E]AI() or 'H]A'() 460.la
iV(OIK"&VOC) 1]' ~a() TIo() Ae( )ITIOAt() 1154.la iv(o'KTt&voc) a,'pa() 'Ayo() 25.23 iv(otmoovoc),' pa() 'Hcof ) 481.13, b, C
iv(olK't,oovoc) 01' Po() r rjir.r a iv(o,K't,&voc) p,' pa() 'Ava() 46.1a Cisterns Gtllhane, near B5b-1 HiimayUn
in + iV(OIKTI&VOC)sI;'eeo() olaxo(vo,,) 509·[b
iv(otK't,oovoc) a' pa() Pcot ) 1182.la iv(olm&voc) p,' ~ac[( )]1 pa() C[ 181.Ia Included in the sample: ee]o() olaxo(vou) 510.13
Cross 1402.lb iv(oml&voc) IW· ~ape() eeo() 502.lb iv(o'KT'oovoc) a' 'AP[ 15.13 ] eeo() olax[o(vou)] 51J•13
iV(O'K"&VOC) re" pa[() 1639·1a (V(OIK'tI&VOC)PI' pa() 'Ioa[()] 577')C tV(OtKTIOOVOC) 9' 'Apee() 8p.,b,d iv(o,K't,&voc) ,'11;' pa() Kv() 700.[a
iv(otKT'&voc) 1;' par 1641.Ia iv(o'KTloovoc) pI'~ape() K"piA(OU) 793·[' tv(Bml&voc) 9' + pa() Bac() I76.ra iv(olK'tloovoc) ,'II;'~a() Kup() I/Kup'O 764·[a
]eO ta'KC11P (?) 1658.1• iv(otm&voc) PI' paper ) K"pt[ I K"p( ) t 8°5.13 tv(o,K'tt&voc) 0' pa() Bccu ) 178.13, b (v(oIKn&voc) l;' pa() Ccnof ). 1213.13, b,
iv(ol«loovoc) 1'1' + pa() [lpo() 1165·I3 iv(otKTt&voc),' pa() Bccu ) 179.13 c
St John of Stoudios iv(otmoovoc) Ot' ~a( ) Ca( ) > II99·I3 iV(OtKTI&voc) a' pa() B(a)cI() 184.13 + iv(Blxn&voc) o'Tpo() + 1238.la
 rr: ANALYSIS OF BRICKSTAMPS AND BRICKS
86 PART CHRONOLOGY

TABLE 12 continued TABLE 12 continued

lv(B,K<toovoC)(;/1:;<1>[ 1321.13 Fingermarks + lvB(IKnoovoc)s tp' 8EOB( ) 508.13 8EOBwpo(u) 535·1a

Excluded from the sample: 8«0)ii XaPlC 8EOBOl\AO~iv(BllC'tlOOVOC)
LP' 518.la 8e.ooropou 536.la, c
]1 CUCl() l]t Cuc() I 1217·1a
Cistern of Aspar ivo(uc"nrovoc} . ' 'I[roci]vvou 602.13 Similar 537,la
Included in the sample: +Koc()+ 657,lc,d 8tocwpou + to 538.1a
Tokludede Mescidi iV(OIKtlOOVOC) i" pu() I'[ 266.la er" ~a( ) Kup() I I KUpl( )
iv(BtlCtlOOVOC) 765." iv(Bt.:c;oo~oci Wll y' ~ap() eeoB[ 540.13
Included in sample I (cluster IB'-IE'): lv(B,lCt·rOOvoc)
l' ~u() 'Iux() 563.1., b 8(Eo)ii X.xPlC[KJuplaK[o]ii lv(Bmloovoc) [..] 777·1a . VO(llCtlOOVOC) m'v'l~(?) + 'laX() 558.1a
lv(Bl1moovoc) hll s,: ~u() 'Ayo() 27,rb ]Ca()t 1208.r3 e(Eo)iiX.xPlC Kw(v)~uvtl(v)ou iv(BlKtlOOVOC) lP' 842.13 l~(i;,moovoc)~' put )Ka~KU() I KM() Ku() 633.1•
lv(Bllmoovoc)' B,'· ~u() + 'AvBpE(U) lv(B,Kt,OOVOC) i" pa() Cc] 1220.13 8(EO)iiXap[IC] AEOV[tlou]lv(B,Kt,OOVOC)[ ..] 858.la nVS(lK'tt&VOC)s Kovcrevrivoo + 658.la
52.la
lv(B,lCt,OOVOC) El' PUpE() 'AvBpEa lv(B,Kt,OOVOC) i" ~a() <l>w() 1306.23 8(EO)iixaplc Mcr;ou lv(B,lCtloovoc) lP' 908.la B'
+ Ko(v)ctuv(t[vou)s iv(B,Kt,OOV.,C)S 66o.1b
n"b.
lv(Bl1moovoc) pl'pa() 'Apo() lv(B,Kttoovoc) t" pur 1636.1• aCEO)U xaplcMapn>piou iv(olltnrovoc) t~' 949.2• B'
+ Ko(v)ctu[v(tlvou)]s [lv(BlKtlOOVOC)S] 660.13
99.13
Seea)l> XO:ptC Bocaoptcc iv(ouctlwvoc) tW 193.13 e(Eo)ii X.xPlCMup[t]up[lou] iv[(BtKnOOvoc).. ] 95°·13 [+ Kjovcrc ]niv( eo) 664·ra
lv(Bll('tloovoc) Bt' pa() E{n() Remains on Ismetiye Caddesi [i]VO(tKtlOOVOC)SflauAou 1049.13 Ko(v)cr~v(tivou) 665.13, la,
418.lc
s,:
lv(BtK'ttoovoc) pa() eEl ) 494·"
Included in the sample: iVO(lK'ttOOVOC) mTlcu].]. ECX 1°57.13 3a,4a
lv(B,lCt,OOVOC) Bl'pa() Ao() + iv(BtKttoovoc) lP' ~a() Au(~)u(vtiou) 12I.IC iv(BlK"OOVOC) lP' pu( ).nE~a( ) 1060.1a + Ko(v)cmv(tlvou) 666.rr,4a,
863·1b
lv(B,lC't,OOVOC) St" pa() Aov()
.• iv(BtKtlOOVOC) I' pa() Au~u(vtlou) 125.13 8(EO)ii xaplc flEtpOU lv(B,';'"oovoc) lP' 1112.1C b,133
867·1d
lv(Bllmoovoc) El'pa() Map() + lV(BtKtlOOVOC) I' pa() AuE;u(vtlou) 125·2b e(Eo)ii X.xPlCFletpou iv(BlKnoovoc) lP' ] 112.2a + Ko(v)ctav('tivou)s 667·1bb
942.la
lv(B,lCt,OOVOC) Bt'· pa( ) Du() + iv(BlKtlOOVOC) t' pu() AuE;a(vtlou) 125·3a S(w)u XaPIC Flerpou iV(01K'T1OOVOC)1'( r rr j.rb 'tav't(ivou)s iV(OtK'tlroVOC)S 672•1b
1026.23
lv(BllcrlOOVOC) I fiyll B' flu() B + lv(B,K1:,00VOC) I' pa() AuE;u(vtlou) 125·4a 8(Eo)iixapt[c] Ccnoupou lv(B,Kt,OOVOC) lP' I215·la + Ko(v)C'tav't(ivou)s t\V(OtK"tlrovOC)S 673.1•
1174.13
ivB(IJ<[tOOVOC) ty' flu ( ) A + lv(B,Kt,OOVOC) m' pu() AuE;u(nlou) 126.2a SeED)u x,aplc Ccncupou iv(ou ....n&voc) ty' 12[6.la uncertain spelling of Kovcccvrtvou 681.13, la
1I77·I3
iv(B,lCttOOVOC) Bt'paO 'YnO + lV(Bll<tlOOVOC) la' pa() AuE;a(vtlou) 126·3b 8(EO)iixaplcTp[0<p]1~ou iv(BlKnoovoc) [.. 1 1l64·1a lvB,(lC't,OOVOC)S
y' pu() Koivjctnvrifvo'o) 687,1'
1276.1b
iv(BtK1:100VOC) hi Bl'PU() 'Yn() + lv(B,Kt,OOVOC) m' ~u() AuE;u(vtlou) 126.43 Christogram six arms 1396.1C [Kojcrcqvrfjvou l[v]B(IKtlOOVOC)S P' +
1277.13 694·"
Included in sample 2 (cluster t..'-HI: + lv(B,Kttoovoc) m'pu() AuE;u(vnou) 126.73 + lvBtKt(loovoc)s [.]B' n A 1440.la KUplUK(oii)s 77pa
+ 'A~EP}ciou ivouc(nrovoc)s,,- + lv(BtKtloovoc) iu" pu() AuE;a(vtlou) I26.8e Uncertain reading . I7u.ra, + Kevcrcvtcivoo) or similar 820.lf
8.13
] sir; eEoBw( ) + lv(B,Kt,OOVOC) lP' pu() AuE;a(nlou) 127. la 1713·Ia + Kccvctuv'rivtoc)s 81I.Jm
52I.la
+ i.V(~h(lC'tL&VOC)S ~'eeoo6po\l + ] AuE;u[ 135.13 Excluded from the sample: Kcwctcvrtvcro) 831•la
532.1a
Ko(v)crav(tivou)s lv(BlK1:1oovoc)sB' 66,.,b lv(BtlCtloovoc) t' pu() Ausu(VtlOU) 148.13 [i]V(OllCtlOOVOC)
c" pa() 'Avrtloo 51.1a Kcrvctuvrfvoro) 831.7'
lv(BllCtloovoc) ,pa() Ku()Eu() K lv(BtK1:1oovoc)I' pa() Ausa(vtlou) 148.6• lv(B,lCt,OOVOC)
BC'p]a( ) Aus(av'lou) 139.13 Similar 831·9a
739,Ia
+ Kovctcvrivc(ojs iv(ouct1.WVQc) 0' 5
..... Koc() 656.,. Flerpou lV<>(UC'tlrovoc) re" 1110.1a + ivB(IKttOOVoc)sy'Kwv(cruvtivou) pup() + 832.13
814·1a
+ Korvtctcvcivoujs ivo(tK"tu:OVQc) {' 828.1a
+ Koc() + 657·Ia iv(BtKtlOOVOC)
y' Bl[ 17°5.13 + Kccvfcrrrvrivou) iva(tK'ttoovoc)s [ 833·la
iv(B,lCttOOVOC) B'pap() AEOV() 856.1a
iV(OllC'tlOOVOC)l "Mct js 897·5' + ivB(tKtlOOVOC) W Kcrvcrrcvrivou) pup() 834·"
Excluded from the samples: iV(OllC'tlOOVOC)la'Ma()s 898.ra St Polyeuktos + ivB(llCttOOVOC)P' Kevcucvrtvoc) pap() 834·2a
]pu()'Ay() lv(B,Kt,OOVOC) lP'Mu( )s 899·2b Included in the sample: iVa(1lC'C1OOVOC)SY'Krovc('Cav'tivou) pap() 835·la
19.13
p]aO rpu() + lvB(tKtloovoc) tp'MautUpi(ou) 952.13 + Tile vios: (iVOtK'tlOOVOC ?) 'Aya80vhwu 10.13 + iVa(llCnOOVOC)s y' pap() Kwvc('Cav'Civou) 1 837·"
250.1a
+t..'lo~~Bou e(EO)iiXaPlCflEtpou lV(OI~'noovoc)lP' 1112.13 iVO(lK't1.rovOC) i" 'Aya1t1l'tou . 21.13 lv8(lK'ttOOVOC}s ? Korvcfrcvrtvoo) pa.p() or similar 838 .r a
304·Ja
Xpqc . 1326.13 + 'Aya1t1l'tou ..... , , 22.r3 + Krcvcqujvreivou) iVO(tK'ttroVOC)s "('
'Ep~OYE() lv(B,lCttoovoc) [.] 378•1a 84°·13
] PUpE() 'HAl[( )] Indecipherable r61I.13 + 'APlC'tCllV(E'tOU)S ivo[ 88.,a lV(OtKtloovoc) t'pu() AE[( )]/Ao[()] 885·la
458•1•
Excluded from the sample: 'Ap]lctE(VEtOU)S lv(B,moovoc) 1(pa() Map() . 938,ra
8eooropo1) + EO n8•1b 89·"
eEroo~Po~Ot~O't(I'tou 546.1b
Aov[y]ou ivo(u(''tloovoc) lE' ivo(ii...-noovoc)s 0' 'Apicrer .. 90.[3 lvoIK(nrovoc)s at' Mapx:ou 946.1a
+ Ko(v)crav(tlvou) 666.1t ]P' c 'APlCtEl[ 91.13 • Mou() + ivo(11cnrovoc)s ~a'+ 976.1a
+ Ko(v)crCXV(-tlVOU)S (i)v s Iv 5 Remains Cemal Nadir SOk3g1
on lvB(IKtlOOVoe')B' s 'Ap[ 1°3.13 lv(B,Knoovoc) lP'M[ 983."
67°·13
+ Ko(v)cmvt(lvOU)SllV(OlXUWVOC)S Included in the sample: . [...] re"] ..] M() . . 119.13 + lvB(llCtlOOVOC)S
.N(I)lCl() rccs.rb
673·1b
+ KUPlUKOiinp(Ec)sP(UtEPOU)S . 8(Eo)ii xaplc 'Ayopactoii lv(BtlCtloovoc) lP' 31.1b lvB[(IK1:loovo~)-l MS[-] 137.13 P]u()fluu() 44.13
787·rb 10

[+] AOVYlVOU ..... 869,la e(EO)ii xaplc 'Avcroxioo iv(B'K1:tOOVOC) LP' 47.Ia ]pup()sA[ 161.la ] flUUAoU[ 1055·la
+Aovy~vou. 87°·13
iVO(llC'tlOOVOC)Sla's 'Aanplou 82.1a ivo(uC'tloovoc)s lP' BaCTlA.tKOU + 187.13 I1E'tpOU 1070.la
[. .. jMay[v]ou flp(E,)SP(UtEPOU)S 8(€O)ii Xap[t]c 'Ana[A]o[u] [iv(8u<ttoovoc)] tp' Iq.la + Fctoc + + with border 203·le I1E'tp(OU) iv(olx:n&voc) tW 1°75.1;1.
919·1a
+ ivdlKt(tOOVoc) ~'rrO:UAOU 1048.13
+ iv(BlKt;&VO~)lP' ~a() M[(E;)a(vttOu)]I Au[Sa(niou)]122.lb lv(Bl1<noovoc) 1;' ~up() rEA(udou) 216.1a + I1E'tp(OU) Ev(al1C'tt&voC) t"(' 1°77.13

+flEtp(OU)u + ivB(IKtlOOVOC).['pa() AjUE;() 123,Ia .Ll.lP.l'tplOU 282.13 + DE'Cp(OU) EV(01.K"tlrovOC) 1.y' I077·2a
1°94.13
Heroou ivo(U('UOOVQC) e" + i~iBlKnoovoc) ta' pa() AuE;u(vtlou) 126.1a + 'tiic vixu: (iVOIK'ttrovOC?) Aop.vou 338.,. Similar 1°77·33
1I09·1e
Fletpou vau1C(A."pOU)s 1128.r3
iv(BllCttOOVOC)I' Pu() AuE;a(~'lou) 148.2a K S + lVO(llCttOOVOC)s S' .6.o)1VO\'l oun:(ovou)s + pa() 340.la + ne'tp(ou) iv(ollcn&voc) ty' T077·43
iv(BtK1:toovoc)u' pup() <1>[ 1319.13
iv(B,lCt,OOVOC)lU'PU() Ausu(nlou) 149.,b, C [t)T\cviac (ivou c·nrovoc?) .6..pocEp(ia)s 342.13 [.. 1
+ flEtp(ou) Ev(B,Kt,OOVOC) 1078.13
Monogram no. 15 IHO"d
e(EO)U XaPIC BaCIA1[X:]OU lP'
Lv(on .."1"uiIVOC) 192.13 iv(BllCtlOOvoe)8' Pu() t..w() 347. la ty' B
+ fl"p(ou) Ev(B,Kt,OOVOC) 1080.1a
Monogram no. 33 8(w)u XaPIC Bocroplcc iV(OlK'TtOOVOC)LP' 193.le 'Emccviou 01' s 368.1a + ne-rp(ou) EV(OlK"tU:l:)vOC)ty'u 1081.1a
'384,ra
Eight-armed Christogram without dots between arms 8(EO)ii X.x[ptc] Bocxcctcc [iv(BlKtlOOVOC) .. 1 194.ra + 'Enupcviou 369." + fl"p(ou) Ev(BtK1:100VOC)
tY'~ T082.13
1398.la
Eight-armed Christogram with splaying at the ends 8(EO)ii xap[tc]t..lO~~Bouc[l]v(BlKttoovoc) [t]P' 3'0.la + lvB(IKtlOOVOC)S
I'· 'HAlOB(wpou)s 469." + I1hp(ou) EV(01.K"tlroVOC) ty' X. I083·Ia
of the arms
e(Eo)ii xaplct..lO~~Bouc lv(OtKtlOOVOC) t[Ph' 3Il,Ia + ivB(llCtlOOVOC)S
lB' 'HAAlOB(wpou)s 471.13 + Fletpfoo) [Ev(B,Knoovoc) .. l 1084.13
1400.IC
iV(OtK'ttOOVOC}0[' .... ]1t 8(to)u XaptC 1l.tOU iV(SlK'ttrovOC} tW 318.13 0e:ro8oupou+ 531.13 + flEtp(OU) with indiction lp'/ly'M' 1085.13
1664·r3
+ {VOlK[ ]s around central * 1700•13
(Pll Yl' t..iou
e(EO)ii xaplc lV(BtKtlOOVOC) 3'9.ra [.] 8EOMp9u [+]
+ ivB(IKtlOOVOC)s 534·1a + Fletctoo) Ev(B,Kt,OOVOC) lB' J087·13
88 PART II: CHRONOLOGY ANALYSIS OF BRICKSTAMPS AND BRICKS
.
,,~

TABLE 12 continued TABLE 12 continued

+ De'tp(ou) iv(Bu('nrovQc) t~' 1088.ra, b, iv(OtK<t&voc) y' ~a.() NE() 988.1a [Kocreveljvou [(]VO(t",&VOC)C ,W 696.1a Similar 666.14d
c Lost monogram ]392.13 K]uplaK(oii)s 779·1a Similar 666.16a
+ rrt:tp(ou) EV(OtK'ttWVQc) tW Io89·Ia 8(EO)ii xa[plc] 1406•13 + Kwvc'tav('tlvoU)S 817.lf, k + Korvlctcvt-dvoujs 667.rr. t, u
+ II,,<p(ou) ev(ou<tt&voc) l[.]' I090.Ja + 8(eo)ii [xaplc] 14°7.13 + Kcovctcvtrfvoojs 817·lh + Kotvjcrovcdvoo) + 668.1d
+ ITE'tp(OU) with indiction tp'fty'/to'/none 109I.1a + ivo(tK'ttrovoc)s la.' +11A 1437·1d + Kro(v)ctav(tlvoU) + 822.lb + Korvlctcvrflvoo) + 674·1C, d, V,

+ II.,p(ou) I093·2a ]O(lKn&;.'oc)s a.' p[ 1578.13 Kevcccvrtvoco) 83I.IC x

+ II",p(ou) 1°95.13 Uncertain . 1579.13, + AOUK&' OUXKOV(OU)s 880.Id + Kotvjcrcvrtvou or similar 675·5a
+ IIe,p(ou) K I096.ra 1580.13, + Muyvou npec~(u,'pou)s 92Lla + Ko(V)Cto.V'tlVOU + 676.13
+ IIe,p(ou) A 1097·1a 158I.13, MaJlii iVO(tK't1WVOC)S tc" 932•13 + Kotvjcrcvclvoc + 676'3C
+ [Il]e[,]p(ou)v 1098.la 1582.Ia, + MaJl& + 934·1a + Kotvjcrcvrtvou + 676.6b
+ II[e],p(ou) 0 1099·la 1583·Ja, + MEY(aATJc)s 'EKKA(TJdac)s iVO(tK'tlrovOC)S la" 96pb [Kocrcjvttvcu 692.1a
+ II",p(ou) -o IIOO.la 1584·la, MEy(&A~C)S 'EKKA(~cia.c)c 966.ra iv(otKn&voc) y' ~a.p() KUPla.() 77I.lb
Similar lIOI.13 158pa, MEY(&A~C)S 'EKK1c(~cia.c)s 967.10, r + KroVctav('tLvoU)S 817·1d,j,
1108.13 1586.la, MEy(UA~C)S 'EKKA(~cia.c)s 967.1g,k m,n
IIh[
iv(5ml&voc)~' ~a.() Ca.() rt 120I.13 '587·Ia MEY(UA~C)S 'EKK1c(~cia.c)s 967·2a + Kcovcrcvftfvou) 819·1h
+ Tooilovoo 1245.13 1682.13 + MEY(UA~~)S 'EKK1c(~cia.c)s 969·ra + Kcovctcvrivtou)s 821.rg
Tpjorpiufou) LVO(l~l&VOC) a.' + 1247.13 170I.Ia + Mey(uA~c)S 'EKKA('lda.c)s 969·1b iv(8lKn&voc) y' Ma.()s 893·}O
* ivo(tKnroVQc) tcTpociuoo * 1249.13
Justinianic Great Church, Hagia Sophia
+ Mey(UA'lC)S 'EKKA(~da.c)s
+ M£:y(Ct.Allc)s 'EKKA(Tjelac)s
969·rl MEY(UA~C)S 'EKK1c(~da.c)s 967.Ia, c, i,
+ LVO(l~l&VOC) la.'Tp(o)'I'i(ilOU) 1250.13 969·1P l,n
Included in the sample: MEYCt.~~TJc'EKKA.TjCla.C 97I.lb Similar
[.] Tp0'l'[til]OU + 1259.13 968.1b, h
Similar to + I'cdou + + without border 203·3a +'twv 'OpJl{~(oou) a.' monogram no. 12 + M£Y("A~C)S 'EKKA(~da.c)s
+ iVO(lK1<&VOC)~'Tpo'l'i[ilOU] 1262.13 I023·IC 969,1C, g, h,
+ I'eopviou 223·lb + Fletpou Mu] ... ]~ 1124·ra
+ iV(OlK1l&VOC)WTp[o]<piilOU 1263.13 97o•la
+ I'ecop(yiou) + iVO(tlC'tlWVOC)S tW + 228.la + Toootuoo iVO(tK'tlWVOC) la"
Monogram no. 22. 1356.Ia up.rh iv(8lKn&VOC)~' pa.p() M[ .. ] 979·1a
Monogram no. 3 I 1378.IC
+ .6.°11vou 337·IC l+l Tpo~iil[ou]lVO(l"'&VOC)s\Y' 1253·Ia iV(OlKn&VOC) y' ~a.(')Ma[ 98I.la
-c Aouvou 337·1d
Monogram no. 36 '386.,a Tpo[ u67·la Monogram no. 59 + Ileepoo i[v]o(l~t&voc) 10' a.+ [..] II14·la
+.6.o11vou 337·3' .+. Tpuqxovoc
Monogram no. 37 1386.23, b 1272.1e Fletpou Te0'l't(AOU) ~ 8£O'I'i(AOU) . II34,1b
+ 'EA1ca.3io[u] a. 355.1• Monogram no. Kupicxou (?) with border + IIo[A]uxpo[vi]ou Lvo[(tKn&voc) .. l
Monogram no. 36 or 37 '387·Ia 2. 1342·3d Iq8.I3
+E[~]~ .. [~] i[vjo[(tm&voc) 4~o.la Monogram no. Kopicoccii (?) with border iv(i;;~I&voc) ~'~,,( ) <Dep() ~
Monogram no. 28 139I.Ia 2. I342.Je 1279·Ia
+ 'Dccpiou 574·" Monogram no. 5. KUptaKOU (?) 1342·7a + Kcpte ~01\9(e)t <I>~5iilou iVO(l~I&VOC)s 1;' 128I.lb
Monogram no. 6 '393·"
+ 'Iocvvqc [.. ] eoj.r a Monogram no. I 5. Mdpcou, Mcxcpiou, Mccopocloo (?) 1350•1b + Kuoie ~[0]n8(£)1 <I>r][Oi(ilOU)] 1284.la, b
Christogram, 6 armed 1396.13
[Tjucvvou lVO(tlC'ttrovoc)s ly , 606.13
Christogram, 8 armed 1397.13, g Monogram no. 48. rEOJ[plYi[ou] (/) 1365·1a + <DlAO[.]AO.. + 1298.1a
+ K~[v]",[a.v(,ivou)s] 663·1a Christogram, six ar~s Monogram no: 2. KUPl<XKOU (?) with border
Christogram, 8 armed, splaying ends I400•lb 1396.1d 1342,31
Kotvjcrcvrrtvoo) 665·6a XlAl[-] (/) ivo(iKn&voc) a.[' Monogram no. I, 2 or J. KUPLaKOU (?)
Cross 14°3.13 1677·la 1342.9:1
+ Ko(v)ctC(.v(,ttvou) 666.11
Monogram no. 46. Fceiou
LVO(t~l&VOC)S y' ~a.() 1417.13 1363·la
+ Kc(vlctcrvf'rivou) 666.1Z
+ Ev8uc(nwvQc)s l;' + 1427.13
Excluded from the sample: Uncertain 1689·Ia
+ Ko(v)C'tav(rivou) 666·4Z + 'APEPKlOU lVO(tK'ttWVOC} y' I.Ia
+ E(V)Ot(K),(i)ovoc K 1432.13
+ Ko(v)ctav(-ttvou) 666-4bb [+] 'A[P]EpK[i]ou [i]vo(m&voc)s 1;' J.13 Baths of Zeuxippos
Uncertain 1588.la,
+ Ko(v)c't"av(t{vou) 66641 + 'A~tPK(OU ivo(lIC'tlwvoc)s~' + Included in the sample:
1683·Ia, 4·la
+ Ko(v)",a.v(,ivou) 666·4" + 'APEPKlO'l.) lV01K('t1rovOC}STJ" 8.Ib • + 'A~EpKiou ra.rd
17°2.13,
1708•13,
+ Kotvjcrcvutvoo) 666'5a + 'A~£PKiou [. . ... ] ILI3 + 'AAES&(V)Opou 4I.Ia
1709·la,
+ Ko(v)c't"C(.v(rivou)s 667·1d ~]~(
iAUS;'[() 128.1a 'Avfipeou s I~' 64·la
1710•13
+ Ko(v)c't"av('t"tvou)s 667-'h iV(OIKU&VOC)y' Ba.() / ~a.() 166.13 + 'Avopeou+ 66.ra
+ KO(V)C't"CIV(ttVOU)s 667·1X +ra.eio[u++] 205·1a + 'Aplc["]v,,o[u] Lvo(IKn&voc)s [..] 96.1a
Roofriles 1731•13,
+ Ko(v)",a.v(,ivou)s 667.1" + r~tOU + + without border 203 .ad, e, g. iV(Ol"'&VOC) W pa.p() A"~a.(",iou)
1733.13, 152.13
+ Kotvjcccvtrtvoc) + 668.lb
1735.13 h,i iV(OlKn&VOC) P'
pa.() re 263_13
+ Korvlctovttlvou) + 668.1e + I'eio]u] Lvo(tKn&voc)s IW + 206.13 + ll(~)~'l,pi[o]u 280.ra
Excluded from the sample:
+ Kotvjcccvrttvoo) + 674·1b + re.,p(yiou) [ ]+ 229·la iv(8lK<t&V~C) El' ~a.() 1l0()
+ 'A[~epKiou] iVOlK[(<t&voc)s .. ] 10.13 J23·Ia
+ Kotvjcrcvnivool + 674,Ij vt' ll~O +.6..o!-lVOU
'A]ptc,,[ 95,,. 270.13 337·3c
+ Ko(v)c'tav't(tvou) + 674·1P + lVO(tK"tlWVOC)S t"Seoooopou+ [+'Ep]ilia. [n(pec)]~u,epou
[iv(Ot~~&voc) ]a.' ~a.() A[,,]~() 143·Ia 533·1a 372.13
+ Kotvjcrovntvoo) + 674·rt iv(otKn&voc) y'~a. ']a.xO 56I.13 ~a.O ZwO e .
iv(oml&voc) a.' ~a.() A"S[a.("iou)] 144.13 444·Ia
+ Ko(v)c'tuv't"(ivou) + 674·IU + 'Ioxivv lC + KO n(VolKn&voc) W'Hil~O
[y'] 0' ~a.O EUc,a.() 407·1a 604·la 475·1b
+ Ko(v)C't"UV't(lVOU) + 674·IW + '].,[6v]vlc +;,[ 605·Ia + 'Hcloopi[ouiKollt'toc (i.e. KOJlTJ't"OC)
ivo(tKn&voc)s~' ~a.PE() 'I1ca.() 57o.1b 478.1a
+ Kotvjcecvnvoo 675·1a 'Icicvvou ·i.vO(l~'tlWVOC)s 11' 608.13 8EOOoo'tOU oTJ1tota'to~
'Iro(u)v[vou] LVO(IK~;&VOC)sy's ~a.[O] 613·Ia 539·Ja
+ Korvjcrcvrtvoo + 676·3h + 'Iexivvou ~Kp()S .. 618.2:1 + 'IAa.pi(ou) iv8(t~l&VOC)S W
£VOt(Knrovoc)s ,( pa.() 'Iroav~o'u 614.13 572.2a
Similar 676'5c + Ko(v)c'tav('tlvoU) 666.11 'Ioxivvou iVO(lIC'tUf>VOC)S 1.
iv(olm&voc)y'IJa.() Kup( )/Ku() p 743.1' 6°7.13
Similar 676.6d + Ko(v)Ctav("tlvoU) + 'IroCt.~v·ou KOAOKUV8ou
KU[pta.K(oii)]s 1t[pE(C~U"pou)s] 782.la· 666.4c, j, 0, 6q.r3
[Kovctjcvtdvoo)s 690.1a u,w,y,:1:1 + 'Ioxivvou CKpt( )
~1Jpt<;tlC(OU)S npe(cpu'tepou)s 783·Ia 619·rc
 ·, .. ~
•
PART II: CHRONOLOGY
ANALYSIS OF BRICKSTAMPS AND BRICKS

TABLE 12 continued
TABLE '}. Correspondences of names between IQ of the samples listed in Table 12. The 10 samples constitute Group,
+ Kovovoc-e 649·ld +CO[-]VX[-] I.l23·1a

~I
666.lc C<E<p6.(vou) -fl .~
+ Kotvjcccvtrtvcc) 122 4.13
~
ld
v
-0 -0 v
+ Ko(v)ctav(tlVoU)S 667'IZ + Gt€(j)G:vou 1225·Ib j -0 -0 -0 -0

+ Ko(v)C'tav«,vou) + 668.1. Cocevvcc iV[O(ll("(l&VOC)]STl~ + 1229. ta U

~
U U U d .s~
+ Ko(V)CtaV'tlVOU 675·IC + Tp{)(p(!)(~oc) ivo(uturoyoc)s n" 126,.Ia
:;;
g -5
u
~ ~ ~
~ ~ :5~ -5 ~
!'l
+ Kotvjcccvrlvco
+ Kotvjcrcveivoo
675-4a
675·6a
+cI>ro,(lVOU
Xptctoinc
J3IJ.Ia
I335·Ia .~ § 0 '" ." ~
0 ~ ~
0

~
~ .9 ~
~ .. ~ e9 -<
-0
0.
~ '"~ :5~
.~ ] 0
-5
J
!'l
Cl ~ ~
0

'" .9 a1;l °e ::E,.., ~v .•

.9
-0 ~
a
~" -<
with border
:il .S .9 'B-<" " ~
V)
Kp(t),tlVVOU + 698.13 Monogram no. 3- Kuptnlwu(?) 1342.51 'OD -0
s « 13 'B :il .S .9 ..:
136r.d
.,. .s'B '0
0
Kopicxo'ii 772.la Monogram no. 45. r<I£IOU
.~ .~ ~ E -0
;; E E .~
.~ § ~
13
..
0
-"" ~
If ~ ~ ~ ~
-0
P'
>. ~I~ ';;'
KUptClKOU 772.23 Monogram no. 27· ? iV(OtlC'tlWVOC) 1382.]a s s " :.!"
!i >. ~
u

u 6 A: ..:
0

+ a lVO(llc:noovoc)s
N

6 ~ 6 6 N ..-,
0
~
+ K.,(v)cmv<'v(ou)s
MaK(E)O()0
825·n
ivo(tK'tui,yOC)S
re"
re"
1422.la

1423.13
Name cc "
'"
0
b
V)
Name
""' "
""'
~ '" .xi b 0
~ U
929·la
MaKEO() 0 I MaKEOo() 931.13 EV + SlK(tOU) 1434.13
MEOoMou+ 97z.Ia lVOIK('tlOOVOC) v 1436.la 1. Sampled brickstamps with names that occur at more than one site 2. continued
Nucneotooo) 1004.13 (Trittm) d(ominorttm) n(ostromm) in(dictione) I 1446.Ia 'AP,O, 'AP,pO AU/;evO
NIKl<pOp(OU)s [.]KlpOU[..] 1011.13 OTl1tOta'tou 1 544.la 'A100 AUpvO?
+I1au1..o(u)+ [Op.la Possibly KUp(I)E 1628.13 'AvOpEa rEO
+ I1~<p(ou)
Fletpofu} O'
1°93.13
11°4.13
Excluded lrom the sample:
+ .6.toJLn0J.l0U lVD(llCtlWVOC)S re" <X A, F3·1a
) 'APECO
Bac() or Bccu ) ,1
r,o
fpO
DE'tp01) Ot~(K6vou) Eu'tolXtav(au) IUS.ld + 1>IO~[~O]ou(vO[... ] 315.,13 rpao np]a[
+ I1,,<pouE"e«6.0)IC II23·I3 EUO f[
E,,<O 1>av()
'HAlO, 'EA10 1>TjO
'HC'UO 1>Tj~O
eEO 1>lOYEO
Table '} shows the samples that constitute Group I. The sixth century. However, only a small proportion of all the names eEO() 1>00
name-correspondences that determine the samples belonging to on sampled bricks appears in Section, of either Group. eEO() 1>,aKo(vou) 1>"0
this Group are given in Section , of that table. The Group The larger number of names in Section 2 of Groups, and 2 are 'laxO, 'IXO 'EAXI()
includes the samples from three sites that are certainly fifth- less reliably dated to either the fifth or the sixth century, since, 'Icct ) EuruO
century: the Palace of Antiochus, St John of Stoudios, and the although they appear on stamps within samples, they do nor KuO '4 ee~O
Cistern of Aspar. The sample from the pre-Justinianic church occur at more than one site. Despite the attempts made to KupO/KuO 6 eeoc()
may, for the moment, only be ascribed to the second half of assemble samples of contemporary material for each of the sites KUpI()/Kup() e£[
1\00 'Ioul )
- the fourth cenrurg-onre-che early fifth century. Samples from in Group I and 2, it is possible, for reasons discussed earlier/
1\0vO 'IcIOO
undated sites in this Group are from the cistern on Siraselviler that a number of brickstamps included in a sample are not con-
Caddesi, the cisterns in Giilhane, the remains near Mercan temporary with the majority. Since the material in Section 2 of
I\ou( ) 'I.,(6.vvou) ~
MaOs 4 KaO 6
Caddesi, the Byzantine drains of the Mese, Balaban Aga Tables r j and, 4 carries names that are not known at other sites Map() KllMypo(u)
Mescidi, and TokJudede Mescidi (sample 1 only). Given that in the same Group, that Section may contain some sampled na() KOKO
three fifth-century samples have been assigned to this Group, it material that is not in fact contemporary with most of the I1uO Koc()
follows that most of the sampled material used in all these struc- material in the sample. 'POlO KupiA(OU)
tures is to be dated, in general terms, to the fifth century. Some material suspected of having been reused from an CaO '3 K[.]
Table '4 shows the samples that constitute Group 2. Again, earlier period, or of relating to a later repair (whether included or TpoO I\EO
the correpondences between names that determine the samples excluded from the samples) is listed in Section 4 of Tables I} and 'YxO MoO
that belong to this Group appear in Section, of the table. The '4. Such material has been isolated on the grounds that it does tlhAO l\O'yoO
t!>.,O Maup()
Group includes names horn three sites that are certainly sixth- not fit certain stylistic criteria. These criteria have been estab-
century: St Polyeuktos (C.5'0-22), Hagia Sophia (5}2-}7), and lished by an analysis of the best-dated material in the Group 2. Sampled bricks tamps with names that occur at only one site Ma[
the Baths of Zeuxippos (after 5 }2). The undated samples from concerned-the material in Section I-and are listed below. MoiMou
'A10 NeO
the remains on Cemal Nadir Sokagi, the remains on Ismetiye 'AJC(%JCi(ou) NECO
Caddesi, and from TokJudede Mescidi (sample 2 only) also fall 'AKUO NIKaO
into this group. The majority of the bricks in all six samples is 'Muo N(I)lCll()
therefore to be ascribed, in general terms, to the sixth century. 'AvaO I10'
Since the names in Section, of Group' (Table I}) or Group 2 'APIO I111<O,I1aO
(Table '4) occur on sampled stamps at more than one site, they 'ApoO I1auO
are the names most reliably ascribed to either the fifth or the 'ACKA.Tj(XlOU) I1e,( )
See Part IfCh.jvsecr.fb.
4
'ACK[
 PART II: CHRONOLOGY
ANALYSIS OF BRICKSTAMPS AND BRICKS
93
TABLE 13 continued
TABLE t4- Correspondences of names between six of the samples listed in Table I2. The six samples constitute Group 2

'5
~ -0'fl v '5 -'" -"
]o
-0 v v
-0 -0
Jl 0
""
() " il
o
1l
()
~v -0
U
1l ~v '5
.!01
-0 '"
.~
.-s 0
.-s
"
v
~ a~ ~ .9
~ ~ ~ ~ 'B
-e
Z ~ ~
~ ~ :oS~ -fi ~ .. j 6 il
0

J 1.'9
0
~
-fi ~
<)
1; ,"
'a us (J) 'g I~ -0 ~ee ~ B
0
,~
l":g
1: ~ ~
1; ,p
'g *1:. -0
.~
~ ~v
0
-0

"
:;
" U
.~ :.2 IY ~ " :.2 ~
.!'i
.~ .8 .~ 'Cl « ~ ,'"
" 'gc ~a -01l 'Cl'"
v v
.~
US c
« 1l
:§ .S .S 'Cl
:g e El v .~ .§ a -0c
,'" 1l
« '"
8
! El " 0
c,
0
.~
~ is I!~ u
I.] "
c, 0 'B
.~

." p
II~ ~ v
~ ·1
.<0 Jl
:>I g, ~
0

.". cJs s ~c, El ~

11
.:E
0 .~ 8 '"
s ~ .... .~'"
.; v"~v
. ~
= a j
0

'"
~
0

·f ~
a
P

~ ~
u
-" u
::;;! ~ t'N III v
"c, ~ ~ f-< ~ 8
>-- 0
1l 0 .8
Name lA; (j
'" '"
0
Name J: 8 ~ cq>-- ~ f-< 0 '=
~ (j .S
~ 0 '2
"cl -0
I.'~
e
~~ ~
@ 'Cl 11
-0

"
2. continued
ITpo()
Name J .D

'" ~
-n
~ '" ~ ~
'"
::;;!
0
f-<
Name
~
1<;:
.D

'""
0 '2
.~
I'y.; 2- ;,OXl
'oS ~
0
f-<

pour) 4. Brickstamps not of Group I style I. Sampled br'ickstamps with names that occur at more than one site 2. continued

Ccnot ) Included in the sample 'AB'PKiou lipocEpia

Tt~OK() 'APtC't'EVE'tOU 4 'EANx8iou
'Av8peou
<DtO Boccoptcc
AtiW or Ati~a() '4 6 'Emqxxviou 2
A.[ BaclA1KoU, BaCllA.llCOU 'Epllia npe:ci3u'tepou
'Emppcviou
A[ Fcdou 'H~tOo()
'Epuic; 2
E[ lifJIlTJ'tpiou, l1tJ-lt'tplou 'Hcifiopuou) Koptroc
Kocrcvutvoo) 6
T[ KUptaKOu 1tpEC
1iOj.lVOU
eEo8()
<D[ 8EOOropOU, 8EO06po'U, 8EWOOUpou 7 eEo8[
AOUKUOtci,K
e[ 'Ixcptoc e.OOOUAoU
Ma~i~ou
Other 4 9 fIE'tpOU .
'Izocvvou 8€OoaHou lill1to'tCX-roU
Koc() 'IctxO
fIE'tpOU litaKV
3. Names on bricks tamps excluded from the sample Korvlctcvrtvoo, Kovcrcvclvou [8 25
ME"{()s 'EKU( )s 'Iecvvoo
'Ay() KUPWKOU 'Icicvvnc
Xpncrou VOU~EPl
Bac() Kcvcrcvtivoo, KroVC't1XV'tivQU 'Irccvvou KOAOJCUv8ou
Monogram
fEO Christogram
Krovcrcvttvou, Kcotvjcrccrtvou 13 'Icicvvou CKP
fpa.() Mcpcupiou Kovovoc
Latin inscription
At() I1auAou Kocrcvdvou 6
'EArrt() Excluded from the sample Fletpou 29 2 Kprrivvou
Eti<() Toociuou 6 Koxvjcrcvrtvoo
Tcelou
'HAt() Tpoqxcvoc AEOV'tlOU
Tpopttuoo)
ee() XPlC'tOU or Xpnctou AOUKUA1WCOV(ou)s
Koc() iVOtK'ttOOVOC
without name 4- Mce-voo
The numbers in the table indicate the total number of catalogue entries. The specific
Kup() entry numbers may be established by consulting Table 12,
Monogram 3 Mcvvcu rrpEcB
Au() Christogram MaKE80
Ma()s Ma~ii
2. Sampled bricks tamps with names that occur at only one site
NEC() M6:plCOU
Nrccvt ) ,AA.~avlipou MeyaA.llC 'EKKA.f]dac 12
0[ ;AVOPEO~ ME8ooo'tou
IToOAr() 'AyuSovilCOU Mou()
ITOAC(), ITo( ) Ac() 'Ayaml'wu N(t)KtO
PoO 'Avopectoil NtKT]q>6p(ou)
pour) 'Avcrocioo Nucupotpoo) Ktpou (?)
Cccu ) 'Awqpiou 'OwiI;8(ou)
cross 'Ap[ ITauO
Fingermarks 'A't'tO:A.oU
ITau[.]
Missing!uncertain! AtiO IT.Aa( )
none A[ Flerpou OlUKOVOU E1l'tOtx.wvou
Bocxoptcc Flerpou Euct(a)9tc
fEOPYlOU Fletpou Mn] ...]
f·",pO Ccsoooou
AtO~1\liou Col
Alou Creecvou
 ..~.,
PART II: CHRONOLOGY ANALYSIS OF BRICKSTAMPS AND BRICKS
94 95
TAJlLE 14 continued TAllLE 15. Inscriptions on stamps in Group I, Section I (see Table 13)(C. first half of fifth century)

-'" -"0 'APlO, 'APlPO 454.1• I]NHHAI Kup()!Ku()

a Ipa IflAS2.6.1I1I
.:;; -a ':i :a
Vl

r4.ra QUiA..i1l1I
455·ra +INIHi\!
IAHINI+
75o.Ia INIBAKYP
INVIBAKYP
~ Z -o
Z H5·23 753.la

~ ~ Ipa IN8AB( 459.10 +IN .HAIS 754·ra INVUYP

u 1 u
v 1 .a~ ~
'AyoO 'Hcut ) 75P' INhIKYP
.~ uc .a
es
-a·0 .~ u~ 758.la I1I1€IBAJUP
Cl.

lif
<'l
El °
c,
Cl. Cl.
1 28.la IN€I<!'K€BAAfO 482.la INHBAHCY
INEIBAKJ.U

1 .~
11 0 0 0
° .jl ~ INAIBAALO 482.Ib ditto 77o.la
.~ ~
Vl
~ ~ Vl

§ j~
.~ ditt~ .. 770,Ib ditto
1: ~
N 1l~ ° a
Vl Vl 483.13 IN8AAHCY

:;
u
0
.~ N 1l INBIBAAfO IN8BAHCY .7p·la. INIBBAKYP
'0 -c 484·ra
.~ I;; rill -o
~ .~ ~ ~ INNIBAAfO INIBA·HCY
~ ° ::;j a 0 ::;;;
27·la 485·Ia KUPl()!KUp()
~ '" 2, ~ b ~ ~ en"" 2, ~
ditt~ ..
!
..0 ..0
27·Ib 48I.Ia INSBAHCY 764·ra INSBAKYPI
Name Vl
'" OQ
0
Name Vl ~ b 0
24.13 01AAff3l1J 481.Ib ditto 8°5·1a INIlIEAP€KYPI(
'AvOp£Ct. 48I.IC ditto AoO
2. continued 3. continued
52·lb IN·.6.I·BA+ANC>P€ 8E() 86pa IN.6.IBAAO
Coxcvvcc aPIC
I I
8EOUX ditto .. .
p.IC 494·ra INilJBA8€ 863·lb ditto
Tpodovoo Chrisrogram 2
p.la ditto 49I.Ia IN.6.BA8€·
Tpo[ AovO
4. Brickstamps not of Group 2 style 53·la I1I1€IBAP€A1I1.6.P€A IN.6.IBAAON
~OYt{vo'U ditt~ . .. . . 8eoO 867·Ib
XlA.t Included in the sample 53·Ib 503·la IN€lWK€BA8€O 867·IC ditto
Indecipherable fu() 'APECO 502.Ib INIii·BVhE8EO 867·Id ditto
Rooftiles r[ 84.ra INSAP€C 502.la ditto Aoot )
Cross .6.o() 84.Ib ditto··
8eoO 8UXKO(VOU) 877·ra IN€IWK€BAAOY
Uncertain 6 .6.w() 8;.r" INB AP€C +INSZ8€O.6.IKO
j09·Ib 877.23 INtlWK€BAA15
Missing/No name 85,lb ditt~· . 8ElO.6.IKO .
Ku()Ev() po.1a 876.1a INITBAAOY .
ZooO 85.ld ditto l8€O.6.Iiq ditto
3. Names on hrickstamps excluded from the sample
5II.Ia 876.Ib
H~1l0 Beer), Bccu ) 509·ld +iNSZ8€O.6.IKO Mo()s
'APEpKiou KOl..KU()!Kal..() Ku() 174.la IN€EABAC 'IoxO, 'IXO 899'3" I1I1IBMA'"
Ail~ KUPlO or Kup() I73.Ia INf,IiABAC
594·ra INBBAIX 895·ra INHMA~
.6.LO~~80u,.6.~o~~8ou AE()or Ao() 176.ra IN8+BABVC
563·la 1Nl BAlAX 895.23 11I1HMA'"
'Ircovvoo AEOVO 178.la IN8BABACI
563·lb ditto 895-3" Simila~t~ 895.1, 2.
Korvlcrcvrivou 22 Map() 17B.rh ditto
'Ioot ) 896.ra I1I18MA'"
KUptaKOU 1tpEC CaO r Sr.ra INBIBAC[ IN.6.IMA~
577·IC INEIBAIOft..( 900.IC
Flerooo Latin inscription 179.ra INIBABACI
576.IC INEIBAIOA Mcp'( )
Monogram
Missing/uncertain

'Avy{M,u
Excluded from the sample
.6.~O
Eoccct )
..- ..- ..- 184.ra
'77.la
fpaO
IN8BABCJ
IN C>EAEACI 577·1a
577·rb
KuO
INBIBAIOA[
'ditto
939·la
941.1a

942.1a
INBIBAMAP
IN.6.IBAMAP
IN€IBAW,p
'Alptcre] 249·Ia lBArPA
'Iax() 700. la INSBAKY I1o()
[aio'U" 245·ra IN8BAfPA
Kup( ) or Ku() VQ1r:NI . zo r.ra IN8BAKY 1026.la IN.6.IBAITA
fEOlPO 246.Ia
MaOs
246.2a VQ1I1I1I 705·la IN. (.BAlKY 1026.23 INiIl'BArrA
'Ep~oye() tv(iil1('tlrovoc)[.] Ma[ 706.la lBAKY I1uO
8£Ooropo'U
M[ EuO lIKJ.
707:1a II74·Ib 8YI1.6.1I111I
8EOOropO'U Ol1tO'tO:'tO'U
NeO 384·la II1€IBA€Y 7lJ.la IMABAKYH
II77·rb I1I1l\lLITYA
'JAct()
<DEPO 388.1. [I]NIA€YS lKiH·
714.13 II74·13 8YI11\.1I1I1I
'Iccvvoo CKp()S
The numbers in the table indicate the total number of catalogue entries. The specific EiHO 726.13 I1YXI( I1I1.6.ILITYA
1177. la
K ...ctcvrfvou
entry numbers may be established by consulting Table 12. 42o.Ia lIBA€YT 71I.13 1YXAffA1I1I
Kuptcf ) 410.Ia INAE:YT INmWK€BAKY€ POlO
712.13
Kcvctcvrtvou 1191,13 lQ)q(
418.1. INf,IBA€YT 730,1:1 I1I1E:iBAKJ.C .
A6vrou 2. THE CHARACTERI;iTICS OF BRICKSTAMPS
4r8.rb ditto . ditt~ . 1186.13 INABAP(J)
730•Ib
Aovvivou IN THE FIFTH AND SIXTH CENTURIES
418.ld ditto 73o.IC ditto CaO
Muyvo'U 1tp(e:c)s~('U'ttpo'U)s 1I96.la INABAr::AB
419.ra Identical or similar to q r S. 73o.ld ditto
McyO:A.'l1c 'EICKA.'l1claC II
Using the brickstamps in Section I of Groups I and 2, which INAUiicAS
418.lc JNMBA€YT 73O.le ditto 1I99·r3
naUAO'U are the most accurately dated brickstamps in those Groups, a INAIBACA·
'I-ll..l, 'EI..lO 73o.2a I1I1€IBVKJ.C Il94·Ia
Flerpou VCl.UKAr1p0'U INAIBACAI1
reliable analysis of the characteristics of the bricks and stamps of 456.la (IlNfIHAI 732.la I1I1[...BAlKYC 1202.13
Flerpou TEO~lO INIiIBACAP
both the fifth and the sixth centuries may be undertaken. Tables 452.ra II1ZBAE:AI 733·Ia IN€IBAKY( 1205·la
DOA,uXpoVtOU I206.13 (Il1l1€BACAC[
15 and 16, which show the inscriptions on the bricks in Section I 453·la +INZI-li\l
<D1]ii(~ou I20S.1a lCAT
<DlM,[.]I..O of Groups I and 2, respectively, facilitate this stylistic analysis. 460.Ia lAI
 ..~..
96 PART II: CHRONOLOGY ANALYSIS OF BRICKSTAMPS AND BRICKS
97
TABLE '5 continued TABLE 16 continued

I220.Ia INJBACA[ I24I.Ia jAITPO <l>t1..() 532.13 C + 673.1• B +KOC B [KOCTANj

696.1a
Tpo() 124'2.13 lNIVBAP€TPO 1294·la INJTJBA<l>IA IN.t.ISS TVN [TI]NOY
+IN.t.TPO+ 'Yn() 1289.13 lNA<DlA[ 8€O.t.O T2HN2 [ljN.t.c1B
1238.13
lll1VHTqO IN.t.IEAYI1 <l>0l() 1;15+ 681.13 B Probably rhe same as 664.1;
1239.13 1276.13 KUPlUKOU
OQTINl+ INIBA<l>ffi 538.lb C q'+O 666.1,4,6,8; 667, 668,
1240.13 1276.1b ditto 1306.23 777.13 C ElY
jBATPO 1277.13 INJl.IJ5AYn jNfBA<l>in ~o).t.3e 669,679·
1243·1a I30S.1a [KjYXPI
3/"0 68I.23 Probably the same as 665,
AKA[OjY
'IAapio'U 666,667,668.
INP[ .. j
574·ra B +IAA 687·1a D BA
IC
TABLE 16. Inscriptions on stamps in Group Secti~n (see Table 14) (c.late fifth and sixth centuries) PlOY IN.t.ISrCTANTI
2, I 775·la B KYPI
572.23 B +[I]AAPI KO
AK2
'A~EpK(OU 148.23 D I .t.tO~~OOU [1]N[.t.2]B 663·la B +KO[N]
779·1a D S2IAIQY[2I
I2.Id B +AB€ N 3]0.13 C ey CT[ANS]
'Icccvvou 772.13 A :IlXiQY21
PKI15' I .t.IOXMH 665·6a B :)021
606.Ia B [I]WAII1I11 772.2a A 6XAlq)(
S.Ja B +AB€PKI15 AM .t.OAYC II1AT
15IN.t.2I1 Kcovcrovrtvoo, Kcitvjcrcvdvou
IN.t.iKSH· Y [ljNP[I]B 666.rI B +KOC
6°7.13 'B iWAMII1' 820.lf B Probably the same as 817,
'AptC'tEvE'WU
2 [IC) TAN
15ill1.t.21.
88.Ta A +~PICTAIN2IN.t.[ A 3II.Ia C m 666.12 B ditto 8,8 or 819 (S, C, or nothing
D i .t.IOXMH Koc() B terminates the inscription).
89·Ia A AP]ICT€2 '49·lb 666'42 +KOC
N .t.OAVC 656.la A ..... KOC TAII1 8ZI.Im B +KWNCT
9o.1a A INV2I1.AdDT31.
lA INPiB 657·la A +KOC+ 666·4bb B dino ANTINS
9I.ra A ]BcAPiCT€I[ .
AaA IC 657·IC A ditto 6664f B ditto 831.la C DII1~
96.la B +APIC[TE] CTAII1
II1E:TO[Y] Y .6..6jlvOU 657·ld A ditto 666·4ii B ditto
2 B +KOC KIDII1
IN·.t.2[ ..] B +f,0 Kovctnvrfvoo, Kotvjcrcvefvou 666·50
337·1C 8)'·7a C Ii1~
A NNOY 658.Ta B HN.t.S TAII1
Msa() D ditto ~II1VT
149·IC B dittO NOY 667·ld B +KOC
I2I.le A +III1IBBAAYA B INt,.[ 337·1d KIIJl1C
137.13 B +f,0 TANTI TANS
125·1a A +INIBAAY~A 337·3' 8)1·9a Probably the same as type I
AY~[ V'II111 +KONC 667·lh B ditto
I25·2b A +lliIBAAY:!A D I Ofl·
Ip.13
B +THCN 660.,b B +KOC 667·IX ditto
A +INIBAA YzA 338.la
125·3a N €AC.t.O TAN 667·lii B ditto 832.13 D "'i
125·4a A +INIBAAYEA +QAaS12.t.1I11+
B WNOV Sf,INS 668.lb B +KOC . ;S: .
126.2a A +INIABAAY:S' A
BAB B +11111.221 660.23 B +KOC TAN+
126·4a A +III1IABAAY3A 34o.Ia 83)·la D
Y MO.t.8Z TA[N] 668.le B ditto
126'7a A +INIABAAXZA Sf..[INS] ;$
A +INL<\BAAY3A
J 1I10Yf,I 674·,b B +KOCT
+KWII1t>[
I26·3b A ANT+
Aa+2)lA 664·Ja B [+K]ONC
u6.8e A +III1IABAAXZA
BCXClA.l1CQU, BaCllAtlCOU B +1.0' . [TA]NTIN 674-lj B ditto
A +III1IBBAAYS'A 337·)C D
127·la
187·la B +AO)lI V'II1R 665·ta B KOC 674·IP B ditto 834-" "'i
135·la A ]AXZA[ +III1Va8mAa
VH:)Va TAN 674·lt B ditto
148.1a D I 8eooropou, 8EOOOPOU,8ewooupou ;$
iN.t.2ia 66502a B KOC 674·IU B ditto
N 53I.I3 B +qOY 834·" D "'i
I 192.1a C e? .t.OV
TAII1 674·1W B ditto
+IlI1va8nQAa
BAXCI 665'3" B KOC 675·,a B +KOCTA
ABA 8€W ;s:
AiA[K]OY NV~ NTINOY
y 534-Ia C [.]2VII1I+ 835·1a D "'i
INPIB 66504' B [KjOC 676·3h B +KOCTAN
2 038 +III1V2L8nQAa
IC cV.t. II1V~ TINOY~ .. ;S:
A
I'cdo» 666.lr B +KOC 676'5c Probably the same as type I,
148.6a D I I'O'I 837.1• D "'i
203·1C B +fA+ TAN 2,J Of4·
N [~] +IN.t.2f8nPAiII
IOY+ 666·4a B +KOC 676.6d B Probably as type) or 4.
I 53P' C OQW.t.038 arranged in a ;$
203·3a B cp. 203.1, 2 TAII1 661.lb B KOCTAN
ABA circle 838.ta Probably the same as 8)2.1,
666·4b B ditto 2MN2
Y 1illJ.l.ll'tPlOU, .l1.1)l1:tpiou 536.la C O'I (j).t. 03 e arranged ill a 834·I-2,835·r.
.t.IMI 666.lp B :)021+ Ko(v)c1"(XV'tlVOU or Kw(v)C't(XV'tlVQU
15 282.Ia B circle around a central Y 84o.la D o-l
II1AT 694.13 B [KO]CTA[N]
A TPIOY 536.1C C ditto
+.t.MH 667·lbb B +KOC [TljNOYI
122.1b A +iIl1IBBAAY[ 280.Ia B 5)7.13 Similar to 535, 5)6. +KWII1I>CT[A]N
TANS [N].t.2B+
123·1a A +IN.t.. [... ]VE TPI[O]Y 5)8.la C Q+O ;$
672.lb B TAN 690.Ia B [ ]
126.1a A +INiABAA'i:jA ~m.t.3e
3f..O T2IN2 [ ]ANS
 ..~..
PART II: CHRONOLOGY
ANALYSIS OF BRICKSTAMPS AND BRICKS
99
TABLE 16 continued
TABLE 16 continued
B +Kc!)N 107o.1a Al5QYTI I09I.Ia B + I1E'tp(OU) with indiction
Tpuqxovoc Christogram with eight
CTANS 1075·la B IT € l~'fly'M'fnone
.g.' ~ I269·ra B +TPYIDc!) 139I.Ia C lJ arms
817·lh B ditt~ I093·la B IT e IN1I.SH IN1I.H
B ditto T P 139Pg ditto
8I7.lk + B +TPYID 1393·Ia Cm: 1400.Ib Christogram with eight
822.Ib B +Kc!)C B IT e H T P
c!)NOC B tliJ>
.g.~ 134Z·3d the-ends
arms that splay at
TAM+ B :3 IT
'.g. Xptcroi), Xpnctou 134z·3e B ditto Chrisrogram with six arms
83I.IC C ~iY1Q ;$ B ,\l,r)
13z6.la A XPHC. 1342·7a B +eN1I.
CTAY1 T P W ~ b
KrnY1 1077·2a B IT € H B IT € 1335.la B XPIC rj cc.rb BM iKSZ+
.g.' Is: .g.' TOYK 1365·ra B i' B +E1I.JT
B +KWCT
AN;TINS 1356.la B 14 I342·5f B t\0t ONO(K
T P W T P
c14 1361.If . B 4- D eN+viK
B iN1I.2 B Same as type I or 2, B IT e I378.le
TIN02 BITe H
.g.' 1386.la
1386.za
C~
c:M
1382.13
c"'z N D M2II1I.lI1J
CTAN + T P2I
C ditto
Key to shape codes:
+KOm Z 1097.13 BITe 1386.zh 1396.IC Christogram with six arms A= Single-line
828.la C +KW T P W .g.' 1387·Ia C variants of monogram nos. 1396.Ia ditto B = Multiple-line
N21N B IT e (.] T PA 36 and 37 Ce Circular
De=Cruciform
,ie + [.] B [IT] e
ZI .g.'
Mcptupiou
952·la D T P W [T] PY1
IOSO.1a B IT1I.ei... B IT [e]
O:J
.g.' Is: .g.'
+IN1I.::;;:TYPI
4! . T P W T PO a. Stylistic analysis of material in Group I, Section I been found (w;'-tO' at the remains on Mercan Caddesi; lW-lE for
~ Io8I.Ia B IT e':' 1100.[3 BITe (see Table 15) the fifth-century material at Tokludede Mescidi; la'-y at
.g.' Is: .g.'
949·2a C 8Y Balaban Aga Mescidi; tr'-a' at the Palace of Antiochus). The use
T PY W TPY The bricks tamps in Group I, Section I have the following
MAXPT of INlfI. would, of course, have avoided any ambiguity, but no
roga.r a B
ITyei... characteristics:
YPAIOY 1101.13 B Similar to 1095-1100.
ambiguity seems.to have been perceived in this period.'
INPIB + II04-Ia B IT er I. The bricks tamp is rectangular and carries a single line of
;$ p.Ia, b, c show a dot dividing IN Irom Al. On 28.Ia, 503.la,
IC + text, generally without any break between each element of the 712.13,877.13, z a, a cross within a heart or leaf and the abbrevi-
95o.la C m T P W P oe inscription.
B IT € H' r roa.ra B nert ation KE follow the year, but these features are restricted to
MAXP[T] .g.' Is: 2. The inscription begins with the abbreviation for lVOtK-
YPA[IOY]
stamps made in a singleyear.' 52.13, b, c, 502.la, b, 1026.23 have
Tpooiuou ttiiivoc. In only a few cases is it preceded by a cross (453.Ia,
T PX W a dot dividing the indiction number from the following abbrevi-
INP[ ..]
BITE (.]
1264.13 C m 455.Ia, 459.Ia, 509.lb, d, 1238.Ia, 124o.la). The abbreviation ation BA or BAPE. 176.Ia has a cross following the indiction
lC TPX[OID]
+ [.] used is regularly IN; INfI. occurs on only four·examples (IJ.Ia, number .
ITauAou IMAOY
[Z] "77.Ia, b, 1239.Ia). On only four examples is the abbreviation 4. The abbreviation BA follows, although this is frequently
I049·Ia A [1]N1I.2ITAYAOY INP[ .. ]
T P [W] IN or INfI. followed by the abbreviation sign S (13.Ia, 243.Ia, omitted. BAPE also occurs on a small number of examples
1055·la B ]YOAYAn[ IC
B + ITe'tp(ou) ~ith indiction A TP]OIDIMIY111.A+ 509.rb, d).
IOp.la A +ITAYAO+ I247·Ia (53. la, b, 5°2.13, b, 805.1a, 1242.la). 52. la, b, c have a cross
lWflr'flO' A *"!enIDOQTAI1I.Y11* 3. The indiction date (one or two letters) follows. Two-letter
Ilerpou J249·Ia following the BA abbreviation.
B IT €I> A +IN1I.IATPcDI indictions are often reversed (i.e. AI' for LA', etc.)." Sixty-two
1250.13 5. One Of, occasionally, two names follow, and are usually
1II2.Ia C 8Y + ~ 1259·1a B [.lTPOID examples in Group I show a reversed two-letter indiction, abbreviated to their first two, three, or four letters. 184. I a, how-
IT€TXPl5 Z
iNAIB T PW
C
[IM]OY+
1I.Y1I+
;"herea~ only twelve examples have the iota in the initial ever, gives the first, third, and fourth letters (B(a)ct( and the »;
P position (388.Ia, 502.Ia, b, 7p.la, 876.1a, b, 899.3a, I 174.la, b, five- and six-letter 'Avop€(a) and 'Avop€a occur (51. la, b,
1088.la BITe OQTH
IC Is: .g. 1177.la, b, 1242.13). Even when the year was fourteen, it was c, 53. la, b). Some name-abbreviations are followed by the
[l5M]IID usual to write the reversed form, 1\.Y: the regular abbreviation
IIU.le C dino " S-shaped abbreviation sign: E1i( )s, 'HAt( )s, Ma( )s, Cat )s.
C 111+
IIIZ.Z3 C 8Y t1J T P for lVOlKttiiivoc in this period was IN (see 2 above), so that INfl.1 6. On only four stamps, all with the same name, does a title
[OiQTa
IETXPl5 I088.lh B dicta would have been understood as iV(OtKttiiivoc) Ol', not as
MIlD appear with the name (509.Ib, d, po.Ia, 51 I.Ia). The finalletter
INAIB loSS.le B ditto ivo(tKniiivoc) t", This is clear, since the indictions on stamps
YO of the abbreviated title is reduced in size and superscript.
P I089·Ia B qy TI
up.rh B +TPOIDI 4I8.Ia, b, c, cl, 4I9.1a, 494.la, 753.Ia, 754.la, 863.Ia, b, 867.Ib, 7. A single accessory letter follows the name on a number of
IC .g.
Ml5IN1I.IA c, cl, 900.IC, 941.Ia, 1026.la, 23, II99.13, 1276.13, rb, 1277.13,
C 8Y ar l13 B [+jTPOIDiM I294.1a are certainly to be read Ot' (not i"), because of the way in
ITX€ B rt e [.] [l5]IN1I.SIf which the indictions cluster at each of the sites where they have ~ Mamboury's brief discussion of this point is somewhat confused ('Nouvel!c
TPAOY .g. lecture', 121-2). He suggests that the inversion of two-letter indictions was t? avol~
INPlf Z ambiguity. In the case of the fourteenth indiction, however, such an inversion (01
IC T P W 5 On the frequency of the inversion of two-letter indictions, sce Mango and for to') creates an ambiguity.
$evcenko, 'Inscriptions', 14 (commentary to inscription no. I7). 7 For its possible historical significance, see below pp. I08-9.

100 PART II:
stamps (after the name-abbreviations Ku( ), Kup( ); Du( ), and
Ca(».
8. On only one stamp (1238.la) does the inscription termi-
nate (as it began) with a cross.
9. The Ietrers are carved simply, without serifs.
b. Stylistic analysis of material in Group 2, Section J S-sign is also used as a divider between elements of the inscrip-
(see Table 16)
The bricks tamps in Section r of Group 2 have the following
characteristics:
I. Several shapes of stamp occur:
A. rectangular with a single line of text;
B. rectangular with two, three or four lines of text;
C. circular;
D. cruciform.
It is clear from Table 16 that stamps bearing the same name
could be of various shapes. Furthermore, stamps bearing the
same name, but of different shapes, might be in use at the same
time. Thus stamps bearing the name A{,~a() and of both shape
A and shape D were used to stamp bricks made in the same year,
as material from Ismetiye Caddesi and Cemal Nadir Sokagi
demonstrates (compare 148.13, 63 with 125.la, zb, 33, 4a;
compare 126.la with 149.lb). Similarly, stamps at To'kludede
Mescidi bearing the name Krovcrovrfvoo and made in consecu-
tive years were of shapes Band C (814.la, 828.la).
2. Many of the stamps of shape A are similar in style to
stamps in Group I, having an indiction number, often the BA
abbreviation, and then the name. However, such stamps in
Group z tend to show some of the rarer Group I features: a cross
preceding the inscription (I2I.IC, 122.Ib, 123.1a, 12 5.la, zb, ja,
4a, 126.13, z a, jb, 43, 73, Se, 127.13, 125°.13); the abbreviation
INA (90.la, 1049.1a, 1250.la); the S-shaped abbreviation sign
(90.la, 1049.la); and longer name-abbreviations (90.la,
1049·la).
3. On the remaining stamps, there is no generally accepted
order for the three main elements (the indiction number, the BA
abbreviation, and the name).
4. A cross frequently appears at the beginning of the inscrip-
tion, and sometimes at the end of it or in the middle. A six-armed
star (*, a monogram of I and X) is used instead of a cross on
1249·la.
5. The name-abbreviations are generally longer than in
Group 1. Many stamps show the complete name in the genitive
case ('APEPKlOU, 'Apicreverou, BactA.ucoil, I'cioo, All~lltp(ou,
AtO~tl80u, Ao~vou, 6w8wpou, 'IA.ap(ou, 'Iroovvou, Kovcrov-
rlvoo, KOCtUV'tlVOU, KUP1.U1COU, KrovC'tUV'tlVOU, Muprupiou,
DaUA.ou, Tlsrpou, Tpooiuou. Tpu<pOlvoc,Xptcroii),
6. In the case of one example, the name is followed by the
abbeviation AIAKS, for the title 8taKovou (34o.la).
7. An indiction date is often o~tted from the brickstamps,
but, where a date is gi ven, the abbreviations used for ivD1Kt1.00VOC
CHRONOLOGY
or ev8tlcnwvoc are generally IN or 1Nl'... However, we also find
EN (1°76.13, 1077.la, z a, 33, 1078.13, 1080.la, 1081.13,
1082.la, I083.Ia, 1084.la, 108s.la, 1087.1a, 1089.13, 109o.1a),
INct (828.la), INAl (532.la, 687.la), HNA (658.la), and HN
(673·1a).
8. Abbreviations (for the name or for iv8tKnWvoc) are
frequently followed by the S-shaped abbreviation marker. The
tion (e.g. on 34o.la where two S signs divide an accessory letter
from the rest of the inscription). The C-shaped abb~eviation
sign is used on 91.la and 696.la. A horizontal bar is placed
above orbelow an abbreviation (e.g. rn, IN, eY) or the last
letter of an abbreviated name (83 r.ra, IC, 7a, where the Y of the
genitive ending is omitted). . that display stylistic elements (crosses, Svshaped abbreviation
9. Formulae such as 6(w)il XaptC (192.la, j ro.ra, 311.la,
777.la, 949.23, 95o.1a, 1112.13, IC, 1112.23, 11I3.1b, 1264.13)
and tfic vsoc (338.la) occur.
10. Accessory letters also occur (34o.la, 1080.la, 108I.la,
1082.la, 1083.13, 1096.la, 1097.1a, 1098.1a, 1099.1a, r roo.r a,
r roa.ra, 1335.la, 1432.la, 1436.la).
II. Numerous monograms (whose solutions are generally
uncertain) occur.
12. Several Christograms (with various numbers of arms)
occur.
13. A few stamps lack names but carry a form of the word
iv8tKnWvoc, either with (1427.la) or without (1432.la, 1434.la,
1436.la) an indiction number.
14. The letters are often carved attractively, with prominent
serifs.
15. Ligatures are common. The ligature 15regularly occurs at
the end of a name in the genitive case. . larger sample were recovered, the indict ions would cluster in
c. Conclusions derived from a and b above
The Group I (fifth-century) brickstamps are clearly highly
formulaic, whereas the Group 2 (sixth-century) material shows
a great deal of variety in the shape of the stamp, the layout of the
text, and the information included. The clear stylistic differences
between the brickstamps in Section I of Groups I and 2 suggest
that the division of the stamps into two groups, which was made
on the basis of the name-abbreviations, was valid. It may
reasonably be concluded that the name refers to an individual
who was involved in the brickmaking industry for a specific
period, and, consequently, that the name-abbreviation is likely
to be a reliable guide to dating brickstamps.
Perhaps the most striking difference between the two Groups
is in the frequency of the occurrence of indiction dates. There is
no stamp in any Group I sample (disregarding, of course, the
stamps of Group 2 style listed in Section 4) that can be said with
certainty to have carried no date. It is, therefore, highly likely
that all stamps used in the period C.415-C.4 59 carried an indic-
tion. A name, usually abbreviated, is also always present in this
period. Stamps of Group 2 (sixth century) carry indiction dates
ANALYSIS OF BRICKSTAMPS
much less freq uently than those of Group I (and the tendency to
omit dates possibly increased as the sixth century progressed)'
There are also a number of stamps in this Group that bear no
name (1427.la, 14J2.la, 1434.la, 1436.1a).
It is unclear precisely when brickstamps began to diversify
from the formulaic Group r style to the variety of the Group 2
style. Our earliest dated Group 2 stamps come from St
Polyeuktos and date to C-j08, and our latest Group 1 stamps date
to C.459. Consequently, we know almost nothing for certain
about the nature of bricks tamps in the second half of the fifth
century. Only a few observations can as yet be made on the
subject of the introduction of the Group 2 style.
Amongst the Group I material, there are a number of stamps
signs, longer name abbreviations) that tend to be much more
frequent in Group 2. These stamps seem, however, to occur in
both the earlier and later material from Group I, and we cannot,
therefore, discern a gradual introduction of the stylistic
elements that typify Group 2.'
If the church of the Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia is the
work ofVerina, built between 474 and 478,'° then material from
this site will be of particular interest. But the small amount so
far recovered from the church would appear to be of mid-
fifth-century date. The three most important stamps are those
found in the north wall of the church, which, according to
Mamboury's notes, was partially demolished in June 1916. The
remains of this wall are located along the north side of Zeynep
Sultan Sokagr. The three stamps read iv(8tK:ttWVOC)Et' Ma( )s
(901.2a); iv(8tKnrovoc) W ~a( ) Map( ) (936.1.); and +
iv(8tKnWvoc) P' Tpo() + (1237.la). This may suggest that if a
the years between indictions Et' and W. Interestingly, Kleiss
recorded two fifth-century stamps with indiction Et' on bricks
reused to block up a door in the octagonal structure on the
church's north flank: iv(811cnwvoc) Et' pa( ) [flpa[ (256.la),
iv(8tKnwvoc) Et' M[ (98 pal. Stylistically, all the stamps are
typical of Group I, and all four names appear in Group I,
Section I. Ma()s was apparently in use as early as C.415 ill the
Theodosian Great Church, which suggests that the stamp with
that name is to be dated no later than C.H 5, and the same may be
true of the others also. If the church was indeed built by Verina,
this material would appear to be reused, and can tell us nothing
about brickstamping in the later fifth century. Finds in the court
8 .See belowp. 117.
~ Stylistic elements that typify Group 2. (including a name with a ticle(509.lb, d,
5Io.la, 511.1:1)) occur particularly on the stamps from the Suaselviler Cistern and
the contcmpor:u-y Cisterns in Gulhane. Tbe pure brick construction of the former
might be adduced in favour of a date in the later fifth century, and the name-
abbreviations AU~EV()(130' la), Corco() (Ill). la, b, c), and Tpo() (I238.la, rlJ9.I:l,
u4o,la) could perhaps be connected with individuals ascribed to Group 2. (cp.
Table ') with Table: 14). However, since the samples from these sites have a few
names in common with the sample from the Theodosian Hagia Sophia (and a name
in common with names from the Cistern of Aetius), a date late in the fifth century
seems to be precluded. For the dating of these samples, see P' r 10.
LO For thc daec.ecc pv j j ,
..~
AND BRICKS 101
to the east of the apse, however, show stylistically distinct
single-line stamps, having the abbreviation pa( ) at the begin-
ning of the inscription (28 5.la, 397.la, 425. la, 795.la, 1031.la).
There is, however. no guide to dating this material, which was
not found in situ.
A brick from the excavations on Saray Burnu is said to have
carried a cruciform stamp bearing a box monogram (186.la) and
a second stamp typical of Group I style (168.1a). The shape of
the former stamp, and the monogra.m on it are characteristic of
material in Group 2, yet the latter stamp belongs firmly in
Group L We can only concfude that both are to be placed some-
where in the third quarter of the fifth century. This constitutes
the only indication we have as yet for a movement away from
the single-line Group I style."
Some evidence from the provinces may have a bearing on the
problem of the emergence of the Group 2 style. The bricks tamps
found in the church at Amorium (possibly dedicated to St
Konon)" are presumably to be associated with the Phase I
basilica, which has been ascribed to Zeno (474-91) on the basis
of sculptural finds." Mango has suggested that one circular
stamp bearing the uncommon name + [ElAIAN[OlY (i.e.
AiA.tavoil) may refer to Zeno's praetorian prefect of that name."
The stamps are similar in style to 536.1, two variants of which
are dated to C.507-22, and which are circular with the final Y of
the OY diphthong in the centre of the stamp. It is possible that
the Amorium stamps were influenced by contemporary
Constantinopolitan models, and they may, therefore, indicate
that stamps of the Group 2 style had begun to appear in the
capital by 474-91.
Not surprisingly, the stylistic analysis reveals that the dating
system proposed by Dethier and followed by Sorlin-Dorigny'"
is wrong in almost every respect. The stamps bearing the name
Krovcrcvcivou, a name assigned to Group 2, Section I, must
belong to the sixth centuty and therefore cannot refer to Con-
stantine I or Constantius Il. Single-line stamps with indictions,
the abbreviation pa( ), and an abbreviated name are generally
fifth-century, rather than belonging to emperors from Phocas
onwards, as Dethier held. Monogrammatic stamps seem to have
become popular in the sixth century, yet Dethier assigned them
to emperors from the time of Theodosius Il, The sixth century
saw the introduction of a large variety of shapes of brickstarnp,
and the cruciform type was certainly not a creation of the
Palaiologoi, particularly since there is no firm evidence that
the practice of stamping continued after the end of the sixth
century. Finally, each sample in Groups I and 2 consists of •
stamps that were used almost contemporaneously. The variety
of names within each sample indicates clearly that the name on a
LI For marc derailed discussion, sec Part Il, Ch. 10,. no. 6.
11 Harrisonctal., 'AmoriumIV',222.
1] Harrison, Christie et al., 'Amorium', 158.
11 Harrison, Christie et al., 'Amocium', lH. SEG 43 (I993), no. 933. For later
finds see Lightfoot et al., 'Amorium', H 5.
15 Derhier, 'Makrikoy', [62, 168; Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 83. See above
pp. 8-10, 45-6.
 102 PART II: CHRONOLOGY
ANALYSIS OF BRICKSTAMPS AND BRICKS
1°3
stamp, even if preceded by-the abbreviation ~a:(), cannot refer to these differences might be used to date a structure by comparing TABLE 17. Brick dimensions for material in Group " Section 1 (see Tables '3, '5)(mm.)
the reigning emperor, as Dethier was the first to suggest. its masonry with that of accurately dated buildings. Research
The stylistic analysis also demonstrates that Schneider's belief undertaken by Mitchell, Aran, and Liggett suggests that a Catalogue Length, Length 2 Thickness Catalogue Length, Length 2 Thickness Catalogue Length' Length 2 Thickness
that stamps with a single line of text belong to the fifth century rigorous statistical approach to the analysis of Byzantine number number number
is incorrect." Single-line stamps also occur in the sixth century, masonry, although not a "mechanical "dating machine"', can
and the name and other stylistic features must be considered in prove very useful when considered in conjunction with
40 482.13 370 370 40 77°·13 370 370 60
50 482.rb 380 380 30 no.rh )80 370 50
order to distinguish the stamps of one century from those of the historica~evidence." Their study was based on structural data 48).13
53 400 370 40 751.13 380 380 50
other. derived mainly from excavation reports; and, with respect to 25.23 50 484.)3 ? ? )80 ?
45 764·r• 40
Peschlow's deductions from the small sample of material brick dimensions in Constantinople, brick length showed 26.13 50 485.'3 37 0 370 50 863." 380 370 45
discovered in Hagia Eirene must alsobe reconsidered.!" The significant variations from the fifth to the fifteenth centuries. 27·]a 45 48I.1h 360 330 35 375 365 45
three stamps found in eighth-century contexts (291.,., 1420.,., The mean of the maximum and minimum values for both brick 45 494·1a 380 ? 45 863·rh • 380 365 45
1553.1a), all of which have inscriptions on a single line, cannot length and brick thickness in a sample of dated sites gave the 45 491.13 ? P 867·1h )85 380 40
be used to support the claim that a type of stamp different following parameters: thickness 43.1-46.9 mm., length 375.0- 45 503·la 400 50 867-'c 390 330 50
from that used in the sixth century had evolved by the eighth 383.8 mm. (fifth century); thickness 41.6-46.2 mm., length 47 400 49 867·1d 385 ? 50
century. It is only by chance that all five stamps that Peschlow 356.0-369.5 mm. (sixth century)." It is notable that the para- 44 (345) 43 )70 )50 50
recorded in sixth-century contexts have multiple lines of text meters for length in the two centuries do not overlap, and
52·,b 370 40 509·1h 374 40 8n· 1• 390 375 50
(666.14b, 676.3k, 5e, 88T.Ia, 920.1h), since single-line inscrip- Mitchel, Aran, and Liggett concluded from this that 'brick
p.IC 370 45 510.13 374 40 8n·2• 400 380/350 55
51·la )75 50 509·1d 370 360 30 876.,a )75 370
tions were used in both the fifth and sixth centuries. In fact, lengths should strongly discriminate among Constantinople
• 45
53·1a ? 45-50 594·" ? ? 40 876.1b 380 )50 55-65
given that there is no other evidence that brickstamping con- cases'. This preliminary conclusion was demonstrated by their 53·1b )75 45-50 )80
44 899·3a )90 45
tinued after the sixth century, and considering the extensive Analysis 6." 84.1• ? 30 576.1e 400 50 895.1• ? ? 40.
reuse of fifth- and sixth-century stamped bricks from the The excavation reports on which the study was based, how- 84·,b 40 577·1h 390 50 9)9.1• 380 370 50
seventh century onwards," the likelihood is that the stamped ever, generally give only a maximum and minimum value for 85·" 350 40 700.13 380 40 941.1a 390 370 50
material in the eighth-century contexts at Hagia Eirene is brick length and thickness at a particular site, or even only a 85·,h )60 45 701.13 390 45 )80 360 45
reused, despite Peschlow's statement that this did not appear to mean value for length and thickness; and they often give no indi- 85·,d )80 50 705·la 385 50 375 350 50
be the case. This cannot, however, be stated conclusively on the cation of the number of bricks measured or the care with which '74'" ? 49 707·1a ? 60 942.13 380 380 50
I73·la )25 )23 ? 713.13 385' 55 1026.13 375 )60 45
basis of the available evidence, and it is not entirely impossible the measurement was undertaken. The round figures given for
350 ? ? 714.13 ? 40 1026 ..23 )80 375 45
that stamping was briefly revived following the earthquake of brick dimensions in most publications suggest that no careful
176.13 385 )70 50 726.13 390 60 I174·,b 370 )65 40
740. measurement was made." This, in addition to the small number
390 365 50 711.13 ? 50 )80 370 40
of securely dated sites of the fifth and sixth centuries in Con-
380 )70 50 712.la 385 55 380 370 40
stantinople, means that results derived from such data must be 400 385 45· 73°·13 39 0 50 375 )55 50
3. THE DIMENSIONS OF BRICKS IN used cautiously" It is notable that Mitchell, Aran, and Liggett 390 370 7)0.rh
40 390 55 390 370 50
THE FIFTH AND SIXTH CENTURIES consider the so-called Martyrion of SS Karpos and Papylos, the '78.1b 375 350 35 730.IC 370 50 380 380 50
Myrelaion rotunda, the so-called Palace of Lausus, and the 179.13 380 ? )cr35 730•rd 390 55 IIn·13 370 )55 40
Dimensions of bricks and thicknesses of mortar joints in the Sphendone of the Hippodrome to be firmly dated to the fifth- 184.13 )90 )70 40 360 55 II86.I3 380 380 50
walls of buildings inevitably vary. It has long been thought that 177.13 380 (287) ? • 365 50 II96.13 370 360 50
I' Mitcbell,Aran, and Liggen, 'Construction'. Contrast M:lllgo,Architeattre, 10. .249·1a ? ? 45 (260) 48 1199.13 370 370 50
Mirchell, Ann. and Liggert deal with far more masonry samples than Kihya ('T ugIa 245.13 380 40 (222) 43 1194.13 )70 )60 45
'Ziegelstempel', 2.6,. The evidence adduced to support this assertion
16 Schneider,
was decidedly thin, since the few brickstamps he referred to came from undated
Boyudan'),
:HI
and their statistical analysis is more successful.
The figures are taken from Mitchell, Aran, and Liggecr, 'Construction', 474,
246.23 370 50 (265) 46 Il05·la 380 375 50
structures, or were not necessarily contemporary with the srrucruresie which they 384." 395 48 390 45-53 IZ39·la 380 370 45
. table 3. Forme sinh century, the figures for Class 2 are given, although both Classes
had been found. On the propylaeum wall, see above p. 56. Schneider's theory 2 and 3 contain data. The decline in thickness and length from the fifth
sixth-century
(310) 45 370 45 1.240.13 ? ? 40
was rejected by Brert (GP 1.29. Cp. Mango, 'Brick Stamps', 2.1), who observed that to fifteenth centuriesillustrated by MitcheU, Arm, and Liggert, 'Construction',
is 388.1• 380 40 730.IC 370 55 1l4I.la 40
in the Great Palace stamps of various shapes and with different numbers of lines of 415, fig. 4.11 Mitcbell, Aran, and Liggeu, 'Construction', 475, 481. 410.13 ? 50 730.23 ? Il42.13
45-50 45
text were found together in masonry of a single constructional period. Although n Mitchell, Aran, and Liggett (,Construction') chose to work with maximum,
various shapes of sump were indeed used in the sixth century, Brett did not consid-
.119.13 375 45 732.13 385 55 12 76.13 400 40
minimum, and mean values for brick length and thickness, but owing to the lack of
er the possibility that the Great Palace material may not all have been of the same 375 45 733.1• ? 45 390/360 ?
published data, the mean value was often taken as the mean of the maximum and the
date, and that some of it mjgLt have been reused. By contrast, Corben (GP Il, 176) minimum (rather than as the true mean for a sample of bricks) or all three
values )80 45 750•13 360 35 400
considered that a rectangular stamp with three lines of text (found on two bricks values were taken to be the same; e.g. Mamboury and Wicgand (Kaiserpalaste, 40) 418.IC )75 50 753.1• 380 )50 55 Il77·1a 370
from the inner Sea Wall near the 'House of Justinian') 'looks as though it belonged state that the bricks from the Spbendone of the Hippodrome were 380-400 mm. ?
to a different period from the others'. which were fragmentary and stamped with
45J·" 40 370 360 45 1294.13 380
square and 50 mm. thick. Mitchell, i'tran, and Liggen therefore entered mean length
just single lines of text. Corbeuwas, in fact, correct: the multiple-line sumps belong, 454·" 45 367 (3OO) 50 Il89·13 ?
as 390 mm., and took maximum, minimum, and mean thickness ro be 50 mm. (Case
in fact, to the sixth century, and the fragmentary single-line stamps to the fifth 86, unpublished data tables). Kjihya (,Tugla Boyutlan') provides more accurate 455·" 40 754.1• 360 ? 50 1306.23 375
cemury (see p. 147). In the Second Report on the Great Palace excavations, Talbot rncasuremcnrs but from far fewer monuments. 455-2' 40 755·" 360 50 1308.13 ?
Rice wrongly dated the single-line stamps from the cistern below the Peristyle and II Mitchell, Aran, and Liggen (,Construction', 485) conclude: 'the analysis suf- 459.1• 758.1• 50
45 360
from repairs to an arch of the early building below the Apsed Hall to the fifth fers from some inadequacies in the data, particularly from a lack of sufficient num-
century all the grounds that the shape was close to that of Roman stamps (GP 11, bers of dated cases to adequately characterize certain of the chronological classes,
IOS). ForafuU discussion, sec pp. I36-8,143. and from the lack of a systematic. consistent sampling procedure in obtaining
17 Peschlow, Irenenkircbe, 226. the brickwork measurements. A study that overcame these inadequacies would
IS See bclowp. 41-2. probably achieve a more consistent level of success'.
 ·.~
-, •
I04 PART II: CHRONOLOGY ANALYSIS OF BRICKSTAMPS AND BRICKS r05
TABLE IS. Brick dimensions for material in Group 2, Section I (sec Tables '4, 16) (mm.) century." Stricdy speaking, these samples should have been TABLE 19. Brick dimensions in the fifth and sixth centuries,
considered as undated, since the masonry from each is dated to based on the material in Group T, Section I and Group 2,
Catalogue Length I Lengrh z Thickness Catalogue Length I Length 2 Thickness Catalogue Length I Length 2 Thickness
the fifth century only on the grounds of the appearance of the Section I (see Tables '3, '4, '7, and IS) (mm.)
number number number
masonry itself. The Land Walls, the Palace of Antiochus, Sr john
ra.rd 40 666"3" J85 J75 40 1070.13 J60 J5-J8 of Stoudios, and the Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia arc the few x X-Un [05(+0'"
S.Ya 50 667·1bb ? ? 40-47 1°75.13 ? 40 independently dated structures of the fifth century. 5thC. 6th C. j th C. 6th C.
8S.1a 35 669·4a ? 45, 1077·la ? 40-45 Even where the maximum, minimum, and mean values
89·Ia JO 672·lb 38-40 1°77.23 J5-5° Lengrh J74 J69 36I-J87 351-J87
provided by archaeologists are based on the accurate measure-
90•13 )2-J5 67) .• a 32-40 1°77.43 30-35 Thickness 46 42 4 -52 J6-48
ment of large samples of material in the same wall, there is no '
]5 6SI.13 45 1078.13 40
guarantee drat all the bricks measured were produced in the xe mean
12I.IC )80 J80 40 687.1• 48 1080.13 )2-)5
same period, and the study of Mitchell, Aran, and Liggett suffers 0',. = standard deviation
)70 J55 45 66).la 40 1081.13 32-40
666.rl from this problem in particular. The most systematic survey of
125·2b J7° )70 60 )80 )70 45 1082.13 420 J5-5°
125.33 )70 )60 40 666·4Z J65 )60 50 1083.[3 ? 30-40 brick dimensions appears to be that of Emerson and van Nice,
)60 6664f )60 who measured the bricks in the south-east buttress of the Both the mean length and thickness are less in the sixth
125+1 360 40 )50 45 lo84·Ia 45
126.23 380 )60 45 666·4ii J5° )50 50 1087.13 )5 Justinianic Hagia Sophia, and concluded that they were remark- century than in the fifth. The difference between the mean
126.43 370 )65 40 666'5a )SO )60 50 J088.13 Jo-)9 ably uniform in size: 350-3 So mm. long (excluding a few, which lengths is just 5 mm. and between the mean thicknesses only
J26.Jb J80 360 45 667·Id· )70 )70 50 10S8.1 b 35-40 may have been broken, having a minimum length of 320 mm., 4 mm. In addition, there is great variery amongst the brick sizes
126.8e )90 )60 45 668.1e ? ? 45 1089.13 J6 and also excluding two large bricks, one 400 mm. long and in both centuries: amongst the Group I material (fifth century),
127.]3 370 J60 50 674·1j )80 ? 45 1090.13 30-45 another 390 mm. long) and 45-60 mm. thick." These ranges of lengths vary berween J2 3 and 400 mm. and thicknesses between
135·la ? ? 45 674·1P J7° }50 45 1°93.23 J5-45 30 and 65 mm.; amongst the Group 2 material (sixth century),
lengths and thicknesses indicate only the range of the sizes of the
148.13 380 370 45 ? ? ]4-42 1°95.13 40
bricks being used at one time, rather than the standard size being brick lengths vary between 340 and 500 mm. and thicknesses
I22.Ib )90 J80 40 674·1U 370 45 1096.la J5-40
between 30 and 60 mm. The standard deviations from the mean
produced at one time. Indeed, the authors observed that in
123.13 J75 360 50 675·" )75 J40 40 1°97.13 )5-40
certain areas many of the bricks were chipped, showing that values are therefore large for both length (13 mm. (fifth century)
126.13 ? ? 45 676.Jh ? ? 50 1098.13 40-45
66I.Ib ? (180) (146) )8-44 they had been reused." The average or majority of bricks and ,s mm. (sixth century)) and thickness (6 mm. (fifth
149·Ib J75 J75 50 40
? ? were 375 mm. square by 45 mm. thick," and, curiously, these century) and 6 mm. (sixth century)). In contrast to the figures
137·]3 ? ? J5 694·" 4J 10 99.13 40
187·la )50 }5-4° 69°·13 50 r rcc.r a )5-42 values are closer to those calculated below for the average fifth- presented by Micchell, Aran, and Liggett, therefore, there is
lO3·1C J80 355 )8-4J 777·Ia 45 1I08.la 45 century brick, than to those for the average sixth-century brick. considerable overlap between the ranges of brick lengths in the
282.la ? ? J2-]4 775·Ia J8 1264·la 380 )60 60 Only by studying the dimensions of samples of bricks known fifth and sixth centuries, whether considering absolute values or
3I['Ia 50 779·Ia 40 1247.13 ? ? 44 to belong to a specific period can we hope to assess changes in the x-a" and x+<J" values. Consequently, in many cases it would
lJ7·1C J65 45 820.rE J5 1l49·13 J7-J9 brick sizes. The study of bricks tamps makes it possible to estab- be impossible to assign a single brick to either the fifth or the
lJ7·Ja 350 ]50 40 82I.Im }5-4° 125o.la 3J5 }5-40 sixth century on the basis of its dimensions alone. It may, how-
lish such samples; and, since Mamboury recorded the dimen-
JJ8.1a ? ? J5 Sp.1a )9 [.259.13 ? 43 ever, be observed that a brick whose thickness exceeds 4S mm. is
sions of most of the stamped bricks he saw, an analysis of brick
34O.la }5-45 8Jl·7a 22-30 1.262.13 40 much more likely to belong ro the fifth century than to the sixth.
dimensions in particular periods is possible. Such an approach
531.13 45-50 (225) (295) )o-J5 u63·Ia ]4
Similarly, a brick whose sides measure less than 361 mm., and
)6 r z j a.rb has already been demonstrated in the case of bricks stamped
534·" 30 (285) (250) J65 355 55
? ? with monograms of the emperor Maurice." Since the bricks in whose thickness is below 4' mm., is much more likely to have
5]5·la )65 365 36-40 832.13 J65 355 J5-4J 1356.la )9
)6-40 ? Group I, Section I and Group 2, Section I have been ascribed been made in the sixth century than in the fifth. The statistics
5]6.,. J65 )65 8Jpa ? J5-40 '378.IC J65 J55 40
5]6.lc J80 ? )J-35 8]4.ra 365 )55 40 1386.13 ? ? )7-50 with a high degree of probability to the fifth and SL'<1:h centuries presented in Table '9 may, therefore, serve as a guide to
5]8.la ? 40 835·la ? ? ]4-J7 IJ86 .aa 42-58 respectively," an analysis of the dimensions of these bricks will differentiating between fifth- and sixth-century structures, if a
5]8.Ib J55 45 837·1a J75 J5-40 1386.2b ]5-45 indicate any difference between the standard brick size of each large sample of brick dimensions has been taken, and if reused
606.13 J5° J5° 45 84o.la J7° Jo-J5 1391.13 J9 century' far more accurately than studie; based on previously material and material relating to repairs is either absent or easily
656.la )95 )80 45 8I7·rE ? 53 'J93·ra J60 J5° 42 published data. The dimensions of the bricks in Groups I and 2 identifiable.
657·ra )80 J75 40 S17·lh 40 IJ42.)d 345 ? 50 Although there may well have been two or more standard
are given in Tables '7 and I S, and the results are presented in
658.1a ? ? 4' 8q.lk )70 J70 55 IJ42.)e 500 J7° ? sizes of brick in use in a particular period," it is nevertheless
? 60 Table '9'"
660.Tb 375 365 )5 814·1a ? 35 1396.IC )90 380 worth listing the more distinctive brick sizes identified in the
664·ra ? ? )8 828.la 40 IJ96.1a ? ? 14
Early Byzantine period in Constantinople:
665·" 42 949.20 45 'J97·ra J0-45
2~ Mirchell, Aran, and Liggerr, unpublished data tables, cases 64, 65, 67,86.
)80 )7-4 1. A group of fingermarked bricks measuring 310 X 300 x
66S·2O 40 950.ta 45 '397·Ig-
' 25 Emerson and van Nice, 'Preliminary Report', 416, -418,420.
66S·J' ? II 1°49.13 )70 )70 l5 1396.ld ? 45 u. Emerson:md van Nice, 'Preliminary Report', 418. 55--<>0mm. from the piers of the Hippodrome appears to date to
? ? ? )8-41 1427.13 26-27 27 Emerscnand van Nice, 'Preliminary Report', 420. the Constantinian period (324-37)'2
666'4a 45 1°55.13
2a See above.p.as. See ahove P' 90.
666·4b ll-)9 r r ra.ra J80 )70 50 1432.13 )0-40 It

)(l Only bricks for which both length r and 'length 2 are known were used for the
666.1r 35-40 length calculations, and vaulting bricks (irregular in shape) were omitted (hence II Note the difference between the sizes of bricks used in the facing and core of a

number in sample: 184 (fifth. century), 84 (sixth century». All thicknesses were fifth-cenrury section of the Land Walls (Ahunbay and Ahunbay, 'Land Walls',
considered, and where the brick was wider at tbe edges than at the centre, the wider 21.9-30), the different sizes used in the walls and channel coping of the baths at
measurement was taken (hence number in sample = 142 (fifth century), 147 (sixth Kalenderhane (p. IS0), and the twO distinctsizes used in differentparts of the church
century». of Sr Polycuktos (Harrison, Sara~haneI, 4I2.). 37 Sec Part IT,Ch. to, no. 2..
106 PART II: CHRONOLOGY
2. Three distinctive sizes of later fourth- or early fifth- 4. Group 2, for the period from c. 500 to C.540, shows a slight
century bricks have been noted: (a) 370 x 350 x 60 mm. with but significant decrease in both length and thickness when com-
horseshoe-shaped fingermarks and, occasionally, a stamped pared with 3 above (mean: 369 mm. x 42 mm. thick).
cross;" (b) 340-50 x 320-40 x 40-50 mm. with a single-line 5. In the reign of [usrin II (565-78) or somewhat later, brick
stamp lacking the abbreviation ~()(O;"(c) 269-3 I 2 mm. square x dimensions appear to have fallen to about 355 x 335 X 4' mm.
32-50 mm. thick, with stamps giving only the indiction number This is suggested by the bricks from the apse of the North
and the abbreviated name"
3. The material in Group " which dates from C.4'5 to C·459,
Church ar Kalenderhane Carnii."
6. Certainly by the reign of Maurice (582-602), brick sizes
Dating the sites discussed in Chapters 6-7
shows a substantial increase in the average brick length when
compared with I and 2 above (mean: 374 mm. square x 46 mm.
were significantly smaller than those of the early sixth century,
having side-lengths of just 3'4-350 mm. (mean: 334 mrn.)." on the basis of the brickstamps
thick).
)~ SeePan lfChr r.seccr r.
II See Part Il,ch. 10, no. I I. The continued use of bricks of about this size is well
J) See Part 11, Ch. 10, no. 1. illustrated in the Fildarru cistern (see p. 39). The decline in brick lengths in
)j See Part H. Ch. 10, no. J. Constantinople until the 6fr:eemh century is traced by Mitchell, Man, and Liggett,
1. DATING THE SAMPLES IN GROUP
)5 See Part 1I. Ch. 10, no. 4. 'Construction', and by Kahya, 'Tugla Boyuclan'.
The dating of the pre-Justinianic Great Church, the Palace of
Antiochus, St John of Stoudios, and the Cistern of Aspar will
now be reconsidered in the light of the evidence from the brick-
stamps. The remaining samples in Group I will then be dated in
relation to the better dated ones.
a. The pre-Justinianic Great Church
Three stamps in the sample from the pre-J ustinianic Great
Church (456"., 899.3a, 119I.,a) have been assigned to Group
I, Section I (see Table 13). They almost certainly belong, there-
fore, to the fifth century. Furthermore, all the stamps in the
sample (see Table 12) comply with the characteristics of fifth-
century bricks tamps as established in Chapter 8. The consecu-
tive indictions that appear on four of the stamped bricks
recovered are IB' (254.Ia, 899,3a) and IT' (86,Ia, 456,Ia). These
nume~als could indicate the years 4' 3ft 4-414ft 5, which would
agree satisfactorily with the dates already established on the
basis of literary sources for the construction of the second Great
Church under Theodosius II (i.e. inception after 5 October 4' I,
and inauguration on 10 October 415). It would seem, therefore,
that the wall from which these bricks came is contemporary
with the propylaeum in front of it, and with the associated archi-
tectural sculpture. In fact, the significance of the indictions was
noted as long ago as 1936 by Mamboury, but thereafter
ignored.'
Ward-Perkins and Krautheimer believed that the wall related
to the first Great Church of Constantius. In that case, the stamps
with indictions would refer to the years 3 53/4 and 354/5, shortly
before Constantius dedicated his church in 360. That, however,
is unacceptable: some of the names correspond with those on
stamps from the Palace of Antiochus, which was built no
earlier than C.41 5, and it is extremely unlikely that the same indi-
viduals were involved in the brickmaking industry some 60
years before that date.
The stamps with indiction IB' ('54. la, 899,3a) have been
1 Mamboury, 'Pouilles 1'. 279 and Mamboury, 'Nouvelle lecture',
CHAPTER 9
I dated to 4'31r4, and those with indiction IT' (86.1a, 456,1a) [(
414/5. The fragmentary indictions on 548,1a (I~') and 980,1:
(I]Bj suggest the dates 415 and 41 31r4, respectively. Th,
material that does not carry any indiction date (IlL1a, 286.1a
959,1a, Il9L1a) may be assigned to the general period c.ar j-o j
b. The Palace of Antiochus
The earliest indiction, which occurs on a small number 0:
stamps from the Palace of Antiochus, {s the thirteenth (399/400
4I41r 5, 429/30), and the latest is the first (402/3, 4I7!t8, 432/3)
The indictions indicate the years in which the bricks were made.
and, as always, it should be borne in mind that the bricks ma)
have been stockpiled and used later. Strictly speaking, tbe date 01
manufacture provides only a terminus post quem for the con-
struction of the palace, and hence Amiochus' palace could have
been built at any time during his service in Constantinople
(C.402-C.439).lt seems unlikely, however, that the bricks would
have been stockpiled for very long in the early fifth century,
which was a period of intensive building activiry.'
Schneider suggested that Antiochus' palace had been con-
structed C.400,' and Holum, who wrongly placed Antiochus'
final dismissal from the post of praepositus in 412, would have
been obliged to follow him. Belting argued that the column base
that refers to Antiochus as praepositus indicates that construc-
tion took place when he held that position. As we have noted,
Malalas suggests that Antiochus was still cubicularius when
Arcadius died in 408, and Belting was therefore correct to reject
the possibility of construction in the period 401-403.'
Belting considered 415-18 the most likely building period.
However, Theophanes suggests that Antiochus was dismissed
in 413 or 414. If tbis information is accurate, Antiochus must
have been reinstated at some point, since his career apparently
continued until C.439. If Puleheria removed him in order to set
up a stronger power base of her own in the palace, it would seem
highly unlikely drat she would have allowed him to return in the
powerful position of praepositus as early as 415. Furthermore,
one Musellius is known to have held the post of praeposit"s on 9
2 See above pp. 14-6. JSchneider, 'Euphemia-Marryrion'. 273·
T 19-20. + Naumann and Belting, Euphemin-Kirche, 10.

08
.pril a r a. It is clearly impossible for Antiochus to have been
ppointed as Musellius' successor, to have built his palace, and
) have departed from the Imperial Palace in the same year. The
lternative would be to imagine that Antiochus had been one of
1usellius' predecessors in the post, in which case Antiochus
rould have been ex-praepositus by 9 April 414. The brickstamps
.idicate that work cannot have started on Antiochus' palace
.ntil September 414 at the earliest, but for Antiochus to have
.een ex-praepositus at the time would contradict the evidence of
he inscribed column base, which suggests that Antiochus was
tillpraepositus when the palace was built. Only the rejection of
"heophanes' statement that Antiochus departed in 413 or 414
vould allow us to suggest that the eunuch's palace was erected
n415-18.
If Theophanes' reference to Antiochus' disappearance should
Q fact be taken to refer to Anthemius' departure, then
vnriochus could have held the post of praepositus and con-
tructed his palace C.41 5-18. In this case, Antiochus would have
.rrived at court C.402, as both tutor to Theodosius and cubicu-
arius. He would have become praepositus after 9 April 414
when Musellius is attested in the post), and would have started
vork on his palace, whilst holding the position, not long after
he beginning of the thirteenth indiction (September 414). We
rave no due as to when Antiochus' tenure might have come to
In end, but when it did, he would nevertheless have continued to
nfluence the emperor as es-praepositus and patricius, until he
"as forced to enter the clergy C.439. If this reconstruction were
.orrect, then, following Anthemius' disappearance shortly after
,8 April 414, the newly appointed praepositus Antiochus may
iave assumed an extremely important role in the government
ilongside Pulcheria.
The extension of Antiochus' career to C.439, however, also
,1I0ws the alternative possibility that the eunuch became prae-
iositus and built his palace around 430. One Chryseros was the
emperor's praepositus from before the Council of Ephesus in
U I until late in 432. The evidence for this comes from a letter
written, probably in the autumn of 432, by Epiphanius, the
irchdeacon of Cyril of Alexandria, to Maximian. Epiphanius
~stsChryseros, who was clearly aNestorian, amongst a number
of influentual individuals to whom Cyril had sent expensive
,ifts as bribes before the Council of Ephesus. It is clear that
Chryseros was still in the post when the letter was written,
since Maxirnian is urged to persuade Pulcheria to devote herself
again to the cause of the Lord Christ', as she had earlier done
at Ephesus, and to convince Theodosius to replace the
N estorian Chryseros with the eunuch Lausus. Whethet Lausus
did in fact obtain the post we do not know' Thus Antiochus
could have become praepositus and have built his palace at any
time from the beginning of 433 until his entry into the clergy
s SeePLRE, ii. 768, s.v. Musellius L
6 The Letter is to be found in ACa, i. 4, H1-5.
Aristolaus' departure for Antiochin the early summer
'3-
J ,,~
PART H: CHRONOLOGY
C·439·'
Allowing for the possibility that Antiochus' career was not
interrupted in 4 13 or 4 '4, the bricks used in the construction
may have been made either C.414-18 or C.429-33. Given the large
number of contemporary stamps that this site has yielded, it
would clearly be desirable to determine which of these two dates
is the more 1lI<e1y.Making a decision is not, however, a simple
matter.
Mamboury had come to the same conclusion as Belting,
dating the bricks tamps and the palace to C.415 on the basis of
comparative materia!" Unfortunately, Mamboury gave no
further details of the comparisons he had in mind, but pre-
sumably they were with stamps from the pre-justinianic Great
Church, dated to 413-15, and the Land Walls, built (.405-13.
The sample from the Palace of Antiochus has two names in
common with the pre-justinianic Great Church (see Table 13)·
The correspondences, however, do not certainly indicate that
the palace is contemporary with the church, since those names
may well have appeared on briekstamps thoughout the period
- from C.413 until C.430. The material from the Land Walls is
particularly difficult to interpret owing to the number of occa-
sions on which the fortifications were repaired. Since, at present,
it is almost impossible to determine a sample of material that can
be associated with the original construction of the fortifications,
the comparative value of the brickstamps from them is greatly
diminished' One incomplete stamp found in the Land Walls,
however, bears a fifteenth indiction, a cross within a leaf or a
heart, and the abbreviation KE (I 501.Ia). The fifteenth indiction
is almost certainly the same fifteenth indiction referred to on the
bricks from the Palace of Antiochus, many of which also bear
the distinctive cross within a leaf or heart design and the KE
abbreviation. However, the Land Walls were apparently under
construction between the years 405 and 413, which correspond
to indictions ['-IB', so the brick would appear to relate to a
repair, and it is therefore unclear whether it was manufactured in
416/r7 or in 43'h Again, 496.lb, known at the Land Walls,
may be identical to 496.la, known at the Palace of Antiochus,
but the stamp bears a first indiction, and so presumably relates
to a repair to the fortifications. The Land Walls and the Palace of
Antiochus have, of course, names in common on their brick-
stamps, but since these names may have appeared on stamps for
perhaps 30 years, this does not help us to determine whether the
t bricksfrom the palace should be placed inc.414-18 or C.429-33·
The cross within a heart or a leaf and the abbreviation KE are
unusual on brickstarnps in this period, and occur only with the
fifteenth indiction.'? These features occur on a number of brick-
7 The only other praeposiu« recorded in this period is one Felix, who held the
post at an unknown time between 4H and 442: see PLRE, ii. 460, s.v. Felix 8.
I Marnboury, Ill', 43}: 'par certains recoupemenrs avec d'auercs monu-
'Fouilles
ments dares, il y a lieu de penscr que I'edifice fut commence en 4·lj-4 16 et termine en
417-4r8, mais la date dC4DO-403 n'cst toutefois pas cxclue'.
For the date, shortly after ~ Sec below pp. 112-5.
of 4)1, seeACO, i. 1,8,12-
10 On the characteristics of fifth-century bricks tamps, see pp. 99-100. For a
similar design on pottery, see Hayes, LRP, 271, nos. 28}-5, fig. 55·
stamps from the Palace of Antiochus (see Table 12). It is perhaps
worth considering the possibility that these elements are to be
explained by an event which occurred in the year concerned-
an event of religious significance, considering the cross and the
letters KE, which are presumably an abbreviation for K(upt)e.
Events in 4161r7 would not appear to provide an explanation,
but at the synod in the Church of the Theotokos in Ephesus in
June 43 I, Cyril of Alexandria persuaded the delegates to depose
Nestorius, the patriarch of Constantinople, who held that the
Virgin-was not the Bearer of God (Theotokos), but only the
Bearer of Christ (Christotokos)." When a counter-synod was
convened, those Constantinopolitans who supported Cyril
entered the Great Church and demanded that the first synod's
decision be enforced. In Chalcedon in September of the same
year, the Emperor Theodosius II abandoned Nestorius and gave
his support to the theological principles of his Alexandrian
opponents. It is, therefore, possible that the cross within the leaf
or heart on the brickstamps is intended as a reference to the
victory over Nesrorian heresy .
It is, however) the correspondences between the names on the
stamps from the Palace of Antiochus with those on stamps from
St John of Stoudios and the Cistern of Aspar that speak most
strongly for a date C.430. The name-abbreviations 'Ayo( ) and
Cu( ) appear at both the Palace of Antiochus and at St John of
Stoudios (c.4P), and the latter name-abbreviation has also been
noted in the Cistern of Aspar (C.456/7) (see Table 13). Although
it is not impossible that the bricks from the palace were manu-
factured G.415, and that 'Ayo() and Cu() continued to produce
bricks from then for another 35-40 years, it would seem more
reasonable to place the production of the bricks purchased by
Antiochus (.429-B, thus reducing the period during which
'Ayo( ) and Cu( ) operated to around 20--25 years. If, as the
column bases suggest, Antiochus was praepositus when he
began work on his palace, construction would have begun after
the autumn of 432, when Chryseros was still in the post. The
palace would have been complete well before Antiochus, as
ex-praepositus, fell from favour C.439. It is possible that con-
struction began in the first indiction (September 432-August
433), and that much of the material supplied to the site had been
manufactured and stored in previous years."
Stamps in Group I, Sections I and 2 have been ascribed alter-
native dates 4141r 5-4171r 8 and 429/30-432/3. This accounts for
all but three of the sampled stamps-667.If, 968.lf, 969.Ij.
These are of Group 2 style, and therefore date to the sixth (or
possibly late fifth) century. They are listed under Section 4.
Of the stamps omitted from the sample (Group I, Section 3),
two were found in locations that suggest that they antedate on
post-date the construction of the palace-hall. The sixteen bricks
bearing stamp 992.Ia from the semicircular conduit beneath the
marble pavement of the portico are difficult to date. If
Duyuran's drawing is to be trusted, they carry indiction Is', We
't Dn this religious controversy, scc c.g. Holum,
12 Seep. 26.
-,
DATIN G SITES
may reject the unlikely suggestion that the conduit was laid
using bricks made as early as 405/6 (if the palace was built c.ar 5)
or 420h (if the palace belongs to C.430). It would seem more
probable that the conduit was laid and the portico paved shortly
after the construction of the main palace buildings had been
completed, bence in z zo/r (if rhe palace was built C·415) or 435/6
(if the palace belongs to C.430)' The brick bearing stamp II82.Ia
(with indiction A') -from the vault of the channel leading
towards the Binbirdirek cistern is presumably earlier than the
sigma-plan portico under who~e foundations it runs.
c. St jobn ofStoudios
All the stamps in the sample from St john of Stoudios are of
fifth-century style (hence there are no entries in Section 4 of
Table 13); and it can hardly be doubted that the nine that have
been assigned to Group I, Section I belong to the fifth century.
Four names on the stamps from St John's occur also at either the
Cistern of Aspar (the material from which dates to C.456/7) or
the Palace of Antiochus (the bricks from which would appear to
date to q29-B) or both. They are 'Ayo(), 'Iux( )!'IX(), Cu( ),
and <Dro(). Since St johri's was probably built shortly before 454,
these correspondences would not contradict the suggestion that
the stamped bricks (which were not found in situ) had come
from the fabric of the church. The stamps in Group I, Sections I
and 2 (i.e, all except 1246.la) may therefore be ascribed dates
between 448/9 (B,) and 4 ph (E').
Mango's theory that the church was built with the intention
of housing the relics found in Emesa in 453 could be accepted
only if it were assumed that the bricks had been stockpiled for a
short time." However, the sample from St john's is small, and
bricks with indictions c;'-Z' may come to light in future.
d. The cistern of Aspar
Three of the names on stamps in the sample from the Cistern of
Aspar have been assigned to Group I, Section I, thus confirming
their fifth-century date. In fact, all the stamps in the sample are
fifth-century in character (hence there are no entries in Section 4
of Table 13). Since all of the bricks were found in situ in the
original masonry and bear the same indiction number (I'), they
may all be dated to 456/7, on the assumption that the date 'Of
construction given in the Chronicon Paschale (i.e. 459) is
approximately correct. If the date given by the Chronicon is
indeed correct, then this material must have been stockpiled for
a short time before it was used. In that case, we would perhaps
expect the cistern to contain Inany bricks bearing later indic-
tions, which were manufactured closer to the time at which con-
struction work began, but which have not yet been recorded.
The alternative is that the cistern was built in 456/7, and that the
reference to its construction is misplaced in the Chronicon.
Empresses, 147-74'
1) As observedby Mango, Studies, Addendum p. 6.

IIO PART II: CHRONOLOGY
to have been built in 420h (a fourth indiction), all are probably
e. Undated sites to be dated to 419ho. The occurrence of the same name on
bricks in the samples from the Cistern on Siraselviler Caddesi
The samples from undated sites that have been assigned to
and me Cisterns in Giilhane lends further support to the
Group 1 can be dated only in relation to the samples from dated
early fifth-century date proposed for them. The cistern on
sites in that Group. This relative dating is based on assumptions,
Siraselviler Caddesi has no names in common with St John of
explained in Chapter 8," about the length of time over which a
particular name-abbreviation is likely to have been stamped on
Stoudiose one with the Great Church and one with the Palace of
Antiochus. It (or rather me material used in it) could therefore
to bricks. The dating parameters suggested here for me material
be earlier man the bricks from the Giilhane cisterns, but the
in the samples from undated sites is necessarily c~nditional
absence of correspondences with StJohn's may simply bedue to
upon the accuracy of the dates established above for the pre-
me small sample recovered from that church.
Justinianic Great Church, the Palace of Antiochus, St John of
Stoudios, and the Cistern of Aspar.
The drains of the Mese have names in common with the
Palace of Antiochus, St John of Stoutlios, and the Cistern of
The name abbreviations Ma( )s and 'Pro( ) occur at both the
Aspar, which suggests a date of 427-62 (i.e. 457-}0 to 4J2 + 30).
pre-jusrinianic Great Church and at the Palace of Antiochus.
Assuming the proposed dating parameters are correct, more
Therefore, the widest date limits for the occurrence of these two
precise dates may be suggested on the basis of the indictions (see
names is 402-45 (i.e. 4}1-}0 to 4' 5 + jo). 'Ayo(), whose name
appears on sampled stamps at both the Palace of Antiochus and
Table 20).
St John of Stoudios, is unlikely to have been operating outside
TABLE 20. Suggested dates for selected samples in Group 1
the period 422-62 (i.e. 452-}0 to 4}2 + jo), The name Ca( )
appears on stamps at the Palace of Antiochus and the Cistern of
Sample Cluster Suggested dates of
Aspar, hence this individual was probably involved in the brick-
manufacrure
making industry no longer than 426-62 (i.e. 45 6-}0 to 4J2 + jc).
The names 'IX( )l'IaX( ) and <Dro() have been noted at both Cistern on Siraselviler Caddesi s-z: 42012'-42)/4 or 4) 5/6-
St John of Stoudios and in the Cistern of Aspar, but since these 4)8/9
Z'-I'
two structures were constructed at almost the same time, we Cisterns in Culhane 42)/4-426/7 or 438/9-
cannot narrow down the period during which these individuals 44112
Remains near Mercan Caddesi IA'-IA' 427/8-430;' or 442/}-
were operating further than 426-82 (i.e. 456-}0 to 452 + jo).
445/6 or 457/8-460;'
In Group r Balaban Aga Mescidi and Tokludede Mescidi
Byzantine drains of the Mese H'-lB' 424/5-428/9 or 439/40-
have nine names in common, which strongly suggests that the
443/4 or 454/5-458/9
two samples are contemporary. The samples from Balaban Aga IA'-['
Balaban Aga Mescidi 417/8-434/5 or 442/)-
Mescidi, Tokludede Mescidi, Mercan Caddesi, and the drains
449/50 or 457/8-464/ 5
of the Mese all contain the name 'Ayo( ). It has already been T okludede Mescidi lB'-IE' 428/9-43,12 or 443/4-
suggested that the period during which this name appeared on 446/7 or 458/9-46112
brickstamps can have been little longer than 422-62. Thus the
samples from all four sites may be placed roughly within this
period. The sample from the remains Dear Mercan Caddesi, It is difficult to choose between the dates given in Group I.
however, also contains the name Ca( ), which has been dated, a Some observations may be made, however.
little more narrowly to 426--62.
J First, the cistern on Siraselviler Caddesi and the cisterns in
The cisterns in Giilhane and the cistern on Siraselviler Giilhane, which were apparently built using bricks made in the
Caddesi have seven names in common, which again suggests same short period, have consecutive clusters of indictions
contemporaneity." The Giilhane sample has some names in (.6.'-Z' and Z'-I). It is likely that construction of the latter
common with me pre-justinianic Great Church, others with the immediately followed construction of the former. Given the
Palace of Antiochus; and one with St John of Stoudios. A date large number of corresponding names at the two sites, it appears
C.422-45 (i.e. 452-}0 to 4'5 + jo) would therefore seem most less probable that the Giilhane cisterns were begun a decade or
likely. Such an early fifth-century date finds additional support more before the cistern on Siraselviler Caddesi. Unless the
from a very few single-line bricks tamps noted in siui in the east bricks in the Giilhane cisterns were reused, it seems that the
wall of the Cistern of Aetius. Some uncatalogued fragments adjacent cisterns published by Forchheimer and Strzygowski,
carry a third indiction, one fragment carries the name 'Hcu( ), which incorporated capitals of a type that has not yet been
and another stamp has both (cp. 480.1.). Since the cistern is said noted earlier than the very beginning of the sixth century, 16 were
unrelated.
!4 Sec pp. 82-3.
Second, the earliest dates for the contemporary samples from
IS The contemporaneity of these structures was noted by M:unboury ('Fouillcs
Ill', 430), but his statement that seven of the stamps from the Sirasclviler cistern are
'absolutely identical' to those found in the Giilhanc cisterns is incorrect. " Seep. 75.
.•
"~
DATING SITES III
Balaban Aga Mescidi and Tokludede Mescidi are perhaps least
'00
likely, since, were they correct, more correspondences with the ~
large sample from the Palace of Antiochus (q29-}}) might
have been expected. As observed elsewhere, me all-brick
00
masonry at the Balaban Aga Mescitli might be taken to indicate ~
a date in the second half of the fifth century." If we were to
r--
accept the latest possible dates for the mausoleum, these would
not exclude the possibility of the structure being associated with
--
the church' of me Theotokos of the Kourator, which was built
~
n
30 f.-
under Verina (457-84). However, the fact that me cistern on
Siraselviler Caddesi was of pure brickwork suggests that the
technique was not restricted to the later fifth century-unless
me construction of the cistern was undertaken much later than
a
a
.Fr'i.
A ,. A E t: H e rr lA lE
me manufacture of the bricks used in it.
sese
Third, the little we know of me repairs made to the colon- "'IL -----7)
nades flanking the Mese is of no help in determining any more
52-115 52516
closely the date at which the drains beneath the street were laid.
HARRISON
----. 51&9519120
---7
The dates suggested in Table 20 have been ascribed in the cata- BARDILl 507~'=-- -.:s~)'r.! 5171a 52112
------7 )
logue to the brickstamps in Sections 1 and 2 of Group I.
FIG. '5. Histogram to show frequency of indictions on the
bricks tamps from St Polyeuktos, with old and new dates
2. DATING THE SAMPLES IN GROUP 2
realized this and, in his discussion of the evidence, he contra-
The dating of the samples from Sr Polyeuktos, the justinianic dicted the conclusion presented in Hill's contribution to the
Great Church, and the Baths of Zeuxippos will now be recon- excavation report. Unlike Hill, Harrison made reference to the
sidered in the light of the evidence from the brickstamps. The two clusters of indictions. He relied more strictly upon Mango
remaining samples in Group 2 will then be dated in relation to and Sevcenko's dating to interpret the data, and considered that
the better dated ones. the ['-It.' peak related to the years 524/5-525/6." As for me
IB'-I[' cluster, he explained it as old stock manufactured in
a. St Polyeuktos 5'8h9-5 19120. He noted, however, that these bricks were less
dense than the others, and put forward the alternative possi-
Table 5, which shows indictions on the brickstamps found
bility that they might have come from a repair following a
during the excavations at St Polyeuktos, clearly demonstrates
collapse of the dome. This he thought less likely, presumably
that me dates on me majority of the bricks fall into one of two
because there is no evidence for any other repair or redecoration
clusters: B'-E' or IA'-lll'. Hill, however, identified a single con-
of the church."
centration between indictions rn'" and 11...., which corresponds to
Most of me bricks were found loose amongst me debris of the
the period 5'8/19-525/6. He adduced the absence of any bricks
collapsed church, but a proportion could be associated with
bearing indiction E' (526/7) or ~' (527/8) as confirmation of
particular architectural elements." However, no analysis of me
Mango and SevcenkoJs observation that the church must have
distribution of indictions throughout the fabric of the building
been complete by 527.'8 Since Hill apparently accepted that con-
was undertaken in the final report. The results of such an
struction took place in 524-27, he presumably believed that me
analysis are set out in Tables 21 and 22. Table 21 demonstrates
many bricks manufactured between 5'81I9 and 523/4 had been
mat the bricks that could be associated with me substructures
in storage before construction began. When the distribution of
indictions at St Polyeuktas is plotted on a histogram (Fig. 15),
., Harrison, Sarafbane I, 111-12. The potential correspondence to Mango and
however, the virtual absence indictions lE' and A' is made Sevcenko's dates (524-527) of the third indiction on cruciform stamps in the debris •
particularly clear, and Hill's brief discussion takes no account of of the fallen barrel vault at the north-eastcorner of the church platform and from the
conduit at the south-east corner (,Building A') was noted by Harrison and Frratlr in
this break.
the first preliminary report on the excavations (Harrison and Firarh, 'Sarachane 1',
Considering the large number of stamped bricks recovered 234. Cp. Hcrrison, Sararhane I, 20; Harrison, Temple, 44-6). For these finds, see
from the site, it is highly unlikely that the paucity of bricks bear- Table 21. Note also that, when discussing these finds, Harrison, Temple, 45, fig.}8
shows brickstarnp 687.13 (Dj), which is not in fact recorded as having been found in
ing indictions IE' and A' is a chance occurrence. Harrison
the northern or southern chamber.
17 See above p. 71. 20 Harrison, Sararhane I, 111-12; Harrison, Temple, 7T. On lack of evidence for
11 Hill, 'Bricks tamps', 223 (indicrion twelve does not correspond to 519/20, redecoration or repair, see Harrison, Sarafhane I, I 12; Harrison, Temple, 142.
and there is no longer a 'complete absence of indiction E" when I009.1b is read 11 The stamped brieks of known architectural context were gathered by Hill,
correctly). 'Bricksramps', 221-2, Section I.
112 PARTII: CHRONOLOGY DATING SITES 1I3

(church platform) bore indictions B', I", /1', or E'. As to the Indeed, since indictions I'-1l1' appear not only on the fragmen- TABLEZI. Brickstamps from St Polyeuktos of known architectural context: substructures (church platform)
church proper, very little remained that could certainly be tary, loose bricks, but also on the bricks from the superstructure
attributed to it. The primary surviving superstructure element pier from the western facade, the suggested repair would have Location Die Indiction Name Total of bricks
from the church itself was a pier that had fallen westwards from had to have involved much more than just a restoration of the
Debris of fallen barrel vault in western 90.'3 (A3/A30) 0' 'Apicrer..
the west facade of the church into the atrium. Several courses of dome. Harrison preferred to believe that the material in the
corridor of the north-east corner of the "9.'3 (Cr) lE'::'
A~()
brick were dismantled by the excavators in order to examine the I'-1l1' cluster was old stock. It would be a little surprising,
church platform (levels 131, 1)8, 140, 369.13 (A9) none 'E1tHpo.VlOU
brickstamps in the pier, and the associated debris was also however.jiad stockpiled material been reserved for the super-
and 143) {Harrison, Sarafhane 1,19) 8p.'3 (D6) 1 Krovtcrcvrivoo) 20
studied. The great majority of the stamps bore the name structures. If stockpiled bricks had been used at all, we would
834·la(D7) W Krovc(tcxvtivou)
nE~pOll, and those with stamps including dates showed indic- expect them to have been used when building started, and there- 835·la (D8) 1 KrovC('t(X.VtlVOU)
tions IA'-I/1' (Table 22).22 Many very fragmentary bricks that fore to be concentrated in the substructures, or to have been 837·,a(D9) 1 Krovc{-tav'dvou) 14
were found as general debris bore stamps similar or identical to used throughout the construction process. How, then, are the 831.9a none KCJ)vC'taVli~o(u) 1

those from the superstructure pier. Their condition, however, two clusters to be explained? 833·,a (DIO) 1 Kevtcccvetvcc)
meant that the precise stamp used could not be identified. It Once we admit that the story of Gregory of Tours provides 838.la Wory' Kevcncvdvco) 24
seems likely that they, too, are to be associated with the super- only a terminus ante quem for the construction of the church, ,095.ra (E,) none Flsrpou 1
1708.ra lost lost r
structures since they appeared to have shattered upon falling and reject the scholiast's statement that construction lasted for
'709." (DIJ) 1 lost
from higb levels, and they were also thinner and lighter than the just three years, it follows that the only certain facts are that the
bricks from the substructures." The indictions on stamps from entablature inscription was carved after 5I 2, and that the church South-eastcorner of church platform 837·Ia (D9) 1 Kevctrcvrtvoo)
the staircase leading up to the church and on stamps from the was complete by 527 or 528. This means that we must consider (Building A'), conduit (Harrison, 838.,a Wory' KOOVC('tC1V'tlVOU)
'baptistery' to the north of the atrium suggest that they were the possibility that the bricks bearing indictions IA'-ll1' (super- Sarafhane I, 20)
erected in the same period as the superstructure of the church. structures) were manufactured in the years 5 171r 8-5201r. Since Brick floor in (baptistery' (impressions 9I.13(A33) P' 'Aptccei
The two groups of indictions we have just identified in Tables the bricks with indictions B'-E' are to be associated with the found in mortar make-up between 84o.la (DIl) 1 KOlVct[a]v(,(vou)
21 and 22-B'-E' (substructures) and IA'-I.t,: (super- substructures, and since the substructures were of necessity II 18* and II 19'1-)
structures)-correspond to the two major clusters of indictions built before the superstructures, the manufacture of the bricks
Wall west of slip-road (see Notes on 369·,a(A9) none 'EIWPO:VtOU
formed when all the stamps from the site are considered (Fig. would best be assigned to an earlier period, 508/9-51I/12.
Tables z r and 22) IZ50.13 (Az6) la";;' Tp(o)<p(~ou)
15). Consequently, we may reasonably infer that all the sixth- As always, the dates for the manufacture of the bricks provide
538.,a (Cz) E SEo6ropou
century stamped bricks bearing indictions B' -/1' came from the only a terminus post quem for the construction of the building. 8F.7a (C8) none Kccvcrcvrfvofo)
substructures (platform) of the church, and that all those bear- Thus, the evidence of the brickstamps and the texts, taken rccs.rb (Da) E N(')K'()
ing indictions I'-I..D....relate to the church's superstructures, ' together, indicates that the erection of the superstructures (plus 834·,a(D7) W KOOVC('tClV'tlVOU)
We have noted that Harrison, following Mango and the staircase and the substructure of the 'baptistery') and the 84o.,a (DIl) r Krovct[a]v(,(vou)
Sevcenko's dating of 524-27, believed that the B'-/1' cluster- carving of the entablature inscription occurred in the period 838.'3 Wory' K~vC('ta.V'tlVOU)
that is, the dates on the substructure bricks-indicated the dates after P71r8 (indiction IA) and before 527 or 528. Although the
of the construction of the entire church. He considered account- superstructures may, therefore, have been built in 524-27, as ;t Seep. Il2 n. 22.

ing for the other cluster (I'-1l1) as relaring to a repair to the Mango at:d Sevcenko suggested, this would require us to believe
proposed dome, but found this an unsatisfactory suggestion. that the bricks had been in storage for about six years before
T AJlLE22. Brickstamps from St Polyeuktos of known architectural context: superstructures
they were used. The alternative is to suggest that construction,
12 There: are only four bricks whose indictions do not coincide with the indiction using newly made bricks, took place in the years immediately
cluster associated with their architecturalcontext-In the 'wall west of the slip-road' Location Die Indiction Name Total of Bricks
was found a single brick with stamp 11 SO. la, which bears indiction lA' and the name
following P71r8. This earlier date for the superstructures
T p(o)cp().l.ou}.Five bricks bearing the same stamp were found amongst the debris of would not be at odds with the evidence of the pentanummium, Atrium: Staircase and (Baptistery'
a fallen superstructure pier. If-and this is not certain-the wall west of the slip-road presumably of Justin I (5' 8-2 7), that was discovered in the Collapsed vault of aa.ra t.Ar) none 'AyCt1t11'tou
was indeed part of the church, it might be suggested that the apparently anomalous
stamp came from the upper part of a substructure wall (i.e. lowest pan of the super-
make-up of the nave floor. Indeed, it would accord with the in situ. (Harrison,
staircase, 471.,a (An) ,0' 'HMlOO()S
structures). This possibility finds supponfrom two observations. First, three bricks overall high: concentration of coins from the reigns of Saradrane I, 26, pls. 66, 67) 946.,. (B28) 0,' M6:.PKOU
from the wall carry dies with indiction E' (n8.13, lQ09.1b), which indicates that Anastasius and Justin. Since the indiction in which most of the
the substructure material in it is late in the A'-E' cluster. Second, the apparently South pilaster of staircase vault 47'.'. (An) ,0' 'HMlOO()S
anomalous brick bears indiction lA', which would relate to the earliest work on the
superstructure bricks were manufactured corresponds to the (TU1r8-19)
superstructures. The debris from the substructure barrel vault at the church's north- years 519120 (indiction IT), work is perhaps unlikely to have
east corner contained twO bricks bearing stamp 119.1:1 with indiction lE' and name started earlier than 519120.24 The only indications we have 'Baptistery') west wall, north 666.4. (BI4) none Kotvjcrcvrrtvc»l I

Au( ). The bricks would therefore seem to he old stock. and may relate to the last end (II ZI bb/r 6)(Harrison, '393.1' (CI2) none 1'1[ 16
regarding the length o( the construction period are the
year of the cycle preceding that to which the dates on mostof the substructure bricks
Sarafhane I, 26, pl. 54) 1378.,C (CI6) none iir
refer. Amongst the debris of a fallen superstructure pier was found one brick bear- scholiast's unreliable claim that work lasted for three years and
1397·la (CI9) none Christogram
ing stamp 1009. rb with indiction E' and the name N( l)!C\(). Either the brick is not in the attractive tale preserved by Gregory of Tours. If there is any
fact to be associated with the pier debris or it was left over from work on the sub- rr,hp(ou)
structures and later incorporated in the superstructures (note that two bricks
truth in it at all, Gregory's story would seem to suggest that the 'Baptistery', west wall, south 1083." (EI9) '1
stamped with this die were found in the 'wall west of the slip-road'). church was already finished before Anicia [uliana's death in end (II2' bblr6) (Harrison, I091.1a 'll'ft1'1t0'/none rr.,p(ou) II

2l Hill simply states that the numerous fragments listed under I09I.ta and 527-28, when the alleged events described in the story are set. Sarafha';e I, 26, pl. 54)
1387.la were 'thinner at the centre' and 'noticeably lighter', and hence 'most likely
to contain remains of the dome, if the church was equipped with such' ('Brick-
Alan Cameron has demonstrated that the former fish-fryer
Church: Low Levels of Superstructure
stamps',222-3)· See also p. 26.
Z~
North wall of church, 658.la (B,O) lost Kovcrcveivco
demolished (Harrison, 665.la (BI2) none Ko(v)c't(l.v('tl.vou)
 "~
•
II4 PART II: CHRONOLOGY DATING SITES

TABLE 22 continued would allow us to suggest that the two poems were written
'00
for simultaneous building projects, perhaps by the same corn-
Location Die lndiction Name Total of Bricks
poser." se
The datjng of the erection of the substructures presents se
Sarsubane I, 22, pis. 28-9) r.aco.rb (Ct8) none Christogram
further complications. Although the bricks used to build
Church: High Levels of Superstructure the platform were manufactured in 508/9-5"/12, it is not
Pier fallen into atrium, 1096.1. (E2) none O"p(ou) impossible that they were then kept in storage for several years
western end, in situ and in t097.13 (E) none Ol:tp(ou) and not used until shortly after 5'7118, immediately before the
debris (,08,*Y/,8-'9) 1099.13 (E5) none O"p(ou) period in which the superstrucrnres were erected using much
(Harrison, Sararhane 1,26-7, 1100.la (E10) none Ol:tp(ou) more recently manufactured bricks. This possibility is all the
pis. 69. 71-2; Harriscn, 108S.1b (El I) 'P' Ol:tp(ou)
more likely given that the period immediately before 5'7/r 8 was
Temple, fig. 50) none O«p(ou) 20

I.
II01.la
one of political and religious turmoil, during which little con-
lp'lty'!,6'/none Ol:tp(ou)
struction would have been undertaken in Constantinople and
Pier fallen into atrium, 1250.13 (A26) let Tp(o)'i>«~ou) when few bricks are likely to have been manufactured.
A' B' r' /i' E' lA' ra- If" re- lE'
eastern end, debris 536.,. (C5) none 6EOMpou Consequently, those building projects-such as St Poly-
50718 511/2 51718 52112
(920*,924, '0' 5*WXI,6-,8.b) 536.IC(C6) none eeooropou euktos-that were begun when the crisis of C.5 '3- 15 was over ) )

r(
(Harrison, Seracbene I, 26-7, 831.Ia (C7)

r
none KrovC1CXV,dvo(u) would initially have been supplied with stockpiled material
T
51H15111TAUAN
pis. 69, 70, 73; Harrison, 139).la (CI2) none 11([ made in the years before the crisis. m<o<s
Temple, fig. 76) '386.,. (C'3) none N It is also possible, however, that work began on the substruc- S06AREOONOUS SI2AREOBIt«lUS
CONSTAWTlNOf'lE

5160EATHOF
1)86.2a(C'4) none N tures in or shortly after 508/9, and ceased around 51 '/12.
BECOMES CQNSLL ll«lJNES
TIE""",,"
ANASTASlUS

1403.1a (C2I) none cross

Although a delay of about five years between the construction
I009·Ib(D2). E N(')KI() FIG. 16. Histogram to show frequency of indictions on the
of the substructures and the erection of the superstructures may
I096.,a (E2) none OE'p(OU) brickstamps from St Polyeuktos with suggested dates and
seem strange, the historical and political context of the church's
'077·" (E15) 'y OEtp(OU) historical events affecting the progress of construction
IoSI.Ia(E17) OEtp(OU) construction perhaps provides an adequate explanation (Fig.
'y
roaa.ra (EIS) tY O«p(ou) 16). The project may have been initiated by Areobindus, who Vitalian turned the troops defending Thrace and Scythia on
1)87·,a none variants of became consul in 5 06." This suggestion would not conflict with Constantinople on the pretext of supporting Chalcedonian
monograms 36 the evidence of the coins or pottery discovered." The apparent orthodoxy (against the Monophysitism of Anastasius)." On the
and )7 cessation of work on the substructures in 51 I It 2 might in that first and second occasions, Anastasius came to terms with him,
none OE'p(OU) case be connected with Areobindus' disappearance. Itwas in but immediately reneged on the agreements made. Although
l077·)a 'Y OEtp(OU) 512 that the citizens of Constantinople who favoured Vitalian's army and fleet were defeated on the third occasion,
Io85·r3 ,y' probably OEtp(OU)
Chalcedonian orthodoxy rose up against the Monophysitical Vitalian himself was not killed, and he remained a threat to
l091.1a ,p'lty'lt6'/none Ol:tp(ou) 22
Emperor Anastasius L When the mob urged Areobindus to take Anastasius for the remainder of his reign. In the early morning
Notes on Tables r s and rs the crown, he declined and fled from the city. Our sources do of 9 July 5' 8 (indiction lA,), Anastasius died." When [ustin I
In his 'Brickstamps', 12 1-2, Section I. HiD considered 'Brickstamps Found in situ', or, more accurately (given that many bricks were found loose), stamped bricks whose orig- not refer 'to him again, and it is possible that he was murdered unexpectedly came to the throne, he restored Chalcedonianism,
inal architectural context was clear from their findspot. From Section I he (for reasons that are not clear) the material [rorn the 'wall west of the slip-road',
excluded which was shortly after. The popular mass then surged to the house of worked to realign the church of Constantinople with Rome, and
recovered during the winter of 1964--65. I have included the material stamps and the indicrions on them are consistent with those on the bricks from other pans
here, since the
of the church. The description 'west of the slip road' might be taken to suggest that the wall was a pact of the church platform, perhaps part of the narthex substructure. It must Pompey, Anastasius' pro-Chalcedonian nephew. But he too came to terms with Vitalian, conferring high office upon him.
be admitted, however, that the wall's locaricn is not dear, and it may not have been part of the church at all. Indeed, the excavation report mentions that in the winter of 1964--65 had fled from his home, and Anastasius thus survived the threat Finally, on 28 March 5'9 (indiction IB,), the patriarch of
a Byzantine wall 0.75 m. thick was found in Sounding 'A', which was about 180 m. to the north of the church, JUSt west of the underpass (Harrison, Sarafhane I, 13 with fig. to his authority. Constantinople signed a document of reunion."
1). Also omitted from Hill's Section I are levels 1)8 (Nho-II}:and L+) (MNIrO-I I), which, together with levels I) I (Mho-II) and 140 (MNho-II), contained debris from
the fallen barrel vault at the north-east corner of the church. (Note that all four levels are, correctly, treated together in Hill's Section 11.)Two bricks, one bearing 837·1a (09), The five-year gap before building work resumed in, or Certainly, work on the superstructures of St Polyeuktos,
the other 838.1a (D6-8), were wrongly ascribed to this debris (level 140) in Hill's catalogue. They in fact came from the conduit in the south-easecomer of the church {Building shortly after, 5 '71t 8 would coincide with, and may be explained which were built by Juliana after the disappearance of her
A'). Hill's ascription of the architectural elements listed in his Section I to particular levels of the building is inaccurate: only his nos. 6 and 7 can be associated with high levels,
by, the crisis of C.513-'5· In 513, 514, and 5'5, the general husband, began between 5'7 and 521. We know from o~r
and no. 8 is certainly one of the lowest partS of the supersuuctures (the vault below the staircase that led up to the tOp of the church platform).
literary sources that Juliana herself was a staunch pro-
1t It has been suggested that the composer of juliana's poem may have been
Theodorus became city prefect for the third time in 520," and perhaps more than coincidence that both poets used the same Christodorus, who was also responsible for describing the Statues in the Baths of
Chalcedonian, and refused to abandon the orthodox cause
that the Palatine Anthology preserves two inscriptions from a epithet aJl£<pT\<oc, especially in view of the fact that St Poly- Zeuxippos (Tissoni, Cristodoro, 23 with n. 36). He may, therefore, have been despite devious attempts made by Anastasius and the Patriarch
responsible for Theodorus' poems, too. Timothy to win her over." We also know that she communi-
church that he dedicated to Justin and Justinian in that year." In euktos was completed (probably) in 527, only seven years ... )0 See PLRE, ii. 14)-4. s.v. Fl. Areobindus Dagalaiphus Areobindus I.
one of the inscriptions, the extent of the marble revetment in after Theodorus' church. Juliana's poet may well have had )1 The earliest concentration of coins from the site relates to the reigns of
cated with the Pope regarding the ending of the Acacian
Theodorus' church is described as 'immeasurable' (aJl£<pT\<oc), [Theodorus'] epigrams in mind'." The proposed redating of the Anastasius I (491-5 I8)andJustin Heady, 'Coins', 278). Note that me
I (51 8-27) (sec schism." It is, therefore, not unlikely that the church is to be
pentanummium of [ustio I (518-27) foundin part of the pottery dump below the regarded as a monument to the reunion with the Catholic
and the same adjective is used in a similar context in Se superstructures of Juliana's church to shortly after 5'7118 paving of the nave (deposit 14, level 261. Sec Harrison, Sararhane I, I r r: Hendy,
Polyeuktos' dedicatory epigram" Cameron conunented: 'It is 'Coins', 289 no. 76; Hayes, Sararhane 11, 7 does not note the coin) is to be associated 11 ScePLRE, ii. 1171-6, s.v. Fl. Vitalianus 2.
21 Palatine Anthology 1.98 with Palatine Anthology l.10.60-1. These
Compare
with the period of work on the superstructures (rather than that on the sub- H SeePLRE,ii.78-80,s.v.Anasrasius4.
lines of Palatine Anthology 1.10 were amongst the verses inscribed outside the
structures). The pottery dump (and hence the coin) was contemporary with work H See Vasilicv']ustin the First, 108-14 (Vitalian), 160-83 (reunion).
2S Alan Camcron, "Ihcodorus', 280. church (vv. 42-76), and Harrison, SarafiJane I, 7-8 wondered if they had been com-
on the superstructures, since a number of pottery-bearing levels .below the nave lS Theodore Anagnostes, Epitome, 504. Theophanes, Chronicle, AM 6005 (= AD
26 Alan Camcroo, 'Thcodorus', 274, The poems are Palatine Anthology 1.97 and posed later than the verses inside (vv. 1-41).
floor also contained marble waste from the carving of the sculpture (265\ J46'~, 512/3).
1.98. 11 Alan Camcron, "Ihcodorus',275.
3P."",456~') (see Harrison,Sararbane I, I I I and eh. 3). )6 Vasiliev,fnstiTJ the First, r79-8r, 199-200.
II6
Church that was achieved in March 519. If work began straight
away, the indictions on the superstructure bricks might indicate
the dates 'of construction fairly accurately, say 5'9-22 for
the erection of the shell of the superstructure." In addition,
it is at least conceivable that the substructures of the church
were begun between 506 and 5'2 by Areobindus, to whom the
populace looked as a potential pro-Chalcedonian successor to
Anastasius. If this was indeed the case, the circumstances would
further support the suggestion that the construction
Polyeuktos was intimately connected with the restoration
of St
of orthodoxy and reunion with Rome. On its completion
(certainly before p8), the church of St Polyeuktos would
indeed have been 'a challenge to the authority of Justin and his
nephew Justinian', as Harrison understood it to be." But if con-
struction of the substructures began before 5'7!I 8, possibly as
early as 508/9, then the project would also have represented the
orthodox challenge posed by the Theodosian dynasty to the
power of the monophysitical Emperor Anastasius."
A small number of stamps have been identified as belonging
to the fifth century on stylistic grounds, and therefore appear in
Section 4 of Table 14 (,I6.Ia, 347.Ia, 633.1a, 885·1a, 938.1a,
983.Ia, 1201.Ia). These are the only stamps that appear to have
been considerably older than AniciaJuIiana's church," and are
discussed in relation to the earlier church of Eudokia (see
Chapter r r, Section 2).
The stamps with indictions have generally been assigned
dates from 5°7/8 to pliz (A'-lE'). However, it is unclear
whether stamp 1247.1a with indiction A' relates to 5°7/8 or to
P2/3; and stamp II9.1a (IE) has been assigned to 5°6/7 (not
521/2), since it was found in the substructures of the church.
Stamps that lack indictions and that can be associated with the
substructures (369.1a, 831.7a, 9a, I095.Ia, '708.Ia, Table 21)
have been ascribed to the general period 507-12. Stamps lacking
indictions, and associated with the superstructures (22.1a,
536.1a, IC, 658.Ia, 665.Ia, 666.4a, 831.1a, I091.1a, 1096.1a,
1°97.13, 1099.la, r roo.ra, IIOI.Ia, 1378.1C, 1386.la, aa,
1387.13, 1393.1a, '397.,a, 14oo.1b, '403.,a, Table 22) have been
ascribed not to 517-22, but rather to 507-22, on the grounds that
some of them may have been reused from the period of sub-
structure construction. Other stamps without indictions, and
that cannot be associated with either substructures or super-
structures, have similarly been dated to 507-22.
J7 If, as Harrison suggested, Bishop Ecclesius of Ravenna visited Sr Polycuktos
when he travelled to Constantinople in 52.6, the building would have been complete.
See Harrison,Sarafhane I, 41 5; Temple, 77, 14o-I.
l. Harrison, Sarafhane I, 410.
19 I intend to discuss the ideological aspects of the church of St Polyeuktos in
greater detail elsewhere, and to present a new reconstruction
40 Although it is conceivable that stamped bricks
centuries after after they were made' (Fowden, 'Constanrine', 275),
strably not the case at St Polyeuktos, except in a few identifiable
Chapter I I, section 2.
PART II: CHRONOLOGY DATING SITES
b. TheJustinianic HagiaSophia The style of most of the stamps in the sample suggests that brickstamps in Group 1 (fifth century)," it might be inferred
they are sixth century. With the exception of five stamps clearly from the evidence that there was a greater tendency to omit
Most of the bricks in the sample from Hagia Sophia were in all
relating to reused material (263.13, 3'3.13, 444.1a, 475.1a, indiction dates from c. 530. If so, the overall presence or absence
likelihood manufactured shortly before the construction of the
r446.1a in Table '4, Section 4), it can only be assumed, until of indictions in a sample in Group' may perhaps be used as a
church. The infrequent use of indictions on the bricks tamps,
evidence to the contrary is forthcoming, that all the remaining rough chronological indicator. Since the bricks in the samples
however, means that it is not possible to check whether the
material in the sample comes from the justinianic construction from Cemal Nadir Sokagi, Isrneriye Caddesi, and Tokludede
sample is jontaminated with material that is much earlier or
after the fire of 532. Mescidi (sample 2) carry sufficient numbers of indictions for
much later. Many stamps in Group 2, Section I have names in
common with stamps from St Polyeuktos, and these names can
therefore be firmly placed in the sixth century (Table 14). Other
stamps in Group 2, Section I have names in common with
[ d. Undated sites
clusters to be discernible, they are perhaps to be ascribed to the
period before c.s 30. The cluster of indictions lA' -Il" at Cemal
Nadir Sokagi may indicate th;t the bricks were made in one of
the following periods: 502/3-504/5, 5'71r8-519/z0, 532/3-
the Baths of Zeuxippos, and may also be assigned to the sixth There are three undated samples in Group 2 to be related
53415. The cluster I'-m' at the remains on Isrnetiye Caddesi
century, although less reliably, since the sample from the baths chronologically to the three dated samples. Since each of them
may correspond to 5°1/2-503/4, 5161r7-5I81r9, 531iz-533/4,
. consists largely of bricks lacking- both indictions and records of has names in common with either the Justinianic Hagia Sophia
and the cluster J\'-H' at Tokludede Mescidi may refer to 4951
findspots. Consideration of the style of all the stamps in the (532-37) or the Baths of Zeuxippos (after 532), or both, it is
6-499/500, 5I0/II-5'4/rS, 525/r6-P9130. In the catalogue,
sample from Hagia Sophia suggests that a small amount of the unlikely that any of them should be dated earlier than c. 500. The
dates have not been assigned to stamps from Tokludede Mescidi
material belongs to the fifth century (see Table 14, Section 4). samples from Hagia Sophia and the Baths of Zeuxippos contain
that lack indictions, since it is not clear to which of the two
The stamps with indictions in the cluster (lA' -IT) were in all few bricks tamps with indiction dates, whereas the sample from
clusters (if either) they should he ascribed.
probability manufactured in the years 532/3, 533/4 and 53415· St Polyeuktos (508-'2) has a larger proportion of dated stamps.
Thus 932.raand 12j2.lb, both noted on bricks from the remains Considering that the indiction date was a consistent feature of ~l See pp. 99. 100.
ofthe atrium superstructure, have been ascribed to 53zl3.'1 The
other sampled stamps from the same remains and without indic-
tions ('23.1b, 337.1d, 674.IP, 203.3a, 574.1a, 665.6a, 666.1Z,
667.rii, 676.6d, 880.1d, 831.1C, 967.2a, 969.1P, 1023.1C, "'4·1a,
134'.73) should probably all be ascribed to C.532/3' Stamps
'
lz8.Ia, 606.Ia, and I253.Ia, from Schneider's atrium excava-
tion, may be dated to 533/4, 534/5, and 534/5 respectively. All
the material without indictions from this excavation (337.1C,
355.", 603·1a, 666.tl, 4Z, ff, ii, 5a, 667.1d, h, 668.1b, e, 674.rb, j,
675.", 676'3h, 5c, 690' la, 779·ra, 817·If, h, k, 921.1a, 934·",
966.1a, 967.1g, k, 0, r, 969.1a, b, I, 971.1b, 1267.ra, 1272.1e,
134'.3d, 1677.1a) may be ascribed to C.533-35. Stamp 965·1b,
from Caferiye Sokagi, is probably to be dated 532/3' The other
stamps from the wall (337.3a, 44o.1a, 663.1a, 674.It, w, 696.1a,
8'2.1b, 969.11, 1365-'a) should also be dated to C.532/3' Stamps
666.4bb,667.1X, 674.IU, '342.3e, '3 50.1h, 1396.1d, from putlog
holes, may be dated to 532-37.
c. Baths of Zeuxippos
As at Hagia Sophia, the lack of indictions on the stamped bricks
recovered from the Baths ofZeuxippos means that the bricks in
the sample cannot certainly be said to have been manufactured
contemporaneously. Furthermore, there is no certainty that all
the bricks came from the Justinianic fabric of the building rather
than from later repairs. Since it was desirable to include most of
the stamps in the sample, rhe best guide as to whether the stamps
relate to the Justinianic phase comes from coincidences of
names. Thus the stamps in Group 2, Section I are those most
reliably associated with the Justinianic period (see Table '4).
of the building.
were somecimes 'reused
this is demon- ~1 Sorlin-Dcrigny, 'Letter', I}O made speculative identifications of the indi-
cases discussed in viduals named on the bricks, which led him to believe that the following indicrion
cycle was meant.

CHAPTER
Further stylistic analysis
In the stylistic analysis based on the material in Section I of
Groups I and 2, the characteristics of the two Groups were
discussed in the most general terms. Amongst the material in the
catalogue as a whole, however, there are other sets of stamps that
can be defined on the basis of similarities in appearance. Some of
these sets are sub-groups of Groups I and 2; others are less easy
to ascribe to either Group I or 2. It is, therefore, necessary to
provide a description of these stylistic sets, and, whenever'
possible, to attempt to date them. For the sake of convenience,
the various sets are presented below in the form of a list.
1. ,A small number of stamped bricks carry the formula
DDDNNN or DDDY1Y111-which is to be interpreted as
(trium) d(ominomm) n(ostrorum}-followed by a tenth or
thirteenth indiction (1446-50). Two similar stamps from Rome,
may be noted. The first is rectangular with an ansa to left, and
reads DDY1lI1 (ClL xv. 1661). The Consiantinian date is
suggested by its discovery in the Arch at Malborghetto, which
was probably built by Ccnstantine shortly after his victory of
3'2.1 The second is rectangular and reads DDD/Y1Y111 (ClL xv.
,662). An example has been found in the church of SS Cosmas
and Damian, which, having been damaged in the fire of 283, was
repaired by Constantine.' The Constantinopolitan examples
may, therefore, refer to Constantine I with the Caesars Crispus
and Constantine (between 3 I7 and 324) or with the Caesars
Constantine and Constantius (between )26 and 333), or to the
three emperors Constantine Il, Constantius and Cons tans (337-
40)' This dating perhaps finds tentative support in the discovery
of one such stamp in the excavations at the Baths of Zeuxippos,
which were inaugurated at the same time as the city itself on "
May 330 ('446.'3).'
2. In 1950, a series of piers was discovered at the north-west
corner of the Hippodrome (Fig. 5). These piers formed the outer
arcade of an ambulatory beneath the tiered seating. Mamboury
records that the bricks in the piers generally measured 310 X 300
x 55-60 mm. (5 courses 440-460 mm. high; mortar beds 40-45
mm. thick). Bricks in the, .83 m.-thick inner ambulatory wall to
the east of these piers were of similar size, measuring 300 mm.
square by 50 mm. thick.' The remains found in '950 are to be
associated with other remains of the north-west flank of the
1Stein by, 'L'indusrria Iatcrizia', 1I 3. De Maria,Archi, II t-U, 24}-4.
1 Srcinby, 'L'industria larcriz.ia', 140.
I I},
J Seep. 68.
~ Ward-Pcrkins in GPIl, 63'
FURTHER STYLISTIC
iv(lhl<'tl&VOC)followed by a numeral, but lacking the abbrevia-
tion ~a( ) before the name, appear to belong to a distinct group.
10 The examples recorded so far bear a fourteenth indiction with
the names 8",() (5P.I.), Kup() (757.13), Iho() (Il71.'3, b),
and Po() (I IS1.Ia), and are of a distinctive size (350 x 330 x 50
mm.; 350 x 330 x 45 mm.; HO x jzo x 50 mm.; 350 x 340 x 40
mm.). Thus they are much smaller than the material in Group I,
Section 1. These stamps come from the inner wall of the
ambulatory of the Hippodrome, from masonry above the drain
beneath the Hippodrome staircase, and from a pentagonal room
beside the Hippodrome. Their contemporaneity is suggested by
Hippodrome that had been excavated further to the south-west the fact that they all carry a fourteenth indiction. If the
in 1927. The earliest coins found in the '927 excavations, above Constantinian phase of the Hippodrome is represented by the
the floor of yellow clay, were dated to the period 330-49', bricks measuring c.300-3 la mm. square x 50-60 mm. thick (see
suggesting that the structures found in 1927 and '950 should be 2 above), then these bricks presumably come from a repair,
ascribed to the Constantinian period.' The original structure of perhaps in the late fourth or early fifth century.
the curved end (Sphendone) of the Hippodrome is built of 4. A number of bricks have stamps with only an indiction
bricks of similar size, and is most probably to be assigned to the
number followed by a name. There is no i~(Ol1C'tl&VOC) or ~a()
Constantinian period also." abbreviation, and the letters are carved simply, without serifs.
The piers discovered in '950 had been repaired, Mamboury All the bricks are significantly smaller than the material in
observed, with bricks measuring 260 x 260 x 50 mm. and 350 x
Section T of Groups I and 2 (see Table '9), measuring 269-3 '2
340 x 50 mm.' The bricks of the smaller size were marked with mm. square by 32-50 mm. thick. The stamps are stylistically
fingermarks forming a X. In pier no. 6, Mamboury recorded close to those in Group' r but their greater simplicity may
bricks with horseshoe-shaped fingermarks measuring 370 x 3 50 suggest an earlier date. However, the names fpa( ) and A'l(),
x 60 mm. They, too, presumably related to a repair to the which occur on these stamps, are also found on stamps of Group
original Constantinian work.
r style in the sample from the Palace of Antiochus (c.429\33). If
Bricks stamped with a simple cross were also found during the same individuals are referred to on both types of stamp, then
the excavations in 1950 ('402.Ia, b). Stamp '402.,a, used the simpler stamps may in fact be no earlier than the beginning
together with fingermarks in a horseshoe shape ('741.2a), was of the fifth century. The coincidences of names may not, how-
recorded on a few bricks from the drain below the staircase at ever, be significant, and the possibility of a late fourth-century
pier no. 4. The majority of bricks from the drain were of similar date is perhaps more likely. The stamps concerned are as
size (370 x 350 x 55 mm.; 370 x 350 x 60 mm.), but lacked the follows:
stamp, and bore only the horseshoe-shaped fingermarks. The
cross indicates a date in the Christian period, but the dimensions Name Catalogue number
of the complete bricks so stamped (360 x 355 x 55 mm.) are not 'Alt() 80.'3
compatible with material from Group r Section I (fifth 'AclC() ros.ra
century) (see Table 19), which suggests that they may belong to 'Ata() II5·la
the fourth century. Since the stamp lacks an inscription, was 'A<p() I56.Ia
used in conjunction with fingermarks, and was discovered along f'l() 234·ra
with unstamped, fingermarked bricks, it is tempting to suggest fpa() 238.13
that it is one of the earliest Constantinopolitan brickstamps, A'l() 269.la, 27I.Ia
Zro() 442•Ia
3. Some single-line stamps employing the abbreviation
For the coins, see Casson et al., Hippodrome I, 4, 48. The excavators believed Ku() 699·ra
5 This suggests an early sixth-century
that stone blocks beneath this clay layer related to the earlier Hippodrome of Map() 9H·Ia
Seprimius Severus: Casson et al., Hippodrome I, 4. Duyuran, 'Palace of Jus rice 1', 36 Xa() 1322.Ia
believed the brick structures dated to the Severan period.
6 Mamboury and Wiegand, Kaiserpalaste, 41 (although this size of brick is here
5. Finds in the court to the east of the apse of the Theotokos
wrongly ascribed to the later bloc~g of the arched openings in the outer wall of the
in the Chalkoprateia show single-line stamps whose inscrip-
Sphcndonc). Kahya. 'Tugla Boyurlan', 171, table I gives rhe brick dimensions from
the Sphcndone as 190-310 mm. long X40-50 mm. thick, most frequently 300-310 x tions have the abbreviation ~a( ) at the beginning of the inscrip-
41-45 nun. See also PanII, Ch. rr.eect. 4. tion (285 .r a, 397.1., 425.13, 795.13, 1031.13). There is, however,
7 The Hippodrome excavations of 1950 were published very cursorily: see
Duyuran, 'Palace of Justice 1', 35-6 with figs. 6-IO, and Mamboury's cross-section no guide to dating this material, which was not found in situ. (see
in Miiller-Wiencr, Bildlexikon, 69, fig. 47. Some useful unpublished photographs of Chapter 8, section 2C).
these excavations arc in the possession of the Dumbarton Oaks Photograph
6. Although cruciform stamps and monograms have been
Collection. The details of brick dimensions are recorded in Mmnboury's notes in the
Deurschcs Archaologisches Institut, Istanbul. found exclusively in Group 2, there appears to be a cruciform
ANALYSIS
stamp with a monogram that belongs to the fifth century.
The monogram-either A (no. 7) or RI: (no. 8), both of which
clearly refer to the same individual-appears alone in one arm of
the cross. In the other arms are an indiction date and name
abbreviation.
According to U nger, a brick from the excavations of ruins on
Saray Burnu (probably a part of the orphanage of St Paul) bore
two stamps: stamp IS6.Ia, of the cruciform type under dis-
cussion and bearing the name Bac( ), and stamp 168.1', of
typical Group I style and bearing the name Ba( ). Both carried
indiction eleven. The name Ba"c( ) occurs at St John of Stoudios
(C·451), but, since it also occurs in the cisterns in Gulhane, dated
C.422-45 (see Table T 3, Section I), it is unlikely to have been in
use after C-475 (i.e. 445 + 30). Thus the presence of ,6S.r3 leaves
no doubt as to the fifth-century date of I86.ra. Similar stamps
are 944.ra, with monogram no. 7 and the name Map( ), and
r 7'4.r a, with a lost name and monogram no. 8. Map() occurs in
the samples from Balaban Aga Mescidi and Tokludede Mescidi
(sample I), which are both probably best placed in the second
half of the fifth cenrury.!
The cruciform stamps with a monogram therefore appear to
be the earliest stamps of that shape, and also the earliest with a
monogram.
The monogram itself-the most prominent letters of which
are A in the centre, and E and r:: on opposite sides-has not been
solved. Clearly, Unger's suggestion that it belongs to the
Emperor Heraclius cannot be accepted on grounds of date,'
although it may indeed be imperial, given that the stamps also
carry an abbreviated name that is probably the name of the
dominus or officinator (compare the late sixth-century tabulae
ansatae surmounted by a monogram of Maurice (see t b
belowj).'? In the period concerned, the likely imperial candi-
dates are Marcian and Leo, but neither of these names appears to
provide the correct solution.
7. A number of stamps carry a formula in addition to the
name. A particularly interesting type is circular with the words
8(EO)ii ?(aplC placed vertically, and the name and indiction date
arranged on either side. A large number of these, carrying many
different names, were discovered together in the ruins near
Cemal Nadir Sokagi." The stamps from this site are to be dated
to the sixth century, and possibly to before c.5)0, if the regular
appearance of indictions on the stamps can be taken as a guide. I.
date for the type. The
examples in the catalogue with this formula and a name are as
follows:
Name Catalogue number
'Ayopucroii jr.ra, b
'Avato:\.tou 47.Ia, b, 4S.,a, 49.1.
I Sec Table 13,PP. r ro-r r.
t Unger, 'Seraispicae', 18, no. 8a.
10 For the monograms of Maurice, see p. 47.
11 See p.vj.
11 Sec p. Il7.
120 PART II: CHRONOLOGY FURTHER STYLISTIC ANALYSIS 121

Name Catalogue number Constantinopolitan bricks stamped with Christograms, He (a) The first is a rectangular stamp with three monograms. (610--41) (74.Ia, 377.1a, 1698.1a, 1699.1a). It is therefore COn-
'Ana1-.o'O Il7.1a concluded that they were used during the reigns of Theodosius The first monogram (I)(), H' or +, nos. II, 41, or 51) gives the ceivable that these stamps are some of the very last to have been
BaCLA.1KOU 192.13 II (40S-50) and Marcian (450--57),16 and that the basic ligature of name of a private individual. The second is a box monogram (~, used before the so-called Dark Ages. The findspot may not,
Bocxopioc 193.13, b, c, cl, 194.ra, 195.la I or + with X was subsequently elaborated in the sixth centur-y, no. 32) to be resolved as Elti, and the third is the imperial mono- however, be significant in determining the date, given the exten-
..6..Wj.l1loou 310.la,3II.13 producing the rosettes srampedon the bricks in SS Sergius and gram (+, 1<
or ..:t., nos. 55, 56, or 57). Of the three initial mono- sive reuse of materials in the original Heraclian work and in the
1.io'O 3 18.1a, 319·1a Bacchus. The examples that Mamboury adduced as datable grams that have so far been noted, one (no. 5I) can be resolved as later repairs made to it. Also, the dimensions of AM 5 (3S5 x 369
88000U1-.o'O p8,la comejrorn the Byzantine drains of the Mese (1397,IC), the Land 8£Otpo.vo'O(1372). x 59 mm., 1699.1a), are closer to those of fifth- and early sixth-
K'OptaKOU 777.1a WaJls (74.Ia, 377.Ia (both of a specific type discussed in section (b) The second type is in the form of a tabula ansata contain- century material than to those of the late sixth-century bricks
Kco(v)c~av~i(v)o'O 842.1a,843.1a 12 below)) and Tokludede Mescidi (1398,la, 1400.IC, 1700,Ia). ing two lines of text, giving a name and an indiction date. A bearing Mauricc's monogram. On the other hand, the absence of
Aeovriou 858,la Unfortunately, the fifth-century dates that Mamboury roundel surmounting the tabula ansata contains the imperial such stamps from early sixth-century contexts (St Polyeuktos,
Aovytvo'O 873.1a advanced for the bricks from these structures are highly monogram (+, no. 55)' The following names appear: Hagia Sophia, the Baths M Zeuxippos) may be evidence in
Mayvou 908.1a, z a, 3" questionable. First, several sixth-century bricks from the favour of a post-justinianic date.
Name Catalogue number
Mcxcpiou 927,la,928.1a drains suggest that repairs were made to the original fifth- Various Late Roman brickstamps are comparable, being
[EOPYlOU 226.la,2a
Maprupiou 949.1a, z a, 950.1a, 951,la cenfury work." Second, the Land Walls were repaired on so circular with a central Christogram: stamps of a Pope John,
I'pnvopioo 259,la,2a
TIE'tpOU rr rz.ra, b,c,2a, 1113.1a, b many occasions that any brick whose context was not recorded which possibly refer to the earliest Popes with this name, John I
.Ll.LO~~OOU 3 r a.ra, 313.1a, b, c, 314.la, b, 3 I 5.la,
Co,1tOUPOU I215.ra,I216.Ia precisely is almost impossible to date." Finally, although (523-25) or John II (5 33-J6);U a series of stamps of the imperial
316.Ia
Tpociuoo 1264.1a Mamboury mentions only the fifth-century material used to officina Claudiana;" stamps bearing the legend spes in Deo;"
8eoooclo'O KO/1(lltoc) 513.Ia
build Tokludede Mescidi, this mosque has been shown to and stamps of Cassius (XMT Kcccctoo)." It is suggested that all
Other formulae that appear with a name are Kupta ~m\e(e)t and ITa:rcuAou 1028.la, h, c, cl, e
incorporate both fifth- and sixth-century samples of contem- stamps of this style are to be ascribed to the reign of Theodoric.
ITauAou b,
'tiic veo.c. The former is known only with the name <DT)oi/1o'O
(1280,1281,1282,1284)13 The latter occurs with 'Aya80viKo'O,
porary bricks," and there is no evidence to suggest to which
group the bricks stamped with Christograms belong.
Tpuqxovoc
1056.13,

1273,la
23
13· A similar stamp, with a central *,
has the letters of the
'An( ), 1.0/1VO'O,and Apocspfu. Since the inclusion of these inscription between the arms of the star (87.1a). A date earlier
Stylistically, the stamps with Christograms belong to Group 2: A similar stamp of this type has a cruciform monogram ("t', no. than C.475 is most unlikely, but precision is not possible.
formulae generally requires the use of multiple lines of text,
they are circular in form, and they carry a specific type of mono- 59) in the round el, which, if correctly recorded, appears to 14· Circular stamps with a cross in the centre and a surround-
these stamps are in the style of Group 2 and belong to the sixth
gram. They can therefore be no earlier than C.475, the earliest incorporate the letters N and A (r r r a.r a), This monogram ing inscription fLre429.la, b, 778.la, 1235.la, 1702.la. Again, a
(and possibly late fifth) cenrury. It is not inconceivable that the
date at which elements of the Group 2 style may have begun to cannot be identified with any emperor of the later sixth cenrury. date earlier than C.475 is most unlikely, but precision is not
latter formula is also incorporated into monogram nos. 36-7
appear. A sixth-century dating is confirmed by the occurrence (c) The third type is a large rectangular stamp displaying in possible.
('tiic vEac TIE'po'O?) (1386, 1387, 1388), which have been found
of Christograms on stamps in Group 2, Section I from St the centre the same monogram as the second type (no. 55). 15· A number of rectangular stamps have a large central
in the sixth-century church of St Polyeuktos.
Polyeuktos, the Justinianic Hagia Sophia, and the ruins near Around this central monogram is inscribed the name and the cross. The letters of the name are arranged in the quadrants, and
8. A number of stamps carry a formula alone, and lack any
Cemal Nadir Sokagi (See Table '4). The rosettes at SS Sergius indiction. All the examples so far discovered name Fsopviou an indiction date is sometimes placed vertically either to the left
name. They are clearly not to be associated with the rigid style of
and Bacchus are irrelevant in this context, since they are in fact CKp() (231.Ia, b, c). or right of the cross. Most of the examples so far discovered
stamps in Group I, Section I, which has been ascribed to the
Turkish rather than Byzantine." 12. Another highly distinctive type, of which several bear the name TI',po'O. Four forms of cross have been recorded:
fifth cenrury. All such stamps are therefore to be dated to the
10. A particular type of cruciforrn stamp has a main inscrip- examples have been recorded, is circular (about lOO mm. in -lP, +, -lP, -lP. Such stamps have been assigned to Group 2, the
sixth cenrury, or possibly the late fifth century. Some carry
(a) lVOtK'tlroVDC, EVOtK'tlroVOC, or an equivalent abbreviation,
tion running along both horizontal arms, and very short vertical diameter) with a central medallion contai.ning a * (or mono- majority having been found at St Polyeuktos. The earliest firmly
arms containing parallel inscriptions, one of which appears to gram of I and X) (74.Ia, 97·1a, 377.Ia, 398.1a, 433.Ia, 956.Ia, dated examples belong to pSlr9 (ro75.ra, IoSS.Ia, b, c,
with or without any indiction number ('417-45)' Others read
give the name abbreviation (558, 976,1437,1438). The names 1697·ra, 1698,Ia, 1699.Ia, I7oo,la). The inscription, which runs 10S9,la).
simply (b) 'tiic visxc (14'3-16);14 or carry symbols or invocations
'IaX() and Mo'O() have so far been noted. The occurrence of two around the central roundel, begins with a cross, and gives the
of religious import, such as (c) Christograms (1396-1401), (d) a
such stamps at St Polyeuktos (5 58.Ia and 976.Ia), which appear name and an abbreviation for lVOlKttOOVQC. The circular shape
monogram (no. 6) meaning f] xaptC (,Grace [of God]') (1393),
to date to 51711S, suggests an early sixth-century date for this and central monogram indicate that the date is unlikely to be 22 Steinby, 'L'industria Iarerizia', rrG (section B, no. 1695).
and formulae like (e) Xpncroc) VllK(~) (?) ('Christ conquers!') Sreinby, 'L'industrialaterizia', 128-9 (section C, series jca).
type. earlier than the last quarter of the fifth century. Several examples 21

(1339.1a), (f) Kupte po~8(e)t (,Lord, help!') (1408-12), and 24 Sceinby, 'L'industrialarerizia',r j r (section E). .
11. We may briefly mention once again the three different have been found in the Blachemai region, two of them in the 25 Sceinby, 'L'industriaIarerizia', 134 (sectionG,no. 2415), 147.SeeDACL, IJ2I,
(g) 8eou XaptC ('Grace of God') (1406-7).
types of stamp carrying the monogram of the Emperor Maurice Pteron of the Land Walls, which was the work of Heraclius fig. I709, s.v. Brique.
Similar Christian formulae, without names of persons or
(582-602).21
officinae, have been found on late stamped bricks from Rome.
The inscriptions are usually in Latin, such as in nomine dei, spes 16 Mamboury, 'Chrisme', 462.
!7 Sec above Table IJ, Section a.
in Deo (both ascribed to the reign of Theodoric), and vivas, or IS For the problems of interpreting the bricksramps from the Land WalJs, see
bona vitae. However, the Greek formula 8eoc ~Olle6c ('God below pp. 122-5.
my helper') has been noted at S. Croce in Gerusalemme, for 19 Sec above pp. 81"90.

zo Two types of rosette may be seen on the tiles in the gallery. The tiles arc
which Krautheimer suggests a date later than 500.15
hexagonal, and are similar to those used to relay the floors in the galleries of I-Iagia
9. Mamboury devoted an article to the dating of Eirenc (sec Georgc, St. Eirene, 62.). The twO rosettes arc illustrated in Mango,
'Brick Stamps', 19, fig. I. Note that Mango's fig. la had previously been published
1) TIllS name is usually accompanied by the words KUP1€ ~o~e(l?)t. Note the use (inaccurately) by Gottwald, 'Ziegelstempel', 485, no. 7 and (accurately) by
of the genitive 1D1lO[~lOU, rather than the dative 1D1lOilltp, after p01l9Ew (see Browning, van Millingcn, Churches, 79, no. 2. Mamboury, 'Chrismc', 458, nos. 16 and 17
Greek, H). republishes the drawings of both Gorrwald and van Millingen, in the mistaken belief
14 For the interpretation of such stamps, sce p. 2.5. that they illustrate different stamps.
15 Scc Steinby, 'L'industrialarerizia',1}1, section E. 2! Sec also pp. 47-8.

CHAPTER
Analysis of brickstamps from selected
.. . of Attila.'? According to Nestorius, the Hun invasion gaye the
remaming sites
A number of sites that deserve discussion have not yet been con-
sidered since, in each case, a sample of contemporary material
cannot be established easily. In most cases this is because only a
small number of bricks have been found at the site, because very
few of the stamps that have been found carry an indiction, or
because the recorded indictions do not form a clear cluster.
1. THE LAND WALLS
Constantinople's double line of fortifications, preceded by a
moat, extended for about 6.5 km. from the Sea of Marmara, in a
westward-bulging arc, to the Golden Horn,' A decree in the
Codex Theodosianus attributes the project to the 'zeal and fore-
sight' of Anthemius,? who is also given credit for the under-
taking in Socrates' Ecclesiastical History' and in an inscription at
Omlii Kapi that commemorates repairs made in the second half
of the fifth century.' Anthemius was appointed praetorian
prefect of the East in 405 by the Emperor Arcadius. He is last
attested in the post on 18 April 414, and was replaced by
Aurelian on 30 December of the same year' Work on the Land
Walls must have been well underway or complete before
Anthernius' d'epositionif we are to explain the attribution of the
construction to him.' In fact, the decree in the Codex Tbeo-
dosianus, which is dated' 4 April 41 3, confirms that the wall had
been built (exstructus est), and that work had been completed
(canpleto opere) in that year,' Furthermore, an inscription found
in I993, which commemorates repairs made in 447, indicates
that the original construction lasted for nine years. Taken
together, the decree and the inscription suggest that work
! See especially van Milfutgen, Walh; Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Lendmaeer;
Foss, 'Constantinople'; Muller-Wiener, Bildlexikon;,28.r;::....307. On the mistaken
belief that the Theodosian Walls stopped at the Tckffir Sarayr, where they joined
earlier walls surrounding Region 14. see Mango, 'Fourteenth Region', 3.
2 CThlS.r.p.
J Socrates, Ecclesiastical History, 7.1.3.
• Sec ClL, iii. 739 <Meyer-Plach and Schneider, Landmuuer, r 36 no. 44; PLRE,
ii. 930, s.v.Pusaeus.
~ PLRE,ll. 93-5, s.v. Anthemius I.
6 As recognised by Holum, Empresses, 89 n. 48.
7 CTh IP.51. For the interpretation, see Speck, 'Mauerbau', 136 with n. 9
(accepted by Miiller-Wiencr, Bildlexikon, 286 and Marrindalc PLRE, ii. 95) and
Lebek, 'Landmauer', 113 with n. 6.
11
started in 404 or early 405, hence towards the end of Arcadius'
reign (395-408), and presumably upon the appointment of
Anthernius as praetorian prefect in 405.' In that case, the project
should be interpreted as an attempt to ensure the security of
Arcadius' young son, Theodosius, upon the emperor's death."
In the period 405-13, both the inner and outer walls would
have been erected. For two reasons, it is most unlikely, as is
sometimes argued, that the outer wall was a later addition.'?
First, the outer wall is an essential terrace wall that prevents the
earth beneath the inner wall from subsiding." Second, the inner
wall has no loopholes, which clearly demonstrates that the
presence of the outer wall was crucial to the defence of its lower
part."
Under his entry for the year 447, Marcellinus describes an
earthquake that brought down 57 towers of the city walls." He
describes the walls as 'only recently built in a reconstruction'
(muri recenti adbuc reaedificatione construeti), by which he
means that only a few years had passed since the Land Walls had
been built as a replacement for the older city wall of Con-
stantine." The same earthquake is described by Malalas and the
I The inscription is discussed at length by Lebek, 'Landmauer', who gives
(p. 138) a restoration based on his own interpretation of the historical sources and
indicates previously suggested readings. Verse 4 begins e.VVa.E"tEC ilOYe.OlV
Ctvc<~ca"to
('he [Theodosius] built it, labouring for nine years').
9 lthas been proposed, however, that construction was provoked by the advance
of the HUllS across the Danube in the summer of 408, shortly after Arcadius' death
(Holurn, Empresses, 88-9). In that case, the nine-year-long project would have been
finished in 416, and we would have to suppose that only the shell of the walls was
complete in 413 and that another three years of internal work remained to be done.
Socrates, Ecclesiastical History, 7.1.3, mentions the construction of the Land Walls
at the beginning of his account of Tbeodosius' reign. Speck, 'Mauerbau', 136-7,
observing that the reference to the fortifications is stylistically awkward and may
represent a biographical note on Anthemius that Socrates lifted from elsewhere,
nevertheless deduces from the position of the reference that work began on the
project soon after 408. This, however, is not a valid conclusion, sin.cethe erecti.on ~f
the fortifications is not the subject of the passage concerned: their construcuon IS
mentioned in passing merely to help-the reader to identify Anthemius. Furthermore,
the awkward style of the passage might suggest that it did not form part of Socrates'
original text.
10 The argument has been made most recently, and at length, by Lcbck, 'Land-
maucr'. 11 Iowet.hisobservaciontoMrJamesCrow.
12 Foss, 'Constantinople', 45. Strangely, however, Foss, 'Constantinople', 53
ascribes the outer wall to C.440. The differences in construction techniques may not
be chronologically significant, however.
Marccllinus, Cbronicle.eer.i,
I)
H Crckc, 'Earthquakes', 135-6, unconvincingly suggested that Marccllinus is
REMAININ
Synaxarion of Constantinople, which place it on Sunday 26
January, towards the end of the reign of Theodosius IV' Late in
the reign of Theodosius (4°8-5°), 26 January fell on a Sunday in
the year 447, which confirms the accuracy of the year under
which Marcellinus describes the earthquake. I'
Marcellinus next mentions a serious plague and the invasion
impetus for the rapid restoration of Constantinople's ruined
walls, I. and other sources say that the plague was responsible for
driving the enemy away from Constantinople." Marcellinus
records that the city walls that had suffered in the earthquake
were rebuilt in the same year by the praetorian prefect Con-
stantine in just three months." In reality, the work took only
two months, as four inscriptions along the Land Walls and the
text of the Patria confirm." The discrepancy most probably
results from an error that has crept into the text of Marcellinus
during its transmission, and there is no need to assume that
Constantine undertook two building campaigns in 447, one of
three months, the other of two. 22
referring to the construction of the Sea Walls, which had been laid out, if the
Chronicon Paschale, 583 is to be trusted, in 419. For Lcbek's untenable explanation
of the reaedificatio, see n. 16.
lS Malalas, Chronicle, 14.22 (ed. Thurn 284-5). Synaxarion of Constantinople
'1-25.1-10.
16 I follow Croke, 'Earthquakes' I}2-}. Lebek, 'Landmauer', 11.4-7, argues that
Malalas and the Synaxarion describe an earthquake on Sunday, 26 January 44L He
believes that this quake necessitated Conscanrine's repairs in 447 (as described by
Marcellinus, Chronicle, 447.}), and that Marcellinus, Chronicle, 447.1 refers to an
earthquake on 6 November 447 (as recorded in the Cbronicon Paschale, 586) that
damaged the recently repaired walls (thus providing anexplarucion for Marcellinus'
description of the walls as mvri recenti adbuc reaedificatione construais. However,
Marccllinus, Chronicle, 447.1, Malalas, Chronicle, 14.22 (ed. Thurn 284-5), and
Synoxerion 425.1-10 all clearly refer to the same earthquake, which must-therefore
be dated to Sunday, 26 January 447; and there were no quakes on 26 January 441 or
on 6 November 447: the Chronicon Pascha!e, 586 has confused the celebrations
commemorating the earthquake of Sunday, 26 January 447 with those marking the
eruption of Vesuvius on 6November 472, when ash fell on Constantinople (Croke,
'Earthquakes', '40-4),
17 Marcellinus, Chronicle, 447.1-.2..
la BazaarofHeracleides, 367-8. Croke, 'Earthquakes', 138.
11 Croke, 'Earthquakes', 139.
20 Marccllinus, Chronicle, 447.3.
11 ClL, iii. 734; Palatine Anthology 9.690, 691; Lebek, 'Landmauer', 138; Patria
2.58 (ed. Preger, 182). The Patria 1.73 (ed. Preger, 150) also alleges that the prae-
torian prefect Consrantine reconstructed the Sea .Walls linking the ends of
Conseanrine's land wall to the respective ends ofTheodosius' land wall. This is not
impossible, since the Chronicon Paschale, 583 states that the Sea Walls had been
erected in 439. It is often suggested that the construction of the Sea Walls lUay have
been undertaken by Cyrus of Penopolis, to whom the Land Walls arc wrongly
ascribed in some late texts (e.g. Thcophanes, Chronicle, AM 5937). Croke asserts
{Earthquakes', J34 with n. 55) that Constantine's repair to the Sea Walls is
confirmed by a lost inscription from Yeni Kapr mentioned by van Millingen (Wails,
180). But Mango (Developpement, 25 n. 12; 'Shoreline', 25 n. 27) points out that this
inscription never existed, and is simply adoublet of that on Yeni Mevlevihane Kapr.
Mango is doubtful that the Sea.Walls were built in 439, since there seems to have
been no fortification along the Golden Horn during the siege of 626. The only brick-
sumps recovered from the Sea Walls in the area that allegedly existed in the fifth
century were found by Mamboury on 18June 1926 during the demolition of the top
4 metres of a stretch of wall about 280 m.long between Koca Mustafa Pasa railway
station (S:unatya) and Narh Kapi (435.la, 636.13, 849.1a), and also ar Narh Knp.
itself (1)2. la, 295.la, 600.IC, U93.ld, 1370.1;\).
2l Lebek, 'Landrnauer', I 27 has argued that damage caused to the inner wall in 44 I
was repaired by Conseaminc during three months in the first half of 447. Having
completed this work, he suggests, Constantine built the outer wall de novo in 60
..~.•
G SITES I23
A Greek inscription from the Polyandrion Gate (Yeni
Mevlevihane Kapr), which is preserved in the Palatine Antho-
logy, proclaims that Constantine built 'a wall with a wall' or 'a
wall for a wall' (,ciFt 'ElXOC). Although this has often been
taken to mean that Constantine added the outer wall to the
existing inner wall;" it seems most unlikely that the construc-
tion of such an extensive fortification could have been com-
pleted de novo in just two months. The phrase may simply mean
that Constantine built a wall using, or upon, the ruins of the old
one." •
The inscription found in front of tower 20 of the inner wall in
1995 also concerns the repairs made by Constantine in 447.25 It
tells how the strong emperor, toiling for nine years, had built the
towering inner wall (inVTlA.Ov ,0 ... Evliov) in his earlier years. It
then states 'he ereected?] so great a circuit for a second time in 60
cycles [of the sun]'." There is no reference in the preserved text
to the outer wall;" indeed, given the evidence from the literary
sources, it would appear that the inscription simply contrasted
the nine-year-long construction of the towering inner wall with
the miraculous reconstruction of its entire length in just 60 days,
following the earthquake of 26Jllmary 447.
Since the inscription concentrates on the construction and
repair of the inner wall, it is possible that this wall suffered more
severely than the outer wall in the earthquake. The fact that the
inscription was discovered about 140 m. south of Belgrat Kapi,
in front of tower 20, adds more weight to Croke's argument that
the damage caused to the Land Walls in 447 was concentrated in
their southern part.28,
Thus the literary sources and the epigraphical evidence
provide little support for the theory that Constantine built the
outer wall in 447, although he may have repaired it in addition to
the inner wall. This brings us to the issue of the 'double wall'
(duplex murus) mentioned in the Notitia Urbis Constantino-
politanae. If this does indeed refer to the double Land Walls
(rather than to both the Land Walls and the old Constantinian
wall or even to the Constantinian walls alone, if they were
days. He does not explain why the repairs took a month longer than the erection of
the entire outer wall.
2} Lebek, 'Landmauer', 132-3.
24 Speck, 'Mauerbau', r6r-2 n. 44. In an attempt to explain the phraseology,
Croke <Earthquakes', 136 adduces an incredible story in the Patna 2.58 (ed. Preger,
r82), which states that the restoration work was organized in such a way that the
Blue and Green circus factions worked from the Blachernai and the Golden Gate
respectively, and met at the Polyandrion Gate. The story, as C. Mango points out to
me, was invented to explain the name Polyandrion Gate, which the author believed
to mean 'Gate of Many Men', but which in fact means 'Cemetery Gate' (Mango,
Developpement, 47-8). It is possible that the tale was inspired by the curious word-
ing of the inscription at the Polyandrion Gate. On the reliability of this tale, see
Dagron, Neissance, 356-7 (who suggests how the circus factions ma.y have become
written into the story) and Cameron, Circus Factions, 1I r-12.
25 Lebek, 'Landmauer', I08,_ItJJ. . "
26 (6) aimJ.p 6 O£U"tEPOV o;u9tc----o oh ltEPl e(lU~' &[1 ~d1;ovJ-(7) £~lllCOV"t(l
Spopcicr JCUlCAoV cocov Tip.[ 'However, he, for a second time-which really [is an
even greater] marvel-cr[ected?) so great a circuit in 60 cycles.'. .
27 Lebck's interpretation of the historical texts, however, leads him to conjecture
"t[E1tp6q>pawaJ(line r) and JCUlCAoV rdcov +]PI;l[OCEV E~(J)J (line 7).
. 28 Croke, 'Earthquakes', 135.
 ..~
124 PART II: CHRONOLOGY REMAINING SITES

double)," the reference provides a terminus post quem of 4'3, The number of stamped bricks recorded from the Land Walls Constantinople on 6 January, Melania had remained in the city
Indiction Catalogue numbers
not 447, for the Notitia's composition." Whatever the correct is tiny in proportion to the scale of the fortifications, and the for 40 days in mourning and had then braved winter storms to
interpretation of this designation, it is clear that there is no good documentation does not reliably indicate whether bricks were
lA' 2I7.Ia, 547.1a, I4S4.ra, 1626.Ia reach Jerusalem in time for Easter." Thus it is probable that
reason to reject the dating parameters for the N otitia established found loose or in situ, and if in situ, in what kind of masonry. IB" 545 .r a, 71 5.2a, 719. la, 7p.la, b, 879.la, b, 1486.13, Melania left Constantinople in late February 438, and that
on other grounds by Speck: 423/4-427.'1 This, and the large number of occasions on which the walls were 1487·Ia Eudokia followed her early in the next month." When Eudokia
The Latin inscription of Pusaeus (possibly the consul of 467) damaged and repaired (as testified by the many visible masonry If' j Sa.r a, 6)6.lb, 854.la, 984.1a, "40.Ia, II89.Ia reached Antioch, she delivered an address to the senate, and her
at Grulu Kapi suggests that repairs were made to the Land Walls styles and.inscriptions), means that we cannot reasonably expect Le," 767.Ia, r aoq.r a, 1288.1a, 1496.13 visit was commemorated with a bronze statue.t" In Jerusalem,
under Leo I (457-74), but whether these were repairs to the gate to solve the complex building history of this monument at lE' 1501.Ia
she attended the dedication of a shrine to house the relics of St
alone or were more extensive is uncertain." Much of Constan- present. The brickstamps of Group 1 (fifth-century) style, f[ 1527.la
Stephen (15 May 438), met a monophysite archimandrite named
tinople's 'inner wall' is said to have been brought down in an whatevertheir findspot, are considered in Table 23; but there is ]1' 549.Ia, 646.Ia, 89o.la
Barsauma, whose cloak s~e acquired, and prayed at Christ's
absolutely no guarantee, given the constant repairs to the walls, Jl.[' IP5·la
earthquake under Zeno (474-91) on 25 September 478.'; empty tomb in the Resurrection Church. Eudokia returned to
]1l.' 6)8.la
Although Whitby has suggested that this refers to the Land that stamps bearing the same indiction number relate to the Constantinople with Barsauma's cloak and relics of St Stephen
Walls, the unspecified outer walls being the Thracian same cycle. (although she left the saint's foot at his church at Euchaita)."
(,Anastasian') Long Walls," it would seem more likely that the The period of the original construction (q05-April 4' 3) If the rise of Eudokia's protege, the poet Cyrus of Panopolis,
2. EUDOKIA'S CHURCH OF ST POLYEUKTOS
sources are distinguishing between the Land Walls and the old corresponds to indictions I" -lA", It is surprising, therefore, that was a result of her triumphal return to Constantinople, she
Constantinian wall further to the east, and that it was this latter few stamps have been discovered that bear indict ions l1.'-Z'. probably returned early in 439. In that year, Cyrus, then city
The first six lines of the dedicatory epigram from Anicia
wall that was damaged. J5 Some of the stamps with indictions H'-IA' may, however, have prefect, was also appointed to the prefecture of the East, some-
[uliana's church of St Polyeuktos inform us that the Empress
In the sixth century, under Justinian, earthquakes damaged been manufactured in the years 409ir 0-412/ 13. time between 26 November and 6 December. Cyrus is also
Eudokia, wife of Theodosius II (408-5°), had been the first to
the Land Walls in 554 (at the Golden Gate) and in 557 (between Constantine's repairs were undertaken during two months recorded as consul in the East (without a colleague in East or
build a church in honour of the martyr." Although the precise
the Golden Gate and the Polyandrion Gate), but no repairs are after the earthquake of 26 January 447, hence in indiction lE'. It West) in 44', and as holding the distinctionpatricius.52 Cyrus'
location of Eudokia' s church is not mentioned, and it is not even
attested by the sources or by inscriptions." It is possible that is again surprising that little material bearing this year number fall from power was instigated by the palace eunuch
certain that it was in Constantinople, it may reasonably be
Justinian paid no attention to the fortifications (and Procopius' has been discovered. Perhaps the speed with which repairs were Chrysaphius. By the time he had reached the place of his exile
assumed that J uliana built her church very close to, or even on
allegations about Justinian's neglect of the public welfare might undertaken' necessitated the reuse of material from the ruined (Cotyaeum in Phrygia) either in autumn 441 or early 443," his
the same site as, her great-grand mother's church."
be taken to support the suggestion)." Repairs were perhaps not walls themselves or much stockpiled material. The latter possi- patroness Eudokia had been accused of adultery and had with-
The date of Eudokia's church may, perhaps, be fixed more
undertaken until the accession of Justin II (565-78), who is bility might help to account for the large number of bricks with drawn to the Holy Land." Henceforth, Eudokia lived in
firmly from our sources. Eudokia married Theodosius II on 7
known from an inscription on the Polyandrion Gate to have indictions IB' -I.6.'. Jerusalem, where, in 460, she died and was buried in the church
June 42142and had retired from the court certainly by early 443
restored the outer wall." The next and last work recorded in the Bricks with indictions B' and I" would appear to relate to a of St Step hen, which she had rebuilt during her exile.
(for the date, see below). These dates are therefore the termini
period that concerns us is the construction of the Wall of repair. It is not impossible that some of the bricks were made There is no evidence to suggest that Eudokia obtained Sr
for the construction of her church. But Eudokia is unlikely to
Heraclius in 627. This new wall brought the church of the following the earthquake in the reign of Zeno on 25 September Polyeuktos' relics whilst on her pilgrimage, but given the desire
have built her church until.the saint's relics had been secured."
Theotokos in Blachernai within the city's fortifications." 478 (indiction B"), If so, they would be the latest dated brick- of the imperial family to obtain the best relics, Eudokia no doubt
According to the account of an anonymous English pilgrim who
stamps of the fifth century. returned to Constantinople with more than the bones of St
Z'J For the possibilities, see Mango, Deoeloppement, 46 with n. 57. visited the city in the eleventh century," Polyeuktos' head was
JO Lcbek, 'Landmauer', 150-3 argues for a terminus post quem in 447. Given the small sample of stamped bricks and the uncertainty Stephen, and it is possible that whilst she was in Antioch or
still housed in Juliana's church, but the date at which the relics
31 Speck, 'Mauerbeu', 144-50. Berger, 'Regionen', 350-1 attempts to reconcile as to whether the bricks relate to original work or to much later Jerusalem she was given alleged relics of St Polyeuktos. There is,
Sp~ck's da~?g of the Notitia with Lebek's faulty argument. arrived in Constantinople is uncertain."
repairs that employed fifth-century material, it would be best however, some reason to think that Eudokia may have sent
CIL,1lI·739· It is possible that it was Eudokia herself who brought the
» Anecdota Cramer,ii. Ill, 11-18. Theophancs, Chronicle, AM 5970 (ed. de Boor not to place much emphasis on the material we possess. The relics to St Polyeuktos to Constantinople after her withdrawal
relics to Constantinople, since she set out on a pilgrimage to
125-6). Cedrenus, i. 618. Whitby, 'Long Walls', 570-1. historical survey presented above may at least serve as a basis for to the Holy Land. In about 455, St Euthymius persuaded
~ Whitby, 'Long Walls', 574. Palestine soon after the marriage of her daughter Licinia
future discussion should new material from the fortifications Eudokia to convert from monophysitism to Chacedonian
3~ For the survival of the Constantinian walls, see Theophanes, Chronicle, AM Eudoxia to Valentinian III on 29 October 437.46 She arrived in
6050, who mentions damage to both the Constantinian walls and the Land Walls in come to light. orthodoxy. Euthymius' birth, which had coincided with the
Jerusalem only a few weeks after Melania, whom she intended
the quake of Friday, 19 October 557. See also Mango, Deoeloppement, 24-5. If the death of the heretical Emperor Valens and the accession of
'inner wall' brought down in 478 is the Constantinian wall? then the sources on the to meet there." After the death of her uncle Volusian in
TABLE23. Frequency of indictions on bricks assigned to the Theodosius I, had been foretold in a vision to his parents at the
quake of 478 cannot be used to support the case for the existence of the Thracian
Long Wall in the fifth century (contrary to Whitby, 'Long Walls', 570-5). In this fifth century from the Land Walls 40 Palatine Anthology 1.10.1-6. shrine of St Polyeuktos. It is at least conceivable that Eudokia
context, it may also be pointed OUt that although the Life of Daniel the Stylite and ~t Harrison's translation in the excavation report (,The empress Eudocia ... was sent relics of St Polycuktos to Constantinople in honour of her
Malchus (both fifth-century) make reference to a 'long Wall' without any mention Indiction Catalogue numbers the first to build here a temple to the divinely inspired Polyeukros' (Sarafhane I, 6»
of the Chersonese, we would be quite unjustified in concluding, on the grounds of appears corrected in I-larrison, Temple, where the
}3, word 'here' is omitted. ~s Life of St. Melania the YOImger56--9.
sixth-century terminology, that they must be referring to the Thracian Long Wall H PLRE, ii. 408-9, s.v. Aelia Eudocia (Arhenais) 2. Clack, Melania, 133-4 argues for a departure in 437, pointing out that Easter in .•
(contrary to Whitby, 'Long Walls', 560-3,,570). For, assuming for argument's sake
496.Ib,7I6.Ia H

H \Ve may note, however, that Justinian built his church of SS Peter and Paul that year fell on II April, whereas in 438 it fell somewhat earlier, on 27 March. She
that the Thracian Long Wall had not been built in the fifth century, these sources 1 58.la, 594.1b, 797,la, 987,la, 1458.la, 1459.1a before writing to the Pope for their relics (see Bardill, 'Sergius and Bacchus', I). neglects, however, Holum's observation (Empresses, 183-4 n. 39) that Eudokia did
would have had no need to specify the location of the long Wall they had in mind- 744·13,1034·13,1461.13,1462.1a Furthermore, a story, probably apocryphal, but not unrealistic, tells how the consul not depart until after the wedding of 29 October 437.
it could only have been the Chersonesc Long Wall. fortunately for Whitby's case, Aurclian built a martyrium of Se Scephcn, but failed to obtain any of the saint's relics so Evagrius, Church History, T.20. ChroniconPaschale, 585 (incorrect year).
1465·1a
his analysis of the events described in the two fifth-century sources ('Long Walls', (see Mango, 'Surdius', 122.). ~l On Stcphen's relics, see Thcodore Anagnosces, Church History, 2.64;
5 6}-9) constitutes rather stronger evidence in favour of the existence of the Thracian H Mercati Anonymous 2.7. Text and translation in Harrison, Sorecbone 1,10 (c). Marcellinus Comes, Chronicle, 439; Hunt, Pilgrimage, 2JJ; Holum, Empresses,
Long Walls in the fifth century. 1I87·IrI -s Harrison,Sarafhane 1,5. r86-9; Clark, 'Bones', 143, 150-1.
)I; Thcophanes, Chronicle, AM 6046 (Saturday, 15 August 554), AM 6050 (Friday, 655-1a ., PLRE, U. 410, S.V. Licinia Eudoxia 2. Pilgrimage:
Marriage: Socrates, ~l PLRE, ii. 336-39, s.v. Fl. Taurus Seleucus Cyrus 7. For the length of Cyrus' city
19 October 557). 31 Procopius, Secret History, 81-8, L1.3, 19.6, 76.13 (several), 1]0.13,1303.13, 1620.1a Ecclesiastical History, 7.47; Life of St. Melania the Younger 56; Tbeophancs, prefecture, see Alan Carneron, 'Empress and Poet', 257-8 and Holum, Empresses,
)S Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, 133. inscription no. 34. Foss, 'Con- Chronicle, AM ~940; Hunt, Pilgrimage 222-33; Holum, Empresses, 183-9. Holum 189-91.
449.la, 762.13, 888.1a, I293.1C
stantinople', 182 n. 50 has been unable to identify this repair. has the preferable chronology. ~J Alan Camcron, 'Empress and.Poet', 257-8. Holum, Empresses, 190.
J9 Cbronicon Paschale, 627. 718. la, 750.2a, 848,la, 897.3a, 1290.Ia
!7 Life ofS!.Melania the YOHngcr 56-8. ~~ AIm Cameron, 'Empress and Poet', 263. Holum, Empresses, 193 n. 8I.
I26 PART II: CHRONOLOGY
teacher and of her conversion. Furthermore, we know that at
about this time (probably between 451 and 453) the relics of St
Stephen that Eudokia had brought to Constantinople in 439
were seized by her rival Pulcheria and deposited in the church of
St Laurence in Pulcherianai. Is it possible that a church dedi-
cated to St Stephen by Eudokia on her return from the Holy
Land in 439 was rededicated to St Polyeuktos soon after 455?"
Whether Eudokia's church was originally dedicated to St
Polyeuktos or St Stephen, the construction of her church should
probably be placed in the period between her return from her
pilgrimage in early 439, and her retirement, which took place
shortly before Cyrus' fall in the autumn of 44' or in early 443.
Unfortunately, however, construction during the years pre-
ceding her pilgrimage, 42I-37, cannot certainly be ruled out.
Several walls found on the site of the excavations of Anicia
Juliana's church of St Polyeuktos were clearly earlier than the
sixth century. The two that were aligned with the southern
walls of what is thought to be a baptistery, and which were
apparently part of a building that determined the orientation of
Juliana's church, were associated with pottery of the early or
mid-fifth century." But) as Harrison points out, no evidence
exists to associate these walls with Eudokia's church." Other
fifth-century structures and architectural fragments were found
in the underpass cutting," and fragments of fifth-century
mosaic decoration were discovered in the atrium and the crypt
of the sixth-century church." The coins found on the site
included a number from the fourth and fifth centuries, and just
three from the reign of Theodosius II'o A number of small
marble heads from the church excavation perhaps also belong to
the fifth century, and Harrison was concerned to explain how
these pieces had apparently come to adorn Anicia Juliana's
church." Is it possible that they had previously adorned
Eudokia's edifice?"
Seven stamps in the sample from St Polyeuktos have been
shown on stylistic grounds to belong to the fifth century (Table
I4, Section 4: 216.1a, 347·1a, 633·1a, 885·1a, 938.1a, 983.",
I201.1a). It may be noted that the thicknesses of the bricks bear-
ing stamps 347.ra.(? x? x 50-60 mm.), 633.1a (370 x? x 51-55),
938.1. (370 ~? x 50--60) and 885.1a (380 x? x 47-55) are con-
siderably greater than would be expected for sixth-century
material (see Table 19). Six of the stamps (216.1a, 347.1a, 633.1a,
885.1a, 938.1a, 1201.1a) cany consecutive indictions Z', H', 6',
l'." This helps to confirm that they do not relate to the sixth-
century church of Anicia J uliana, since their indictions fall
ss On Eudolcia and Euthymius, see Mundell Mango, 'Review' and Cyril of
Skythopolis, Life o[S,. Entbymius, 2, 30, 35. On rbe possibility of rededicetion, see
Magdalino, 'Oikoi', 58--64-
Si. Harrisoo, Sarafhane I, 15-18, 112. Hayes,Sarafhane 11, 92-4, deposits 7-1}.
)1 Herrison, Temple,700-I. s. Harrison, Temple,II-15,IIT.
n Harrison,Sarafhane I, 182-). &0 Hendy, 'Coins', 278.
61 Harrison, Sflrafhanc I, 157-60,418.
62 This suggestion W3S made by Harrison and Frrath in a preliminary report on
the excavations but not repeated in the final report ('Sara~h:mc IV', 277).
6' The provenance was recorded for only brick no. 647, which W:lS found in level
no. 1000*, and bore stamp 347.13.
between the two main clusters identified on the sixth-century
material (B'-E' and !A'-Ill.). We cannot be certain that these
bricks relate to Eudokia's church, bu t, assuming AniciaJuliana's
church was built on the same site, it is not unlikely that bricks
from the earlier church would have been reused in the new
building. Furthermore, it seems unlikely to be coincidence that
these indictions could correspond precisely to the period 438/9-
44II2, which appears to be the most appropriate time for the
construction of Eudokia's church. Nevertheless, since we can-
not rule out the possibility that Eudokia built her church before
her pilgrimage, it is not inconceivable that the indictions indi-
cate the years 423/4-426/7, shortly after Eudokia's marriage to
Theodosius Il, The names in Group 1, Sections 1 and 2 that
occur on the stamps apparently from Eudokia's Polyeuktos are
.6.0)( ) (347.1a), Map( ) (938.1a), Ae( ) or Ao( ) (88 pal, Cat )
(1201.1a) (see Table 13). .6.0)() occurs at the Palace of Antiochus;
and it has already been suggested that the name Ca() was used in
the period 426-62" This information does not, however, help
us to determine which of the two sets of dates is the more likely.
In the catalogue, the fifth-century stamps 216.I', 347.1a,
633.Ia, 885.1a, 938.I', and I201.1a have been assigned dates in
the period 438/9-44112 with the possibility of dates in the
period 423/4-426/7.
3. THE HEXAGON IN GULHANE
Almost directly east of Hagia Sophia, on the slope descending
from the acropolis towards the Sea of Marrnara, and about 100
m. inside the Sea Walls are the remains of a hexagonal Byzantine
structure with a marble pool at its centre (Fig. ID). The building,
which was excavated by French troops under the direction of
R. Demangel and E. Mamboury between I92I and 1923," con-
sisted of five apses arranged around a hexagonal room that was
entered from the north-west through a doorway in its sixth
side. The apses measured between 6.02 and 6.08 m. wide by
3.97-4.03 m, deep." In front of the doorway was a sigma-plan
entrance portico enclosing a semicircular area paved with slabs
of Proconnesian marble. Leading down into the marble pool on
two sides were steps, and surrounding it were twelve regularly
distributed mortices, indicating that it was originally covered by
a canopy supported by twelve octagonal columns." Beneath
this pool was an earlier octagonal pool of brick, which is
apparently contemporary with the hexagonal hall"
The foundations of the hexagon were of stone blocks, and
above this the walls wer~ built in regular courses of brick
measuring about 370--380 mm. square by 50 mm. thick. The
thickness would appear to favour ~ fifth-century date (see Table
64 Scc p. r ro.
6S Dcmangel and Mamboury, Mtlnga'JCS, 81-111. See also Mcthews, Survey,
200-5, Muller- Wiener, Bildlexikon, 42-).
6(, Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 81 with nn. 2-}.
67 Dem:mgel and Mamboury, Manganes, 86-7.
61 Dem:mgel and Mamboury, Manganes, roo, fig. 11'1; rea.fig. 117; 104.
REMAINING
I9)"The portico, being somewhat misaligned with the hall, was
believed to be a later addition, contemporary with the marble
pool, whose alignment it shares." Above its stone foundations,
the portico had walls of alternating brick and stone. Bricks taken
from the rear wall of the portico are reported to have been some-
what larger than those in the hexagcn-s-aoo x 400 x 50 mm. and
400 x 380 x 50 mm. on average." An Ionic impost capital,"
believed to have been located at the springing of an arch opening
into one of the hexagon's niches," dates to the mid- or late fifth
century;" and activity on the site in the late fifth century is
confirmed by a copper coin of Anastasius I (491-5'8)." About
40 m. south-east of the hexagon, a Byzantine water source was
discovered. This was aligned with the axis of the hexagon, and
with two Turkish fountains, one north-west of the hexagon, and
another in the Sea Walls south ofincili Ko§kii."
aurnann and Belting point out the close parallels between
the Giilhane hexagon and the Palace of Antiochus, and conclude
that the two structures were built at about the same time. They
suggest that the GiiIhane hexagon was a model for the Palace of
Antiochus, the latter using the same form, but in a bolder, more
harmonious way as a free-standing structure." However, since
the sigma-plan portico is apparently a later addition to the
Giilhane hexagon, the similarities between the two structures
should not be overstated.
Long before the excavation of the area around the marble
pool, Mordtmann and van Millingen had suggested, on the basis
of topographical information preserved in texts and early views
of the city, that the structures belonged to the shrine of the
Theotokos Hodegetria, where there was a holy water source."
The topographical indications are not precise, however;" and
Wulzinger proposed instead that the hexagon might have been
" Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 8). The hexagon is case no. 71 in
Mitchell, Arm. and Liggen, 'Construction'. Their unpublished data tables show
that in Analysis 6(3), the structure was assigned to the fifth century (group r)with a
probability XlC of 0.9450 and crx of 0.9867.
Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 87-8.
10
11 Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 90 nn. )-4, 105, fig. 120.
12 Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 8), 94-.1°7, fig. u5, 108, fig. 126.
n Dcmangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 8}.
The capital may be compared directly wichmid-fifth-cenrury examples from Sr
H adducing the drop in ground level at the centre of the hexagon and a drain Ieadi
John of Stoudios in Istanbul, Basilica A :1( Nea Anchialos, and St Leonidas at
Corinrh-Lechaicn. See Yegtll, 'Capitals', 267-8, 6gs. 21-3. The capital from the
ayasma (Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 92, fig. 10). 106. fig. 12r), decorated
on only the pulvinus, with the exception of a cross on the impost, may be compared.
with the Juscinianic capitals from Hagia Eirene in Istanbul and St john of Ephesus.
See Yegiil, 'Capitals', 269-70. figs. } 1-2. Kaut2sch,Kapitellswdien, 167.
1S Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 94, r09. fig. 127.
76 Demangel and Mamboury, Ma1lganes, 77, 81, 92, fig. 10}.
n Naumann and Belting, EuphemUtkirche, 4}-4.
71 Mordtmann, Esquissc, St-2. Vm Milliageo, Walls, 257-9. For details of the
shrine: Janin, Eglises, 199-207; Majeska, Russian Traoelers, }6}-6.
7'9 For the Buondelmonti maps, see Gerola, 'Buondclmonti', esp. Bibliotheque
Nacionale 2383 and Rossiano 702. For the topographical indications in texts, see
Majcska, Russian Treuelers, 138-9, 362-3 (Russian Anonymous: on the right when
going east from Hagia Sophia towards the sea), 182-}, )6) (Zcsirna: near Hagia
Sophia, and reached before St Lazarus on the route to St George Mangana): Mercati
Anonymous, ed. Ciggaar, 249 (between the Great Palace, Hagia Sophie, and the sea);
Cantacuzcnos L59 (on the road from Hagia Sophia to St George Mangnna); Patria,
cd. Preger .2.292, I4; 2.2.94-95 (between the Tz.ykanisterion of the Great Palace and
the Mangalla).
SITES I;
an annexe of St Lazarus, from which it would follow that r:
Hodegetria shrine was located further south, near the terrace
the military hospital.t? Schneider, on the other hand, consider.
that the hexagon would better be identified with one of r:
fifteen private baths listed by the Notitia in Region I of the city
Following the excavation of the site, however, Demangel ar
Mamboury returned to the original identification." In suppc
of their case, they pointed in particular to the discovery of cl
front half of a bronze reliquary cross that depicted the Virg
bearing the Christ child on. her left arm-iconography typical
the Virgin Hodegetria." The identification was accepted I
Mathews, who attempted to argue that the centralized arcl
tecrural form chosen for this source of holy water could be us.
to visualize the Octagon of St Stephen in Daphne, despite t!
fact that the latter was not in fact the site of a holy spring"
It would appear from the sources, however, that rl
Hodegetria shrine was located on the right-hand side of a stre
which led directly eastwards from Hagia Sophia. If so, it stoc
in the coastal strip of land to the east of the Great Palace, ar
much further south than the Giilhane hexagon. Indeed,
panorama of Constantinople in the Diisseldorf Liber insularu
shows a church labelled 'Santa Maria' close to the sea shore ar
just inside the Topkapi Sarayi fortification. Such a locatic
would explain how, in 1201 and 1346, troops managed to rear
the heart of the imperial palace by passing through tl
monastery grounds." As a result, we should perhaps assum
with Schneider, that the structures in GiiIhane belonged to OJ
of the fifteen private baths known to have been located
Region I; or, with Muller- Wiener, that the structures belong,
to one of the palaces in that region."
10 Wulzinger, Bsudenkmider, 44, 46.
" Schneider, Byzanz, 90. Notitia urbis Constantinopolitanae, ii. 17: Balm
prnuuas quindecim.
n Demacgel and Mamboury, Manganes. 10 response, Schneider argued rh
although the Giilhane hexagon might have been an ayasma at a late date, in
original form it was certainly a bath or nympbaecm. He proposed that the simil
hexagon of the Palace of Ancicchus may also originally have been a bath buildir
out through the northern niche (but admitting that no trace of a hypocaust had be
found) {Eupbemia-Marryrion', 2.57-8). This evidence has, however, been reject
by Naumann and Belting, Eupbemiakircbe, }7. Schneider further argued that t
original brick pool in the Giilhane hexagon could not belong to a fifth-century fou
dation on the grounds that the later marble pool was itself of fifth century dare. I
observed that the marble blocks display anarhyrosis, and asserted that this feature
known in Conscaminople only at the Golden Gate, dared, according to him, to t
fifth-century. Leaving aside the fact that Golden Gate is to be dated to the reign
Theodosius I (see Bardill, 'Golden Gate'), aaarhyrosis was a technique of 10:
standing for which termini cannot be established given the lack of dated sro
monuments in Constantinople.
U Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 97-8, 109, fig. 129. A lead sell was al
found bearing on its reverse four lines of text, which Demangcl and Mambou
tentatively restored as referring to the monastery of the Hodcgci -.
•• Marhews, 'Eglises palatiales', 22-24 with strong objections from Mang
'Scrgius and Baccbus I1', 390.
8S Barsanci, 'Buondclmonci', 226-7, fig. 59;Berger, Patria, }77-8.
U MiiUcr-Wiener, Biidiexikon, 42. For an attempt to establish the boundaries
the regions of the city on the basis of a hypothetical linear street plan, see Bcrgr
'Regionen', esp. }53 and, on rhe Gulhane hcxagon, 358.
128 PART II: CHRONOLOGY REMAINING SITES 12 9
In this area, between the Forum of Consrantine and the what such marks represent, but if they are the signatures of indi-
The brickstamps 4. THE HIPPODROME Forum Tauri, was the Artopoleia (or Bread Market), where vidual sculptors, then any mark would have been in use only
Locations the Bronze Tetrapylon is known to have stood. This highly dunng the lifetime of the sculptor who adopted it.106Several of
The great cracks that exist in the vaulted corridor and chambers decorated four-sided archway is helieved to have marked the the capitals and imposts of the Divaru Ali Sokagl cistern carry
Mamboury associates most of the material that was recovered
within the Sphendone of the Hippodrome almost certainly intersection of the Porticoes of Dornninus (whose position is such marks, and Mamboury observed that the one that appeared
with the hexagon (I6I.Ia, 382.2a, 3a, 383.13, z a, 404.13, 387.13,
developed following an earthquake." It has been suggested that today represented by U zun Carsr Caddesi), running from north most often-K and Y in ligature-occured also on the capitals
566.,a, 85o.,a, ,64;.Ja, ,653.,a), but some with the water
the qu}ke responsible was either the devastating one of 26 to south, and the Mese, running from east to west.95 h was and stone collars at the Binbirdirek cistern.r" For two reasons
source (569.,-a, 7~9.,a, I106.~a, rzoc.r a) or with debris near the
January 447 (indiction lE') (after which the Praetorian Prefect topped bya pyramidal weathervane, for which reason it was also however, it is uncertain whether the marks in the two cisterns
hexagon (8q.,o, "'9.'C, rzoc.ra).
Constantine repaired the Land Walls, and possibly also the Sea called the Anemodoulion." Near the Tetrapylon, and to the east have the same meaning, and we must) therefore, be cautious
Indictions Walls, in just 60 days)" or those of 557 (which caused the of the church of the 40 Martyrs, the Emperor Phocas is said to about drawing chronological conclusions from this observa-
TAllLE 24. Frequency of indictions on bricks from the collapse of the dome of Hagia Sophia in the following year)" have built a masonry column as well as a cistern." Berger has tion. First, in the Binbirdirek the K
ligature is always followed
Giilhane hexagon This cracking necessitated the bricking up of the large arches on argued that Phocas' cistern must be that discovered by hy the letter N, whereas, in the Divaru Ali Sokagl ci;tern it
the exterior of the Sphendone, and then, in the internal corridor Mamboury, and suggests that the column was erected in a paved appears alone or associated with the letters A, E or 11.108Second,
Indiction Catalogue numbers and chambers, the insertion of a skin of brickwork and buttress- court laid over the cistern." Mango objects, pointing out that it is demonstrable that artisans of different periods might use the
ing arches." The bricks of the original (presumably Constan- Mamboury's cistern is quite small, whereas Phocas' Cistern must same mark, presumably because they shared the same name: the
A' tinian) piers and arches on the exterior measure 285-3 IO mm. have been extremely large to have merited any mention in the ligature K has been noted both on paving slabs from the
B' Cbronicon Paschale. Indeed, Mango observes, Buondelmonti
square x 40-4 5 mm. thick. The construction technique is of pure Theodosian Hagia Sophia.!" and on a slotted rectangular post
r- brick, but at the springing of the arches it changes to alternating attests the existence of a vast cistern near the church of the 40 from the sixth-century church of St Polyeuktos.!'? Besides these
IJ.'
bands of brick and stone. The later filling of the original arches Martyrs." Dismissing Mango's objections, Berger has restated two difficulties, there is a third: even if it could be demonstrated
E'
was undertaken in pure brickwork, the bricks measuring his argument. 100 that the masons' marks from the two cisterns referred to the

"
Z'
H'
370-400 mm. square X} 5-4 5 mm. thick."
Three stamped bricks, [WO measuring 380-400 mm. square
Supporting the 35 domes of the cistern's roof there are 24
columns surmounted by undecorated basket capitals with
same individual, the dating of the Divani Ali Sokag, cistern
would not be clarified, since the Binbirdirek itself is not yet
e- by 5° mm thick, have been recovered from the repaired parts of impost blocks.'?' The basket capitals, which have the form of an accurately dated.'!'
r the Sphendone, 559.Ia and 560.la carry indiction B' with the inverted, truncated cone, are similar to those that occur in the Eight of the stamps noted on bricks from the water inlet and
lA' names 'Ia() and 'IaX(), and 29.Ia has the name 'AyoO and indic- subterranean Binbirdirek cistern, although impost blocks are from the walls above the Divam Ali Sokag; cistern carry the con-
lB' tion A' or AI', the former being the more likely, given the indic- not employed there. The Binbirdirek cistern is often identified secutive indictions I' or IA' and the name abbreviation AIi~a( ).
rr' 382.23,3a tion on 559.ra and 560.Ia. The name 'IaX() has been found in with the Cistern of Philoxenus, which, according to the Patria, They were presumably manufactured in consecutive years. Six
I.e.: 383.1a, 1.3, 404.Ia, 71.9.13, S50.la, 1653.13 the Cistern of Aspar on bricks made in 45617, and is, therefore, was built by a magister under Constantine the Grear.102 of them are cruciform (148.3a, b, '48.4a, 5a, '5 r.r a, rb) and two
lE' 569:.13, r acc.r a Accepting this identification, Mamboury proposed dating both are single-line (126'5a, 126.6a). In Table r4, Section, the name
unlikely to have appeared more than }o years earlier (i.e. not
rt 1645.13 before 426)92 The name 'Aro( ) appears on sampled stamps at cisterns to the fourth cenrury.'?' However, the Binbirdirek AIi~o:( ) has been firmly assigned to Group 2. Since it appears on
IJ.' or J\l' 16I.J3
cannot, in fact, be the Cistern of Philoxenus, which was an open two stamps in the sample from St Polyeuktos (I19.,a, 137.ra)
both the Palace of Antiochus and Stjohn of Stoudios (Table 13),
lost/none 437.13,566.13,827.13, IIo6'3a, IIl9·IC cistern of the fifth century, located closer to the Forum of (Table 12), the name is unlikely to have been in use later than 557
and is unlikely to have been used later than 462 (i.e. 432 + 30)93
Consequently, the Hippodrome bricks probably date to 427- Consrantine.'?' Furthermore, the basket capital makes its first (i.e. 517 + 30). The Divam Ali Sokag: cistern would, therefore,
The sample of material is admittedly small, but there is an appar- 62. One possibilty is that indictions A'and B' on stamps 29.,a, dated appearance in Constantinople (in highly decorated form) appear to have been built using material produced in tenth and
ent cluster of indictions between IT' and lE'. Within this cluster, 559·Ia and 560"a correspond to 447/8 and 448/9, in which case in the church of St Polyeuktos (c.pO).I05 Consequently, it is eleventh indictions in the first half of the sixth century.
only 569.la, 7~9.,a, and rzoo.ra were not, according to strengthening of the Sphendone was undertaken about two likely that both the Binbirdirek cistern and the Divani Ali It might be argued that the stamped material discovered in
Mamboury's notes, associated with the hexagon. The names years after the earthquake struck. Sokagt cistern are to be placed around or after C.500. and above this cistern had been reused, but there is no evidence
EIi() (38~,2a, ja, 383.'0, 20), 'IaX() (566.,a), Ku() (729.'0) and The masons' marks from the two cisterns may suggest that to support such a proposal. According to Mamboury, the struc-
CaO (rzcc.ra) on the stamps within the cluster between If" and they were built at about the same time ..It is uncertain exactly ture as a whole is built of bricks measuring about 360 mm.
lE' all occur in Group I, Section I (see Table '3), and are there-
5. THE CISTERN ON DivANI ALi SOKAGI 28}, fig. 311. Mamboury's claim that the cistern stood partly on the site named <;ifte square x 40-50 mm. thick; and the mortar-joints vary between
fore firmly ascribed to the fifth century, a dating that agrees with Saray is in fact incorrect: the Cifre Saray (which burned in 1912) stood on the oppo- 50 and 70 mm. in thickness."? These brick dimensions agree
In November '934, during the construction of ahouse in Divam site side of Yeniceriler Caddesi, in the area bounded by Fuat Pasa Caddesi,
the structural techniques already mentioned. Three of these with the dimensions of the stamped bricks that came from the
Tacirhane Sokagl, Nargileci Sokagr, and Semaver Sokagl. See Ersoy, Anadol et al.,
Ali Sokagi, Mamboury discovered a subterranean cistern which Peruitucb, 59 (map 2.) and 136 (map 61). cistern (360-39° mm. square X4°-5omm. thick). There is, there-
names occur at the Palace of Antiochus, and two appear at the
he published in 1936." Internally it measures 23.95m. by ,6.60m. 9S Mango.Diveloppement,3~1.
fore, no reason to believe that the stamped bricks are not typical •
Cistern of Aspar. W~ may, therefore, suggest that all the bricks
in the cluster were manufactured between 426 and 462. Con- " For the detailed descriptions of the monument, see Mango,Art, 44-5. Berger, of the structure as a whole. Furthermore, the dimensions of the
17 Casson er al.; Hippodrome 1,17. Mamboury and Wiegand, Kaiserpoliute, 41. 'Chalk/m Tetrapylon', 8, rightly observes that these descriptions indicate that the
sequently, they are likely to have been manufactured in 429/}0- I1 Casson et al., Hippodrome I, so. On Consrantinc and the Land Walls, see above
bricks in the structure, and of the stamped bricks, are typical of
T etrapylon and Anemodoulion were the same monument.
43'12, 444/5-44617, or 459160-4611z. The hexagon was pp. 122-3· '17 Mango, Diveloppement, 30-1. Cbronicon Pascbale, 698-9, 703.
" Mamboury. Tourists' lstanb,d, 360 (wrongly giving the year Sf I). ,. Berger, Patria, 316-18, 310. I~ On masons' marks, see Deichmann, Ravenna, 206-30.
probably built shortly after the bricks were made. Stamps 'JO Casson et al., Hippodrome 1,17-18. Mamboury and Wiegand, Kaiserpaliiste, 99 Mango, 'Columns', 14-17. Gcrola, 'Buondelmonri', 276. 10' Mamboury, "Ichifre Serail' 174-6.
827.13, 1I06.3a and I119.'C are of sixth-century style, and the 40-3. Miiller-Wiener, Bildlexikon, fig. 44. 10(1 Berger, 'Chalklm Tetrapylon', 101 Wulzingcr, 'Sreinmctzzeicheu'.
names on 827.' a and II 06. 3a (Kevcrevel V01)and IT"P01» occur 91 Mamboury and Wiegand, Klliserpaliiste, 41 wrongly ascribe bricks measuring 101 Mamboury, 'Tchifre Serail', 170,pl. 19. IO! Schneider, \Vesthof, 20.
300-FO mm. square to the blocking of the external arches of the Spbendoue. 102 Patria 1.63,67 (ed. Preger 146-8). Ila Harrison,SaTafhane 1,151 no. I 4C(i) with fig. H.
in Group 2, Section I (see Table 14). This suggests repairs or '2 See above, Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. 1 e. la) Mamboury, "Ichifte Serail', 176,179-80. HI The bricksramps from the Biabirdirek that are published here appear to
nearby construction work in or after the early sixth century. 9) See above, Part Il,Ch. 9, sect. le. 1G4 Bardill, 'Lausus', 69-75. belong to the fifth century.
94 Mamboury, "Tchifte Scrail'. The cistern is F71t in Miiller-Wiener. Bildlexikon, lOS Harrison, Sarafhane I, 4 17. 112 Mamboury, 'TchifteScrail'.171.

PART II: CHRONOLOGY
13°
the early sixth century. III By the reign of Maurice (582-602),
average brick dimensions had apparently fallen to 323-344 mm
square x 45 mm. thick.' 14Therefore, had the cistern been built
under Phocas (602-10), the average brick dimensions are
unlikely to have been as great as those recorded by Mamboury,
even allowing for the reuse of some earlier material. Con-
sequently, on the basis of the information currently available,
the construction of the cistern at Divam Ali Sokagi should be
placed in the first half of the sixth century, and the identification
with Phocas' cistern appears unrenable.!"
6. THE MONUMENTAL
FORUM TAURI
ARCH IN THE
In Beyazit, on the south side of Ordu Caddesi, in the courtyard
of Simkes ham, two marble bases of a monumental arch were
discovered in 1928, together with numerous pieces of archi-
tectural sculpture (Fig. 17). The arch, originally 7.20 m. wide and
supported by four decorated columns standing on each base,
was plausibly identified with one of two that straddled the Mese
on either side of the Forum of Theodosius I (the Forum
Tauri).!" In notes taken at the time, Mamboury recorded a
number of stamped bricks coming from what he described as a
large wall to the south of, and parallel to, the drains of the Mese,
and to the right of the first base of the arch. By 'the first base', he
mearit, presumably, the first of the two bases to be discovered.
The description clearly refers to the 3.5 m.vthick wall butting up
against the southern base of the arch (Fig. '7). Since this wall was
partially built over the southern base, it was certainly erected
later than the arch. It was built of mortared rubble with a facing
of limestone blocks (6 courses 1.06 m. high) punctuated by
bands of brick (5 courses 0.53 m. high).1l7
Work on Theodosius' forum probably began shortly after
Prornotus's victory over the Goths in 386, which seems to have
been the subject of the spiralling sculpture on the monumental
column that stood in' the forum."! Theophanes states that this
column was erected as early as 38516,"9 before the triumphal
procession of Theodosius and Arcadius on 12 October 386.120
The forum itself was not inaugurated until 393,'21 and in the
See Table 19.
l1J
114 See pp. 48, I06.
115 In his notes, Mamboury adopts a date at the end of the fifth or beginning of the
sixth century on the basis of the brickstamps.
116 On the arch and the forum with which it is associated, see: Naumann, 'Ncuc
Beobachrungen', Muller- Wiener, Bildlexikon, 258-65; Berger, 'Tanros eSigma', 17-
24; Bauer, Stadt, 187-203'
117 See Casson and Talbot Rice, Hippodrome U, fig. 43, left background;
Naumann, 'Neue Beobachrungen', 130-1, pl. 33.1. Note that the plan by
Mamboury in Hippodrome n shows north incorrectly, and that this error has been
transferred to the description in the text. The error is corrected by Naumann, 'Neue
Beobachtungen', fig. I.
113 Cedrenus, i. 566 states that the reliefs commemorated victories over Soythians
and barbarians. !
119 Thcophanes, Chronicle, AM 5878.
120 Mango, Deoeloppcment, 43 is cautious about Theophancs' date.
121 Chronicon Paschale, 565.
..
,,~
ltEMAINING SITES 13 I
following year, a statue of the emperor was set up either upon
the column or in the square. m
The forum was damaged under Justinian in the earthquake of
19 October 558 (indiction si, when a statue of the Emperor'
Arcadius fell from the left-hand side of one of the arches giving
access to the forum.!" Mamboury suggested that the wall from
which he necovered the brickstamps had been built after the
earthquake. His conclusion was accepted by N aurnann, who
argued that the earthquake had damaged the arch by bringing
down two narrow flanking arches, the supposed bases of which
were discovered in 1943 (north) and '973 (south). These arches,
Naumann argued, had been added to either side of the original
arch in the early fifth century to support statues of Theodosius'
sons. In Naumann's opinion, they had not been reconstructed
after their collapse. Instead, the wall with which we are con-
r~'IT!r'
;.& .. ~..
~:
BEYAZIT
HAMAMI
cerned had been built against the main arch immediately to the
south of the Mese, together with another in the corresponding
.
position on the opposite side of the street.!" Naumann may
have been wrong in thinking that the narrow side-arches-if,
ORDU CADDESi
. -. 11 ....•
Dr~c:J
indeed, they existed at all-were additions rather than part of
the original Theodosian arch. Furthermore) there is no reason
why the statues of Arcadius and Honorius mentioned in our
texts could not have been placed over the principal arch rather
I
than over the proposed subsidiary ones. 125As for the wall to the
south of the Mese, although some bricks of Group 2 (early sixth-
century) style were found in it (582.1a, d, z a, 820.1C), its banded
. 50 100 m 1/
masonry is not typical of the Justinianic period, so a later date
for its construction-perhaps in the eighth to tenth centuries,
FIG. '7. Plan of the Forum Tauri and environs, including the Diakonissa church.
before the introduction of recessed brickwork-seems likely.
The construction of the wall might then be associated with the
conversion of the forum into a cattle market under Constanrine logisches Institut in Istanbul, has since been published by
V (741,743-75)'26 7. THE BEYAZIT CHURCHES Mathews and Miiller- Wiener, 130but it is unfortunately unclear
A number of other stamps from the wall (presumably also whether it is in fact more reliable than that initially produced.
reused) but of uncertain date) carry single-line inscriptions. Six On the north side of Ordu Caddesi (which follows the line of For purposes of reference, the three churches have been called
of them have consecutive indictions (Z'-H') and may, therefore, the ancient Mese), and immediately to the east of Buyiik Resit A,B,andC.
be contemporary with one another. They are as follows.!" Pasa Caddesi, preparations were made for the construction of an Church A (the south church) had a nave with a single aisle on
annexe to Istanbul University in [943, 1944, and 1946. During either side. Three column-bases of the aisle colonnades were
A': 845.1a (KD
the work, the remains of a terrace wall and three Byzantine found in situ) and incisions in them suggested that screens
Z': II88.1a ('Pro( ), 844.la (K .. ), 264.1a ([D, 974.1a (Mo(). or
churches were discovered (Fig. '7). Expense and the construc- divided the nave from the aisles at ground level, 13'This was a
Mo.()
tion schedule precluded a systematic excavation, but the struc- common arrangement in Greece, but the only other example
H': 978.1a (Mrocfi), 977." (Mrocft)
tures were photographed and hastily surveyed.'" N. Firath of known in Constantinople was in the basilica of St Jobn the
lA': "53.1a (I1?Kta8o(\l»
the Istanbul Archaeological Museum published a short descrip- Baptist in Oxeia, which is known to have existed as early as the
122 Chronicon Pescbale, 565. It is unclear whether this was the statue Oll top of the
tion of the site together with a plan by Mamboury and Turkish reign of the Emperor Maurice (582-602).132 The plan published
column or Theodosius' equestrian statue, which was placed on a rectangular marble
based decorated with reliefs. . colleagues dated 25 August 1947.12' A second version of the by Firath suggests that the apse may have been flanked by side
12) Thcophancs, Chronicle, A;."l 6050. plan, derived from Mamboury's notes in the Deutsches Archao- chambers. Mathews, who has attempted to show that the triple
lH Naumann, 'Neue Beobachtungen', 130-2 with fig. 7.
128 On the endpaper map in Muller-Wiener, Bildlexikon, the complex of churches sanctuary was unknown in Constantinople until the Middle
125 Muller- Wiener, Bildlexikon, fig: 298 (caption) rightly observes that the bases
of the side arches may not have supported columns, as reconstructed there and in is placed c.60 m. too far to the east. See rather Pirath, 'Trois egiises', fig. r inset Byzantine period, explained these as entrance halls from
(although this inset clearly misaligns the complex) and, for the surrounding the east, on the grounds that door sills were found nearby'"
'Neue Beobacbrungcn', fig. 6. The existence of the arches themselves is uncertain,
but seems likely given the discovery of a pilaster that appears to have stood upon one buildings, Miiller-Wicncr, Bildlexihon, fig. 2.90, and Ersoy, Anadol et aI., Peroititcb,
192. The location is confirmed by Mamboury's sketches in the DAI (Istanbul). 1:;1) Marhcws, Survey, 29 with P: xviii n. 5; Mullcr-Wiencr, Bildlexikon. 72, fig. 50
of the presumed bases of the side arches ('Neue Bcobachrungcn', 125 (north base),
129 (pilaster), uS (south base)).
Consequently, the retaining wall east of the church complex did not coincide with (with credit on p. 9).
Il6 Patria, cd. Prcger 263-4' Berger, Psuria, 425. Muller- Wiener, Bildlexikon, 262. Bozdogcn Kemcri Caddcsi, and there is, therefore, no support for the claim that that lJl Puath, 'Trois eglises', 176, and pl. j a.
Magdalino, 'Ncighborhoods', 215. Mango, Deoeloppement, 57. street follows the line of an earlier Byzantine thoroughfare, nor for the belief that llZ Mango, "Templon', is mistaken in stating on p. 6 that 'no instance of such an
735.13, of which many examples were found, also bears indiction Z' (Ku() Region VII was 3 stadcs in width (contrary to Bcrger, 'Regioncn', 396 and Bcrger, arrangement has yet been found at Constantinople'. The unreliable Pama 3.51 (ed.
127
Eil()), but is not said to have been found in the wall and may be irrelevant. 'Streets', r66). The site of the churches is now occupied by thcSu Uriinleri Pakultesi Preger, ii. 235-6) dates the church to the reign of Anasrasius.
of Istanbul University. 1!'J Fu-arh, 'Trois eglises'. r» Mathews, Early Churches, 72, I05-7.

IF
However, these door sills might rather have communicated
between the chancel and the side-chambers. Contrary ro
Mathews, side chambers communicating with the chancel are
known ro have existed at Stjohn the Baptist in Oxeia.!" and may
also have been a feature of the early sixth-century church of St
Polyeuktos.!" Since the revised plan published by Mathews and
Miiller-Wiener does not show the chambers, it is difficult to be
sure whether or not they existed.
The column-bases of Church A supported columns of
Thessalian marble of about 0.50 m.iin diameter.'? Three Ionic
basket capitals with a base diameter of 0.48 m. were found in the
church and evidently belonged ro them. m Pilaster capitals of
similar type were also found.'" Justinian's Hagia Sophia
provides excellent parallels for the capitals and for the mould-
ings on the column-bases.'?" Two plain Ionic impost capitals
found in the church may be compared with those from Justinian
and Theodora's church of St John at Ephesus. The sculptural
evidence therefore suggests an early sixth-century date for
Basilica A. Many fragments of a large ambo of red- and black-
veined marble were also found in the church. no
Church C was located immediately to the north of Church A.
Under the court between the two churches, a cistern measuring
4.96 x 2.80 m. was discovered. An opening in the floor of the
court may suggest that the court was open to the sky and that the
cistern stored rainwater. W The church possessed an exonarthex
and narthex; its nave was about II m. wide, and its aisles 9· 5 m.
long. Firath believed that Church C had been a basilica with a
nave and a single aisle on each side, and argued that it was
probably contemporary with Church A, adducing the similar
masonry sryle and the fact that the two buildings formed part of
the same complex with narrow passages linking them.!"
Mathews, however, has suggested that rhe church was of the
four-column (cross-in-square) type, and should be dated, like
other examples of the type, ro the Middle or Late Byzantine
period.!"
Church B srood to the east of Church C at a level 1.5 m. above
it. The difference in height could result from the topography,
but it may indicate that Church B was built later than Church C.
Firatli assumed a late~ date, observing that Church B had no
walls in common with either of the two other churches.!"
Mathews also thought B was later than C on the grounds that
Church B had been planned without any western entrances
because of its proxi~ty to Church C.145However, if reliable,
UI Mango, "Temploc'.
us Harrison,Sarafhane 1.411,425 n. 25.
IH Fuadr, 'Trois eglises', 176 ..
m Fu-ath, 'Trois egliscs', In.pis. Je and d.
III Fuath, 'Trois eglises', 175, pl. lb.
ut As noted by Mathcws, Early Churches. 6!r70.
HO Firath, 'Trois eglises', pis. 6 a-c with Mathews, Suruey. pis. 56-8 and fig.
HI Frraeh, 'Trois eglises', t67 (where the reference to pis. 2 d, e is erroneous),
H] Frradr, 'Trois eglises', 168, 171.
I4l Mathews, Early Churches, 69.
1++ Eiraeh, 'Trois eglises', 167-8, 171.
I+S Methews, Survey, 69.
PART II: CHRONOLOGY
the revised plan subsequently published
Muller- Wiener would suggest that Church
entrances. 146
At the centre of the nave of Church B were found the remains
of what Firath identified as a marble pool. Schneider, however,
suggested that the remains would better be interpreted as the
footings gj an ambo.!" The feature consisted of a circular block
decorated with a cross with a curving block to both its north and
south, and a rectangular base with moulded sides to its east and
west, on the axis of the nave.':" If it was a pool, water was
perhaps obtained from the IQ m.-long cistern beneath the
southernmost aisle of the church. Three openings in the paving
of the aisle afforded access to the cistern; two were covered by
marble slabs, the third possibly by a lost metal cover. 14' Just
2.5 m. north of the church the walls of another cistern survived.
It meas;'red 15.5 m. long x 9 m. wide x 5 m. to the springing of
the vaults."? It is in the ruins of this cistern that a number of
stamped bricks were found.
Church B is perhaps best categorized as a 'compact domed
basilica'. This term was coined by Krautheimer to describe the
church at Qasr Ibn Wardan in Syria (c.56I-64) and the later
variants on its plan that are not true cross-domed churches
(St Clement in Ankara, St Nicholas at Myra, and possibly the
Church of the Archangels at Sige). Both Church B and the
church at Qasr Ibn Ward an are small: the former measures c. I 3
m. long x 19 m. wide (12 m. wide excluding outer aisles), the
latter c.I7 x 13 m. In both churches, the east and west arches of
the central square bay form short ba;rel vaults that extend the
nave a little at either end. Since the north and south arches have
not been similarly exrended, the churches cannot be categorized
as cross-domed.'!' The size and plan of Church B suggest that.
we should consider the possibility that it was constructed as
early as the mid-sixth century. This calls into question the
assumptions that Church C dates to the Middle or Late Byzan-
tine period and that Church B was constucted even later.
Mamboury's notes in the Deutsches Archaologisches Institut
in Istanbul record seven different types of bricks tamp that were
found on the site. At least one of these stamped fragments is now
in the Hagia Sophia Museum collection (AM 194, 1376.1.). This
corroborates a statement made in 1958 by a former director of
the Museum, F. Dirimtekin, that bricks from Beyazit had been
added to the collection.!" It is therefore likely that a number of
other stamped bricks in the store came from the excavation
we arc discussing, but this is impossible to determine with
certainty, Five of the stamps recorded by Mamboury are
14' Mathcws, Survey, 29.
147 Schneider, 'Bibliographical Note', 222-}.
141 Frrath, 'Trois eglises', 167, pis. la, b,c.
1~9 Fuath, 'Trois eglises', 171, pis. ad, e.
}6. (~ Fu-arlr, 'Trois eglises', 171.
[71. l~1 The north and south arches of Church B were
western arch was 1.10 m. deep, and the eastern
defined the central bay of the nave, which was 5.7
taken from Mamboury's plan dated 1945-46 in the
Instirut, Istanbul. IS!
..~
REMAINING SITES
•
133
by Mathews and particularly distinctive (259.la, 3I3.IC, 1028.lb, 1056.Ia, aa, building from which the bricks came is difficult to determine. It
B did have western 1273.la). They take the form of tabulae ansatae (although is conceivable that the bricks were stockpiled, and were not used
I056.Ia, z a lack ansae) surmounted by a roundel containing a for some years after their manufacture, or that they were
cruciform monogram (+
no. 55) that is to be resolved as salvaged from an earlier, demolished building. In either case,
Mcupuciou (although the monogram has broken away on they would provide only a terminus post quem for the construc-
3 13·IC).'" They may be briefly discussed in turn. tion of the cistern. Furthermore, if the bricks do not relate to the
259.Ia carries the name Gregorios, and possibly a first indic- first phase of building on the site, but come from later repairs,
tion. This came from the cistern north of church B, according to then they may be of no use whatsoever in determining the date
Mamboury. A similar stamp, but not.the same fragment, was of construction.
found in the Hagia Sophia store (AM 59,259.20). One way of establishing whether the bricks found in the
j rj.rc appeared on several bricks found at the site, according cisrern relate to the main phase of building at the site is to
to Mamboury's notes. It gives the name of one Diomedes, examine their dimensions-and the dimensions of all stamped
accessory letters A and A, and a fifteenth indiction. It is clear that bricks of the reign of Maurice--and compare them with
the wooden' die into which the inscription was carved had what we know of the brickwork at the site. An analysis of the
become damaged and that the roundel containing the mono- dimensions of all the bricks in the catalogue that are known to be
gram had broken off. Similar stamps in the Hagia Sophia stamped with monograms of Maurice, has shown that the side-
Museum include AM 130, which measures 335 x 320 x 36 mm. lengths are remarkably consistent at 3 '4-3 50 mm. with a mean
Other material shows us what this stamp looked like when of 334 mm. IS' This is significantly shorter than that of bricks of
still complere, although already on these examples a crack was Group I and Group 2 (Table 19). Marnboury's notes on the
developing at the base of the roundel (312.la). excavation fortunately provide details of the brickwork at a
I028.Ib, of which at least one example was found, bears the number of locations on the site.!" Measurements were taken
name Papylos, a fifteenth indiction, and accessories Band E. from the east wall of the cistern below the south aisle of Church
Firath gives the findspot as the cistern 2.5 m. to the north of B (330-350 x 40 mm.; mortar beds 60 mm. thick); from the
church B'" A similar example, which measures 337 x 325 x retaining wall behind church B (about 7 courses of brick alter-
48 mm., was found in the Hagia Sophia Museum store (AM 4, nating with 3 courses of small squared limestone blocks; bricks
1028.Ia). 320 mm. square x 30-50 nrrn. thick; mortar beds 3D-80 mm.
I056.Ia (without bar) and 1056.2a (with bar) bear the name thick; blocks 12D-I80 mm. high); from the foundations west of
Paulos and a first indicrion. There are no accessory letters. Church C (bricks 32D-3 30 x 4D-5 mm.; mortar beds 4D-60 mm.
Mamboury records that several examples of the two types were thick); from the westernmost pier of the north wall of Church C
found. Frrarh illustrated the example without the bar in his (bricks 350 mm. square x 35-40 mm. thick); from the north-
report, and stated that it came from the cistern 2.5 m. to the south wall to the west of this pier (bricks 330 mm. square' x
north of Church B.'55 Several similar stamps, also without the 30-40 mm. thick; squared blocks I6D-170 mm. thick); and from
bar, were found in the Hagia Sophia Museum store, and one a brick vault containing a terracotta drainpipe running below
brick measures 335 x 317 X 42 mm. (AM 19). . one of the cisterns (bricks 32D-330 mm. square). It is clear,
1273.la, of which Mamboury recorded at least one example therefore, that where .Mamboury did take measurements, these
from the cistern, bears the name Tryphon and a fifteenth indic-' were consistently within the range of 320-3 50 mm. square.
tion with accessory M. Another accessory is presumably miss- The dimensions of the bricks recorded in situ by Mamboury
ing from the other ansa. No similar example was found in the are not typical of Group I or Group 2, but are closer to those of
Hagia Sophia Museum store. the reign of Maurice. We are clearly dealing with post-
The stamps listed above therefore bear a cruciform mono- Justinianic structures. Furthermore, Mamboury's figures
gram of the Emperor Maurice (582-602) and a fifteenth or first suggest that all of the bricks used in these strucrures were manu-
indiction . .159.13, I028.lb, 1056.13, 23, and 1273.13 were all factured at one time, since reuse of larger bricks of rhe early sixth
found in the cistern 2.5 m. to the north of Church B, and-we may century and of the fifth century would have widened the brick-
reasonably assume that the fifteenth and first indictions relate to length parameters to about 320-380 mm. square. It follows that
the last year of one cycle and the first year of the next. The bricks the stamped bricks from the cistern, which bear the monogram
were therefore manufactured in the years 582-58213 or 59617- of Maurice, in all probability relate to the main phase of building
597/8. The same dates may also be ascribed to the other stamps at the site, and that the cistern itself, and Church B to which the
of the reign of Maurice that come from the site (3I3.IC, i372.Ib, cistern was attached, can be dated to around 582-582/3 or
1376.la). 59617-597/8.
0.55 m. deep, whereas the Whether this also gives a date for the construction of the We can, in fact, identify the complex and in doing so
I.IS m. deep. These four arches
m. square. The dimensions are In For the resolution, see above p. 47. 1st. Seep. 48.
Deutsches Archaologisches I~ Fuatlr, 'Trois eglises', 172 no. I with pl. 7b. IS] The notes are in the possession of the Deutsches Archaologisches Instirut,
Dirimrekin, 'Work Done', 3, 19. I~~ Puath, 'Trois egliscs', 171. no. 2 with pl. zb. Istanbul.
 PART r r: CHRONOLOGY REMAINING SITES
'34 135
corroborate our proposed date. Constantine Porphyrogenitus'
tenth-century Book of Ceremonies'v describes how, on Easter
Sunday, the imperial cortege proceeded from the Forum Tauri
it would be one of the earliest occurrences of this architectural
form. As for Church A, it may have been built earlier than
churches Band C, although we must bear in mind the possibility
o /
/
/
/
/

-,
\
(Forum of Theodosius I) westwards to the Diakonissa (as yet that the capitals on which the dating is based were outdated ,
unlocated) and then to the Philadelphion (believed to have been stock. ~
"

,
near the Myrelaion or Bodrum Carnii)"? where it took the Mention may be made of further walls discovered to the north
,
Masonry i
, north-west branch of the Mese towards the church of St of the three churches (Fig. 17). The long, main wall, which Sultan Ahmet Camii
I
~ObeljSk , I,
Polyeuktos (whose location is kno~n for certain)."? The topo- Mamboury believed to have been a retaining wall, was aligned i / /
graphical recension of the Patria indicates that both the 10°-15° east of north. It was founded upon the clay by means of '.I~/

Diakonissa and the Kourator were between the Forum Tauri large sandstone blocks (1.7-2 m. long x 0-48--0.65 m. high),
and the Philadelphion.'?' One of the gates of the Forum Tauri which in turn stood upon perpendicular walls set into the clay (I
/
has been located by excavation at Beyazit, so we can be certain m. wide x I. 5-1.8 m. deep, built of medium-sized blocks set in a ,. /
/
that the Diakonissa and Kourator were to the west of this gate.l62 very hard, sandy mortar). The bricks in the retaining wall ,.
How far to the west cannot be determined, since it depends on measured 370-400 mm. square x 40-50 mm. thick, with mortar
whether the gate belongs to the eastern or western side of the beds 50-60 mm. thick. Numerous stamped bricks were found in
forum, and on how large an area the forum itself covered.l" it, all of Group 2 style, and probably contemporary with each
Although their exact locations cannot be established, both the other (582.1e, zb, 609.la, 4k, I, I2e, 667.Igg, hh, 676.}f, j,
Diakonissa and the Kourator are clearly possible identifications I05}.la). The stamps and dimensions of the bricks clearly indi-
for the complex discovered near the University. Since the Patria cate that the structures belong to the sixth century (probably the
suggests that, of the two, the Diakonissa was closer to the forum, first three-quarters of that century), and are certainly not as late
this would seem the more likely identificarion.l" There is a third as the church complex to the south.
possibility, however, since the Patria also mentions a church of
St Mark, which was located beside the western arch of the
Forum Tauri.!" 8. THE GREAT PALACE: PERISTYLE

The problem of identification can be resolved thanks to the AND APSED HALL
early ninth-century chronicle of Theophanes, which gives a ""~"" ..., .•.. '-.-.--.~~"
The Walker Trust of the University of St Andrews funded two
precise date for the construction of the church of the Theotokos .... \. ,,\ -. - -'-'-.:-"
of the Diakonissa. It was built by the Patriarch Kyriakos campaigns of excavation in the Great Palace: the first in I9} 5-}8
(596-606) in the year 597/8 (AM 6090). Since this year coincides under the direction of]. H. Baxter; and the second in 1952-54
under the direction of D. Talbot Rice. The site chosen was -, -,
" i\\"'-~--~==~-~~~-~-
exactly with the later of the two dates suggested for the manu- 1 Terrace Wall- -.-.-
facture of the stamped bricks from the cistern 2.5 m. north of towards the south-eastern corner of the upper terrace of the , I

Church B, there can be little doubt that Church B, adjacent to Palace, and the excavations exposed a rectangular courtyard \....,. '~ I~
I
'-·_·20 .--

the cistern, should be identified as K yriakos' church of the surrounded on all sides by colonnaded porticoes, which covered \ , "0#"~, I
I
i

Theotokos. The plan of the church, having close affinities with an area of 65 x 55.5 m. The short sides of the Peristyle were \ \ " I

"
\

compact domed basilicas, such as that at Qasr Ibn Wardan roughly parallel to the euripos of the Hippodrome. 17- magnifi-
,\ ! " /','
(c.j6I--64), would fit fairly well with the proposed date. If cent mosaic, depicting rural scenes, animal hunts, and myrho- \ \. i I

; I .'

Church C were contemporary, as Mamboury's masonry logical.subjects decorated the floors of the porticoes. To the 10" \"', \. ,; /
south-east of the courtyard, on the same north-west-south-east ••••• , '. \ J ii I
statistics would lead us to believe, and if it were indeed a four- "./ it'1

axis, were found a vestibule and an attached hall, together ..... \\I! ii / /
column (cross-in-square) type, as Mathews has suggested, then -'-'-' ·....
·,\\1 li'/ I I

measuring j z x 16.5 m. At the south-east end of the hall was an - -

-,
\
'~i
( "I
'. /
l5S Ed. Reiske, i. 74-6, ed. Vogt, i. 67-8. ~ t
/
apse (Figs. 18 and 19). The first excavation campaign concen- \ i
159 Muller-Wiener,Bildlexikon,266-7.

160 For the location of St Polycuktos, see Harrison, Sararhane I, 4, fig. A. trated on the Peristyle area, and although some furrher work
.> "-'-''''':,'::::,! '.1
, , i
1

i ,
Harrison discusses the path of the northern branch of the Mese at Sarachane I 5, was undertaken there in the second campaign, attention was
405-6. This branch is reconstructed by Mango.Developpement. plan Il, as a straight Inner
street passing from the Deuteron Gate and parallel to the southern flank of the
then concentrated on the Apsed Hall. The results of the excava- Wall \~~'"-,
Cistern of Aspar, thus running close to Marcian's Column and to the south of St tions were pu blished in two lengthy reports. '" The mosaic Outer ' ••.....•.. .•
,
Polyeuktos. See also Mango, 'Triumphal Way' 177; Mango, 'Shoreline', fig. 1. Wall
deteriorated badly in. the decades following its discovery, Maritime
161 Patria, cd. Preger, 293-4. Berger, Patria, 327-9. 347 (where la Dialeonisses is Gate
wrongly shown to the west of ta Kurataros],
and between 1983 and 1997 an extensive restoration and con-
162 Miiller-Wiencr,Bildlexikon,258-G'5. servation project was undertaken by the Austrian Academy
lbJ Mango believes the arch to be the western one (Developpemeru, 44), as does
100m.
of Sciences in co-operation with the Turkish Ministry of
Bauer (Stadt, 193-7). Berger has suggested that it is the eastern one, and that the
Forum was about 55 m. square: Bcrgcr, 'Tauros e Sigma', 17-24'
Culture. In 1987, following the lifting of the portions of the 1"""""""""'1 r---""1 e---"""! r---! I-"'"'"I---=-i
11.1 Mango, Developpemeru, 28 n. 35 noted the possibility of this identification. mosaic that had been left in situ in the north-east portico, it was
16S Patria, cd. Preger, 277. The identification was adopted by Bergcr, 'Trucrcs c possible to make three soundings, which have contributed some
Sigma', 24 with fig. I, butlaterwithdrawn: Bcrger, 'Regionen', 396 n.253 and figs. 5, FIG. 18. Plan of the Great Palace area and surrounding Byzantine structures, including the Hippodrome and Sea Walls.
9; Berger, 'Streets', 166 and fig. L 166 GPI and GPlI.

PART II:
further evidence of importance in establishing the history of the
site.!"
Archaeologists and art historians have reached no agreement
regarding the date and identification of these structures. The
question of identification, which depends largely on topo-
graphical considerations, need not concern us here. It is enough
to say, as I have argued elsewhere, that the Peristyle and Apsed
Hall may have constituted the Augusteus in the Daphne
Palace.!" In the following discussion, I will concentrate on
dating the excavated structures.
a. The pre-Peristyle structures
Below the Peristyle, and on its long, central axis was a viaduct,
5.80 m. wide, originally paved with large marble slabs (Fig. 19
A).I" This consisted of two tiers of brick arches supported by
piers of 1.45 m. in thickness. The lower viaduct had narrow,
pointed arches with a high pitch, and rose to a level of 3.2 m.
below the top of the srylobate blocks in the Peristyle. It was
faced with small, roughly dressed blocks of limestone. The
upper arcade was narrower than the lower by about 0.50 m. on
either side. This narrowness may have resulted from the robbing
of its facing. Its arches, which were pitched very low, and were
wider than those in the lower arcade, raised the surface of the
Paved Way a further :i. m., to about 0.80 m. below the mosaic
pavement."? The bricks of the lower arches and the coursed
brickwork on top were 300-)40 mm. square x 40 mm. thick,
whereas the bricks of the upper arches measured 380 x 380 x 45
mm171 Both arcades of the Paved Way were clearly older
than the Peristyle, since they continued under the north-west
167 See primarily [obst and Vetters, Mosaikenforschung.
168 See Bardill, <Great Palace', The relative positioning of the palatial rooms pro-
posed in my article has been accepted by Bolognesi, 'Gran Palazzo', esp. pl. VII, fig.
8. However, Bolognesi differs somewhat regarding the superimposition of the
scheme of rooms on the site of the palace. She proposes (pp. 221-3) that wall 'h' on
the east flank of the Hippodrome (Mamboury and Wiegand, Kaiserpaldste, pl. ell)
may once have formed part of the Kathisma. This suggestion, although not
provable, is not impossible; nor is it (contrary to her assertion on p. 222 n. 78) at odds
with my own conclusion that the Kathisma was somewhere between the Masonry
Obelisk and the Serpent Column (Bardill, 'Great Palace', 227). We may note, how-
ever, that Mango, 'Boukoleon', 46-7 would place the imperial boxes far south as the
Masonry Obelisk, whereas Dagron, 'Courses', 119 favours a location opposite the
Serpent Column. The measurements, of uncertain reliability, in Hero of Byzantium,
Geodesia, 5, ed. Sullivan 275-81, would locate the box just north of the Serpent
Column. Additionally, Bolognesi claims that vaulted structures at the south-east
corner of the terrace of the Sultan Ahmet mosque stood close to the cast end of the
Covered Hippodrome (p. 2}3 with pl. VIII, fig. pn). I would have liked to see more
evidence to support this claim, which implies that other elements of the Daphne
Palace were further north than Isuggested: thus Bolognesi locates the Apsis, and the
chapels of the Thcotokos First-Founded and the Holy Trinity just to the north of
the Peristyle and Apscd Hall (pp. 227-8). These differences of opinion illustrate the
difficulties involved in superimposing any schematic plan of the Great Palace on to
the topography of the sitc-difficulties that arc only likely to be eased by further
archaeological investigation.
169 GP I, 7, pls. 2.3, 3.2, 3.3. GPII, 12-15, folder A.
17C GP I1, 13 and folder A. Lower arches about 1.44 m. high and 2.04 m. wide at
the spring. Upper arches about 85 cm. high and 3 m. wide at the spring.
171 GP Il, 13 nn. 1-1 (lower tier), nn. 3-4 (upper tier). GP I, 7 gives slightly
different measurements: lower tier 325 mm. square by 25-30 mm. thick; upper tier
360-370 mm. square and 40-45 mm. thick.
",
•
CHRONOLOGY REMAININ G SITES I37
portico.V' The upper tier of the Paved Way, whose bricks
were of typical size for the fifth and early sixth cencuries,""
apparently provided access to a lost building, the substructures
FtG.19· Plan of the Peristyle and
of which were discovered beneath the Apsed Hall (Fig. t 9 B). As
Apsed Hall in the Great Palace.
we shall see below, these substructures appear to date to the
early sixth century. The possibility that the lower tier relates to
Key:
an earlieg.period does not seem to have been considered, hut is A Paved Way.
certainly possible, and the dimensions of the bricks may indicate B Early piers beneath the Apsed Ha!L
a fourth-century dating.!" Another early structure found C Cistern.
during the first campaign was a partially collapsed brick wall at D Drain (phase 2).
E Corridor.
Site D. This was found at 6-70 m. below datum (which was set
F Drain (phase J).
just above the level of the mosaic)."! In a hole in the wall was G Drain.
found a lamp of fourth- or fifth-century date.!" The wall, as we H \Yfall in front of the piers in north-
shall see, had collapsed on to pottery that had accumulated east corridor.
I Triple Arch.
during the period of occupation and subsequent abandonment
J Apse remains.
at this level.
K Piers in front of the Apse
During the second campaign, excavations in the south-west (contemporary with the Apsed
portico revealed the remains of a cistern (Fig. 19 C).177 It was Hall).
certainly earlier than the Peristyle, since its floor level was about L. Vaulted chambers south-west of
the Apsed Hall.
1.5 m. below the mosaic, and since both its floor and walls were
M Chamber C beneath the Ante-
cut through by the foundation trench of the ou ter retaining wall chamber of the Apsed Hall.
of the Peristyle. The cistern yielded a lamp dating to the fourth
or fifth cenrury.!" Three unfinished impost capitals were found
on the floor of the cistern. Since they were not found in situ, it is
uncertain whether they had formed a part of the structure. They
were, however, certainly earlier than the Peristyle, and Talbot
Rice accepted that they were unlikely to have been made before
the end of the fifth century."? The first dated use of the impost
capital in Constantinople-although in higWy decorated
form-is in the church of St Polyeuktos, dated to around
5I8-22.ISO Krautheimer compared the capitals from the cistern
with a Middle Byzantine capital found near the Church of the
Transfiguration on the island of Burgaz, and proposed, without
Salies, clearly misunderstanding Mango's criterion for dating former's enquiry, that he was in no doubt that both stamps from
any justification, a date as late as about 600.181 the stamp, argued that a much earlier date was possible, on the the cistern belonged to the sixth century. I" The absence of
About half of the bricks found in the cistern bore stamps, grounds that brickstamps of cruciforrn shape had already been cruciform monograms amongst those on the sculpture and
either of the typC201.1a or q64.1a. Mango adduced 1364.1a as
used in Imperial Rome.'!' I364.ra is, of course, rectangular in bricks tamps from the superstructures of St Polyeuktos indicates
evidence for a sixth-century date for the structure, on the shape: it is the monogram that is cruciform. Miranda similarly that the type was developed after 5,8, and their absence from the
grounds that it bore a cruciform monogram.!" Hellenkernper expressed doubt about the sixth-century dating proposed by capitals of SS Sergius and Bacchus might be taken to suggest that
!72 GP I, 7, pl. 3.J.GPIl,12. Mango for this type of brickstamp, and .wondered whether it they had not emerged by 527. It is even possible that they were
17J See Table 19. might be of the fourth or fifth century, admitting that he was first used for the Empress Theodora in Hagia Sophia as late as
m Compare the dimensions of the bricks in the piers of the Hippodrome: pp. unaware whether comparative fifth-century material had been C.533.187The terminus post quem for 1364.1a, for the cistern in
105-6,118-9 ..
175 Datum was taken to be the top of the levelling course at 26.10 m. above sea
discovered in Constantinople. I" Talbot Rice described the which it was found, and hence for the later foundation walls of
level(GPI,2and plan 59). 17~ GPI,5,I6,3J,61,pl.I9.39. 177 GPII,IS-19. stamp as 'probably of the fourth or early fifth century' and
118 GP 11, r6-17, fig. 8, IIJ. Haycs, Soracbone Il, 82, Type 4, with n. 15. 'certainly to be assigned to before the year 450',185 despite the IS6 Mamboury's letter (dated 17 August 1951) is preserved amongst T albot Rice's
Hellenkernper Salics, 'GroBcn Palest', 281 n. 42. notes at Birmingham University. Commenting on 20I.1a and 1364.1a, he wrote; 'En .•
17'1 GPII,I5-17,PI.4,E.
fact that the expert Mamboury had stated, in reply to the
generalles monogrammes appartienncru au VIe s., et les noms inscrits en entier,
180 Harrison, Sararha'Je, I, 4J7-:Betsch, Capital, 244-5. Hellenkcmper Salies, la) Hellenkemper Salies, 'Groflcu Palase', 280, 281-2 with n. 43, referring to the comme j'ai pu le voir par maints exemples, appartiennene aussi a la premiere mcitie
'Grofien Palasr', 281, has, however, attempted to dismiss the possibility of establish- stamps published in Cl L, xiii.6. Cruciformstamps published there include those of du VI s.... Pour moi, il n'y a aucun doutc qu'on se trouve en face d'estarnpillcs du
ing a terminus post quem for the three capitals, and hence for the cistern. She goes on Lcgio XJ(II Primigcnia (p. 68 <p14'5). VIes.'
to argue that the Peristyle should be placed in the fifth century. The material 111 Miranda, 'Palais Sacre', 201-1. Arguing that the cistern and Peristyle arc But alrcady TalborRicc had written to Sir DavidRussell(on 3 I May 1952}regard-
adduced by Trilling, 'Soul', 36-71l. 27, is not comparable; as Del1JJcrt,Kapilellc, 135 Constantinian structures, Mirancla attempts to explain the brickseamps from the ing the stamps from the cistern: 'Mamboury is convinced they are only shortly
observes, the capitals made to adorn the eight-sided piers that arc a characteristic cistern, and the pottery beneath the mosaic as belonging to later repairs (p. 204). His before Justinian. I can't believe they are so late. But even so, they can't be early, and
component of Middle Byzantine remplon screens form quite a different group. assertion (p. 202) that 'Cyril Mango nous dit que lcs inscriptions des briqucs ne sent I am absolutely convinced that the mosaic cannot be earlier than 400, and may be
181 GP IJ, 16. Kraurheimer comparcd the capitals from the cistern with Ksurzsch, pas satisfaisanrcs' is apparently a mistranslation of Mango's criticism of Talbot later.' This letter is preserved in St Andrews University Library, Sir David Russell
Knpicellstu dien, 201-1 no. 677, 011 which see Dennen, Kapitelle, 70 no. 151. Rice's commentary on the brickstamps in GP Il (Mango, 'Review 1', 68 n. 2). Papers, General Files, Box: 134.
182 Mango, 'Review]" 68-9. 18\ .GPII, 105, 106-7. 117 See above pp. 48-9.
 PART 11: CHRONOLOGY REMAINING SITES I39
the Peristyle is therefore 518. Talbot Rice read the monogram as 0.60--0.80 m. below the mosaic, the offset was found to coincide 475 or later.'08 This fragment, which has rightly been adduced as that Phocaean Red Slip Ware, Form 3 was produced in the mid-
Fcdou. From the published drawing, which shows a damaged with a bed of mortar in the portico itself. This mortar horizon, indicating a terminus post quem for the laying of the second fifth century."! Indeed, the earliest types must in fact date to
example, this reading appears impossible, since the right-hand found in all three soundings, appears to represent the initial (mosaic) floor,'" in fact also provides a terminus post quem for before 450.219 But the evidence will not allow such an early
letter appears to show traces of a diagonal, and to be N or M.!" ground level in the Peristyle."! Although decisive proof of a the construction of the first Peristyle. terminal date for the pottery that was found at Site D. Hayes
However, a photograph of a complete example is preserved in mosaic on this early floor was lacking, numerous individual There is, however, other pottery -evidence of importance in divides Form 3 into eight types (A-H) which show a gradual
the excavation archive, and this shows that the four letters tesserae were discovered, and in one sounding a fragment was dating the construction of the Peristyle and the laying of the first developmendrom before 450 (type A) into the first third of the
attached to the cross were I', A, I, and (1), and the stamp is there- found bearing decoration in black and white.'?" Although the floor. During the Baxter excavations of 1935-38, a sounding 8 sixth century (type H).220 The rim gradually becomes shorter
fore to be read as raicp, in the dative case.!" first flooflevel corresponded with the level of the paving on the m. deep was made in the north-east portico at Site D, and a large and thicker, and overhangs more and more at the bottom. That
Regarding the date of 201.la, Talbot Rice had perhaps been upper tier of the Paved Way,2()(}the two structures need not have quantity of Hellenistic and Late Roman pottery was discovered Hayes could establish a precise terminal date of c. 520-40 is a
influenced by Schneider's article (to which he does not refer) in been built simultaneously."! We shall see that the Paved Way in the filling."? Although the material found was not published clear indication that the earth dump contained a closely datable
which the incorrect theory was advanced that all single-line and the chamber to which it led were constructed some time in full, the first excavation report did contain a selection of type ofPhocaean Red Slip·ware. This could only be Form 3F."1
stamps belong to the fifth century."? In fact, stamps with a before the Peristyle was built. twelve Late Roman pottery fragments, all of which were found Indeed, three certain, and twO possible fragments of this type are
complete name in the genitive preceded by a cross (+r AIOY) The employment of cramps to link the greenstone blocks in between 2.50 and 6.70 m. below datum, and hence well below recorded in Stevensori's notes on the Site D pottery.'" Two of
are quite uncharacteristic of Group I, and can hardly be earlier the levelling course cannot be used as a dating criterion. Hellen- the level of the first Peristyle floor subsequently determined by the certain pieces were found amongst the material below the
than the last quarter of the fifth century."! Although the name kemper Salies' claim that the use of cramped blocks of stone is the Austrians."! All twelve are clearly fragments of Phocaean first floor of the Perisryle.s" The other three pieces were found
ratOD occurs at both St Polyeuktos and the Justinianic Hagia last attested in the early fifth century at the Palace of Antiochus Red Slip Ware. On the basis ofWaage's dating of similar pottery in a lower level relating to a still earlier period of occupation and
Sophia, it is unlikely that 201.Ia refers to the same individualfor is mistaken!" levelling courses of cramped blocks have been in the Athenian Agora, Martiny and Stevenson held that the abandonment. The pottery in this lower level was found
two reasons. First, all of the bricks with this name that come found in the early sixth-century church of St Polyeuktos and in Phocaean Red Slip pottery (then known as Late Roman C beneath the debris of a partially collapsed brick wall in which
from St Polyeuktos and Hagia Sophia bear multiple-line, not the mid-sixth-century basilica to the north of Kalenderhane pottery) could be no earlier than the very end of the fourth there was a hole containing a lamp dating to the fourth or fifth
single-line, sramps.!" Second, the average dimensions of the Carnii.20J The use of the technique does not, therefore, rule out a century."! However, subsequent research on Late Roman cenrury.P'
bricks in the cistern-e-jao x 340 x 40-50 mm.193-are incom- date after the fifth century. In order to date the foundation walls pottery led J. W. Hayes to a different conclusion: 'In the build- Thus the terminus post. quem for the construction of the
patible with either a fifth- or early sixth-century date, and are up to the level of the first floor, we must examine the finds from ing fills under the Great Palace mosaics almost all the fine-ware Peristyle and its first floor is the date at which Phocaean Red Slip
closer to those of bricks ascribed to the reign of Maurice (582- the mortar bed and the deep clayey fill below it.'"' The Austrian fragments are Late Roman C, with only rare scraps of African Ware, Form 3F began to be produced. In a pottery dump in
602) and others that are possibly as early as the reign of justin II report makes no specific observations in this regard,2°s and a R. S. Ware; this material is of late fifth- and early sixth-century sector 13-R at Antioch, the most developed type of Phocaean
(565-78).!94 very general fourth- or fifth-century date has been assigned to types, with a probable terminal date of c. j20-540.'2lJ Red Slip Ware found was Form 3F, and this occurred in large
the first Peristyle.i" A large number of pottery sherds were. Hayes' dating was questioned by Hellenkemper Salies, who numbers'" It is assumed that the building that collapsed over
found in the levels concerned, however," and a number of them believed that he had based his terminal date on just the five the dump was brought down in the earthquake of j26,'26 and
h. The Peristyle structures: the foundation walls
can be dated fairly accurately. The latest datable piece, which stamped pottery sherds mentioned in his own catalogue.'!' In hence that the material in the dump can be no later than that
and first floor (phase I)
comes from the deep clayey fill below the floor level, is a fact, Hayes' conclusion was based not simply on these year. The same type has also been discovered in the Athenian
The outer walls of the Peristyle had foundations of various fragment of Phocaean Red Slip Ware, type 3E, which dates to fragments and the other pieces published in the first report, but Agora in a deposit of the second quarter of the sixth century.'"
widths between C.2.20 and 3.60 m., consisting of a rubble core on all the excavated material recorded in the pottery notes of The excavations at St Polyeuktos in Constantinople produced
(which preserved the imprint of timber shuttering) faced with 19! [obsc, 'Archaologic', 33, 40-r, 42. Note that HeIJenkempcr Salics, 'Review', R. B. K. Stevenson.!" Although most of this material was fragments of Form 3F in Deposits '4, 16, and 17.'" Deposit '4,
courses of stone with rnortared joints.!" In their upper parts, the II2 misunderstands the evidence, and claims that there is insufficient proof of the
unpublished, Hayes observed that the sherds that had been
existence of the first floor level. The early floor is represented by the mortar bed analysis by J. W. Hayes, dated 16 January 1963) on jo September 1997 among Sir
walls narrowed at a levelling course of greens tone blocks to a chosen for illustration in the excavation report were 'typical of
('Mortelausgleichschic.hte'). This was later covered by packing for the mosaic: David Russell's Papers {General Files, Box 134). ratherthan among the excavation
width of 1.85-2.85 m. This levelling course thus created an off- primarily a pottery-bearing stratum {'Isolierschicht') and rubble packing (,Bruch- the group as a whole'.'!6 Stevenson's notebook recording all the notes. From the notebook, it is clear that eleven in the shaft dug
levels were discerned.
set on either side of the walls. Its blocks were joined by dovetail steinpackung') containing architectural fragments (some of which possibly came at Site D. The Phocaean Red Slip Ware pieces selected for publication were: from
pottery discovered at Site Din 1936 is, fortunately, preserved in
from the demolition of the first Peristyle). Hellenkempcr Salies (p. 112) claims that levelDR 1 (below-c.jc m.), DI67(GP Lpl. 19. no. 33); from levelDRII,D171 (pl.
cramps {possibly of wood rather than ironj.!" The inner the archives at St Andrews University, and it confirms the
jobsr assigns the pottery-bearing stratum to the period of the first floor, but this is 19. no. 27); and from level DRX (the brick wall level, --6.70 m.), 0115. DI r8, D119,
foundation walls of the Peristyle, on which the colonnades not so: Jobst assigns the mortar bed to the period of the first floor (,Archaologie', accuracy of this observation.'!' Hellenkemper Salies points out Ono, 0122, 0132, Dr jj, DI35,D136,DI37(pL 19, nos. 26, 31, 29. 28, 30, J2 (= pl.
stood, were similarly built. At least in the north-east portico the 33). Consequently, contrary to Hcllenkemper Salies' claim. there is no discrepancy 27.9 c), 34, pl. 27.9 b, a, c). Stevcnson's notes have been published: sec Bardill and
between Joust's interpretation of the evidence and that of Turnovsky, 'Fund- Hares, 'Pottery'.
inner wall had an offset corresponding to that in the outer. This lea Turnovsky, 'Fundbericht', 56,no. 38.
bericht', 43, 60, who uses the pottery to give a terminus pose quem for the laying of ZOO) Turnovsky, 'Fundberichr', 60. liS Hellenkemper Salies, 'GroBen Palest,' 284' The fifth-century types of Form 3
offset was revealed by three soundings made in the north-east [he second (mosaic) floor. The evidence for the existence of the first floor appears
110 On Site D, sec GP I, 5, I6, plans 60, 61, 63 section 2-2. For the pottery, see GP (types A-E) are discussed in Hayes, LRP, 329-38. On the finds of Form 3B. C, D at
portico in 1987.197 About 0.20 m. wide, and at a depth of indisputable.
1,31-2. Conimbriga in Portugal and of Form 3B at Iatrus in Bulgaria, see Hayes, LRP
I" Jobst, 'Archiiologie',41.
211 GP I.pl. (for no. 31., see also pl. 27.ge) and pi. 27.9a-c.ln
19, nos. 26--)4 GP I, Supp!., pp.Iix-bd and Hayes, Sararhallc 11. 7 with 42+ n. 9·
,•• CPll, T07.fig. 21.} with the comments of Mango, 'Review 1', 68. 200 As observed by jcbsr, 'Archaclogie' •.•p.
62-3. no. 33 is placed DR I, DO, 27 in DR Il, and the remainder in DR X.
in level m Hayes, LRP. 337 (Form 3, type A).
,It St Andrews Universit)' Library, Sir David Russell Papers, Miscellaneous 10l jobsr, •Archaologie', 41 links the first £loor with the Paved Way and with the
IN Hayes, LRP, 329-38.
From p. 32, it is clear that levels DR I and 11 extended from -2. 50 to -4.0 m .. and from
Remainder, bOX.3S. structure to which the Paved Way led. the remains of which were discovered
P: 31, iris dear that level ORX was ar a depth of-6.70 m. In GPI, datum was taken 2!1 For Hares' dating of this form, see LRP, 338. ,
1'l1) Schneider, 'Ziegelsrcmpel', z69. See above P: IOZ with n. x6. beneath the Apsed Hall.
to be the top of the levelling course at 26.10 m. above sea level (GP 1,2 and plan 59). l22 Certain: Dj a (level DR VII), D79 (DR VIII), DU4 (DR X). POSSIble: D1I9,
See above pp. 99-l0t. lOl Hcllcnkemper Salies, 'Groflen.Palast', 282-3.
191
Note that GP I, pl. 27, fig. 9d came from Site 0 (GPI, 32). DIlJ (both DRX).
192 Unfortunately, stamps from neither site bear indicticns. 100 See above pp. 52-3'
III GP 1,16,31. Schneider in a review of GP I (GP Il, 197) suggested an even m Dp (level DR VII), D79 (DR VIII).
GP 11, 15. Note that the reference here to stamped bricks should read 'see p. 1004 Cp. jobst, 'Arcbsologie', 33. The deep clayey fill is termed 'Hangauf-
I,))
earlier date. 2U Hayes, LRP, 418. m GPI, s,.r6,JI, 62. pl. 19.39,
106, nos. 2-3 '. schiirrung' . 214 Hellenkemper Salies, 'GroBen Palest', 1.84. For discussion of these five pieces, m Waage. 'Tableware' pl. XI. 944 f = Hayes, LRP, 335. Form 3 F no. 20.
I'M On-brick dimensions, see above pp. 48, 102-6. The dimensions were consid- ~ Turnovsky, 'Fundbcricbt', 60 attempts only to provide a terminus post quem m See Waage, 'Tableware', 53, S6--7.
see Hayes,LRP, 351, no. 5 (GPI,63,PI. 27, fig. 9C). 363 no. 66 (GP I, pl. 27, fig. 9a),
ered in Mitchell, Aran, and Liggett, 'Construction', as case 95, but produced no for the second (mosaic) floor.
W See Hayes, LRP, 333-5 nos. (7 (e Rcbinson, Agora, pl. 36, MJ~I). (8
J6S no. 67 (GP I, pl. '7, 6g. 90= pl. 19 no. 3'), J67 no. 71 (GP I, p]. '7, fig. cb), J68
helpful result. I!IS GP 1.5--6; GP n,
7, pl. 2A, B. 206 jobn.Brdal, and Gunner, htallbl~/,l.S.
no. 79 (GP J, pl. 27. fig. 9d). Only four of these pieces were found at Site D. (=Robinson,Agora, pls. 33. 36.71,M350), '9, 2).25· Hayes, LRP. 338 explains that
196 GP I. 5-6. pi. I. I with plan 63. section 2-2 (Site D). The outer wall of the south- 2Ol' T urnovsky, 'Pundbcrichr'. From the mortar bed in sounding 2187 come pieces
lIS See Hayes,LRP.p. xii,4I8n. r. no. 19 comes from a deposit dated to the second quarter of the sixth century.
west portico does not display this lower offset: GP Il, q, fig. 7, pl. jc. 22-4, and from the deep clayey fill below it in sounding 1/87 come 29-33, 36-8,
m I-Iayes,LRP,418n.2. m See I-Iayes,Sarafbane 11, 94-6 with fig. 33 nos. Io-I3 (Deposit 14), fig. 34110.
m jobst, 'Archiiclogic', figs. 4,19-20,22-3,27.30. 41-51.
217 I rediscovered the notebook (in which were inserted twO typed pages of 17.3 (Deposit 17)'
 "~
•
PART II: CHRONOLOGY
REMAINING SITES

which comprises the layers of fill for the nave floor, contained a c. 5))). But how much later than C.5r8 was the Peristyle estab-
the north-east portico had brick piers (bricks )50 x 350 x )5
pentanummiurn of Justin I (p8-27)-'" Thus Form )F had lished? T urnovsky pointed out that no fragments of the Hayes
c. The Peristyle structures: the mosaic pavement mrn., [0 courses to 0.99 m.) constructed along its inner face.
certainly developed by 527, and probably by c.yzo, if we assume Type 9 amphora (Benghazi Late Roman Amphora 2) were dis-
(phase 2) These projected one metre into the portico, and created recesses
that this is when the pottery dump was set down.P? More recent covered in the pottery-bearing stratum immediately below the
in which marble benches had been incorporated.''' The bricks
finds from Beirut suggest that Form )F may have appeared as phase 2 mosaic floor. Claiming that the Type 9 amphora began The mortar bed that 1'epreSents the first floor level was later
used in the walls of the south-west and north-east porticoes
early as c. 500,'31 which thus becomes the terminus post quem for to appear in Constantinople in the middle of the sixth century, covered by various strata that formed the bedding for the
were therefore similar in size to those used in the earlier cistern
the Peristyle. she argued. that its absence strongly suggested that the stratum magnificent mosaic pavement excavated in the north-east,
and are far smaller than the material in Groups, and 2. '
There is further evidence from the pottery dump that deserves should be dated to before c. 550. If so, the phase, floor must have north-west, and south-west porticoes. The layers that com-
In the north-west portico, the mosaic foundation rested upon
attention. Stevenson, although adopting a fifth-century date for been laid before the middle of the sixth century'" In fact, how- prised the foundation for this floor consisted of a pottery-bear-
the vault of a brick conduit running from the north-west to the
the Phocaean Red Slip ware, had observed the existence of ever, the Type 9 amphora was commonly found in the construc- ing bed of about 0.2-<:>.) m. in thickness, and an overlying layer
south-east, which cut through the cement surface of the Paved
material of an even later date amongst the dump: at Site 0 was tion levels at St Polyeuktos (Deposits '4-'7 and '9), and was of rubble packing (starumen), about 0.60 m. thick, containing
Way (Fig. '9 D)'" The conduit was certainly earlier than the
found 'a pointed jar base that was stamped with a monogram in therefore in use in Constantinople at least as early as C.5 20.'" If small stones and architectural fragments, some of which
mosaic, and possibly laid immediately before the mosaic
relief, probably of the sixth cenrury'.'" The notebook of finds its absence from the stratum were indeed a significant chrono- possibly came from the first Perisryle.t" On top of this were
floor. The dimensions of the bricks ()40 x )40 x 40 mm., with 5
for '9)6-)7 indicates that it was found at a depth of about) m. logical indicator, the phase, floor would have to have been set further layers of mortar (0., m. thick); of clay, soil, and charcoal
courses to 0.40 m.)2S3 are consistent with those used in the outer
below datum, and hence well below the level of the first down before c. 5 20. This is unacceptable) however, since, on the (0.0)-<>.05 m. thick); and of hard mortar with very many small
walls of the Peristyle in phase 2, and in the cistern below the
Peristyle floor.'" The jar described by Stevenson is to be basis of brickstamp evidence, the construction of the Peristyle brick fragments (0.0) m. thick) upon which the mosaic pave-
phase, Peristyle.
identified as a Lace Roman unguentarium,2J-4 a type that 'can and the laying of its first floor can be firmly placed after c. 5 I 8, if ment was laid.H3
The mosaic was in use long enough to require substantial,
hardly have come on the market before the very end of the fifth . not after CS)3. Turnovsky's argument from the silence of the The latest dated pottery fragment found in the strata above
careful repairs in opus signinum,'54 and this provides the only
century' and which disappeared in the mid-seventh century.'" pottery is clearly flawed'''Turning to the pottery from beneath the level of the first floor was a piece ofPhocaean Red Slip Ware
clue to the length of time separating phases 2 and ).
A photograph in the excavation archive confirms the identifi- the phase, floor, we must bear in mind that the massive dump of of type )E found in one of the Austrian soundings'" On the
cation, and shows that the unguentarium carried a circular earth in which it was found had not accumulated on the site, bur basis of this and the fragment of the same type found below the
stamp containing a box monogram: 18l."6 The find helps ro elsewhere, and had been transported to the Peristyle site-The level of the first floor, a terminus post quem of 475 was proposed d. The Peristyle structures: the marble pavement
confirm that the terminal date for the pottery dump below the original excavators realized this, having found no clear stratifi- for the laying of the mosaic 1100r.'" In fact, the mosaic floor (phase 3)
hrst floor is no earlier than the very end of the fifth century. Its cation of pottery at Site D, but instead large numbers of must be later than 500, since, as we have aLready demonstrated,
In phase ), in the north-east and south-west porticoes, a pave-
discovery was not, however, mentioned in Marriny's discussion Hellenistic and Early Roman sherds mixed indiscriminately even the first floor can be no earlier than the beginning of the
ment of marble slabs (1.0-1.5 m. broad x 2.0-2.5 Ill. longx
of the excavated strucrures.i" with the Late Roman fragments throughout the dump.!" sixth century (on the basis of the pottery finds from Site DJ and
0.02-0.06 m. thick) was laid over the mosaic in a make-up of
The evidence of the pottery, therefore, serves ro support in Furthermore, this substantial dumping of earth was clearly not must be later than c.pS (on the grounds of brickstamps). We
hard mortar mixed with crushed brick. This make-up was
general terms what we have already deduced from the evidence connected with the construction of the Peristyle. The dumping can, therefore, certainly reject Hellenkemper Salies' claim that
o. )0-0.45 m. deep in the north-east portico, and o. I 2 m. deep in
of the bricks tamps. The cruciform monograms found on the operation must have been undertaken before the Peristyle was the mosaic must have been laid in the last quarter of the fifth
the south-west portico.t" Below this, in the north-east portico,
bricks in the cistern beneath the Peristyle establish a terminus built, since, already at the time of the construction of the cistern century.!"
there was a packing of marble chips.''' The majority of the
oast quem for both phases, and 2 of c.pS (and possibly even that was demolished during the construction of the Peristyle, The raising of the floor level was, of course, accompanied by a
pottery between the mosaic and the marble pavement was
ground level was at most about 0.8 m. below the level of the later raising of the inner and outer walls of the Peristyle. In the inner
'coarse reddish-brown ware including extremely crude jars with
phase I floor. Clearly, therefore, the phase r floor may be walls, the cramped greens tone levelling course was topped by
22'J Hendy, 'Coins', 189 no. 76 (from level 261:1-); Harrison, Saradmne I, 111. a sort of ribbing, like overlapping stralres, produced by some
considerably later than the latest pottery found in the strata marble stylobate blocks measuring 1.50 m. square by 0.50 ill.
Mention of the find is omitted by Hares, SarQrhane 11, 7. who dates these deposits sharp instrument. Another shape is a carefully corrugated juglet
according to Mango and Sevcenko's chronology (524-7). below it. In short, the evidence of the pottery indicates that the high, placed at intervals of 1.45 m.,''' thereby creating a second
covered outside with a slip the colour of the body, and fired
DO Construction of the superstructures probably began c-p9 (see pp. 111-5). Peristyle and its first and second floor are no earlier than the offset. The srylobate blocks were arranged on a slightly different
Clearly the pottery fill below the nave floor cannot have been set down any earlier black inside.?? Unfortunately, Srevenson selected only glazed
beginning of the sixth century, and the evidence of the brick- alignment from the rubble foundation walls below, which has
than 5 t 8 (the earliest date of the coin found in Deposit 14). That the dumping of the Byzantine pottery for discussion, and this unglazed material
pottery is contemporary with work on the superstructures of the church is suggest- stamps pushes the terminus post quem to c. pS, and possibly been taken as a further indication that we are dealing with at least
was not considered in any detail, and none of it was illustrated.
:d by the het that a number of pottery-bearing levels below the nave floor also con- even as late as c. 53); but none of the evidence so far adduced rwo structural phases in the Peristyle." The mosaic pavement
tained marble waste from the work on the sculpture (26r*. 346"', )51\ 456*) (see He did, however, observe that a terminus post quem for the lay-
gives any indication of a terminus ante quem. overlaid the greensrone levelling course.249
Harrison,Sarafhane I,ll I and eh. }). ing of the mosaic had been established by the sixth-century
Personal communication, John W. Hayes. The deposit of c.500 may possibly The outer walls of the Peristyle above the cramped levelling
Zll
stamped unguentarium found at Site 0, and that the date of the
be debris associated with one of two attested earthquakes in that region in 497 and course were of both mortared rubble-work and brickwork. In
5°2.
pottery above the mosaic probably did not accurately represent
the south-west portico, the bricks measured )25-)40 mm.
:m GPI,p. • :ut Turnovsky, "Typologic', 60-1. the date of the laying of the marble floor, since similar un glazed
a» Find no. 481. For site 0, see GP I, pls. 60, 6r, 6) section 1-1. From GP I,pl. 6) D9 Hayes, SaTa~hane n, 66 (in general), 94-7 (for derails of Deposits 14-17 and square x 40-50 mm. thick (10 courses to 1.02 m.)250The wall of
material had been found beneath the mosaic in association with
section 2-2 it is clear that the excavation at Site 0 reached a depth of 3 m. only in the '9)· m On the pottery-bearing Isolierschichr, see Turnovsky, 'Fundberichc', 4). On Phocaean Red Slip ware'58
immediate vicinity of the Paved Way. It must therefore be recognized that the find HO Turnovsky, "Typologie', 61, suggests that the absence of spathcia from the
the architectural pieces in the Bruchsteinpackung, see J obst, 'Archaologie', 3), 42.
may have come from disturbed levels detected GP n, I).
in the second campaign: pottery dump may also be significant. It may be noted, however, that even in the In the marble pavement phase, the marble stylobates of the
2.) GPI, 8;jcbst, 'Archaologic', )9-40 with fig. 18.
U! As suggested by Haycs, 'Ampulla', 147. Wc may add to the examples found at construction deposits of Se Polyeuktos (c. j ac), the spatbeion was rare: Hayes,
W Turnovsky, 'Pundbericbr', 5S no. 34.
Constantinople, three discovered east of Bostanci (Tsakalof, 'Saryros', 115; Feissel, Sarafhanc Il, 67 (Type I)).
2n Turuovsky, 'Fundbericht', 60. 1lI GPI,s-6.
'Inscriptions'. 4 I 5;SEG,}7 (1987) 1040). one found in the second GreatPalace cam- GP I, j; Talbor Rice, 'Mosaic Floor', 5. The selective published data (GP I, pl.
paign (GP II, 11), and onc from the Great Palace excavations of 1997-8 (Pasinli, 19
ZAI

nos. 13-5.40 (GP I, )1, 62 indicates rhar no. lS came from level DR rv, and l.' Hellenkernper Salics, 'Groficn Palest', 284, )08; Hellcnkempcr salies, m GPT, 7, 10, pl. 4.1,plans 6J and 6}, section 6-6; GP IT, 10,p!. 1 B, fig. 5 no.).
'Review'i r ra. m GPI,10.
'Btiyiik Saray', 68 no. 2). nos. 2)-4 from level DR VU» might give the impression that the Hellenistic
m Hayes,.' Ampulla', 14 5. The dating is accepted by Degeesr et aI., 'Ungucntaria', material was isolated between Late Roman levels (as GP I, )1-1), but from
2.7 jobsc, 'Archaologie', )1-) ('Stcreobacblocken'); GP I, 6. Cramps: GP if, 19, 1~ GP Il, 1). At GPI,9itis suggested that phase 2 may have come to an end after
54,61. an earthquake. lSS GP 1,8.
2.52· Stevcnscn's notebook, it is clear that Hellenistic and Early Roman pottery was
z..u jobsr, 'Archaologie'j j a, 41. m GPI, 8. This packing contained lamp no. 19: GPI,pl. 27, fig. 8a.
Zl6 St Andrews University Library, Sir David Russell Papers, Miscellaneous found throughout the sounding, mixed with the Phocaean Red Slip ware. Sec Bardill
H9 jobsr, 'Archaologie'j a r, fig. }o. m GPI,)).
Remainder, box )8, neg. 58) (print in box 40). 1)1 GPI, 16. and Hayes, 'Pottery'.
250 GPI,6. m GPl,)).

PART rr: CHRONOLOGY
north-east and south-west Peristyle colonnades were used as
the foundations for brick walls'" Thus, what had previously
been porticoes were transformed into closed corridors. Again,
the dimensions of the bricks employed in these walls (310-330 x
35-40 mm.) are not typical of Group I or Group 2.'60 The
discovery of moulded marble door-frames, which resembled
those in Justinian's Hagia Sophia, demonstrated that there
had been openings from the corridors into the courtyard."!
The almost total removal of the north-west colonnade and its
mosaic allowed the courtyard and the north-east and south-
west corridors to be extended as far as the north-west outer wall
of the Peristyle. Beyond this wall, a 4 m.-wide corridor was built
over an existing vaulted cellar passage (Fig. 19 E). To provide
access from the 4 m.-wide corridor to the extended courtyard, a
door was incorporated in the middle of the old north-west wall,
and a flight of steps was built down from it. zsz
In order to achieve the extension of the courtyard, it had been
necessary to remove the mosaic and its foundations in the north-
west portico to a depth of about 1.50 m. below the mosaic. After
the mosaic and its foundation had been cleared away, a conduit
with a pitched brick vault was laid in a trench along the inside of
the north-west wall. This trench cut through the phase 2 conduit
mentioned above, what remained of the mosaic foundations,
and the Paved Way (Fig. 19 F). After the drain had been built,
the trench was packed with rubble and white mortar.'" Several
stamped bricks were recovered from the walls of this drain
(620.la).'''Talbot Rice believed that they had been reused, and
the reason for this is clear from his notes, where he recorded that
the stamped bricks were fragmentary whereas the unstamped
bricks were complete." Similar stamps were found in the vaults
built to support the floor of the Apsed Hall, and in the chambers
adjoining the south-west flank of the Apsed Hall (61S.lb,
619.1a, 620.la), which may indicate that the material came from
structures of the mosaic phase. Given that the complete bricks in
the drain were unstamped, it is possible that the practice of
bricks tamping had ceased by the time the conduit was laid. Since
our latest dated bricks tamps belong to the reign of Maurice
(582-602), this would suggest c.600 as a terminus post quem for
the conduit, and hence for the marble pavement phase. Again,
the dimensions of the complete bricks in the drain (320-340 x
40 mm., 5 courses 0.40-0.47 m.)'" are smaller than those in both
Groups I and 2.
After the removal of the mosaic and its foundations in the
north-west portico, ai,d after the laying of the drain along the
15t GPI.9.
uo GP I, 9 (with pl. 2, figs. J, 4) gives dimensions from rwc phase J 100.uo05. The
third set of dimensions given (from the north-east wall) in fact relates to a later phase
(see below).
l.l GPI,9,12,pls.12.I,13.4.
l61 GPT,9.
ID GP 1,10, pis. 4.2.,12.1. GPlI,9-IO, figs. 4 no. 6, ~ no. 6,pl. 2.1J-c.
1601 GPII, 109. Also found in this location was a brick stamped with I2.~7.Ia.
m The notes concerned are in the Barber Institute of Fine Arts, Birmingham
University.
2r.6 GP I, 10.
north-west wall, packed earth was deposited to the same level
as the marble floors in the north-east and south-west
corridors.t" In the packing, at about 1.30 m. below the top of
the srylobate blocks, a coin of Justinian I was found. This dis-
covery, together with the style of the door frames, led Martiny
to ascribe the marble pavement phase to C.550."· But the
door frames may well have been reused, and they and the coin
provide only a terminus post quem for the marble pavement
phase.'" Subsequently, a trench was cut into this packing for
the construction of another drain, parallel to, and 2 m. to the
south of the conduit just described (Fig. 19 G).'70 During the
second campaign, it became clear that sherds that had been
found in this area during the first campaign must have
come from this trench."! Amongst the pottery, now called
Glazed White Ware I, the first excavators had found coins of
Phocas (602-10) and Constantine IV (668-85).2n This trench
was certainly cut later than the creation of the marble-paved
corridors. But, as in the case of the first and second floors of
the Peristyle, the date of the trench may not be accurately
represented by the date of the latest pottery and coins found
in it.'" If, however, the pottery does give a reliable indication of
when the trench was cut, then the marble pavement was set
down no later than C100. It may be noted that the cutting of
the trench need not indicate the end of the marble pavement
phase, since the drain was laid not in the marble-paved north-
west passage, but in the courtyard just to the south-east of that'
passage.'" The absence of stamps on the complete bricks in the
drain along the north-west wall, taken together with the pottery
and coin evidence, might be interpreted as suggesting that the
marble pavement phase began between c.600 and C.700.
The marble pavement continued to be used long enough for
repairs to be needed, and was then damaged in a serious fire. In
many places, the pavement was blackened and cracked, and it
was covered by a layer, up to 0-40 m. thick, of remains of burnt
roof beams, of roof-tiles, and of the walls themselves."> Later, in
the north-east corridor, a new rear wall was built directly in
front of the brick piers (Fig. '9 H). Its foundation trench cut
through debris that had accumulated above the marble pave-
ment, through the pavement itself, and through the mosaic
below. Marble and mosaic fragments were found in its filling.
261 GPU, 8--9, I2. Datum in fig. 4 refers to the level of the mosaic £loor(GPII, I),
and is therefore about 0.40 m. below the datum of GP I.
2" GPI, 16-17 with section 8-8 onpl. ra.fig. 1
2" Compare the comments of Nordhagen, <Great Palace', 57, who is so sceptical
as to wonder wbether the coin may even have come from what remained of the pack-
ing for the mosaic floor. .
21'0 GP 11,8 (I1g. 4 no. 7), 9, pis. 2. a-c.
m GP Il, 9.
m GP I, 16, 34-5 (Site A4); pl, 61 Ea IV 2-3, section 8-8; pl. 12..1. For Glued
White Ware I,see Hayes,Sararhanl! Il, 15-18.
21J Compare the comments of Nordhagcn, 'Great Palace', 57-8.
214 GP Il,9 with fig. 4 no. 7; fig. 5, cross-section B-B.
m GP I, 8. The Paved Street, probably contemporary with the mosaic (phase 2),
outside the north-cast portico had also been affected by a fire 'which may perhaps be
dated very roughly by acoin of Ccnstantinc V (AD 740-75)'. Sce GP 1,2.1.
REMAINING
The bricks of this new wall measured }O0-340 x 40-45 mm. (4
courses 0.3° m. high).'"
The evidence suggests that by the mid-twelfth century the
Peristyle area was falling into ruin, apparently following
another fire: a coin of Manuel I (1143-80) was found fused with
numerous fragments of strip armour amongst the debris of walls
that had collapsed on to the paved street along the north-east
flank of the Perisryle.i" and a dump of mint refuse to the north-
east of the courtyard contained a coin of Alexius III (II95-
1203).'78 Evidence of burning was also found to the north-east of
the Peristyle. This fire was certainly later than the burials of the
Comnene period (1081-' ,85) found below the burnt layer."?
e. The structures south-east of the Peristyle
The Apsed Hall and the complex structures below it were dis-
covered during the second campaign of excavations, and
showed various phases of building, the most important of these
being the first and the fifth. The first phase involved the con-
struction of Piers la and Ib, and Piers Ila-d (Fig. 19 B). Although
Piers la and Ib were clearly erected earlier than the piers they
abutted (Ila and IIb respectively), all six piers were probably
part of the same construction project, since the brick arch that
had once rested on Piers la and Ib supported superstructures
that had also rested on Pier IIa.'80 Piers la and Ib were of com-
posite construction: brickwork articulated by occasional single
greenstone courses. The average brick dimensions were 380 x
380 x 40 mm., with 10 courses to 0.92 m.; and the greenstone
blocks were 0.28--<>.30 m. high.''' Single greens tone bands in
pure brickwork are first seen in the substructures of St
Polyeuktos Cj08-22, although we cannot be certain that the
technique was not introduced in the second half of the fifth
century.'" The brick dimensions would also agree with a date in
the early sixth century.28J These piers must represent the sub-
structures of the lost building to which the Paved Way led,'"
and it is notable that the only other bricks of similar size in the
excavated structures were used to construct the upper tier of
arches in the Paved Way.
Piers Ila-d were built of greens tone blocks between 250 and
400 mm. high, bedded in white mortar.'" Pier IIa showed
evidence of reuse on two occasions. On the first occasion a
pitched brick vault replaced the original greens tone vault, but
presumably covered the same area. The first bricks of this vault
(from Pier IIa towards IId) remained in situ overlying the
m GP 11,4. fig. 3 no. 3. The original excavators wrongly believed that this new
north-ease boundary wall had been established in the marble pavement phase: GP I,
9,PI.2.·1.
V1 GPI,21,99.
.' m GP 1,2.6,2.7'
l1"J See GPI, 24 (burnt layer), 23, 46 (burials). See also Bolognesi, 'Winter', 130-1
(although the charcoal is debris from the mint, not evidence of burning).
uc GP n, )'-3 (Ib, lIb), 36--9(b, Ib, 11,), 49·
lI! GPII,33 (Pier Ib), 36-8 (Pier la).
112 See above pp. 51.-3.
1Il SeeTable 19. 1H GPII.49. m GPII,p.
·.,
•
SITES
springing of the greenstone arch." A brick stamped with
571.1a, said to have been found 'in situ in brickwork repairs to
the stone arch?" and in 'one of the earliest sections of the build-
ing complex',"! presumably came from here.'" Talbor Rice
described this stamp as a 'long single-lined stamp', observed that
its shape was 'closer to that found on Roman bricks than are
any of the others',"? and pronounced that it was 'Probably
fourth century'."? But the stamp is clearly cruciform; and this,
together with the abbreviation IN.6. followed by the S-shaped
abbreviation sign, indicates a sixth- (or possibly late fifth-)
century date.'" The name abbreviation 'IA.a() is probably to be
linked with rectangular stamps from Hagia Sophia and the Baths
of Zeuxippos which bear the complete name 'IA.ap'ou (Table 14,
Section I). If so, the stamp could hardly be earlier than the very
beginning of the sixth century, nor later than about 565. The
average brick size for this repair (360 x 360 x 40 mm.) is typical
of early sixth-century material,'" and it may be noted that the
bricks used in the third and fourth phases of repair were of
similar dimensions (360 x 360 x 40 mm.).'" These piers
originally supported the floor of the building to which the
Paved Way led. It would therefore appear that that building was
still standing atleast until the beginning of the sixth century. The
Apsed Hall, which must be later still, may have been supported
i.npart by these piers.295
The fifth phase is associated with the construction, using great
stone blocks, of the foundations for the external walls of the
Apsed Hall, its antechamber, and the Triple Arch dividing the
two. The construction of Piers Vb, c, d of the Triple Arch (Fig.
19 I) necessitated the removal of the brick arches resting on both
the composite piers and the abutting greenstone piers. Piers IIa
and Ild were then used to carry a half-barrel vault (lower than
the previous brick vault) to buttress the Triple Arch on its
south-east face." The south-west pier of the Triple Arch (Vb)
was built of twelve courses of limestone blocks (to a height of
:w. GPH,34,Pl.l4J).
liT GPH,I06.
m GPII,105.
lU Written on the back of the photograph of this stamp in the Talbor Rice
Archive are the words, <In situ, on right of stone arch entering from S.E., and of
earlier date than great stone wall'. The 'great stonewall' refers to the south-west wall
(cp. GP H, 38) or, more likely, the Triple Arch (cp. GP Il, 34). If 'entering' here
means 'springing', Pier Ha or lld must be meant. Whatever the exact findspor of this
brick, it certainly provides s termisua post quem for the Apsed Hall.
2'10 GPII,105.
l'II GPII,I06.
:m See the discussion of the characteristics of stamps in Group 1. on p. 100.
:u GP Il, 56 (where Ward-Perkins gives measurements for the corresponding
arch between Piers Ilb andc; cp. GPII, )2).
1ti GPU, 39-40.
:w.. Purther evidence for a sixrh-cenrury terminus post quem for the Apscd Hall
may come from the' structure recorded by Marnboury and Wiegand to the north-
east of the Apsed Hall. (See structure Db in Marnboury and Wiegand, Kaiserpaliislc,
33-4. pIs. 85-8). Its structural technique (pure brickwork (bricks 360 x )60)( 50
mm.) with single limestone course's at the springing of the vaults) suggests a sixth-
century date. The building is said to be earlier than the Apsed Hall, since a large
arched doorway and a small window in its south wall were blocked when the foun-
dation of the Apsed Hall was builr.cp. GPII, 26, 18 and Bclogncsi, 'Survey Ill', 135·
2% GP 11,)2,34, fig. 13·
 ",
•
144 PART r r: CHRONOLOGY REMAINING SITES

6.22 m.) topped by r3 courses of brick) measuring on average
340 mm. square x 40 mm. thick {IO courses to 0.99 m.).'97 Simi-
larly, the six surviving courses of brickwork that stood on top of
the stone foundations of the Apsed Hall, and which represented
all that remained of the upper walls of the Hall, consisted of
bricks measuring on average 340 mm square x 40 mm. thick {5
courses to 0.42 m.).'" Ward-Perkins records that the bricks of
the substructures of the Apsed Hall's antechamber were
approximately the same size, measuring 330-340 mm. square by
40-45 mm. thick {5 courses to 0.46-0.47 m.).'"
At the south-east end of the Apsed Hall were found three
courses of limestone blocks that indicated the commencement
of a semicircular apse with a diameter of 10.9 m. {Fig. 19 ]).'00
The blocks were linked by dovetail cramps.'" Just in front of
these stamps is typical of Group 2, bearing two lines of text, a same type (821.,e, k, 1), the bricks probably came from a single la and Ib) are of typical early sixth-century size (380 x 380 x
complete name in the genitive case preceded by a cross, and, in demolished structure.'!' They bear the name Krovctovrivou, 40 mm.). The composite construction of the piers is highly
the case of 618.rb, 619.ra, 787.rd, giving a title and employing which is firmly ascribed to Group 2 (Table 14, Section I), and appropriate to the early sixth centuty, toO, although it must be
the S-sign.'06 In his notes, Talbot Rice recorded that 90 per cent can hardly have come into use before 500. admitted that we cannot be certain that the technique was not in
of the stamps found were 6r8.1b; 6r9.13, and other similar The end-wall of Chamber I was built of limestone blocks, use in the later fifth. A stamped brick used in a repair to Pier Ila
types. It is not entirely clear, however, whether bricks with which had clearly been reused, since in several cases cramp- can be no earlier than the beginning of the sixth century. Thus
stamps .•6I8.Ib and 6r9." are reused or contemporary with the holes were visible in the vertical faces.!" The side walls were of the Apsed Hall that replaced the earlier chamber to which Pier
construction. Both name one '!oo&'vvo1)cxp] )s. A complete brick widely jointed brickwork pointed horizontally with a 30 mm.. IIa belonged must have been built later than c. 500.
bearing this name is in the Hagia Sophia Museum (AM I, wide groove, flat in section. A course of dressed grey limestone The next phase of building on the site saw the construction of
619.rb) and measures just 340 x 337 x 50 mm., which may point punctuated the pure brickwork after every 9 courses or so. The the cistern over which the Peristyle would later be built. Since its
to a post-Justinianic date. The dimensions of the similarly footing was of smaller coursed-stone masonry (probably facing floor level was only 1.5 m~below the level of the later phase 2
stamped bricks from the Apsed Hall, as published and recorded a mortared rubble core), which at one point stood upon a course (mosaic) floor, it is clear that a substantial dumping of earth,
in Talbot Rice's notes are, however, somewhat larger, but still of massive stone blocks.l15Ward-Perkins gives the average brick raising the ground level by at least 5 m., had taken place. Pottery
below average for Group 2.307 Were the abbreviation ClCp()to be

lI
dimensions as 340 x 340 x 40 mm., with 5 courses to °-46-0.47 in the earth dump indicates that this terracing work must have
the opening of the apse were two piers, 3.2 m. apart, placed completed CKp(tpoovoc), rather than CKp{tVtCXp(01)), then a date m.'16 These correspond with those of rhe bricks in the walls and been undertaken after 500. Presumably the operation should be
symmetrically about the axis of the Hall (Fig. 19 K). These had before 545, when the title is first attested,JO· would be unlikely. supporting vaults of the Apsed Hall, in the cistern beneath the linked with the construction of the upper tier (if not both tiers)
clearly been built specifically to support the floor of the Apsed As for 222.rd and 787.rd, bricks from other sites with similar Peristyle, and in the walls of phases 2 and 3 of the Peristyle. of the Paved Way and the chamber to which the Paved Way led
Hall.'" The south-west pier, of pure brick construction, stamps have dimensions within the parameters for Group 2 Bricks found in situ in the walls of this chamber bore the name rather than with the later construction of the cistern.
was better preserved. From it sprang both an arch towards a marerial.'" These are certainly to be explained as larger bricks of Kcovcrcvrivou (821.Ie, k, 1);317and others were inscribed with The cruciform monogram on the bricks from the cistern indi-
destroyed pier within the apse, and a higher vault (of which only the early sixth century that were reused in the construction of 'Itocvvou CKp{ ) {620.ra).J\8 Bricks bearing the former were cates that it was built after 518 (and possibly afcer r.jj j}. Mono-
the corbelled springing survived) towards the north-west. These the Apsed Hall.'" certainly reused, but those stamped with the latter {as in the case grams known from early sixth-century contexts are in the
piers were later reinforced by the addition of piers on their South-west of the Apsed Hall were found four, possibly five, of the similar examples noted above that were found in the genitive case, so the fact that the mo.nogram on the bricks in the
north-west sides, which, together with two more piers further vaulted chambers {Fig. 19 L).'" Conduits leading into the vaults vaulting debris of the Apsed Hall (618.,b, 619.ra)), may have cistern is in the dative case raises the suspicion that the structures
to the north-west, supported a low domical vault. The two showed that they were intended as cisterns, but the absence of been manufactured shortly before the chamber was erected. might be assigned to a different, post-Justinianic period. This
phases of construction are not necessarily separated by a long waterproofing and incrustation caused by standing water Glazed pottery fragments of the mid-twelfth century were possibility is strongly supported by the observation that the
period, for the techniques employed and the dimensions of the suggests that they were never used. Their walls abutted the great discovered in a refuse dump in the substructures of the Hall.J19 bricks in the cistern (340 x 340 x 40-50 mm.) are considerably.
bricks are indistinguishable, except for the fact that, in the stone foundations of the Apsed Hall, which were therefore This supports the evidence found in the Peristyle, which smaller than those used in the upper arcade of the Paved Way
secondary piers, a levelling course of limestone blocks was used already in place when the chambers were built. That need not suggested that the site was falling into ruin around I' 50. and in the piers of the building to which that viaduct led. The
at the springing of the arches.'?' The bricks measure 330-350 x mean, however, that the chambers were planned and built as size is not typical of theJ ustinianic period, and we may conclude
35-50 mm. with 5 courses to 0.47 m., and Ward-Perkins com- part of a separate project. All of them were filled almost to the that the cistern-and hence the later Peristyle and its first floor
mented that this appeared to be 'a very irregular batch'.'?' The top of their barrel vaults with rubble.!" Talbot Rice points out
f Conclusion
{phase r)-islater than the major Justinianic monuments, such
dimensions are similar to those recorded in the Triple Arch, the that, since the numerous bricks tamps in the debris of Chamber The earliest structures on the site are the brick wall discovered at as Hagia Sophia. It appears, therefore, that the terminal date of
superstructure of the Apsed Hall, and the substructures of its I (which was cleared by the excavators) were all variants of the a considerable depth at Site D in r936, and the Paved Way. If the pottery in the earth dump below this first floor does not give
antechamber. They are also much the same as the brick sizes coming from this location (trench D2) in T albor Rice's notes. GP Il, 109 no. 8 clearly anything can be deduced from the size of the bricks from which a true indication of the date at which the first floor was laid.
reported in the cistern beIow the Peristyle, and the Peristyle stands for all the variants of 'Irccvvoo CKp() stamps discovered, including 61 S. Iband it was built, the lower arcade of the Paved Way may belong to The bricks of the phase 2 Peristyle, of the superstructure
619·la.
structures of phases.z (mosaic period) and 3 (marble pavement the late fourth century. If so, the arcade would have stood as a of the Apsed Hall, of the Triple Arch, the antechamber sub-
306 The names or names and titles on these stamps have not been firmly assigned
period). As we observed in the case of the Peristyle, the dimen- raised bridge, since the pottery evidence indicates that until at structures, and of the vaulted chambers built up against the
to the sixth century in Group 2, Section I. .
sions of the bricks are considerably smaller than those of 301 618.lb: .360 x360 x 50. 618.1C: 350 x 330 X40 and 360 x 3Go x 5 5. 619·l;\: 355 x least the beginning of the sixth century the ground level in this Apsed Hall are similar in size to the bricks used in the earlier
Justinianic bricks, and are similar to those of the stamped bricks 355 x 55. 620.la: 360 x 35 5 x 50; 360 x? x60; 370 x355 x 50; 360 x? x 50; 365 x? x 55· area remained at a depth of about 6:7 m. below the later phase 2 cistern, measuring C'340 x 340 x 40 mm. This is again indicative
(All dimensions in rurn.) The only other stamps with the title CKp( ) name one
that have been ascribed to the reign of Maurice and others that (mosaic) floor. However, the excavations appear to have of a post-justinianic date. Bricks of early sixth-century dimen-
Georgios, andcarry a monogram of the Emperor Mauricc.
are possibly as early as the reign of Justin II. loa [ones, LRE, ii. 658. revealed no evidence of any early rooms to which this lower sions, and bearing early sixth-century stamps, that were
In the debris of the fallen vault beneath the Apsed Hall were )(19 The dimensions given in GP Il, 108-9 arc: aaa.rd: 37ox360 x6S mm.; 787.Id: viaduct may have led, and the lower tier of arches may in fact found in the debris below the Apsed Hall, and in situ in the
350 x 340 x.38 mm. Those given for 787.td seem rather smaller than expected, com-
found brickstamps 222.Id, 6I8.rb, 6r9.ra, 787.rd.305 Each of have been contemporary with the upper. The bricks in the upper adjoining vaulted chambers, must have been old material reused
paring similar material from other sites.
297 GPII,4I. )10 Excavations during the first campaign at Site B1 (north-east of the Peristyle) arcade of the Paved Way and in the composite piers that once in those structures. It is conceivable that these bricks were
298 GPII,4I. revealed a building with seven piers that support arches, and a cellar. Martiny dated supported the chamber to which the two-tier viaduct led {Piers salvaged when the earlier chamber below the Apsed Hall was •
m GP Il, 56. On the antechamber, sec GP Il, 26-34_ the structure to the early sixth century on the grounds that the brickstamps
demolished.
lOO GP II, 42-4-, figs. 12, r6. were similar to those known from Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene, and that the con-
}Q\ GPll,43· struction technique was typically Justinianic, the piers being of pure brick with m GPII,<j.S. m GPII,47. JI5 GPII,46. . Jl6 GPlI, 56. The changes in the sizes of the bricks through the various
302 GPII,41-2. occasional courses of ashlar (GP 1,27). However, the [act that the piers beneath the )17 GP Il, I08
no. 4. This catalogue entry stands for several variants of this type of phases of the structures were noted by Ward-Perkins, but no
3<») Set: GP II, pl. 13A, which shows the view roughly towards the west: earlier-pier Apscd Hall, and the vaulted chambers to the south-east of it, were also built in this stamp that were discovered. The entry states that some were found in situ, others in comparisons were made with dimensions at other sites, aD;d~he
(south-west of axis) in centre, pier for domical vault (with limestone levelling fashion, allows the possibility of a later date, perhaps contemporary with the Apsed the filling.
course) on right. See also pis. 13B-D. Hall and Peristyle, the [usrinianic stamped bricks having been reused. The brick ;\8 GPlI, 109 no. 8. This catalogue enu-y srands for the many variants of this type
importance of the diminution was missed."? Ward-Perkins
JI)! GPII,42,56. dimensions spanned the range 310-380 mm. square by 30-50 mm. thick (GP I. 25). of stamp that were discovered. The example chosen for illustration as fig. 21, no. 8 in wrongly concluded that bricks about 340 mm. square were
)05 At GP Il, 42, Talbor Rice omits to refer to brickstamps 6I8.rb, 619.1.3. and and it is possible that some of the smaller material belongs to the late sixth century. fact came from elsewhere (trench T), according to Talboe Rice's notes. In the same
787.1d. Examples of 787.ld were certainly found here (sec GP 11, 108 no. 7, and )11 GPII, fig. 9, 110S.I, TT, IV, V and possibly Ill. notes, Chamber I is referred to as trench C o.
Talbot Rice's notes), and many examples of 618.1b and 619.la are recorded as au GPII.46-8,fig.18.pl. 15. m GP 11, 44, ~ !I-I2. 310 GPIl,55-6.
 PART II: CHRONOLOGY REMAINING SITES

typical of the Justinianic period, and suggested that larger construction of the Apsed Hall is not strong. We have noted that erection of a new north-east Peristyle wall. The Peristyle and containing the Maritime Gate is contemporary with anoth
material, up to 380 mm. square, was older and reused.?' The several large cisterns were constructed to the south-west of the Apsed Hall were clearly not incorporated within the circuit wall section of Sea Wall found to the east of the monumental stairca
larger material is indeed reused, but belongs to the early sixth Apsed Hall. These seemed never to have been used, and were of the Boukoleon Palace, which was erected under Nicephorus in '953. This wall, which was also built of asWarinits lowcrpa:
century, whereas the smaller bricks are typical of Byzantine found crammed full of debris. The Emperor Heraclius, who had Il Phokas in 969')4 How long they remained in use thereafter is and which contained a gateway, was 3.2 m. thick. Its upp
architecture of the seventh to mid-ninth centuries, occurring, a phobia of water) is said to have ordered cisterns at the uncertain, but it seems that they were in ruins by the middle of portion was constructed of bands of brick alternating wil
for example, in the repairs made to Hagia Eirene after the earth- Magnaura, and between the Justinianos and the Lausiakos to be the twelfth century.'" regular courses of neatly squared stones, was crowned by
quake of 740, in the Fildarm cistern, at St Nicholas at Demre, and filled up." On topographical grounds, the cisterns with which chemin de ronde, and possessed arched lancet windows ar
in the Koimesis Church at Iznik {Nicaea).'" Bricks of this vfe are concerned cannot be identified with those mentioned in crenellarions.r"
smaller size were certainly in use during the reign of Maurice our texts.327 evertheless, if, for the sake of argument, we 9. THE HARBOUR OF THE BOUKOLEON Mango has already rightly surmised that this latter section I
and possibly as early as the reign of justin 11.''' If the construc- assume that the Apsed Hall's cisterns were similarly filled under wall is not earlier thap the sixth century, on the grounds of
tion of the Peristyle and Apsed Hall were to be placed in the late Heraclius (6,0-4')' then their construction, and hence the con- The discovery of two types of stamp (230.Ia, I028.1C) in the brickstarnp found in it (580.1a).'43 Stylistically, the stam
sixth century, at the beginning of the so-called Dark Ages, the struction of the Apsed Hall, could be no later than about 638, by piers between the Maritime Gate and the so-called House of certainly belongs to Group 2 and, therefore, to the sixi
reuse of early sixth-century bricks, of cramped blocks in the which time Heraclius' phobia had become serious.?" That Justinian in the Sea Walls (Great Palace, area Fb, Fig. 18) merits century. 'H Since it has not yet been found elsewhere in the cir
vaulted chambers abutting the Apsed Hall, and of old archi- would make the most likely reigns for the construction of the attention.'" Both types carry monogram no. 55, and they it may belong to the post-Justinianic period. Unfortunately, ti
tectural members in the Peristyle would not be surprising.''' Apsed Hall those of Maurice (582-602), Phocas (602-1O), and have consecutive indictions (fifteenth and first). It seems that dimensions of the bricks, which might have shed some light 0
Although it is uncertain whether stamps 618.1b, 619.10, Heraclius (610-41). numerous examples of stamp Ioz8.IC were noted, since the date, are not recorded. The third line of the inscription 0
620.1a, of which large numbers were found in the debris below The relative dates of the Peristyle and Apsed Hall are far from Mamboury comments in his notes, 'Toures les briques avaient la this stamp has not been satisfactorily interpreted, but it is ne
the Apsed Hall and in situ in Chamber I, are contemporary with clear.P But, in all likelihood, the Hall was contemporary with merne estampille', On the basis of the monogram, these bricks impossible that the last two letters indicate a fifteenth indictio,
the construction of the Hall or reused, they would, if they could either phase I or phase 2 in the Peristyle. That would mean that can be dated to the reign ofMaurice (5 82-602). The fifteenth and 580.1. was the only stamp in the wall of which rnultip.
be accurately dated, provide a terminus post quem, and perhaps the mosaic floor (phase 2) could be no earlier than the Apsed first indictions would therefore indicate the years 58112-58213 examples were found. This may indicate that the bricks bcarin
a fairly accurate date, for the construction of the Apsed Hall. If Hall; that is, no earlier than 583/4. We could thus rule out or 59617-597/8. Mamboury's comment that 'all the bricks' bore it were contemporary with the wall's construction, although it.
they refer to a skribon (rather than to a skriniarios), the Apsed Cameron's suggestion that the mosaic should be dated to the· stamp 1028.1C perhaps refers to finds from a specific pier, or also possible that they had been stockpiled or salvaged in larg
Hall would be later than 545, when that title is first attested. A reign of justin II (565-78)'3O Mango's proposal that the Peri- perhaps to the majority of the material in various piers. He also numbers from another building. Four of the other stamps froi
single stamped brick (measuring 350 x? x 45 mm.) was found style and Apsed Hall should be ascribed to Tiberius II (578-82) notes fragmentary fifth-century stamps from some large piers at the wall are certainly reused. They have inscriptions on a singl
loose in Chamber C beneath the antechamber of the Apsed Hall. would be acceptable only if we were to assume that work began area Fb (708.1a, 13 18.1a), and from the monumental staircase at line and may be ascribed to the fifth century on srylisri
In Talbot Rice's opinion, it had fallen from the vault of that under that emperor) but was largely undertaken by Maurice.?' area Fb (16.1a, 391.Ia, 960.1a). grounds. That they were reused is also confirmed by the fact rh.
chamber (Fig. '9 M). Presumably because its inscription could We have no certain indication as to how much time elapsed There are two sets of piers in area Fb to which Mamboury three of them were on half-bricks, already broken when the wa
not at the time be adequately deciphered, the stamp was not between the construction of the Peristyle (phase I) and the lay- may be referring. The northern piers are apparently contem- was built {27.1C, 1228.1a, 1483.1a, 1494.Ia).345
published. It carries a monogram of the emperor Maurice ing of the mosaic floor (phase 2). If, for the sake of argument, we porary with the inner Sea Wall,'" which is built entirely of Mango, believing the two sections of wall to be contempo
(582-602) and a second indiction (23I.lb). Consequently, its take the pottery evidence at face value and assume that the ashlar up to a certain height, and includes the Maritime Gate.'lS rary, suggested a date under Justinian II (685-95. 705-II), who
manufacture can be dated to 58314 or 598/9; and if Talbot Rice marble pavement phase is unlikely to be later than C.700, then The date of the inner wall is uncertain, although it must be later is known to have built, during his first reign, the Chryso
is correct in believing that it came from the vault, it gives a the laying of the mosaic pavement, which was in use long than the fifth century, since it contains many reused capitals of triklinos, a neighbouring fountain for the Blue faction, and als.
terminus post quem, and perhaps an approximate date, for the enough to require careful repairs in opussigninum.v" is unlikely that date.P? and earlier than the reign of Theophilus (829-42), to a new circuit wall for the palace." It should be noted, however
construction of the Apsed Hall. to have occurred much later than 650. Certainly, the date of whom the later outer wall has plausibly been ascribed.t" If the that the meagre archaeological evidence that is currently avail
The fourth-century date suggested for the construction of C.630 suggested for the mosaic by Trilling on art historical stamped bricks came from the northern piers, then the inner able would allow earlier dates for both sections of the inner wal.
the Peristyle and Apsed Hall by Miranda may now be firmly grounds is not unlikely.l" wall would be no earlier than 581, and may have been built in the Indeed, Bolognesi has suggested ascribing the section near th
rejected, together with the fifth-century date of Hellenkemper The marble pavement phase seems to have been ended by fire. reign of Maurice given the large number of such stamps that Maritime Gate to the sixth century, and the section east of th
Salies, and the early sixth-century dating proposed by both Further construction in the Byzantine period is indicated by the Mamhoury reported. If, however, the stamped bricks came monumental staircase to Justinian n.3"7
Talbot Rice and; more recently, jobst."" Both the phase I Peri- from the southern piers, which were Quilt at the same time as, or
m Theophanes CominltatJls 5.92 and Cedrenus ii.141.
style and the Apsed Hall are apparently post-justinianic, and the later than, the outer wall.!" then they must have been reused.
JZ1 For the topography of the area. see Bardill, 'Great Palace'.
construction of the latter was probably, but not certainly, m Trilling, 'Soul'. 60 n. 144. It is not entirely certain whether the section of the inner wall 10. THE GREAT PALACE: AREAS A a, Ab, AC
undertaken in or after 583/4- }1'J Sec GP 11, Talboc Rice presumably believed that the Apsed Hall was later
43.
than the Peristyle, since he was prepared to date all the bricksrarnps below the Hall see: 'Boukoleon'; Bardill, In 1914, the Turkish government began the construction of,
The evidence for establishing a terminus ante quem for the )}4 For this fortification wall, Mango, 'Great Palace'
to the sixth century (aaa.rd, 523.1b, 6r8.It, e, 619.la) 787.ld, 821.le, k, 1; GP Il, 2.26.
m GPII.76. 108--9), yet insisted on dating those below the Peristyle to the fourth or fifth prison near the Palace of justice." Terracing work was under
m GP I1, P' xxii. Mango's objection (,Review I', 70 n. la) should now be
m See the survey of Dark Age brickwork from various sites in Ruggicri, century (20I. rn, 571.1a, 1364.1:1; GP 11, 107-8). contrasted with Mango, 'Boukoleon', 45-6: 'The core of the original palace of taken to the east of the lawcourts, and the foundations 0
Architecture, (53-61 and, on the Pildanu cistern, p. 39. Ruggieri concludes (p. I 6 1) m Camcron, '[ustin lI', 75-6. Constantine and Justinian, including, if ] am not mistaken, the main complex
that 'one may take 31-33 by 3.5-4.5 cm. as the most frequently employed dimension 3lI Mango, 'Review 1', 69-70; Mango, Art, 128. John of Ephesus states thatJustin of Theophilos, remained outside the enclosure [of Nicephorus II Pbocas] and )41 GPlI, 172-7. Miiller-Wiener, Bildlexikim, 6.&S.158, }60.
during our period [581-867]'. The high average dimensions for this period that are II and Sopbia occupied the Great Palace and that Tiberius occupied and remodelled gradually fell into ruin.' lO Mango, 'Spolia', 649.
presented by Mitchc11, Aran, and Liggen (,Construction', 474, table 3. class 4) are the northern part. This might conceivably mean rhat justin and Sophia occupied the lU For the Great Palace, area Fb, see Mamboury and Wiegand, Kaiserpaliiste, pis. J-H See p. 100.
perhaps to be accounted for by the broad chronological parameters chosen for the extension that Justin had created to the south of the original Daphnc Palace (Leo 508,21. m GP TI I75. Mango, 'Spolia', 649 n. 36 questions Corbet~'s statement t~1
class (8th-lOth centuries) and the extensive reuse of earlier material in that period. Grammaticus, Chronographia, I37-8; Mango, Art, 118). The northern part that was »7 Bolognesi, 'Boukoleon', 279. materials were reused, ignoring the important fact that the bricks were alrca }
m See p.jce. remodelled by Tiberius would then be the original Daphne Palace, in which [he ))I On the Maritime Gate, see Miiller-Wiener, Bildexihon, figs. 258, 362. Mango, broken when used.
U. For the cessation of brickseamping, see above pp. 39-41. Peristyle and Apsed Hall were indeed located (sec Bardill, 'Great Palace'). 'Spolia',647-8· )" Mango, 'Bcukoleon'j as.
m Miranda, 'PalaisSacn;';HellenkemperSalies, 'GroRenPalast',284,308;Talbot m GPII,1). 'Boukcleon', 2.80.
ll' Mango, 'Boukolcon', 47 with fig. 7; Bolognesi, 'Boukcleon', 279· l41 Bolognesi, . cl:
Rice, 'Mosaic Floor', 5;Jobst, 'Grollen Palasr'j jobst, Erdal, and Gurtner,lstanblll, m Trilling, 'Soul', 6Q--9. Munddl Mango, 'Seventh Century', 1}1-4 has ).40 Mango, 'Spolia'. 3-41 The Palace of Justice was established in the former Ottoman UniverSlty ):1."
21,25-7,61. expressed doubts about Trilling's date. }.t! Bolognesi, 'Boukclcon', 279. had been built by the Fossad brothers. The edifice burned in 1933·
 PART II: CHRONOLOGY REMAINING SITES

numerous Byzantine structures were discovered. Mamboury appears carry the name abbreviation Kcovtcrcvrivo»), which is
was authorized to follow the progress of the construction work, also firmly assigned to Group 2 (Table '4, Section r ) and can
and he recorded the remains. hardly have been in use before 500.'" Mamboury suggested that
The two complexes of buildings discovered, which are the technique of construction employed in the piers of Ab, FIG. 20. Plan of the Great
referred to as Ab and Ac, were bounded to the north-west by a (from the bottom upwards: 5 brick courses, 3 stone courses, 5 Palace, areas Aa, Ab, Ac.
huge wall (Aa), '0 m. high, 73.5 m. long and, in its best- brick, 7 stone) and the size of the bricks used in the vaults (370
preserved section, I.25 m. thick (Figs. 6 and 20). Its lower part, mm. square) indicated a fifth-century (or earlier) date.?" Since
to a height of 5 m. consisted of fine limestone blocks about 40 the brickstamps indicate that the bricks were manufactured in
cm. high and 0.6 m.long, laid in regular courses. Its upper part, the early sixth century, and since alternating brick and stone is
to the top, consisted of pure brickwork, the bricks being not typical of the sixth century.l" a date for the structures
380-400 mm. square. At the south end of the wall, and perpen- between the eighth and tenth centuries seems likely (that is,
dicular to it, were two parallel walls running towards the north- between the end of the so-called Dark Ages and the intro-
west for a distance of up to ,8 m." Mamboury suggested that duction of recessed brickwork in the early eleventh century).
the original limestone construction was Consraminian."? Two parallel vaulted passages (Ab.) ran along the south side
Whether or not he was correct in that belief, the upper section is of Ab" and the south wall of these passages apparently repre-
probably later, since the average size of me bricks (380-400 mm. sented the boundary of complex Ab. Remains of the super-
square) is much larger than the presumably Constantinian structure above the passages indicated that this had once been a
material from the Hippodrome.'!' At the southern end of the single large room. To the south of the main boundary wall,
wall, in the lower, stone part there was a 4.2 m.-wide opening, buildings had been added on at a later date (Ab,), misaligned
which was not original. It was built with poorly cut blocks and with the main Ab complex by 3'-4°, and on a level "2.5 m.
was cov~red by a relieving arch with two sets of radially lower.'> Excavations further south revealed nothing.
arranged bricks 400 mm. square. Directly above this arch, in the In the second group of structures, group Ac, the ruins labelled
brick part of the wall, was another, smaller doorway with a Ac, consisted of a regularly arranged series of cross-shaped
similar relieving arch. The upper arch, which had been closed at pillars supporting oval brick vaults.P" The vaults themselves had
a later date, was at a level corresponding to that of the ancient not survived, but the walls were constructed thus: small square
Mese, about 3' m. above sea level. The lower arch indicated the stones to a height of I.2 5 m.; sandstone blocks 0.9 m. high, '.4 m.
height of the upper terrace of the Great Palace, about 26 m. wide and 0.8-2 m. deep; brick courses for a further 1.10 m.
above sea level. The 73. 5 m.-long wall and the ruins to the south- (bricks 370-380 mm. square); a sandstone course 0.4 m. high;
east of it were termed complex A by Marnboury. The wall itself again brick courses for I. I 0 m; and once more a sandstone
was called Aa, and the adjacent structures, with a lower level at course 0.4 m. high.'" The area Ac, was 5 m.lower than Acl' at
2I m. and an upper level at 26 m., were divided into two groups 21 m. above sea level, but the construction technique was the
by Mamboury: Ab (which he chose to identify as the sub- same, except that the cross-pillars were often connected by
structures of the Magnaura), and Ac (which he called the Senate walls, leaving no passage in between. This similarity in both the
House). construction and the alignment of the two groups of structures
In the six rooms labelled Ab,,''' many bricks stamped with suggests that Ac, and AC2 were contemporary. The construction
the inscription Ma:yvou "P£C~'\HEPOU were found (909.,b, technique is typical of the early sixth-century, and Mamboury
91O.,a, 918.,a, b, c), together with others incorporating what was almost certainly correct in suggesting a [ustinianic dare.!"
appeared to be a Latin letter 'd' (828.,b, c, 829.,a, 830.,a). There In the published report, it is stated that no stamped bricks were
can be no doubt that all of these stamps were made after C.475, discovered, only fingermarked bricks ('736.,a, '737.,a,
given that they carry multiple lines of text and belong, therefore, '743.,a, '74+,a, 1745·,a), but in Mamboury's notes many
to the style of Group 2. Mamboury describes the use of the 'cl' as
a pre-Justinianic feature, but in fact the stamps on which it m For the use of <t on bricksramps elsewhere, sec 301.1:1 (fihh-cenrury), p6.1, stamped bricks are recorded as coming from this area."? The the construction of structures Ab (eighth-tenth centuries?) and
586.1, 8I2.L (sixth-century), 231.1 (late sixrh-cenrury). For its use in inscriptions of wall to the north-east of Ac, was '-4 m. thick and was not Ac (sixth century). This may well suggest that they were built
J~9 For the location of these remains, see: Mamboury and Wiegand, Kaiserpaldstc, the fifth and sixth centuries, sec Mango and Sevcenko, 'Inscriptions' 6 (no. 6, line 7),
pis. XV-XCI; Schneider, Byzanz, pl. la; Muller-Wiener, Bildlexikon, fig. 263. Further 7 (no. 7, line 5), 18 (no.a r.Iine 7), 2} (no. 30, line 8).
broken by any opening. It may have indicated the extent of the using materials from fifth-century remains in the Great Palace. 36'
walls, apparently identical in technique, were discovered in 1937 where the north J~ Mamboury, 'Fouillcs 1', 238' (for date); Mamboury and Wiegand, structures in this direction,"! but since the area further east It is also striking that amongst the fifth-century stamps with
wing of the Palace of Justice had previously stood. A wall of pure brickwork with Kaiserpoldste, 36 (for structure). Mamboury's sections GH, AB and EP in pl. XCII could not be excavated, this is uncertain. indictions found in both area Ab and area Ac, there is a clear pre-
the springing of three vaults to the north-east was also found: Mamboury, 'Pouilles dearly show the alternation of brick and stone in the walls at the ends of the
H', 306-7; Mango, Brazen House, 42 wich n. 36;Eyice, 'Arslanhane'. chambers of Abr The technique is not clear from the photographs in pls. XClll and
A large amount of fifth-century material was clearly reused in dominance of indiction IB', which wou Id tend to suggest that
J~O Marnboury, 'Fouilles I', 237. It is unlikely that the 73.5 m.-Iong wall and the XCIV. us Sec pp. P-3. J60 Mamboury and Wiegand. Kaiserpalsste, J6. Contrast Mamboury (Guide!, much of the material came from demolished structures of the
perpendicular walls marked the south-eastern corner of the Augusraion, as J~6 See Mamboury and Wiegand, Koiscrpolaste, pl. xcrrr (top) for wall of pure 233) who refers to stamps reading 'Mcgalis Ecclisias' (sic) from this area (966.1b, same date (see Tables 25-26).
Mamboury held, since the Augustaion seems to have extended only as far as the brick construction with three windows and half of a gateway. 968.1C, e, 969.IC, 971.1). Wle may reject his suggestion that they came from a restora-
colonnaded way that formed a direct link between the Chalkc and the Holy Well at m Sec Mamboury and Wiegand,Kaiserpaldste, pl. XCI. tion made to Hagia Sophia, rather, they may indicate that work on this part of the
the south-cast corner of Hagia Sophia: see Mango, Brazen House, 60-72, SO-I, 88-9, m Mamboury and Wiegand, Kaiserpolsste, 37. Great Palace was undertaken at about the same time as the original work on the
and Stichcl, 'Scchs kolossalc Saulcn'. J59 Mamboury, 'Fouilles 1', 238, who describes the construction of the Ac church (532-37), given that such stamps have been found in jusrinianic contexts at
lSI Sec pp. 105--6. complexes 'scmblablc a ccllc dc Src-Sophie Ira a rp lirs de briques, un rangde picrrc Hagia Sophia. )61 Dagron, Naissance, 95-6, suggests that the fifth century may well have bcco
m Sec Mamboury and Wiegand, Kaiserpalaste, pl. XCII. de 50 cm. de h.).' For this technique, see above pp. 52-3. )6! As indicated by Muller- Wicner, BiLdlexikon, fig. 263. the most important period in the development of the Great Palace.
 PART II: CHRONOLOGY REMAINING SITES
150 151

Indictions
I I. KALENDERHANE CAMii
r to have been one of the bathing establishments counted in the
inventory of the Notitia, a text wbich was compiled around
Koc1aV1(tVoU) (674.1q) has been firmly ascribed to the early
sixth-century in Group 2, Section 1 (see Table 14), and bricks
TABLE25. Frequency of indictions on fifth-century stamps 371
425. with this stamp would, therefore, appear to be reused material of
from area Abl-5
The orth Church was later than both the aqueduct (whose the early sixth century. The name ~lOflf]80u (306.1d) occurs
Between 1966 and 1974 a large sample of stamped bricks was
Indiction Catalogue number piers were used to support the northern wall of the nave) and the both in Group 2, Section 2 (see Table 14), and on stamps from
recovered during excavations at Kalenderhane Camii, to the
baths (Room A of which was demolished to make way for it).'" the reign of Maurice (312-16), which serves to remind us that
south-east of Se Polyeuktos and close to Sehzade Camii.J63 A
A~ 490.[3,891.23 The apse of the basilica was of pure brickwork with occasional
fresco of the early twelfth century, which was found in the door bricks stamped with the same name need not have been manu-
B" 722.13, 892.U, 43, S3 greens tone courses, and therefore of typical sixth-century con-
leading south from the bema to the diakonikon.>' and another factured in the same period. It is, therefore, uncertain whether
[I 555.Ja,b,893.Ic,d,e,Z3 srruction.Y' Pottery and coin finds suggest rhat the church was
s: of the Palaiologan period, over the main ·door into the inner the bricks bearing stamp 306.1d were reused material of the
constructed shortly after the middle of the sixth century, under early sixth century or contemporary with the construction of
E' 497.Ia, 595.13, 806.1a, 1149.23 narthex,365 indicate that, from at least the early twelfth century,
[ustin II (565-78) or slightly larer.?' the North Cburch. • .
Z' 86I.Ib the church on the site was dedicated to the Theotokos
The vault of the Byzantine drain below tbe apse of the North Some of the other stamped bricks in the North Church are
,;:IZ' 208.1a, 386.23, b, c, d, 748.13 Kyriotissa.
H' Church yielded several stamped bricks (a r.rb, 972.2a, II33.1b, very likely to have been newly manufactured. Examples of
1027.13 Between the north wall of Kalenderhane Camii and the so-
8' 1150.23
1255.1a, 1379.1a, 1445.1a).375 All show Group 2 (sixth-century) r r jy.ra, b inscribed fl'1pOU "p(EC~U1'POU)S measure 355 x 335
called Aqueduct ofValens were found the remains of the orth
l' r66I.Ja characteristics, and the name Tpoeiuou on 1255.1a is firmly X 41 mm. and }48 x (223) x 42 mm. They are, therefore, much
Church (a basilica), and of a bathing complex that the church
JA' 167.13 ascribed to the sixth century in Group 2, Section I, occurring smaller than the average brick assigned to Group 2, Section 1,379
had partially suppressed. The baths, which were located in
IB' ISO.la, 25 r.rb, 296.13, 414.Ia, amongst the samples from tbe ruins near Cernal Nadir Sokagi, St and are unlikely to belong to the Justinianic period. A number of
Region X, the limits of which are defined in the Notitia Urbis
416.13, IOU. la, I2.03.Ib, Polyeuktos, and tbe Justinianic Hagia Sophia.l" The earliest
Constantinopolitanae, are assumed to have been one of the examples were found in both the apse and the drain beneatb it,
121.2.Ib,1488.13 dated stamp with this name, from St Polyeuktos (1263.Ia),
many private bathing establishments mentioned in that text.366 and it seems possible that they are contemporary with the con-
IT' 43.1. comes from the church's substructures and apparently dates to
I!;..' They are certainly earlier than the North Church, and a date struction of the North Church, shortly after tbe middle of the
5°819; the latest example, from Hagia Sophia, is dated to 534/5 sixth century. The name Ma.yvou occurs in Group 2, Section 2
IE' II63.Ia, 1297.13 around 400 has been proposed on the basis of pottery and
(1253.1a). Stamp '255.1a carries indiction I~', so the likely (in the sample from the ruins on Cemal Nadir Sokagi), and
coins.>" Probably because of their small size and complex plan,
dates for its manufacture are 505/6, polr, 535/6. Since the appears, therefore, to be associated with the early sixth century.
Indictions on sixth-century material are as follows: 145.ra (A'), the baths were built using bricks measuring just 300-320 mm.
pottery and coins suggest that the North Church was built after However, the bricks stamped with that name that come from the
lI09.1d (A'), lI09." (A'), II09.Ib (A'), '368.1' (A'), 1019.1b square x 30 mm. thick (with ten courses of brick and the inter-
the middle of the sixth century, it seems that this brick was apse of the North Church at Kalenderbane (907.5a) may not
(I"), 1019.1C (I"), II62.1a (I"), '96.1a (E'), 82I.lb (E'), 829.1a vening nine mortar courses measuring 74 cm.). However, the
reused, and provides only a terminus post quem for the erection refer to the same individual; rather, they may be contemporary
(E'), 828.1C (E'), 83o.1a « i), 1226.1a (,'/Z'), p. (Z'), pb bricks used in the coping of the contemporary cbannel that runs
of the basilica. A single brick in the vault of the drain bore a with the church's construction shortly after 550. The complete
(Z'), 426.1. (l'), 427.1• (l'), 14o.1a (Bl'). within the wall of Room C of the bath are of more typical Early
stamp of typical Group 1 (fifth-century) style, and was there- side lengths of these bricks vary between 348 and 365 mrn.,
Byzantine size, measuring 370 mm. square x 55 mm. thick.
fore certainly reused (73.1a). which, although greater than the lengths of the bricks stamped
TABLE26. Frequency of indictions on fifth-century st.mps Three bricks stamped iv(8uC"ttwvoc) T)' ~a() 'IaX() (562.20) were
The apse of the North Church yielded a number of stamped fl'1pOU "p(EC~U1'POU)S, are still below average for Group 2
from area Ac found in situ in the coping of this channel.'" The same name
bricks. One fragment found in situ bore the stamp material. Note also that one complete edge of a brick bearing the
occurs on bricks that were found in situ in the north-east and
Indiction . Catalogue number [iJv(8t1c1:twvoc) l' pa() AE() (853.1a). The formula is typical of monogrammatic stamp 1354.Ia measured just 347 mm. Again,
north-west walls of the Cistern of Aspar, and which were prob-
Group I, and there can, therefore, be no doubt that the brick is a this is well below average for bricks in Group I, Section I,
ably, therefore, manufactured in 45617.'69 Consequently, the
A' reused piece of the fifth century. The name abbreviation has which may indicate that this brick, too, belongs in the mid-sixth
B' name 'IaX() is unlikely to have been stamped on bricks more
been noted on a brick that presumably came from the original century.
r' than 30 years before or after that date, and tbe bricks from the
fabric of St John of Stoudios, and which was used to repair the The stamped bricks found in the Berna Church, which was
!;.." bath were probably manufactured in the years 439/40, 454/55,
nave floor.V" The same name may also have appeared on a brick perbaps built after 686-87,380 and in the Main Church, which
E' or 469170."0 Clearly, this bath complex can hardly have been
from St Polyeuktos that presumably relates to Eudokia's church may be securely dated to "97-' 2°4,''' are reused material of the
C;' built as early as C.4OO.It was probably built JUSt a year or two
on the sire." The other stamped bricks from the apse of the fifth and sixth centuries. 'It may be noted that amongst the
Z' after the manufacture of the bricks, and it is, therefore, unlikely
H' North Church are of Group 2 (sixth-century) style, bearing material that appears on stylistic grounds to belong to Group I,
e' multiple lines of text or monograms (306.1d, 674.1q, 907.5a, and hence to the fifth century, tbe consecutive indictions lE' and
)6J The Kalenderhane Camii material also appears in Peschlow, 'Brickstamps',

r Professor U. Peschlow generously allowed me to consult his catalogue of the br~ck- 957.2a, II33.1a, "33.1b, 1354.1a, 1691.1a). The name A' appear fairly frequently. It would seem that the bricks come
lA' 267.13,740.13 stamps from Kalenderhane before its publication. He, and Profess~r C" L. Striker from ruined or demolished structures of various dates. Whether
IB' kindly consented to the incorporation of the information and drawings m my own
.09.13,172.13,251.13,.255.13, these structures included the bath building or the undiscovered
catalogue. Photographs were not taken of the Kalenderhane brickstamps, and
292,13,296.1 b, 296.23, 413. la, inventory numbers were not applied to the bricks, which are, apparently, still stored church believed to have been built nearby by the ex-consul'
m For the date of the Noutia, see Speck, 'Maucrbau', 144-50.
415.13,486.13,486.23,487' la, inside the church. m Striker and Kuban, Kalenderbane J, 37. Cyrus under Leo I (457-74) is a matter for speculation.'"
899.43, IllS.ra, rzoj-ra, )(,4 Striker and Kuban, Kaienderhane 1, 124-5. m See above pp. 52.-3.
raaa.tc )('s Striker and Kuban, Kalenderhane T, l42-3. J74 Striker and Kuban, Kalenderbone I, 44.
Berger, 'Topography', 7, contrary to Striker and Kuban, 'Report Ill-IV', 2.55 m For this drain (no. 38), sec Striker and Kuban,Kalenderhane, I, fol. 33 (a) (also
IT' 1493.13
)(,6

I!;..' n·7· Iols. H (d), '3 (i), '4 (d)). l19 See 'fable 19.
900.33 )('7 Striker and Kuban, Kalenderhane T, 36. l16 See Table 14. no Striker and Kuban, Kalenderhane, I, 56. . 1
lE' 37.23, 774.Ia, 868.13 )(,1 For this channel, see Striker and Kuban, Kalendcrhane I, 34 with fol. J2 (b). m See Table 13, Group T, section 2 and 8p.la dated 449'SO .. .HI Striker and Kuban, Kalenderhane, I, 71, giving II95-1204. IS to be supp e-
}('9 Scepp.86,91,I09ands63.1:t,b. . J1I See Table 14, Group 2, section 4 and 8S S.l:!. (i\o(}or A£(», which is tentatively merited by Magdalino, 'Consrancinopolitana' 217-30.
l7C Stamps with the name-abbreviation 'Ix() at St John of Stoudios may refer to dated 44112 or possibly 42617. m For this proposal, see Mango, 'Review II', 587-9.
Indictions on sixth-century material are as follows: 572.1. (B'),
the same individual, and might be taken as furthcr suppOrt for a date close to the
661.1. (~'), 774.1a (lE'). middle of the fifth century.

CHAPTER
Conclusion
An analysis of the most reliably dated material in the catalogue
has revealed srylistic features rypical of both the fifth and the
sixth century.' These criteria may be used to assign many brick-
,stamps in general terms to one century or the other. Used in
isolation, however, they cannot always be considered a reliable
dating guide, since certain stylistic features common in the sixth
century occasionally occur in the fifth, and since our knowledge
of bricks tamps in the later fifth century is, at least for the
moment, nlcagre.
The name on a brickstamp is a more accurate guide to dating
the brick and the structure from which it came. But the precision
with which the period of a name's appearance can be determined
varies. Several samples of contemporary stamps each coming
from a different site can be arranged in a relative chronological
sequence by examining the correspondences and absence of
correspondences between the names in the samples.' Establish-
ing an absolute date for a sample and the material in it is, how-
ever, more difficult. Although we have a reasonable number of
samples consisting of bricks that were clearly manufactured at
the same time, only a few of these samples-from the pre-
justinianic Great Church, the Palace of Antiochus, St John of
Stoudios, the Cistern of Aspar, St Polyeuktos, the Baths of
Zeuxippos, and Hagia Sophia--can be closely dated by inde-
pendent means. The majoriry of samples can be dated only in
relation to the few better dated ones, and any change in the
dating of the latter will inevitably necessitate adjustments to the
chronological framework. The chronology established in Part II
is, therefore, both fragile and preliminary.
Two issues should be borne in mind by those working on the
chronology of Constantinopolitan brickstamps, First, when
attempting to date new and undated samples in relation to the
existing ones, it should be recognized that if a single name is seen
to be common .to two. samples, the observation may not be
significant in chronological terms. This is because there is
always the possibiliry that a sample is contaminated with a few
stamps that are not contemporary with the majority, and
because the same name-abbreviation may have been used by
different individuals living at different times. The relative dating
of samples therefore requires a consideration both of the
numbers of corresponding names and the sizes of the available
samples. It is also necessary to consider. stylistic criteria to
1 See Part II, Ch. 8. 2 See Tables 13 and 14.
"~
•
CONCLUSION
be possible to identify groups of bricks that are known or requires, whenever possible, the provision of a good, scaled
suspected to have been deposited here. Mamboury recorded, for photograph or drawing of the stamp (unless an identical stamp
12 example, that the stamped bricks from the Balaban Aga Mescidi has already been published), a description of the size and con-
and Tokludede Mescidi were taken for storage in the museum.' dition of the brick (noting whether it is whole or a reused frag-
The numbers mat were assigned to the bricks are preserved in ment), and precise details of the context of the ·find. The last
Mamboury's notes and are published here in the hope that the should indicate whether the brick was found loose or in sit"
material will one day be identified. The cataloguing of the
material in the museum will require careful numbering of the
and, if in situ, in what rype of masonry (a good sample of brick
dimensions and of mortar course depths is highly desirable) and
bricks and attention to be paid to their positions in the store, in which construction phase. Furthermore, the find number or
in order to assess the likelihood that bricks stored in close museum inventory number of each stamped brick should be
proximiry were found at the same site and deposited in the store published, and the brick i self should be clearly labelled'
ensure that a sixth-century individual is not not being equated
at the same time. Given that the origin of most of the material in The conditions under which Ernest Mamboury worked did
with his or her fifth-century namesake: only the occurrence of
the store is likely to remain a mystery, the stamps are unlikely to not generally allow him to record bricks tamps with the detail we
identical variants or of variants displaying similar, distinctive
be highly useful in chronological terms. Inevitably, however, might now desire (or he himself might have desired). But he did
srylistic characteristics would leave absolutely no doubt that the
numerous new stamps and variants will come to light, and com- his very best to sketch all the variants he saw, to record brick and
same individual was meant. Second, it is necessary to be fully
plete or more complete examples of stamps currently known stamp dimensions, and, crucially, the findspots of the bricks.
aware of the assumptions that form the basis of the dates
only from fragments will emerge. These will certainly improve The information preserved in his notes, which would largely
assigned to the stamps in dated samples. I may mention in
our knowledge of the scale and organization of the brickmaking have been lost had it not been for his dedication, has proved
particular the material from the Palace of Antiochus, which con-
industry; and perhaps some stamps will help to solve the invaluable in the attempt to establish both a model for the
stitutes one of our larger samples from the fifth century.
enigmatic abbreviation ~C1(). The material will also prove useful organization of the brickmaking industry and a chronological
Although there is strong evidence for placing manufacture of
for conducting a detailed mineralogical study of bricks of framework for the material. Scholars of the archaeology of
the bricks C429-33 , the dates C.4'4-' 8 cannot yet be wholly dis-
various periods and carrying various names in an attempt to Early Byzantine Constantinople, not least myself, are therefore
counted. Additionally, very fewof the stamps from the Baths of
identify production sites.' much indebted to him for his devotion to recording, as hi
Zeuxippos carry indicrions, and therefore the sample, presumed
Finally, it cannot be overstressed that if the potential of prophetically described them, 'ces modestes monuments
to beJustinianic, may be contaminated with material from other
Constantinopolitan bricks tamps is to be fully realized, both ceramiques, qui joueront sans nul doute un role honorable dans
periods.
newly discovered material and material in museum holdings les futures etudes byzantines'.'
I hope that the publication of this catalogue will encourage
will have to be satisfactorily recorded and published. That
the careful recording and publication of yet more samples of
6 It is to be hoped. for example, that the large sample of stamped bricks from the
contemporary stamps. Even if the structures from which the
excavations in the Great Palace in 1997---98 will be published according to the
new samples come cannot be dated by independent means, it ~ See pp.va.Rr , standards described here. A preliminary catalogue has appeared in Pasinl.i, 'Bi.iyiik
will be possible to date the samples approximately by com- S Note, however, the disappointing results obtained for Ostian bricks: Steinby, Saray'.
'New Cll: XV.I', ace with n. 38. 7 Mamboury, 'Mara', 319-
paring the names with those on the stamps in existing samples.
Thus we will begin to fill the gaps in the chronological frame-
work. It is by closing these gaps that a more rigid chronology of
both stamps and structures will gradually emerge.
The chronological potential of brickstamps now lies, there-
fore, in material recorded at newly discovered sites, and during
thorough surveys of known structures. With regard to the
former, large-scale systematic excavations in Istanbul seem less
and less likely. It has rightly been observed that we can realisti-
caUy expect only fortuitous discoveries when trenches are dug
for pipes, when foundations are excavated for new buildings,
and as the new underground rail system is constructed.' The
problems of accurately recording material turned up in such
circumstances are obvious. As for surveys of known structures,
there is still plenty of scope for study (Constantinople's ubiqui-
tous cisterns immediately come to mind); although the threat of
demolition, inexpert restoration, or conversion is ever present.
In addition, there are museum collections yet to be exploited.
In the Cukurbostan of the Istanbul Archaeological Museum are
stored thousands of stamped bricks. Although the findspots of
many-perhaps almost all-of these arc unrecorded, it may
) Compare me comments of Mango, 'Urban Centre', J 33.
 PART III

The Catalogue

CHAPTER
The sources of the information included
in the catalogue
The bricks tamp details that appear in the catalogue, and on
which the analysis is based, are derived from many sources,
which can be divided into two categories: first, books and
articles; second, various museums and archives. The informa-
tion available in booksand articles may be assessed by referring
to the index of previously published brickstamps, which is to be
found at the end of this volume. The second category of infor-
mation will be discussed here.
MAMBOURY'S NOTES
Ernest Mamboury's notes constitute the largest single source of
material for the catalogue. Most of the records of brickstarnps
are in the possession of Cyril Mango, although some are
amongst the archives of the Deutsches Archaologisches Institut
in Istanbul.' The majority of the brickstarnps recorded by
Mamboury were simply sketched, although squeezes and
rubbings were taken from some. Mamboury also noted the find-
spot of the brick, its dimensions, and the dimensions of the
stamp. Subsequently, he made small ink drawings of the stamps,
so that he could glue several on to a single page for purposes of
comparison and cataloguing. Whenever possible, any illustra-
tion reproduced from Mamboury's notes is a copy of his
original sketch rather than of his later, smaller drawing.
MANGO'S NOTES
Cyril Mango made drawings from a number of squeezes and
rubbings that possibly belonged to Mamboury and are now lost.
The most important drawings are of stamped bricks otherwise
unrecorded or known only from less accurate sketches in
Mamboury's notes. They come from Balaban Aga Mescidi
(squeezes), Tokludede Mescidi (squeezes), Rarnazanoglu's
excavations south of Hagia Eirene (squeezes), Schneider's
1 Brickstamp material deposited at the Deutsches Archaologischcs Instirut in
Istanbul includes some material from the excavations of tbe Palace of Aceiochus and
the Hippodrome, the three churches in Bcyezu, Tokludedc Mescidi, Balaban Aga
Mcscidi, and from the Hegia Eirene collection (possibly aU from Ramazanoglu's
excavations at that church).
·.~
•
13
'939 excavations at Hagia Sophia (rubbings), the cistern 01
Sirasclvilcr Caddesi, and from the Cinili Koskii of the Istanbu
Archaeological Museum. The findspots of the bricks in the las
group are unknown, and they have presumably since beer
moved into the Cukurbosran of the Archaeological Museum
Mango also recorded bricks from the Kariye Camii (rubbings)
and from a collection in Robert College (on which, see below)
The original rubbings of the material from Fenari isa Cami
(which was published in Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari is:
Camii') are also preserved. Mango'S other records are largelj
of stamps of which we possess photographs. They includt
material from the Land Walls (also known from photographs 0
casts in the Deutsches Archaologisches Institut, Abteilunj
Istanbul), all of the Mordtmann collection (recorded in photo
graphs of the DAI (Ist) (from casts) and of the MSBK (from th
bricksj), and some of the material from Schneider's excavation
at the Palace of Antiochus (partially known from photograph
in the DAI (Ist)).
DEUTSCHES ARCHAOLOGISCHES INSTITUT,
ABTEILUNG ISTANBUL, PHOTOGRAPHIC
ARCHIVE (DAI (1ST))
Land Walls
The following unpublished photographs feature stamps 0:
plaster casts of stamps found along the Land Walls of Constan
tinople, In the DAI (Ist) archive, I found only the brickstamp:
appearing on negative 6594 labelled as coming from the Lane
Walls. That all the stamps listed below came from the fortifi
cations is certain, since most of the inscriptions correspond wid .•
those published in Meyer-Plath and Schneider's survey of th.
walls, and since Mamboury sketched the plaster casts in th:
possession of the DAI, and indicated their provenance as th.
Land Walls, referring to .Meyer-Plath and Schneider's work
According to Mamboury's notes, some casts of stamps no'
published by Meyer-Plath and Schneider were also taken frorr
bricks from thefortifications.
 PART II!: CATALOGUE SOURCES

DAlneg. Catalogue nos. DAI neg. MSBKinv. MSBKneg. Catalogue nos.

Palace of Antiochus Cistern on Straseluiler Caddesi
6594 1266.la 6202 6202a 129I.Ia The DAI (Ist) possesses negatives of the material recovered in The DAI (Ist) possesses a single sheet with sketches of three
6595 837·1a 6209 6209a 1293·Ib 1939 by A. M. Schneider from the Palace of Antiochus beside brickstamps from this site (inv. no. 3305A): 460.1a, pT.la,
6596 306.la, II27·1a, 1333.23, 1338.la 579·1a the Hippodrome (later the church of St Euphem.ia). Only one of 1213·1b.
6597 695·Io, 9'7·,a, 1359·1b 6217 6217a 488.la the photographs (neg. Kll 1499) has been published previously.
I 6598 676.6a, 1265.la, 1458.la 6207 6207a 495·1a Many of the stamps are also recorded in the Mamboury archive, Byzantine drains along the M ese
6599 r ro.ra, 5'4.1a, 817.lb, 8q,'q 976.1b where the dimensions of the stamps and bricks are given.
6600 37o.1a, 661.2a, 859.1a 2339 6204 6204a 1256.1a DAI (Ist) neg. Kll3354 shows stamp 1380.la. Notes of W.
6601 Kleiss record 25.2b.
74·la 6213 621}" '444-,a DAlneg. Catalogue nos. DAlneg. Catalogue nos.
6602 302.13, 828.ld, 1045.ra 785·1a »
660} 545.1a, 750.2a, 1260.1a 1486.la, "577.Ia 6197 6197a 6p.la 627·1a KB 1500 730.Id STAATLICHE MUSEEN ZU BERLIN-
KB995
6604 504.1a, 6p.lb, 660.1h 6199 6199a 337·53 ':. KB996 1196.1a Kll 1501 210.13 PREUSSISCHER KULTURBESITZ, MUSEUM
6605 1377.13,1465.13, r 501.13, one uncatalogued uncatalogued p8.lb KB 1502 108.2a FUR SPATANTIKE UND BYZANTINISCHE
Kll997
fragment. 2341 999·Ia KB 998 62pa Kll 1503 384·Ia KUNST, BERLIN (MSBK)
6606 984·1a, 1285·la, 1359·1b 62J2 62J2a 704·1a KB999 990.,. KB 1504 332.1a
6607 549.1a, 646.1a, 666.1g, 848.1a 6201 6201a 500.1a :;.
KB 1010 542.Ia KB 1505 1029·2a This museum houses the collection of stamped bricks assembled
6608 854·1a, 943·1a, II89·1a, '459·la 6215 621j3 2OO.Ie
Kll lOll 1287·1a KB 1506 by Dr A. D. Mordtmann. The catalogue numbers, museum
P7·"
6609 638.la, 744.la, 1484.la, 1487.10 6198 6198a 409." KB rOI2 7 3·la Kll 1507 975·1b inventory numbers, and museum negative numbers are given
6610 575.1a, 802.1a, 890.,., 1496.1a 2343 6222 6222a J018.1a ::. '
268.la KB 1508
KB '490 496.1a above (see the listing for the DAI (Ist)).
KB 5469 278.1a 6224 6224a '566.1a Kll '495 IISpa Kll 1509 625·1a
KB 5470 632•1b 6228 6zIIa 666.le Kll 1496 uncatalogued KBlpo uncatalogued
KB 5476 828.1d 666.12C 'f
uncatalogued MU SEE DES ANTIQUITES NATIONALES,
KB 1497 Kll 15" 7 3·la
KB 5478 504·I3 2344 81pa ' SAINT-GERMAIN-EN-LAYE, PARIS
Kll '498 327·la KB 1558 384."
Kll 5479 64o.1a 6229 6229a 573·1a" Kll 1499 975·lb
Kll 5488 377·1a 62II 6211a 8°3·1a Three bricks were donated to the Saint-Gerrnain-en-Laye
KB 5494 74.1• 2345 684-1a ':. Museum by Sorlin-Dorignyin 1874, and were all given the sa m,
6200 6200a 1396.lb inventory number (2II03) (see 674.1P, 967.2a, 1252.lb). One
Rotunda and Great Hall to the north of the (12 52.1 b) is apparently mentioned by Sorlin- Dorigny in a letter
6205 6205" 337·4d
Mordtmann's collection Hexagon of the Palace of Antiochus to the museum.' Together with sixteen others, it is said to have
6208 6208a '359·,a "
579.10 come from structures demolished in November 1873 outside
The DAI (Ist) possesses photographs showing casts of Dr A. D. The DAI (Ist) possesses photographs of the stamped bricks
6203 6203a the west entrance of Hagia Sophia in Istanbul.' It is likely that al
Mordtmann's collection of 48 stamped bricks. The collection 57·1a recovered from R. Naumann's excavations beside the Mese in
62r8 6218a 546.1a three bricks in the museum came from the remains dcmolishec
itself is deposited in the Museum fur Spatantike und '964. None have been previously published.
6192 6192a rz yr.ra in 1873's The structures were the remains of the south arcade oi
Byzantinische Kunst in Berlin (MSBK, on wh.ich see below),
2347 6195 6195a 800.13 Catalogue nos. the Justin.ian.ic atrium of the church."
and the following list of DAI (Ist) negatives gives the corres- DAlneg. Catalogue nos. DAlneg.
6206 6206a 1296.1a
ponding- MSBK inventory numbers and negative numbers
6210 62Ioa 867." KB6Ij6 KB 6,62 uncatalogued
where known. Note that both DAI neg. 235' and neg. 2336 '344·1b iSTANBUL ARKEOLOJi MUZELERi,
62'9 62I2a 82I.Ij KB6157 KB 6163 667·1g
show 393.la. The fragmentary 48th piece has not been cata- 142.13 ISTANBUL (iAM)
6194 6194a 387·,a Kll6158 1435·1a Kll6I64 '589·1a
logued. The publications of Dethier and of Sorlin-Dorigny
6193 6193a 821.Id KB6159 87·,a KB6165 618.If
that feature stamped bricks collected by Mordtmann make it Many hundreds of stamped bricks fill the shelves that line thr
2349 6226 6226a '328.,a KB 6,60 1684·la KB 6166 1473·1a
possible to state that some of the bricks come from the walls of me vaults of the Cukurbostan of the Istanbu
6216 6216a 1349·1b KB 6161 1404·,a Kll6168 737·Ia
Hebdomon, Blacherna.i, the Land Walls, and the Sea Walls.' Archaeological Museum. The findspots of most of the pieces an
62}1 62}la 820.1d
Those whose findspots have been identified are signalled by an unknown. In his notes, Mamboury states that stamped brick
2}50 6220 6z2oa '408.la
asterisk. from the Balaban Aga Mescidi and Tokludede Mescidi we,'
220.la Hagia Eirene deposited in the museum, and records the numbers that we~1
235' 393·1a assigned to the bricks. These numbers have been preserved 11
866.1a DAI (Ist) neg. R6100 shows a brick stamped with the same die as
6196 6r96a the catalogue, prefixed by lAM. Since the material in the under
DAI neg. MSBKinv. MSBKneg. Catalogue nos. appears on negs. }8.}72 and 38.373. The brick was found during
6212 6212a 445·1a
U. Peschlow's survey of Hagia Eirene and is catalogued here as ) Sorlin-Dorigrry, 'Letter', 130, no.}. I

393·1a 1394.". Prints of other stamps found at the same time are in ~ Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Letter' and Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 80-95 nos . .20-;
58.la" 48-5 I (nos. 48 and 49 arc illustrated in pl. 14, nos. ro-r r}. .'
possession of the DAI (Ist), but are not catalogued here: inv.
5 I am grateful to Hdlcnc Chew for supplying photographs and dimensions of th
2337 381.1a nos. 92.452-5, 41240 (see also the two references given in bricks and stamps.
2 Dethier, 'Makrikcy', Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions'. Peschlow, 'Brickstarnps', B27)· 6 See Part Il, Ch. 6, sect. 6.
160 PART III: CATALOGUE SOURCES 161

ground vaults is unlikely to have been disturbed, it should one Ramazanoglu': excavations south of Hagia Eirene (1946-47): brick in the museum correspond with those given in Mango's notes: 400 x(370) x 50 mm. (see 503·1a). AM 248 may
day be possible to identify these groups of bricks on the basis of AM 48 (1281.IC) is published by Maletskos as coming from the Mamboury's notes (609.1a). AM 93 (94+13), which is very dis- be the same as a brick recorded in Mango's notes (see 864.1a, b):
their stamps and the numbers applied to them. A collection of excavations made to the south of Hagia Eirene.'? AM 55.97, 188, tinctive, corresponds exactly to a brick recorded in Mamboury's in both cases the first three letters of the stamp are poorly
bricks that was once stored in the Cinili Kii~kii (indicated in the 287,288, 289, and 312 all bear a scamp with an inscription that, notes as coming from the excavation of tombs near the impressed, although the recorded brick dimensions differ by 5
catalogue as iAM (<;::K))has probably since been moved into the according to Maletskos, was found in the same excavations (cp. University. Other stamped bricks in the museum are very mm.
Cukurbosran. 509.la with 5'2.la). AM 2, 20, 215 are of a type known to have similar to, or of the same type as, bricks known to have come
Sarachane: AM 349 was labelled 'Sarachane' (144.la).
Some previously published pieces in the museum collection been fQ.und during Ramazanoglu's excavations (cp. 586.la with from Beyazit. In the absence of an inventory, however, we
may be mentioned: lAM 74.3 PT (312.la); lAM 76.1 PT 586.lb). AM 73 carries a stamp known to have been found in cannot be certain of their provenance: cp. 1028. la with 1028.1b; Great Palace, area Ab: AM 65 is clearly identical to a brick
(40pa), an unnumbered example (821.1f), lAM box no. 368 these excavations (226. la). Bricks in the museum that carry cp. 1056.lb with 1056.1.; cp. I372.1a with 1372.lb. fragment found and sketched by Mamboury in area Ab of the
(roof tile) (1729.1). Previously unpublished pieces are: lAM 74.4 stamp 1064.la almost certainly come from Rarnazanoglu's site, Great Palace (1226.la).
PT (rozj.r a); iAM 7P PT (493.la); lAM 78,3 PT (736.la); given that 1064.lb, c occurred there. AM 58 (1736.le) is perhaps
Fenari isa Camii: Most of the stamped bricks published in '.
Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari isa Camii' were found in the Hagia Sophia: AM 21 is possibly identical to a piece recorded in
lAM 87-7 PT (r r ac.r a). to be identified with 1736.ld. The following stamps on bricks in
Hagia Sophia collection. The following table gives the AM Mango's notes, since the dimensions are very close (II34.lb).
the Hagia Sophia Museum are similar or identical to those on
inventory number corresponding to the published reference. Since some material from the Hagia Sophia collection has
pieces in the Hagia Eirene collection, and the museum's bricks
AYASOFYA MUZESi, ISTANBUL (AM)
previously been published by Maletskos, it may be useful to
may, therefore, have come from Ramazanoglu's excavations: cp.
Mango and Hawkins, indicate the inventory numbers of the bricks mentioned in his
203.la, 23, zb with 203.3c; 221.13; 400.13; cp. 461.13 with b; cp.
A collection of stamped bricks is stored in Hagia Sophia at 'Fenari isa Camii' AMinv.nos. Catalogue nos. article.
509.1. with 509.IC; cp. 6p.lb with 6p.13; cp. 666.4m with
ground level in the structures attached to the back of the south- 666.6a; cp. 667.lk with 667.lm, n; cp. 667.IP with 667.IS;
west buttress pier. The material was catalogued by me during 144 74·la Maletskos, 'Plinth os' Catalogue AM inv.
669.ld; cp. 674.1i with 674.lh; cp. 474.lm with 674. ri, n;675.33;
September 1994 and December 1995. and numbers (from 1 to 450 98.,. nos. nos
cp. 678.2C with 678.2b; 73o.ld; cp. 772.lb with 772.IC; 957.33;
477) were applied to the bricks in white ink. No inventory of the 3 148 92.1•
cp.' 1064.13 with 1064.lb, c; cp. II05.lb with II05.1a; cp.
collection was found, so the findspots of most of the bricks are 4 155 541.1a pI. 53.3 (near Cistern of I406.lb
I118.lb with IlI8.IC; 1258.la; cp. 1323.1. with 1323.23; cp.
unknown. F. Dirimtekin had intended to produce a catalogue of 5 156 II09·1C . Mocius)
1342.4bwith 1342.4a; cp. 1342.5C with 1342.5d; cp. 1345.1cwith
6 ,8, 1342.5' 270 (mentioned) 509.la Cp. 55,97, 188,
the material in this collection,' and the existence in the store- 1345.1b; 1358.la; 1362.1.; cp. 1363.ld, e with 1363.IC; 1371.1.;
room of many (now largely broken) plaster casts of the stamps 7 '77 337·4b 287,288,289
cp. 1382.lb with 1382.IC.
may indicate that the project was begun; it was not) however, 8 79 1378.1• }22
completed. Old numbers written in chalk on the bricks in the Kariye Camii: Either AM 158 or AM 364 may be identical with 9 157 1427.1• 270, pl, 54.1 (excavations south
a piece recorded in Mango's notes, which was found at Kariye 10 162 792.la of Hagia Eirene) 1281.IC
Hagia Sophia collection have been recorded in the catalogue in
case they should later prove useful for identifying the findspots. Camii, and which came to the museum from Robert College, Il 189 516.13 271,PI. 54.2 (excavations in
It was nor, however, possible in the time available to match the having been donated by Erciirnent Atabay (see 1332.la). AM 12 191 209·la Beyazit near the 153.lb '53
I I 5 has been identified as coming from the Kariye Camii, on the 19° 25·1a University building)
plaster casts (which carried reference numbers on the reverse) '3
grounds of a rubbing in Mango's notes and of a photograph in 15 163 326.la 272, pI. 54.3 not found in
with the bricks.
the Dumbarton Oaks Photographic Archive (neg. H56.465), 16 160 346.13 the collection
At present, the only clues we have to the findspots come from
where the findspot is recorded (see 135o.la). AM 402 (see 17 18pnd 293* 498.la 273, pI. 54.4 1742.13 II4
an article by Maletskos, which gives the findspot of three bricks
in the store (see below); and Dirimtekin's statements that 928.ra) certainly came from Kariye Camii, since a rubbing 18 19° 25.13
many-but not necessarily all-of the bricks may have come identifying the finds pot exists in Mango's notes. 19 161 "43·la
from Ramazanoglu's excavations to the south of Hagia Eirene in 20 417t 12°7.13 HAGIA EIRENE COLLECTION
Blachemai: AM 5 (1699. la) is almost certainly from Blachernai,
1946-47,' and that bricks from Kariye Camii, Blachernai, 21 '75 1230.13
since the impression of this broken circular die is very distinc- One of Mamboury's notebooks contains details of bricks stored
Beyazit, the Land Walls, and St] ohn of Stoudios had been added tive and is almost certainly that published by Dirimrekin." AM 23 78 72o.1a
in Hagia Eirene." Elsewhere in Mamboury's notes, three of the
to the collection by 1958' 12 (242.ld) and 385 (468.13) are also likely to be from
24 187 723·1a
176 and 213 796.1• bricks are explicitly stated to have come from Ramazanoglu's
That many of the bricks came from Ramazanoglu's excava- 25
Blachernai, since they are similar to pieces mentioned by excavations to the south of Hagia Eirene, and it is likely,
27 154 112.1a
tions is made more likely by the fact that many of the stamps are Dirimrekin,
28 although not absolutely certain, that all of them shared rhe
similar or identical to those on bricks that were once stored in 184 996.la
Excavations at and near the Diakonissa complex in Beyazu: AM same origin. Many of the stamps illustrated by Mamboury an
Hagia Eirene and that are themselves likely to have come from • Both carry the published stamp, but the measurements of the bricks do not
194 is certainly identical to the brick record~d by Mamboury identical or similar to stamps on the bricks in the Hagia Sop hi, •
Ramazanoglu's excavations (see below on the Hagia Eirene seem [Q corrrespond.
during the excavation of three churches in Beyazit in 1943-46 t Has the same stamp as, but it is nor the same bnck as, [hat published.
storeroom (which may themselves have come, in large parr.
Collection). It is possible that, if they can be located,
(1376.la). AM 153 (153.lb), published by Maletskos, is said to from Ramazanoglu's excavations). It is conceivable that all ~J
Dirimtekin's notes will one day shed light on the findspots of
have come from excavations in Beyazit near the University part of the Hagia Eirene collection was transferred to Hagis
some of the bricks. The Palace of Antiocbus: AM 34 is exactly the same as the brick
building. It seems almost certain that AM 6 is to be identified Sophia; but the similarities between the twO groups are perhaps
Bricks from the following findspots were identified from shown in DAI (Isc) neg. KB 1504, and therefore certainly comes
with a brick found by Mamboury in the walls to the north of the more likely to result from the fact that the bricks came from the
publications and using Mamboury's notes: from. A. M. Schneider's excavations at the Palace of Antiochus
Diakonissa complex, since the dimensions of the stamp and same excavation.
(see 331.13). AM 25, which measures 400 x (370) x 49 mm.,
1 Dirimrekin, 'Work 1957-1958', 3. 19 with pl. 12
Malcrskos, 'Plinthos'c azc.pl.
probably comes from the palace, since the dimensions of the 12 It may be noted thatSorlin-Dorigny also mentions a number of stamped brick:
8 Dirirntekin, 'Pouilles', 178. 10 54.1.
9 Dirimtckin, 'Work 1957-1958', 3. 19. n Dirimrekin, 'Blacbernes'j aa, )1 no. 7. brick agree almost exactly with a similar piece recorded in stored in Hagio Eircnc (e.g. 'Inscriptions', 95 no. 65)·
 r62 PART rrr: CATALOGUE
SOURCES
163
Neg.: Brick nos. (=nos. used Catalogue nos. there are photographs of all the brickstamps (except no. 8)
Neg.: Brick nos. (= nos. used Catalogue nos.
FORMERLY IN ROBERT COLLEGE, in GP I, p]. 14)
in GP I, pl. '4) Concerning the later work on the site (1953-55), there are notes
ISTANBUL, AND DONATED TO THE
on the brickstamp finds, photographs of several variants of GP
iSTANBUL ARKEOLO}i MUZELERi 188 '0 1592.1• 237* unknown uncatalogued Il nos. 4 and 8 (8,1., k, I; 6 I 8. 1b, c), and of 8 more unpublished
AND AYASOFYA MUZESi 189 II 1596.,a 238'. unknown uncatalogued stamps (I09.Ia~ 23I.Ih, 6,19.13, 666.15, 820.1£, 8ZI.Ib, 1257.13,
'90 '2 1597·,a unknown uncatalogued 14Io.la). Also ID the archive are the rubbings made of the brick-
Mango's notes contain sketches and rubbings of a number of 239
'9 ~ 14 964·la * unknown uncatalogued stamps from the Myrelaion (Bodrum Carnii) excavations ,many
stamped bricks that were once in Robert College, and which ' 240
192 Ij '591." 241:0:- unknown uncatalogued o f w hi eh were published, although inaccurately and in the form
were donated by Erciiment Atabay to the Istanbul Archaeo- ,6
'93 1355·la 242* unknown uncaralogued of tiny :ketches, in Talbot Rice's short excavation report.'? The
logical Museum and the Hagia Sophia Museum. The following
'94 '7 75·" 243:;- unknown unpublished stamps frs>m the Myrelaion are catalogued as
appear to correspond to the pieces seen by Mango: iAM 74·3 PT I337·lb
'95 '9 575·lb 244* unknown uncatalogued ,18.,a, 353.1., 354·Ia, 660.1., 681.1d, 749.13, 986.Ia, I052.Ia
(312.13) and 74.4 PT (ro73.la); AM 100 (rr rc.rb), AM 102 21 1443·,a
'96 245'· unknown uncatalogued '472.la. A further photograph is of a stamp published b;
(439.1.), AM 103 (357.1.), AM 122 (I 511.1.), AM 129 (3'2.13), 23 785-1e Laurent (949.1.).
'97 246*
AM '92 (343.la), AM 196 (IH3.lb), AM 214 (909.1.), AM 2'7 55 55·la
'98 24 667·ICC 247'· 48 575·lb
(527.13), AM 253 (126.8a), AM 263 (1283-"), AM ,64 25 '495.1•
'99 266" 77 924.1•
(1272.2.), AM 304 (102pb), AM 305 (1564.13), AM 342 DUMBARTON OAKS PHOTOGRAPHIC
200 26 287·la
267" possibly 78 COLLECTION, WASHINGTON
(74I.lb), AM 444 (1018.lb), AM 468 (possibly) (cp. 667.IV, w). 201* 27 '063.13 (but see neg. 348)
AM 158 and AM 364 (IH2.la) do not seem to be exactlythe I399·la
20' 28 5I7·la
306" unknown 9'4·la The following photographs from this collection are noted in the
same as pieces mentioned in Mango's notes. 203 29 8I6.la
3'6" 8, 676·5b catalogue:
204 30 I654·ra JI7". 82 uncatalogued
206 32 667·lb
SARA<;HANE (R. M. HARRISON) ARCHIVE, JI8"· 83 666·4f H56·465 1350.1•
unlocated 33 380.,a H61.,6
INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY, OXFORD 348* possibly 78 25·la
207 34 1337.1• (but see neg. ,67) L62-41 (c. Mango)
1399·lb 129.13
208 35 273·"
The photographs of the brickstamps recovered during R. M. 349 84 I696.la L62.42 (c. Mango) 464-la
20 9 36 380.1• L62-43 (c. Man&,o)
Harrison's excavations at Sarachane (St Polyeuktos) did not 720" 90 uncatalogued 889.1•
210 37 'H4·,a
appear in the final excavation report, but were substituted by 721'. 89 546.lc L67-365-366 (1. Sevcenko) 8'I.If
2II 39 '590." L67.968 (1. Sevcenko)
line drawings. The photographs appear here courtesy of Mrs E.
212 594·lb
4' '594." L67.969 (1. Sevcenko)
Harrison, the official photographer during the excavations. The Russell Papers, Miscellaneous Remainder, box 37' This box
1052.IC
2'3 42 1397·,b L67 .97 I (1. Sevcenko)
negative numbers have been provided in the catalogue in case contains the excavation notebook recording the stamped bricks '405.
214 43 78pd L72.751 (1. Sevcenko) "
these should be of use to future scholars. found during the Great Palace excavations of '935-38. The 8'7·lU
215 44 676·3b
2,6 46 8I6.lb approximate brick dimensions have been inserted in the cata-
217 47 1695." logue, but the very general references to finds pots, which are of R. VAN NICE ARCHIVE, DUMBARTON OAKS
ST ANDREWS UNIVERSITY LIBRARY
2,8 49 r r j.rb little value, have not been included. FIELDWORK ARCHIVE, WASHINGTON
2'9 50 666.IU
Russell Papers, Miscellaneous Remainder, box 38: This box Russell Papers Miscellaneous Remainder box 35: This box A dossier containing rubbings of stamped bricks in Hagia
. contains almostall the negatives of tire published stamps from
220 jI 666.14' contains unnumbered negatives of the material from the excava-
22I Sophia is to be found in box 19 of the Van Nice Archive, part of
tire Great Palace excavations of '935-38 (published in GP I) and 52 676·5b tions in the Great Palace in '953-55. All but one (that of
222:;- the Dumbarton Oaks Fieldwork Archive. The stamps are cata-
of a number of unpublished stamps from the same dig (here 54 189.23 '364.13) are also to be found in the Talbot Rice Archive. logued under the following entry numbers and the drawings are
indicated by an asterisk). Note that negatives of all the stamps
223 56 1595.1•
]. H. Baxter, Miscellaneous Papers MS ;696611: A photograph of published courtesy Dumbarton Oaks: 3.la, 4.", 8.,b, 11.1',
published in GP I are also to be found in the T albot Rice Archive
224 57 676·3e
225'· unknown uncatalogued a stamp recorded in Mamboury's notes as coming from the 128.la, 203.zd, e, 229.13, 254.13, 270.13,548.13,561.13,.605.13,
(except for GP 1, pl. '4 nos. 30, 6,), although negatives of most 618.,., 666.4C, 0, u, w, y, bb, 666.14d, 666.16., 667.rr, x, 674·ld,
226 61 820.Ii Great Palace excavations of 1935-38 was found here (880.1.).
of the unpublished fragments are not there. u, x, 676.6b, 77l.lb, 8I7.ld, j, m, 819.lh, Sz r.rg, 893.3", 967·li,
227* unknown uncatalogued
228* unknown uncatalogued 1, 968.lb, h, 970.13, 979.1., 980.la, 981.1', 1010.Ia, Il58.1.,
Neg.: Brick nos. (= nos. used Catalogue nos. D. TALBOT RICE ARCHIVE, BARBER 1279.la, 1298.la, '342.3e, f, 1350.lb, I396.Id.
229 62 1393·,b
in GP I, pl. 14) INSTITUTE OF FINE ARTS, BIRMINGHAM
230 63 1479·,a
66 666.4bb UNIVERSITY
231"
1498.1• K. WULZINGER'S NOTES
232 69 1482.la
'593.1• This archive contains negatives of most of the brickstamps
233 7' 1344·'c
3 '7,8.la published in the first and second reports on the Great Palace K. Wulzinger mentions his own large collection of impressions,
820.lh '34 73 372.Ib
5 excavations (GPI and GP Il), in addition to a number of unpub- transcriptions and photographs of brickstarnps." Two hand-
235 74 1485-'a
7 1719·ra lished stamps that were discovered. All the published photo-
236 75 1361.Ia
8 821.111
graphs from GP I survive except nos. 30 and 6,; and from GP II
U Talbot Rice, 'Bodrum Camii'. H Wulzingcr, Baudenkmider, 38 n. .2..

PART III:
written brickstamp notebooks amongst the Wulzinger archive
in the Deutsches Archaologisches Institut, Abteilung Berlin
contain only details of material already known from the publi-
cations of Wulzinger himself or of others." A card index in the
Deutsches Archaologisches Institut, Abteilung Istanbul in-
cludes mainly material published by Wulzinger himself (cards
76 (1372.1e), 80 (153.1a), 93 (121pa), 95 (1713.1a), 98 (194.1a),
99 (842.1a), lOO (508.ra), 102 (6p.ld), IQ3 (76pa),
(198.1a), 106 (241.1a), 107 (II97.1.), 108 (1546.1a), 109
(II41.1a), IIO (1067.1a), 1I5 (193.1b)) or by others (cards
I I 8- r 2 5) and the stamps from the A. D. Mordtmann collection
(cards r-43). There are, however, a few unpublished stamps
from the Istanbul Archaeological Museum, the 'House of
Justinian', the ruin of ishak Pasa, and elsewhere. These are not
catalogued here, except for those stamps from the Archaeo-
logical Museum that were published by Sorlin-Dorigny
44 (1361.1g), 48 (666.1Z), 57 (337·rd), 60 (1065.1a), 6, (1625.ra),
62 (1622.1a), 63 (574.1a), 64 (203'3"), 65 (p6.1b), 66 (1281.1b),
69 (IQ23·1C), 70 (1252·1h), 7' (800.1a), 73-4 (8So.1d)).
OTHER COLLECTIONS
A Constantinopolitan stamped brick was purchased in Athens
in 1901 by F. W. Kelsey and is now in the Kelsey Museum of
Archaeology, University of Michigan accession no. 2450
(873.1a).
A number of bricks from Marrnara Ereglisi (Perinthos) are
stored in the barracks there (r346.ra, 1347.1a).
Material from Mesembria that has been deposited in
museums in both Sofia and Burgas, and in the store in
Mesembria, is catalogued by Besevliev, Inschriften, 102-5' For
the catalogue numbers, consult the 'Index to the Published
Brickstamps in the Catalogue'.
Two stamped bricks were acquired by Professor R. Naumann
from an unnamed museum in Istanbul and given in April 1968 to
Basil Saffer, curator of the Museum of Ancient Brick, General
Shale Products Corporation, Johnson City, Tennessee (954.1a,
1367·1a).16
Stamped bricks in private collections are noted under entry
numbers 36.1a, 227.1b (N. Talbot Rice), 815.1a (H. Hallens-
leben).
IS I am grateful to Marcin Maischberger for sending me copies of these two books.
\6 Sec Suffer, Bricks of History. 60-7_
..~
•
CATALOGUE
LOST AND UNLOCATED MATERIAL
CHAPTER 14
According to Leval, bricks were donated to the Musee du
Louvre, Paris, by G'edeon (398.1a, 987.1a);17 but although tbe
museum inventory confirms that in July r 886 Gedeon donated
105
two-bricks, which were given the inventory numbers MNC
II62 andMNC II63, they cannot be located."
The organization of the catalogue
Lampakis states that in 1870 the Greek ambassador in
Constantinople, Mr Rhangabe, sent some stamped Byzantine
bricks from Constantinople to the Inspectorate of Antiquities
The brickstamps are grouped under alphabetical headings (including stamps whose indiction is fragmentary, and stamp.
(otherwise known as the Ministry of Ecclesiastical Affairs or
according to the names (or abbreviated names) that they carry. lacking an indiction, but which certainly once bore one)
Ministry of Education)." One of these bricks, which Lampakis
After the alphabetical sequence are additional headings for 'Without indicrion' (for stamps which certainly did not includ,
illustrates, is said to have fallen from Hagia Sophia in 1870
stamps with monograms, Christograms, crosses, formulae, a dare); and 'Mayor may not have carried indiction'.
(967.1b).20 It seems, however, that the bricks never came into the
(cards uncertain names, stamps on roof-tiles, bricks with fingermarks, (iii) The name-abbreviation. The name-abbreviations an
possession of the Byzantine Museum (founded in 1914), nor
and bricks with tool-made 'impressions, used as category headings, and are arranged in alphabetica
into the collection of the Christian Archaeological Society
To simplify comparison between material in the catalogue order. Name-abbreviations that cannot be completed with:
(founded by Lampakis)."
and new finds, the headings preserve the names in the form reasonable degree of certainty are catalogued after the mail
Lampakis tells us that the founder of the Christian Museum
(spelling and case) in which they appear on the stamps. This alphabetical list, and abbreviations the exact spelling of which i
of the University of Berlin, Ferdinand Pieper, showed him a
means that in all but a few instances they are given in the genitive unclear come last. Stamps employing the same name-abbrcvia
stamped brick similar to that which had fallen from Hagia
case: it seemed unhelpfully pedantic to give the nominative. cion need not refer to the same individual.
Sophia, This brick is listed in the inventory of 1915 under the
Stamps on which the same name is spelled in different ways have (iv) The layout of the text. The aim is to bring together stamp
number 7632, but was apparently lost during the Second World
generally been grouped together under a single name heading with text laid out in a similar manner by considering, fo
War. The entry confirms that the brick bore the inscription
(e.g. "Apiorevero», 'Apicroaverou'; '6eoOOUAOU, 6eoMAou, example, the number of lines of text used (fewest first), and th.
MEfSEKKAS and that it was 300 x350 mm. square (967.1P).22
6eoe6:r),ou, Teoe6Mu'), and cross-references to the main entry position of line-breaks. In some cases layout headings have beei
The stamped brick published by Curtis and Aristarches,
are g'iven from each of the spellings. I have, however, chosen to used to indicate the criteria used to determine the groupings.
which bore an inscription that they erroneously interpreted as
list 'Ko(v)C'W.V'tlyOU,KOYC'tav,tlYOU'separately from 'Kevcrov- (v) Accessory letters.' Category headings used are 'N,
INr[AINOy] BAPE[ffOY] (1463.1a)," was, according to
rivou, Kw(v)ct<lV,lvou'. If a partially preserved name can be accessory', 'Accessory A', 'Accessory B', etc. Stamps that 'Ma.
Belin, transferred to a museum in Stuttgart. Since then, the brick
restored with certainty or with a high probability, then the or may not have carried an accessory' come last.
has been wrongly described as an inscribed stone, and whether
stamp is catalogued under the appropriate name. It should be (vi) Indictions. Stamps are arranged with their indictions ii
this incorrect assumption has contributed to the failure to locate
borne in mind, however, that stamps under the same name head- ascending order (which is not necessarily chronological order
it is uncertain. Despite IUs false interpretation of the inscription
ing need not necessarily refer to the same individual, and that, in since stamps do not carry any indication of which indictio:
and his incorrect description of the object, Blondal may be
some cases, a particular spelling may have been deliberately cycle is meant). Lost and uncertain indictions come last.
correct in suggesting that the piece was lost during the First or
employed to distinguish an individual from his contemporary
Second World War.l< Stamps for which all the characteristics listed under (i)-(vi
namesake. "
In 1968, at the Deutsches Archaologisches Institut, Abteilung are the same are all listed under the same catalogue entr:
Under each name heading, brickstamps are grouped accord-
Istanbul, Basil Saffer, curator of the Museum of Ancient Brick, number, which is given in bold type (e.g. 230). .
ing to the following considerations, which are listed below in
Johnson City, Tennessee, was shown by Professor R. Naumann If an indiction or accessory letter is missing from a stamp, I
order of priority:
two bound volumes containing neat drawings and details of can be restored only if a more complete stamp made by the ver:
same die survives. Since our records do not often allow us tl
perhaps 400 bricksrarnps." It is much to be regretted that Pro- (i) The shape of the stamp. The category headings used are (in
fessor N aumann was unable to inform me of the present where- order of priority): 'Single-line', 'Multiple-line', 'Single-line or confirm that two stamps were created by the same die, in m~s
abouts of these records," and that, since his death (24 April Multiple-line', 'Circular', 'Cruciform', 'Triangular', 'Tabula cases missing indictions and accessories cannot be restored :'ltl
1996), they have not been found amongst his papers." ansata' , 'Uncertain shape'. These category headings have been certainty, and stamps lacking them must therefore be ascribe:
omitted where the typescript representation satisfactorily individual entry numbers.
17 Leval, 'Archaiologika', 618-19. conveys the shape of the stamp. The stamps grouped under each entry number are subdivide,
18 I am grateful to Carherine Merzger for this information.
19 Lampakis, 'Christian Stamps', 5 I I; Lampakis, Mone Dopbniow, 87 n.}I The significance of the shape of a stamp has not yet been according to types and variants.
20 Lampakis, 'Christian Stamps', 515. determined. Stamps of various shapes can on occasion be shown
21 I thank Dr Myrtali Achcimasrou-Porarnianou for this information. to refer to the same individual (see Part II, Ch. 8, sect. zb (r)).
22 Information courtesy of Dr.Arne Effenberger.
However, on other occasions, differences in shape may have TYPES
2l Curtis and Arisrarches, 'Anckdoroi'j je no. PM:;'.
24 Blondal, Varangians, 188. been used to distinguish between individuals with the same
25 Letters to the author dated 19 December 1994 and 18 October 1996. See also
name or between workshops. The different types under an entry number are assigne,
Saffer, Bricks of History. 60-7. consecutive Arabic numerals in bold (e.g. I). These typ
26 Letter to the author dated 22 September '995.
(ii) The presence or absence of an indiction date. The category
27 I am grateful to Fr. Naumann-Sreckncr for her efforts to locate this material. headings used are (in order of priority): 'With indiction' numbers indicate differences in line-breaks, in letter forms, 11
 ----------------~--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~------~--------------------.-------------~
166 PART IIl: CATALOGUE
the orientation of letters, and the use of prominent ligatures,
of horizontal lines dividing lines of text, of borders, and of
abbreviation bars above and below letters. An upper-case diplo-
matic transcription follows each type number) and this pre-
serves in typescript the main stylistic details that distinguish
each type. The diplomatic representation is compiled with
reference to all stamps listed under that type number. Therefore,
unless only one brick is listed under a type number, the diplo-
matic transcription should not be taken to reflect the appearance
of any individual stamp. When distinguishing types we often
depend on the aecuraey of the records of brickstamps recorded
by others. However, published typescript representations of
stamps) for example, may not correctly indicate the precise form
or orientation of letters; and it is therefore sometimes difficult to
determine whether a type that is better attested elsewhere is
meant, or whether a new type is indicated. I have used my judge-
ment, but have generally preferred to inerease the number of
types to ensure that information is not lost. Following each
diplomatic representation there is usually an interpretation of
the inscription in lower-case. Only when little can be done to
interpret the inscription has it been omitted.
The following editorial conventions are used in the diplo-
matics and interpretations:
Kovcrcveivoo Unclear or incomplete letter) the identity,
orientation, or precise formation of which
cannot be determined when it is taken in.
isolation, but for which a restoration can be
suggested.
pa ... Visible but indecipherable characters (the
number of dots indieates the approximate
number of characters).
p[a]p or p]ap Suggested restoration of lost text is contained
within square brackets. If the brackets are not
closed, the restoration may not indicate the
full extent of the missing text. The brackets
may be empty if no plausible restoration ean
be suggested.
[....] Lost letters or symbols (the number of dots
indieates the approximate number).
t-: Unknown number of lost letters or symbols.
pa(P! Letter carved in error.
Kocruvrrlvou) Suggested interpretation within round
brackets.
Ao() The completion of the abbreviation is
uncertain.
,8' Indiction number.
,['oral' Indiction number possibly incomplete.
M Letter has been erased, altered or superseded.
This is usually used in connection with indic-
tion numbers that have potentially been
altered.
S, s S-shaped abbreviation sign or word divider or
space-filler. This cannot always easily be dis-
tinguished from the numerals t;' and 1;'.
C,c C-shaped abbreviation sign.
Abbreviated names have not been completed because there
usually exist several or many possible restorations; and even
when y,.e abbreviation is almost complete, there is generally still
a choice between a masculine and a feminine form. Thus, for
example, 'AKUA( ) might stand for 'AKUA(1vou), 'AKUA(lou),
'AriA(ou), or 'AKUA(IVllS). For the same reason, accents and
(often) breathings, have been omitted from abbreviated names.
The reader wishing to establish the possible completions of
abbreviated names is referred to: Fraser and Matthews, LGPN,
i- ; Preisigke, Namenbuch; Foraboschi, Onomasticon; and
PLRE, i-iii. In the ease of some ambiguous stamps, more than
orie suggested reading has been given. The reading of some
apparently ambiguous stamps beginning with the letters INAI
has been settled on the basis of their stylistic dating, since
the abbreviation IN is more usual on stamps of fifth-century
style, and the abbreviation INA more usual on stamps of sixth-
century style (see Ch. 8, sect. z a (3)). In general, largely beeause
of limitations of space, I have not explicitly pointed out where
my own reading differs from those given in earlier publications.
Readers wishing to compare my reading with those of earlier
scholars need only consult the bibliographie references given
under each catalogue emry.
VARIANTS
Stamps grouped under the same type number may vary in size,
in the relative positioning of letters, and--although having.
letters of the same orientation and form-in the precise size and
shape of letters. These differences distinguish variant stamps,
which are designated using lowercase letters (a), (b), (c), etc.
Although variants are catalogued under a single type number,
and therefore share a compiled diplomatic representation and
interpretation, they are illustrated separately so that their indi-
vidual characteristics are recorded as fully as possible. Iliustra-
tions compiled from several variants have been used only where
absolutely necessary, since they do not, of course, reflect the
true form of any single die. The impreeise nature of many brick-
stamp sketches means that it is often impossible to tell whether
stamps grouped under the same type number are identical or
variants. Each potential variant has been listed separately, and it
must be borne in mind that, in many cases, those of similar
dimensions may in fa~t be identical. The problem of dis-
tinguishing variants is not only encountered when dealing with
drawings and photographs of stamps: it may also arise when
studying the stamps at first hand, partieularly if the impressions
are shallow, or if the stamps are very fragmentary. Thus several
variants are sometimes listed under a single variant heading with
a statement to that effeet. Where there are large numbers of
ORGANIZATION
variants under a type number, the arrangement is usually by
size, with the smallest first, and those of unknown size last.
Otherwise, the arrangement is arbitrary.
Under each variant heading, the following information may
be given:
(i) The dimensions of the impression in millimetres. Length is
given before width. The dimensions can vary depending on how
hard the die was pressed into the Clay; hence recorded maxima
and minima are sometimes given. Also, an indication is given if a
stamp is not of consistent length, width, or diameter. In the case
of cruciform stamps, a breakdown of the length and height
measurements is sometimes given, thereby providing details of
the length and width of each arm of the cross. Illustrations of
most variants are given in the Illustrations volume. Whenever
possible, line-drawings are reprodueed at a scale of I: 3, and
photographs at a scale of I; 2. In many cases, however, a line
drawing is a rough sketch that cannot be accurately scaled.
Consequently, a stamp's dimensions should always be taken
from the catalogue.
(ii) A suggested date for the stamp. The reader must refer to
the text in order to fully understand the basis and the reliability
of any suggested date. For this reason, references to the text
accompany mo-.?tof the dates that are given. A date, of course,
indicates when the die is believed to have been carved, and when
the brick was manufactured. It does not necessarily indicate the
time at which the brick was laid.
Where a date is not provided for a stamp, it may be possible to
propose one, either (a) by comparison with similar, dated
stamps bearing the same name, or (b) on the basis of general
stylistic criteria:
(a) In general, variants of the same type are likely to be of
broadly similar date. In some cases, however, it can be demon-
strated that one variant was in use up to a decade before
another.' Stamps that not only bear the same name but also come
from the same site, or bear the same tide, or are of the same
shape, or share distinctive stylistic features are more likely than
not to refer to the same individual, and therefore to date within
the lifetime of that individual. Stamps that have only the
same name in common should not, however, be assumed to be
contemporary: in some cases the stamps gathered together
under a main name-heading refer to different individuals living
at different times (e.g., cp. 80.Ia with Sr.ra, za; cp. r jc.r a with
IZI.IC, 122.Ib, and many others; cp. 20I.Ia with 203.IC; cp.
907.5a with 908.la, z a, j a),
(b) The stylistic criteria established by examining the material
in Group J and Group 2 can also be used to assess the date of a
stamp for which no date is given in the catalogue. In short, all
stamps that are not rectangular with a single line of text are
typical of the style of Group 2. They are most unlikely to be
dated before 475, and the vast majority belong to the sixth
I For examples of variants dated about a decade apart, see Part Il, Ch. 8, sect.
with na.
.
,,~
century. Determining whether a single-line inscription is
stylistically closer to the material in Group 1 (before 475) 01
Group 2 may not be straightforward, and often a firm con-
clusion cannot be reached. The formulaic stamps giving merely
IN, a numeral, BA) and a short name-abbreviation of two or
three letters are certainly of Group r style; in other cases.
however, the reader should refer to the stylistic difference,
established above in Ch. 8, sects. 2-3, and to the tables chat
accompany the discussion.
For example, under the heading Aovyivou are single-line
(869-71), multiple-line (8'72), and eircular stamps (873). Nom
eome from dated contexts. As the catalogue indicates, the
circular stamp, 873, is of a style found in early sixth-century
contexts. The multiple-line stamp, 872, like all such stamps, is oJ
Group 2 style, and may be plaeedin general terms after 475, and
most probably in the sixth century. We cannot be certain, how-
ever, that it refers to the same Longinus as is named on the
circular stamp. As for the single-line stamps, 869-71, they an
stylistically similar to each other, and, therefore, in all likelihood
refer to a single individual. They clearly do not fall into the
formulaic Group I category; the complete name in the genitive
case and the initial cross point rather to the style of Group 2, and
hence to a date after 475 and probably in the sixth century. BUl
again, whether the name refers to the same individual as is
named on the multiple-line or circular stamps is not certain.
(iii) The site and the location of the find. If the findspot is nOI
known, this is indicated explieitly. Details of many sites will be
found in the main text. For others, referenee should be made tc
the works in which the brickstamps were published, and to the
standard topographical literature: Muller- Wiener, Bildlexikon.
Kleiss, Plan; Schneider, Byzanz, Where, however, informatior.
is scarce, difficult to locate, or unpublished, details have beer.
included in the 'Index to the Findspcts in the Catalogue'.
(iv) In round brackets, the total number of bricks found at
that location. This is given only if known, and if the number 01
bricks for which specific details are recorded (see (v)) doe,
not itself indicate the total number found. In the case 01
Mamboury's records, usually no explicit written statement was
made regarding the total number of bricks found. In such cases
it is likely that only one brick was found unless details of man
are recorded (see (v)). Mamboury sometimes records simply
'numerous' or 'many', and these indications have beer
preserved in the catalogue.
(v) The bold Arabic reference numbers of any bricks found al •
that locatiori for which some specific details (e.g. dimensions:
are recorded (see (vi)).
(vi) Details of individual bricks, preceded by their bole
Arabic reference numbers. These details may include dimen-
sions in millimetres and inventory numbers. Brick dimension:
are generally given as 'length x width x thickness'. Incomplete
dimensions are placed in round brackets, and unknow~ dl.men.
1 sions are indicated with a question mark. For the material ID thr
 ..~
•
168 PART III: CATALOGUE

Hagia Sophia Collection (AM), the maximum length and width
were measured parallel and perpendicular to any surviving edge.
The dimensions of vaulting bricks with a tapering width are
given as 'length x maximum width/minimum width x thick-
ness',
(vii) Notes. Under this heading, details are often given of
, brick dimensions that can be ascribed only to a group of bricks,
rather than to a specific piece.
(viii) The source or sources of the information given in (i), and
(iii)-(vii). These are also the sources of any illustration or photo-
graph given in the Illustrations volume.
CHAPTER 15
The information indicated in (iiiHviii) above is repeated if
exactly the same variant has been found at more than one
location.
The Catalogue
Dimensions of bricks and stamps are given in millimetres

ABEPKIOY
I. +AB€PKI
WITH INDICTION 15INt..SZ+
+ 'A~epKiou iVO(IKtIWVOC)S1;' +
I. +AB€PK (a) Stamp: 128 x 57.
H5INt..r Great Palace. Area Ab: I:
I. )65 x)65 x·55·
+ 'APEpt.:(O'l) iVS(lK'tlCOVOC) ,,(
[I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp: 110 x 75. (b) Stamp: 128 x 57.
Sophia. Loose in approach to, or room of, the south-east Great Palace. Area Ab: 1.
buttress, I·36oX36oX50.
[I] Antoniades, Hagia Sophia I, 84,fig. 12. [2] Soteriou, Hagia [I] Mamboury's notes.
Sophia,64· (c) Stamp: 128 x (50).
Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: r.
I. ()20) x (247) X48.
t. +AB€[PK]
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', Br.
H5INt..[ .. l
(cl) Stamp: (90) x60.
+ 'A~E[pKliou iv8[(IK"&VOC) ··1 Sea Walls. Near tower 8: 1.

(a) Stamp: (80) X62. 1.350X34ox5°·

Unknown: r. [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Demangel and Mamboury,

I. no. 92.
)50 x? x 55; iAM (<;:K) Man.ganes, 15 with n. 2, 16, fig. 17 no. 2.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes.

I. [+ ]A[B]€PK[I]
15[IlNt..2Z I. +AB€[PKI]
l+l 'A[PlCpK[i]ou [t]vo(U<"tlwvoc)s 1;' 15IN( ... ]
(a) Stamp: I12 x6). + 'A~E[pKi]ou iV[O(lKtlWVOC)s .. 1
Hagia Sophia. Exonarchex, repairs to paving beside second (a) Stamp:? x 66.
door from north leading to narthcx: I. Rhegium (Kii,iik Cekmece). Acropolis to the north-west of the
I·340X340X? bath.
[I] Van Nice archive (rubbing). [I] Mamboury's notes.

I. +AB€PKI
15IN1,.2Z+
S' ~
+ 'A~~pKi?,?iVO(llC'CtroVOC)s
I. +ABEPKI15
(a) Stamp: 128 x66. INt..IKSt..
Hagia Sophia. Exonarthex, repairs to paving beside second
+ 'ApepKlou lVOlK(noovoc)s 0'
door from north leading to narthex: 1.
1. 350 x345 x? (a) Great Palace. Area Ba.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Van Nice archive (rubbing). [r] Mamboury's notes.
 CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE
'71
(b) Stamp: 8p rz,
ABAHI1IOY (b) Possibly a different type if the A at the end of line 2 is correctly
· +ABePKIl5 Walls of Nessebdr. Pavement no. 5 of tower no. 2: J.
recorded .. '
IN.6.IKSH 1.350 x 345 x?, surface of brick has yellowish tint. 16 Sea Wall of Boukoleon.
[I] Ognenova-Marinova, 'Briques', III no. 9, 112, fig. 100.
+ 'ApepKiou lV01K(nmVOC}s 11' 1. ]fBAABAHmO[ [I] Mamboury and Wiegand.Ka;se'/..a~asce, 20 (bottom).
(c) Stamp: about 87 x 70.
(a) Stamp: 1)5 x 58. [iv(B,mwvoc)]y' ~a() 'A~A.~.io["] [2] Schneider, 'Ziegelsrempel', 269:'r.{rJ.'98. [3] Mamboury's
Walls of Nesscbfir. Pavement no. 5 of tower no. 2: I.
notes.
Date: 499/500 or 5 14/15 or 529/30. See Part H, Ch. 9, sect. ad. I. 3PX345 x? (a) Stamp: ? x 27. (c) . Hebdomon (Bakukoy).
Tokludede Mescidi: 1-3. ~ [r] Ognenova-Marinova, 'Briques', 11 I no. 10, J 12, fig. ICI. Sea Walls. Near the monumental staircase, area Fb: I.
l.iAMt9· a.iAM47· ).iAM9a.
[I] Derhier, 'Makrikdy', 162 no. f1.~,pl. IA' no. 1o;".
(d) Stamp: 90 X7a. l. ? x? X35.
Notes: 1-3. One brick measures? x? x 50. Date: after S32. See Part 1I, Ch. 9, sect. 2C. er] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 265 no. 24. [2] Mamboury's Baths of Zeuxippos: (several) I.
notes (squeeze). [3J Mango's notes (from squeeze), I. ? x? x40.
AfAITHTOY
(b) Stamp"). x68. [I] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 266 no. 41. [2] Mamboury and
Hagia Sophia. Exonarthex, repairs to paving beside second Wiegand,KaiserpaIaste, 38 (bottom row, right).
door from north leading to narthex, opposite south jamb of
Af() WITH INDICTION
bJ Mamboury's notes.
door: 1. H
17
1. 350 x350 x? t, IN.6.IAfATIHT15
1. INfIBAAf
[r] Van Nice archive (rubbing).
iv8(lIcnrovoc) ('Arc:t"'?l~9~
i"(o\l('nrovoc) y,' P~( ) 'Ay()
The reading of the name is that given by Hill. The photograph
(a) Stamp: r82 x 30.
· +ABEPKIl5 shows only the first five letters of the inscription clearly.
Kalenderhane Camii, G4/r: I.
IN.6.IKSlf (a) Stamp: 12} X2S.
I.)63X363xP·
+ 'APep1CtOU lVOUC('tlOOVOC)S r( ABI( ), ABIP( ) [r] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', AI. Date: p6h7. See PartIl, Ch.9, sect. za.
St Polyeuktos. Levels IF I.
(a) Great Palace. Area Ba. 18
ABI() r. No. 679, 580x3oox40.
[r] Mamboury's nores. 1. INVIBAAf
[r] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 207, A2. [2] Sarachane archive negs.
'3 iv(oLKnrovoc) [rH B,' ~a() 'Ay() rO·3·I4a,lsa.
o t. IIIAS2L1J/1I
· +A[BEPKIl5] Gamma altered to delta by the addition of a diagonal stroke.
ivo("nrovoc)s~' 'A~\()
IN.6.IK[ .. ] WITHOUT INDICTION
(3.) Stamp: 122 X22.
(a) Stamp: t98 x p.
+ 'A[PEPKtOU] ivolK[(n&voc)s. Date: 4151r6 or 4)0/r. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. rb. 22
Date: 423/4 or 43819. See Part 1I, Ch. 9. sect. le. Palace of Antiochus: I.
t, 15THTIA1A+
(a) Sarachane: I. Cistern on Siraselviler Caddesi.
1·390X385x6s,
1. No. 1329 (duplicated number). [r] Mamboury, 'Nouvelle lecture', 122. [2] Mamboury's notes. + 'Ayu1t11"tot)
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes.
[I] Sarachane archive neg. 9.10.21. [2] Mango's notes.
(a) Stamp: t 50 x 34.
19
Date: ~07-22. See Part 1I, Ch. 9, sect. za.
I
t, ]BAAf
St Polyeuktos. Collapsed staircase vault: 1-.28.
+ABePKIl5 ABlP() ] pa() 'Ay() t, No. 960. a. No. 96t, ). No, 962, 4. No. 96). 5. No, 968.
[.:.: .. :.] .
'4 (a) Tokludede Mescidi: t, 6. No. 969, 7, No. 972. 8. No. 97), 9. No. 974. to. NO,975,
+ 'A~Eedo" [ ] t. QIlIA.6.Y11 H. No, 976. 12. No. 977, 1), No. 978. 14. No. 981. 15. No.
1. iAM 79, ? x ? x 40.

iv(o\1cnrovoc) B' 'A~\p( ) [r] Marnboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. 98a. 16. NO,98). 17. No. 984. 18, No. 986. 19. No. 987,
(a) Stamp: 132 x?
20. No. 988. 21. No. 989. 22. No. 994. 2}. NO.99S . .24. No.
Hagia Sophia. Narthex, repairs to paving beside threshold of (a) Stamp: t85 xa8-)0. 996. 25· No. 997 . .26. No. 1000. 27. No. r002. 28.No. 1081.
central door leading to exonarthex: 1. Date: 420h or 43S16. See Part JI, Ch. 9, sect. le. Notes: 1-28. One brick measures 380 x 380 x 30.
1.360X360X? Cistern on Siraselviler Caddesi: (two) I. [r] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 207. AI. [2] Sarachane archive neg.
[rJ Van Nice archive (rubbing). s
I.36 x?x4°. AfAEJONIKOY 9·tt.a6(a5)·
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes.
ao
VITHOUT INDICTION t, +THeN
AB[ eACAfA AfO()
2
8ONIKOV
+ABe 15
+ 'tilc vecc (iv8ucnrovoc?) 'Aya8ovlKoU 23
PKW 1. IN8AB[
1. 01AA1I1Y1
+ 'A~£pKlou iv(o\1cr\rovoc) 9' 'A~[. (3.) Stamp: r6I x90.
Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. za. (i)v(BLKtrovOC)y' pa() 'Ayo()
(a) Stamp: 86 x67. (a) Stamp: ? X}2.
St Polyeuktos. Level 967: I. (a) Stamp: 173 X25.
Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: I: Date: 42S16 or 440h. See Part 1I, Ch. 9, sect. le. I.No.1297· Unknown: .1-2.
1. )88 x(a75) x p. Cisterns in Giilbane, near Bfib-i Hiimdyun. [r) Hill, 'Brickstamps', 210, B I. [2] Sarachaue archive neg. t, )65 x(.t7) x )8-4); AM )81. a. )70 x )65 X40; AM )24.
[r] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', B8. [I] Mamboury's notes.
9.11.23. [r] Bardill negs. 95.5.t8-t9 (a), 20-2 (r ).
 -_._-------.------------------------------------,----------.

[72 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE I73

(a) Stamp: I76-I78 X 24-28. AfOPACTOY
'4 AKAKIOY
L O'IAAff3J.11 Date: 430/1 or 445/6 or 460/1. See Part I1, Ch. 9, sect. le.
Balaban Aga Mescidi: 1-5. 3'
iv(Sucnrovoc)£~ex() 'Ayo() 35
J.iAM50. 2.iAM59· 3·iAMI08. 4· iAMIJ4. 5·iM.>II72. 8Y 1. I SAKAKI
(a) Stamp: 182. x z z, Notes: 1-5. Three bricks measure 375 x 340 x45, 380 x 370 x45, AfXOP
Date: 451/2. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. IC. 365 x 365 x45. ACATIS iv(lSl1C'uoovoC) <;I/~' 'AKald(ou)
St jobn of 5toudios: 1-2. [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. [3] Mango and INPIB (3) Stamp: 177 X2S.
I.364X363X47· 2.?X?X44· J Hawkins, 'Fenari Isa Camii', 183 no. 13 (mentioned). IC Date: 422/3 or 423/4 or 437/8 or 43819. See Part n, Ch. 9, sect.
[I] Peschlow, Studioskircbe, (in preparation). (b) Stamp: I80 x26.
8(eo)u XaPlC 'A,,(opaCtou iv(8uc'no>voc) lP' re.
Date: 4301r or 445/6 or 460/I. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. re. Cistern on Srraselviler Caddesi: I.
25 TokludedeMescidi: 1--6. (a) Stamp: 110 diameter.
1. IYlAIBAArO I.370X355X4O-45·
dAM 18. 2.iAMJ4. 3.iAM36. 4-iAM39' 5·iAMI09· Date: early 6th century. See Part Il, Ch. 10, no. 7.
[r] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes.
iv(Sucnrovoc) ut" pex() 'Ayo() 6.iAM "7. Unknown: I.
Notes: 1-6. One brick measures 370 x 370 x45· I.Fragment, ? x? x35, iAM 22.
(a) Stamp"74 Xl8.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. [3] Mango and [I] Mamboury's notes.
Fenari isa Camii: (seven) I.
(b) Stamp: 110 diameter.
Hawkins, <Fenariisa Camii', 183 no. 13 (mentioned).
L (270) x (240) x44, AM '90.
(c) Stamp: 172 x )0. Date: 503/4 or 518/19 or 533'4' See Part n, Ch. 9, sect. ad, Ch.
[1] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari
Section of first (inner) Sea Wall beneath the <House of Justinian' ,lono·7·
isa Camii', fig. 39 no. I), fig. 40 no. 18 (both in fact from the \ Remains destroyed in 1924 nearCemal Nadir Sokagr I. AKI.6.( )
excavated in 1953.
same die). [3] Bardill negs. 94.lt.22a, 2» (1). [4] Dumbarton r , ?x?x40'
[I] GP II, I75> fig. 36 no. 5·
Oaks Photographic Collection neg. H61 .26. [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari isa
28 36
Unknown: I-5- Camii', 183 no. 13 (mentioned). I. IYllrAKIJI.
J. INE:IWKE:BAAfO
1.390 x 360 x 50, fingermarks along one side of brick, AM 8. 2.
iv(~uC'ttrovoc) El' + (in heart or leaf) K(upt)e pex() 'MoU ......• iv(Sumrovoc) ty' 'AKtS()
385 x369 x44-5o,AM 233· 3· 380 x360x45-6o,AM325·
4.375 x(335) x 37-45> two animal prints, AM 347· 5· (220) X A2. () (a) Stamp: (r r a} x(34)'
(a) Stamp: 142 x23.
(255) x 50, AM 428. Date: 4161r7 or 431h. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb. Myrelaion excavations. Trench A, deep: I.
[I] Bardill negs. 94.Lt 5a, I6a (I); 94·I2.'5, I6 (2); 95.5-23,24 32 I. In private ownership of N. Talbot Rice.
Palace of Amiochus: I. [I] Talbot Rice, 'Bodrum Camii', r73, fig. II no. 11. [2] Talbot
(3); 95.6.25,26 (4); 95-' r.aa, ja (5)· I. INhBAPAZ.
I.390X380X50. Rice archive (rubbing).
2. INAIBAALO [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango'S notes. [3] Mango and iv(Sumrovoc) [y'l S' pap() 'A~ ()
Hawkins, 'Fenari lsa Camii', 183 no. 13 (mentioned). Inverted gamma perhaps altered to delta by the addition of a
iv(StK'tlrovoc) ext'pex() 'Ayo()
Unknown: I. diagonal stroke.
(a) Stamp: I83 x27.
J. 376 xJ57 x53, AM 35· (a) Stamp: 159 X22.
Date: 427/8 or 442/3 or 457/8. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect.. le.
[I] Bardill neg. 94.2.22. Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: 1-2.
Miihiirdar Emin Pasa Sokagi: I.
(215) x I8p 58. 2. (305) x(235) x49-55.
I. 380 x 380 x 50. 29 I.
AKY(), AKYi\()
[I] Mamboury's notes. 1. ]ABAAfO [I] Peschlow, <Bricks tamps' • A2.
(b) Stamp: '95 x 30. ]ex'pa() 'Al0() AKYO
Date: 427/8 or 442/3 or 457/8. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. le.
(a) Date: possibly 447/8. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. 4· 37
Byzantine drains along the Mese.Junction with Gedikpasa AHYOEIY (?)
Hippodrome. In situ in the lower part of the east wall of the 1. INEIVKY
Caddesi: (several).
[I] Kleiss' notes in the DAI, Istanbul. tunnel of the Sphendone, butressing: (one). Inside the fifth AHYO() iv(ouC'uwvoc) ell 'Ah..IJ()
chamber of the long east side of the Hippodrome, buttressing:
26 (one). B (a) Stamp:I32x34.
I. AI-IVO Date: 4161r7 or 431h. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb.
J. INBIBAAfO [I] Mamboury and Wiegand, Kaiserpaldste, 40 (bottom)
[2] Mamboury and Wiegand, Kaiserpaldste, 43· [3] Schneider, Palace of Antiochus: 1-2.
iv(StKttrovoc) Pt' ~a() 'Ayo() 'A~"o(l)
'Ziegelstempel', 264 no. 2. I.345x?x50.2·37ox370X55
(a) Stamp: 188-192 x24. (a) Stamp: 100 X40. [1] Mamboury's notes. (2] Mango's notes.
Date: 428/9 or 443/4 or 458/9. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le. Great Palace. Area Ba. r. (b) Stamp:(I25)x35.
Balaban Aga Mescidi: 1-3. I. 370 x370 x60. Unknown: I.
I. 385 ~ 365 x 50, iAM 109. 2. iAM 164. 3· iAM 170. AfOP() [I] Mamboury's notes. I. 364 x(248) x 60; AM 36.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. [3] Mango and [I] Bardill neg. 94-2.24.
Hawkins, 'Fenari isa Camii', 183 no. 13 (mentioned). 30 AHYOEIV
I. qO'IVVBSNI [I]NE:IVKY
27
J. INNIBAArO
iv(~umrovoc)~'pex() 'Ayop()
34
I. AI-IVYOE:IV
[i]~(S\I<tlrovoc) e, 'A",,()

(a) Stamp: 15ox32. (a) Stamp: (IOO) xJ5.

iv(Sumrovoc) lrll S, Pex() 'Ayo() 'A~"oe~~ (1)
Unknown: I. Great Palace. Area Ac: I.
Gamma altered to delta by addition of a vertical and a diagonal I. 4IOX390 x60,iAM 10. (a) Great Palace. Area Ba. 1.? x?x50.
stroke. [I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes.
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------c--------------,-------

174 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 175

AKYA()

38
AAY() 1 ANATOAIOY CRUCIFORM

42 CIRCULAR 50
r. H1HAKYA r. <
r . ]NBIBAAAY
iV(OI"'tlroVOC)~' 'AK1lA() 47 Z
(a) Stamp: 142 x40. [i]v(Ol1ctlrovoc) ~t' ~a( ) 'AAu() 8Y ]Nlil A<AIOV
Unknown: 1-2. (a) Stamp: 18o (est.) x28. ANAXTOA I--<
r.)55 X)5 5 x 40-4), AM 251· 2. (2)0) x (2)0) x )9, AM 212. Date: 428/9 or 443/4 or 458/9. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le. [OAY o
[I] Bardill negs. 94-1).)0 (2), )1; 94.14.7 (I). Byzantine drains along the Mese. Forum of Constantine: INPIB
[i]~O(tK"!t&V~C)tu" 'Avcceox.tou
(numerous) I. IC
(a) Stamp: 170 (= 70 +)0 + 70) x90(=)0 + )0 + )0).
I·37ox37°xso. 8(eo)u XaPlC 'Ava'tOA.lOU i.V(SlK'tlroVOC) lP'
[I] Mamboury's notes. Augustaion. Base of the column of justinian i: (several).
(a) Stamp: I IO diameter. [I] Mamboury's notes. •
AAE()
Date: 503/4 or 5rS/I9 or 533/4. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad, Ch.
43
r . ]rIBAAAY r o no.j-.
39
r. ]IEAAE Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagt: r,
[iv(OtK'ttrovoc)] YI' ~a() 'AAu()
I. 39ox38ox60.
[iv(oumrovoc)]LE' 'AAE() (a) Stamp: ? x )0. [r] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Sea Walls. Destroyed towers near Yeni Cami. Great Palace. Area Ab: r. (b). Stamp: 112 diameter. ANrIAOY
[I] Gottwald, 'Ziegelstempel', 485 no, 5, [2] Schneider, I.? x? x 50. Date: early eth century, See Part Il, Ch. 10 no. 7.
'Ziegelstempel', 265 no. 27. [I] Mamboury's notes.
I,. Sea \Vfalls. Degirmenkapi:
I. ?
I.
x 50, lime-mortar with large pieces of brick adhering.
X?
5'
r. [I]
[I] Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 15 with n. 2, 16, fig. Y1

AAEzAN1I.POY
.. -.--- 16. [2J Mamboury's notes . A
AY11IL15
Af:.,K[ a
A
SINGLE-LINE
44
r. INSBAAA. K[ Note the Latin L (cp. the D in 67, 68).
40 [8Y] [i]v(8IK<lroVOC)0:' ~a() 'Avyilou
t.]ll.IAAA€. iv(oumrovoc) ,'/~' ~aO 'AA ~[
[ANAXT]OA
(a) Stamp: 1)6 (= 57 + 25 + 54) x72 (= 22 + 28 + 22).
[iv]O(mIrovoc) ra"A4 0 (a) Stamp: (125) "27. [I]OAY .
'Bath' building beside the Myrelaion rotunda. Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagi: 1-2.
(a) Stamp: (1I0) x )0. INPlr
[I] Talbot Rice, 'Bodrum Camii', 17), fig. I I no. 8. [2] Talbot I. ?X?X45. 2. ?X?X45'
Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri IC
[I] Mamboury's notes.
Rice archive (rubbing).
(Beyazit), I928: I. [8(EO)uxltiPIC ['Avo:t]o),[i]ou iV(Oll<tlroVOC)ty'
I. ? x? x40.
(a) Date: early 6th century. See Part Il, Ch. 10 no, 7.
[1] Mamboury's notes.
Sultan Ahmec: I.
I. ? x? x 3 5, carries Turkish inscription in Arabic script reading
MULTIPLE-LINE
ANA() 'Sultan Ahmet', iAM.
AN1I.PEA
[r] Mamboury's notes,
41 45 See also ANMEOY.
r. +AA€X r. INIBAANA
AliPOY iv(ollC"ttrovoc),' ~a() 'Ava() SINGLE-LINE
The ligature of alpha and delta in line 2 may have been thought to (a) Stamp: 186 x 25. 49
AN1J.PE()
contain the nu. Vefa Kilise Camii. Foundation walls adjoining north facade of 8Y
church, in Divan Efendi Sokagr (revealed during laying of AN[AX]TOA 52
+ 'AAESti(v)opou
. IOAY I. IN'liI'BA+ANliP€
drains 9June 1935): 1.
(a) Stamp: (120) x p. iNPI.
1.? x? x 35-40. iV(OIKtlroVOC)' Ot'· ~a() + 'AvopE(a)
Date: after 532. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ac. IC
Er] Mamboury's notes.
Baths of Zeuxippos. (a) Stamp: 196 x )0,
S(eo)\> [x]6:P1C 'J:.v[aJtOAfou iV(OlK"tlOOVOC) 1.'
Er] Mamboury and Wiegand,Kai5erpala5te, 38 (centre row, Date: 430iI or 445/6 or 460/1. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le.
46 (a) Several variants.
left). [2] Schneider, 'Ziegelsternpel', 26G no. 4). Tokludcde Mescidi: 1-12.
I.INBIBAANA
[3] Mamboury's notes. Stamp: approximately r06 diameter. LiAM4' 2.iAMG. ).iAM8. 4.iAMI), 5.iAM2).
(b) Stamp:(G))x55. iV(OllCtlroVOC)Pt' paO 'AvaO Date: early 6th century. See Pare II, Ch. 10 no. 7. 6. iAM )7. 7· iAM 40, 8.iAM 98. 9. iAM ,OG. la. iAM 107.
Kalenderhane Camii. Vault of Byzantine drain below apse of (a) Stamp' 168 x 27, Kalenderhane Camii. Chamber, window sill: I. Unknown: 2. lI.iAMTTI. I2.iAMI19'
North Church: I. Date: 428/9 or 443/4 or 458/9. Scc Part H, Ch. 9, sect. IC.
I. ()IS) x(260) X4G. 2. (205) x(r95) X47. Notes: 1-12, One brick measures 375 x 375 x 50.
J. (no) x (no) X40. Miihiirdar Emin Pa§3 Sokagl. [I] Peschlow, <Bricks tamps', C4 (illustration compiled from [I] Mamboury's notes. [2) Mango's notes (from squeeze).
[x] Peschlow, 'Brickstarnps', B9. [r] Mamboury's notes. several variants). [3] Mamboury, 'Nouvclle lecture', 123.
 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE
.
.•.....

(b) Stamp: 202 x}2.

Date: 430/1 or 445/6 or 460/1. See Part n, Ch. 9, sect. le.
55
J. +AN+
1 [I] Sorlin-Dorigny,
'Ziegelsrempel',
'Inscriptions', 88 no. 28. [2] Schneider,
266 no. 44. [)) MSBK neg. 6225". [4] DAI
ANLiPEOY
Balaban Aga Mescidi: I-H. llP€A (Isc) neg. 2336 (cast). [5] Mamboury's notes (from cast). See also ANf>.PEA.
LiAM26. 2.iAM27. ).iAM28. 4.iAM29. 5.iAM)a. [6) Mango's notes (from cast).
+ 'AVOPECt+
6.iAM)). 7·iAM)8. 8.iAM40. 9.iAM4r. ro.iAM45.
Il.iAM53' I2.iAM65,imprinrofdog'spaw. 13·iAMJI9· (a) Stamp: (70) x6).
14.iAMI24· I5·iAMI32. 16.iAMI41. q.iAM150' Great Palace. Excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38: J.
SINGLE-LINE
r8.iAM 154. r9· iAM 179· 20.iAMr84. 2r.iAMr87· 1.36ox?x5o,no·55·
Notes: 1-21. One brick measures 380 x 370 X40' [I] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous Remainder, box 38, neg. 246, 63
'ANf>.PEOY
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. [3] Mamboury, (b) Stamp: 75 x 6). r. ]Y13153QllY1A+
'Nouvelle Iecture'j r aj. Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between WITH INDICTION
+ '~VOPEO\l E:v[(oucn&voc)
(c) Stamp: 213 x30 Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I.
Date: 430iI or 445/6 or 460/1. See Part n, Ch. 9, sect. le. I. Once in the Hagia Eirene collection. 59 (a) Stamp: (I)j) X)2.
[I] Mamboury's notes. r. +ANllP Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38.
Balaban Aga Mescidi: I.
€OVf>.S Mamboury gives the location as 'B'.
I. 380 x 370 x45,iAM 122.
56 INf>.SI€ [I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze).
[1] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. [3] Mamboury,
I. +AN
'Nouvelle lecture', 123. + 'Avopeou 8(lCXICOVOU)s
iVO(~K'tlrovOC)S
re" (b) Stamp: (r)5)X)).
llPE:[A]
Balaban Aga Mescidi: I.
(a) ,9tamp:8SX75.
Possibly the same as 54 or 55. I. iAM96,? x? x35.
Cistern on Divfiru Ali Sokagi. Byzantine rubble above cistern: [I] Mamboury's notes.
+ 'A~OpE["] !.
ANAPEA
(a) Stamp: 100 x6S. r I. ? x? x 35.
53 Sea Walls. Between the 'Tower of Belisarius' and the Harbour [I] Mamboury, "Tchifte Serail', r72 (top). [a] Mamboury's
r. IY1€IBAP€AY111P€A of Sophia, in situ: I. notes.
MUL TIPLE-LINE
iv(Sl1C'nrovoc} et' ~(lpe() 'AVOPECl J.37ox370x4°.
[r] Mamboury and Wiegand,Kaiserpalaste, 3 no. 2. WITH INDICTION
(a) Stamp: 202-206 x 30.
[2] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 266 no. 42. 60
Date: 43 II2 or 446/7 or 46rlz. See Part n, Ch. 9, sect. le. 64
r. +ANllP€
Balaban Aga Mescidi: 1-2. I. ANllP
15f>.IAKS
r.iAM4). 2.iAMr)9· €15SlB
INllSe!
Notes: 1-2. One brick measures ? x? x45-50. ANLiPEA LiIAKONOY,ANLiPEOY 'Avfipeou S lW
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. + 'Av8pEOU OlCtK(OVOU)s
iv8(n::'tlWVOC)SEt'
MAKONOY (a) Date: after 532. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. ac.
(b) Stamp: 206 X)r. (a) Stamp: 93-101 x75-80.
Date: 43I1z or 446/7 or 46112. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le. Baths of Zeuxippos. In or near Building 1 or 2.
Unknown: 1.
Tokludede Mescidi: 1-3. [I] Gray, 'Bricks tamps', 53 no. 10. [2] Mamboury, "Tchifte
ANAPEA I. 365 x 360 x40.
r.iAM24- 2.iAM25. ).iAM7j. Serail', 173 (top).
[1] Mamboury's notes.
Notes: 1-3. One brick measures 380 x 375 x 45-50. 57
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes (from squeeze). !. +ANllP€
AllIAS€
6,
+ 'AvopeCt Ota(KOVOU)SE !. +ANf>.[P€]
It is uncertain whether the final epsilon is an indiction or an 1511IA[KS] + 'Av8~EOU s to'
MUL TIPLE-LINE accessory. INf>.[S .. ]
(a) Stamp: 91-95 X6)-68.
(a) Stamp: 1)1 X45. + 'AVO[pE]OUOta[K{ovoU)s] iV~[(llC'tlWVOC)s, Unknown: 1-2.
54 Unknown: I. I. (300) X(225) x 44-50; AM 127. 2. ? x? x43;AM2IS.
(a) Junction of Piyer Loci Caddesi and AlmanJardin SOkagl: I.'
r. +AN I. MSBK inv. 6203, 360 x 350 x? [I] Bardill neg'. 94.6.22a (2); 95.1.27, 28 (r).
I. ? x? x 38.
llP€A [r] MSBK neg. eaoja. [2] DAI (1st) neg. 2)46 (cast). [I] Mamboury's notes,
The tau (in ligature with the nu) is apparently superfluous. [3] Mamboury's notes (from cast). [4] Mango's notes (from
cast).
+ 'AVOPEU WITHOUT INDICTION

(a) Stamp: 76 x64. 58

66
!. +ANll.P[€] WITHOUT INDICTION
Unknown: I. 1. +AN+
All.IA[ .. )
J. 355 x240 x40;AM 54· 62 llP€15
+ 'Avop[i]" OW[(KOVOU).
[I] Bardill nogs. 94.).14,lj. 1. Albert read 'A8pEov .6..taXOUO\l.The correct reading was + 'AVOPEOU +
Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between (3) Stamp: (IOj) X4). presumably 'AVOPEOU8tCtKOVO\l.The inscription must have been
(a) Date: after 532. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. 2C.
Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I. St Euphcmia in Hebdomon (Bakirkoy) (location according to on two lines, but the exact layout is unclear.
Baths of Zeuxippos. In or near Building I or 2.
I. Once in the Hagia Eirene collection. Sorlin-Dorigny, but no such church is known): l.
(a) Burgaz Adasr. Transfiguration church. [I] Gray, 'Brickstamps', 55 no. 40. [2] Mamboury, "Ichifte
[1] Mamboury's notes. 1. MSBKinv. 6225> (I 50) x(I60) x?
[r] Albert, 'Antigoni', )8. Serail', 173 (bottom).
 ..~
•
CATALOGUE CATALOGUE I79
67
I. +AY1+
AN1I.PEOY N(?) 1 AN8H.() ANTIOXOY
DP€15 7I 75 79
1. [+]ANl>.P€ J.]AN8H. 1. A11TIOXOY
Note the Latin D (cp. the L in 51).
[O]YNl>.I
] 'Avllr]·O 'Avnor"ou
+ 'Av-r-dpeoo [.]e
(a) Stamp: (88) X'). (a) Stamp: 115 x 22.
(a) Stamp: 95 x65· [+] 'Avapi[o]uval[. .]9
Land Walls. Orillii Kapn I.
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site Sea Walls on Saray Burnu: I.
TIre theta is perhaps an indiction. BI, building north-west of church (debris): I. 1.355 x350x37·
I.38ox?x48.
I.? x? X20,00. 17. [I] Unger, 'Seraispirze', fig. 10 no. 16. [2J Schneider,
[r] Mamboury, "Ichifte Serail', I72 (bottom). [2] Mamboury's (a) Stamp: (98) x(69).
Kalenderhane Camii. B3/3: [1] GP I, pl. 14 no. 17. (2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous 'Ziegelstempel', 266 no. 46.
notes. I.

1. (250) x(225) X41. Remainder, box 38, neg. 194. (3] Talbot Rice archive oeg. as
[2]. 2, ANTIOXOY
68 [1] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', B2.
1. AN+ 'AV~16r"ou
DPE[15]
(a) Stamp: 160 X40.
Note the Latin D (cp. the Lin 51). Great Palace. Area Ac, in the underground passage beneath the
'Avdpejoo] + AN8() AN8I( ) great wall: I.

I
I.? x? X25.
(a) Sekbanbast Ibrahim Aga Mescidi.
72 76 [I] Mamboury's notes.
[r] Schneider, 'Aquadukt', col. 76. 1. INHBAAN81
1. INIBAAN8
). VOXOIT11A
lv(aucnrovoc) I' ~a( ) 'Av8( ) lv(all"'rovoc) ~'paO 'Av8,O or
lv(all",rovoc)~'~a() 'Av80 1 'Avnoxou
(a) Stamp: 148 X2I.
Unknown: 1-3. " -.--- In the case of the second reading, the final iota would be an
accessory.
(a) Se'a Walls
1.380x380x4°.
00 Saray Burnu. Rubble: I.

dAM (<;:K) 69. 2. iAM (<;:K) 69a. 3. iAM (<;:K)(no.

[r] Unger, 'Seraispitze', fig. 10 no. 17.
unknown), fragment. (a) Land Walls. In situ in the first course of bricks of wall between
AN1I.PEOY 1I.IAKONOY (b) Ruins on Saray Burnu (orphanage of St Paul?).
Notes: I or 2 measures 370 x 370 x 50. towers 96 and 96a: (several). [I] Mamboury's notes.
SeeANl>.PEA l>.IAKONOY, ANl>.PEOY l>.IAKONOY. Er] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. [r] Meyer-Plarh and Schneider, Landmaner, 148 no. I.
(2] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 263 no. la.
73
1. 111€IBAl>.118[

lv(a""rovoc) er" ~~() 'Av8[()]

(a) Stamp: (1)2) X2). AN8[ [AJ~T(j)N[IJ<:)Y
AN1I.PEOY HfOYMENOY Kalenderhane Camii. Vault of Byzantine drain below apse of
North Church: I. See 341.
77
1. (182) X(156) X44- 1. ]+AAN8[
69 [r] Peschlow, 'Bricksramps'i Aj.
1. +ANl>.P€OY ]+a"Av8[
HfOYM€N
The first alpha may represent an indiction.
+ 'AvBpe:ouy!YOUI1EV(OU)
(a) Land Walls. Edirne Kapr.
(a) Se Euphemia in Hebdomon (Baktrkoy) (location according to AN8EMIOY [I] Gorrwald, "Ziegelstempel', 485 no. 1. [a] Schneider,
AD()
Sorlin-Dorigny, but no such church is known). 'Ziegelstempel', 263 no. lb. [3] Avi- Yonah, Abbreviations 45
[I] Derhier, 'Makrikoy', (6) no. E'c pl. lA' no. a. [a] Sorlin- 80
74 s.v.AAN8. .
Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 88 no. 24. [3] Leclercq, 'Estampilles', 1. +IN1\..IK2.+AN[0JE;:M2 around central * I, ITA"
col. 546 no. 9h. [4] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 266 no. 45·
+ iv8~K('t100Voc)s + 'Av[e]~)l(iou)s around central * .'A·O

70 (a) Stamp: r08 diameter. (a) Stamp: 77 x '7.

1. [+ANl>.] Date: after 475. See Part Il, Ch. 10 no. 12. ANT() Date: late ath century? See Part n, Ch. 10 no. 4.
[P]€15 Unknown: I.
Land Walls. Pteron.
Hf15+ I.(24) x (240) x )6-46, AM 1)9.
[xJ Meyer-Plarh and Schneider, Londmauer, 150 no. 27·1. 78
IN8BAANT [r] Bardill neg. 94-7-1 5
l+ 'Avap]iou ~10u(~ivou) + [aj Mamboury, 'Chrisme', 455 no. 4· [)] DAI (Isrj negs. 6601 1.

(a) St Euphemia in Hebdomon (Bakirkoy) (location according to (cast), KB 5494 (brjck). [4] Mamboury's notes (from cast). lv(allenrovoc) 0' ~a() 'A,,()
Sorlin-Dorigny, but no such church is known). Fcnari isa Camii: I. (a) Scamp: 140 X2I. SI
[I] Dethier, 'Makrikoy', (6) no, E', pl. lA' no.). [2] Sorlin- 1. ()IO)x('55) x)6-55;AM 144· Unknown: I.
I. +THCN
Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 88 no. 25. [3] Leclercq, 'Estampilles', [I] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenan 1. iAM (<;:K), )60 x? x 50. €ACAIT
col. 546 no. 9c. isa Camii', fig. 39 no. I. [3] Bardill negs. 94.7.9,1 I. [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. + -n;c VECtc (iV01J('tl00VOC?) 'A1t()
 ' ....
180 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE I8r
(a) Hebdomon (Bakirkoy). Date: 422/3 or 423/4 or 437/8 or 438/9. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. APIC[ (a) Stamp: 266 x42.
[r] Dethier, 'Makrikoy', 162 no . .6.", pl. lA' no. I. [2] Schneider, re.
Date: 510/1 I. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. aa.
'Ziegelstempcl', 269 no. 97. Cistern on Srraselviler Caddesi: 1.
CIRCULAR St Polyeukros. Level 13 r (fallen vault, debris): 1. Level 159: 2.
1. 360 x? x 30.
[+THCN) Level 600: 3. Level 671: 4· Level 67,-"FS. Leve1I230':': 6. Level
2.
[I] Mamboury's notes. 87 .. .. 1,•• V- .. l,

€ACAO (b) Stamp: IBo X25. 1. INf[AJPI<;:[..) in a circle between the arms of * 13 8 I: 7.
1.Na.6B. 2.No,I64. J.Na,707.
....~'"
4.Na.3J1. 5.Na.J68.
[+'tiiCV]ECiC(ivOlK"tl&VOC?) 'An() Date: 422/3 or 423/4 or 437/8 or 438/9. See Part
re.
Il, Ch. 9, sect. iV(OIK'Iliiivac)y' ['AjPI~[ .. ) * 6. No. 802. 7. No. 1235.
Derhier's illustration apparently shows the corner of the stamp in Notes: 1-7. Two bricks measure? x? X32-35 and? x? x 35.
Cistern on Siraselviler Caddesi: I. (a) Date:after475.SeePartII,Ch. rono. 13.
an incorrect position. [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 207, A3 and 210, A30' [2] Sarachane
I. 350 x? X400. Rotunda and adjoining hall north of the Palace of Amiochus.
(a) Hebdomon (Bakirkoy). [I) DAI (1st) neg. KB 6rs9. archive negs. 9.1 1.1 5a (I), 5.aa.roa (5).
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes.
[r] Dethier, 'Makrikoy', r62 no. fJ.:, pl.La" no. 111'.

APICTEI[

85 91
1, INBAP€C APICTAINETOY 1. )BcAPICT€I[
AITHPIOY
iV(olK'Iliiivac) B" 'ApEC() SecAPICTENETOY, APICTAINETOY )P' c ·Aplcm[

Indiction theta possibly altered from eta. (a) Date: 508/9 or p81r9. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. aa.
82 St Polyeuktos. In mortar make-up of brick floor between level
I. ~
(a) Stamp: 165 X22.
1118>:'andleve1 1119*: I.
Date: 425/6 or 440/1. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le.
t: APICTENETOY, APICTAINETOY I. No. 1432 (mortar-impression).
Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bfib-r Humfiyun. Floor above the
INJl.2«:PIOV [.1] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 210, A33.
cisterns: I.
1.380x35ox4°. SINGLE-LINE
[I] Mamboury's notes. APICTENE()
APICTAINO
(b) Stamp: 185 x25.
iv8(lK'tU))VOC)S tet's 'Annptou Date: 425/6 or 440h. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. le. 88
92
(a) Stamp: 130 (= 50 + 30 + 50) x So (= 25 + 30 + 25)· Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bab-i Hiimfiyun. l. 1, +APICTAIN2INJI.[ I. )Jl.2€APICT€N€
Date: 502/3 or 517/18 or 532/3. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. ad. I.370X360X45· + '~P1C'tCt;tV(E'tOU)S iv3[ iv]?(u('ttoovoc)s 1.0' 'Actceeveteoo)
Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagi. Piers in [I] Mamboury's notes.
(c) Stampi{zccj x a y. (a) Stamp: (I4a) x J6. (a) Stamp: (180) x ao.
Hoca Kasim Koprii Sokagn I.
Great Palace. Area Ac, second foundation below the bath: I.
Date: 507-22. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. 23. Fenari isa Camii: 1.
I. 390 x 370 x 50, bright red.
I.? x? X40. St Polyeuktos. Level r03: I. Level 146: 2. Level 217: 3. Level 1. (265) x(JJO) x32-38,AM '4B.
[r] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Mamboury's notes. 299: 4. Level 700':': 5· Level 724: 6. Level 727: 7. Level 782: 8. ~I]Mango's nores (rubbing). [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari
Leve!989: 9. Unknown: 10. Isa Camii'cfig.j o no.j , [3) Bardill neg.pa.y.z j.
(cl) Stamp: about zoo X25.
Date: 425/6 or 44011. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. le. I. No. 302. 2. No. IS7. 3· No. 28r. 4· No. 797· 5· No. 525.
Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bab-r Hiimfiyun. I. 6. No. 620. 7· No. 718. 8. No ..29 I. 9. No. 531. re. No. 1)20.
AP( ) Notes: 1-10. One brick measures? x? x 3 5. APICT()
I.400X380X5°·
[I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 207, A4. [2J Sarachane archiveneg.
5.42.23. 93
83
1. +INJl.2fBAPSAQICTS[
I. IY1HBAAP
APICTE() +ivO(lmOivoc)s y'papOs 'APIC'OS [
iv(ollc"tLwvac)~' pa() 'Ap()
89 (a) Stamp:(245)xJB,
(a) Stamp: 141 x 19·
1. APjICT€2 Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
Unknown: I.
API( ) Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I.
1.368 x 357 x 50-58, mark made with three fingers applied 'Ap]lC't"e(vE"tou)S
I. 380 x 380 x 50, once in the Hagia Eirene collection.
before stamping, AM 343.
86 (a) Stamp: (IJO) x J6. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[I) Bardill negs, 95,6,17,18.
I. INrIBAAPI Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Cb. 9, sect. aa.
iV(OIlC'IIWVOC)yI' paO 'APIO St Polyeukros. Level 100}: I.
I. No. 674, ? x? x 30.
APICT[
(a) Stamp: 196 x27.
[r] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 210, A25. [2] Sarachane archive neg.
Date: 414/1 5. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. la. 94
APEC( ) Theodosian Hagia Sophia. Back wall of Schneider's
5·4o,26a.
l.jTJI'IA!!lY11
propylacum: I.·
iv(ollC'Ilwvoc) y' P() 'APIC'I[
84 APICTEI.
I.390X385X43·
1, INSAP€C (a) Stamp:? x jo.
[I] Schneider, 'Sophienkirche', 84 no. 2. [2] Schneider, 90
iV(OIK'IIWVOC)(/~. 'ApEC() Great Palace. Area Ba: r.
'Ziegelsternpel', 264 no. 3. [3] Schneider, Westhof, 6 no. I. 1. INV21.AdDT3I.
I.? x? x 60.
(a) Stamp:I52x23. [4] Mamboury's notes.
ivB(llC"tlWVOC)S B' 'AP1C"tEl. [I] Mamboury's notes. [2J Mamboury, 'Nouvelle lecture', 123.
 -_._--------------------------------------------------------------------------------:--------,

.•
,,~

182 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE

MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE CARRIED INDICTION APO() ACKAEI1IOY

95 SINGLE-LINE See ACKAHITIOY, ACKJ\EfIlOY.

99
I. )PIC~E:[ I. INlllEAAPO
103
'Ajpicee] iV(OllcniDvoc) ~l' ~a() 'Apo() I. jn b-t.SAP[
(o) Stamp: (72) x(27). The name is otherwise unattested. Conceivably, the reading may ) ivo(l1mrovoc) 0' s 'A~[
Sarachane: I. -¥ have been 'Ayo().
I. No. 741, flake off the top of brick. (a) Stamp: (132) x42.
(a) Stamp: 195 X20. Date: 510/1 I. See Part 11,Ch. 9,sect. aa.
[l] Sarachane archive oeg. 9.7+
Date: 428/9 or 44314 or 458/9. See Part H, Ch. 9. sect. le. St Polyeuktos. Level 700*: I.
TokludedeMescidi: J. I. No. 522,? X?X)O. ACKAHI1IOY, ACKAEI1IOY
I. iAM. 15.370 x? x50. [1] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 210,A29. [1] Sarachane archive neg.
[r] Mamboury's notes. 5.10.12.
MUL TIPLE-LINE SINGLE-LINE

96 MULTIPLE-LINE
I. +APIC[TE) ACK()
ME:TO[y) 104 107
INb-2[. ,) APT( ) J. +AP[ J.)ACK
+ 'Ap1.c[n.]vE'to[U] iv3(llC'tlWVOC}S [. AIE:A[ )'ACK()
100
(a) Date: after 532. See Parr Il, Ch. 9. sect. ac. + 'A~[ -)1-"A[ -) (a) Stamp: (83) x 33.
J. INb-IBV1fb~
Baths ofZeuxippos. In or near Building I or 2.
(a) Stamp: (I2o) x6o. Myrelaion, debris.
[1] Gray, 'Brickstamps', 54 no. 15. [2] Schneider, iv(ol1cniDvoc) Ol'pa() 'Ap'() [I) Talbot Rice arehive (rubbing).
Great Palace. Area Ac: 1.
'Ziegelsrempel', 265 no. 25. (a) Stamp: 12 5 x H· 1.370X37ox4°.
Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: I. (I] Mamboury's notes.
I. (230) x(I70) x40' two breaks, stamped twice.
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', A48.
ACKAH()
CIRCULAR
ACB, () 108
APICT() I. INeIAI:KAH

97 105 iv(811C"tlrovoc) El' 'AcKAl1(nLOU)

I. +APICTS+INb-IKTS around central * APTEM( )
J. rNb-BAACB.
(a) Stamp: 145 x 35,
+ 'APlC't(£VE-cou)s+ ivSuct{t&voc)s * iv(o"'nrovoc) 0' ~a() 'Ac~ () Date: 416117 or 43112. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. lb.
101 (a) Stamp: 142 x 20 (left)-I6 (right). Palace of Antiochus: 1-1.
(a) Stamp: 95-100 diameter.
J. M3TPAINI I.340XHox6S· 2·35ox15ox50. 3·38ox380x55·
Date: after 475, See Part Il, Ch. 10 no. 12. Kalenderhane Camii. North aisle, middle of filling wall: I.

Unknown: 1-2. ivo(l1cnrovoe) i" 'AptE~() J. 360 x(a80) x 55. [I] Mamboury's notes.

J.(298) x (204) x4S, AM 24· 2, ?x?X4I,AMI93. [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', A4. 2. INEIAI:KAH
The bar below the nu is perhaps meant to be a ligature of nu and
[I) Bardill negs. 9402.9 (I); 94. II .28a, 29a (a). delta rather than an abbreviation mark (cp. 401.1, 4°9.1). iV(OlK"tHOVOC) Ell 'AclCl..l1(l'tlOU)
(a) Stamp: 106 x 30. (a) Stamp: 140 x 36,
Unknown: r. Date: 416h7 or 43112. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. lb.
ACK()
APICTENETOY I. iAM24, fragment,? X? X45. Palace of Antiochus: I.
[I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). I.? x? X45.
106
98
J. + J. [JACK [I) DAI (1st) neg. KB 1502, [2) Mamboury's notes.
INMb. [3) Mango's notes.
'\'l"AeK()
APICTE:
(a) Stamp: 89"""91x2!r33.
NE:rOY
Date: late 4th century? See Part Il, Ch. Iona. 4.
+ AP[ 109
Unknown: 1-7.
J.)HA)!JA
+ iVS(lK1U7>VOC) tl)1 'Apicreverou + J. (170) x(138) X4D-P, AM 81 (old no. F). 2.298 X298 X44.
102 'AcKA~[
(a) Stamp: 94 (horizontal)-98 (vertical) diameter. stamped twice (first stamp shallow), AM 105 (old no. 125).
I. +AP[, .)E:[ .. )IN
Fenari isa Camii: I. 3· (180) x(I84) X46,AM 121. 4· (188) x(230) x42,AM 123. (a) Stamp: (83) x 39.
+ 'Ap[ .. )E[ .. jrv 5· (212) x(16o) x 35-40,AM 198. 6.303 x 297 x }t-47, AM 261. Great Palace, excavations in Peristyle and Apsed Hall in
J. 368 x365 x47-5o,AM 450.
[I] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari (a) Stamp: l57X 32. 7· (245) X(220) x 37-50,AM 370. I953-H: J.
isa Camii', fig. 39 no. 2. [3] Sodini, 'L'Arrisanar', 74, fig. I no. Excavations near Istanbul University 1943-46. [I) Bardill negs. 94.8.26 (2); 94· I l.34a (5); 94.13.18,19 (6); J. Labelled no. 23,
I. [4]Bardillnegs.95.14.18a,I9a. [I] Firatlr, 'Trois egliscs', 172, 177, p]. 7(b) no. 5. 9j.1·31 (3), 32,33 (4); 95.5.10, 11 (I); 95-7-32 (7), [I) T albot Rice archive photo,
184 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE
..
'.~

ACKA(H)nIOY AT() AY() AYzANTIOY, AYzENTIOY

110 SINGLE-LINE
"4 SINGLE-LINE
I. ]p,I:KAmO[
I. INBIBAPAT
lIS WITH INDICTION
] 'ACKA(~)",O[ iv(Suctlrovoc) p,' pexp() 'A,()
I. [I]N€IBAAY
(a) Stamp: (70) x25. (a) Stamp: 185 x '4. AY(z)A()
[i]~(Sllmrovoc) El' pex() AiJ()
Land Walls. Singer House (sewing machines), Beyazrt: I.
J21
[I] DAI (Isr) neg, 6599 (cast). [2] Marnboury's notes (from '" 1.380X380x45· (a) Scamp: (I 50) x 30.
I. +1Y1IBBAAYA
cast). [3] Mango's notes (from cast). [r] Mamboury's nates. Ruins on Saray Burnu (orphanage of St Pault): 1.
I. (260) X(I9") X40-45. + iv(Suetlrovoc) \P- Jla() AiJ(~ex(",iou)
[I] Unger, "Seraispitze', 6g. Iona. 12. [2] Schneider, (a) Sramp"27 x)5.
'Ziegelstempel', 264 no. 4. Unknown: I.
ACK[
ATA() I. 380 x 370 x40' iAM 7.

III
[I] Mamboury's nates (squeeze).
J. ACK[ Ili (b) Unknown: i.
I. IrATA z.iAMIO.
'Acl<[ [I] Mamboury's notes.
,y' 'A,ex()
(a) Date: 413-15. See Part H, Ch. 9. sect. la. (c) Stamp: 228-230 x 35-37.
Theodosian Hagia Sophia. Back wall of Schneider's (a) Stamp: 90 x 37-40. Date: 503/4 or 518/19 or 533/4. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad.
Date: late ath century? See Part Il, Ch. 10 no. 4. Remains on jsmeriye Caddesi. South group, arch in wall: 1-2.
propylaeum.
Unknown: 1-3. I. 380 x380 x40' 2. 370 x355 x45.
[I] Schneider, Westhof, 6no. 5.
L 300 x288 x40' AM 37. 2.299 X294 x 32-43, AM 269.
Ay()
[I] Mamboury's notes.
3· (t77) X (200) X40-45,AM 306. _._
[I] Bardill negs. 94-2.25 (I); 94-4.18. (3); 94.13-9 (2); 95·3-3" (3)· CIRCULAR
AY(z)A() or AYzA()
Il9
MULTIPLE-LINE
I. .[ ... ] 122

I12 no[.] I. + IY1IBBAA Y[

I. A)1,:)A ATTAAOY AY + iv(S,lC'tlrovoc) \p' pex() Au[(~)a(niov)]
lSllH .[...],E[..]AiJ() + iV(SIKHroVOC)\P- pa() AiJ[~a(nio")]
MULTIPLE-LINE
'AC1(A.Tl1t1.?~ (a) Scamp: diameter about 110. (a) Stamp: 190 x 33.
Il6 Unknowru r.
(a) Stamp: 87 x40. Date: 506/7. See Par'tI!, Ch. 9, sect. aa.
I. ATIA z.? x? 35-45, iAM 5.
Fenari isa Camii: I. St Polyeuktos. Level 13 I (fallen vault, debris): r. Level r40 X

I. Circular brick, 300 diameter, 45 thick, AM 154. AOY+ (fallen vault, debris): 2. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Ecnari 'ATIw...ou+ No. 57. 2. No. 33.
I. (b) Stamp: ? x 3°.128 to right hand end of first alpha.
isa Camii', fig. 40 no. 27· [3] Bardill negs. 94.7.35. 36, 37· Notes: 1-2. One brick measures ? x? x3O-35. Date: 503/4 or 518/19 or 533/4. See PartIl, Ch. 9. sect. ad.
(a) Stamp: 110 X 50.
[1] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 214, Cl. [2] Sarachane archive neg. Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir SOk:tgl: r.
Walls of Nessebdr. Pavement no. 5 of tower no. 2: I. Walls, near
5-39-7 (2). I. 390 x380 x40.
the western front of the court to the north of tower no. 3
[I] Mamboury's notes.
(horse-shoe shaped tower): (one).
CIRCULAR I.330X33oX35·
[I] Ognenova-Marinova, 'Briques', 114 no. 20, 116, fig. 110. AYz()
I13
I. 0 123
CIRCULAR I. +INll. [... ]n
ACKA€m
Y + ivS(ucnrovoc). [' Jla() AjiJW
'AClCA.t1ctOU tN The indiction might have been 6' (8 possibly altered from H) or
ATXTA AYPHAIOY perhaps y" cr yt".
(a) Sea Wails.
[A]AO[Y]
[I] Scrlin- Dorigny, <Inscriptions', 94 no. 56. [2] Schneider, (a) Stamp: 195 x 30.
[IN]PIB
'Ziegelsrempel', 266 no. 49. Date: 502-33 Or 517-20 or 532-35. See Part Il. Ch. s.eece. ad.
[Ijc 120
(b) Stamp: Approx. lOO diameter. I. + Y[OIA]HqX + Remains destroyed in [924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagl: r .
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site E)(EO)UX"p[,]~'A",,[,-]o["] [iv(Suctlrovoc)],P' 1.375X360X50.
Br: I. + AiJp~[,-io]" +
(a) Stamp: II I diameter. [I] Mamboury's notes.
I. ? x? x 40, no. 49. Date: 503/4 or 518119 or 533/4' See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. ad. (3) Stamp: (164)"41-
[I] GP I, pl. 14 no. 49. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir SOkagl: 1. Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: r.
I. ('00) x(130) x 34 . AYzA()
Remainder, box 38, neg. 218. [3] Talbor Rice archive neg. as I.? x? x50.
[2]. [1] Mamboury's notes. [I] Peschlow, 'Bricksramps', A57. See also AY(z)A() or AYzA( ).
186 CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE
"~
.
124 5. +I)',!IBAAY[zA]
6. ]II1IABAA YEA 127
r. +INBBAA Y"S.A + (v(3um&voc) ,'~,,() A;,[~"(v<[ou)]
] iv(3tK"&VOC) re" ~,,() A;,~a(vtiou) 1. +II1IBBAAY,A
+ iv(3\1m&voc) 9' ~,,() A;,~"(niou) (a) Stamp: (170) x JO.
(a) Stamp: 205 x40. + iv(3tKn&voc) tW ~,,() A;,~,,(v<iou)
Indiction possibly altered from eta. Unknown: I. '<;VI
1. Fragmentvjyo x? x40, iAM 15.
Date: 502/3 or P7h8 or 532/3' See Part Il, Ch. I I, sect. 5. (a) Stamp: 240 x 30. . I, ·~:;,;.r·,
(o) Stamp: 196 X)2. Cistern on Divaru Ali Sokagl. \'qalls above the cistern: 1.
[I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). Date: 503/4 or 5 18/19 or 533/4. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. ad.
Remains in the 'area bounded by Divan Yolu, Piyer Loci I. 37ox36oX45. Remains on Ismeriye Caddesi. North group: 1.
Caddesi, Dostluk Yurdu Sokagi, and KIod Farer Caddesi: [I] Mamboury's notes. I.370X360X50.
(numerous) J-2. [I] Mamboury's notes.
I. 380 x 380 x44. 2.370 x 360 x45.
126
[r] Mamboury's notes. 2. tINIBBAAV"A
1. +INIABAA '{jA
(b) Stamp: (I5o)xJ5. 7. +INIABAAXZA + iv(3,K1:t&voc) tp' ~,,() A;,~"(~«ou)
Remains in the area bounded by Divan Yolu, Piyer Loci + (v(3,,,,,,&voc) tc" ~,,() Au~,,(v,iou)
+ iv(BLK"t"L&voe) re" pex() Au;ex{v'rlou) (a) SS Sergius and Bacchus.
Caddesi, Doscluk Yurdu Sokagi, and Klod Farer Caddesi. (a) Stamp: 192 xJ5.
(a) Stamp: 2l.0 x35. [I] Meliopoulos, "Iopothesia', 23 I section I" no. I.
[r] Mamboury's notes. Date: 502/3 or P7h 8 or 532/3' See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad.
Date: 502/3 or 517/18 or 532/3. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad.
Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagl: I.
Remains on Ismetiye Caddesi. North group. AY:l;A[
I.? x? )(45.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Mamboury's notes. I2S
1. B]AAV~A[
125 2. +INIABAAY,A
1. +lliIBAA Y~A ~],,()A;,~,,[()
+ iv(Bucn&voc) re;" ~a() Au~a{v't{ou) 8. +II1IABAAXZA
+ iv(3\1m&voc),' ~,,() A;,~,,(v<iou) (a) Stamp: (127) XJJ.
(a) Stamp: '97 x)2. + i.v(ol1cnrovoc) lex' pex() Au~a(v'tlou) Hagia Sophia. North-west pendentive stair opening, loose
(a) Stamp: 2J jX JO. Date: 502/3 ~r 5 I7h 8 or 532/3. See Pan H, Ch.: 2.~.:.:;.!.2d.
(a) Stamp: 219 X)4. fragment: I.
Date: 50112 or 516h7 or 53112. See Parr 11, Ch. 9, sect. ad. Remains on Ismetiye Caddesi. North group: 1.
Unknown: I. I.? x? X35.
Remains on Ismeriye Caddesi. South group. 1.380x360X45·
1·375 x 375 x45-48, once in Robert College, AM 253. [I] Van Nice archive (rubbing).
[r] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Bardill negs. 94.1).28-9. [2] Mango's notes (rubbing). 129
2. +lliIBAA Y'ZA J. +INIABAAY3A (b) Stamp: 220XJ5. I. ]8BAA Y"S.A[
+ iv(3\1cu&voc),' ~,,() A;,~"(v<iou) + iv(3,,«,&voc) I'" ~,,()A;,~,,(v<iou) Unknown: I.
[iv(3tKn&voc)] W ~,,() A;,~,,[()
1.iAMJ,4·
(a) Possibly same as b. (a) Possibly same as h.
[I] Mamhoury's notes. (a) Stamp: (IJ8) x J4.
Stamp: 235 x30' Stamp: ]95 xp.
Cc) Stamp:220x35· Eerhiye Camii.
Hebdomon (Bakirkoy). Hypogeum: 1. Unknown: I.
Hebdomon (Bakirkoy). Hypogeum: I. [I] Mango's notes. [2] Dumbarton Oaks Photographic
I. 370 x 370 x60. I. Fragment, 385 x370 x40,iAM 14·
I.390 x360 X45. Collection neg. L62.41 (C. Mango).
[r] Mamboury's notes. [r] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes.
(b) Possibly same. as a. (b) Possibly same as a.
(d) Stamp: approx. 220 x 35. AYZEN(TIOY)
Stamp: .2 J5- K30; Stamp: 197 x 32. Hebdomon (Bakrrkoy). Hypogeum: 1.
Date: fo::n.h.01:'-S.;rffI7 OJ!'5F/2. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. ad. Date: 50213 or 517h8 or 53213. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. ad. 13°
I·39ox360X45·
Remains on [smeriys-Caddesi. South group: I. Remains on Ismetiye Caddesi. North group:!.
[1] Mamboury's notes. 1. INZAY3E:N
I. }70 x 370 x 60. 1.380X360X45·
(c) Stamp: 22ox35. iv(3uctl&voc) 1;' A;,~ev«iou)
[I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes.
Date: 502/3 or 517/r8 or 532/3' See Part Il, Ch. 9,sect.2d.
(a) Stamp: 192 x 27.
J. +INIBAAY'ZA 4. +II1IABAA Y3A Remains on Isrnetiye Caddesi. South group: I.
Date: 423/4 or 438/9. See PartIl, Ch.9, sect. re.
r·39ox360x45·
+ (V(3tKU&VOC)" ~,,() A;,~,,(v<iou) + iv(31""&VOC) re;" ~,,() A;,~,,(v<iou) Cistern on Siraselviler Caddesi.
[IJ Mamboury's notes.
[IJ Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes.
(a) Stamp: 2JO x J5. (a) Stamp: 188 x jo. (f) Sramp: 225XJ5·
Date: 50112 or 5l6h7 or 53112. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad. Date: 502/3 or 517h8 or 532/3' See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. ad. Unknown: I.
Remains ort Ismetiye Caddesi. North group: I. Remains on Ismetiye Caddesi. North group: I. I. 390 x 370 x 50, mortar adhering, lAM 2. WITHOUT INDICTION
I. 370 x 360 x40. 1.370X365 x ao. [I] Mamboury's notes. AYzAN()
[I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes.
131
4. +INIBAAY3A 5. +II1IABAAYEA 1. AY~AI1
+ (v(3um&voc),' ~,,() A;,~"(v<iou) + (v(3tKn&voc) w' ~,,()A;,~,,(v<iou) 9. ]IYlIABAAXZA
A;,~"v«iou)
(a) Stamp: 220 x 32. (a) Stamp: 223 X40' ] iv(ouc·tl&voe) lex' Pex() AuS~(v"tiou)
(a) Stamp: 142 x 39.
Date: 50112 or p6h7 or 531h. See Part IT, Ch. 9, sect. ad. Date: 502/3 or 517/r8 or 532/3' See Part Il, Ch. I I, sect. 5. (a) Stamp: (191) X(JI). Remains in the area bounded by Divan Yolu, Piyer Loti
Remains on Ismetiye Caddesi. North group: I. Cistern on Divaru Ali Sokagl. Walls above the cistern: 1.
Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: I. Caddesi, Dosrluk Yurdu Sokagr, and Klod Farer Caddesi- I.
1.360X360X4°. T.380X360X45· 1. (200) x(I60) x 44- 1.400 x380 x 50.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes. [1] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', A64. [I] Mamboury's notes.
 -~-----~~~--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-~~-~--------,---------,

188 CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE
MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE CARRIED INDICTION (a) Stamp: (50) X(60).
Date: 507-22. See Part 11, Ch. 9. sect. za. '4' [Z] 145
AY'ZA() St Polyeuktos. Level 938*: r .
I
[Y] N
I. No. I095.? x ?xH.
1J2 BAA A
[I] Hill, 'Bricks tamps', 210, B2. [2] Sarachane archive neg.
1. ]AAYf.A [.] AHA
9.11.29.
[.] V
~]exAu~ex(v«ou)
[.] f.
(a) Stamp:? x(35).
[... ] ~ex() A[ "~( exv«ou)] A
Sea Walls. Narh Kapi, south tower.
[r] Mamboury's notes. CIRCULAR (a) Stamp: 175 x65' (v(B'x<,iiivoc) et: ~() Au~ex(v«ou)
Great Palace. Area Ab. (a) Stamp:I65(=60+45+60)x60.
133 138 [I] Mamboury's notes. Great Palace. Area Ab, near thi collapsed vault: I.
1. ]AYsA I. Il1NI
I. 39ox37ox50.
'!AHl1 J4Z
] AU~,,(v«ou) I. S [IJ Mamboury's notes.
Yf.YA
(a) Palace at Ku,ukyah. Y
(vB(l1<niiivoc) ,B' ~exp() A,,~() u 146
[r] Mamboury's notes. BAA
The final upsilon may be an accessory. In
-1-1
r, I
N
'34 (a) Stamp: 90 diameter. ABA
1. A]Yf.A
Tombs in me Mangana region: I.
i Y
A]u~ex(v«ou) I .In situ, 360 x 360 x 40. (v(BlI""iiivoc) ~[. I'~ex() Au~("v«ou) :s:
(3) Stamp: ? x 25. [I] Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 37, fig. 44 no. I. 1- (a) Rotunda and adjoining hall north of the Palace of Antiochus.
A
Palace at Kilciikyah: I. [r] DAI (1st) neg. KB 6l57. (v(Bu""iiivoc) a' ~() Au~ex(v«ou)
I. ?x?x40.
(a) Stamp: l67 (= 65 + 37 + 65) x80 (= 25 + 30 + 25).
[I] Mamboury's notes. Layout: ABA in crossbar Unknown: I.
CRUCIFORM
143 1.390 x350 x40' iAM.
I. ~ [I] Mamboury's notes.
AY'ZA[ AY'Z()
[Y]
Layout: BAA in crossbar A '47
'35 I
1. ]AXZA[ ABA
139 [.] N
]AU~ex[ 1. Z 11
[.]
V [.] A[B]A
(a) Sramp{rooj xjj.
[B]AA V
Date: 501-504 or 516-19 or 531-34. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad. [(v(BlI""iiivoc) ]ex'~ex() A[u]~()
Remains on ismetiye Caddesi. North group: r.
11 :s:
I. ? x? X45. YI (a) Sarachane: I. A
I I. Found before the excavation of St Polyeuktos began. About
[I] Mamboury's notes. (v(Bu""iiivoc) B' [~]ex() A"~ex(v«ou)
360x36ox45·
(v(l),miiivoc) B' [~]a() A,,~(exv<iou) (a) Sekbanbasr ibrahim Aga Mescidi.
136 [I] Dirimtekin, 'Sarachane', fig. 14 (left).
(a) Stamp: '70 (= 70 + 40 + 60) x70' [I] Schneider, 'Aquadukt', col. 76.
1. ]BAAYsA[
Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagl: I.
] ~,,()AU~,,[ 148
I. ? x? X45. AY'ZAO
x. I
(a) Stamp:? X35. [I] Mamboury's notes. Layout: ABA in crossbar N
Palace at Kiiciikyalr: 1.
144 I
I. ? X? x40.
I. I ABA
[I] Mamboury, 'Man', )28. [2] Mamboury's notes. I. Z N Y
[3] Feissel, 'Inscriptions', 419 no. 30.2. [4]SEG 37 (1987) no. Y A 2
1056.
BAA ABA A
IN Y (v(Bumiiivoc) ,'~a() Au~ex(v«ou)
B ~ That the reading is not iV(OUC'UIDVOC) j}() Au~a(v'ti01.) is
I [A] tal
MUL TIPLE- LINE
confirmed by 149.
(v(B,K'tliiivoc) ~,' ~ex() A,,~(av«ou)
(v(B,miiivoc) ex' ~() A"~[ex(v«ou)]
137 (a) Stamp: l60 (= 55 + 45 + 60) x60 (= 20 + 20 + 20).
1. IN.t.[ (a) Stamp: 165 x(= 60 +45 + 60) x70(= 20 + 30+ 20). (a) Stamp: (I27) X6,. Date: 50112 or 5161r7 or 5JIh. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad.
Great Palace. Area Ab: I. Sarachane: I.
AY~[ Remains on Ismeriye Caddesi. South group: I.
J.? x? X35.
r. (240) x(245) x )8, AM 349. J.380X370X45·
(vB[('x<,iiivoc)-] A"~[ -] [I] Mamboury's notes. [l] Bardill neg. 95,6.29. [I] Mamboury's notes.
 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE
.
",

(b) Stamp' 160 (~55 + 45 + 60) x 65 (~20 + 25 + 20). ). I 150 Layout: BAPA in cross-bar
Hcbdomon (Bakirkoy). Hypogeum. N I. [.]

[r] Mamboury's notes. I

153
I. I
ABA ABA Yl
I
Y Y
N 11
Z X
I AqAI1
AB,/\, A A
Y
.lV(OlKn&VOC)l' ~a() Atisa(v,iou)
Y
[2] That the reading is not iV(OtKtlroVOC)la' ~() Ausa(V'tlou) is
[.]. ~a() Au~a(v,iou)
(a) Unknown.
"
A
[A] confirmed by 149. [I] Sorlin-Dorigny, <Inscriptions', 87 no. 16, pl. I4 no. 2. iV(Oll«l&VOC) P' ~ap() Ausa(v,iou)
(V(Oll«l&VOC) t" ~a() Au[sa](v'iou) (a) Stamp: approx. 165 x70' (a) Stamp' 160 (57 + )9 + 64) x89 (1 + 38 + 1).
Cistern on Divdru Ali Sokagl. Water inlet: (several). Layout: AA? in cross-bar Mangana district: I.
That the reading is not iv(8uc1t&voc) W,- ~() Au~a(v't{ou) is
confirmed by 149. [r] Mamboury's notes. I. )75 X(290) X44.
'51
I [I] Wulzinger, Baudenlemaler, 38, 41, pl. 20 (top).
(a) Stamp:? x 68. 100 from top of upright to bottom of horizontal 6. I
bar. Yl [2] Mamboury, "Nouvelle lecture', I23. I24. [3] Wulzinger's
N
I notes.
Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagr, I
A,A. (b) Stamp'(156)x80.
[r] Mamboury's notes. ABA
A Beyazir, excavations near the university building: I.
Y
3, I Y I. )80 X(260) X45-P,AM t5).
15
N S [I] Maletskos 'Plintho,', 27', pl. 54.2. [2] Bardill neg'. 94-7-)),
A
I A )4.
ABA (V(OlK"&VOC)t" ~a() Au~a(v,iou) (c) Stamp' (140) x(58)
iv(oum&voc) la' ~a() Ausa()
Y That the reading is not iV(OlKttrovOC)ta' ~() AUS(l(vti~~)is Unknown: I.
S Although we would expect the doubtful letter to be a beta, the L (255) x(295) x)8-4o,AM )48 (old no. 2).
confirmed by 149.
A

(v(Oml&voc) t" ~a() Ausa(v,iou)

That the reading is not iv(3tKtt&voc) to" PC) Au~a(v'[iou) is

(a) Mamboury points out that the right-hand alpha of the crOSSR
bar is in more of a hollow than the rest of the inscription.
Stamp' 170 (~65 + 40 + 65) x 80 (~25 + )0 + 25)'
I illustration does not seem to support the reading.

(a) Stamp: I63 X70'

Dare: 502/3 or P7h8 or 532/3. See Pare Il, Ch. I I, sect. 5.
Cistern on Divaru Ali Sokagr. Exterior window of the water
[I] Bardill neg'. 95.6.27-8.

confirmed by 149. Date: 50112 or p6h7 or 53112. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad.
inlet: I.
Remains on Ismeriye Caddesi. Nonh group.
(a) Stamp: 160 x70' 1.380X37ox48. AYzENTIOY
[I] Mamboury's notes.
Date: 50rh or p6h7 or 53112. See Part Il, Ch. II, sect. 5. [I] Mamboury's notes.
Cistern on Divfiru Ali Sokagl. Exterior window of the water (b) Stamp' ,62 x7J. See AYzANTIOY, AyzENTIOY.
inlet: (several) I. Date: 502/3 or 5l7h8 or 53213. See Part Il, Ch. r r.sect. 5.
I. 39ox38ox40. '49 Cistern on Divfm Ali Sokagr. Exterior window of the water
[r] Mamboury's notes. I. I inlet: I.
(b) Stamp" 64 X70. N I. 370 x360 x jo.
Date: 50112 or 516/7 or 5JIIz. See Part U, Ch. r r, sect. 5. lA [I] Mamhoury's notes.
Cistern on Divaru Ali Sokagr. Exterior window of the water AaA AY[
inlet: I. Y Layout: BAB in cross-bar
I. 390 x 380 x40. 2 '54
I. INlfAV[
[1] Mamboury's notes. A
I
iv(otll:'nwvoc) lY' Au[
4. I iV(Oll«l&VOC)la' ~a() Au~a(v,iou) N
N B (a) Stamp: 122 x 30.
(a) Stamp' '70 (~64 + 42 + 64) x (50) (~? + )0 + 20).
I Unknown: I. BAB Rhegium (Kii9Uk Cekmece). Large surrounding wall of the
ABA 1. Fragment,? x? x 50, iAM 19. Y Acropolis, centre, beside the sea: I.
Y 1.370X37ox5°·
[rJ Mamboury's notes (squeeze). J
!: (b) Stamp' 166 (~62 + 42 + 62) X72 (~2O + J2 + 20). A [I] Mamboury's notes.
A Date: 502/3 or 517/18 or 532/3. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad. The second beta in the crossbar has perhaps been misread. If it was
iV(OllCtl&VOC)t" ~a() Ausa(v,(ou) Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagi: I. a rho, the crossbar would have read po:p( ). The large alpha at the 1)5
1. 375 x 375 x 50. intersection may have been intended to operate for both pap( ) and I. IYlleAY[
That the reading is not I.v(OtK1:trovoc)tu" ~() Ausa(v'tlou) is
[I] Mamboury's notes. [he initial of AuSa. Hence:
confirmed by 149. iV(OlK"tlrovOC)te" Au[
(c) Stamp: Mamboury estimated 16S X72.
(a) Stamp: approx. 160 x 70. Date: 502/3 or 517/18 or 532/3. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad.
iv(oum&voc) P' ~ap() Ailsa(niou)
(a) Stamp'(146)xP_
Cistern on Divani Ali Sokagi. Water inlet: (several). Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagr. (a) Date: after 532. Sec Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. 2C. Kalcndcrhanc Camii. Unknown: 1.
[r] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes. Baths of Zeuxippcs. In or near Building 1 or 2. 1. (2))) X(185) X5).
[I] Gray, <Bricks tamps', 55 no. 4I. [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', AS.
 ~--------~---------------------------------------------------.,..---------,-------,
"<

CATALOGUE
•
CATALOGUE 193
,.'\
M>() 16, (a) Hebdomon (Bakrrkoy).
I.IN A[
.•••.••• BAC( ), BACI( )
[r] Dethier, 'Makrikoy', t67 no. IH', pI. lA' no. '7. [2] Sorlin-
156
iV~(llCtlOOvoc}~' 'A[ Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 94 no. 58. [)] Schneider, In at least one case, the abbreviation BA() re'fers to the same
I. IrA<I>
ivB(uctl&voc) o~'( 'Ziegelsrempel', 266 no. 48. individual: see 168.la and J86.13.
ly"A'P() .:."}:;"'~ ••.•.J"
... ~";.
The alpha is shown fairly clearly in one of Mamboury's
(a) Stamp: (92) x J2. illustrations.
Date: late ath century? See Pan Il, Ch. 10 no. 4.
(~ Stamp:? x 28.
Unknown: t. SINGLE-LINE
Hexagon complex in Giilhane. Hexagon: I.
I. (205) x(I85} x )4-40, AM)7J.
I. 38ox36ox45_
[I] Bardillnegs. 95.8.), 4.
[r] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). BA() BAC()

In at least one case, the abbreviation BAC() refers to the same Layout: abbreviation pa() omitted.
individual: see 168. la and 186.la.
MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE CARRIED INDICTION
A.E() 170
166 I. INHBAC
162
I. I rBA
'57 I.]BAPSA[ iv(~lICtlOOvoc}~' Bac()
I.:3 .AH2I .•••J.11 iV(~lIC'tlOOvoc} '(Ba()
]~o.p()sA[ (a) Stamp: 150xi,.
ivlh(lK'tUDVOC)STl' 'A EO iv(81ICtlOOvoc) t' ~o.(}
Land Walls. Wall between towers 95 and 96a: r.
(a) Stamp: (80) '10.
(a) Stamp: I60x)). It is uncertain whether the BA represents the name abbreviation or J.? X? X45.
Date: 507-22. See Part I1, Ch. 9, sect. za.
Unknown: I. is the equivalent of ~apE(), in which case the stamp carries no name [r] Mamboury's notes.
St Polyeuktos. Level 1266*: I.
I. iAM (CK) no. 60, fragment. abbreviation (CP.1420.Ia).
I. No. 1430,? X? x35.
[I] Mango's notes. (a) Stamp: 85 x ,6.
[I] Hill, 'Bricksramps', 210, A3I. [2] Sarachane archise neg.
1°·}·3oa. Hagia Sophia. Threshold of the west entrance to the north-east '7'
buttress: I. I. JAII8NI
I. }65 x }60 x?, marked with three fingers in the form of a theta. iv(8,,('[IOOvoc} 9' Ba.c()
A[ [I] Antoniades, I-IagiaSophia I, 84, fig. 14. (2] Swift,Hagia
(a) Stamp: 157 x 28.
MULTIPLE-LINE Sophia, 50 no. 4.
Palace of Antiochus: I.
SINGLE-LINE
WITH INDICTION 1·39ox39ox6o.
WITH INDICTION 167 [I] Mamboury's notes.
163 I. AIIAIIAIJ.11

158 I.+A[ ..... ] iV(~lImOOvoc) 10.' ~o.(} Bo.(}

I. INBA.[ [.:]INlIIA
(a) Stamp: 165 x26. 172
iv(~u<tlOOvoc} ~' 'A . [ + ~[ ] iv~(u;:·tl&voc) la' Great Palace. Area Ab: I. I. INIBBAC
(a) Stamp: ? x 20. (a) Stamp: I28 X62. r. ?x?x50. iV(~I\CnOOvoc} l~' Ba.c(}
Land Walls. Between Oriilii Kapr and Topkapi: I. Unknown: I. [I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stampr r j o x jj ,
I.? x?x45. r.iAM(<;:K}.
Great Palace, great foundation wall [0 the east of the
[I] Mamboury's notes. [r] Mamboury's notes. [z] Mango's notes. 168 Augustaion near area Ac: I.
I. INBAIABA r. ?x? X50.
'59
1. INBA[ iV(~,ICtIOOvoc} ~o.(} 10.' Ba.(} [I] Mamboury's notes.
MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE CARRIED INDICTION
iV(~II<tlOOvoc} W 'A[ (a) Date: <-450-75? See Pan 11,Ch. to no. 6.
Layout: abbreviation ~a() included
(a) Stamp: ? x JO. 164 Stamp: 160 X25-27.
I. +A.[ Ruins on Saray Burnu (orphanage ofStPauJ?): r.
Date: 433/4 or 448/9 or 46)/4. See PanlI, Ch. 9, sect. le.
Balaban Aga Mescidi: I. <1>.[ r. )80 x 375 x 55. The brick also carries stamp 186.13.
'73
I.iAM17,?X?X45.
[I] Unger, 'Seraispitze', fig. re no. Bb. [2] Schneider, I.IN.t.EAEAC
+A.[-]'P.[-]
'Ziegelstempel', 265 no. 26.
[I] Mamboury's notes. iv(81ICtlOOvoc}~' ~() Bac(}
(a) Stamp: ? x 80.
[60 Great Palace. AreaAc: I. (a) Stamp:z67 X27.
169
+IJ.1IABAA[ I. ?x?x45.
I.
I. INIBBABA Date: 450/1. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. IC.
[r] Mamboury's notes. StJohn of Stoudios. Nave floor, repair to north strip: 1. Nave
+ iv(~u<tlOOvoc} 1(1' ~o.(} A[ iV(~llCtlOOvoc} IW ~() Ba(}
floor, repair immediately next to west end of southern
(a) Scamp: (1l7) x)4. 165
(3) Stamp: 170 X 20--25. srylobate of bema: 2.
Unknown: I. 1. +A[ ... ]
AISAC .••• Great Palace. AreaAc: 1. I.J25 x323x? a.Stampcd rwice.qjo x j x ?
I. Fragment,? x? x45,iAM9- I. 390 x380 x60. (I] Peschlow,Studioskirche, (in preparation). [2] Bardill neg.
[I] Mamboury's notes. Probably poorly recorded. Reading uncertain. [I] Mamboury's notes. 96.2.2)' (I).
 -- ------------------------------------------------------------~-----------------------------------------------,--------

194 CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE 195
'74 (a) Stamp: 195 x25-30.
1. IN€BABAC Date: 425/6 or 440/1. Sec Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. re.
B(A)C() BACIAIKOY, BACHAIKOY
Cisterns in Gulhane, near Bab-r Humayfin: 1-2. 183
iv(ol1C'tlwvoc) E ~a() Beef)
1. 400 x 385 x45. 2.39° x 370 x40. 1. :)IIAII2Y1[I MULTIPLE-LINE
(a) Stamp: 184 X)2. [1] Mamboury's notes. i]~(O'K'IlWVOC),' ~a() B(a)c()
Date: 45112. See Parr I1, Ch. 9, seer. IC. (b) Stamp:190X2j. WITH INDICTION
St john ofStoudios: I. (a) Stamp: (140) x )0.
Date: 425/6 or 440h. Sec Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le.
I.? x? X49. Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bsb-i Hiimayun: r. Ruins between the Giilhane hospital and the Topkapr Sarayr BACHAIKOY
[1] Peschlow,Studioskirche, (in preparation). fortification: I.
1.375 x35ox35·
I. ? x? x60. 187
[I] Mamboury's notes.
175 [I] Mamboury's notes. I. +AO)[I
I.INHEAEAC VH:)VII
'79
1. INIBABACI
INlI.2111
iv(o,,,,,,&voc)~' ~a() BacO B(A)CI()
iV(OlK"rlWVOC) l' ~a( ) Bccu ) iv8{tKnrovoc)s lp'BaCTlA.u(Qu +
(a) Stamp: '74 x28.
184
Unknown: I. (a) Stamp: I90X25. (a) Stamp: IOO·X79.
1. IN8BABCI
I. iAM (<;;K) no. 45, fragment, )75 x ? x 45· Date: 426/7 or 44112. See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. le. Date: p8h9. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. za.
[1] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. iv(ou,"Itwvoc) 8' ~a() B(a)cI() St Polyeuktos. Level 95: 1. Level 501: a. Level 650*: 3. Level
Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bab-r Humayun. Large vaults, and
(b) Stamp: (105) x(25). portico between them and Hagia Eirenc: I. (a~.Stamp: 195 X25. 886: 4. Unknown: 5·
Unknown: 1. I.38ox?><3O-35· Date: 425/6 or 440/1. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le. I. No. 210. 2. No. 893. 3· No. 259· 4· No. 885· 5·No. 1315.

I. Once in Robert College, fragment, ? x ? x 40. [I] Mamboury's notes. Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bdb-r Hiimdyun: I. Notes: 1-5. One brick measures 350 x? x 35-40.
[I] Mango's notes (rubbing). I. 390 ><370x40. [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 210, B3. [2] Sarachane archive negs.
(c) Cistern of Mocius. In situ in north wall. [I] Mamboury's notes. 5.41.17,9.10.17,9.11.1 la.
[I] Forchheimer and Strzygowski, Wasserbehiilter, 45, 160.
[2] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 264 no. 5. BA[
180 BACIAIKOY
Layout: + ~a() included I. INIBBABA[ MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE CARRIED INDICTION
188
176 iV(OlK"rlWVOC) LP" ~a() Ba[c()) or 185 1. +BACI
1. IN8+BABVC iV(OlK"rl&VOC) LP" ~a() Ba[Cl()] 1. ]BACI[
AIKOY
iv(o"",,&voc) 8' + ~a( ) Beef ) (a) Stamp:(I60)X25. ] BaCl[ [1]NlI.S
Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
(a) Stamp. r So x '7. (a) Fenerbahce + BacIAlKoii [i]VO(l""l&VOC) ,'/(,'
Date: 425/6 or 440h. See Part I1, Ch. 9, sect. le. I·39ox39ox60.
[I] Gorrwald, 'Ziegelstempel', 485 no. 6.
[I] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stamp: 107 x 80.
Cisterns in Gulhane, near Bab-i HiimayfIn: 1-3.
Sr George in the Mangana. Cistern beneath the church: I.
1. 385 x370 x 5°.2.39° x365 x 50. 3. 380 x370 x50
I.360X35ox50. "
[I] Mamboury's notes.
(b) Stamp: ,8,-,85 X20. CRUCIFORM [I] Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 29, fig. 33 no. 4·
BAC[
[2] Mamboury's notes.
Great Palace. Area Ac, second foundation below the bath: 1-2.
181 BAC()
1. 380 x 360 x40' 2. 390 x ]80 x 50.
I.INBIBAC[ 186
[I] Mamboury's notes.
iV(OlKnwvoc)
iv(omlwvoc)
~l' ~ac[()
~l' ~a() C[
'"» WITHOUT INDICTION
Cl
It is not clear from Marnboury's notes whether the stamp was 189
BACI() INIABA
complete. 1. +EACI
:"I AIKOY
'77 (a) Stamp: 148 x 27.
1. INlI.EABACI iV(<5lK'tL(;)vOC) ta'pet() Bac(} plus monogr~m no. 7
Date: 428/9 or 443/4 or 458/9. See Part U, Ch. 9, sect. le. + BaclAtlcoU
iV(OlK"rlWVOC) 0' ~a() Bccu ) Miihiirdar Emin Pasa Sokagl. (a) Date: C,45O-75? See Part 11,Ch. 10 no. 6.
(a) Land Walls.
[I] Mamboury's notes. Stamp: 140 (52 + 35 + 53) x 170 (70 + 30 +70).
(a) Stamp: 172 x 28. [I] Dethier, 'Makrikoy', 167 no. K', pl. IA'.no. 19" [2] Sorlin-
Ruins on Saray Burnu (orphanage of St Paul?): I.
Date: 450/1. See Part I1, Ch. 9, sect. IC. 182 Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 94 no. 59·
I. The brick also carries stamp 168.ra.
St john of Stoudios. Nave floor, north strip, repair: 1. I. INIBBAC.[ [1] Unger, 'Seraispitze', fig. 10 no. 8a. 2. [+BACI]
1. )50 x(287) x?
iV(Ol""l&VOC) LP" ~ac() . [ [A]IKOV
[I] Peschlow, Studioskirche, (in preparation). [2] Bardill neg.
96.2•27a.
iV(OlK'IlWVOC) LP" ~a() C . [+ BO:C1A.]~KOU
(a) Stamp:(I55)xJ4. (a) Stamp: (9) x 58.
'78 Unknown: I. Great Palace. Excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38: I.
1. IN8BABACI
I. ? x? x 49-54. AM 410.
BACHAIKOY
I.?x?x}S,no·54·
iV(Ol""'&VOC) 8' ~a() Bccu ) [I] Bardill ncgs. 95.10.2a, p. [I] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous Remainder, box 38, neg. 222.
See BACINKOY, BACHAIKOY.
 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE
,.,1
197
'90 (c) Date: 502-33 or 517-20 or 532-35. See PaTtII, Ch. 9, sect. ad,
(+B]AC
'97 r AHOY TPO<DlMOY
1. Ch. ro no. 7.
I. '"
(IAIK]OY Behind A~lf Efendi Caddesi (hence from the vicinity of the A 200
(+B]nc(,).w]ou remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagi). ]KOC<DOPA I. +fAH15
[I] Malcrskos, 'Plinrhos', 270, p]. 53.2. ri . TPO<DIM15
(a) Hebdomon (Bakirkoy).
(d) Date: early 6th century. See Part Il, Ch. Iona. 7.
(I] Dethier, 'Makrikoy', r67 no. K',pI.IA' no. r9. Unknown. ] pn() Boc~op(t)n(c) ~ + I'cotou TPOqJlJ.lOU
[I] Laurent, 'Inscriptions', 229, 230 no. 2. (a) Stamp: (105)(= ? + JO + 75) x90 (= JO + JO + JO). (a) Caddebostaru, Bagdad Caddesi.
'9'
r. +BACI Cistern on Nuruosmaniye Caddesi: I. [r] Meliopoulos, 'Rufinianai', 282 no. 2. [2] 1. Kalch. 109+
I. ? x? X45. [3] Peissel, 'Inscriptions', 418 no. 28.2, and 425 (mentioned).
AIK15 '94
+ BaClA.UCOU 1. m [I] Mamboury's notes. (4] SEG J7(t987)no. IOJ8.
'Bocxrro (b) Pendik. About 100 m. to rhewest of the tomb opposite the
(a) Stamp: IIO X75. PIAAC church.
Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between (INP .. ] [I] Xenakis, 'Exakriboseis', 116 no. 4.

Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: 1. (IC] (c) Stamp: IJ~x65.

I. ? x ? x 45> once in the Hagia Eirene collection. Unknown: I.
G(eD)\) Xa[ptc] Bocnoptcc [iV(OllC'tlroVOC).
[r] Mamboury's notes.
BOC<I>OPlAC I. MSBK inv. 62I 5, (160) X(200) x?
Wulzinger restored indiction twelve on the basis of I93.Ib, but (r] MSBK neg. 621p. (2] DAI (Ist) neg. 2J42 (cast).
there is no certainty that the two were identical. See BOCrrOPIAC, BOC<DOPIAC. [3] Mamboury's notes (from cast). [4] Mango's notes (from
CIRCULAR
cast).
(a) Stamp: 107 diameter.
(cl) Unknown.
Date: 502-33 or 517-20 or 532-35. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad,
m Ch. rc no.p. (I] DAI (1st) neg. KB 549J.
BAXCI Substructures south of Cemal Nadir Sokagi, in rbeyaalc of Hall
AIA(K]OY IV.
INPIB [I] Wulzinger, 'Substruktionsbauten', 381 no. 3. rA()
IC

8(£0)1) xaplc BO:C1A.t[K]OU iv(811cn&voc) t~' 198

'95
(a) Stamp: IIO diameter. 1. m 1. A1AlI::rNI r AlOY, r AEIOY, rElOY
Date: 503/4 or 518/19 or 533/4' See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. zd, Ch. Bocxrro iv(Su",wvoc) e" pn() fn()
ro no.v. PIAA(C] SINGLE-LINE
(a) Cistern south of Divan Yolu, between Boyacr Ahmet Sokagi
Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagi. [INP .. ]
and Piyer Loti Caddesi. In situ in north-west wall, about 3 m. 201
[I] Mamboury's notes. (IC]
below the impost level. r. +fAIOY
8(EO)U xa(plC] Bocnopic]c iv(omlwvoc) .. l [I] Wulzinger, 'Substruktionsbauten', 390, fig. 15.
+Fcdou
(a) Date: early 6th century. See Part Il, Ch. 10 no. 7.
BOCI10PlAC, BOC<DOPlAC Unknown. (a) Stamp: 94 x46.
(,] DAI (1st) neg. KB 5481. Date: late 6th century. See Part Il, Ch. I r, sect. 8.
CIRCULAR Great Palace, excavations in Peristyle and Apsed Hall in
1953-55· In situ in the cistern below the south-west portico (in
BocrrOPIAC CRUCIFORM same wall as I364.Ia): (numerous) I.
rAEIOY
I. 3 50 x 340 x 50, labelled no. 9.
'93
r. m BOC(DOPIAC See rAlOY, rAEIOY, fEIOY. Notes: Bricks all hard and well-baked. Published
BOCxrrO measurements 340 x 340 x40.
PIAAC '96 [r] GP Il, 107, fig. 21 no. 2. [2] Talbot Rice archive photo.
1. C
INPIB [3] Mamboury's notes.
]SE:BAQ.OPIAC
IC . 0
S(EO)U XO:P1C Bocnopicc iv(StlC't"i&voc) LW 11
rAHOY AMANOY MULTIPLE-LINE
(a) Date: early 6th century. See Part Il, Ch. 10 no. 7. (iv(S,K't'wvoc)]~ e" pn() Boceoplcc
T oldudcde Mescidi. WITH INDICTION
What appears to be an .3: in Mamboury's sketch was presumably a
[r] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 268 no. 9I. '99
11. +fAH15
(b) Stamp: 107 diameter I. fAEIOY
Date: early 6th century. See Part Il, Ch. la no. 7. (a) Stamp: (r oo) (=.1 + JO + 70) x (60) (= JO + JO + ?) AMAN15
202
Sea Walls. 'House of Justinian': I. Great Palace. Area Ab, collapsed vault: I. + I'coiou 'Aucvou I. +fAE:ll5E:N
J.37ox?x? I. 380 x? x45.
(a) Caddebostarn, Bagdad Caddesi. l.IKTIOYNOC
[I] Wulzingcr, 'Substruktionsbauten', 382 (mentioned). [I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Meliopoulos; 'Rufinianai', 282 no. I. [2] Feissel, B
[2] Mamboury and Wiegand, Kaiserpalaste, 15 no. 2.
(J] Wulzinger's notes.
'Inscriptions', 418 no. 28.1. (J] SEG J7 (1987) no. !oJ8. + Fcetoo £VOtlC'ttouvoc W
 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 199
(a) Stamp: 130 x 77. (e) Stamp: 88 x(40) (a) Stamp: ? x 64; 68 mm. from left edge to right of omicron. (a) Stamp: 160X25.
Byzantine drains along the Mese. Forum of Constantine: I. Hagia Sophia. North-west buttress, loose brick at gallery-roof Hagia Sophia. Reused in repair to Turkish wall, in a corner and Great Palace ..Area Ab, collapsed v~ult: 1.
I.360X345X45· level: I. to the right of the alley as one faces the north entrance to the I.390X360X55· •
[I] Mamboury's notes. I.35ox?x48. narthcx: I. [I] Mamboury's notes.
(b) Stamp: ')OX77. [I] Van Nice archive (rubbing). I. 370 x? x)6.
Remains found when laying drains in Atik Ali Pasa Caddesi. (f) Stamp: 90 x61. [r] Mambcury's notes. [2] Mango's notes (from rubbing).
Oblique wall at cast end of street: J. Hagia Eirene. Southern side of atrium: J.
209
I.360X340x45· 1.3'lAa'ZNI
r. )55 X)55 x45· rEIOY
[I] Mamboury's notes. [I] George, St. Eirene,pl.I6no.13. (v(aumrovoc),' ~a() rE()
, z06
(g) Stamp: 90 x 62.
1. +f€IO[Y] (a) The indicrion on this die was later altered: see 210. la.
WITHOUT INDICTION Hagia Sophia. South-east buttress, third window sill below the
INl>SiB+ Stamp:(I27)X21.
top sill, work of either Sinan or the Fossati brothers.
rAIOY Fenari isa Camii: I.
[t] Bardill negs. 94·8.6, 7. + I'eio]u] iVS(lK'tlOOVOC)S lW +
J. (300) X(210) X40-50, AM 19I.
Z03 (h) Stamp: I r z x?
(a) Stamp: 110 x 56, [I] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari
I. +fA+ Hagia Sophia. South-east buttress.
Hagia Sophia. Little court between the baptistery and Hagia isa Camii'rfig. 39 no. 12. [3] Bardill neg. 94.II.24a.
IOY+ [I] Antoniades, Hagia Sophia I, 84, fig. 13. [2] Soteriou, Hagia Sophia: (many) r.
Sophia, 64.
With border I. 350 x ? x 50.
(i) Gray gives no indication of the layout of the inscription. It is 2IO
+futo'U++ I '[IJ Mamboury's notes.
almost certainly the same stamp as g or h. 1. 31AIISNI
(a) Stamp: 85X 69. Hagia Sophia. In situ on an upper staircase, (v(atKtlOivoc) kH ~'~u() fE()
Unknown: I. [I] Gray, 'Brickstamps', 51 n. I. [2] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel',
266 no. 50. Indiction altered to zeta from vau.
1.)j2 x (290) X4t-44, AM 182 (old no. 14).
fAIOY AMANOY
[I] Bardill neg. 94.I1.I5a. (a) The original stamp was 109.Ia.
3· Probably the same as type I or 1.
(b) Stamp: 88 x 65. See r AHOY AMANOY. Stamp: 105 x 22.
Retaining wall and barrel vault between the church of the (a) Date: c. 532/3. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. ab. Palace of Antiochus: I.
Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia and the Basilica Cistern Hagia Sophia. Ruins in front of the west doors, demolished 1. 370 x? x 50.
(Yerebatan Sarayr), in situ: I. November 1873. [I] DAI (Ist) neg. KB '50r. [2] Mamboury's notes.
I·37ox?x4°' [I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 87 no. 21. [2] Leclercq, [3] Mango's notes. [4] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari isa Camii',
'Estampilles', col. 546 no. 8b.
r AIOY [MJ-yPIAP:l,CO,(
[I] Mamboury's notes. 183 no. 12 (mentioned).
(c) Stamp: 88 x67. (b) Great Palace. Area Ab, in situ.
207
Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. za. [r] CPII, 106 (mentioned). [2] Talbot Rice archive (letter-from
1.]fAI15 2II
St Polyeuktos. Unknown: J. Mamboury to Talbot Rice Dated 17 August 1952)'
)"YPIAPIS 1. INAIBAf€
1. No. '46,)80x)55 x)8-4). (c) Stamp: 90 x65.
[I] Hill, <Bricks tamps' , 211, B4. [2] Sarachane archive neg. Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between ] fUlOU [~l~pl6:p~ou (I) iv(5tlC'ttrovoc) at' ~a() fE()
10.2.28. Hagia Sopbia and Hagia Eirenc: 1. The interpretation of line 2 is that suggested by Peschlow. Given (a) Stamp: 170 x 30.
I. ? x ? x 35, once in the Hagia Eirene collection.
the occurrence of + Tcnou 'Audvou and + Icoicc Tpoctpoo, a Date: 427/8 or 442/3 or 457/8. See Part H, Ch. 9. sect. le.
1. +fA+ [1] Mamboury's notes. double name may also be possible. Byzantine drains along the Mese. Opposite Firuz Ag3 Camii: I.
IOY+
(a) Stamp: (8)) x 54. I.400X37ox45·
Without border [rJ Mamboury's notes.
Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: I.
+fcdou++ 1. (140) X(IOO) x)4.
(a) Stamp: 8o x (6o) fAEIOY [r] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', B34' 2I2
Unknown: 1. r. INIlIIlAf€
1. (270) X(2IO) x 40-60, AM )6). Z04
1.]fA€ (v(aumrovoc) ~t' ~a() fE()
[t] Bardillneg. 95-7-20.
[I]OV (a) Stamp: '75 x )0.
(b) Stamp: 85 X62. r AIOY TPOcDIMOY
Unknown: 1. Singer House: 1.
] fUE[l]OU
I. 360 x 350 x 40-50, AM 326. Sec fAHOYTPO<I>IMOY. 1.)75X)7ox55·
(a) Stamp: (84) x 55. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[I]Bardillnegs·95·P5,26.
Unknown: 1.
(c) Stamp: 88 x65.
1. ? x? x 35-40, AM 273.
Unknown. r. 213
[I] BatdiU negs. 94.1).), 4.
")55 x? X 50, iAM (t;:K) no. 90. rE() 1. IN€IBAL€
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes.
(d) Stamp: 88 x65. (v(aumrovoc) El' ~a() I'et )
Layout: indiction number after abbreviation IN
205
Hagia Sophia. North-west buttress, loose brick at gallery-roof (a) Stamp: r 68 X) 1.
1. +fA[+] 208
level: I. Kalenderhane Camii. Roof, wall-filling: 1.
€IO[Y+] IN2BAr€
1.360X350X42. 1. ()77) X(22) x 51.
[I] Van Nice archive (rubbing). +r~do[l)++] (v(alKtlrovoC) ,'It; ~u() fE() [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', All,
 200 CATALOGUE
..
~
CATALOGUE 201
214 218
I. ]BArE r. IN,;SBAfE:AA
I. (3u) X(lU) x 55. AM 50 (old no. lOO). 2. (220) X(2t)) x 55. (b) Date: C,j)l/).See Pm u, Ch. 9;' sect. ab.
AM,SI. ). ?x?x58-60,At\1JS2. 4-AM185. j.{)45)x(250) Hagia Sophia. Ruins in front the west doors. demolished
] ~a() re() iv(ot1cttOivoc) /)' s ~() fu.a() X47,At\1J86. 6. (2)4) X(220) x 5'-56, AM )1). 7. )68 X(225) November 1873. -
(a) Stamp:? x 30. ivo(tlC'ttOivoc) 1$1 ~'~()fu.a() x 50-6o,AM 317. 8,335 x300X 55-60. animal footprint, AM [1] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Letter', 13q~t;t:>.7.
Sea Walls. Wen of the monumental staircase and north of the )18. 9· )6) x)60 x60--65. two animal footprints made after J,1..•~~.'
The fourth character may be a form of space-filler (cp. 291, 1494) or
railway, area Fa: I. the result of an overlap of S (the old indiction) and Z (the new stamping, AJ.\1 )45· 10. )70 x()30) X46-5 5. AM )96. J I. )70 x
I.? x? X3S. indiction). (108) x 47-50, AM )97. MULTIPLE-LINE
[I] Mamboury's notes. J [t] Bardill negs. 94·).8 (I); 9P.5-8 (1), 9-1I (3); 95-'.23,)a (5);
(a) Stamp: 150 x 30. 224
95·)·6a, 7a (6), z j a (7), '4a (8); 95'4-2)a (6);95-5')-4 (7), 6 (8);
Rotunda beside the Myrelaion church. Wall of rotunda, west 1. fE]Orf ,
Layout: indiction number after abbreviation for name 95·6.1I, 12 (9); 95·9.t), 14 (10).
end. ]T1B
215 [I] Talbot Rice archive (rubbing). Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
I. INBAfEEI Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I. fe]opy[ -Jr tW
2. IN';. BAfE:AA 1.365 x )60 x 55. once in the Hagia Eirene collection. (a) Stamp: ? x 5).
iv(oucrtOivoc) ~a() f£() et'
iv(otIcttOivoc) S" s ~a() fu.a() [I] Mamboury's notes. Unknown: I.
(a) Sancaktar Mescidi: (several). ivo(uC'llOivoc).' ~a() fu.a() I.? x? x 26-}5. AM 440.
[I] Pasadaios, Mnemeia, 13 pl. jc", W. [I] Bardillnegs. 9P).15. 16.
(b) Stamp: 141 x25. (a) Stamp: 145 x '9.
WITHOUT INDICTION
Unknown: I. 'Bath' building beside the Myre1a.ion rotunda: (two). 225

I. (lOO) X(lIO) X)5-45, AM )7'. [r] Talbot Rice, 'Bodrum Camii', 173. fig. II no. 10. [zj Talbor 222' 1. fEDPfI
Rice archive (rubbing). l. +f€AA OA[.... ]
[I] Bardill negs. 95-7.)4,)5; 95.S.I, 2.
CIOY+
Kariye Camii. Loose: I. 219 Fecpviou [.... ]
I. ]BAf€AA + feJ..ac1ou +
I.37°XJ70X43· (a) Stamp: (107) x()8).
[I] Mango's notes (rubbing). ] ~a() r£lux() (a) Stamp: 115 x 60. Unknown: I.
Great Palace. Area Ac, foundation piers: I. I. ? x? X}2-35, AM )99.
(a) Stamp: (75) X22.
1. )80 x360 x60. [I] Bardill negs. 95.9.17, 18.
Land Walls. Golden Gate: I.
[lJ Mamboury's notes.
rElOY I.? x? x 50.
(b) Stamp: "7 x60.
[IJ Mamboury's notes. TABULA ANSATA
Walls of Nessebfr. Pavement no. 5 of tower no. 2: I.
See rAIOY, r AEIOY, fEIOY.
I. )55 x 340 x?, surface has yellowish tint, stamped four times
226
with this die.

+
I.
[r] Ognenova-Marinova, 'Briques', 113 no. 13, fig. 10). II4.
rEAO rEAAClOY figs. 104 and 105.
(c) Stamp: I2ox60. +fE:OPfI15
216 WITH INDICTION Land WaIls. \Vall between towers 95 and 96a: I. IN,i21E:
I. INZBAPfE:A J. ?x? x 55-60.
220 Monogram no. 55 (Maupndou)
[I] Mamboury's notes.
iv(ot""tOivoc)~' ~p() fEA(aciou) I. +IN,iSIfBA + Feopyiou iVS(lK'tlrovOC)S te"
(d) Stamp: UI X62.
(a) Stamp: 12) X)). fE:AACIOY (a) Stamp: tabula 154 x 51; roundel j e wide.
Great Palace, excavations in Peristyle and Apsed Hall in
Date: 4)8/9 (or 42)/4). See Part Il, Ch. 11, sect. 2. + ivS(uC'tl&voc)s 1{ pa() fEAaclOU 1953-55· In situ on fallen vault. close to stone structure of Date: 582 or 59617. See Part 11. Ch. 5. sect. la.
St Polyeuktos. Unknown: I. Apsed Hall: I.
(a) Stampr r 60 X60. Unknown: I.
I. No. 14J.? x? X45. 1. 370 x 360 x 65. labelled no. 17. 1. (160) x(148) x ac, AM 7J.
Unknown: I.
[I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 208, AS. [2] Sarachane archive neg. [I] GPII, 107, fig. 1I no. 5. [2] Talboc Rice archive photo.
I. MSBK no. unknown. [I] Bardill negs. 94+25, 16.
9·II.2Ia.
Irl Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 164 no. 7. [1] MSBK (photo). In the area of the excavations undertaken in I946-47 and
[)] DAI (Isr) neg. 2)50 (cast). [4] Mamboury's notes (from r9 58-60 between Hagia Eirene and Hagia Sophia.
cast). [sJ Mango's notes (from cast). [I] Mango's notes (from squeeze).
rEAA() rE OPrI OY

+
221 2.

I. +fE:AA
217 SINGLE-LINE
CIQY
I. IJ.1AIBNfE:AA +fE:OPfI15
IJ.1,ifI
IN,i21€
iv(oumOivoc) at' ~a() fu.a()
With border
(a) Stamp. r 57" ()o) Monogram no. 55 (Moopudoo)
+ fEAac10U lVS(lK'tlcl}voC)r~1 + Feocylou +Feopyiou iVS(lK'ttrovOC)s re"
Land Walls. In situ in arcade of outer wall to south of tower 15
+feMxclOU iVS(\K'tl&VOC)~ ~I
(a) Stamp: (160) xJj.
of inner wall: I. (:1) Date: 582 or 596/7. See Part H, Ch. 5. sect. la.
I. ? x? X47. (a) Stamp: 102-104 x 74-77. Sea \Vall of Boukoleon.
In the area of the excavations undertaken in 1946-47 and
[I] Bardill neg. 96.l.Joa. [I] Mamboury and Wiegand. Kaiserpoldste, 20 (centre row, 1958-60 between Hagia Eirene and Hagia Sophia.
Unknown: 1-11.
right). [2] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Dirimtekin, 'Fouilles', 180 no. 6.
 .._--------------------------------------------------:-,

202 CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE
203
rnru P(rI OY) (b) Stamp: (54) x65·
Date: 582/3 or 597/8. See Part Il, Ch. 5V, sect. la.
233 Date: 416/7 or 431/2. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. rb.
Unknown: I. KPS[ ] Palace of Antiochus:
227 I. I.

I. +r€(J)P$
+r€[(J)PrIOYC] J. ?x? X50.
t. (2'7) x(I90) x 37-40, AM '34.
INJI.sIll+ [I] Bardill negs. 95·I.t4, '5. + r.[roPrlou C]Kp()S [ ..... ] [r] Mamboury's notes.

+reoop(riou)s ivo(uC'tlroVQc)s tW + a. IN~}V (a) Stamp: (64) x 59. Accessory A

(a) Stamp: IIO x 53. pr ~i1"IQC Date: C·582-602. See Part Il, Ch. 5, sect. la.
SeerPA().
Unknown: I. .# +r €(J) Kalenderhane Camii. North-east corridor, floor: 1.

1. ('45) X(I 57) x43·

370XJ55 X49,A,\115'
J.
+ Feopylou C(1Cp) ivo(\lCt\oovoc)s c" around monogram no. 55 Accessory 0
[I] Bardill neg. 94. I. J2a. [r[Peschiow, 'Bricksramps'j Er c.
(Mcupudoo) See 1666.1.
(b) Stamp:(Ioo)x55'
Myrelaion, debris: I. (a) Stamp: '33 x70'
Date: 582/J or 597/8. See Part Il, Ch. 50sect. la.
I. In private ownership of N. Talbor Rice.
Unknown: 1-2. rH()
[I] Talbor Rice, 'Bodrum Camii', I7J, fig. I I no. '4. [aj Talbot
1.329 x (270) x 37, incised line down one side of brick 70mm.
Rice archive (rubbing).
from edge, AM 67 (old no. 86) .•. (.85) x('55) x 35-40, AM 234 rPA( )
228 I. ArH

J. +rE(J)p+ [I] Bardillnegs. 94+,6"7 (I); 94.6.4a, 5a (a). Layout: abbreviati~n IN omitted
a;r~()
IN.6.SIB+
3· As type 2, bur possibly with a different indicrion letter. (a) Stamp: Il7 x 3 1. 238
+ ferop(YloU) + ivB{uc'tloovoc)s tW + (a) Stamp: 131 x 67. Date: late ath century? See Pact Il, Ch. 10 no. 4.
r . ArrA

(a) Date: 533/4. See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect .• b. Date: 582/3 or 59718. See Part II, Ch. 5, sect. la. Unknown: I. aTpa()
Hagia Sophia. Debris from the collapsed barrel vault in the Unknown: 1-2. I. 280 x(r65) x 35-50, AM 145.
(a) Stamp: 114 x 30.
substructures of the west wing of the justinianic atrium. t. (337) x('95) x a.a, AM 68. z . (t85) x(175) x4i~l'dI'f"I20. [I] Bardill neg. 94-7 .z0.
Date: late 4th century? See Part n, Ch. la no. 4.
[r] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 265 no. 28. [2] Schneider, [I] Bardill negs. 94-4.18,19 (I); 95.t.I6, 17 (a). Unknown: I.
Westhof, 26 no. I I. [3] Mamboury, 'Nouvelle lecture', r ao. I. 283 x 269 x42-44,AM 137.
231 [I] Bardill neg. 94-7.19.
229 t. KPS;QSB rI( )
1. +r€(J)p+
Layout: abbreviation IN included
[ ] 235
+r€(J)PrIlSC r. INABAfI 239
+ rerop(YloU) [ ]+
r. AI1AMI
(a) Stamp: r ra x('7) Monogram no. 55 (Meupudou) iv(B,,,,,rovoc) «' pa() r,()
+ fEOOpyiou CKp()S ivo(uC'noovoc)s~' iv(B«nrovoc) a' r~a()
Hagia Sophia. South-west ramp. south landing, second below (a) Stamp: 148 x 30.
gallery. (a) Sramp. r yc x84. Date: 417/18 or 432/3' See Part H, Ch. 9. sect. rb. (a) In the lintel of a window of a monumental tomb near incili
[I] Van Nice archive (rubbing). Date: 583/4 or 598/9. See Part 11,Ch. 5, sect. la. Palace of Amiochus: r. KOlkii.
Kalenderhane Camii. North-east corridor, floor: 1. 1. 37ox360x50. [I] Curtis and Aristarches, 'Anekdoroi', I I no. KE~, [2] Curtis,
1. 345 X 320 x47, three breaks. [I] Mamboury's notes. Broken Bits, i, no. 23.
[I] Peschlow, 'Bricksramps', El a.
236 240
(b) Stamp: 164 x8I. J. INBrPA+
I. INrIBArI
nmPrIOY CKP() Date: 583/4 or 598/9. See Part Il, Ch. 5, sect. la; Ch. 8, sect. 8.
Great Palace, 1952. Loose brick from trench PI. in Chamber C iv(B'KTlrovocl1< Il<x() r,() iv(Bumrovoc) pTpa() +
The title C.cp() is to be completed CKp(ilXovoc) or Ccpfwtcplco). See below the Antechamber of the Apsed Hall, probably from (a) Ruins near Topalian Ham, in the area bounded by Hoca Ham
(a) Stamp: 120 x 22.
Mango, 'Review 1', 68 nc z and cp. I(J)ANNOY CKP(). vault of chamber: I. Sokagt, Kapurcular Sokagl, and Kanrcioglu Sokagt.
Date: 414.1t5 or 429/30. See Part H, Ch. 9. sect. rb.
1. 350 x? x450IabeUed no. 14. Palace of Anriochus: I. [I] Meliopoulos, 'T oporhesia', 2.j r no. 6. [2.] Schneider,
230 [I] Talbot Rice archive photo. 1. 365 x36ox50. Byzanz, 96.2.7 no. 2. [3] Schneider. 'Ziegelstempel', 264 no. 6a
I. IN.6..,1,.,2V (c) Haydarpasa. [I] Mamboury's notes. (apparently erroneous).
rr ( '1") IRC Date: 583/4 or 598/9. See Part Il, Ch. 5, sect. la.
'+r €(J) 24'
[I] Meliopoulos, 'Anekdoroi', 73. [2] Feissel, 'Inscriptions',
J. INBBAfPA
+ fEcof?'Y1?U C(Kp) ivS(uc'tloovoc)s c" around bracketed monogram 408 no. '·3· bl SEG J7 (1987) no. 1025.
no. 55 (Mnupudou} rP( ) iv(BlJ<tlrovOC) p'pa() rpa()
(a) Stamp: 128 x ? 232 (a) Stamp: 200 X2S.
1. Similar to 231. No accessory
Date: 582/3 or 597/8. See Part Il, Ch. 5, sect. la. Binbirdirek cistern. in situ in north wall, about 1 m. above the
Sea Walls. Pillars near the monumental staircase, between the (a) Date: C.582-602. See Part Il, Ch. 5. sect. la. 237 interior ground level: (three) I.
railway and the sea, area Fb: I. Kalenderhane Camii. North-east corridor, east end: 1. I. IN€I'IIK€BAfP r.375 X375 x44,iAM.
I. ? x? X40. l.340X337X45· [I] Wulzinger, 'Subsrruktionsbauren', 386, fig. 10 no. 1.
iv(Bmlrovoc) El' + (in leal or heart) K(up,). pa() rp()
[r] Mamboury's notes. [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', El h. [2] W ulzinger, Baudenkmiiler, 41, pl. 20 (bottom).
(a) Stamp: 145 X22. [3] Schneider, 'Ziegelsrempel', no. 6a,
 -- .~----.---._-----

CATALOGUE
20 4 CATALOGUE
,. ~.
(b) Ruins near Topalian Ham, in the area bounded by Hoca Ham 246 rPAI1( ) 256
Sokagl, Kaputcular Sokagl, and Kaurcioglu Sokagi. I. "Q1INI I. INeIB"[f)PA[
[JJ Meliopoulos, "Topothesia', 230 no. 2. [2] Schneider, iv(ot«ttibvoc) tTpa() 25'
Byzanz, 96.27 no. I. [3] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 264 no. 6b_ i~(Ot«ttibvoc) et" fla() [I'Jpa[
I. INIBBAfPAIl
(c) Sea Walls. Near the little mosque of the Mangana Quarter (a) Scamp' ,64 x 24· (a) Stamp: (186) x 29. .s }l-;:~..J.-
Date: 426/7 or 44112. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. le. iV(OtlmiOvoc) t~- ~() [pu.()
(Bostancilar Tdbhanesi Mescidi?). Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia, octagonal crypt, north wall,
Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bab-r Hiimayfin. (3) Scamp: 195-205 x )0.
[I] Mamboury's notes. Room A, material broken out of blocked-up door .
., [I] Mamboury's notes. Great Palace. Area Ac: 1. [I] Kleiss, 'Grabungen', fig. 4a.
1. 390 x 370-380 x60.
242 2. "Q1IliII
[I] Mamboury's notes.
I. INf+rPV iv(otl<ttibvoc) tTpuO (b) Srampr r So x jo.
iv(otmibvoc)y' + fpa() (a) Stamp: 160 x 30. . Great Palace. Area Ab: (numerous).
(a) Blachernai. Enclosure wall near Theotokos of Blachernai. Date: 426/7 or 441/z. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Mamboury's notes. Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bab-r Hiimayfiru (large numbers) I. rPHf()
(b) Dirimtekin published INT +[PY, apparently misreading the I. 380x370x50- 252
characteristic form of V as Y. [I] Mamboury's notes. I. )BBArPAIl
Blachemai, excavations of July-August 1958.
WPaOfpa·O
[I] Dirimtekin, 'Blachernes', 22, 31 no. 2.
(a)' Stamp: 180 x 30- 257
(c) Dirimrekin published IN[ +PY, apparently omitting the I' and 247 I. INfBArPf
misreading the characteristic form of V as Y_ I. INIBArPA Great Palace. Collapsed vault and between areas Ab and Ac:
Blachemai, excavations ofJuly-August 1958- (numerous) 1. iv(otK'ttibvoc) t' Jlo() fp(~)y()
iv(omtibvoc) t" ~() fpa()
[I] Dirimtekin, 'Blachernes', 22, 31 no. 3· I. ?x? x60_
(a) Stamp: 153 x26.
(a) Beirut. [I] Mamboury's notes.
(d) Scamp' ,8I x 40. Kalenderhane Camii. Vault of north cross-arm, filling: I.
Unknown: I.
[I] Du Mesnildu Buisson ya. [2] SEG 7, 40 no. 1'99:---
1.325 x322X38.
[)) Lauffray, 'Beryre', )2.
I. 39ox355 x4hAM H_ [I) Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', A6.
(b) Beirut, baths, floor above hypocaust.
lr.l BardiU negs. 94.1.270, 2Ba.
[I] Butcher and Thorpe, 'Beirut', 304-
fHPf()
243
rPA[
I. Aq1l>.2li11 258
248 253
iv(otutibvoc)s oTpa() I. INIBBArPA I. INArPHf
I. AQ1AliI[I)

(a) Scamp' 22 jX )0. iv(otlcrtibvoc) tP' ~a() fpa( ) i~(OtK'ttibvoc) aTp~y()

[i)v(OtK'ttibvoc) a' Fpc]
Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bib-l Hiimayfin: 1. (a) Stampt r j j x j y.
(a) Stampr rpc X)O.
1.? x? x40. (a) Stamp' ('4)) "7.
Sea Walls_ 'Tower ofBelisarius': 1_ Kalenderhane Camii. Vault of west cross-arm, filling: I.
[I] Mamhoury's notes. Unknown: I.
I.390X380X55· I.)20X(I70)x45·
1.Fragment, ? x? X 37. iAM 25.
[I] Mamboury and Wiegand, Kaiserpaldne, 20 (centre row. [I] Peschlow, 'Bricks tamps', A7.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
244 centre). [2] Marnboury's nores.
I. Aq1+3li11
254
iv(otl['[tibvoc)" + fpa() I. )IBf[P)A[
249
(a) Scamp' '90 x )0. )BAfPA
I. )~PT[p)a[
Unknown: 1-2_ fPHfOPIOY
I. (267) X(200) x )6-50, AM 66. 2. (29B) X(250) x )B-45, AM ) paO fpaO (a) Stamp, (no) X)!.

174· (a) Stamp: (120 from upright of beta to right-hand edge) x }8. Date: 413h4. See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. la.
[r] Bardillncgs. Theodosian Hagia Sophia. Back wall of Schneider's 259
94-'1.2',)O (2); 94+'4, '5 (,). Date: 4]4-18 or 429-33. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb. I.
propylaeum.

245
Palace of Antiochus: I.
I.? x? X4j.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Van Nice archive (rubbing). [+]
+fPHfO[PIO)
I. IN8BAfPA
255 YINl>.2A
iv(ot1C'[tibvoc) 6' ~a() fpa()
I. INIBBAfPA[
[Monogram no. 55 (MaupIKloU)]
(a) Stamp' (210) x2B. 25°
Date: 425/6 or 440/1. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le.
iv(Otmibvoc) tp' ~() fpa[ + [PllYO[PlO]1.l i~~(lK1trovOC)sf!.'
I. )ArPA
Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bab-r Hiimjiyfin. Floor above the (a) Scamp' 190-'95 x )0. (a) Stamp'? X (4)),
~)aO fpaO
cisterns: (large numbers) J. Great Palace. Ana Ac: 1-2. Date: 582/3. See Part I1, Ch. 5, sect. la and Ch. 1I, seccz.
I. 390x380x40-
(a) Stamp: (85) x26. L 380 x 370 x 50- 2.39° x 370 x 50. Excavation of the Diakonissa complex near Istanbul
[I] Mamboury's notes. Tokludede Mescidi: I. Notes: 1-2. White mortar with some sand, and very little University, 1943-46. Cistern 2.5 m. north of Church B_
(b) Excavations near the University, in Buyiik Resit Pasa Caddcsi. r. ?x?X5o,IAM68. crushed brick adheres to brick. [I] Frrath, 'Trois eglises', 172, 177, pl. 7(b) no. 7.
[I] Schneider, 'Aquadukr', col. 75- [I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Marnboury's notes. [2] Mamboury's notes.
206 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 207

f[ .t..AN() Layout: abbreviation IN included

+
+fPHfOP[IO]
VINA2[ .. ]
263
1. INBBAf[
268
1. INABAAAN

iV(OL"'roVOC) a' ~o:( ) Ao.v( )

272
1. INEIAI-f

iV(OtKttwvoc) et" .6.11( )

(v(omLrovoc) W ~a( ) rt
Monogram no. 55 (Mcopudoo) (a) Stamp: 126 x 30.
(a) Baths of Zeuxippos. In or near Building I or 2. (a) Stamp: I30 x 25.
+ I'prryop'[Io]u (vo(o<ttrovoc)s [.. ] Date: 416/17 or 43112. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. lb.
[I] Gray, 'Bricks tamps', 53 no. 8. [2] Schneider, Date: 4 I71r 8 or 4)2/3. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. rb.
Palace of Antiochus: I.
(a) Stamp: tabula? X43; roundel j a diameter. 'Ziegelsrempel', 265 no. 16. Palace of Antiochus: I. I. 36ox35S X50.
Date: C,S82-602. See PartII, Ch. 5, sect. r a. I.350X340X5°· [I] Mamboury's notes.
Unknown: I, [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] DAI (Istj neg. KB 1490.
2.IN€IAH
1. JJ2 X (2 )2) X )9,
AM 59.
[I] Bardill negs. 94+), 4· 264
1. ]1AIISV11
Unknown: I.

1. (260) X(2)I) x45, AM 26.

(v(OL1mrovoc) E' A~()

[I] BardiIl neg. 94.2.12. (a) Stamp: 126 x 30.

(v(omLrovoc) ~'~a( ) f[ Date: 4I61I7 or 4) tl z, See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. lb.
(b) Although incomplete, appears to be variant of a.
Palace of Antiochus: I.
(a) Stamp: (125) x )0. Stamp:(72)X25·
Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri I.360X355 x·S5·
Date: 417/18 or 432/3. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb.
fY() (Beyazrt), 1928. Great wall to the south of, and parallel to, the
[I] Mamboury's notes.
\ 'Palaceof Antiochus: I.
drain, and to the right of the southern base: I. I. ? x? X40.
260 I. 375 x? x 50, mortar with large pieces of brick adheres to Er] Mamboury's notes.
1. INIBfY brick.
.t..HMH( ), .t..HMHTP( )
iV(OLlcrLroVOC)
LWfu() [I] Mamboury's notes.

(a) Stamp: 127 X)). AHMH()

Unknown: I.
273
1.360 x 350 x 50, line made with tool all around the edges of the INfAHMH
265 .t..H() 1.
brick, iAM '5.
1. IV1ZBVPf[ y' A~~~()
iv(oL1C"tLrovoc)
[I] Mamboury's notes.
(v(Oumrovoc) ~'~ae() f[ Layout: abbreviation IN omitted
(a) Stamp: 120 x 37.
(a) Stamp: (170) X)4. 269 Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site
1. fAH B2: I.
Rhegium (Kticuk Cekmece). Large surrounding wall of the
Acropolis, beside the sea: 1. I. ? x? X45, loose brick, no. 35.
y' A~()
I.? x? X40-So. [I] GPI,pl. r.a no. 35. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous
fYM() (a) Stamp: (78) x 26.
Remainder, box 38, neg. 208. [3] Talbot Rice archive neg. as [2].
[I] Mamboury's notes.
Date: late ath century? See Part n, Ch. 10 no. 4.
26, Unknown: I.
1. + AHMH(T)P()
1. (180) x(I60) x45, AM 1)8 (old no. )4).
I]V1efYM [1] Bardill neg. 941-16. 274
266
B" fu~( ) +
(]V(OLKttroVOC) 1. IV1AIAI:M:P
1. INIBAf[ 270
(a) Stamp: IlO X40. 1. IfAH 0, A~~~(')e()
(V(OLKtLroVOC)
(v(oumrovoc),' ~a() f[
Unknown: I. (a) Stamp: I)) X)7.
LY'A~()
I.jAM (CK) no. 94,fragmem,? x? X40. (a) Date: 45617. See Parr 11, Ch. 9, sect. Id. Unknown: I.
[r] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. Cistern of Aspar. North-west wall, lowest brick band, fourth (a) Stamp:79x)5.
I. 345 x34S x46, AM28.
course up, in situ. Date: late 4th century? See Part II, Ch. la no. 4.
[I] Bardillnegs. 94-2.14, '5.
[I] Bardill. Hagia Sophia. North-east ramp, paving probably laid in
Turkish period: (four) 1.
J. 290 x? x?

[I] Van Nice archive (rubbing). .t..HMHTPIOY, .t..IMITPIOY

fY[ 267
1. IV1Alf[ 27' WITH INDICTION
262 1. AIAH
iv(Bucnc1voc) 0.\'[[
1. IV1HfY[ 0, A~() AHMHTPIOY
(a) Stamp: ? x 25.
iv(01.1Ctt&voc),,' fu[ (a) Stamp: 74X25. 275
Great Palace, Area Ac, reused in masonry with mortar joints
Date: late ach-cenrury? See Part Il, Ch. IOna. 4. 1. +AHM
(a) Stamp: 105 x )8. I I-I 2 cm. thick, white sandy mortar, and a small amount of
Unknown: I. Unknown: I. HTPHl
crushed brick: I.
I. 295 x 288 X 50, AM 40 (old no. 2)8). INASI
dAM (<;:K) no. 91, )70 X)55 x40. I.? x? X35.
[r] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. [1] Bardillncg. 9402,)0. + 1l11~11'tP{01J ivo(\I(uoovoc)s ~~
[I] Mamboury's notes.
 ..~..
208 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE

(3) Stamp' 74' 70. 1>(H)MHTPIOY (a) Stamp: ? x 30. 1>1MOq)

Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: I. Great Palace. Area Ba.
280
I. (170) X(I25) x)6.
289
+l1MH [I] Mamboury's notes,
[1] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', B3.
I.
1.TIIY!'.1l1MOC
TP1[O]Y
1tlvelilllOc()
+ l1(~)~~Tpi[oJu
i'>.l-IM01'>.() The significance of the initial Fllj-Eis uncertain (cp. 286.1, 448.1,
WITHOUT INDICTION (a) Date: after 532. See Part If, Ch. 9. sect. 2C. 1473-1).
Baths of Zeuxippos. In or near building I or 2.
1>HMHTPIOY • 85 (a) Stamp: 130 x 40 .
[I] Gray, 'Brickstamps', 53 no. 3.
'r. KAl1HHOll[ Great Palace. Isolated vault, area Ff: I.
276 I.37ox?x50.
I. +1>HHH 1>HMHTP10Y or l1(H)MHTP10Y Ot l1I¥1TPIOY ~a( ) 11~~0/i[(
)]
[I] Mamboury's notes.
TP10V 281 (a) Theorokos in the Chalkoprareia. Court to the east of the apse.
+1l.TlIl11'tpiou I. +11[ [I] Mamboury's notes.
TP[ MULTIPLE-LINE
(3) Stamp' 125 x 50.
Great Palace. Area Ac: I. +ll[~~~]Tp[iou] 290
1.? x? ><45-50. + l1[(~)~~],p[(ou] 1'>.HMOC( ), 1'>.IMOC( ) I. +AH
[I] Mamboury's notes. + l1[t~t]Tp[(OU] MOC
(b) Stamp: 79 x)4. SINGLE-LINE
Cp. 276-80, 283. + l1~~oc()
SS Sergius and Bacchus. East end of south aisle.
[1] Antoniades, Hagia Sophia I, B) n. )6. [2] Van MiIlingen, (a) Stamp: Letters 2O-25mm. high. , l1HMO (a) Hebdomon (Bakrrkoy).
Churches, 79 no. r. Sea Basilica, Nessebfir: I. [I] Dethicr, 'Makrikoy', 166 no. lA .., pl. lA' no. I2.
.86
I. Sofia Archaeological Museum, (130) x (140) x 38.
2. +l1HMH r. ITIVEl1l-M
[r] Velkov, 'Basilica', 69 no. 5. [2] Besevliev,Inschriften, 103
TP10V inscr. no. Ini,pI. 57 no. 16o. mve 11~~()
+AllllT\1ptOU The reading may be liql( ) rather than lirU.l( ) if the horizontal bar
(a) Hippodrome. Sphendone. was inserted to create a ligature berween an iota and mu (cp. 295.1, 1'>.HOMH1'>.OY
[I] Mamboury'snotes. 282 310. I). The significance of the initial DI.VE is uncertain (cp. 289. I,
I. l11M1 44B.I,I47P)·
277 TP10[Y] (3) Stamp: 1)2 X)5.
I. +l1HHH
Date: 413-15. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. la.
l1t~"pio[ u]
TP10YPK Theodosian Hagia Sophia. Back wall of Schneider's
(a) Stamp: 81 x 6B. propylaeum: I.
+ 1l11I.tTJ't"P1o'l) px
Date: 507-22. See Pan Il, Ch. 9, sect, 23. I. ?x? x50. ~H[
The significance of the final letters, p and K, is unclear. St Polyeuktos. Level 826~': I, Level 907: 2,
[I] Schneider, WesthoJ, 6 no. 7 with Corrigenda. [2] Mango's
(a) Stamp: "5 X4). 1. No. 6pA..2. No. 407. 291
notes (from rubbing).
Notes: 1-2. One brick measures? x? x 32-34. I. INMl1H[
Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
I. 360 x? x 50. [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', HI, B5, [2] Sarachanc archive neg. l1HMOq) iv(/ill«t;;voc)/i'151>~[
[1] Mamboury's notes. 9.10.29 (2).
.87 What appears to be an 15ligature perhaps served as a form of space-
I. ]l1HMOCH[ filler (cp. 21B, 1494).
283
278
I. +l1HH[H]
I. +l11MI ]l1~~oc()~[ (a) Hagia Eirene. In situ in putlog hole in synthronon, north wall
TP10Y[ .. ] TPIOY behind the south entrance.
(a) Stamp: (102) x )0.
lilJll'tpiou [I] Peschlow, Irenenleirche, 224, fig. 30 no. 8.
+ l1~~[~],piou[. Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site
(a) Stamp: (101) X79. BI: I.
(a) Land Walls. Tower loa.
Kalenderhane Camii. Roof, fill wall: I. I. ? x ? x 40, no. 26.
[I] Meyer-Plathand Schneider, Landmauer, 149 no. 14.
I. (IBo) x(I7B) x 40. [I] GP I, p]. 14 no. 26. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous
[2] DA1 (1st) neg. KB 5469.
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', BIO. Remainder. box 38, neg. 200. [3] Talbot Rice archive neg. as
[2].
1'>.I( )
279
1. [+Jl1HHH
.88 292
TP10Y[ .. ] l.]VHMOCKV[ I. 1NIBBA111
[+]l1~~~,piou[. 1'>.HMO() ]l1~~oc() ~a[ iv(/itlCtt;;voc)
tW~a() l1t()
(a) Stamp: lIS x43. (a) Stamp:(125)X)I (a) Stamp: r80x25-30,
Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
284
l.]HHO Unknown: I. Great Palace. AreaAc: (numerous) I.
1.370X360X50. I.310 x(no) x 38, AM 125. I.390X380X55·
[I] Mamboury's notes. 11]~~0() [1] Bardill negs. 95-1"9, )0. [I] Mamboury's notes.
2IO CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE
•.\1' , 2II

293 Great Palace. Area Ab, near the aqueduct at the corner of the
J. INAIBAVI great wall: I.
(a) Stamp: 177 X'7. L'..IOMHL'..OY, L'..HOMHL'..Oy
Unknown: I.
J. )95 X)75 x 50.
iV(~lI,ttii\voc) ~,'!la() A,() I. Fragment, 380 x? x 50, iA..i\1. 17.
[r] Mamboury's notes. MULTIPLE-LINE
[r] Mamboury's notes (squeeze).
(a) Stamp: 1'5 x )8. (b) Stamp: 175 x'5.

I
Palace of Aurioclius. Restored part to the left of the circular Great Palace. AreaAc: (numerous) 1-2. (b) Stamp: 177 XI8.
AHOMHAOY
room with chapel attached: I. L390x380x55·2·380x380x60. Myrelaion church. Found in r936 during construction of house
I.350X320X50. [r] Mamboury's notes. to the south-west of the church: J. 304
[I] Mamboury's notes. I. 375 x 375 x 50. J. +AHO
2.INIBBA1I..I0 [r] Mamboury's notes. MHA15
iV(~l1Ctlii\voc) 'W~,,() 1'.'0() a. INSBA1I..IOfE +ATlo~~oou
(a) Stampr r Sc x25. iV(~lIct1ii\voc) c;/r,'!la() Atoy«) (a) Stamp: 98 x 55.
L'..IMITPIOY Great Palace. Area Ac: (numerous) I. Tokludede Mescidi: I.
I.390X38ox55 For the lozenge-shaped omicron, cp. 298.la, 320.13. I.? x? x45,iAM 57.
See AHMHTPIOY, AIMITPIOY. [I] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stamp: 178 XI9. [I] Mamboury's notes.
Unknown:

297
I I.

I. Fragment, 380 x? x47, mortar containing large pieces of

J. INIABA1I..I0 ,crushed brick adhering, JAM 14. AIOMHAOY
[r] Mamboury's notes.
MMOC() iV(~lIctlrovoc) ,~. Jl<x()A\O() 305
+AIO+
See AHMOC(), AlMOC(). (a) Stampr r So x()o). r L

_.-
MHAOY+
Se George in the Mangana. Dome of cistern beneath the church:
I. + AlOJ.lnSOU + +
301
I.? x? x 50. (a) Stamp: 122 x 53.
r. )ABA~IOfE
[r] Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 29, fig. 33 no.!. Rhegium (Kticiik Cekmece). Bath south-west of the Acropolis:
MO() [2] Mamboury's notes. ),,' ~,,() ALOY'( ) L

(a) Date:-4'7/8 or 43.1) or 44.1) or 447/8 or 45718 or 46.1). See I.? x? x38.
WITH INDICTION
Part II, Ch. 9, sect. re. [I] Mamboury's notes.
298
)AAIO Balaban Aga Mescidi: I.
294 t •

J. INHBAAIO I.iAM II,? x? X40.

~),,()A\O() 306
[r] Mamboury's notes. L +AIOMi
iV(~lImii\voc)~'!la() ALO()
Cp. 300.1-2, }2o.I.
AOY+
(3) Stamp: 139-141 X24-27.
(a) Stamp: (90) x )0. + A10J.lnSOU+
Unknown: 1-2. Rotunda beside the M yrelaion church.
J. ()'4) x(.85) x49, Alv! )5) .•. )70 x)60 x 44-54, AM '97· (a) Stamp: 108 x )0.
[I) TalbotRice archive (rubbing). 302
[I) BardiIl negs. 95.6.)), J4 (I); 95.'.''', 22a (.). Land Walls. Near tower 47a.
r. ) . BAP€AIOfE
[I] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, 149 no. 15.
Hagia Eirene. In situ in window sill of western gallery: (several). 299 )'!lap£ AlO',(£() [.) DAI (Ist) neg. 6596 (cast). [)) Mamboury's notes (from
[r] George, St. Eirene, pl. 16 no. 20. [2] Schneider, J.)PAIO
(a) Stamp: (120) x24. cast). [4] Mango's notes (from cast).
'Ziegelstempel', 264 no. Id. (b) Stamp: 110 X 50.
~,,)p() A,o() Land Walls.
[I) DAl (1st) neg. 660. (cast). [.) Mamboury's notes (from Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
295 (a) Scamp: (50) x '0.
I. ?x?x50.
J. INIAlO Rhegium {Kiicilk Cekmece). Acropolis. cast). [)) Mango's notes (from cast).
[I] Mamboury's notes.
iV(~lI<t1rovoc) t ALO() [I] Mamboury's notes.
(c) Stamp: 110 X 50.
Note the horizontal bar joining the iota and omicron. Cp. 286.1, Great Palace. Are:! Ab. Collapsed vault: I.

}20.1. I. 350 X)20 x 50.

(a) Scamp: JJ 5 x )0.

[I] Mamboury's notes.
MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE CARRIED INDICTION
Sea Walls. Narlr Kapr, south tower. I.
(d) Several variants.
MOfE() Stamp: approximately 116 x 52.
I. 3S0x? x 50. 303
[1] Mamboury's notes. Kalenderhane Camii. North-east corridor, north wall door-
1.). VIOfE
WITH INDICTION filling: (one) I. North-east corridor, arch: (one). North-east
This is a suggested correction of Meyer-Plath and Schneider's corridor, arch filling: (two) 2. Vault of east cross-arm, north
296 300 reading. side: (two) 3. Bema, main arch restoration of the crown: (three)
J. INIBBAAIO l. INSBA1'.IOfE 4· Apse of North Church: (one). North Church. rubble under
). AlO'y£()
iV(~lIctlii\voc) ,w ~,,() ALO() tv(~u'"tlrovoc)c:lr;!la() 1'."'1"()
(a) Land Walls. Near Br r.
apse: (one) 5. F): (one). F4: (two). B71t: (one). B7/z: (four).
B5h: (one). North-east corridor: (five) 6. Unknown: (sixty)
(a) Stamp: 165 x.6. For the lozenge-shaped omicron, cp. 298. la, )20. la. [r] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, 150 no. 26.4. 7-16.
 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------"-----------------------------------~----------------""4

"~
.>
212 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 213

I.? x? x36 .. 2.? x? x38. 3· ?x?x43. 4.? x? x39. 5.348 x JIO (190) x(245) x42, once in Robert College, hobnail imprints
I.
3I6
()I5) X42. 6. )60X(170) x40. 7· J6jXJ5jX4J· B. J6jXJ5J x 8Y made before. stamping, AM 129. 2.340 x J.17 X 38-42, AM r67. A+.II.IOM[HJ\.~J[ J
41. 9·365x(263)x41. 10.360 x358 x42. 1I.365 x348 x42. .ll.IOXMH [lJ Mango's notes (rubbing) (I). [2J Bardill negs. 94.7.6 (1), IN.II.2[ ... J .
12·363x353x45· 13·36ox353x49· J4·36oX340X42. .ll.OAYC 94.lo.[9a, 20a, 2Ia (2).
15.360 x 360 x 37. 16.362 x 360 x 36. [IJNP[IJB
+ .ll.lO~[~OOUJ(VO(lIcrtoovoc)s [... J a (:K~
•..
,:· .
.~'..'
[r] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', BI 1 (illustration compiled from [1C] It is unclear whether the rounde! (presumably containing
several variants). monogram no. 55) had broken off the die (cp. 313.1) or off the
[LW
8(£0);; Xap[lCJ .ll.lO~~OOuC[iJV(OlKnOOVOC)
brick.
.ll.IWMH.II.OY "'(a) Date: 503/4 or 518!r9 or 533/4. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. ad .
(a) Stamp: tabula (79) x46.
Behind A~lr Efendi Caddesi (hence from vicinity of remains
Date: 582-602. See Part Il, Ch. 5. sect. ra.
307 destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagl). + 1l.tOll1l30Uiv3(lK"ttOOVOC)s
1£' a A-
I.+.l\.IWM Myrelaion. Debris, upper church, east end.
[r] Maletskos, 'Plinthos', 270, pl. 53.1.
H.II.OY A roundel containing monogram no. 55 (Mcuptxiou) has broken [I] Talbor Rice, 'Bodrum Camiii, I73,fig. r r no. 12. [aj Talbot
off the die. The significance of the alpha and lambda in the ansae of Rice archive (rubbing).
+i'LlroJ.L1l30U 3II
m the tabula is unclear.
(a) Pendik. Tombs. MOXMH (a) Stamp: 125 x 40.
[I] Meliopoulos, 'Panteichion', 456 no. 2. [2J 1. Kalch. 109.6. .ll.OAVC Date: 582 or 59617. See PartII, Ch. 5, sect. la.
[3] Feissel, 'Inscriptions', 425 (mentioned). INPIB Baths of Zeuxippos. At the bottom of the rotundas (apsidal
IC .building found in [912), l..IOC, MOY
'[PUy' [I] Mamboury's notes.

I.
8(£0);; xaplc IHo~~oouc iV(OllC"IlOOVOC)
UNCERTAIN SPELLING (b) Stamp: 128-130 x42-43. SINGLE-LINE
Beta altered to gamma by addition of horizontal bar. It seems less
JoB Date: 582 or 59617. See Part Il, Ch. 5, sect. la.
likely that the bar is a numerical marker. Unknown: 1-1. 37
I. +.I\.[.OJ I.' JBAP.II.IOC
MH.I\.[OY (a) Stamp: III diameter. _. _ 1.(260) X(220) x 50, AM 344. 2. JJ5 x J20 x J6, AM IJO.
Date: 504/5 or 5191200r 53415. Sec Parr Il, Ch. 9,sect. ad, Ch. [lJ Bardill negs. 94.7-7 (2); 95.6.19,20 (1). J pap() .ll.10c
+.11.[.oJ~~o[ou
10no·7· (c) Srampr r jo x aj. (a) Land Walls. Golden Gate.
(a) Stamp: ? x 50. Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagl: Date: 582. See Part Il, Ch. 5, sect. ra and Ch. I I, sect. 7. [I] Mango, <Brick Stamps', 20, fig. 2 (bottom).
Great Palace. Area Ab: I. (numerous) I. Beyazrt, site of three churches.
I.? x?x40 I.? x? x 50. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[1] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes.
MULTIPLE-LINE

See 169I.Ia.
3'4
TABULA ANSATA I. Same as 312 or 313.
CIRCULAR
(a) Stamp: (II6) x(4J) .
.ll.IOMH.II.OYC .ll.IOMH.II.OY
Date: 582 or 59617. See Part n, Ch. 5, sect. la. CIRCULAR

312 Unknown: I.
309
r1c 3I8

+ m
I. eDI.l\.IOMH.II.OYCeDAPXOY around central
I. I.? x? x 30-35, AM 195. I.
[IJ Bardill neg. 94.1 r.j ra.
Ent AtoJ.L1l3oucEmlPXou around central monogram no. 61 J\.IXOY
(b) Date: 582 or 59617. See Part n, Ch. 5, sect. la.
INAIB
('pro~(~)c).
Land Walls. Kerkoporta.
IPC
A central monogram is otherwise unknown on brickstamps from [I] Mordtmann, 'Diomedes', 23 no. I.
Constantinople, with the exception of the circular stamps with Monogram no. 55 (Mccpucioo) 8(£0)\i xaplcAiou iv(31ICtt&VOC)lP'
central *.
Considering the formula used, the central monogram, + AtOJ.L1l30uiv3(tlCtt&voc)s 1£' aA (a) Stamp: 110 diameter.
and the circular shape, it is tempting to suggest that this stamp was Date: 50J/4 or pBlr9 or 5JJ/4. See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. ad, Ch.
The significance of the alpha and lambda in the ansae of the tabula 3'5
not, as Sorlin-Dorigny claimed, on a brick, but on a glass weight. I. +ltIOM[HJ\.J Iona. 7.
is uncertain. Note the crack beginning to develop at the base of the
For a glass weight with the inscription + E1tt 'Icxsvvou €1tapxou roundel. ~INJ\.[ ... J Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagu (many).
around a central box monogram that is probably to be resolved €ttL [I] Mamboury's notes.
Mcuprcioo, see Buckton, Byzantium, 89 no. 88. (a) Stamp: tabula 128 x43; roundel diameter 49 horizontally. + J\.lO~[~OJou (vo[ ... J
Date: 582 or 59617. See Part II, Ch. 5, sect. la.
(a) Date: after 518 and possibly after c. 530. See Part H, Ch. 5, sect. The distribution of the letters suggests that this stamp was in fact a
3'9
la. Land Walls. Near Silivri Kap» 1. tabula ansata, It is unclear whether the rounder (presumably m
From a garden near Sultan Bayazit Camii. I. ? x? x 37, once in Robert College, iAM 74.3 PT. containing monogram no. 55) had broken off the die (cp. 313.1) or INXBI
[I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 90-91 no. 35. [IJ Curtis, Broken Bits, ii no. 80. [2J Van Millingen, Walls, 265 011 the brick. J\.IAOY
[2] Mordtmann, 'Diomedes', 23 no. 2. [3] Schneider, (mentioned) where it is erroneously stated that the bricks were (a) Date: 582-602.SeePartH,Ch. 5,sect. la. IPC
'Zicgelstempel', 269 no. 99. [4] Mango, 'Brick Stamps', 26. found 'west of the Gas Works at Yedi Koule'. [3] Mcyer-Plath Baths of Zeuxippus. In situ on a pier at IB (presumably
and Schneider, Landmauer, 150 no. 30.1. [4] Mango, 'Brick Building 1).
8(EO);; XaPlC iv(omloovoc) [PU Yl' J\.(ou
[5] PLRE, iii. 402 S.V. Diomcdes 3, where it is again suggested
that the individual is to be identified with Diomedes 2 (PPO Stamps', fig. 4. [5] Mango's notes (rubbing). [I] Gray, 'Bricks tamps', 54 no. 22. [2] Schneider, Beta altered to gamma by addition of horizontal bar. It seems less
(Orientis) 572). [6] Manacorda, 'Bolli larerizi', 147. 'Ziegelstcmpel', 265 no. 29. likely that the bar.is a numeri~al marker.
Unknown: 1-2.
 ----------------- - ------------------ -------------------------------------~------------------------------------,------------------

,,~
•
214 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE

(a) Stamp: 120 diameter. (a) Stamp: '70 xl5. (a) Sramp- t a S x 18.
333
Date: 504/5 or 519120 or 534/5. See Part H, Ch. 9, sect. ad, Ch. South of the 'Bath' building beside the MyreIaion rotunda, Date: 4I5h6 or 430/1. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb. r. UOVAUAMI
ro no.p. towards the sea: I. Palace of Antiochus: I.
iv(otK"tt&voc) a' ~a() ll.oOn
Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir SOkagl: (many) I. I.jIOX3IoX4°. I.385X370X5°·
1. )80x? x 55. [I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stamp: 140 x 25. Dt~~#y.
[I] Mamboury's notes. (b) Stamp: qo x IS. Dote: 4I7ir8 or 432/3. See Part II, Cn'::"'9, seer. rb.
Date: 415/16 or 430/1. See Pare H, Ch. 9, sect. lb. Palace of Antiochus: I.
325 Palace of Amiochus: 1-2 . I. ? x? x 50.
••1.]BAll.O
I.375X360x60.2.)80X380x45· [1] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes.
] ~aO ll.oO [IJ Mamboury's notes. [2] DAI (1st) neg. KB 997.
AlO[ (a) Stamp.fr roj x j a.
Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: I.
Accessoryl\.
320 t. (190) x (175) x40'
I. IMll.BAll.1<> [ [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', A8. 329
I. B]APll.OA
0' ~,,() ll.to[
(V(OllC'tlroVOC) ~OMN()
326 p]apO ll.oO A.
298.1, which has a similar lozenge-shaped omicron, may indicate
I. IM[ .. ]BAll.O 334
that the name abbreviation is complete. Note the horizontal bar (a) Land Walls. Edirne Kapr.
l.]BAll.OMN
joining the iota and omicon (cp. 286.1, 295.1). iv(ollm&voc) [.. ] ~a() ll.o() [i] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 89 no. 33.
] ~aO ll.o~vO
(a) Stamp: (168) x lO.
Fethiye Camii: I.
I. JOOX? x 50, broken.
The stamp may have been broken in two, or the indicricn
been carved away.

(a) Stamp: (41) XjO and 92 x 29 with gap of 10.

may have

I. 330
I.]ll.OA

]ll.oO ).
The Talbot Rice archive preserves rubbings of fragments from
the Myrelaion reading just INEI[ (i.e. iv(BtK'tt&VOC) et" D, but
[r] Mango's notes. Eenari Isa Camii: 1. they apparently do not complete 334.1a, as suggested by the
I.? x? x48-51, AI\1 16).
(a) Stamp: (70)X2j. illustration in Talbot Rice, 'Bodrum Camii', 173, fig. I I no. I.
321 Great Palace. Area Ac: I.
I. INE:BAll.IO[ [I] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari (a) Stamp: (94) X2l.
I. ? x? X45.
isa Camii', fig. 40 no. 15. lsl Bardill negs. 94.Io.9a, rea. 'Bath' building beside the Myrelaion rotunda: (one). Myrelaion
(v(olKnrovoc) e" ~,,() ll.to[ [r] Mamboury's notes.
debris: (one).
(a) Stamp: (Il2)X)2 [I] Talbot Rice, 'Bodrum Camii', 173, fig. II no. I. [zj Talbot
Unknown:r.
Accessory I Rice archive (rubbing).
Accessory M
I. (228) x(I79) x40-45, AM 90.
327 331
[I] Bardillneg. 94.5025. 1. INE:I'l'KE:BAll.OI 335
I.]NBIBAll.OW
I. INSBAll.OMN
(V(Oll'''&VOC) Cl' + (in leaf or heart) K(vpt)c ~,,() ll.o() l [i]v(ollC"tt&voc) ~l'~aO ll.oO ~
(v(omt",voc) S/~' ~"'()ll.o~v( )
(a) Stamp:I4jX25. (a) Unknown.
Date: 416/17 or 43 1/2. See Part H, Ch. 9, sect. lb. (a) Stamp: 140 x 30.
[I] DAI (1st) neg. KB 5472.
~O() Sea \Valls. Between the 'Tower of Belisarius' and the Harbour
Palace of Antiochus: (numerous) r-e.
of Sophia.
No accessory I.j85Xj65x50.2·400Xj7°xP·
Accessory Fl [I] Mamboury and Wiegand, Kaiserpaliiste, j no. I.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Bardill and Grcarrex, 'Antiochus', [2] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 264 no. 8. [3] Mamboury's
322 fig.2A. [l] DAI (Isr) negs. KB 1498 and 1506 (apparently the 332
I. 01>.ABrNI+ notes.
same die). I. INABAPll.On
y' ~,,() ll.o()
+ (V(OllC"tlroVOC) Unknown: r. iv(otm&voc) a' P"p() ll.o( ) n
(a) Stamp: 142 x jO. I. l77 X(240) X42-52, AM 424. (a) Stamp: 146-150X23.
Unknown: I. [r] Bardill negs. 95.IO.29a, jca. Date: 417!r8 or 4)2/). See Part II, Ch. 9. sect. lb.
I. iAM (<;K) no. 9. j70 Xj70 x60.
(b) Stamp: '40"'5. Palace of Amiochus: (many) 1-2.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. Date: 416h7 or 43 Ih. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb. I. 400 x450 x? 2. 375 X(2IO), animal footprints, AM )4. ~OMNOY
Palace of Antiochus: (very numerous) 1-2. [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] DAI (1st) neg. KB '504-
323
t. INE:IBAll.O I.j80Xj75X55. 2.j85Xj65xP· lsl Mango's notes. [4] Bardill neg. 94.2.21.
[I] Mamboury's notes. SINGLE-LINE
iv(olK;nrovoc) et' ~,,() ll.o() Unknown: 1.
1. 392 x(290) x 50, AM 10. 336
(a) Baths of Zeuxippos. In or near Building I or 2. 1. INll.ZBAll.OMN15
Accessory K [I] Bardill neg. 94.1.I9a.
[r] Gray, 'Bricks tamps', 54 no. 20. [2] Mamboury, "Nouvellc
(b) Stamp: 150X22. (vo(tKtl&voc)~' ~tx() ll.6~vou
lecture', 12j, 124.
328
1. INVIBAll.OK Date: 417/18 or 43213. See Part II, Ch. 9. sect. rb. (a) Stamp: 192 x jO.
324 Palace of Antiochus: (numerous) I. Rumeli Hisan. Loose: I.
I. E>MIAUOll. iv(ollmOivoc) nrJ I;" pa( ) ll.o() K 1.455 x j ao/joo x j c. I. ? x? X38.

ll.o( ) ~a() iV(OllmOivoc) Cl' Gamma altered to delta by the addition of a diagonal stroke. [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. [1] Mamboury's notes.
-------------------------------------------------------------------~

216 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 21 7

r'"

MULTIPLE-LINE (a) Scamp: 8j x6j. (a) Several variants. (a) Stampr r az x74.
Walls of Nessebfir. Pavement no. S of tower no. 2: (four) I. Stamp: approximately I SO x 89. Date: 507-22. See Part 11, Ch. 9. sect. ~a.
1. 340 x 340 x 40. Kalenderhane Camii. G6 Turkish wall: I. Vault of east cross- StPolyeuktos. Level 398'*: J. •

[I] Ognenova-Marinova, 'Briques', 114 nos. 16, x7. 18, 19. and arm, north side: (one). Unknown: (two) 2-3. r. No. 71Z,? x? x 35-38. ':.:...~."
lIS fig. 109. 1.(1l)X(lIj)x)8. '·)j7X)j2X44. ).)j7X)jjX)7. [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 214, B29. ·61'§'.:.ra~hanearehive neg.
+ .dOJ,1VOU (b) Scamp: 87 x70. [1] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', B39 (illustration compiled from 9.7.2.
FenatiisaCamii: I. several variants).
(a) Stamp: 8j x6j. )43
1. ())7) X()OS) x )8-4', AM 177.
Unknown: 1-4. 1. +THCN
[I] Mango's notes (rubbing). [z]Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari
I. iAM (<;:K) no. 18, )6j x)j j x jO. '-4.
iAM (<;:K).
Isa Camii', fig. 39 no. 7· [3] Sodini, 'L'Arrisanat', 74 • fig. I no. €AC
[I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). [2] Mango's notes. II.POC€PIA
(b) Stamp: 87 x 66.
3· [4] BardiU negs. 94·11.8a, 9a, loa. ilOMNOY lUAK(ONOY)
(c) Stamp: 8jX7j. + 'tile vecc (ivouc'uoovoe ?) apoap.lcx
Hagia Eirene. Southern side of atrium: I.
Unknown:r. AccessoryK
l.)jjX)jjX41. (a) Stamp: ISS x87.
1. iAM (<;:K) no. '9, 1x ? x 40.
[I] George, St. Eirene, pl. 16 no. 12. )40 Unknown: 1-1.
[I] Mamboury's notes. +1V111.22I
(c) Stamp: 8p 67. I. I. Once in Robert College,? x? x 3S. 2. Once in Robert
(d) Stamp: 8S X77. MOII.92
Date: 533-35. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ab. College.> x? X40, AM 192 (old number no?)
Unknown:r.
Hagia Sophia. Debris from the collapsed barrel vault in the V10Y1H [I) Mango's notes (rubbings) (1-'). [a] Bardillnegs. 94.Il.26a,
I. MSBK inv. 620S.)20 x (290) x?
substructures of the west wing of tbeJustinianic atrium: I. Afft22IA '7a(.).
[1)MSBK neg. 620sa. [.) DAI (1st) neg. ')4j (cast).
J. 365 X?x45' KS ~ iVO(llCtlOOVOC)S 8' .ftOJ..LVOUOlCXK(OVOU)s + ~cx()
[)] Mamboury's notes (from cast). [4] Mango's notes (from 344
[r] Schneider, 'Ziegelsrempel', 266 no. 52. [2] Schneider,
cast). (a) Stamp: 108 x 92. 1. [+T)HCN
Westho[. 26 no. 3. [3] Mango's notes (from rubbing).
Date: SI S/16. See Part II. Ch. 9, sect. za. [€A)CA[P)
(d) Date: c.jJ2/). See Part II, Ch. 9, sect .• b. S. +II.OM
St Polyeuktos. Leve184: I. Level 16S: 2. LeveI702:l-: 3. Level [OC€)PIA
Hagia Sophia. Ruins in front of the west doors, demolished NOY
828: 4. Level 898: 5· Level 977*: 6. Level rcor": 7-8. Unknown:
November 1873. +.ll.OI-lVOU l+ t]fle v[icx]c (tvB1KtlOOVOe ?) A[pocE]pia
er] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 87 no. 20. [2] Leclercq, 9·
(a) Hebdomon (Bakrrkoy).
(a) Stamp: 98 x 55. I.No·3I2· 2.NO.lOO. 3.No.622. 4.No.509. 5.No.685.
'Estampilles', col. 546 no. 8a. [I] Dethier, 'Makrikdy', 162 no 11.', pl. lA', no. I~'.
Land Walls. Blachernai region: I. 6. No. 5'9· 7· No. 655. 8. No. 6j9. 9. No. I)2j.
(e) Stamp: 8j x jO.
Unknown: 1. 1. MSBK inv. 6199, (.00) x('70) x 1 Notes: 1-9. One brick measures? x? x )5-45.
[IJ Dethier, 'Makrikoy', 166 no. lE', pl. lA' no. 14. [2J MSBK [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 21 I, B7. [1] Sarachane archive negs.
I. Once in Robert College, ? x? x36.
neg.6199a. [)) DAI (Ist) neg. 2)40 (case). [4J Mamboury's HO.I)a (I), 9.10.18 (9), 9.12.2 (4).
[I] Mango'S notes.
notes (from cast). [5] Mango's notes (from cast).
2. Probably the same as type I },;!ayor may not have carried a71 accessory
(a) Scamp: ? x 60. 34'
1. 2)![ 345
Great Palace. Between areas Ab and Ac: I.
1. IYlVBVII.(U
I. ?x?x38-40. MO[
338
[I] Mamboury's notes. 1. +THCN AffYO[ iV(~lK"tl&voe) a' ~a() II..,()
V1(uTL1[
€ACII.O (a) Stamp: 143 x 22.
3. +11.0
WNOV Possible readings include: Remains in the area bounded by Divan Yolu, Piyer Loci
VVlQ
+ -rile visu; (lV~llC'tl(OVOC ?) Aoj.lvOU [~la).(6vo,,)s [II.)6~[v)o" ~a() [.)Vt.,v (1) Caddesi, Doscluk Yurdu Sokagl, and Klod Farer Caddesi: I.
+Ao~vou ['A)V~OlV[()O~Ila[() .)6~(~toe) [i;~l).(n&voe)s (1) r. 400 x360 x 50.
(a) Stamp: 172 x 92. [x] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari isa
(a) Stamp:9j x78. (a) Stamp: (87) x 90.
Date: S07-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. za. Camii', 183 no. 16 (mentioned).
Date: C.S32/3. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect . ab. Unknown: 1.
St Polyeuktos. Level 700*: I. Level 908: 2.
Hagia Sophia. Wall with exedras, Cafcriye Sokagl: I. 1. (21S) x(I90) X47-jO, 1\.\01 r rg.
I. No. 638. 2. No. 392.
1.350 x 3 50 x40. mortar with crushed brick and coarse sand [I] Bardill negs. 94.9.8; 94.6.I7a-l9a. 346
Notes: 1-2. One brick measures? x? x 35. I.INSBII.(u
adhering.
[I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 21 I. B6. [2] Sarachane archive neg.
[r] Mamboury's notes. iv(~um&voe) <;./~'~() II..,()
5-41.)2(1).
(b) Scamp: 80 x 80.
(a) Stamp: 1)9 x)4 .
Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
.liPOCEPIA Fenari isa Camii: I.
I. 3Sox? X40'
r. ?x? xso,AMl60.
[rj Mamboury's notes.
)4Z [I) Mango's norestrubbing). [.) Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari
(c) Date: after S32. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. 2C. 339 1. [T)HCN€A Isa Camii', fig. 40 no. 16. [3] Bardill negs. 94.lo.6a, 7a.
Baths ofZeuxippos. In or near Building I or 2. 1. +HCN
C
[I] Gray, 'Brickstamps', 53 no. I r , €ACII.O
II.POC€Ps 347
M[N)O[V) 1. INBBAVm
4. +11.0 ['[]~cvias: (iV~llCtlOOvoe?) apocEp({CX)S
MNl! + (t)iievEae (iv~tl("tl&voe 1) 1I.6~[v)o[,,)
The missing tau in line I was possibly in ligature with the left-hand
iV(~lK"tl&voe) e' ~a() II..,()
+ AoJ,.l.vOU The initial cross was perhaps intended to stand for the tau.
upright of the following eta. Indiction theta possibly altered from eta.
218 CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE
.,
,,~

219
(a) Stamp: 16) X)2. 352
Date: 440/1 (or 425/6). See Part Il, Ch. I I, sect. 2. I. INIBAPJl..
EAA[ - FCIM[ 362
1. [I]NVlBA€Anr
St Polycuktos. Level 1000*: 1. Unknown: 2.
iv(oll",6>voc) I' ~ap() JI.
I. No. 647. 2. No. '45.
357 [i]v(o,Kt,rovoc) lrl 0,' pa( ) 'EAnt( L.
I. +€Ai\[
Notes: {-2. One brick measures? x ? x 50-60. (a) Stamp: (142) X(22).
ICIM[ Gamma altered to delta by the addi&~~9f.a diagonal stroke.
[I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 208, A7. [2] Sarachane archive neg. Unknown: I.
I. Once in Robert College, ? x? x40. + 'EU[ -]IC'~[ (a) Stamp" 50 x 28.
9.1 I.I6a (2).
[I] Mango's notes (rubbing). Date: 41 5h6 or 4301x. See Part Il, Ch. 9, Sett. lb.
(a) Stamp: (62) x 60.
Palace of Anciochus: 1.
Unknown: I.
353 I. 375 x.360 x60.
I. IYllrJl.[ I. ? x ? x 30-40, once in Robert College, Al'vi 103_
348 [I] Mamboury's notes.
I. IN€I'I'K€BAJI.(J) [I] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Bardill neg. 94.8.24.
iv(Suctu))voc) t-y' A[
iv(SlIcurovoc) El' + (in leaf or heart) K(Up')E ~a() JI..,() )63
(a) Stamp: (71) x(28). 1. IMJl.EIEi\JlI
(a) Stamp: t45 X24· Myrelaion debris.
ivli(llC'tl&VOC) El' '£Mt()
Date: 4J6/17 or 431/2. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb. [I] Talbot Rice archive (rubbing).
Palace of Antiochus: I. (a) Stamp: 148 x )0.
I. 390X38S X50. 354 EAIT() Date: 416/17 or 431/2. See PanII. Ch. 9. Sett. lb.
I. I]NIJI.!IVqJl.[
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari Isa Unknown: 1-3.
358. '
Camii', 183 no. 16 (mentioned), i]~(o,,,,,6>voc) '0' ~ap() JI.[ I. 360 x 350 X45-53. AM 292. 2.360 x 355 x 52-H. AM 303.
1. INBEATI
(a) Stamp: (89) x (26). 3· 360 x360 x48-P, AM 41S.
iv(ouc,,6>voc) 8' 'EM()
Myrelaion church. Upper church, east end. [I] Bardill95.2.9a, loa; 95.2.343, 36a; 95-4-93, IIa, I2a;
349 [rj Talbot Rice archive (rubbing). The square theta was possibly created by altering an eta. 95·10.17a,18a.
I. IN.BBJI.(J)
(a) Stamp: 140 x 32. Palace of Antiochus: I.
iv(S,lCtlrovoc) W ~(a) JI..,() Unknown: I. I. 350 x350 x60.
1. iAM (CK) no. 28, )60 X) 50 x 50. [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes.
(a) Stamp: t40 x )0.
Cistern of Aetius: EAI( ) [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes.
I. 2. IMJI.€IEAITI
I.400X390x6S·
See HAI(), EAI(). 359 ivB(uC'tt&voc) et' 'Et...m()
[I] Mamboury's nores. [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Penari isa
1. H11AEATI
Camii', 183 no. 16 (mentioned). (a) Stampr r ay X) 1.
(V(O""I6>VOC)la' 'EAn() Date: 416/7 or 43 Ih. See PartII, Ch. 9, sect. lb.
Palace of Antiochus: I.
EAAA.6..IOY (.) Stamp: 105 x 28.
I. 37ox36ox60.
Unknown: I.
I. iAM (CK) no. 89,)50 xl X)5. [I] Mamboury's notes.
Accessory A
.6.[ [1] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes.
355 ). INJl.EIEATII
I. +€AAA
ivo(IICtl6>voc) El' 'EAXI()
350 JI.IOrY]A
I. INSBAJI.[ (a) Stamp: 148 x )0.
+ 'EAJ..aoio[u] a
iv(SII<tlrovoc) c,'/~'~a() JI.[ Date: 41617 or 43112. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. lb.
(a) Stamp: 127"68. EAITI() Palace of Antiochus: 1-3.
(.) Stamp: (I)5)X)0. Date: 533-35. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. ab. I.3S0X34ox60. 2·3Sox38ox55· 3·35ox35ox55·
Date: 422/3 or 423/4 or 437/8 or 438/9. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. Hagia Sophia. Constructions of the north-west court I. 360 [I] Mamboury's notes.
le. I. }65 x 350 X 60. I. INIA€ATII
Cistern on Srraselviler Caddesi. [I] Mango's notes (from rubbing). ivOhlC'tlroVOC) la' 'EA-m()
[r] Mamboucy's notes. [2] Mango's notes.
(a) Scamp: 140 X2S.
Palace of Antiochus. EIT H <I>
AN IOY
[I] Mango's notes.
351 EAA[ .. ] See EnI<I>ANI0Y, ETIH<I>ANI0Y.
I. INJl.IS!IAqJl.[
361
ivoI(ICtl6>voc) c,'/~'pap() JI.[ 356 I. IYlIJI.€ATII
I. ]NAI€lV\[ .. ]
iv(ou",6>voc) 01' s pap() Jl.[
iv(ol",,6>voc) 10' 'EAnt()
i]~(ouc,,6>voc) en" 'Ell[ .. ]
(a) Stamp: (182) x28 (endsj j a (centre). EITI()
(a) Starnp. r ao x28.
Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri (0) Stamp: (IIO) x )2:.
Date: 415/16 or 430/1. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. lb.
(Beyazu), 1928: I. Pethiye Camii: t.
Palace of Antiochus: I. 364
J.? x?x50' I. ? x? x 50, fragment.
I.360X34ox50. I. INBB"€f1!
[r] Mnmboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Mamboury's notes. iv(o"mrovoc) p- ~a() 'Em()
 "~
•
220 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 221

(a) Stamp: 162 x30. [I] Hill, 'Bricksramps', lOS, A8, [2] Sarachane archive neg, EPMIA fIPECBYTEPOY EPMorEO
Ruins onSaray Burnu (orphanage of St Paul?): l. 9.12.1I (I).
1.}85 X()25) X47-60. Unknown: I, MULTIPLE-LINE EPMOr()
] Unger, 'Seraispirze', fig. 10 no. 13. [2] Schneider,
'Ziegclstcmpel', 264 no. 9·
1. ()IO) X(245) X}5-4), AM 259.
372
377 ;S4...~,(.·
[1] Bardill negs, 94,13,11, 22, r. +INt..IKS[ + EP)MOf( )S around >i'e'"
r. [+EP)MIA
365 [rI)BYT€PlS S/~'[+ 'Ep)~oy()s *
1. II13:aJYlI

iv(~t1mrovoc) ,~' 'En,()

..
WITHOUT INDICTION
[+'Ep)~iu [n(p£c»)~~'EpOU
+ iV~lI'("rovoc)
(a) Stamp: 100 diameter .
around

369 (a) Date: after 532. See Part If, Ch. 9. sect. 2C. Date: after 475. See Part II, Ch. ro no. I~.
(a) Stamp: 1}5 x28. 1. YOIYlAcDlrI3+ Baths ofZeuxippos. Near the large columns. Land Walls. Pteron.
Unknown: I. [I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, 150 no. 27.2.
+ 'Emecviou
I. Fragment. 360 x ? x 50, iAM 16. (b) Stamp: approx. (80) x66. [2) Mamboury, 'Chrisme'r455 no. 5. [}) DAI (1st) negs. 6600
[r] Mamboury's notes, (a) Stamp: 120 X 40. and KB 5488.
Great Palace, excavations in me Peristyle area in 1935-38.
Date: 507-12. See Part H, Ch. 9. sect. za.
Room north-west of Hall G.
St Polyeuktcs. Level 138 (fallen vault, debris): I. Level 165: 2.
J. ?x?x40,debris,no.73.
Level 367: 3. Level 381*: 4-5· Level 684: 6. Level 745*: 7. Level EPMOrE()
[r] GP!, pl. r a no. 73. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous
831.: 8. LeveIS71": 9. Level 948: 10. Level 977·: 11. Level 994>1-:
EIlIf>.IOY fIPECBYTEPOY Remainder, box} 8. neg. 234. [3] T albot Rice archive neg. as [2]. 378
12. Level 1017*: 13. Level 1020*: 14· Level 1029*: I 5. Level
). +EP
1059: 16. Level 1°71: 17-18. Level 1°92"": 19. Level r rao": 20. 373
366 Level 1159;}: z r . Level rrea": 22. Level 1362*: .23. Level 13S0*:
MOr€
1. +EITIllI ). +€PMIA
IY1[ .)
.24. Level 145 I: .25.Wall west of slip road: 26-7. Unknown: I1P€BYT€P<X
OYITPEB
2S-p. 'EP~OYE() iV(~l1mrovoc) [ .)
YTEPOY + 'Epuic 1tpe(c)pu".epou
I. No. 92. 2. No. 125. ). No. 747. 4· No. 758. 5~~795· (a) Stamp: 91 horizontal diameter.
+ 'Emfiiou 1tp£(C)~utEPOU 6. No. I}H. 7. No. 510. 8. No. 6)9' 9· No. 58}. 10. No. 748. (a) Stamp: 163 x6); inner border 155 x 52.
Tokludede Mescidi.
(a) Court of Fatih Carnii. 11. No. 489. ll. No. 5)2. 13· No. 107.2· 14. No. 1273. 15.No. Eenerbahce. Cistern: I. [I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze).
[I] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 266 no. 5 I. 1.285. 16. No. 875. 17. No. 1271. ]S. No. 1308. 19. No, 642. 1.363 x 350 x 40, lines around stamped face of brick 45 mm.
(b) Stamp: 93 horizontal diameter x 80 vertical diameter.
.20. No. 126r. .21. No. 1229 . .2.2.No. 1223 . .23. No. 1]14. from edge . Unknown: 1-2.
24. No. 1177. 25. No. 1321. 26. No. 127. 27. No. 128. 28. No. [r] Mamboury's notes.
). ()25) X(2}6) X42, AM 69. 2. pS x )60 x40, AM 5' (old no.
749. 29· No. 1301. 30. No. 1302. 31. No. 1306. possibly 240 or 340).
Notes: 1-}1. One brick measures? x? x 35.
374
EIlITP() ). 'Ep~iu n(p)E(c)PU«EpOU) [I) Bardill neg. 94-4.20 (I).
[I] Hill, 'Bricksramps'j zog.Ac. [2] Sarachane archive neg.
9.12.10. Paspates does not indicate the shape of the stamp, but the length of
367 the inscription suggests that ir filled more than one line.
1.)BA€ITITP
(a) Near the Binbirdirek cistern.
) ~u() 'Em<p() MUL TIPLE- LINE
[I] Paspares, ByzantinaiMeletai, 366. EYO
(a) Stamp: (107) x26.
Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri
370
1. +€rIHcD EY()
(Beyazu), 1928: 1. SINGLE-LINE OR MULTIPLE-LINE
ANIOY
I.? x? x40. 379
+ 'E1tTI'PaVlOU 375 r.INV€Y
[I] Mamboury's notes.
).)€PMIA iV(~lImrovoc) «" EU()
(a) Stamp: 120 x 55.
Balaban Aga Mescidi: I. )'Ep~iu (a) Stamp: 170 x}5.
r . ?X?X45,iAM97. (a) Hebdomon {Bakirkoy). Unknown: I.
EfIlcI>ANIOY, EfIHcI>ANIOY [I] Mango's notes (from squeeze). [I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 92 no. 46. I. Fragment, 3So x? X45-50' iAM 29.
(b) Stamp: 108 x60. [r] Mamboury's notes.
SINGLE-LINE Great Palace. Area Ab, collapsed vault, great wall at the 376
bottom. ).)MIA 380
WITH INDICTION [I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). r. IN€€X
'Ep)~iu
368 2. +€rIHcD iV(~lIctlrovoc) E E,.,()
(a) Stamp: (70 mm. from centre of M to right-hand edge) x 37.
I. €rIItANIlSllI2 ANIO(Y) (a) Stamp: (I}7) x 2).
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 193 5-3S.
'Emecvlou St ~s + 'E1ll]'Puvio[u) Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site
Mamboury gives location as 'Ac': I.
(a) Stamp: 1I8 x(lo). B2: I.
(a) Stamp: J 14 X40· r . ?x? X50.
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-}8. 1. ? x? x46, no. 36.
Date: 520/1. See Pact II, Ch. 9. sect. 23. [I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze).
Mamboury gives location as 'B'. [I) GPI,pl.14 no. }6. [2) TalbotRicc archive photo.
Sr Polyeukros. Level 566*: I. Level 671: 2. Level 859: }. Balaban Aga Mescidi: I.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
I. No. 1274. 2. No. 332. J. No. 441. r.iAM 104,? x? x50. 2. IYI€€X
Notes: 1-}_ One brick measures ? x? X3O--35, 37' (no entry) [r] Mamboury's nores. iV(~lIctlrovoc) £'E,.,()
- --------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------~--------,------------------
..~
-e

222 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 223

(a) Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site (3) Stamp: 148 x 20. (c) Stamp:? x 3 5-40. Mamboury estimates die-length would have 391
Br, building north-west of church, debris: I. Date: 430/r or 445/6 or 460/1. See Part n, Ch. 11, sect. 3. been [45. I. IN1l.I[e]Y2
I. ?x?x45,no.33. Hexagon complex in Giilhane. Hexagon: 1. Great Palace. Area Ab: 1.
iv(SIK"ttOivoc) lit' [E]U()s
[I] GP I, pl. I4 no. J). [a]TalbotRice archive photo. I.? x? x 50. I.370X370X5°·
(b) Stamp: Approx. I58 xa8. [1] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). [I] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stamp: 172 x(38). ~1f 4~,~.
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site (d) Numerous variants. Sca Walls. Near the monumental ~ti~rcase, area Fb.
B2: I. Great Palace. Area Ab. [I] Mambcury's notes.
I. 360 x 360 x 50, in situ, no. 79. 384 [IJ Mamboury's notes.
I. ""iHeIBAey
[,] GP I, pl. '4 no. 79. 392
iv(liumOivoc) Et' ~a() Eu() I. ]eyS
381 387
I. [IN]BIBAeY (a) Stamp:I35x21. I. INBeY2 ] Eu()s
Date: 416/17 or 431/2. See Part Il, Ch.9, sect. lb. (a) Stamp: ? x )0.
[iv(liumOivoc)] ~t' ~a() Eu() lV(OlK'ttWVOc) 8' Eu()s
Palace of Anciochus: I. Myrelaion church. East part of church: I.
(a) Stamp: (9» x z r . The theta was possibly created by altering an eta.
I.400X395 X48. I. ?x? x35.
Unknown: I.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. lJ] DAI (1st) neg. (a) Stamp: 140 x )7. er] Mamboury's notes.
1. MSBK no. unknown.
KB ISO) and KB t558 (same brick). Unknown: I.
[I] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', a65 no. zo. [a] DAI (Isr) neg.
I. MSBK inv. 6194. }80 x 360 x?
a»7 (cast). [)] Mamboury's notes (from cast). [4] Mango's Unknown: 1-2.
, [I] MSBK neg. 6I94a. [2] DAI (1st) neg. 2)48 (cast).
notes (from cast). I. 384 x(310) x45> AM 382. 2.400 x 380 X47, AM 265.
[3J Mamboury's notes (from cast). [4] Mango's notes (from
[I] Bardill negs. 94.1).I), I4 (2);95.8.20, 2I (I).
cast). EYArrc)
382
I.INfIBAeY

iv(litmOivoc) yt' ~a( ) Eu() EYAf()

388
(a) Stamp: I75 X)O. EY()S r. [I]NIAeyS
Land Walls. Golden Gate: I. 393
[ilv(litKttOivoc) re EU( )s
385 I. INVSE"XAf
I.? x?x40' I. mrevs (a) Stamp: (r20) (from right-hand upright of nu to left) x 26.
[I] Mamboury's notes. ivli(tK'ttOivoc) ,'fI;'Euay()
iv(limt&voc) y' EU()s Date: 427/8 or 442/) or 457/8. See Part If, Ch. 9, sect. le.
2.INLIBAEY Byzantine drains along the Mese. Opposite Firuz Aga Camii: I. (a) Stamp: '4) X».
(a) Stamp: 177 x )7. Unknown: I.
iv(litmOivoc) yt' ~a() EiJ() I. 380 x 380 X40, red brick stained with yellow.
Ruins on Saray Burnu (orphanage of St Paul?): I.
I. MSBK no. unknown.
[tJ Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp: 141 x 22. I. )55 x()05) x 50. [I] DAI (1st) negs. 2)5' and 2»6 (cast). [2] Mamboury's notes
Date: 429/30 or 444/5 or 459/60. See Part 11, Ch. r r , sect. 3. [rj Unger, 'Seraispitze',fig. Iona. II. (from cast). [3J Mango's notes (from cast).
Hexagon complex in Giilhane. Hexagon: I. 389
2.INfEYS
I. 380X?X38. r. INfIeY[2]
[I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). !V(litKttOivoc) y' Eu()s EYAff()
iv(litKttOivoc)yt'Eu( )[s]
(a) Silivri.
).INLIBVE);' (a) Stamp: (I )9) x )0.
[r] Dirimtekin, 'Se1ymbria', 32 no. 3. 394
iv(litmOivoc) yt' ~a() Eu() Kalenderhane Camii. Diakonikon, bema door: I. I. INfEYAff

r. (240) x(I95) X4). iv(litlcttOivoc) y' EUan()

(a) Stamp: '75 x 24.
386 er] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', AI I a,
Date: 429/30 or 444/5 or 459/60. See Part I1, Ch. r r, sect. 3. (a) Stamp: I)9 X)4-
r. [I]NSeYS
Hexagon complex in Gulhane. Hexagon: I. 2. [IN]fIeY2 Kalenderhane Camii: West facade under foot: I.
I. 370 x? X40' [i]~(litKtt&voc) ,'It; EU( )s (295) x(245) '44-
[iv(litKttOivoc)] yt' EU( )s I.
[r] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp: (I )5) x )0. [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', A9.
(a) Stamp: (I)O) x 28.
Sea Walls. Large vaults, area Fe: 1.
383 Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: I.
1.IN1l.IBAEV I.? x? X35.
r • (265) x(250) x 45, one break.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
iv(liucrtOivoc) lit' ~a() EiJ() er] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', AI I C.

(a) Stamp: '7) x24·

2.INseyc EYA~PC)
Datel 430/1 or 445/6 or 460/1. See Part Il, Ch. II, sect, 3. iv(litKttOivoc) (/1;'E,,()s
390 395
Hexagon complex in Giilhane. Hexagon: I. (a) Great Palace. Area Ab: I. I. IN[ .. eY]2 I. ]EyAfP
J. ?X? X50. I. )60 x350 x40.
iv(litlcttOivoc) [ .. Eu( )]s ] Euayp()
[r] Mamboury's notes, [I] Mamboury'I notes.
(b) Stampr rao X40. Ca) Stamp: 175 x JO. (a) Stamp: (82)X)5.
2.IN1l.IBAEY
Great Palace. Area Ab, collapsed vault: r. Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: r. Land Walls. Wall between towers 95 and 96a: I.
iv(lit1<ttOivoc) lit' ~a() Eu() 1. 390 x380 X49. I. ? x? X35.
I.370x360x5°·
One of Mamboury's drawings shows the indiction clearly, [r] Mamboury's notes. [I] Peschlow, 'Bricks camps', Al lb. [r] Mamboury's notes.
 ",
CATALOGUE
•
224 CATALOGUE 225

EY8() EYI10CI() EYCTA() 407

1. VBAE:YCTA·
396 400
1. INE:IE:Y8[ 1. E:VnOCIBAA EYCTO h'D B' pa() Eucm()

~v(5umwvoc) Et' Eu~[ EilnOC10 paO a' Gamma altered to delta by the addi;i~~:b~'a-diagonal stroke.
'''~'
403
(a) Stamp: 180 x 30. (a) Stampr rae x aj . 1. INHEyr:T (a) Stamp:I49 x 29. .
Ruins on Saray Burnu (orphanage ofSt Paul?): I. Sounding A, north of St Polyeuktos. Level 6: I.
Unknown: 1-4. iv(Suc'nffivoc)TJ.'Euct{ )
1. )70 x()65) x 40-45. I.NO.260,?x?x55·
I. 320 x 305 x 40-49. AM 13 (old no. 285). 2.310 x 307 x 48.
[r] Unger, 'Seraispitze', fig. Iona. 9. [2] Schneider, (a) Stamp: q6 x 42. [I] Hillv'Brickstamps', 208, Alo. [2] Sarachane archive neg.
AM '4- ).)10X)IOX44,AM296. 4.(255)x(I70)X)7,AM
'Ziegelsrempel', 265 no. 30. [3] Mamboury, 'Nouvelle lecture', Unknown: I. 9·11.13a.
4)1.
121,122. I. 363 x 350 x J 5-43, two overlapping stamps, AM 172.
[IJ Bardill negs. 94-1.29a, loa (1), )" (2); 95-'· '9', 20a ();
[I] Bardill negs. 94.lo.)2a, 33a.
95-11.8, (4)·

Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between EYCTA() EYT~()
397 Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: 1.
1. BAE:Y8IA 404
i. Once in the Hagia Eirene collection. 1. T::>Y3:AffIA[ 408
pa() HS() (iv81K"tlWVOC) 18' [I] Mamboury's notes. 1. J . BE:YCTAEY.Tq
J ~,. pa() Euc,()
(a) Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia, court to the east of the apse. J. P() HC"ta() Eu,p()
[r] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stamp: (150) XlO.

Date: 43o/r or 445/6 or 460/1. See Part Il, Ch. I I, sect. 3. (a) Stamp: (121 from upright of beta to right-hand end) X22.
Hexagon complex in Gi.ilhane. Hexagon. Unknown: I-
[I] Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 90 n. 4 (mentioned). 1. )00 x(275) x40, AM )80.
[2] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). [IJ Bardill negs. 95.8.16, '7.
EYCEBIOY

SINGLE-LINE
EYNOMI() EYCTAeI()
401 EYCTAO
1. Jff3::>Y3HMI
See EYCTAIl>I().
CIRCULAR The bar below the nu is perhaps meant to be a ligature of nu and 405
1. AIBAE:YCTA
delta rather than an abbreviation mark (cp. 101.1, 409.I).
398 at' pa( ) Eucm( )
1. +INAIK~E:YNOMIC around central * lVSe llC'tlroVOC) 1)'EUCE~[iou]
(a) Stamp: 1 I I x 23. EYCTAcDI()
+ ivoIK(n&voc)~' EUvoJ.ll()c around central * (a) Stamp: (82) x 29.
Kalenderhane Camii. C3/C4 'B'; I.
Beyazrt, Sogan Aga (presumably from the church about 300 m.
(a) Date: after 475. See Part II,Ch. Iona. 12. south of Forum Tauri): L 409
1. (1)5) X(I)O) x44. 1. Il'HEJ.r:lVIl>I
Land Walls: 1. I. 330 x294 x42-47, iAM 76.1 PT.
[r] Peschlow, 'Bricks tamps', Ale a.
1. Louvre museum. [IJ Bardillneg. 92.5024. iVS{llC1:l&VOC),,' E-uerCl<pi()
[I] Leval, •Archaiologika' >6 J 9 no. B'. [2] Meyer- Plarh and 2. YOlff3::>Y3H[ -J
Church about 300 m. south of Forum Tauri in Sogan Aga: I. The bar above the nu is perhaps meant to be a ligature of nu and
Schneider, Landmauer, 150 no. 27.3. [3] Mamboury, [ivB(11C1100VOC)] 11' EUCEPiou I.3IOX3IOX4°. delta rather than an abbreviation mark (cp. 101.1, 401.1).
'Chrisme',455 no. 6, [r] Muller-wiener, 'Hagios Agathonikos?', 18, fig. 4 (omitting
(a) Stamp: (78) x 28. (a) Stamp: 110 X 32.
Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: I.
the iota).
Unknown: I.
1. (150) x(I49) x44· I. MSBKinv. 6198, 340 X350X?
[I] Peschlow, 'Bricksramps', AID h. [I] MSBK neg. 6I98a. [2] DAI (1st) neg'. 2)42 (cast).
406 [3] Mamboury's notes (from cast). [4] Mango's notes (from
1. fBE;YCTA cast).
CIRCULAR
y' PO Euc,aO
EYI1() 402 (a) Stamp: 119 x 28.
1. ::>Y3:
Ja03: Walls found in Alemdar Caddesi during laying of drains. Wall EYT()
399
1. JAffnY3HAJ11 above the fountain on the left at the top of the street: (several) L
Y
I. ? X? x40.
EYTO
tV8(lKnWVOC)~' Hn() pal EUCE~iou [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Dcmangel and Mamboury,
(a) Stamp: (175) x )4. (a) Stamp: 65 diameter. Manganes, 90 n. 4 (mentioned). 410
1. INAE:YT
Unknown. r. Unknown: 1. Unknown: I.
I. (220) x(181) x 50,AM45. 1. iAM(<;K) no. 5,37ox365 x40. lV(OlK'tlWVQC) a'Eu't{)
1. (2))) X(2))) X) 1-)9, AM 262 (old no. 207)
[r] Bardill negs. 94.3.1, 2. [1] Mango's notes. [IJ Bardill neg. 94.1).17. (a) Stamp: 170 x 30.
 ..~..
226 CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE 227
Date: 432/3 or 447/8 or 462/3. See Part n, Ch. 9, sect. r e. 4'7
Balaban Aga Mescidi:
Notes: 1-62. Three bricks measure 365 x 375 x45. 375 x 375 x EYTYX()
I. 1. INnBAE:YT
45,39ox38ox4S·
1.iAM6.2.iAMIJ' 424
iv(8,K'C'wvoc) y,' po( ) E",( ) [r] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes.
Notes: 1-2. One brick measures? x? x 50. 1. rBAEYTYX

[r] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stamp: 19J X27.

y' ~a() E,J,uX(iou)
Kalenderhane Camii. Bema, fill of south chamber: 1. 420
1. ]IBAE:YT
Unknown. a. (a) Stamp: lI5 x23.
4"
r. INrBAE:YT I. (260) x(250) X34. 2. (325) x(240) x37, one break. ],' paO E",O Great Palace. Area Ac, below the Palace of Justice: I.
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps'j Ar z a, b. I.J25 x250X35·
iv(Bl1mwvoch' po() E,,,() (a) Date: 426-29 or 441-44 or 456-59. See Parr n, Ch. 9, sect. le.
(b) Several variants. [I]Mamboury's not~s.
Byzantine drains along the Mese. Opposite the fountain of Atik
(a) Stamp: I80 x30. Stamp: approximately ]93 x27·
Ali Pasa Camii.
Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bfb-i Hiimay-iin: l. Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: 1-1..
[I] Mamboury's notes. EYTYXH()
I. 390 x 380 x40' 1. (I50)x(I)7)xJ4. 2. (JI5)X(270)X41.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', AI2 c, d. AccessorylJ..
421
1. ]AE:YT 425
4I2 4,8 1. BArE[YT]VXH.t.
1. TY3V1I2Y11 p]a E",O
1. IN .t.IBAE:YT
pa()y'E["']uX~(ou) B
iv(Bl1<nwvoc),' ~o() E",() iv(8t<nwvoc) B,' pa() Ein( ) (a), Stamp: ? x 28.
\ Great Palace. Area Ac: I. (a) Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia. Court to the east of the apsc.
(a) Stamp: 180 x JJ. (a) Stamp: 178 x28.
I.? x? x 50-55. [I] Mamboury's notes.
Unknown: I.
Date: 43011 or 445/6 or 46011. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le.
dAM. [I] Mamboury's notes.
Balaban Aga Mescidi.
[I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). er] Mamboury's notes. EYTOYXO
422
(bj Sramp.o go x ag. _ ......-
4'3
1.]EYT 426
Date: 43011 or 445/6 or 460/1. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. re. r. XYOTY312I.t.Y11
1. INIBBAE:YT
Balaban Aga Mescidi. ] E",O
iv(B,mwvoc) 'P' po() E",() [I] Mango's notes (from squeeze). {Ah(K'tt&voc)s l.'Etl'to,,!X(iou)
(a) Stamp: ? x )8.
(c) Stamp: 184 x28. Vefa Kilise Camii. Foundation walls adjoining north facade of (a) Stamp: 200 x 35.
(a) Stamp: t95 x JO.
Date: 430/1 or 445/6 or 460/1. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le. church, in Divan Efendi Sokagl (revealed during laying of Great Palace. Area Ab, collapsed vault: I.
Great Palace. AreaAc: I.
Tokludede Mescidi: 1-7. drains 9June 1935): I. I.390X350X35·
I. 400 x390 x60.
1.iAM9. 2.iAM'2. ).iAM14' 4.iAM22. 5.iAM27' I.? x? x 30. [r] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
6. iAM 4). 7.iAMI25' [I] Mamboury's notes.
Notes: 1-7. One brick measures 390 x 375 x 50. 427
4'4 [I] Mamboury's notes. 1. .YOT312I.t.Y11
1. ]TY31I1I.t.Y11
(cl) Stamp: 188 X28. i.VSt(Ktl&VOC)S t'E(u}rou. (too)
ivB,(mwvoc) 'P'E",[()] Date: 43o/r or 445/6 or 46011. See Part Il, Ch. 9, SCCt.le.
(a) Stamp: t95 x )0.
(a) Stamp: (t80)X)5. Balaban Aga Mescidi. EYTOYXHOY Great Palace. Area Ab: 1.
Great Palace. Area Ab, pillar: I, [I] Mamboury's notes. (2] Mango's notes.
I. 390 x360 X40.
I.? x? X30 See EYTYXIOY, EYTYXHOY, EYTOYXHOY.
[I] Mamboury, 'N ouvelle lecture', I22. [2] Mamboury's notes.
[r] Mamboury's notes. 4'9
I. Identical or similar to 418. 428
4'5 1.].OTY3[
(a) Balaban Aga Mescidi: 1-62.
1. TV3IIII.t.Y1I+
1. iAM 8. 2.iAM14' J.iAM19. 4.iAM22. 5.iAM24. [Ewro . [
+ ivB,(mwvoc) 'P'E",() 6.iAM25. 7.iAM46. 8.iAM47· 9.iAt\148. 'O.iAM55·
EYTYXIOY, EYTYXHOY, EYTOYXHOY
(a) Stamp: (97) x jc.
Ir.iAM56. I2. iAM 64. I).iAM68. 14.iAM71. Ij.iAM Rhegium (Kiicuk Cekmece). Large surrounding wall of the
(a) Stamp: 185 X34. SINGLE-LINE
Great Palace. Area Ac: I.
72. 16.iAM76. 17-iAM78. 18.iAM79' 19·iAM8r. Acropolis, beside the sea: I.
I.? x? X40'
20. iAM 82. z r. iAM 8). 22. JAM 84. 2). iAM 87. 24. JAM EYTY() I.? x? X25.
[r] Mamboury's notes. 89. 25·iAM90. 26.iAM91. 27.iAM9). 28.iAM95· [I] Marnboury's notes.
29· iAM 99· 30.iAMIII. 3I.iAMII2. 32.iAMII5· 423

4,6 33· iAM 123. 34· lAM 126. footprints of little goat. 35. lAM r.]AE:YTY
1. ]TY3BII.t.Y1[
I27· )6. JAM 128. J7· iAM 129· J8. iAM I)l. J9. iAM IJJ. CIRCULAR
~]a() E,,'tU(Xiou)
40. iAM IJ7· 41. JAM I)8. 42. JAM '40· 4)· JAM 142.
i]v8,(K'C'wvoc) 'P' E,J,[()] 44· iAM '4)· 45· iAM 145· 46.iAM 146. 47· JAM I p. (a) Stamp: ? x 29. EYTYXO
(a) Stamp: 155 x )0. 48.iAM15J' 49.iAMI56. 5o.iAM157. P·iAMI58. Date: 414-18 or 429-33. Sec Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. rb.
Palace of Antiochus: I.
429
Great Palace. Area Ab: I. p. iAM 160. 5). iAM 161. 54· JAM 16). 55· iAM 165. I. XVTV3211I+ around central +
I. ? X? X40. 56. iAM 167· 57· JAM '75· 58.iAM '77· 59. iAM 181. I.? x?x35.
[I] Mamboury's notes. + lv(8uc'n&voc)~' E{)'tux({ou) around central +
[r] Mamboury's notes. 60. JAM 182. 61. iAM 18). 62. iAM 185.
(a) Stamp: 75 diameter.
 ·._----------------------------------------------------------,
"~

228
•
CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 229
/./
Date: after 475. See Part IT, Ch. re no. 14. CIRCULAR 4}7 Z(J)O
Ruins between the Gi.ilhane hospital and the Topkapr Sarayr I.)iIAiI[
fortification: 1. 433
J.? x? X40' I. [I)Ne€Y[ ) around a cenrral * ) ~a()E[ WITH INDICTION

[r] Mamboury's notes. [i)v{5umoovoc) a' Ei>[. . . .) (a) Stamp:? x 30. Layout: abbreviation IN omitted }~t:!./"··
(b) Stamp: 77 diameter. Date: 429-32 or 444-47 or 459-62. See Part Il, Ch. 11, sect. 3.
(a) Stamp: 100 diameter. 442
Date: after 475. See Part 11, Ch. re no. 14. Hexagon complex in Giilhane. Hexagon: 1. 1. IIJS'II
Date: after 475. See Part 11, Ch. Iona. 12.
Kalenderhane Camii. Diakonikon floor: J. Over diakonikon t. ?x?x42.
.., Structures to the south-east of the Istanbul Archaeological lY'Zm()
vault: 2. Under minaret: 3. Unknown: 4. [I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze),
Museumr r ,
1. {zoo} x{I95) X)5. '.370 X(.07) x 37· 3· 386 X('96) x40' (a) Stamp: rOI-I03 x 27-30.
1. 38ox370X45.
4· (225) x{I50) x 39. Date: late 4th century? See Pan Il, Ch. 10 no. 4.
[I] Peschlow, 'Bricksramps', Cl. [I] Ulker,Proje, 63.
438 Great Palace. Area Ab: I.

I. IAD3:HYlI 1. 290 x280 x45.

iv{5umOOvoch-E~l.t{ ) [1] Mamboury's notes.

CRUCIFORM
(a) Stamp: 98 x 32. Unknown: 1-4.
430 I. '94 x.8. "43, AM 47 .•. '97 x{I85) x 38-45> AM '99.
x. •• Unknown: I.
,I. iAM (CK) no. 6r, fragment,? x? X40' 3.291 x28I x45,AM255' 4· 290 X (272) x35-40,AMz68.
A
, [r] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. [I) Bardill negs. 94·3-4 (I); 94·6.Ia; 94·t 1.35a, 36a (.); 94.13.IO
) fTYXI" E[
r.') . (4), .6(3)·

[.) SINGLE-LINE
i· MULTIPLE-LINE Layout: abbreviation IN included
) l' [Ei>)WX'{ oo) 5 ~a()
434 439 443
The delta is perhaps an accessory. I. I)NElBA€[ r. IN. [.)Z(J).
r. +€ .. [ .. )
(a) Stamp: Complete arm 72 x 30. i)~{5mtOOvoc) 9' ~,,{) E[ NO€N[") iv{511cnoovoc) . [. r Zoo{) .
Unknown. r. !'KTI['
The square theta was possibly formed from an eta, (a) Stamp: '30 x 36.
I.? x? X38-42, AM 407.
(a) Stamp'? x 30.
+ E.. [.. )~o Ev[5)um{oovoc)[ Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
[I) Bardillnegs. 95.9.32, 33
I. ? x? X45.
Date: 425/6 or 440h. See Parr H, Ch. 9. sect, le. (a) Stamp' (89) x (95).
Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bfb-r HumayUn: I. Unknown: r. [I] Mamboury's notes.
1. ? x? x35. I. ? x? x 45-58, once in Robert College, AM 102.
EYTYXIOY [r] Mamboury's notes, [I) Mango's notes (rubbing). [z] Bardill neg. 94.8,'3.
WITHOUT INDICTION
See EYTYXIOY, EYTYXHOY, EYTOYXHOY.
444
435 440 1. BAZ(J)€
1. )3IIII"YlI+ r , +€[
N .. [ iJa() Zro() E
EY[ + ,v5t{""oovoc) t~'E[
+ ,v5t{moovoc) i" ~() E[ I[N)"[ (a) Baths of Zeuxippos. Flooring in or near Building I or 2.
SINGLE-LINE + E[ -)v .. [-) i[v)5[{"ttloovoc) [I] Gray, 'Brickstamps', 54 no. 23. [2] Schneider,
(a) Sramp- ? x 46.
'Ziegelsrempel', 266 no. 55.
Sea Walls. Between Koca Mustafa Pasa station (Samatya) and (a) Date, 1.532/3. See Parr 11, Ch. 9, sect .• b.
431
NarhKapl. Hagia Sophia. Wall with exedras, Cafcriye Sokagl.
r. )fBA€Y[
[I] Mamboury's notes, [I] Mamboury's notes.
JOa() El>[
(a) Stamp: (120) x j a.
Z(J)TIKOY
Walls found in Alemdar Caddesi during laying of drains.
436
Corner at the bottom of the street, opposite the Sublime Pcrte, I.INNIBA€[ SINGLE-LINE
and at the foot of the Alay Ko§"kii.
,v{5umoovoc) fill 5t' iJa{) E[
[I) Mamboury's notes. ZI[ 445
Gamma altered to delta by the addition of diagonal and upright 1. IYlIAS(J)TI
432 strokes. 441
1. IYlA€Y[ iV(&lK'tt&VOC) ta"Zortl(lCoU)
r, +INAZI[
(a) Stamp: (I45 from left-hand edge to right-hand of E) x .6.
iv(01.lcuoovoc) a' Eu[ + iv(&rK'tt&voC) a" Zt[ (a) Stamp' 127 x 37.
Date: 430/1 or 44f/6 or 460/1. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect, le.
Unknown: I,
(a) Stamp.f r joj x j a. Balaban Aga Mescidi: 1-5, (a) Stamp: ? x 38. The height within the border is 27. r. MSBK inv. 6.12, (90) X(170) X?
'Bath' building beside the Myrelaion rotunda. dAM 3.•. iAM4· 3·iAM5· 4.iAMI5. 5.iAM70' Great Palace. Area Ab, collapsed vault: I. [1) MSBK neg. 62I za. [1) DA.I (1st) neg. '35' (cast).
[I) Talbor Rice, 'Bodrum Camii', '73, fig. I I no. 3. [.) Tnlbor Notes: 1-5. One brick measures ? x? x40, I,? x? X40' [3] Mamboury's notes (from cast). [4] Mango'S notes (from
Rice archive (rubbing). [I] Mamboury's notes, (I] Mamboury's notes. cast).
 '.~
•
23° CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 231
MULTIPLE-LINE HEO 455 Cisterns in Gtllhane, near Bab-r H~mayUn. Floor above
I. +INIHAI cisterns: I ...
446 450 I.? x? X45.
J. SUlT + lv(litlcnrovoc) i" 'HAl()
I. [I]NAIBAHE: [I] Marnboury's nores.
IKOA (a) Stamp: 192 x40'
[i]v(Bumwvoc) a,'Ila() 'HE( )
Zo:n:ucou Date: 42617 or 44112.. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le.
(a) Stamp: (1I 5) x 2). Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bib-I HiimiyGn. Floor above the EAI()orHAI()
(a) Stamp: 77 x 50.
Fethiye Camii: J. cisterns: l.
Unknown: 1-2.
I.? x? x60, fragment.
460
J I. ?x?x40' I.]AI
I.iAM(<;:K))6.2.iAM(<;:K))6a.
[r] Mango's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes.
Notes: 1-2. One brick measures 370 x 360 x40' 'E]A'O or 'H]A'()
[1] Mango's notes. 2.IAHINI+
(a) Stamp: ? X)).
+ tv(liucncOvoc) t" 'HA.l() Date: 42cr24 or 435-39. See P~rtIl, Ch. 9, sect. le.
(a) Stamp:? x 30. Cistern on Srraselviler Caddesi.
He() Date: 426/7 or 44112. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le. [I] DAI (1st) inv. no. ))05-'.
Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bjib-i Humayfln: I.
45' I. ? x? X40.
I. IN.II..II.IHe
HO ,[I] Mamboury's notes.
ivB(umwvoc) B,' 'H9() HAIANOY
WITH INDICTION 456
(a) Silivri. I. [I]NfIHAI
Sec IAlANOY.
[1] Dirimtekin, 'Selymbria', 32 no. 2.
447
I. IVlfH

iv(B,1<tl&voc) y' 'H()

_.- [ijv(B,lC'tt&voc)y,' 'HA'()

(a) Date: 4141'15. See Part Il.Ch.y.secr.

Theodosian Hagia Sophia. Back wall of Schneider's
la.

(a) Stamp: 105 x)o. propylaeum.

HAI()EKAH()
Unknown: 1. [1] Schneider, 'Ziegelsrempel', 265 no. 33. [2] Schneider,
HAl(), EAI()
1.(245) x(I85) QQ-47,AM 1)1. \VesthoJ, 6 no. 4.
461
[I] Bardill neg. 94.7.8. EAI() t. +INfHAIE:KAH
457
I. llIlE:I·BAPE:HAI + tv(Bmtwvoc) y' 'HA,() 'EKA~()
452
I. IVlZBAE:AI tv(Bumwvoc) er": papE() 'HA'() (a) Stamp: 209 X)I (ends)-)8 (centre).
MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE CARRIED INDICTION iV(Ouctlwvoc) 1;' pa() 'EA'() (a) Stamp: 170 x 32. Unknown: 1-3 ..
<Bath' building beside the Myrelaion rotunda: (two). I.)78x)75X4o,AM42. 2·)76x()IO)XJ7,AM4I). ).)84X
(3) Stamp: 182 x30.
[I] Talhot Rice, 'Bodrum Camii', 173, fig. II no. 4. [2] Talbot ()IO)X4S,AM)82.
Date: 423/4 or 43819. Sec Part H, Ch. 9, sect. le.
Rice archive (rubbing). [I] Bardill negs. 94.2.)2 (I); 95.Io.8a, 9a (2); 95.8.22,2) ()).
Cistern on Siraselviler Caddesi.
Interpretation unclear. For the initial ilINEcp. 286.1, 289.1, (b) Stamp: 182 (maximum) XJJ. (b) Stamp: lx)5.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
1473·1. Unknown: I. Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
I.? x? x 33-42,AM 315. Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I.
(a) Stamp: 145")0.
HAI() [I] Bardill negs. 95.3.loa, r ra, I2a, 21a, 22a; 95.4.27a, 28a. I. Once in the Hagia Eirene collection.
Great Palace. Area Ab, collapsed vault: 1.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
I. ?x?x50' 453 458 (c) Blachernai. Along the road between Emir Buhari Tekkesi and
[I] Mamboury's notes. I. +INZHAI I. ]BAPE:HAI[ the fountain in front of the garden of the ivaz Efendi mosque.
+ iv(BtlCt,&voc) 1;' 'HA'() ]IlaPE() 'm,[()] [I] Papadopoulos, <Note', 341.
(a) Stamp: 205 X)2. (a) Stamp: ? x 23.
Date: 42J/4 or 438/9. See Part H, Ch. 9, sect. le. 462
Tokludede Mescidi: I. I. INfHAIEKAH
Cistern on Srraselviler Caddesi: I. I. ? X? x40,iAM 89.
J.38ox?x4°. [I] Mamboury's notes. iv(B,m&voc)y"HA,() 'E1<A~O
Hr( Er] Mamboury's notes. (a) Blachernai, excavations of July-August 1958.
[I] Dirimtekin, 'Blachemes', 22, 3I no. r ,
449 454 HAI()S
I.]IN8Hf. I. I]NHHAI 463
] iv(B,,,,,,&voc) a' 'Hy . i]v(Bucn&voc)~' 'HA>()
459 I. IN.II.HAIE[KAH]
I. +IN. HAIS
(a) Stamp: (140) X40. (a) Date: 424/5 or 4)9/40. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le. iv(Btlcttwvoc) B"m,() ·E[.A.~()]
+ iv(B,mo,voc). 'HA'()s
Land Walls. Wall between towers 95 and 96a: 1. Cisterns in Gi.i1hane, near B5.b-1 Hiimdyfln. Upper storey: I. (a) Blachernai. Along the road between Emir Buharl Tekkesi and
r.? x? x3S. I. ? x? X45. (a) Stamp: 200 X)2. the fountain in front of the garden of the Ivaz Efcndi mosque.
[1] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes. Date: 42J-270r 438-42. See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. le. [I] Papadopoulos, Blachernes, 146 no. 2.
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~

CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 233

464 St Polyeuktos. Unknown: L
HAYOY HPAKAHC
+1[N]a[S]E:HAI€K[ I. No. 1318,370 x 360 x 40-45.
[I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 208, AI I. [2] Sarachanc archive neg.
+ i[v]o{tmrovoc)[s] ."HAt{) 'E~[A~{)] 473 477
9.10.24. .SHA I, :)HAJ!AqH
(a) Stamp' (I77) x 34,
Unknown: 1. YOY+
Ferhiye Camii: 1. 'J-lpaKA~c
T. (250) X(220) x )9-45> AM 384, . s 'H),;uou +
1, ()33) X (240) x? (a) Stamp: 125 (wirhin borderj x ao.
[t] Bardill negs. 95.8.24, '5.
[r] Mango's notes. [2J Dumbarton Oaks Photographic (a) Stamp' 80 x65. Great Palace, Area Ab, below the collapsed vault: I,
Collection neg. L62.42 Cc. Mango). Great Palace. Area Ac: I. 1. 360 x 360 x40.
470"-
1. [+I]N~2IAHAIO~2 I.350x335 X35. [I] Mamboury's notes,
465 [I] Mamboury's notes.
I. Dirimtekin published INIHEKAH, possibly in error for The stamp has been altered from 469.la by squeezing in the letter
INIHAlEKAH alpha.

iv{otmrovoc) t"HAt{) 'EKA~{) l+ i]VO{lK1troVOC)sre" 'HAlOO{)S

(a) Stamp: (I67) X41.
HMH() HCIL'..OPIOY KOMITOC
(a) Blachernai, excavations of July-August 1958.
Unknown: I.
[r] Dirimtekin, 'Blachernes', 22, 3 I no. 5.
474
I. 355 x (250) x 32-45. stamped twice, AM 341 (old no. 656).
I. H.ABAHMH 478
[I] Bardill negs, 95,6.tI-I4. I. +HCI~OPI
466
1, [IN. ,]HAIEKAH ~;:a'~a{) 'H~~{) [15]KOMITOC
Dirimtekin read H1\.I instead of HA!. HAAIO~() (a) Stamp: 130 X40' + 'Hctfiopljoo] KOl1l;:ac(i.e. K6J.lTl't'oc)
[iv{otmrovoc) .. ] 'HAt{) 'EKA~{) Tombs in the Mangana region: I.
471 Schneider's reading has been adopted in preference to that of Gray.
I. 290 x 290 x 42.
(a) Blachernai, excavations of July-August 1958. 1. +IN~SIAHAAIOAS
[I] Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 37, fig. 44 no. 2. (a) Date: after 532. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect, 2C.
[r] Dirimtekin, 'Blachernes', 22, 31 no. 4. + iVO{tK"ffivoc)s to' 'HA),toO{)s -.-- Baths of Zeuxippos. In or near Building I or 2.
(b) Stampr r j o x zo.
(a) Stampi z j j X3'. Unknown: I. [I] Gray, 'Brickstamps', 56 no. 46. [2] Schneider,
467 Date: 520/1. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. za. I. 364 x 354 x 54, three fingers used to make twO diagonals 'Ziegelstempel', 266 00,54.
1, [IN .. ]HAIEKAH
St Polyeukros. Level j S: I. Level sz'': 2. Level 165: 3. Leve1211: across brick before stamp applied at centre, AM 3,
Dirimtekin transcribed JNAIEKAH. The reading suggested seems
4· Level 302::'; 5. LeveIS33": 6. Collapsed staircase vault: 7-15. [I] Bardill negs. 94.1.5a, ea.
more likely on comparison with other stamps found in the same
South pilaster against west church wall: 16.
location. 475
I. No. 267. 2.No.257. 3·No.III. 4.No.I73. 5.No.80I.
, -l 'HAt{) 'EKA~{) I, HBH+I
[iv{otmrovoc) 6. No. 578. 7· No. 964, 8. No. 965. 9. No. 966. 10. No. 967. HCY()
(a) Blachemai, excavations of July-August 1958. 11. No. 979. 12. No. 980. 13· No. 985. 14. No. 998. 15. No. ~(VOlxnroVOC) W 'H~~{ ) (I)
[I] Dirimtekin, 'Blachernes', 22, 31 no. 6. 1001. 16. No. 1083. ~(VOl1crtrovoc)~' 'HA~{) (?) 479
Notes: 1-16. One brick measures 360 x 350 x40. 1, Y:)HAa:AVlI
The penultimate letter, in ligature with the letters on either side, is
468 [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 208, AIl. [2] Sarachane archive neg. perhaps M or an inverted A. iv{otl<ttrovoc) a' ~a{) 'HC1J{)
1, [IN, ,]HAIEKAH 9·II.34{t6).
(a) Stamp: 138 x40. (a) Stamp: 195 x30.
[iv{otK"Ctrovoc).. ] 'H1.t{) 'EKA~{) Rotunda north of the Palace of Antiochus, brick floor of south- Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia. Church: r.
HAA[
(a) Stamp:{I42)x35, west niche: 1-2. I.38oX350x30.
Unknown: I. 472 L 340 x 340 x? 2.340 x 340 x? [I] Mamboury's notes.
I. +INA2AHAA[ [I] Bardill.
1,(255) x(2)7) x)8-42, AM385·
+ iv8(lK't'LOOVOC)s 8' 'HAA[ (b) Baths of Zeuxippoa.In or near Building I or 2: (common). 480
[I] Bardillnegs. 95.8,26, '7.
I. Y::JHAa:1li11
[I] Gray, 'Brickstarnps', 56 no, 49. [2] Schneider,
(a) Stamp: (I 87) x 34.
'Ziegelstempel', 266 no. 53. iv{oumrovoc)y' ~a{) 'Hcu{)
Ruins on Saray Burnu (orphanage ofSt Paul?): I.
I. 370 x (205) x25-P. (a) Stamp: 140X25.
[I] Unger, 'Seraispitze', fig. 10 no. la. Date: 419/20, See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. re.
Cistern of Aetius: I.
HAIOL'..(), HAAIOL'..() HPA()
1·38ox380x45,
[I] Mamboury's notes.
HAIO~{) HAAIOL'..() 476
1. INAI-IPA
481
469 Scc HAIOA{ ), J-lA.AIOA{) . iv{ol1crtrovoc) 0' 'J-lpa{) I. INSBAHCY
t • +IN~2H-IAIO~2
Papadopoulos may have transcribed the letters incorrectly: the rho iv{ol1mrovoc) ,'/1:,' ~a{) 'Hcu{)
+ iVO{tlCtl&VOC)S t.'. 'HA.wo()s
may have been a beta, giving iVO(lK'ttOOVOC).,,' pa() [.
(a) Stamp: 160 X25,
For an alteration to this die, see 470.la.
HAIOY (a) Blachernae. Along the road between Emir Buhari T ekkesi and Date: 422/3 or 437/8. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le.
(a) Stamp: 192 X4I. the fountain in front of the garden of the Ivaz Efendi mosque, Cistern on Srraselviler Caddesi.
Date: p61I7. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. za. SeeHAYOY. [I] Papadopoulos, Blachernes, 146, no. I. [I] Mamboury's notes.
 "~
•
234 CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE
,.;'
235
(b) Scamp: '75 x28. 486 (a) Scamp: 165 x25. (a) Stamp:I48 x 2).
Date: 422/3 or 437/8. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. le. 1. INIBBAHCY Great Palace. Area Ab: I. Unknown. I';
Cistern on Srreselviler Caddesi: I.
iv(8lKn&voc) lp-pa() 'Hcu() 1.320X310X5°· I. MSBK inv. 6207,(60) x(170) x?
I. 360 x 330 x 35. [1] Mamboury's notes. [I] MSBK neg. 6207a. [2] DAl (.1st) neg. 2))8 (cast).
[I] Mango's notes. (a) Scamp: (170) x )0.
Great Palace. Area Ac: r.
t.·r~t:.;~.
(c) Stamp: 190 x 28.
Date: 422/3 or 437/8. See Pan Il, Ch. 9, sect. le. I.? x? x 50.
Cistern on Srraselviler Caddesi. [I] Mamboury's notes.
J
[r] Mamhoury's notes. 2. INlBBAHCY
6E() 6EM()
iv(Sucn&voc) lP' ~a() 'Hcu()
482
I. INHBAHCY (a) Stamp: 180 x 30. 491 WITH INDICTION
Great Palace. Area Ac: r. 1. INJl.BA9€
iv(S"C"tl&voc)~' pa() 'Hcu()
496
(a) Stamp: 170 X2?
I.? x? x55. iV(S"'tl&VOC) s- Pa() ge() I. INABA9€H
[I] Mamboury' s notes.
Date: 42+'5 or 439/4°. See Parr 11, Ch. 9. sect. le. (a) ScamP:(156)X27. iV(SlK"tl&VOC)a' pa() 9t~()
Cisterns in Gulhace, near Bab-i Hiimfiydn. Large vaults, and Date: 450/1. See Part II. Ch. 9. sect. IC.
487 (a) Stampc r ac X18.
portico between them and Hagia Eirene: I. I. INIBBHCY St john of Stoudios: r.
I. ? x? X5I. Date: 417/18 or 432/3. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. lb.
I.J70X370X4°. I'

iv(Sllcn&voc) lP' Pia) 'Hcu() [I] Peschlow, Studioskircbe, Palace of Antiochus: (four) I.
[I] Mamboury's notes. (in preparation).
I. 370x370x60.
(b) Stamp: 175 x 28. (a) Stamp: 170 x 30.
..INJl.BA9€ [I] Mamboury" notes. [2] DAI (1st) neg. KB 1508. [)] Mango
Date: 424/5 or 439/40. See Part 11, Ch. 9. sect. le. Great Palace. Area Ac: (many).
Cisterns in Giilhane, near Blib-I Hiimayfin. Large vaults, and
portico between them and Hagia Eirene: I.
I. 38ox38ox30.
I. ?X?X55.

[I] Mamboury's notes. _.- iv(Su<",,&voc) S' pa() ee()

(a) Scamp: 124 x25.

Palace of Antiochus, round room to the west of the hexagon: I.
and Hawk.ins, 'Fenari isa Carnii', 183 no. 17 (mentioned).
(b) Stampr r aa x 18.
Land Walls. Wall between towers 95 and 96a: I. Tower 49: 2.
Notes: 1-.2. One brick measures 360 x? x 50-55.
[I] Mamboury's notes. 488 I. 385 x? x6o.
I. ]BAP€HCY [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari Isa
[I] Mamboury's notes.
Camii', 183 no. 17 (mentioned).
483 ] ~ap,() 'Hcu( )
1.INeAAHCY 492
(a) Stamp: (140) x 29. 497
I. INHBAe€
iV(SlKtl&VOC)9" aa 'Hcu( ) I. IN€BVe€M
Unknown: I.
iv(Sllm&voc)~'pa()ee( )
Mamboury suggests a mistake by the die-cutter, who carved AA for I. MSBKinv. 6217, (170) X(200) x? iv(SlJ<"tl&voc) " pa() eE~()
the abbreviation pa(). [I] MSBK neg. 6217a. [2] DAI (1st) neg'. 2))8 (cast). (a) SCamp:I47 XI 7.
(a) Scamp: 165 x )0.
[3J Mamboury's notes (from cast). [4] Mango's notes {from Sea Walls. Near tower 16.
(a) Sump: 200 x 25. Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
cast}. [I] Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 77, 81, fig. 88 no. I.
Date: 42516 or 440h. See PartIl, Ch. 9, sect. le. I. 390 x 370 x60.
Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bab-l Hiimdyun: I. [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Penari isa
493
1. 400 x 370 X40. I. INIlIIlA9€ Camii', 183 no. 17 (mentioned).
[I] Mamboury's notes. iv(SlJC"tl&voc) Plo pa() eE() 498
I. IN:S:Be€M
484
H[ (a) Scamp:(175)XJ4.
I. IN9BAHCY Tiyatrc Arahgl SOkagl. Beyazrc I. iV(SlK"tl&VOC),'It; ~() geJ1{)
489 I. ? x? X42, lAM 75.2 PT.
e-
iV(SllCtl&VOC) Pa() 'Hcu() I.]Jl.IBH[ [I] Bardill's notes.
(a) Stamp: 1)7 x 29.

(a) Stamp: '75 x )0. Fenari isa Camii: (three) 1-2.

iv(Suc,,&voc)] S,' ~(a) H[
Date: 42516 or 4-40/1. See ParrIl, Ch. 9. sect. le. 494 I. 380 x )65 x 50. 2.365 x 365 x 50.

(a) Stamp: (58 from iota to right-hand upright of eta) x 32. I.INJl.IBA9€ [I] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari
Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bdb-i Hii miiyiln: I.
Unknown: I. Isa Camii', fig. 40no. 17.
I.? x? X45. iv(SlJctl&voc) S,' Pa() ee()
I. Fragment,? x? x)5. iAM27.
[.1] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stamp: 188 x25. Unknown: 1-2.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
Date: 430/1 or 445/6 or 460/1. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. le. I.)90 x )65 x )9-46, AM 29). 2. (285) x(255) x42-47,AM 18).
485 T okludede Mescidi: I. [I] Bardill neg'. 95.2.12a, l)a(I);94.1 I.I6a (2).
r, INIBAHCY r. 380 x? X45.iAM 87 .
iV(SllCtl&VOC)l' pa() 'Hcu() [I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Sump: (172) x 28. 6~() 495 MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE CARRIED INDICTION
Date: 426/7 or 44Th. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. le. I. IN[ .]BAP6€
Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bfib-r Hiimfiyfln. Vault: 1. 490 499
r. I).e. AaAl11 There appears to be space only for an iota between the nu and beta. I. +6€l"i[
1.370X370X5°·
[I] Mamboury's notes. iv(Suc,,&voc) a' pa() ea() iv(SlJctl&voc) [ .] pap( ) ee() +9,~() [
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~

CATALOGUE CATALOGUE
r'i
237
(a) Stamp:? x 32. 8EO() 8EO( ) "",IAKO(NOY) 8EO"",OAOY
Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
r . 340 x? x40. 504 Sec 8EOl'.OYI\OY, 8EOJl.OI\OY, 8E01>.<pI\OY and
5°9
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari Isa r . O:?8dAa82l'.+N(I] r. +INSZ8eOl'.IKO TEOl'.OI\OY. '.
Camii', 183 no. 17 (mentioned).
(i]v + o("",twvoc), e' ~ap() 8EO() + iV(SlK'tlWVOC)S~'e£o() SIClK6(vou)
(a) Stamp' r98 x )0. (a) Stamp: 191-192 x34-35.
Land Walls. Pentapyrgion. Unknown: 1-7. 8EO"",OPOY
[I] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, 149 no. 9. [2] DAI 1.(250)x(z3o)x42,AM55. 2. ?x?x4o,AM97. 3. (300) x
(Ist) negs. 6604 (cast) and KB 5478 (brick, clearly broken after (2)o)X)0-)5,AMr88. 4.(275) x(260) X22-)5, AM 287. 5.1x See8EOl'.<PPOY, 8EOl'.OPOY, 8EOl'.OYPOY.
8EO()
cast had been made). [3] Mamboury's notes (from cast). ?x35,.Alv{288. 6.3Gox?x47,AM289· 7.?x?X3O--38,AM
[4] Mango's notes (from cast). 322.
500
r. INBBA8EO (r] Bardill negs. 94·)· r 8 (r); 94. j.)4 (2); 94· rO.29a (); 95-'·)6, )7
5°5 (5); 95-'·)4, ) 5 (4); 95 .a.oa, ta (6); 95· j.I 5, 16, r 7 (6). 8EO"",OCIOY KOMHTOC
iv(311CtlWVOC)
P' ~,,() 6EO()
l. INl'.SeBA8eO (b) Stamp' r98 x )4.
(a) Stamp: approx. 142 X29. Date: 423/4 or 438/9. See Part 11,Ch. 9, sect. re. 513
iv3(llmwvoc)s" ~a() 8EO()
Sea Walls: I. Cistern on Siraselviler Caddesi: I.
I. MSBKinv. 6201,(33°) x380x? (a) Stamp: r97 x )0-)). ,I.374x?x40.
[I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 85 no. 7. [2] Leclercq, Unknown: I. \ [rj Mango's nores.
'Estampilles', col. 546 no. 7. [3] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 264 1. 380 x (26o) X4O--50, AM 421. (c) Stampi zoc X)5. +8EOVOCIQ
[I] Bardill negs. 95.10.24a, 253. KOME!I1l'.2IE
no. II (erroneous). (4] MSBKneg. 620ra. (5] DAI (1st) neg. Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
2341 (cast). [6] Mamboury's notes (from cast). [7] Mango's Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I. Monogram no. 55 (Mcuptxiou)
notes (from cast). I. Once in the Hagia Eirene collection. + Oeodocioc KOJ.l(rrtoc)evB(lK·n&voc)s re"
[I] Mamboury's notes.
50! (:1) Stamp: tabula l32 X49; roundel diameter 54.
(d) Stamp' 1 X)5.
INfBA8eo Date: 582 or 596/7. See Part Il, Ch. 5, sect. la.
l.
8EO"",() Date: 423/4 or 438/9. See Part n, Ch. 9, sect. re. Unknown: J.
iv(OtKtlwvoc) y' ~,,() eEO() Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bfb-i Hiirndyun: I.
I. 337 x 314 x 35-40, brick broken in two, Alv1 lG4.
(a) Stamp: 170 x aS. 506 1.370 x360 x30.
[r] Bardill negs. 94.IO.12a, r ja, 14a.
r. ]l'.OO8Aff( .]2l'.!I1H [I] Mamboury's notes.
Unknown: I.
I. iAM (<;;K) no. )0, 1 x 1 x 60. ~v3(Llmrovoc), (.] ~a() 8E03(()
5'0
[I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Theotokos in Chalkoprateia. Court to the east of the apse. r. 8E]Ol'.IKO
[I] Mamboury's notes. 8e]0() 3ta,6(vou)
8EO"",OY AOY, 8EO"",OAOY, 8EOMJ)AOY,
502
r. INIB'BV1eeeO TEO"",OAOY
(a) Stamp' 1 X)4.
iv(311mwvoc) LP" ~"pe( ) eeo() 507 Date: 420-24 or 435-39. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. re.
r. l'.038AaHl'.!I1I+ SINGLE-LINE
Cistern on Sirasclvilcr Caddesi: I.
(a) Stamp: 192 x25.
~a() 8E03()
+ iv3(L1CtLWVOC)~' I. 374 X? X40. 8EOl'.OI\(O)Y
Date: 428/9 or 443/4 or 458/9. See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. le.
(a) Stamp- z ro x j a. [I] Mango's notes.
Byzantine drains along the Mese. Vaults of drains in the Forum
of Constantine. Cistern destroyed injune 1916 near Thcotokos in 5'4
5'! I. B]A8EOl'.OI\V
[I] Mamboury's notes. Chalkoprateia. r.]8eOl'.IK(
[I] Mamboury's notes. ~]a 8e0(6).( o)»
(b) Stamp:z04X28.
K perhaps misrecorded for K..
Date: 428/9 or 443/4 or 458/9. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le. (a) Stamp,(r)0)x)4.
Miihiirdar Emin Pasa Sokagi. 508 ] 8EO() 3t(a),(6(vou)] Land Walls. Near rower 48a.
[I] Mamboury's notes. r. +INl'.2IB8eOl'.
(a) Stamp' (98) X)4. [I] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, 150 no. 26.1.
(2] DAI (1st) neg. 6599 (cast). [)] Mamboury's notes (from
503 + ivS(ucnmvoc)s lW E>EO?() Date: 420-24 or 43 5-39. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le.
Cistern on Srraselviler Caddesi. case). [4] Mango's notes (from cast).
l. INt:i<:9KeBA8eO A rho with a crossbar, as shown in Wulzinger's illustration, is
(r] DAI (1st) inv. no. ))05A.
iv(3LKtlWVOC)et" + (in leaf or heart) K(upL)e ~,,() eeo() unattested elsewhere: the initial character may have been a simple
TEOl'.OAOY
cross.
(a) Stamp' 148 x 25. 5'2
(a) Stamp: 208 x 34. Malcrskos reads 8eifl ~hKClicp,which is otherwise unattested. Geo() 5'5
Date: 416/17 or 43112. See Part n, Ch. 9, sect. lb.
I.
I. K2TeOVOVYI
Date: 503/4 or 518/19 or 533/4· See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad. SIClK(6vou) is the closest attested inscription. Examples of such
Palace of Antiochus: (two) 1.
stamps are in the Hagia Sophia collection (see 5°9.13), and they KsTeoSoA.ou
Substrucrures south of Cemal Nadir Sokagi. Debris above the l

1·400x(370)x50. may, like Maletskos' stamp, have come from Ramazanoglu's

substructures: (two) I. What appears to be an inverted alpha is presumably an inverted
[1] Mango's notes. excavations of 1946-47.
L 390 x390 x? lambda in ligature with a lozenge-shaped omicron. The first and
Unknown: 1-2. [I]Wulzinger, 'Substruktionsbauten', 381, fig. 8 no. 6. (a) In the area of the excavations undertaken in 1946-47 between last letters may be accessories. Given the length of the stamp, it
r. 400 x ()70) x 49, AM 7· 2. ()45) x()r4) X4),AM 25. [2] Schneider, 'Ziegclstempel', 265 no. 3 lb. [3] Mamboury, Hagia Eircne and Hagia Scphia. seems unlikely that the die is broken and originally began
(r] Bardillnegs. 94.UP, r4a (r); 94.2.ro, II (2). 'Chrisme',459 110. 18'. [I] Maletskos, 'Plinrhos', 270 (mentioned). [ivSl]K(n&voc)s.
 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 239
(a) Stamp: 213 x28. 8EO~O[ 8EO[>.(J)PITOY (a) Stamp: 76 x76.
Unknown: I. Unknown: ,I." .:
523
1. ()60) x(285) x )5-48, AM 169. 519 I. lAM (~K)no. 13, fragment,? x? x 50.
I. +880[>,
[I] Bardill negs. 94. IO.24a, 25a. 1. ]0[>'03812[>'V11+
(J)PITOY [I] Mango's notes.
(b) Possibly the same as a.
516 + iv8(1K1:t&VOC)sy' 8eo8o[ + 8£OSropi-ro\l Unknown.
1.]EOVOVYI (a) Stamp: (220) x )2. (a) Unknown. [1] Sorlin-Dcrigny, 'Inscriptions', 93 no. 55.
T]eo86Aou, Little cistern near the Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia, [I] Mamboury's notes.
destroyed in june 1916: I.
What appears to be an inverted alpha is presumably an inverted (b) Stamp: (98) x 7J.
I. 385 x370 x 55. 8EO[>'OPOY,
lambda in ligature with an omicron. The final letter is possibly an Great Palace, excavations in Peristyle and Apsed Hall in
[1] Mamboury's notes. Accessory M
accessory. 1953-55. Filling close to great stone wall: (few) I,
(b) Mamboury notes a variant besides a. r. ? x? x 52, labelled no. 7.
(a) Stamp: (168) x27. 527
[I] GP Il, 107, fig. 21 no. 6. [2] Talbot Rice archive photo. 1. +880l;0
Fenari isa Camii: I. 520
1. ... 880[>,0[.] [3] Mamboury's notes. PI5IN[>'Sl[>'
1. ()75) X(joo) x48, AM 189.
M
[r] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari .. 8eooo[.]
8E(J)J\.(J)PHTOY
ha Camii', fig. 39 no. 11. [3] Bardill negs. 94.lo.27a, 28a. + 8eo06pou iv8(1lC'tt&VOC)slS' Jl
(a) Stamp: Il7 x 32
Unknown: I. 524 , (a) Unknown: 1.
1. +88(J)
MULTIPLE-LINE I. Fragment, 350 x? X40, iAM 18. I. (225) x (167) x 35, once in Robert College, AM 2I7.
[>.(J)PH
[I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). [I] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Bardill negs. 94.6.20a, 2Ia.
(T]I51N[ .. ] (b) Unknown.
5'7
I. +36+ + 8ewowpil[t]Ou (v[. [I] Leval, 'Archaiologika', 617 no. W. [2] Schneider,
(J)l;0
YOA 8EO~(j)( ) _.--' (a) Stamp: 105 x(59).
Unknown: I.
'Ziegelstempel',
(c) Stamp: (10)) x64
265 no. j r a.

+eeO()cOAou+ Unknown: I.
1. (2)2) X(I95) x)8-45, AM 126.
52' 1. (270) X(224) "42, AM 8).
(a) Stamp: (78) x 69. 1.]2880[>.(J) [I] Bardill neg. 95-1.26.
lrl Bardill negs. 94.5-14, '5·
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area 1935 -3 8. Site B I, ]s'1I;' 8EOOW()
building north-west of church (debris): I. UNCERTAIN SPELLING 528
I.?x?x40,no.28. (a) Stamp: 120 x 33. Letters 5 mm. thick. 1. +880[[>,0]
[r] GP I, pI. 14 no. 28. [2] RussellPapers, Miscellaneous Date: 497/8 or 498/9 or 512h3 or P31I4 or 527/8 or 528/9. See 525 PI5IN[[>'S .. ]
Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad. 1. +8€[
Remainder, box 38, neg. 202. [3] TalbotRice archive neg. as [2]. M
(b) Hebdomon (Bakrrkdy). Tokludede Mescidi: J. PHT[
I. ? x? X40, iAM 62. 1Nl;[ + 8eo[B6]pou (v[o(,,,",,,,voc)s .. l ~
[I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions" 92 no. 41, pl. 14 no. 7.
[2] Schneider, 'Ziegelsrempel', 266 no. 56. [I] Mamboury's notes. +8e[00w]p~,[ou] (vo[(u"""voc) .. ] (a) Stamp: 1x6).
Unknown: I.
(a) Stamp: (72) x 72.
I. Once in Robert College.
CIRCULAR Unknown: I.
8EO~(j)AOY [1] Mango's notes (rubbing).
1. (260) x(205) x 50,AM )55.
518 [I] Bardill negs. 95-7.1, 2.
1. BY See 8EO[>'OYAOY, 8EOl;OAOY, 8EO[>.(J)J\OY and 8EO[>.OYPOY
88XO[>. TEO[>'OAOY.
OYAAI5 529
INPIB 8EO~(j)PITOY 1. 880
le 8EO~(j)PHTOY, 8EO~(j)PITOY, Sec 8EO[>.(J)PHTOY, 8EO[>.(J)PITOY, 8E(J)[>.(J)PHTOY.
[>'OV
POV+
8(eo)u X6:ptC6eo8ouA.ou iv(ou;:nrovoc) lW
8E(j)~(j)PHTOY 8eoooupou +
(a) Stamp: I 10 diameter.
Date: 503/4 or 5 18/19 or 533/4. See Part IT, Ch. 9, sect. ad, Ch. 8EOJ\.(J)PHTOY (a) Stamp: 93 X74·
8EO~(j)POY, eEO~OPOY, 8EO~OYPOY, Ruins west of Boyacr Ahmet Sokagi, opposite the Kopriilii
10 no. 7.
522 8E(j)~OYPOY library. Wall of hypogeum: 1.
Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagi: I. 1. +880[>,
I. ? x? x40.
I. ?x? X40.
(J)PHT
[r] Mamboury's notes. MULTIPLE-LINE [1] Mamboury's notes.
OYIV1S1[>.
8E(0)<l(J)P(OY)
+ 8eo8oopfrcou iV(OlK:"t\&VOC)s
18' 530
1. 03[8]
(a) Stamp: I '7 x 59. 526
1. +88
YO[[>']
8EO~OYPOY Unknown: I. yO[q]
~(J)P
1. (278) X(2)2) x 4), AM 44.
See 8EO[>.(J)POY, 8EO[>'OPOY, 8EO[>.OYPOY. [I] Bardill negs. 94.2.34, )5. + 8e(0)owp(ou) [8]eo[0]ou[p]ou
 ------ -----------~-----------------------------------------------------------~----------_o__------,

..~
.<
CATALOGUE CATALOGUE

(a) Stamp:? x(105). The die is clearly broken, and would originally have been similar, [r] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 214, C6. [2] Sarachane archive neg. 8E01l.(J)TOY 1I.HIIOTATOY
Ruins west of Boyacr Ahmet Sokagl, opposite the Kopriilii or possibly identical, to 5H.1. Hill's drawing wrongly shows the 10.2·34 (7).
library. Wall of the hypogeum: 1. loop of the rho as an omicron, and the traces of the final omicron
Unknown: r. 539
I.? x? X40. and upsilon as a rho. I. eeOJ',.(J)T15
I. (275) X(220) x44, AM 3 59·
[r] Mamboury's notes. liHITOTAT15
(a) Stamp: r oo diameter. [I] Bardill negs. 95.7.II, 12.
Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. aa. 6eooclnou Snxorcroc
8E(J)liOYPOY (d) Hebdomon (Bakirkcy).
Sr Polyeuktos. Level 828: 1-2. Level J072: 3-4.
[t] Dethier, 'Makrikiiy', 164 no. lA·, pl. lA' no. 9. [2] Sorlin- (a) Date: after 531. See Pan Il, Ch. 9, sect. 2C.
JI 1. No. 505. l. No. 507. 3. No. 1268. 4· No. 1270.
531 Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 94 no. e r, pI. 14 no. 9. Baths of Zeuxippos. In or near Building I or 2.
I. +QOY Notes: 1-4. One brick measures? x? x 30.
[1] Gray.eflrickstamps', 54 no. 18. [2] Schneider,
J',.OV [r] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 214. C3. [2] Sarachane archive neg.
8EOll.(J)PO(Y) or 8EOll.(J)POY 'Ziegelsrempel', 266 no. 57. [)] Manacorda, 'Bolli laterizi', 146
8ew 9.10.4(1).
n.I77·
537
8eooooupou +
(a) Stamp: 100 x 88.
Date: 507-22. See Part 1I, Ch. 9. sect. za.
StPolyeuktos. Level B)": I. Level 72S*: 2. Level 833*: 3.
l. No. 272. 2. No. 337. 3. No. 562.
WITHOUT

8EOll.(J)PO(Y)
INDICTION
I'l I. Similar to 535, 536.

(a) Date: 507-22. See Pan IT, Ch. 9, sect. aa.

Se Polyeukros. Level 674: I. Level Sj j: 2. Level 1005: 3. Level
1091: 4·
8E01l.[
535 I. No. 582. 2. No. 559· 3· No. 839· 4. No. 677.
Notes: 1-3. One brick measures ? x? X45-50. I. OQW.il.030 arranged in a circle 540
Ill] Hill, 'Bricks tamps', 215 C4-6.
[I] Hill, 'Bricksramps', 211, BB. [2] Sarachane archive negs. I. INIlBAP8EOll.[
Possibly a clogged die of type 536.1.
6.11.8a, 9.10.3° (2).
8eoMpo(u) [ iV(0tK't1OOVOC) IWll r' ~ap()

Beta altered to gamma

8eoo[

by the addition of a horizontal bar.

(a) Stamp: 72 diameter.
CIRCULAR
Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. aa. MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE CARRIED INDICTION (a) Stamp: (100) x23.
-,~'
WITH INDICTION St Polyeukros. Level 702':': I. Date: j09!IO. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. aa.
8EOll.(J)POY St Polyeuktos. Unknown: I.
I. No. 611, 365 x )65 x 36-4°.
8EOJ',.OPOY [r] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 2r4, C4, [2] Sarachane archive neg. I. No. 142, ?x?x31-35'
538
532 5.39.8. I. Q+O [r] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 208, AI3. [1] Sarachane archive neg.
I. + :>-<mJ',.38 9.11.37.
INJ',.ISS 8EOll.(J)POY 3b.0
8eOJ',.0
536 8eo?0eo,! + ~o
P15+ I. OQWA030 arranged in a circle around a central Y
The reading is not entirely clear. The significance of the epsilon and
+ iVOl{K'tt&VOC)s c;' 8eooopo'O + 8EO() EKA()
Oeofxccou delta in line 3 is uncertain.
(a) Stamp: 97 x 93.
(a) Stamp: 72 diameter. (a) Stamp: 85-100 diameter. 54'
Date: 497/8 or 512/13 or 527/8. See Part I1, Ch. 9, sect. ad.
Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. la. Date: 507-22. See Pare n, Ch. 9. sect. za. I. ]V8eOeKA
TokludedeMescidi: I.
St Polyeuktos. Level er: I. Level 86: z , Level Sp": 3. Level 828: Se Polyeuktos. Level 24: I. Level 66: 2. Level 94: 3. Level 123: 4.
dAM 31. ] [rll/;-8EO() ·EKA()
4· Levcl Bj I~': 5· Levei833*:-6:·1,.... "24 (pier, eastern end. Level 192: 5. Level 7:::;:"'''.6.iWall west of slip road: 7.
[I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). [2] Mango's notes (from Gamma altered to delta by addition of diagonal bar.
debris): 7. Level 1005*: 8-10. Level 'L330A: r r. I. No. 121. 2. No. 309."l:No. 201. 4. No. r04. 5. No. 62.
squeeze).
I. No. 278. 2. No, 296. 3. No. 273· 4· No. 462. 5. No. 640' 6. No. 325. 7. No. 134. (a) Stamp:(115)X29.
6. No. 628. 7. No. 1049. 8. No. 827. 9. No. 835. 10. No. 849. Notes: 1-7. One brick measures? x? x40. Fenari isa Camii: I.
8EOll.(J)POY II. No. Il73. [r] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 214, C2. [2] Sarachane archive neg. I. (198) x(205) x31-4j,AM 155.
533 Notes: I-I I. One brick measures 365 x 365 x 36-40. 9.12.6 (2). Er] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Eenari
I. 32VY1I+ [r] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 214, C5. [2] Sarachane archive neg. (b) Stamp: 95-98 diameter. isa Camii', fig. 39 no. 4. [3J Bardill negs. 94.Io.oa, la.
038 10.2·35 (4). Tokludede Mescidi: I.
(J)1l. (b) Stamp: 76 diameter. 1.355 x?X45,iAMlt9·
yoq Rhegium (Kiiciik Cekmece). Substructures to the south of the [rJ Mamboury's notes. [2J Mango's notes (from squeeze).
+ ayasma: I.
I. ?x?x)8.
8EOC( )
+ iVO(tK"ClWVOC)s e'Seooropol) +
[I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Hagia Sophia.
(c) Stamp: 77 diameter.
542
I. INABA8eOC
[I] Mamboury's notes.
Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. aa.
iV(01K't1OOvOC) ex ~a() 8EOC( )
534 St Polyeuktos. Level 50: 1-1. Level 56*: 3· Level 61: 4-5. Level
I. [.]2VY1I+ 87*: 6-7· Level 16'5: 8. Level 725*: 9. Level 920* (pier, eastern (a) Stamp: 136 x 22.
038 end, debris): 10. Level cxa": r t • Unknown: 12. Date: 4I7/r8 or 432/3. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. rb.
(J)J',. I. No. 271. 2. No. 299· 3. No. 300. 4. No. 277· 5. No. 284. 8E01l.(J)POY 1I.ITIOTATOY Palace Antiochus: I.
YOQ 6. No. 292. 7. No. )64. 8. No. 107. 9. No. 318. 10, No. 905. 1.390x385 X50.
.[.;.]. Sce8E(J)J',.(J)POY 1l.U10TATOY. [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] DAI (1st) neg. KB 1010 .
11. No. 1335. Il.No·I49·
+ iVO(1K't1OOvOC)S[.]8eoMrou [+] Notes: I-Il. One brick measures 380 x? x 33-35.
242 CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE
,."!
2. INABAG€OC eEW1..0YPOY 548 Hippodrome, Inner wall of ambtitat6~found in [950 near the
iv(S"e,,&voc) c" ~,,() 8EO~() r. ]382A!I1\.I2NI+ Palace of Antiochus: L .
See GE01\.OJPOY, 8E01\.OPOY, GE01\.OYPOY,
l. 340 x 320 x 50.
(a) Stamp: 120 X22. 8EOJ1\.OYPOY. + iv(SuC"ttwvoc)s ~S' P",()s Ge[
[IJ Mamboury's notes,
Remains in the area bounded by Divan Yolu, Piyer Loti (a) Stamp: (,8,)X2I.
Caddesi, Dostluk Yurdu Sokagr, and Klod Farer Caddesi:
Date:'4I5? See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect, la.
(numerous) 1-2.
Theodosian Hagia Sophia. Back wall of Schneider's portico.
L 390 x 380 x60. 2. 390 x 360 x 60.
eS:W1..WPHTOY [I] Van Nice archive (rubbing).
[r] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). 8WMA
See8E01\.OJPHTOY, 8E01\.OJPITOY, GEOJ1\.OJPHTOY. '549
). [I]NABA8€OC
t. [IN .]IBA8E:[ 553
[i]v(Stm&voc) CC' ~,,() 8~oc() r. 8U1MA
[iv(SuC"tt&voc) .],~,,() 8e[
(a) Stamp: (124) X2r. eooj.lCi
(a) Stamp: (95) X20.
Remains in the area bounded by Divan Yolu, Piyer Loti eEW1..WPOY 1..mOTATOY Land Walls, Near tower oj. (a) Stamp: 85 x45,
Caddesi, Dostluk Yurdu SOkagl, and Klod Farer Caddesi.
[I] Meyer-Plarh and Schneider, Landmauer, 148 no. 2,1. Sea Walls, West of the 'Tower of Belisarius'.
[r] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). 546 [r] Mamboury and Wiegand, Kaiserpaliiste, 20 (centre row,
[2] DAI (1st) neg. 6607 (cast). [)] Mamboury's notes (From
r. 8E:OJ1\.OJP15 left), [2] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 266 no. 58. [)]
cast). [4] Mango's notes (from cast),
1\.UIOTAT15 Mamboury's notes.
8ecoooopou omo'ta'tou (h) Kadikoy.
[I] Meliopoulos, 'Anekdotoi', 74, [2J Fcissel, 'Inscriptions',
(a) Stamp.f r jol x y S.
Unknown: I.
8Y()EY() 409 no. 5· [)]SEG)7(I987)no. 10.8.
eEO<DIAOY, e(E)W<DIAOY I. MSBK inv. 6218, (200) x (J2o) x?
[I] MSBK neg. 6218a. [2] DAI (Isr) neg. 2)46 (cast),.-, 550
GEO<I>IAOY r. INHOVGYEY
[3] Mamboury's notes (from cast). [4] Mango's notes (from
543 cast). iv(Stm&voc)~' ~,,() Gu() Eu() e(E)W<DIAOY
r. +8E:0Il>I (b) Stamp: 122 x 56. The 0 appears where wc would expect a beta. SeeGEO<l>IAOY, G(E)OJ<I>IAOY
AOY+ Tokludede Mescidi: 1-3.
(a) Stamp: 1I7X23,
+8eocp\A.ou+ r. iAM )8. 2. iAM 90. J. iAM IOr.
Unknown: I.
Notes: 1-3. One brick measures? x? x 55.
(a) Land Walls.
Er] Mango's notes (from squeeze). 1. iAM (<;:K) no. 82, ? x? x 50.
[I] GottwaJd, 'Ziege!stempe!', 485 no. 2. [2] Meyer-Plath and [r] Mango's notes.
(c) Stamp: (92) x 56. 8[
Schneider, Landmauer, 149 no. 16.
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. De
IV 1./3 old debris: 1. 554
8(E)(j)<I>IAOY I.? xj x ao.no. 89. 1. INfBV8[
[r] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous Remainder, box 38, neg. 721.
8YPCIAC
544 iv(S'Kn&voc) y' ~,,() G[
1. +GOJ<I> (d) KefeliMescidi.
[I] Gedeon, 'Engraphoi', )82.
551 (a) Stamp: ? x 20,
IAlISIB 1. +8YP
(e) Court of Farih Camii. Sea Walls. Langa Bostam, inner wall, west of tower 68: I.

+ 8(e)ro~il.oustW [I] Schneider, 'Ziegelsrernpel', 266 no. 57,

CIAC I.380X38ox60,
IN1\.2IA [IJ Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp: 8) x 52. (f) Kalenderhane Camii. West of narthex above the stone pillar: I.

Perhiye Camii. 1. (2)8) X(227) X4). + 8UPClCXC lVO(lK'tlOOVDC)S ta'

[r] Mango's notes. [r] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', B35 a. 555

(a) Stamp: 90 x 80. 1. ]8J21\.VlI
(g) Kalenderhane Cnrnii. Exonarthex north end: 1.
Ruins west of Boyaci Ahmet Sokagi, opposite the Koprtilii
r. (190) x(I70) x )5. library. Wall dividing the entrance from the hypogeum: r. iVO(lK'tlOOVOC)S "('e[
[rj Peschlow, 'Brickstamps'j Bj y b. 1. 370 x370 X40' (a) Great Palace, Area Ab: I.

[IJ Mamboury's notes. L?x?X35'

[I] Mamboury's notes.
eEO[ (b) Great Palace. Area Ab: I,

eEl I. ?x? X35.

545 8W( ) [I] Mamboury's notes,

r. I]NBIB[AP]8E:O[ 547
1. INAIBA8E:[ 552 556
i]v(StKn&voc) ~t' ~["p] 8EO[

(a) Stamp: (1)5) x.).

iV(S'K"WVOC)er" ~,,( i8e( I.IN1\.I8OJ r. INIBAG[

(a) Land Walls. Yedikule: (one). Near tower 49: (one). iv(Stm&voc) St' GUl() iv(Suctt&voc) t' ~,,() 8[
Land Walls.
[I] DAI (Isr) neg. 660) (cast), [.] Mamboury's notes (from [I] Meliopoulos, "Toporhesia', 231 section B' no. 2, [2] Meyer- (a) Date: late ath century? See Part Il, Ch. 10 no, 3, (a) Stamp: ? x )0.
cast). [3] Mango's notes (from cast). Plath and Schneider, Landmaner, 148 no, 2.2. Stamp: 122 x 28. Date: 42617 or 44112. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le,
 ..~
•
CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 245

Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bfb-i Humayun. Portico between (a) Stamp: 200 x25. 565 lAA()
the building and Hagia Eirene: (large numbers) 1. Date: possibly 448/9. See Part Il, Ch. 1 I, sect. 4. t. XAIAffI[
l. 380X?X35. Hippodrome. In situ in the lower part of the east wall of the
]~'pa() 'Iax()
(r] Mamboury's notes. tunnel of the Sphendone, butressing: I. 1. '"
1.400X380X50. (a) Stamp: (I 57) x 27. >-
[I] Mamboury and Wiegand, Kaiserpaliiste, 40 (top). Unknown: I.
557 JIi1J1.2HIAA
€L1IE8[ 1. (260) x (250) x 40-57, AM 404.
I.

5<?,I [I] Bardill negs. 95.9.27,28.

'"
(I)
Ev(oucn&voc) u:.'8[
I. INI'BAIAX
(a) Stamp: (90) <46. '566 iVO(LK'tI&VOC)S~' paeE() 'IAa()
Kalenderhane Camii. A5/2.: I.
iV(~LKtl&VOC) l' pa 'Iax( ) 1.]XAIA[
(a) Stamp: I)7 x78,
I. (260) x(I40) x)4. (a) Stamp: 126 x 26. p]a() 'Ia~() Unknown: 1-3.
(I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', AI 3. Hagia Sophia. Exterior hole in east wall, loose fragment: l.
(a) Stamp: (85) x28. I.372X375x5o,AMp. 2..35;X275X44,AM368. 3·(282)X
North wall of south-west room, gallery roof, hole in exterior
Date: 429-)2. or 444-47 or 459-62. See Pare Il, Ch. I I, sect. 3. (21) X45-48, AM )94 (old no. 85).
wall.
Hexagon complex in GUlhane. Hexagon: I. [I] Bardill negs. 94-J.I I (I); 95-7,29,)0 (2); 95.9.9-10 (),
I.? x? x 50. (b) Sarachane: I.
I. ? x? x42.
lAX() [I] Van Nice archive (rubbing), I.No·92I. .
(I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze).
[1] Sarachane ~rchive neg. 9.6.28.
CRUCIFORM 562
I. XAIABHNI IAXI() 57'
1.
558 iV(OLKtL&VOC)~' pa() 'laX()
. NJl.IAYR1+ 567
. 'IAX . (a) Stamp: 180 x 30. 1. lXAIAfflli11
Bcyazrt, Sogan Aga. In a compJex of cisterns at ~~;.;;..9ge of the iV(OLK'tL&VOC)l' pa() 'laXL()
. ~~(t1m&voc) ~a'v~~(?) + 'Iax() second supporting wall between the Forum Taun and the Sea iVO(llen&voc)s LP' pa() 'IAO:()
(a) Stamp: about 170 x 25.
(a) Stamp: (1)9) X()2), of Mar mar a: l. Cruciform stamp, incorrectly described by Talbot Rice as
Perinthos (Marmara Ereglisi).ln situ in west circuit wall: 1-3.
Date: 507-22. See Part 1I, Ch. 9, sect. aa, and Ch. la no. 10. l.400X380X60. 'single-lined' .
Notes: 1-3. Mortar impressions from lost bricks that measured
StPolyeuktos. Level roor": I. [I] Mamboury's notes.
about 380 x 380 X? (a) Stamp: App10X. '54X54.
l. No. 649,? x? x35-40.
IL1HBVIAX (r] Communicated by J. Crow. Great Palace, excavations in Peristyle and Apsed Hall in
(I] ruu, 'Brickstamps', 2.17, D3. (2.] Sarachane archive neg.
2.

1953-55. In situ in brickwork repairs to stone arch: (one).

5-39,1). iv(oLl('n"voc) ~'pa( ) 'Ia~( )
Filling near stone arch: (two).
(a) Stamp:(I76)X)1. Notes: Published measurements 350 x 350 x 50.
Date: 439/40. 454/5 5, or 469/70. See Part Il, Ch. I I, sect. I I. [I] GP 11,107, fig, 21 no. t.
Kalenderhane Camii. Bath building, Room C, coping of lA[
lAX1( ) channel, in situ: (three) 1.
I.370X37°X55·
568
It is likely that the name is to be connected with IX( ), but this is not t. IL1J1.IBAIA[
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', AI4.
lAAPIOY
certain. iV(OLIC'tL&VOC)OL' pa() 'Ic]
563 (a) Stamp:(II)X25. WITH INDICTION
1. INIBAIAX
SINGLE-LINE 'Bath' building beside the Myrelaion rotunda.
iV(OllcnrovOC) L' pa() 'Iax( ) IAAPI(OY)
(r] TalbotRice, 'Bodrum Camii', 17), fig. II no. 5. [2] Talbot
IA() Rice archive (rubbing).
(a) Date: 45617. SeePartll,Ch. 9,sect. Id. 572
Cistern of Aspar. North-east wall, in situ: (duce). t. +IAAPI
559
I. INBBAIA [I] Bardill. INJl.2B·

iv(~t1t1:t&voc) W pa() 'Ia() (b) Stamp. r Sa x aofcentre). + 'IAapi(ou) iVO(LK'IL&VOC)s P-

Date: 456/7. See Part H, Ch. 9, sect. Id. 111.[
(a) Stamp: '70 (approx.) x )0, (a) Stamp: 128 x 72.
Cistern of Aspar. North-west wall, lowest brick band, second
Date: possibly 448/9' See Part Il, Ch. I I, sect. 4. Great Palace. Area Aa: I.
course up, in situ. 569
Hippodrome. In siuc in the lower part of the east wall of the t.]Jl.IAffI31i11 I.? x? x45.
[t] Bardill negs, 96,1.7, 8,9,
tunnel of the Sphendone, butressing: l. [I] Mamboury's notes.
iV(OLlcn&VOC) EL' pa() 'Io[
l. 400 x400 x 50.
564 2, +[I]AAPI
(r] Mamboury's notes. 1. XAIAaINI (a) Stamp: (180) x)4.
[1]N[Jl.2]B
Date: 43112 or 44617 or 46112. See Part Il, Ch. I I, sect. 3.
iv(oLlm&voc) L' pal) 'Jax() + ['I]Ao:pi(ou) [i]V[O(LIC'tL&VOC)s] p-
IAX() Hexagon complex in Gulhane. Water source: I.
(a) Stamp:I)6 x28. I.? X? X45. (a) Date: after 532. See Part 1I, Ch. 9. sect. 2.C.
560 Beyazrt: I. (I] Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 104, fig. 119 no. 3. Baths of Zeuxippos. In or near Building J or 2.
I. INBBAIAX
I·3IOXJIox35· [2] Mamboury's notes. (I] Gray, 'Brickstarnps', 5} no. 9.
iv(ou('n&voc) W pa() 'Jax( ) [I] Mamboury's notes.
 .,
,,~

246 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 247

,"j

(a) Stamp: (190) x )0. IOYAIANOY

11\APIOY IOA( )
Date: 425/6 or 440/r. See Part 1I, Ch. 9, sect. le.
573 IOA() Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bab-i Humayfln: I. 582
I. +11\A I. 390 x 360 x40. I. +IOV
PlOY 576 [r] Mamboury's notes. AlA
€N1i2S L INBIBAIOA J.10Y2
+ 'It..cxp{o1) E:VO(l.1C't1.WVOC)s~' iv(ollmwvoe) ~l' ~cx() 'Ioa() + 'IOUA.laVOU s
(a) Stamp: 90 x 80. ., (a) Unknown.
(a) Stamp: 100 x 100. ~
Hebdomon (Bakrrkoy): I. [I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 86 no, 13. Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri
I. MSBKinv. 6229, (1)0) x(I60) X? (b) Unknown. IOYAN(N)OY NOTAPIOY (Beyazn), 1928. Great wall to the south of, and parallel to, the
Er] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 90 no. 34. [2] Schneider, [I] Sideropoulos, 'Byzantinai Epigraphai', 26 section I" no. 2.
drain, and to the right of the southern base: I.
'Ziegelstempel', 266 no. 60. [)] MSBK neg. 6229a. [4] DAI (c) Stamp: 18) x)o. 579 r. 385 x375 xp. •
(ISI) neg. 2)44 (casr). [5] Mamboury's notes (from cast). Date: 428/9 or 443/4 or 458/9. See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. le. I. [+]I15ANI5N [I] Mamboury's notes.
[6] Mango's notes (from cast). Byzantine drains along the Mese. Vaults of drains in the Forum [O]TAPH52H (b) Stamp: 102·X 104.
(b) Stamp: (90) x (66). of Constantine: I. Unknown: ;~
Unknown: I.
l+l 'Ioucvfvlou vjcjrcpious n"
1.400 x370 x 50, I. 370 x365 x'5o,AM 17,
I.? x? x4o,AM36o. [I] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stamp: ? x63,
[I] Bardil! negs; 9+1.)5", )6a.
[I] Bardill negs.jijp.r j, 1+ (d) Stamp: 184 x26. Unknown: I.
(c) Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri
Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: I, 'z. Two fragments clearly from the same brick, MSBK nos.
(Beyam),I928.
I. ())5) x(245) x 51. unknown.
[I] Gray, 'Brickstamps', 56 no, 42, [2] Schneider,
[r]Peschlow, 'Brickstamps'v At j. [I] DAI (1st) negs. 2)45 and 2JJ7 (casts). [2] Mamboury's
WITHOUT INDICTION 'Ziegelstempel', 266 no. 59.
m __ notes (from casts), Mango's notes (from casts).
(cl) Several variants.
574 Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri
I. +11\A I. INIlIEAIOA[ (Beyazrt), 1928. Great wall to the south of, and parallel to, the
PlOY
iv(ollmwvoe) ~l· ~cx() 'Iocx[( )] drain, and to the right of the first pillar.
+ 'IAaptou [I] Mamboury's notes,
(a) Stamp: (160) x26.
(a) Dare: c. 5)2/). See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. ab. IOYAN(N)OY ONOKTHTOY (e) Stamp: 104 x 107,
Date: 428/9 or 443/4 or 458/9. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le.
Hagia Sophia. Ruins in front of the west doors, demolished Beyazrt, great wall to the north of the Diakonissa complex: I.
Byzantine drains along the Mese. Vaults of drains in the Forum
I.370X37ox4o-50.
November 1873. of Constantine. 580
[I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 93 no. 51· 1. +115AN15 [I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
(b) Stamp: 88 x j r , (b) Stamp: 185 X)). ONOKHT15
Unknown: I. J([¥15TI€ 2. +IOY
Date: 428/9 or 443/4 or 458/9, See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le,
I. (260) x(25)) x 34-44, AM )86. AlA
Byzantine drains along the Mese. Opposite the fountain of Atik The reading of the third line of text is uncertain: there may be a
[1] Bardill negs. 95.8.28, 29. J.10Y2
Ali Pasa Camii: I. ligature of alpha, nu and tau at the beginning, a chi in ligature with
I.390X380X5°· an iota, and an iota with an abbreviation bar above. + 'IOUA.laVOU s
[I] Mamboury's notes.
+ 'Iouav(v)ou ovocrfrtou 'Av,tl(6)x01) ~(VOt1C'tl&voc) re" (a) Stamp: 110 X 102.
(c) Stamp:? X27. Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri
Date: 428/9 or 443/4 or 458/9. See Part Il, Cb. 9, sect. IC.
(a) Stampr r ro x yj .
(Beyazit), 1928. Great wall to the south of, and parallel to, the
Miihiirdar Emin Pasa Sokagi. Section of first (inner) Sea Wall beneath the 'House ofjustinian'
drain, and to the right of the southern base: I.
[I] Mamboury's notes. excavated in 1953: (multiple).
IAIANOY 1.380X370x50,
[I] GP II, 17.5, fig.)6 no. I. [2] Mango, 'Spolia', 649 n. )6.
[I] Mamboury's notes,
575 (b) Stamp: IIO x 107.
I. t IAIAt Beyazit, probably from great wall to the north of the
NOY Diakonisse complex: I.
IOANNOY, IOAN(N)OY
+ 'D.lCXVOU+ 1.378x370x50,

(a) Stamp: (90) x(57). See](J)ANNOY,IOANNOY. IOY() KY() [I] Mamboury's notes,

Land Walls. Wall between towers 70a and 7Ia.

[I] Meyer-Plarh and Schneider, Landmauer, 149 no. 17. 581 3. Of type I or 2.
1. INBBAIOYKY (a) Hebdomon (Bakirkoy).
[2JDAI (ISI) neg. 6610 (cast). [)] Mamboury's notes (from
[I] Dethier, 'Makrikoy', 164 no. H', pl.IA' no. 6. [2] Sorlin-
cast).
IOY() iv(ollctlwvoe) W ~a() '[ou() Ku()
Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 93 no. 52·
(b) Stamp: (68) x (58).
(a) Stamp: 145 X22.
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38: 1-2.
578 Remains in the area bounded by Divan Yolu, Piyer Loti
I.?x?x40,no.I9·1.?x?x40,no·48. [I]N8BAPI<X[
1. Caddesi, Dosriuk Yurdu SOkagl, and Klod Farer Caddesi: I.
[I] GP I,pI. 14 no. r9. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous
Remainder, box )8, negs. '95 (I), 247 (2). [)] Talbot Rice
[i]V(OlKtlWVoe) e- ~,,~( ) 'Iou() I.390X39ox5°·
[I] Mamboury's notes.
archive neg.as [aj neg. 195. The final letter is possibly an 1:5 Iigarure on its side (cp. 600. I).
-------------------------------------------------------------------.--,

CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 249

IOYi\[ (a) Date: 535/6. See Part Il, Ch. 5, sect. la. (b) Stamp: Letters 20 mm. high. Dare: 527-64.
In the area of the excavations undertaken in 1946-47 and Date: 527-64. Sea Basilica, Nessebfr: 1.
583 1958-60 between Hagia Eirene and Hagia Sophia. Sea Basilica, Nessebfr: 1. I. S06a Archaeological Museum, 365 X('36oX 50.
I. BAP]€IOYA[ [I] Mango, 'Brick Stamps', 23 (mentioned). [2] Ramazanoglu, I. Sofia Archaeological Museum, (21 S) XCI 50) x 60. [I] Besevliev, Inschriften, 103 no. ;$3a, pl. 5"4no. 151.
'Irenen-Kirche'j ajz and, fig. 9. [3] Mango's notes (from [I] Besevliev, Inschriften, 103 no. IS3c, pl. SS no. r 53. [2J Feissel, 'Edifices', 93 no. 24 (ni~ti~Jlea). .
Pc<p]E() 'IouA[
squeeze). [4JFeisse1. 'Edifices" 91 no. rcbis. [2] Feissel, 'Edifices', 93 no . .24 (mentioned). (f) Completion suggested on the grounds' that only this type has
(a) Stamp: Letter height! 5-20 mm. (b) Dare: 535/6. See Part Il, Ch. 5>secr. la. (c) Stamp: Letters 20 nun. high. 'Ioccnvicvou on the upper line of text.
Nessebdn I. Stamp: I26-I29x50. Date: 5.27-64. Date: 527-64.
r. Burgas Archaeological Museum no. 1424. (400) x(75) x 35. Unknown: 1-3. Nessebar: I. Sea Basilica, Nessebfr.
[1] Besevliev, Irucbriften. 105, pl. 58 no. 162. 380 x 376 x 52, incised lines 45 and 37 mm. from edges of 1. Sofia Archaeological Museum, (I 50) x <90) x SO.
I. [I] Velkov, 'Basilica', 69 no. 3.
brick, semicircular fingermarks made with three fingers, AM 2. [I] BesevlievJnschnften, 103 no. Ing, pl. 56 no. 157.
2.380 X(2S0} x 52, AM 20. 3. (217) x(I98) x 50, fu\t[ 215. [2] Feissel, '&tifices',93 no. 24 (mentioned).
[I] Bardill negs. 94.1.3", 4a(I); 94.2.4,5 (2); 94.6.16a(3). (d) Velkov reads upsilon instead of kappa, omits the final tau, and
shows neither nu inverted, although this may result from
typographical constraints. IOYCTINIANOY TOY <DIAOKT(ICTOY) or
IOYOrNOY Date: 527-64. IOYCTINIANOY TOY <DIAOKTICTOY
IOYCTINIANOY TOY <DIAOKT(ICTOY) Sea Basilica, Nessebfr.
[1] Velkov, 'Basilica', 69 no.!. 591
587 I. Similar eo 587, 588, 589, 590.
1. +IOYCTII1IAI1 (a) Stamp: letters 20 nun. high.
+ 'Iooojvou OYT15tIAOKT Date: 527--64.
(a) Beylerbeyi. Foundations of building around a fountain, 1000

_.-
+ 'Icucnvtcvoii 'tou <plA.oJCt(tctOu) Sea Basilica, Nessebsr: 1.
paces from the shore. IOYCTINIANOY TOY <l>IAOKTICTOY I. Burgas Archaeological Museum, (170) x(190) x 50.
[I] Sideropoulos, 'Autonomos', 122. [2] Feissel, 'Inscriptions', (a) Sump: 140 x65.
[I] Besevliev, lnschrijten, 103 no. I 53d, pl. 55 no. 154.
418 no. 29.2. [3] SEG 37 (1987) no. 1051. Date: 527-64. 590 [2] Feissel, 'Edifices', 93 no. 24 (mentioned).
Walls cf Nessebdr. Pavement no. 5 oftower no. 2: I. 1. +IOYCTII1IAN15
(b) St George, Nessebdr.
I. Approx. 360 x 360, dark brick-red. TOY<I>IAOKTICT15
[I] Ognenova-Marinova, 'Briques', 116 (mentioned).
[I] Ognenova-Marinova, 'Briques', 1I I no. 4. 110, fig. 96.
+ 'Ioucnviovod 'to\) <jllAOK'ttctOU
[2J Eeissel, 'Edifices', 93 no. 24 (mentioned).
(b) Sramp:Approx 140 x65. (a) Stamp: 170 x67.
Date: 527-64. Date: 527-64.
I OYCTINIAN OY Walls of Nessebfir. Pavement no. 5 of tower no. 2: I. \Valls of Nessebfr. Pavement no. 5 of tower no. 2: 360 x360 x?,
dark brick-red.
The emperor Justinian reigned between 527 and 564. Monogram no.
I. Approx. 360 x 36o, dark brick-red. IOY[
[I] Ognenova-Marinova, 'Briques', II I no. 5. [2] Feissel, [r] Ognenova-Marinova, 'Briques', 109 no. r, I la, fig. 95.
54 (1394) also refers to Justinian. [2] Feissel, 'Edifices', 93 no. 24 (mentioned).
'Edifices',93 no. 24 (mentioned). 592
(b) Sump: approx. 170 x67. 1. ]YOIAllr;rY11
Date: 527-64.
iV(O'K"tIWVOC)y<'Pc<O 'Ico]
588 Walls of Nessebdr. Pavement no. 5 of tower no. 2: I.
IOYCTINIANOY 1. [+IOYC]TII1IAN I. )60 x 360, stamp partially hidden by mortar (hence reused (a) Stamp: (I39)(lromle£r side of omicron to final iora) x(27).
[OYT15]<I>IAOKT brick). Unknown: I.
585
I. +IOYCTI [I] Ognenova-Marinova, 'Briques', XII nos. 2 and 3. 372 x(I90) x 40-45, AM 395.
l+ 'Iouc]mlC<v[ou,oii]'I"Ao1<"t((crou) 1.

NIANOY
+ 'Ioucnvicvou
(a) Stamp: 100 x 40.
Date: 527-64.
Walls of Nessebjir. Pavement
1. 380 x 370 x?, dark brick-red.
[I] Ognenova-Marinova, 'Briques',
[2] Feissel, 'Edifices', 93 no. 24 (mentioned). [r] Bardill negs. 95.9.11, 12.
(a) Stamp: Letters 20 mm. high. (c) Besevliev does not note the ~ ligature of 'Icucnvirrvoii.
Date: 5 27-64· Stamp: letters 20 mm. high.
Sea Basilica, Ncssebjir: l. Date: 527--04.
I. Sofia Archaeological Museum, (I 80) x (159) x 50. Nessebar, city centre: I.
no. 5 of tower no. 2: J. [I] Besevliev,lnschriften, 103 no. I53e, pl. 56 no. 155. I. Lapidarium in Nessebar, 550 X 400 x 50.
[2] Feissel, 'Edifices', 93 no. 24 (mentioned). [I] Besevliev, Inschriften, 103 no. I53g', pl. 57 no. 158.
ICI~( )
110, fig. 97. III no. 6. [2] Peissel, 'Edifices', 93 no. 24 (mentioned).
593
(d) Besevliev does not note the ~ ligature of 'Ioocrwtcvoii. lI.I:)JQAII'I111
589 Stamp: letters 10-18 mm. high.
1.

I. Possibly same as 587 or 588. iv(ollmwvocJl' pc<p() 'Iclo()

Date: 5.27-64.
IOYCTINIANOY NIKHTOY (a) Stamp: Letters 20-24 mm. high. Sea Basilica, Nessebfir: I. (a) Stamp: 155 x 24·
Date: 527-64. Sofia Archaeological Museum, (290) x (210) x40'
I. Dare: 434/5 or 449/50 or 464"5. See Part II, Ch. 9, seer. le.
586 Sea Basilica, Nessebdr: 1. [I] Velkov, 'Basilica', 69 no. 4. [2] Betevlicv, Inscbriften, [03 Balaban Aga Mescidi: ]-2.
I.+I15J:TINIAN15N I. Sofia Archaeological Museum, (210) X(I85) X40. no. 1531, pl. 56 no. 156. [3] Feissel, 'Edifices', 93 no. 24 dAM 5'. 2. iAM 52.
IKHT15IN<tJ~+ [I] BdevlievJnscbriften. 103 no. J j jb, p]. 55 no. 151· (mentioned). Notes: ]-2. One brick measures 385 x 380 x60.
+ 'Ioucnvicvoii vllCTl'tou iV~(lIcnrovoc) lO; + [2] Peissel, 'Edifices', 93 no. 24 (mentioned). (e) Stamp: letters IS mm. high. [1] Mamboury's notes.
 CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE
IClf>.OPIOY KOMHTOC (a) Stamp, 218 x)8. .';'
r(J)AN[ I(J)ANNOY
Date: 430/1 or 445/6 or 460/I. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le.
See HCIl;OPIOY KOMITOC. Balaban AgaMescidi: 1-3. 601 606
,.'
I. iAM 1I4. 2. iAM 118. 3· iAM 174. I. B)API(J)AN[ I. [I)(J)Al1l1
Notes: 1-3. One brick measures 380 x 365 x 50. 15INl;2rI
~)"p() 'Icxiv]
[I] Mango's notes (from squeeze).
(a) Sea Walls. Davutpasakapr. ['I]<!lavvou ivc5(lK'nroVOC)sl'(
2. [I)Nl;IBAl(J)
[I) Gedeon, 'Engraphoi', )82. (a) Stamp: 122 x 56.
IX() "[i)V(OlK<liiivoc) Ol' ~,,() 'I",() Date: 534/5, See Part 11,Ch. 9. sect. ab.
(a) Stamp'(194)X)5. [IOA)NNOY or [I(J)A)NNOY Hagia Sophia. Constructions of the north-west court: I.
It is possible that the abbreviation is to he equated with IAX(), but
Date: 43o/r or 445/6 or 460/1. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le. 1.35ox35°X45·

c
this is not certain. 602
Balaban Aga Mescidi: 1. I. 1Nl;. 1[(J)A)NNO.x [I] Mamboury's notes, [2] Mango's notes (from rubbing).

594 I.iAMS4,?X?X45·
iva(u(''t'lOOVoc) . "I[ro6:]vvo\l
I. INBBAIX [I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp-reo x 26. 607
iY(otlmiiiyoc) ~'!lot'Ix( ) t. I(J)Al1l1
Date: 502-33 or 517-20 or 532-35. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. ad.
(a) Stamp'(149)X24. 15IJ.o!a2I.
Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagl. Walls
Date: 44819. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. re. positioned furthest north: I. 'Icocivv~~ iVS(llCtUOVOC)s t .'
StJohn of Stoudios: 1-2. ICVA( ) I.380X365X50.
1. ? x? X40' 2. ? x? X44.
Gray shows an S at the beginning of line 2. He possibly misread ~ as
[I] Mamboury's notes.
S(cp.608).
[I] Peschlow, Studioskirche, (in preparation), 598
(b) Land Walls. Tower 41, rubble (September 1967). I.)BAI(J)A (a) Date: after 532. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. 2C.
[r] Dumbarton Oaks Photographic Collection neg. L67.968 MULTIPLE-LINE Baths ofZeuxippos. Inor near Building I or
) ~,,() '10Xl() 2.

(I. Seyeenko). r(J)ANNHC [I] Gray, 'Brickstamps', 54 no. 21.

(a) Unknown.
[I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 85 no. 10. [2] Schneider,
595 603
'Ziegelstempel', 264 no. 10. I. +I(J)AN
1.INl;EIlIX 608
NHC( .. ) I. +I(JJAl1l1
ivo(ll<'ttiiivoc)£~() 'I~()
+ 'Ioxivvnc [ 15IYll;SH
(a) Stamp: 180 x 32.
Great Palace. Area Ab, collapsed vault: 1. (a) Dale, 5))-)5. See Part Il, Ch. 9, seer.ab. + 'Iedvvou iV~(ll(t100VOC)~ 1)'
ICVANNOY, IOANNOY Hagia Sophia. Debris from the collapsed barrel vault in the
I.390X385 x55· (a) Stamp' 122 x(50).
[r] Mamboury's notes. substructures of the west wing of the justinianic atrium. Hagia Sophia.
SINGLE-LINE
[I] Schneider, Westhof, 26 no. 8. [I) Mango's notes (from rubbing).
I(J)ANNH[
I(J)ANNIC
599 609
I. )Hl1l1A(J)I[ 604 I. +I(J)AN
I. +I(J)AN
ICV( ) ]1~YV1][c NOY
NIC+Kl;
INfi2IE:
(a) Erenkoy.
596 + 'Iccvvic + !Cb + 'Iecvvoo iVb(lJ('(lOOvoc)s te"
1.INAIlAI(J) [I] Siderides, 'Remarks', 218 no. 4.
The final letter may be delta or alpha. The significance of the last
iv(otlmiiivoc) ,,' ~,,( ) 'Iro( ) (a) Stamp' 94" 86.
IOAN(N)OY two letters is uncertain. They may be accessory letters or may
Beyazir, great wall to the north of the Diakonissa complex: I.
(a) Stamp: 180 x26. indicate the numeral 2 I or 24.
600 r . )75 x)65 x58,AM6.
Sea Walls. Interior arcades near tower 19: r. (a) Stamp: 128 )(66. [I] Bardill negs. 94.I.Ira, 12a. [2] Mamboury's notes.
I. INaBAPE:IOANtX
I.38oX37ox3°· Hagia Sophia. Room of south-west buttress, fill.
[r] Dernaogei and Mamboury, Manganes. 78 with n. 2, 84, fig. iV(OlK"tliiivoc) 0' ~"p,() 'Ioav(v)ou [I] Mango's notes,
92.(bottom), [2] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stampr rpo x aj . 610
(b) Stamp' 190 x )0. Unknown: I. 605 I. I(J)AN

Sea Walls. Tower 15,insitl4.: I. I. +I(J)[AN) NT15N

1.390 x 375 x3S-45,AiV1224'
l.J70x36oX40. NIC+A[
[I] Bardill neg. 94.6.))a. 'Iedvvou tv
[1] Demange1 and Mamboury, Manganes, 78 with n. 2, 84, fig. (b) Biiyiikada (Prinkipo). Vaults ('Kamares'). + 'I",[av)vlc+,,[
92 (bottom). [2] Mamboury's notes. Line 2 reads from right to left, The significance of the final tau and
[I] Leval, 'Archaiologika', 616. [2] Peissel, 'Inscriptions', The significance of the final letter is uncertain. It may be an nu in line 2 is uncertain.
427-8 no. 44· [i)SEG)7 (1987) no. 1068. indicrion or an accessory.
597 (c) Stamp: 190 x 30. (a) Stamp' ? x 66.
I. INMBAI(J) (a) Hagia Sophia. South-east buttress, upper room,loose: 1. Unknown: J.
Sea WaUs. Nerh Kspr, south tower.
iY(oll<tliiiyoc) s,: ~,,() 'Iro() [I] Mamboury's notes. I. ?x?x3I.
I. iAM (<;:K) no. 7),? x? x40'
[I] Van Nice archive. [r] Mango's notes,
----------------------_._---------- -----------

CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 253

I(J)AN(N)OY I(j)ANNOY HrOYMENOY [I] Meliopoulos, "Topothesia', 230 no. 1. [2] Xenakis, 2. As type 1 but with horizontal ]ineaivia~~ text.
'Exakriboseis', 116 no. 3. [3] Schneider, Byzanz,96.27 no. 5.
611 (a) Stamp: 1 i'2. 'X 61. to •
614a [4] Schneider, 'Ziegelsrempel', 265 no. )2. [5]1. Kalch. t09.).
I. +I(J)A Hagia Sophia. Narthex, repairs to paving beside threshold of
+1(J)ANNOY [6] Feissel, 'Inscriptions', 425 (mentioned). [7] SEG)7 (1987)
NOV central door leading to exon3{iit - .:.~._.
TOYHENOY no. 606.
J. 364 x354 x? /~.
+ 'Iroav(v)ou NaICTIS
[I] Bardill neg. 94.1)-2. [.] Van Nice archive (rubbing).
(a) Stamp: 95 x 50. The typescript representation is that given by Meliopoulos. The tau
Unknown: 1-2. -eat the beginning of line 2 was presumably a gamma, and the eta on
I. 335 x 355 x 44-55, AM 22). '·355 x)4o x 47, AM )46. the same line was presumably a mu. The sigma on line 3 was I(j)ANNOY NOTAPIOY
[I] Bardill negs. 94.6.)Oa-)2a (I); 95.6.2), 24 {a). presumably a kappa.
I(J)A NOY CKPI( )
+ 'Icodvvou [itJyoU~EvOU [t]v!ill<"tI(Oivoc) <;' See IOYAN(N)OY NOTAPIOY.
619
(0) Near Erenkoy. I. +IIIIAVI
I(J)A[ [1] Meliopoulos, Investigations, 9. [2] Feissel, 'Inscriptions', Vl15CKPI
612 419 no. 5.
+ 'Iodvvou CKpl()
I. [I](J)A[NNOy]+
I(j)ANNOY ONOKTHTOY
(a) Stamp: IIO,x65.
INaSlaAQe[ .. ]
See,IOYAN(N)OY ONOKTHTOY. Great Palace, excavations in Peristyle and Apsed Hall in
['I]roa[vvou]+ tv!i(llctlOivoc)s l"~ap( )a[ ...]
I(j)ANNOY KOl\.OKY eov 1953-55. Debris of fallen vault beneath Apsed Hall:
1. Labelled no. '5,)55 X)55 x 55.
I.

The theta in line 2 is perhaps an accessory.

[I] Talbot Rice archive photo.
615

_.-
(a) Stamp: 128 x 55 (Ieft)-61 (right).
+I(J)ANN15 (b) Stamp: II6 x 61.
Structures behind Istanbul Archaeological Museum: I.
I.
I(j)ANNOY CKPI( ) Unknown: 1.
KOIl.0KYN815
1. 375 x? x 50. 1.)40 x 337 x 50, AM t (old nos. 286 and 45).
[I] Dlker,Proje, 61. + 'Ioxivvou KOA.OIcUv90u The completion of the abbreviation CKpt() is apparently CKpl(~roVOC)
or cxpuvrcpiou) (Mango, 'Review 1', 68 n. 2). PLRE, iii lists a number
[I] Bardill negs. 94.I.oa, la, aa.
(a) Date: after 532. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. 2C. of possible sixth-century candidates named Ioannes skriban and
(c) Date: after 532. See Pan Il, Ch. 9, sect. 2C.
Baths of Zeuxippos. In or near building 1 or 2. Great Palace, area Ea (Baths of Zeuxippos).
Ioannes skriniarios. Cp. also rE(J)prrOY CKP( )S.
[I] Gray, 'Brickstamps', 53 no. I. [2]Schneider, [I] Mamboury's notes.
I(J)(A)N[
'Ziegelstempei', 266 no. 62.
I(J)ANNOY CKP( )S
61)
I. ]Aa212aNI 616 618 620
"]N(J)I I. +I(J)ANNll I. +I(J)AVI
KOIl.0KYN8'i' (a) Several variants similar to 618, 619.
'IOl(a)v[vou] tv!i(mlOivoc)'1" s ~,,[()] Vl15CKP2
+ 'Icxivvou KOA.ox:Uv8( o)u Great Palace, excavations in Peristyle and Apsed Hall in
(a) Sarachane: I. + 'Icodvvou CKp( )s
t9lJ-jj·
I. No. 1098. (0) Sramp. rjc x 60. Conduit close to north-east end of north-west portico:
(a) Stamp: 97 x61.
[1] Sarachane archive neg. 9.10.37. Great Palace. Area Ab: r , (plurality). In situ in the vaulted chambers adjoining the Apsed
Kalenderhane Camii. B 3/4: I.
1. 34ox? x 50
1. (350) x()I8) X)). Hall to the south-west: (several) 1-4. Trench T, filling: 5.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [1] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', B13. 1.36ox355x50. 2·360x?x60. 3·37ox355x50. 4·36ox?x
(b) Kalenderhane Camii. Exonarthex Tr/2: r. (b) Stamp: t08 x61. 50. 5· )6jX? x 55·
I. (,08) x(I8)) x)7. Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle and Apsed Hall in [t] T albot Rice archive photo.
CRUCIFORM [r] Peschlow, 'Bricksramps'j Br a a.
1953-55. Debris of fallen vault beneath Apsed Hall: I.
(c) Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: 1.
I(J)ANNOY I.Labelled no. 13.360 x 360 x 50.
1.360x350xJ8. [I] Talbot Rice archive photo.
614 [1] Peschlow, 'Bricksramps", B I 2 h. (c) Scamp: 109 X62.
I. '"
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle and Apsed Hall in
-<
1953-55' 1-4·
€VlaISrAN<15 I(j)ANN9,( [ . ].K[ ... ]~[ .]K[ .... ]
1. Labelled no. 3. 2.? X? x 55, labelled no. 4. 3 Labelled no. I I.
ID I(j)ANNOY NAYKl\.HPOY 4· Labelled no. I).
I 621
[I] Talbor Rice archive photo. [2] Mamboury's notes.
£VOl( K'uihvoc)s r' Jla.( ) 'Icouvvou 617 (d) Saray Burnu. r , +I(J)ANN
I. +I(J)AN<OV 15[.].K( .. ]
(a) Stamp: 182 x92. [I] Mamboury's notes.
NAVK1I.HP A[.]K[ ... ]
Sarachane: I. (e) Stamp: II4 x64.
OVINa2€
I. No. 193. ? x? x 37. found before excavation ofStPolycuktos Great Palace, excavations in Peristyle and Apsed Hall in + 'lroav~o~ [.]. K(... ]a[ .]x[ .... ]
began. + 'Iro~vvo\)vauKJ~npo\) iVS(UC'tl&VOC)S e" 1953-55. Floor at level of bottom of outer wall, trench T.
(0) Stamp: t92 x 88.
[1] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 2I7. D4. [2] Sarachane archive neg. (a) Ruins near T opalian Ham, in the area bounded by Hoca Ham [I] GPII, t07, fig. z r no. 8.
Sea Walls. Near tower 8.
Sokagi, Kaputcular Sokag', and Kaurcioglu Sokagl. (f) Rotunda and adjoining hall north of the Palace of Antiochus.
5·)9·9· [I] Mamboury's notes.
[,]DAI (Isn neg. KB 6,65.
-. .,
..~
..
254 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 255

KA() 627 KAi\AfPOY K()K()

I. INliiBAKAA
No accessory 631 No Accessory
[v(StlCttrovoc) tS' pa() Ka() le
I. INIAKAAAfPO
622 634
(a) Stamp: '45 X22. I. lDIAB1111
L [I]NMBAK~
iV(Ol.Ktl.&VOC) ic" KaA.6:ypo(u)
Date: 41 5/r6 or 430/1. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. rb.
[[]V(StlC'tlrovoc) s,: pa() Ka() J Palace of Antiochus: (numerous) I.
(a) Stamp: '75 X25. [v(Stmrovoc)y' pa() K( )x()
Date: 427/8 or 442/3 or 457/8. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le. (a) Stamp:t47 x )0.
(a) Stamp: 120 x 22. I. (450) X)50/)10 x45.
Byzantine drains along the Mese. Higher up Divan Yolu than Unknown: 1.
Date: 415116 or 430/1. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. lb. [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] DAI (1st) neg. KB 995·
Firuz Aga Camii: I. I. Pragment.P x? X45, iAM 33.
Palace of Antiochus: 1. Unknown: I. I. )65 x)65 x 55. [I] Mamboury's notes.
1. ? x? X40.
I. (2)0) X(2)0) q8,AM 295· [1] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Bardill negs. 95.2.173, r8a. (b) Cistern in $i~hane. 635
(b) Stampr r yo x aa. [I] Firath, 'Important Finds', 182, fig. 2. I. INAI[ ... ]KK
Accessory I
Date: 4r 5/r6 or 430/1. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb. [v(Sm:trovocfat' [... ] K( )x()
623 Palace of Antiochus: I.
I. IN€I'O'K€BAKAI (a) Stamp: 1)5.X25.
I. 450 x? x45.
Unknown: I.
[v(StlC'tlrovoc) Et' + (in leaf or heart) K(vpt)e pa() Ka() ~ [I] Mamboury's notes.
KAAATAT(J)NOC ITPECBYTEPOY I. iAM (<;:K) no. '5,? x? X45.
(a) Stamp: t 32 x 24- [1] Mango's notes.
Date: 416117 or 43112. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. rb. 6p
I. +KAAA[T] 636
Palace of Antiochus: (numerous) I.
AT(J)NOC I. INfIBAKK
I. 390 x390 x6o.
ITP€CB2Z
[I] Mamboury's notes. See also KAH( ) [v(St<nrovoc)yt' pa() K( )x()

Unknown: I.
+ KaAa[" jccnovoc ~pecp( U",pou)s S' (a) Stamp: 151 X2I.
No accessory
I. 400 x385 x54,AM 11. (a) Stamp: I J2 x 70. Sea Wall. Between Koca Mustafa Pasa station (Samatya) and
[I] Bardill negs. 94.1.20a, 21a. 628 Unknown: I. Narh Kapr.
I. IN811AKA I. MSBKinv. 6197, (200) x(230) x? [I] Mamboury's notes.
AccessoryK [v(StlCttoovoc) 8' pa() Ka() [I] MSBK neg. 6I97a. [2] DAI (1st) neg. 2)40 (cast). (b) Stamp: I30 X20.
[3] Mamboury's notes (from cast). Mango's notes (from cast). Land Walls. Yedikule: L
624 (a) Stamp.f r ej l x jo. (b) Stamp: (80) x(50)' I·38ox38ox55·
L INABAKAK Kalenderhane Carnii. North-east corridor, north wall, door Land Walls. Preron. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[v(StlCttrovoc) a' pa() Ka() x filling: I. [r] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, 150 no. 22.2.
I. ()40) x()25) x46. [2] DAI (1st) negs. 6604 and KB 5470 (cast). [4J Mamboury's 637
(a) Stamp: 130 x 25 [r] Pcschlow, 'Bricksramps', Ar8. notes (from cast). [5] Mango's notes (from cast). I.INVHIAKK
Date: 417/18 or 432/3- See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. rb.
Palace of Antiochus: r. AccessoryH
[v(SUettrovoc) s,: pa() K( )x()
I. 360 x350 x50. (a) Stamp: 168 X)5.
629
[I] Mamboury's notes. Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: I.
I. INHBAPKAH
KAi\H( ) 1.387x387Xp·
625 [v(StKnrovoc)~' pap() K<;«) n [1] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', AI?
1.111€IBAKAK
(a) Stamp: 150 x 28. SeeKAA(), KAAH().
[v(StlCttrovoc) Et' pa() Ka() x 'Bath' building beside the Myrelaion rotunda. 638
[I] Talbot Rice, 'Bodrum Camii', 173, fig. 11 no. 2. I. ]VBAKK
(a) Stamp: 135 X2).
Date: 416/7 or 431/2. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb. [2] Mamboury, 'Nouvelle lecture', 124. [3] Talbot Rice archive WPa()K()x()
Palace of Antiochus: (DAI (Isr) records two) I. (rubbing).
KAi\() KY() (a) Stamp: (100) X25.
I. 385 x?x55.
Land Walls.
[I]DAI(lst)negs.KB998andKB '509. [2] Mango's notes.
633 [I] DAI (1st) neg. 6609 (cast). [2] Mamboury's notes (from
I. INHBAKAAKY cast). b] Mango's notes (from cast).
Accessory A KAi\( ), KAi\H( )
[v(Stxnrovoc) ~'pa( ) KaA() Ku()
626 639
630 (a) Stamp:t77 x 29. I.].KK
L [1]11fKAA
I. B]AKAAI:J Date: 439/40 (or 424/5). See Part H, Ch. I I, sect. 2.
[[]v(Stxnrovoc) y' Ka() le ]. K()x()
p]aKaA()~ StPolyeuktos. Unknown: 1-3.
(a) Stamp: (9)) x 29· ~]';'K';'i.~() I. No. I44. 2. No. 147· 3. No. 153· (a) Stamp: (65) x 27 .
Unknown: I. . (a)St~mp: (85 from upright of kappa to right) X25· Notes: 1-3. One brick measures 370 x? x 51-55. Ruins on Saray Burnu (orphanage ofStPaul?): I.

I. )18 x(I85) x4o-47,AM409· Land Walls. Wall between towers 95-96. [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 208, A14. [2] Sarachane archive neg. I.300X(230)X42.
[I] Bardill negs. 95.9.36; 95.lo.oa, la. [I] Mamboury's notes. 9.11.28 (I). [I] Unger, 'Seraispitze', fig. 10 no. 14.
 .,
"~

CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 257

Accessory I KOI() KON() KONCTANTINOY

640
645 See 644.la. See KO(N)CTANTINOY, KONCTANTINOY and
1.] .. KKI
I.INIBAKOI KO(N)CTANTINOY, KONCTAt!.TINOY,
.. K()K() l
K(J)NCTANTINOY or K(J)(N)CT.A~r~INOY:
iv(allC"tlrovoC) t " ~,,() KOl()
(a) Land Walls. Tower 48a.
(a) Stamp: 1)8 X22 (right)-)o(left).
[I] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, 150 no. 26.2.
Unknown: 1. KONONOC
[2] DAI (1st) neg. KB 5479. [)] Mamboury's notes.
1. 340X340 x 55. iAM 30.

AccessoryY [r] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). 649

1. +KONO
641 646 NOC+
1. IN8BAKKY 1.]IBAKOI
+ K6vovoc +
iv(aLKnrovoc) e' ~,,() K( )K() u ]l'~,,()Kol()
(a) Stamp: 115 x60.
(a) Stamp:I88 x28. (a) Stamp: (IIO)X)O. KOC()
Walls of Nessebdr. Pavement no. 5 of tower no. 2: 1-2.
Date: 425/6 or 440/] or 455/6. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le. Land Walls. W91/92.
I. 345 x345 x?, surface has yellowish tint. 2. 345 x345 x?,
Byzantine drains along the Mese. Vaults of drains in the Forum [I] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmaner, 148 no. 3. [2] DAI WITH INDICTION
surface has yellowish tint.
of Constantine. (Ist) neg. 6607 (cast). [)] Mamboury's notes (from cast).
[r] Mamboury's notes. [4] Mango's notes (from cast).
[I] Ognenova-Marinova, 'Briques', 111-12 nos. r r and 12, 112 6p
fig. 102. l. IJIlll.KOC
May or may not have carried accessory (b) Stamp: ? '45.
iv(almrovoc) a'Koc()
Sea Walls. Near the wall between the walled-up gates between
642
r. B]AqKK[
~]"p()K()K()[
_.- towers 17-I9: l.
I.? x? X28.
[I] Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 77, 81, fig. 88 no. 3.
(a) Stamp: 16o xl5.
Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I.
KOIP[ [2.] Mamboury's notes. 1.390 x 380 x35, once in the Hagia Eirene collection.
(a) Land Walls. Tower 48a.
(c) Stamp: (86) '49. er] Mamboury's notes.
[I]Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, 150 no. 26.3.
647 Fethiye Camii. (b) Stamp: (r50) x )9.
1. ]E:[.] . BAPE:KOIP[ .] [IJ Dumbarton Oaks Photographic Collection neg. L62.41 Unknown: I.
(C. Mango). 1. (247) x(r58) x.8-40, AM 406.
[iv(alKnrovoc)] e[. I': ~ape() KOlp[.]
(d) Date: after 532. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. 2C. [r] Bardill neg'. 95.9.)0,) l.
(a) Stamp: 173 x 20. Baths of Zeuxippos. In or near Building 1 or 2.
Unknown: 1-2. 653
[r] Gray, 'Bricks tamps', 56 no. 47. [2J Schneider,
KAH() LiAMr).2.iAM'4· 'Ziegelstempel', 266 no. 63. 1. J021A!!3J1l1
Notes: 1-2. One brick measures 380 x 380 x p.
iv(amlffivoc) e" ~,,() Koc()
See also KA( ) [I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). 650
1. +[KON] (a) Stamp: 130 x 18.
643 ONO. Palace of Antiochus: I.
1. ]IBAKAH I. ? x 3301280 x 50.
+ [K6v]ovo.
]{ ~,,() KA~() [I] Marnboury's notes.
(a) Stamp: (85) x 55.
(a) Stamp: (II5)(from iota to right-hand end) x26. Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
654
Unknown: 1. KOKHOY 1.340x?x4°' l. IJIl8+KOC
r , (22)) X(210) X44-50, AM 426. [1] Mamboury's notes.
[r] Bardill negs. 9po.))a, J4a. lV(Ol1Cnoovoc) 8' + Koc()

(a) Stamp: I80X25.

Date: 425/6 or 440h. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. re.
+ Kocfjoo Cisterns in Gulhane, near Bdb-i Hiimdytln: I.
KON<;:() 1.385 x37ox4°·
(a) Stamp: 80 x 57.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
Walls of Nessebsr. Pavement no. 5 of tower no. 2: 1.

KO() 65'
I. 335 x 340 x?, dark red. 655
L]KONC
[r] Ognenova-Marinova, 'Briques', 113 no. 14, Il5 figs. 106, 1. [IN]2SKOC
644 ] Kovc()
107. [iv(almrovoc)]~ ,';r; Koc()
1.]KO+[ (b) Stamp: Letters, I3-20 mm. high. (a) Stamp: (108) X)).
] Ko()+[ Sea Basilica, Ncssebar: I. (a) Stamp: ? X)5.
Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri
(a) Ruins in Beylerbcyi (Sophianac palace?). I. Sofia Archaeological Museum, (300) X (220) x 39. (Bcyazn), 1928: I.
Land Walls. Between 6rulii Kapr and Topkapi: I.

[I] Dirimtekin, 'Beylerbey', 13 no. 2. Note that 29 no. 2 shows [I] Velkov, 'Basilica', 69 no. 2. (2] Bc~evliev,Inschriften, 103 I. 360 x? X40.
I.? x? x40.
]KON+[. no. 153h, pl. 57 no. ] 59· [I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
 -----------------------------------------------------~------ ......•

258 CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE

656 Date: 507-22. See Part II. Ch. 9, sccr. ae.

Kalenderhane Camii. Covering of diakonikon vault: I. Land \Valls. Pentapyrgion: (tw~)/-.:'~·
I .... KOC St Polyeuktos. Level 476*: I. Level 1001*: z , North aisle-
1.380x38ox37· [IJ DAI (Ist}neg. 6600 (cast). [2J Marriboury's notes (from
demolished wall: 3-11. Unknown: r z .
.. Koc() [I] Peschlow, 'Bricksramps', B4 c. cast). [3] Mango's notes (from cast). ~
I. No. 814. 2. No. 639A. 3. No. 1004, 4· No. 1005· 5. No.
(a) Stamp: 185 x }O. (d) Stamp: 85 x80.
1006. 6. No. r008. 7. No. 1012. 8. No. 1013. 9. No. 1014.
Date: 501-504 or 516-19 or 531-34. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. ad. Remains in the area bounded by Divan Yolu, Piyer Loti KO(N)CTANT(INOY)
10. No. 1015. r t • No. 1016. 12. No. 634.
Remains on Ismeriye Caddesi. North group: I. Caddesi, Dostluk Yurdu Sokagr, and Klod Farer Caddesi.Jn a
Notes: 1-12. One brick measures ? x? X4I.
wall 6 m. east of Piyer Loci SOkagl: I. 662
1.395 x38ox45· [I] HiU, 'Brickstamps'i z r I, BIO. [2] Sarachane archive neg. 1. INll.SIBA
[r] Mamboury's notes. ., 5.40.) 5a (12). 1.380 x 370 x 40, very light white mortar of crushed brick and
sand adheres to brick. KOCTANT
KO(N)CTAN(TINOY)S [I] Mamboury's notes. (vo(tJ<tLmvoc)s L'pa() Ko(v)cwv,(ivou)
WITHOUT INDICTION (e) Stamp: 90 x77.
659 (a) St Euphemia in Hebdomon (Bakrrkoy) (location according to
Kalenderhane Camii. Nave, south-west pier, south side, in situ
657 I. +KOC Sorlin-Dorigny, but no suchbhurch is known),
+KOC+ in puclog hole at height of 2-3 m. (now plastered over): (one).
I. TAN [I] Sorlin-Dorigny, <Inscriptions', 86 no. II. [2] Schneider,
Ba/a. r.
+ Koc() + DAINS 'Ziegelstempel', 264 no. 13· [3J Mamboury, 'Nouvelle lecture',
I. (200) x(r95) x48.
Meliopoulos' Latin D is perhaps a misreading of an S sign: cp. 660. I23·
(a) Stamp: 160 x 40. [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', B4 a, b.
Date: 501-504 or 5 16-19 or 531-}4. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad. + Ko(v)c'tC(v('t{vou)~ iv(8u(1t&voc) Cl's (I) Blachemai.
Remains on [smetiye Caddesi. North group: I. \' [I] Mamboury's notes. WITHOUT INDICTION
(a) Stamp: 87 x 86.
I.38oX37S X4°' (g) Unknown.
Unknown. KONCTAN(TINOY)
[r] Mamboury's notes. [I] DAI (1st) neg. KB 5480.
[I] Meliopoulos, 'Auxentiou', 64 n. 4. [2] Feissel,
(b) Myrelaion debris. (h) Unknown. 663
'Inscriptions', 421 no. 35. [3] SEC 37 (1987)no. 106I.
[IJ Talbot Rice, 'Bodrum Camii', r7J, fig. I I no. 18. [2J Talbot [IJ DAI (1st) neg. KB 5491 = KB 6604. I. +KON
Rice archive (rubbing). 660 CT[AJNS
2. +KOC
(c) Stamp:? x4o; 114 from upright of kappa to right-hand end. I. +KOC
TA[NJ + Kovct[a]v(-dvou)s
Date: 502-33 or 517-20 or 532-35. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad. TAN
Sll.[INS] (a) Stamp:?x55.
Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagr. 2ll.IN2
[I] Marnboury's notes. + Ko(v)"a[v(,ivou)Js [(v(oummvoc)sJ 0' Date: C.S32/3. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. zb.
+ Ko(v)c'tav{'tivou)s iv(81IC'tl&VOC)8' s
(cl) Date: 502-33 or 517-20 or 532-35. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad. Hagia Sophia. Wall with exedras, Caferiye Sokagr I.
On the reading of the indiction, see 660.1.
Substructures south of Cemal Nadir Sokagr. Numerous examples have been found at St Polyeuktos (see b), I.? x?x40.
where the distribution of indictions on all the brickstamps indicates (a) Date: 5 IolI 1. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. aa. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[r] Wulzinger, 'Substruktionsbauten', 381, fig. 8 no. 5.
that it is unlikely that the year should be read as c,'/~'.The position St Polyeuktos. Level 833": I. (b) Stamp:? x55.
of the A. before IN in line 3 suggests that the intention was to I. No. 630. Great Palace. Area Ac: 1.
preclude the possibility of reading iv8(ncnwvoc) c,'I~'. [I] Sarachane archive. I.? x? x ~o.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Sramp: 75 x 8). 661
Myrelaion debris. I. KOCTAN
[IJ Talbot Rice archive (rubbing). 2ll.IN2 KONCTANTIN(OY)
(b) Stamp: 78 X75. 664
Ko(v)c'tcxv(dvou)s i.v{OtlCtt&voc)s 8'
Date: 510/1 I. See Part H, Ch. 9, sect. z a. I. [+KJONC
St Polyeuktos. Level 59: 1. Level 87r.·; 2. Level 229: 3. Level 297: On the reading of the indiction, see 660.1.
KO(N)CT ANTINOY, KONCT ANTINOY [TAJNTIN
4. Level 312: 5· Levcl jj S": 6. Levc1532: 7· Level 593'f: 8. Level (a) Sramp: 88 x 55.
[+ KJov~[,aJv'(v(ou)
See also KO(N)CTANTINOY, KONCTANTINOY, 596: 9· Level 599: 10-12. Level 600: 13-24. LeveI725*: 25-7· Great Palace. Area Ac: I.

K(J)NCTANTINOY, K(J)(N)CTANTINOY. Level7J6: 28. Level Sj r": 29. Level 898: 30. Level ju z": j r. I.? x? x45-50. (a) Stamp: (100) x75.
Level 1003:}2. Level 1362*: 33· Unknown: 34-40. [I] Mambcury's notes. Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. za.
I. No. 708. 2. No. 282. 3. No. 205. 4. No. 189. 5. No. 731. (b) Probably identical to a. St Polyeuktos. Level 1001*: I.
MULTIPLE-LINE 6. No. 1287. 7. No. 7)5· 8. No. 687. 9· No. 69)- 10. No. 7)2. I. No. IOOI,? x? x38.
Stamp: 88 x 55.
II.No·733· I2. No. 7J4. 13·No.695· 14·No.696. 15·No. Date: 495/6 or yro/r I or 52516. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad. [r] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 2Il, B9. [2] Sarachane archive neg.
WITH INDICTION 697. 16. No. 698. 17. No. 700. 18. No. 701. 19. No. 702. 5-4L9·
Tokludede Mescidi: 1-4.
20. No. 703. 21. No. 705. 22. No. 706. 23. No. 715. 24. No. r.iAM)5· 2.iAM46. ).iAMp. 4. iAM 6).
KONCTANTINOY
716. 25· No. P3. 26. No. 324· 27. No. 358. 28. No. 345. Notes: 1-4: One brick measures? x? x40. KO(N)CTAN(TINOY)
658 29· No. 457· 30. No. 640A. 31. No. 630A. 32. No. 651· [I] Mnrnboury's notes (squeeze). [2J Mango's notes (from
I. HNll.S )). No. r r r S. J4. No. 270. )5. No. 688. )6. No. 690. 665
squeeze).
NOY' I. KOC
)7· No. 691. )8. No. 1)29 (duplicated number). )9. No. r j jc.
TANTI 2. KOCTM TAN
40. No. 1331.
+KONC Notes: 1-40. One brick measures 375 x 365 x 35. 2ll.IN2 KO(V)ctcxV(tlVOU)
ti.vO(lxn&voc)s KoVC!nV!lVOU+ [I] Hill, 'Bricksramps', 212, Bz a. [2] Sarachane archive neg. KO(V)ctClV('tlVOU)SiV(OllC'tt&VOC)s
8' (a) Stamp: 8) x 58.
(a) Stamp: 8, ~(70). 504o.I6a (27)'
On the reading of the indiction, see 660.1. Date: 507-22. See Pare Il, Ch. 9, sect. la.
(c) Stamp: 8p 76.
(a) Stamp: 80 x 50.
 - --------------------------------------------------------------------------~--------,------------------.

1
,,~
..
CATALOGUE
I CATALOGUE

StPolyeuktos. Level 499: 1. Level 725*: 2-3· Level 742: 4. Level 6. oox (k) Stamp: 8 I x 69. (w) Stamp: 90 x 80.
I005*: 5. North aisle - demolished wall: 6-7. Unknown: 8. MAT Unknown: 1-2. Unknownrr. (
I. No. 891. 2. No. )27. 3. No. 346. 4- No. 742. 5. No. 575. Ko(v)ctcw(tlVOU) I. 364 x 360 x 35-40, A.M 23 r (old no. 6). 2.370 x 350 x 36-48, 1. iA1v1(:K) no. 4I, stamp slightly obliterated, 380 x 380 x 50.
6. No. 1003. 7_No.10Il. 8.No. 1304. AM)2). [I] Mango's notes.
Notes: 1-8. One brick measures? x? x42. (a) Date: (.532/3. See Part H, Ch. 9, sect. ab. lrl Bardill negs. 94.6.29a (I); 95.5.18,19 (2). (x) Stamp: 91 x66.
[r] Hill, 'Bricksramps', 21 J, Bl2. [2] Sarachane archive negs. Hagia Sophia. Ruins in front of the west doors, demolished (I) Stamp: 82 x 62. Structures behind the Istanbul Archaeological Museum: I.
5-41.21 (2), IO.).7a (1). November 1873. Date: 533-35. See Part n, Ch. 9, sect. ab. 1. 37ox360x50.
[I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Letter', 130 no. 5c. Hagia Sophia. Constructions of the north-west court: 1. [I] Dlker, Proje, 58.
2. KOC I·380x370x45· (y) Stamp: 94 x 68.
666
TAM [I] Mamboury's notes. Hebdomon (Bakirkoy). Tribunal: I.
I. +KOC
(m) Stamp: 82 x65. 1. 370 x370 x 40-
Ko(v)ctav(tivou) TAN
Ruins west of Boyacr Ahmet Sokagl, opposite the Kcpriilii [I] Mamboury's notes. •
(a) Stamp: 75 x68. + Ko(v)cwv(,ivou) library. Wall near the east of the hypogeum: I. (z) Date: c. 532/3. See Parr Il, Ch. 9, sect. ab.
Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. za. I. ? x? X40. Hagia Sophia. Ruins in front of west doors, demolished
(a) Stamp: 72 x 57.
StPolyeuktos. Level 95: I. Level 165: 2-3· Level 674: 4. Level [I] Mamboury's notes. November r873.
Remains found when laying drains in AtikAli Pasa Caddesi.
859' 5-6. Unknown: 7-8. (n) Stamp: 82 x 76. [r] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Letter', 130 no. sa.
In the middle of the street: 1.
1. No. 21I. 2. No. 83. 3. No. 88. 4- No. 446. 5. No. 369. Balaban Aga Mescidi: 1. (aa) In the area of the excavations undertaken in 1946-47 and
I.? x? x45.
6.No.43I. 7. No. 1)26.8. 1327. I. 380 x370 x 55,iAM 130. 1958-60 between Hagia Eirene and Hagia Sophia.
[r] Mamboury's notes.
Notes: 1-8. One brick measures? x? x40. [I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Dirimtekin, 'Fouilles', 180no. 5.
(b) Stamp: 73 x 58.
[r] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 211, Br3. [2] Sarachane archive negs. (0) Stamp: 8) x(58).
Sea Walls. Near tower 8.
5.41.33, ro.j.roa (8). Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: 1. 2. +KOC
[r]Demangel and Mamboury, Mnnganes, 15 with n. 2, 16, fig.
1.385 X(200) X47. TAN
I7 no. 4· [2] Mamboury's notes.
3. KOC [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', BI6. + Ko(v)c!av('tivou)
(c) Stamp: 76 x45.
N'H (p) Stamp: 84'66.
Date: after 532. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. 2C. (a) Stamp: 78 x 70.
Ko(v)ctav(,dvou) Great Palace, area Ea (Baths of Zeuxippos). Unknown: I.
Great Palace. Area Ab.
[I] Mamboury's notes. I. iAM {(:K) no. 28, fragment, 380 x? X45.
(a) Stamp: 7SX 64· [I] Mamboury's notes.
(d) Stamp' 76 x60. [r] Mango's notes.
Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. za. (b) Erenkoy.
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. (q) Stamp: 85 X70'
StPolyeuktos.Level r oro: I. [1] Siderides, 'Remarks', 218 no. 3. [2] Eeissel, <Inscriptions',
Mamboury gives location as 'Af': I. Byzantine drains along the Mese. Vaults of drains in the
I. No. II03, ?x?x33. 418 no. 29.3.
1.? x? x36. Forum of Consrantine.
[I] Hill, 'Bricks tamps' , 212, B I 6. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[IJ Mamboury's notes. 3. +KOC
(e) Stamp: 78 x (57). (r) Stamp: 8P78. TAN
4· [K]OC Date: 5°7-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. aa.
Unknown: I. + Ko{v)etuv{ttvou)
MVJ.
I. MSBK inv. 6228, (80) XCI 10) x? St Polyeukros. Level 1001>:·:I.
[K]o(v)c,av(,(vou) 1. No. 648 (was r j ar}, ? x? x 35-40. (a) Stampt rca x 68.
[I] MSBKneg. 62Ira. [2]DAI (Istj neg. 2343 (cast).
[I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', l12, BI8. [2J Sarachane archive neg. St George in the Mangana. In situ in the cistern beneath the
(a) Stamp: 74 x68. [3J Mamboury's notes (from cast). [4J Mango's notes (from
rO·3·IIa. church.
Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. aa. cast).
(s) Stamp: 86 x 67. [IJ Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 29, fig. 31 no. 1.
St Polyeuktos. Level 600: 1. Level 736: 2. (f) Stamp: 80 x 62.
Great Palace, excavations in Peristyle and Apsed Hall in [2] Mamboury's notes.
1. No. 694. 2. No. 316. Hagia Sophia. Near the Director's office, December 1939.
[I] Mango's notes (from rubbing). 1953-55: I. .
Notes: 1-2. One brick measures? x? X45. 4- +KOC
(g) Stamp: 80 x 62. 1. Labelled no. 19.
[I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 212, BI7. [2] Sarachane archive neg. TAM
Land Walls. [I] Talbot Rice archive photo.
5·93-3(2). + Ko(v)",c<v(,(vou)
[I] DAI (1st) neg. 6607. (t) Stamp;88 x68.
(h) Stamp: 80x65. Tokludede Mescidi: I. (a) Stamp: 6SX55.
5. KOC
Great Palace. Area Ab: r. I.?x?x50,iAM83· Date: 507-22. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. za.
MAT
1.360X360X55· [I] Mamboury's notes. St Polyeuktos. Level 655: I. Level 1121 ('Baptistery', west wall,
Ko(v)ct"av(dvou) (u) Stamp: (80) x(58). north end): 2_
[I] Mamboury and Wiegand.Kaiserpaliiste, 38 (top row.Ieft).
(a) Stamp: 55 x 60. [2] Mamboury's notes. Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site I. No. 737. 2. No. 770 (was 1320).
Sea Wall ofBoukoleon: (numerous). (i) Stamp' 80 x (80). BI: 1. Notes: 1-2. One brick measures? x? X45.
[r] Mamboury and Wiegand,Kaiserpa/iiste, 20 (top). Remains in the area bounded by Divan Yolu, Piyer Loti I.? x? x34,no. 50. [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 211, BI4. [2] Sarachane archive neg.
[2] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 267 no. 64e. Caddesi, Dostluk Yurdu Sokagi, and Klod Farer Caddesi: J. [I] GP I, pl. 14 no. 50. [a] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous IO·3·3a(2).
(b) Several variants. I.370X370X45· Remainder, box 38,neg. 219. [3] Talbot Rice archive neg. as (b) Stamp: 69 x 59·
Stamp: approximately 78 x 65. [IJ Marnbourycs notes. [2]. Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. za.
Kalendcrhanc Camii. Roof, filling-wall: 1. B3 well wall: 2. (j) Stamp' 81 x 58. (v) Stamp: (90) x 60. St Polyeuktos. Level 94: I. Level Sj j": 2. Level 898: 3- Level
I. (175) x(I55) X45· 2. (270) x(I95) x49· Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: I. Land Walls. Pcntapyrgion, vicinity of Sr Nicholas: I. Tower 1I65'~: 4· Unknown: 5·
[1] Peschlow, 'Bricks tamps', B2I (illustration compiled from I. (21 5) x(I95) x40. 91: 2. I. No. 214. 2. No. 637. 3. No. 682. 4. No. 1216. 5. No. 253.

several variants). [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', BI4. Notes: 1-2. One brick measures? x? x 55. Notes: 1-5. One brick measures ? x? X33-39-
[I] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, 149 no. 12.3.
262 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE

[1] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 212, BI9. [2] Sarachane archive neg. [I] Van Nice archive (rubbing). Hagia Sophia. North tympanum, east hole at foot of central 6. Same as either type 4 or 5. ",
10.3. I2a (2). (p) Stamp: 100 x65' recessed panel.
(a) Stamp: 95 x75·
(c) Stamp: 74 X(62). Great Palace. Area Ac: r. [I] Van Nice archive (rubbing).
Probably from the area of the excavationsin 1946-47 between
Hagia Sophia. Narthex, repairs to paving beside threshold of t.? x? x 50. Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38: I. Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eireoef'~":~~,Cf"
central door leading to exonarthex. [I] Mamboury's notes. 1.00.66. I. Once in the Hagia Eirene collectiari.
[r ] Van Nice archive (rubbing). (q) Stamp: 100x65. [1] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous Remainder. box 38, neg. [I] Mamboury's notes.
(d) Several variants. Great Palace. Area Ac: I. 131. (b) Stamp: ItO X70'
Stamp: approximarely pj x64. 1. ?x?x50. (cc) Stamp: 110 X70. Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
Kalenderhane Camii. TI/2: r . Unknown: 2-3. [I] Mamboury's notes. Land Walls. Tekfur Sarayi, interior: I. I.?x?xA5·
1. (220) x(140) x ao. 2. (255) X(220) x )8.). (185) X(I)O) x )9. (r) Stamp: 100 x 80. I. ?x?x40. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Peschlow, 'Bricksramps', B 17 (illustration compiled from Hagia Eirene. Southern side of atrium: r.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
several variants). I. 355 x 340 x47. 7. +KOC
(dd) Stamp: 110 x 69.
[I] Gecrge.Sr. Eirene, pl. 16 no. 6. TAN
(e) Stamp: (75) x70' Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38.
Unknown: 1. (s) Stamp: 100 x 70. Mamboury gives location as 'Ca, Turkish wall vault': I. + Ko(v)Ct<:£vb"ivou)
r.iAM (C;;K) no. 75>fragment, 1 xl X45. St George in the Mangana. In sitz, in the cistern beneath the I. 370 x36ox45. (a) Stamp: 124 x 62.
[1] Mango's notes. church: I. [I] Mambcury's notes. Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
(f) Stamp: 78 x ) I. ?x? X40.
(ee) Stamp: 112 x70' Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I.
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-)8: I. [I] Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 29. fig.)I no. 3. Balaban Aga Mescidi: I. I. Once in the Hagia Eirene collection.
I. no. 83. [2] Mamboury's notes. 1. ? x? x40' iAM 101. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Russell Papers. Miscellaneous Remainder, box 38, neg. J18. (t) Stampr roo x72. [I] Mamboury's notes.
(g) Stamp: 88 x (72). Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. 8. +KOr:
I
,. (ff) Stamp: 116 X70'
TA[N]
Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri Mamboury gives location as 'Ca': I. Date: 533-35. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb.
(Beyazn), 1928: r . J.360x35ox48. Hagia Sophia. Constructions of the north-west court: 1. + Ko(v)etCC[v](tivou)
I.? X? X55. [I] Mamboury's notes. I.360X350X45· (a) Stamp: ))6 x (92).
[I] Mamboury's notes. (u) Stamp: 101 x74. [1] Mamboury's notes. Long Walls of Constantinople. Fort near Karacakoy: (one).
(h) Stamp: (65) x(74)· Hagia Sophia. South-west corner, loose on vault exposed (gg) Stamp: 116 x65. Within Fort D, between towers r a and 13: (several).
Kalenderhane Camii. B 3/2: J. when the roof of the washing founrains was removed. Rumeli Hisan. Loose. I.? x? X50.
r. (r j a) x(108) x42. [I] Van Nice archive (rubbing). [I} Mamboury's notes. [I] Schuchhardt, 'Anastasius-Mauer', 113, fig. 9. [2] Harrison,
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', Br 5. (v) Stamp: 100 x76. (hh) Stamp: (70) x74. 'Long Wall',)6 n. '7.
(i) Stamp: 90 x75. Unknown: 1. Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: I.
Unknown: I. 1. iAM (C;;K) nos. 42, 42>. 9. +KOC
1.(2)8)x(I75)x45·
dAM (C;;K) no. 54,)75 x 1x45· [I] Mango's notes. er) Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', B18.
NAT
[I] Mango's notes. (w) Stamp: 100 x 80. (ii) Stamp: 1 x75. + Ko(v)etav(tivou)
(j) Stamp: 98 x 7" Hagia Sophia. Exonarthex, repairs to paving beside second Date: 533-) 5· See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. ab. (a) Stamp: 77 x(66).
HagiaSophia. Near the Director's office, December 1939: door from north leading to narrhex, opposite north jamb of Hagia Sophin. Constructions of the north-west court: I. Sea Walls. Near tower 16.
(two). door. 1. 350 x 350 x 50. [I] Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 77, 81 fig. 88 00.2.
[I] Mango's notes (from rubbing). [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Van Nice archive (rubbing). [I] Mamboury's notes.
(k) Several variants with different forms of kappa. (x) Stamp: 100 x 86. (jj) Stamp: 1 x 7J.
10 . .±.KOC
Stamp: average 98 x 78. Unknown: I. Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri NAT
Beyazrr, great wall to the north of the Diakonissa complex: I. 1. iAM (C;;K) no. 56, )80 x 345 x 50. (Beyazn), 1928: I. + KO(V)CtClV(dvou)
I. 380 x 360 x 50. [I] Mango's notes. I.? x? x45.
[I] Mamboury's notes. (y) Stamp: 100 x 89. (a) Stamp: 78 x75.
[I] Mamboury's notes. Unknown: 1.
(I) Stamp:98x(58). Hagia Sophia. Narthex, repairs to paving beside threshold of
Beyazat, great wall to the north of the Diakonissa complex: 1. central door leading to exonarthex: r. 5. +KOC 1.)5' X(195)X)~44,AM 2)8.
I. 390x380x50. I. 370X3H x? TAY! [r] Bardill negs. 94.12.22,23.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [1] Bardill neg. 94.1).1. [2] Van Nice archive (rubbing). + Ko(v)ctav(·d.vou) It. ±KOC
(m) Stamp: 98 x 79. (z) Stamp: 101 x75. [ ...]
(a) Stamp: 97 x 80.
Unknown: 1-1. Date: 533-35. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. ab.
Date: 533-35. See Pan I1, Ch. 9. sect. ab. + Ko(v)c[tav(tivou)]
r. )75 x)7o q8, AM 220 (old no. 269). 2. (280) x(225) x Hagia Sophia. Constructions of the north-west court: I.
Hagia Sophia. Constructions of the north-west court: I. (a) Stamp: 80 x 1
44-50, AM 469. I.365X360X50.
I. 380x36ox50. Sea Walls. Near tower 8: I.
[IjBardill negs. 94.6.24a, 25" (I); 95-'5.20, 21 (2). [I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 267 no. 64d. [2] Schneider, ? X? X40.
I.
(D) Stamp: 98 x 80. (aa) Stamp: 104 x87.
Westhof, 26 no. I. [3] Mamboury's notes. [I] Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 15 with n. 2, 16 Jig.
Balaban Aga Mescidi: 1.
Hagia Sophia, South-east buttress. (b) Stampryy x Sr .
I.? x? X40, iAM 106. 17 no. 3. [2] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Antoniades, H agia Sophia, i. 84, fig. 10. [2] Soteriou, Hagia Eirene. Southern side of atrium: I.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. 12. +KOC
Hagia Sopbia, 64. [3] Swift, Hagia Sopbia, 50 no. 2. 1. )55 X)55 x45.
(0) Stamp: 98 x 80. Y!AT
(bb} Stamp: (87) x (76). [I] George,St. Eirene,pI. re no. 5.
Hagia Sophia. Baptistery, under sarcophagus.
Date: 532-37. See Pan Il, Ch. 9, sect. ab. + KO(V)CtClV(·dvou)
 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE

(a) Stamp: 7P 70. (d) Stamp: 98 x(55). (e) Stamp:9a x65' (s) Stamp- roc x ?
Hippodrome. Window of exterior-wall near the Palace of Hagia Sophia. North-west buttress, loose brick at gallery-roof Unknown: I. Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
Antiochus: I. level. I. (240)X(I70) x)8-4I,AM 448. Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: T.
I. )80 x3°O x 55. [I] Van ice archive (rubbing). [1] Bardill negs. 95.14.53. 6a. I. Once in the Hagia Eirene collection.
[I] Mamboury's notes. (e) Tuzla, church at Dcgirmenaln. (C) Stamp: (82) (from vertical of cross to right-hand edge) x 66. [I] Mamboury's notes.
(b) Stamp: 75 x 60. [I] Eyice, "Tuzla'c j 5 with pl. 2I. Palace of Antiochus: J. (t) Stamp: 100 X7I.
Ruins at Kiiciikyah. Upper floor: I. I. ?X? X40. Hngia Sophia. Near the Director's office. December 1939.
l. ? x? X35.
IS· Same as type 9 or r a.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mango's notes (from rubbing).
[1] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stamp: (70) x70. (g) Rotunda and adjoining hall north of the Palace of Antiochus. (u) Srampr roa X7).
(c) Stamp: 75 x68. Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in r 93 5-38. [I] DAI (Ist)neg. KB 616). Hagia Sophia. Remains of the wall behind the ticket-office,
Hebdomon (Bakrrkoy): I. Mamboury gives location as 'Af'. (h) Stamp: 94"(60). south-west of the baptistery: I.
1. MSBK no. unknown. [I] Mamhoury's nores (squeeze). Date: 533-35- See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. ab. I.? x? x 55.
[I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 92 no. 45. [2] DAI (1st) Hagia Sophia. Constructions of the north-west court, large [I] Mamboury's notes.
16. Same as types 1--6, 9-Jl..
neg. 2343 (cast). [3] Mamboury's notes (from cast). surrounding wall of Hagia Sophia. (v) Stamp. roli X75.
[4] Mango's notes (from cast). (a) Stamp: 97 x (6a). [r] Mamboury's notes. Unknown: I.
(d) Stamp: 74-77 x 68-7 I. Hagia Sophia. Exonarthex, repairs to paving beside second (i) Stamp: 95 x(6,). I. Once in Robert College, fragment, ? x? x 50.
Unknown: [-2. door from north leading to narthex: 1. Unknown: 1-2. [I] Mango's notes.
I. ? x? X45. AM 242. 2.370 x 365 x 42-49. AM 234 (old no. 1.360 x? x? • I. iAM (<;:K) no. 68. a. iAM (<;:K) nb. 77. (w) Stampt roe x 76.
71). [I] Van Nice archive (rubbing). \ [I] Mango's notes. Unknown: I.
[I] Bardill negs. 94.12.17 (2), 29 (I). (j) Stamp: 95 x64· I. (a55) x(I55) x46--48, AM 468.
17· Same as type 1 or 4.
Unknown: 1. [I] Bardill negs. 9J.I p8, '9·
Kariye Camii. Loose: I.
(a) Stamp: 110 X70. I. )90 x )70 x qz , AM ,)6 (old no. 5). (x) Stampr c.r ra x ya.
I. ?X?X45' Great Palace. Area Ab, collapsed vault: I. [I] Bardill neg. 94.12.20. Date: 532-37. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ab.
[I] Mango's notes (rubbing).
1. ?x? x50. Hagia Sophia. South-west corner, east wall above washing
(k) Stamp: 95 x65.
(e) Stamp: 77 x70' [I] Mamboury's notes. Unknown: I. fountain, brick built into wall and visible in roof of hole of
Beyazrt, great wall to the north of the Diakonissa complex: I.
I. ()62) x())o) X 47-5 I, AM ))4. former wooden tie.
l.370X37oX45· 18. Snme os rypes r.a.or j.
[I] Bardill negs. 95.6.9, 10. [I] Van Nice archive.
[I] Mamhoury's notes.
(a) Stamp: (70) x70' (I) Stamp: 95 x65. (y) Found in the process of opening a tunnel from the central
'3. :)O)!+ Unknown: T. Great Palace. Area Ab: 1. nave of Hagia Eirene.
MAT I. (,60) x(aoa) x47-5), AM 466. I. 390x36ox35. [I] Ramazanoglu,Sainte-Irene, fig. 2. [2] Mamboury,
[I] Bardill negs. 9J.IJ.I4, 15. [r] Mamboury's notes. "Nouvelle lecture', 124. [3] Mamegris, 'HagiaSophia', 289
+ Ko(v)ctav(,ivou)
(m) Stamp: 95"66. (mentioned as + Kccvctcvc +). [4] Schneider, 'Review', 221
(a) Stamp: 90 X77. Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between (mentioned).
Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. za. 667
HagiaSophia and Hagia Eirene: I. (z) Date: after 532. Sce Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. 2C.
St Polyeuktos. Level as": I. Level j a": 2-3· Level 1237*: 4. I. +KOC
J. 390 x ? x 50, once in the Hagia Eirene collection. Baths ofZeuxippos. In or near Building 1 or 2:.
Level up"': 5. Unknown: 6-9. TANS [I] Gray, 'Bricksramps', 54 no. 13.
[1] Mamboury's notes.
I. No. 74. a. No. 7J. 3· No. 78. 4· No. II69· 5. No. II48. + Ko(v)C'tcxv(dvou)s (n) Stamp: 95 x66. (aa) Stamp: 12 5 x 70.
6. No. 219. 7. No. 22I. 8. No. 227. 9. No. 1328 (duplicated Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri
(a) Stamp: 88 x 50.
number). Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: 1-3. (Beyazn), 1928: 1.
Balaban Aga Mescidi: T.
Notes: 1-9- One brick measures 385 x 375 x40' I. 390 x 370 x 50. 2.390 x 360 x 50. 3.375 x 375 x 50. I.? x? x40.
l. ? x? x 50, iAM 2.
[I] Hill, 'Bricksramps', 2.I 2, B20. [2.] Sarachane archive neg. Notes: 1-3. Once in the Hagia Eirene collection. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Mamhoury's notes.
9.12.16 (3)· [I] Mamboury's notes. (bb) Stamp: I]I x68.
(b) Stamp: Approx. (8) x 60. (0) Stamp: 96 x 58. Date: 5°7-22. See Part n, Ch. 9, sect. za.
14- Same as types 1-6.
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site Hagia Eirene. Southern side of atrium. St Polyeuktos. Level 1237*: I.
(a) Stamp: (8a) x (49). BI, building north-west of church (debris): I. [1] George, St. Eirene, pl. 16 no. I I. T.No. 1080,? x? x 40-47.
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site T. 360 x? x 50, no. 32. (p) Stamp: 9JX 57 {left}-65 (right). [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 212, B2T. [2] Sarachane archive neg.
BI:!. [I] GP I, pI. 14 no. 32. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous Unknown: I. 9.12.15.
1. ?x?x34,no. 51. Remainder, box 38, neg. 206. [3] Talbot Rice archive neg. as (cc) Stamp: Approx. (64) x68.
I. ())o) x(a80) x 35-4), AM 257·
[I]GPI,pI.14no. p. Ial Rcssell Papers.Miscellaneous [,].
[I] Bardill neg. 94.1).24. Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site
Remainder, box 38, neg. 220. [3] Talbor Rice archive neg. as (c) Stamp: (81) (from upright of + to right-hand side) x 62. (q) Stamp: 98 X61. Letters about 25 mm. high. BI, building norm-west of church (debris): I.
[a]. Unknown: I.
Silivri: 1. I.? x? x40,no. 24.
(b) In situ in the excavation between Hagia Eirene and Hagia I. 205 x 170 x 38-47, AM 467. [I] GPI,pl. 14 no. 24. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous
I. 360 x 360 x45. stamp in centre, traces of circular
Sophia. First aisle, west bay, top of broken vault. [I] Bardill negs. 95.1j.I6, 17. Remainder, box 38, neg. 198. [3] T albot Rice archive neg. as
fingermarks.
[I] Peschlow,lrenenkirche, 21'h fig. 30 no. 5. (d) Stamp: 88 x6). [I] Seure, 'Anriquires', 573. fig. 17 no. 3. [2].
(c) Stamp: 75 x(S3 from top to bottom of alpha in line 2). Date: 533-35. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ab. (r) Stamp: 98 x 64. (dd) Stamp:? x 80.
Balaban Aga Mescidi: I. Hagia Sophia. Constructions of the north-west court: I.
Hagia Sophia. North gallery, east bay, east window, external Great Palace. Isolated wall west of area Ba (area Bf?): I.
I.? x? x3S,iAM 103. I. 370 x 370 x 50.
patch in south end of sill. I.? x? x 50.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes. [r] Van Nice archive (rubbing).
 '.
"~

CATALOGUE CATALOGUE

[r] Mamboury and Wiegand, Kaiserpaliiste, 12 no. 3 (where 2. +KOC KO(N)CTANT(INOY) (b) Stamp: 77 x78.
the location is said to be near the monumental staircase at the TAYl+ TokludedeMescid.i: I-10.
67' I. iAM45' dAM p. ).iAM60. 4· iAM 70. 5.iAM 84·
'House of Justinian'). [2] Mamboury's notes. + Ko(v)ctav(tivou) + 1. +KOC
6. iAM99. 7. iAM 108. 8. iAM It2. 9· iAM tI). 10. iAM
(cc) Stamp: 1)0 x (66). TAN
(a) Stamp: 107 x6). 115·
Unknown: I. T2IN2
Sea Walls. Near tower 19. Notes: I-10. One brick measures 375 x 370x40·
I. (345) x(270) x45-48, AM 470.
[r] Demange! and Mamboury, Manganes, 78, 84, fig. 92 (top). + Ko(v)cto.v't(ivou)s iv(Sn:::tlrovoC)S [I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). [2] Mango's notes (from
[I) Bardill ncgs. 95.1 j.22, 2).
[2] Mamboury's notes. squeeze).
(If) Stamp: I) I x 69. For lVOt1C'tl&VOCwithout a following numeral, cp. 67°.1, 672.1,
(b) Stamp: 105 x 64.
Unknown. r. 673.1. It seems unlikely that the finallenershould be read as r,.'j~',
Between the Giilhane hospital and the hexagon.
1. )85 x)69X45-57,AM 2)0. since the broken form of this die (672.1 b) was found ar St KO(N)CTANT(INOY)
[I] Mamboury's notes.
[r] Bardill negs. 94.12.8, 9i 94.14.18,19. Polyeuktos, where the distribution of indictions does not include
(gg) Stampr r j a x65' years six and seven (cp. 660. I). 674
1. +KOCT
Beyazrt, great wall to the north of the Diakonissa complex: I.
669 (a) Stamp: 8,. 76. ANT+
I. 37ox36ox50. 1. +KOC Unknown: J.
[I] Mamboury's notes. + Ko(v)C'to.v'C(ivou) +
TANc I. iAM (<::K) no. 25, fragment? x? X35·
(hh) Stamp: 1)2 x65. (a) Stamp: (90) x 60.
+ Ko(v)c-tav«ivou)c [I] Mango's notes.
Beyazrt, great wall to the north of the Diakonissa complex: I.
Unknown: I.
(b) Stamp: 82 X7)·
1. 39ox38ox55· (a) Stamp: 9' x65-67. \ •St George in the Mangana. In situ in the cistern beneath the I. Once in Robert College.
[r] Mamboury's notes. Unknown: 1-2.
church. [I] Mango's notes.
(ii) Date: c.lJ2/). See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. ab.
Hagia Sophia. Ruins in front of west doors, demolished
1. )75 X)62 X45,AM222. 2. )65 X(262) x42-45,AM2)7·
Ir.l Bardill negs. 94.12.10,11 (1),21 (2). I. [I] Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 29, fig. 31 no. 2. (b) Stamp: t04 x?
Date: 533-35. See Part 11,Ch. 9, sect. ab.
November 1873.
[r] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Letter', 130 no. jb.
(b) Stamp: 96 x 6o.
Balaban Aga Mescidi:
r. 360 x? x 50, 1AM98.
J.
_.- 672
1. TAN
T21N2
Hagia Sophia. Constructions of the north-west
surrounding wall of Hagia Sophia.
[I] Mamboucy's notes.
court, large

[I] Mamboury's notes. 1<XV1:(ivou)siV(Sl1C't\&VOC)s (c) Stamp: 110 X6l.

668 (c) Stamp:9P(55)·
A broken form of 671.1. For iVOIK11rovOC without a following Hagia Scphia. Near Director's office, December 1939.
1. +KOC Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38.
numeral, cp. 670.1, 67r.I, 673.1. It seems unlikely that the final [1) Mango's notes (from rubbing).
TAN+ Mamboury gives location as 'Ca': J.
letter should be read as t;'/s', since 671.lb was found at Se (d) Stamp: (68) x6)
+ Ko(v)cnxv(tivou) + 1.360x35ox48.
Polyeukros, where the distribution of indictions does not include Hagia Sophia. South-east buttress, upper room, loose: I.
[r] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). I. ? x? X45, fingermarks near stamp.
(a) Stamp. rod x 55. years six and seven (cp. 660.1).
(d) Stamp: 97-99 X62-6). [I) Van Nice archive (rubbing).
Date: after 532. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le.
Unknown: 1-1.. (a) Stamp: 77 x (78). (e) Stamp: 109 x65.
Great Palace, area Ea (Baths ofZeuxippos): 1.
Sea Walls. Lighthouse tower, area Fp. Unknown: 1.
?x?x55.
1. 1. (290) x(285) x40-46,AM 2)9. 2. ()45) X(275) x 40-48, AM
[I] Mamboury's notes. 1. (joo) x(250) x45,AM240.
[r] Mamboury's notes. 447·
(b) Stamp: 8r x 54. [I] Bardill negs. 94.12.26, 27·
(b) Stamp: 110 x68.0micron is 17 mm. high. Nu is 29 mm. high. [I) Bardill negs. 94.12.25 (I); 9P4.)a, 4a (2).
Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. za. (f) Possibly of this type. The final letter, which appears in
Date: 533-35. See Pan Il, Ch. 9, sect. ab. Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between St Polyeukros. Leve!229: I. Mamboury's drawing as a sigma, has been taken to be a tau.
Hagia Sophia. Constructions of the north-west court, large Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: r. I. No. 243, ? x? x 38-4°.
surrounding wall of Hagia Sophia. Stamp: 110 x65'
1.380 x 375 x 50, once in the Hagia Eirene collection. [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 214, B30. [2] Sarachane archive neg.
[I] Mamboury's notes. Great Palace. AreaAb: I.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
9·12.·9· T.?x?x45'
(c) Stamp: III x 61.
Unknown: 1. 673 [I] Mamboury's notes.
1. ()40) x (270) "45-50, AM 180. 670 I. +KOC (g) Stamp: 112 x65.
[I) Bardill neg. 94.Il.l)a. 1. +KOCT T'fN Great Palace. Series of piers to the east of area Ac, second
(d) Stamp: 11) x 60. AN2N2 T2HN2 foundation below the bath: (numerous) I.
Hagia Sophia. Near the Director's office, December 1939· I. 37ox360x40'
+ Ko(v)cto.v(·tivou)s (i)v(SuC'tloovoc}s + Ko(V)cto.V1(ivou)s l}v(O\1C'!\rovoc)s
[1) Mango's notes (from rubbing). [1] Mamboury's notes.
+ KO(V)CU1V(tivOU)sv s ForivSuC'nrovoc without a following numeral, cp. 67o.r, 671.1,
(e) Stamp: tI4"62. (h) Stamp: It) x6).
The significance of the final nu is not clear. It may be an 672.l.lt seems unlikely that the final letter should be read as r,.'/~', Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
Date: 533-35. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ab.
Hagia Scphia. Constructions of the north-west court: J. abbreviation for (i)v(Sl1'mrovoc) or an accessory. For ivSuC'nrovoc since 6n.1a was found at St Polyeuktos, where the distribution of Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I.
without a following numeral, cp. 671.1, 672.1, 673.1. Although the indictions does not include years six and seven (cp. 660. I). I. Once in the Hagia Eirene collection.
I. ?X.?x45.

[r] Mamboury's notes. final letter might be the indiction r;'/~', the evidence of67I.I., 672.1, [I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp: (70) x 77.
673. I suggests that it might be an abbreviation sign. Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. aa. (i) Stamp: It4 x 64·
(f) Stamp: IIP65·
Great Palace. Series of pillars to the east of area Ac. (a) Stamp: 86 x 50.• St Polyeuktos. Level 279: J. Level 673: 2. Unknown: 3· Unknown: I.
Foundations near the terrace: r. Tokludede Mescidi: I. I. No. 31 I. 2. No. 467. 3. No. r332. 1. (258) x(264) x )6-44, AM 454·
I. 37ox370x50. r.?X?X45,IAM71.· Notes: 1-3. One brick measures? x? x 32-40. [I] Bardill negs. 95. 14.26a, 27a.
[r] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes. [r] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 212, B23. [2] Sarachane archive neg. (j) Stamp: It4 x 65.
10')'5"(r). Date: 533-35' See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. zb.
 ..~..
CATALOGUE CATALOGUE

Hagia Sophia. Debris from the collapsed barrel vault in the (u) Stamp: 12ox6S. (a) Stamp: 123 X62-64. (c) Stamp: 152 x55.
substructures of the west wing of the justinianic atrium: I. Date: 532-37. See Part I1, Ch. 9. sect. zb. Beyazrt, excavation of three churches near Istanbul University
Unknown: 1-5.
I.380x? X45. Hagia Sophia. South-cast buttress, in situ in putlog hole in east '943-46.
I. 385 x 36. x 45-50, AM 227. 2. (347) x (.00) x 38-45, AM 463.
[I] Schneider, Westhof, 26 no. 9. [2] Mamboury's notes. wall, at level a: 1. [I] Frrarh, 'Trois eglises', 172. [77, pl. 7(b) no. 4·
3· (a r j ) x(I80) x 46-12, AM 464. 4.367 x(247) x 3 1-38,AM
(k) Stamp: II4 x 66. L37ox?x45· (cl) The omission of the nu in the second line is perhaps an error in
Hagia Eirene. Southern side of atrium: 465. 5· 380 x ('70) '30-37, AM 474·
I. [I] Emerson and van Nice. 'Preliminary Report', 416 n. 30. recording.
[I] Bardill negs. 94.12.3, 4 (I); 95. r 5.8, 9 (a}, ro, t r (3), r z, '3 (4),
1. 355 x355 x44· [z] Van Nice archive. Silivri.
30,3 (5)·
[1] George, St. Eirene, p]. J6 no. 7. ...i(v) Hagia Sophia. Ruins of east porch: I. ' [I] Dirimrekin, 'Selymbria', 32 no. J.

(I) Stamp: It 6 x 60. I. Approx. 355 x 355 x 50, fingermarks with three fingers. Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between [I] Salzenberg, Baudenkmale, 64 no. 1. [2] Lethaby and Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I.
Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: 1. Swainson, Soncta Sopbia, 156 no. I. J. 370 x 3 50 x 3 5, once in the Hagia Eirene collection. z . +KOCTAN
I. 370 x 370 x40' oncein the HagiaEirene collection. (w) Date: c.532/3. See Part I1, Ch. 9, sect. ab. [r] Mamboury's notes. TINOY+
[I] Mamboury's notes. Hagia Sophia. Wall with exedras, Caferiye Sokagl. + Ko(v)Ctc;V-rlVOU +
(m) Stamp: II5-tI7 x 63-66. [1] Mamboury's notes. 4. +KOCTA
NTINOV (a) Stampr r yo x65'
Unknown: 1-6. (x) Stamp: (1I4) x65. Unknown: I.
I. 360 x355 x 39-44, AM 300. '.365 x(330) x41-43,AM 3.8. Hagia Sophia. South-west corner, loose brick on vault exposed + Ko(v)cmv-rlvou I. 385 x370 x 50, AM '35 (old no. 26).
3· ('75) x ('40) x35-45, AM'43· 4· 370 x 36ax 37-40, AM when the roof of the washing Iountains was removed.
(a) Stamp: 125 x63. [I] Bardill negs. 94.12.18,19 .
z ,6 (old no. '5)' 5'? x? x35-40, AM '46. 6. (.65) x('50) x [1] Van Nice archive (rubbing).
\ Date: after 532. See PartlI, Ch. 9, sect. 2C.
35-37, AM 453. 7. ('70) x('70) x J4-38,AM 45 5· Great Palace, area Ea (Baths of Zeuxippcs): (many) I.
[I] Bardill negs. 95.5.30, 31 (.); 95·'·'7a, 28a; 9504·)3, 4a (I); 3. +KOCTAN
I.370X37°X5°·
94.12.14 (4), JI (3), J4, 35 (5); 9P4-24a, 2 5a (6), z Sa, '9a (7)· TINOY+
[I] Mamboury's notes.
(n) Stamp: 1I6x64. KO(N)CTANTINOY
+ Kotvjcecvelvoa +
Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between 5. Probably the same as type I, 2, 3. or 4·
675 (a) Stamp: 140 x60.
Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I. I. +KOCTA (a) Stamp: ? x 61. Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
I. 390 x 370 x45, once in the Hagia Eirene collection.
NTINOY Hagia Sophia. Reused to repair the Turkish wall, in a corner
[r] Mamboury's notes. Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I.
+ Ko(v)c1:O:v·ttVOU and to the right of the alley as one faces the north entrance to 1.380 x380 x 50-60, once in the Hagia Eirene collection.
(0) Stamp: It5 x65. the narthex: I.
Unknown: 1-2. [I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp: 122 x 64. I.? x? X55. (b) Stamp: r43 x?
dAM (<;:K) no. 7.•. JAM (<;:K) no. 7a. Date: 533-35. See Part I1, Ch. 9, sect. ab. [I] Mamboury's notes. Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site
Notes: 1-2. One brick measures 360 x 350 x 50. Hagia Sophia. Constructions of the north-west court: I.
(b) Stamp: (77) x(5 5)· Br, north-west of church (debris): 1.
[r] Mango's notes. I.375XHOX4°· Unknown: I.
I. ? x ? x 40, stamped twice with overlapping stamps, no. 44.
(p) Stamp: II5 x65' [I] Mamboury's notes. I. JAM (<;:K) no. 27a. [I] GP I, p]. 14 no. 44. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous
Date: C.53213. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb. (b) In the area of the excavations undertaken in 1946-47 and [I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). [2] Mango's notes. Remainder, box 38, neg. 215. [3] Talbor Rice archive neg. as
Hagia Sophia. Ruins in front of west doors, demolished 1958-60 between Hagia Eirene and Hagia Sophia.
[I] Dirimtekin, 'Fouilles', 180 no. 2.
[.].
November 1873: I. 6. +KOCTA
(c) Stamp: 150 x 60.
1.37° x 350 x45. Musee des Antiquites Nationales, (c) Stamp: 125 x65. Y1TIY10Y
Hagia Sophia. Near the Director's office, December 1939:
Saint-Germain-en-Layeinv.21I03· Date: after 532. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. 2C.
+ Ko(v)cw.v-rivou (IWO).
[I] Musee des Anriquites Nationales, Saint-Germain-en-Layc Baths of Zeuxippos: I.
(a) Date: after 532. See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. 2C. [I] Mango's notes (from rubbing).
(photo). I.370X370X50.
Baths of Zeuxippos. In or near Building I or 2. (d) Stampr r jo x Sy.
[I] Mamboury and Wiegand,Kaiserpaliiste, 38 (bottom row,
Unknown: I. Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
left). [2] Mamboury's notes. [I] Gray, 'Bricksramps', 55 no. 38. [2] Schneider,
I. ?x?xH-42,AM456. I.380X360X50.
'Ziegelstempel', 267 no. 64a.
[I] Bardill neg. 9P4.30a. a. +KOCTA [1] Mamboury's notes .
(q) Stamp: rr6 x60. NTINOY (e) Stamp: r49 x63·
Kalenderhane Camii. Apse of North Church 12: I. + KO(V)Ct(lVlivQU 676 Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site
I. 353 x( z.z o) x 55· I. +KOCTAN BI:I.
[rj Peschlow, 'Bricksramps'cBaj. (a) Stamp: "5 x65·
TINOY+ I. ? x? x 50, no. 57.
Great Palace. Area Ac: I.
(r} Stamp: r rp 69. [I] GP I, pl. 14 no. 57. [2] Russeli Papers, Miscellaneous
I.370X370X50. + Ko(v)ctcXvtivou +
Hagia Eirene. Southern side of atrium: I.
Remainder, box 38, neg. 224. [3] Talbot Rice archive neg. as
[I] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stamp: r55 x6 z .
1.3·55 x355 X44· [2].
(b) Stamp: 122 x68. Hagia Sophia. Remains of the wall behind the ticket-office,
[I] George, St. Eirene, pl. 16 no. 8.
Unknown: I. south-west of the baptistery: I. Unknown: 1-6.
(s) Possibly of this type.
I. JAM (<;:K) no. 27. I. 380 x 363 x45-59, AM .29 (old no .• 6) .•. (3 50) x(300) x 50,
In the area of the excavations undertaken in 1946-47 and L380x350X45·
[I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). [2] Mango's notes. [1) Mamboury's notes. AM33I. 3· 37ox348 x 50-57, AM 457· 4'(''5)x(I87)x
1958-60 between Hagia Eirene and Hagia Sophia.
[I] Dirimtekin, 'Fouilles', 180 no. 4. (b) Stamp: (r ac) x65' 38-5o,AM459· 5. ?X?X40-45,AM460. 6. 38jX(.80)x
3. +KOCTA 45-60, AM 47J.
(t) Date: c. 532/3. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. zb. Unknown: I.
NTINOV [I] Bardill negs. 94. I 2.6,7 (I); 95.6.3,4 (a); 9P P, 2, 3 (5);
Hagia Sophia. Drains of Caferiye Sokagi. I. (3 ro) x(275) x 39-48, AM '58.
[r] Mamboury's notes. + Ko(v)eto.vtivou [r] Bardill neg. 94.rJ.23. 9P4·34a, 3 sa (4); 9P4·3 fa (3); 95.1 p8, '9 (6).
 "~
.<

CATALOGUE CATALOGUE

(0 Stamp: '5J x65·

Beyazit, great wall to the north of the Diakonissa complex: I.
Kuqunla. Village on hill, loose. 1, (a) Stamp: 98 x92.
Unknown: I.
(a) Stamp: (p) x68.
[I] Mango's notes. Kalenderhane Camii. Roof, filling wall: I.

I.36oX35ox50. (c) Hagia Eirene. In situ in putlog hole in the north bay of the west 1. 380 x )65 x40' iAM7. 1.(Il)x(88)X39·
[I] Mamboury's notes. wall of the narthex. (r] Mamboury's notes. [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', B24.
(g) Stamp: t54x65. [I] Peschlow, Irenenkirche, 224 no. 3. (b) Stamp: 106 x reo.
Unknown: 1-6. Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
6. Probably tyPC3 0'4.
dAM (<;:K) no. 71. 2. iAM (<;:K) no. 7'". 3. iAM (<;:K) no. Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I. UNCERTAIN SPELLING
7tb. + iAM (<;:K) no. 85. 5. iAM(<;:K) no. 85a. 6.iAM(<;:K) # (a) Stamp: (Il4) x 59- 1. 360 x 360 x 3 5. once in the Hagia Eircuc collection.
no. 85h. Land \'{falls. Near BI. [r] Mamboury's notes. 68,
Notes: 1-6. Two bricks measure 360 x 360 x 40, 370 x 395 x 50. [I] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, 149 no. 19 (I). (c) Stamp: r07 x 103. I. Probably the-same as 664.1; 666.1, 4, 6) 8; 667.1; 668.1, 2; 669.1;
[I] Mango's notes. [2] DAI (Isr) neg. 6598 (cast). bJ Mamboury's notes (from Unknown: 1-2. 679·1.
(h) Stamp: '56 x 62. cast). (4] Mango's notes (from cast). I. 355 xJ50 x45,AM 57· 2.(240) X(I85) xp,AM449. (a) Stamp: (70) x 65.
Date: 533-35. Sce Part II, Ch. 9. sect. ab. (h) Stamp: (II5)x7J. [I] Bardill negs. 94.).22, 2) (r): 95-14.7a, Sa (2). Date: 507-.22. See Part I1, Ch. 9. sect . za.
Sophia. Debris from the collapsed barrel vault in the Hagia Sophia. South-west room, horologion. (d) Stamp: 101 x98. St Polyeuktos. Leve165S: 1.
substructures of the west wing of the justinianic atrium: I. [1] Van Nice archive (rubbing). Excavations near Istanbul University 1943-46. I. No. 739, ? x? X45.
I. ?x?x50. (c) Stamp: (120) x70. [I] Firarh, 'Tuglalar', 13. (2] Frratlr, 'Trois eglises', 172,177 pl. [I] Hill, 'Bricksramps', 21 I, BI 5.
[I] Schneider, Westhoh 26 no. 2. [2] Mamboury's notes. Unknown: I. 7(b) no. (0. (b) Hebdomon (Bakirkoy). Tribunal: I.
(i) Stamp: t56x61. I. Once in Roberr College. ? x? x35. (e\ Stamp: 120 x 100. I.? x?x45.
Unknown: 1-3. [I] Mango's notes (rubbing). SarayBurnu: I. [r] Mamboury's notes.
I. (290) x (270) x 35-45, AM 458. 2. (300) x(285) x 32-45, AM (d) The rcrminal S ligature shown by Sorlin-Dorigny is not known I. 380 x 360 x 50. (c) Stamp: (74) X(64).
461. 3· (272) X(265) X44-62, AM 462. on any similar example. and is perhaps an error. [r] Mamboury's notes. Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: 1.
[t] Bardill negs. 95-14.320, 33a (I); 95-1 H, 5 (2), 6, 7 (3). Date: c. 532/3. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect . .2b. I. (280) X(235) "45.
(j) Stamp: (105) x65. Hagia Sophia. Ruins in front of west doors. demolished [1] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', B19.
KO(N)CTA(N)T(INOY)
Beyazrt, great wall to the north of the Diakonissa complex: r. November IB73. .--- (cl) Stamp: (68) x(67).
I.36oX36ox45· [rj Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Letter', 130no. 5d. 679 Myrelaion debris.
[r] Mamboury's notes. 1. +KO[C] [I] Talbot Rice archive (rubbing).
(k) Hagia Eirene. In situ in putlog hole in the north bay of the west TAT (e) Stamp: (90) x70.
wall of the narthex. 677 + Ko(v)[cJ,a(v),(ivou) St George in the Mangana. In situ in the upper wall of the
[I] Peschlow, Irenenkirche, 224. fig. jo no. 4. I. KOCTANT cistern beneath the church: I.
INOYS (a) Stamp: (70) x 54.
I. 3Bo x? x45.
4· [+KOCT]AlI! Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: I.
Korvjcrcvrtvoo s (I] Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 29, fig. 31 no. 4.
[TINOY+] I. (190) x(I67) x46.
[2] Mamboury's notes.
l+ Ko(v)c,]av[,tvoU +l (a) Stamp: 14ox65. [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', B22.
(f) Stamp: (50) x70.
Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
(a) Stamp: (40) x(39). Unknown: r.
1.3BoX360X45·
Kalenderhane Camii. B2/12: I. KO(N)CTAN(TINOY) I. Once in Robert College.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
I. (140) x(90) X45. [I] Mango's notes.
680
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', B25. I. fOC 2. Probably the same as 665, 666) 667, 668.
678 TAN
5· Probably the same as type 1,2,3) or 4. (a) Several variants.
I. +KOC + Ko(v)ctav(ti.vou)
(a) Unreliable typescript representation. Date: 507-.2.2. See Part I1, Ch. 9, sect . za.
TAN
Ruins in Beylerbeyi (Sophianae palace?). (a) Stamp: 76 x 70. St Polyeuktos. Level 700: I. Level yjec 2. Level 853: 3. Level
TINOY
[1] Meliopoulos, "Topothesia', 229. Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri B59: 4· Level 925: 5· Level 1010: 6. Level 1357: 7. Level 13Br: 8.
(b) Stamp: (II6) X(55). + KO(V)C1CXVllVOU (Beyazit), 1928: I. 1. No. 569. 2. No. 344· 3· No. 371. 4. No. 389. 5. No. 1026.
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-3 B.Site 1.370 x? x 50-5 5, mortar with large pieces of brick. 6. No. II06. 7. No. 1176. B.No. 1230.
(a) Stamp: 105 x95.
Br: I. Unrecorded: 2. Silivri: I. [I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps'j z r a BI2-.2l.
1.?x?x40,no.52. avno.Er , 1.365 x 360 x45, stamp in centre askew, line around edges. 65
2. fOC 3. Probably the same as 666.1) 667.1, 668.1, 669.1.
[I] GP I, p]. 14 no. j a. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous mm. from edges.
TAll! (a) Tuzla, church of St Glykeria.
Remainder, box 38, negs. 221 (I), 316 (2). [3] TalbotRice [I] Seure, 'Antiquites', 573, fig. 17 no. 4.
archive neg. as [2] neg. 221. + Ko(v)ctav(ti.vou) [I] Eyice, 'Hagia Glykeria', 102, fig. 9 (upper left).
(b) Unreliable typescript representation: an initial cross has
(c) Date: 533-35. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ab. presumably been omitted. (a) Stamp: 77 x 68. 682
Hagia Sophia. From the wall with the hollowed-out pillar-like Sekbanbasi ibrahim Aga Mcscidi. Unknown: I.
1. Cp. 659,660,663,664,666,667,668,669,670,671,67), 674, 675,
block that runs at right angles to the surviving section of the [I] Schneider, 'Aquadukt', col. 76. dAM (<;:K) no. 58.
north wall of the justinianic atrium. 676,678,679.
2. +KOC
[I] Mango's notes.
[I] Remezi, 'Sophienkirche', col. 178 (left). [2] Schneider, (h) Tuzla, Church of St Glykeria. (a) Stamp: (60) x(33).
Westhof, 39 no. 2. TAN Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: 1.
TINOY [I] Eyice, 'Hagia Glykeria', 202, fig. 9 (lower left).
(cl) Stamp: (65) (from left-hand cnd to right of nu) x (59) (from top, l. (193) x(160) x40.

to bottom of iota). + Ko(v)ctCtVllvOU 3. Same as type I or 2 (I] Pcschlow, 'Brickstarnps', B.2o.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

,,~
.>
CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 273

CIRCULAR (a) Stamp: 162 (= 62+)6 +64) X75 (= 25 + 25 + 25). (a) Date: 5)J-J5· See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. zb. 695
Unknown: 1. Hagia Sophia. Constructions of the north-west court, large 1. [-]YONI[-]
KO(N)CTANTIN(OY) I. 375 x345 x40,iAM 13. surrounding wall of Hagia Sophia: I. [ - ]
[r] Mamboury's notes. I. ? x? x 50.
683 [Kcctcvrjivou
[I) Mamboury's nores.
+
KO(N)CTANTI(NOY) (a) Stamp: (100) XC))).
KOC
Land Walls.
TAN 687
~ BA [I] DAI (1st) neg. 6597 (cast). [2] Mamboury's notes (from
TIN 691
INJ>ISrCTANTI -1.+K[-] cast). [3J Mango's notes (from cast).
+ Ko(v)ctaV'tlv(ou)
KO T[ -] 696
(a) Stamp: 80 x 80..
iV01(K'tl{OYDC)S '(' ~Ct() Ko(v)c'tO,V'1{(vou) + ~[-cJ"t[av"tivou] I. [K-CTAN]
Great Palace. Between areas Ab and Ac: 1.
[TI]NOY
1. 370. x360 x40' (a) Stamp: 216 x96. Probably the same as 666.1-8, 667.1, 668.1, 2, 669.1, 676.1-6, 679.1,
[I]NJ>cIB
[I] Mamboury's notes. Date: 509!I o. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. za. 822.1,823.1,824.1,826.1.
StPolyeuktos. Level yaa: r. Level 600: 2. Level 673: 3. Level [Kccrcveflvou [i]vl3{tlC"tt6ivoc)c l~'
(a) Stamp: 1x 80.
700*: 4. Level I266:l-: 5. Unknown: 6.
KO(N)CTANTINOY Great Palace. Area Ab. (a) Date: c. 532/3. See PartIl, Ch. 9, sect. ab.
1. No. 892. 2. No. 699. 3. No. 466. 4· No. j z r. 5. No. 1)62.
[I] Mamboury's notes. Hagia Sophia. Drains of Caferiye Sokagi.
684 6.No·54)·
I. TU,IOY
[I] Mamboury's notes.
Notes: 1-6. One brick measures ? x? X48.
KOCTAN [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps", 217, D5. [2] Sarachane archive negs.
+ 692
5.40.)"(2),9.12+ l

+ Ko(v)ctavtivou 1- 1. [-] CIRCULAR

KO(N)CTANT[ NTINOY
(a) Stamp: 88 diameter.
[Kccrcjvrtvou 697
Hebdomon (Bakirkoy): I. 688
I. KOTO[ .. ]YTINO around central +
r. MSBK ne. unknown. [BA] 675.1,2 are the most likely restorations. Nothing similar has been
[I] Sorlin-Dorigny, <Inscriptions', 92 no. 42. [2] DAI (1st) neg. . INJ>SI[C]TANT[ found reading Kcvcrcvrivoo. Apparently a garbled form of Kocecvelvoo or Kcovcrcvtfvou .
2345 (cast). [)] Mamboury's notes (from cast). lsl Mango's KO (a) Stamp: (l20) x? (a) Land walls. Near Edirne Kapr.
notes (from cast). . iv&(tm&voc)s t" [pa()] Ko(v)[c]wv,[(ivou)] Hagia Sophia. Near the Director's office, December r939: [I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 95 no. 67.
(two).
(a) Stamp: (1)4)(= 1 + 29 + I) x 74 (= 22 + 28 + 24).
KO(N)CTA(N)TINOY [r) Mango's notes.
Kalenderhane Camii. Vault of north cross-arm, covering: I.

685 I. 370x(2IS) X41.

+ [IJ Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', DI. KPITINNOY
693
KOCTA
1. [ - ]
TIMOY 698
UNCERTAIN SHAPE [-]INOY
+ Ko(y)c1:o:.(v}d.vou MITq
[Kcctuvt] Ivou +YOM
KONCTANTINOY or KO(N)CTANTINOY
(a) Stamp: 8) x78.
Great Palace. Area Ab: 1.
675.1,2 are the most likely restorations. Nothing similar is Kp(t)"ttVY01.) +
689
recorded among stamps reading KOOVC"tIlV"tlVOU (besides 826.1,
I.38oX37ox35· I. Paspares gives no indication of the layout. The iota was probably considered to be contained in the ligarure of
which has a final +).
[I] Mamboury's notes. kappa, rho, and nu.
Ko[(v)cJro:vttvo[u] iVI3(tKtt&VOC)
(b) Fenari isa Camii. Rubble of the foundations of the north (a) Stamp: (96) x ?
Kojvcjtcvttvo]u] ivB(llCtUOVOC) (a) Date: after 5)2. See Part If, Ch. 9, sect. 2C.
church. Sea \Valls.
Baths of Zeuxippos. In situ in the apse of Building 2.
[r] Mamboury's notes. (a) Unknown. Er] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Paspates, ByzantinaiMeletai, 366.
[IJ Gray, 'Bricksrarnps', 5 S no. 34. [2] Schneider,
'Ziegelstempel', 267 no. 65.
CRUCIFORM
694
KO(N)CTAN(TINOY) KO(N)CTANTINOY, KONCTANTINOY, 1. [K-]CTA[N]
[TI]NOYI
686 K(J)NCTANTINOY, K(J)(N)CTANTINOY KY()
[N]J>2B+
I
N MUL TlPLE-LINE [K-]C"la[ni]vou ([v]&(mtoovoc)s p- + Layout: abbreviation IN omitted
I (a) Stamp: () 8) x 8 1.
690 699
CO)!
Date: 508/9. See Part lI, Ch. 9, sect. z a. 1. IllKV
1. [ - ]
T St Polycuktos. Unknown: I.
A [-]ANS tlrWKu()
I. No. 1305,? x? x43.
N [K-c"t]av(tlVoU)S [r] Hill, 'Bricks tamps', 212, 214, B27. [2J Sarachane archive Gamma altered to delta by the insertion of two converging
iv(oucrt&voc) r" Ko(v)ctCtV(1lVOU} Probably the same as 663.1, 667. I or 817.1. neg.uo.j.ea. diagonals below the horizontal.
 "~
.<
274 CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE 275
(a) Stamp: 88 x 29. 705 (a) Srampr r ap x z z: Accessory I
Date: late ath century? See Part Il, Cb. 10 no. 4. r. IN. [. BA]KY Date: 417ir8 or 432/3. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb.
Unknown: I. 716
[v(OtlC"troovoc). I.' ~o.( )] Ku() Palace of Antiochus: J.
I. IY)[A!IAIl.YlI
1. )02 X(20)) X40-47, AM 146 (old no. 174).
I.? x? x 50.
[1] Bardill neg. 941.21. (a) Stamp: 139 x 30. [vo(ucrrrovoc) a' ~a() Ku() r
[r] Mamboury's notes.
Date: 414-18 or 429-33.
Palace of Antiochus: I. (a) Stamp: 170 x 30.

Layout: abbreviation IN included Accessory E Land Walls. WI51r6: 1.

r . 385 x? x 50
I.390 x 390 x 50.
No accessOlY [I] Mamboury's notes. 7I2
r. IN€l<rKE:BAKYE: [I] Mamboury's notes.
700 706
1. INSBAKY r.]BAKY [v(Omroovoc) Et' + (in leaf or heart) K(upt)e ~a() Ku() e
[v(OtKttrovoc) (If,' ~a() Ku() (a) Stamp:J47X 24.
717
] ~a()Ku() I. IYlSBdKYI
Date: 416ir7 or 43 tt z, See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb.
(a) Stamp:J74X)5. (a) Stamp: ? x 30. Palace of Anciochus: I. [v(OrK"ttrovoc) (~a() Ku() t
Date: 422/3 or 423/4 or 437/8 or 438/9- See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. Date: 423-27 or 438-42. See Part I1, Ch. 9, sect. le. I.)8jX)6jX55· (a) Stamp: 124 x 22.
le. Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bfib-r Humfiyun. [I] Mamboury's notes. Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: I.
Cistern on Siraselviler Caddesi: I. [r] Mamboury's notes.
1. 380 x 370 x40. 1.370X370XP·
[r] Mango's notes. [I] Peschlow, 'Bricksramps', AI9.
707 Access~ry H

701
1. IN8BAKY
I.]IKA

]t'Ku()

(a) Stamp:? x 36.

I. 713
r. IYlABAKYH

lV(On,"urovoc) a' ~a() Ku() 11

718
I. [I]NIBAKYI

[v(OtKtt6ivoc) 9' ~a() Ku() Date: 411-]7 or 426-32. See PartIl, Ch. 9,sect. Ih~ [[]v(OtK"ttrovoc) t" ~a() Ku() t

Palace of Antiochus: J.
(a) Stamp: 140 x 32.
(a) Stamp: 175 X)5. (a) Stamp: 115 x25.
Date: 4r7ir8 or 432/3. See Part I1, Ch. 9, sect. rb.
Date: 425/6 or 44oh. See Part n, Ch. 9. sect. re. I.? x? x6o. Land Walls. Yedikule Kapm: I.
Palace of Anriochus: (two) I.
Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bab-t Hiimdyun: I. [I] Mamboury's notes.
1.340X300X55·
I·385x360x55·
I.390X38oX45· [r] Mamboury's notes.
708 [I] DAI (1st) negs. KB Ion and K.B r 51 r. [2] Mango's notes.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
1. Y)[QV[8

~]txp Ku() 719

702 714 I. INBIKYI
1. ]NIl.IIAKY (a) Stamp:? x )0. 1. ]KAH
Sea Wails, Large pillars near the monumental staircase, area Fb: [v(otlC"trrovoc) ~t' Kuf ) t
[[]vOt(K"trrovoc) la' KuO 1 Ku()~
(a) Stamp: r40 x 30.
(a) Stamp: (155) X4). (a) Stamp: ? x 32.
I.? x? x 50. Land Walls. Oriilu Kapn I.
Unknown: I. Date: 414-18 or 429-33. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. rb.
[I] Mamboury's notes. I. 350 x? X40.
1. iAM (<;:K) no. 84. Palace of Antiochus: I.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
[r] Mango's notes. 709 I.? x? x40.
r. Y)[Il.[ [I] Mamboury's notes.
703 ]o'Ku() Accessory K
I. Y)[A8:J1YlI
(a) North-eastcorner of the garden of Blachernai. Accessory 8 720
[v(01l("n6ivoc) -n" ~a() Ku() [I]Mamboury's notes. I. INSBAPKYK

715
Ca) Stamp: 130 X22-25·
1. INBIBAKY8 [v(orIC"Itrovoc) ,'Is' ~ap() K1J() K
Unknown:r. AccessoryB
1. (I90) X (220) x)8,AM )I4. [v(or><nrovoc) ~t' ~o.() Ku() e (a) Stamp:(144)XJ2.
710 Fenari isa Camii: ].
[1] Bardillnegs. 95.).8a, 9a, 16a; 95+25", 26a. r , INIBAKYB (a) St Euphemia in Hebdomon (Bakirkoy) (location according to I. (290) x(250) x 50, AM 78.
Sorlin-Dorigny, but no such church is known). [I] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari
[v(Otm6ivoc) t' ~a() Ku() ~
704 [r] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 88 no. 12. [2] Leclercq,
isa Camii', fig. 40 no. 2). lsl Bardill negs. 94.5.5, 6.
1. INE:IIlAKA (a) Unknown. 'Estampilles', col. 546 no. ge. [3] Schneider, 'Ziegelsrempel',
[v(O,,,,!oovoc) Et' ~a( ) Ku()
[I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 85 no. 8. [2] Schneider, 264 no. 14c.
'Ziegclsrempel', 264 no. 14a. 720a
(a) Stamp:(175)xJJ. 2. [IN]BIBAKY8 I. INSBAKYK
Unknown: 1- Accessoryf [[v(oumrovoc)] ~t' ~a() Ku( ) e [v(orm6ivoc) ,'If,' ~a() Ku() K
I. MSBK inv. 6232. (140) x(190) x?
7II (a) Stamp: (176) x )0. (a) Stamp: I45 x jo.
[r] Schneider. 'Ziegelsrempel', 264 no. 12. [2] MSBK neg.
r. lY)[A!!AYlI Land Walls. Tower 17: I. Unknowru t.
6231~L [3] DAI (1st) neg. 234T (cast). [4] Mamboury's notes
I.? x ? x25.
(from cast). [5] Mango's notes (from cast). a' ~a() Ku() y
[V(OtlC"tlrovOC) t. (270) x(255) x 5'-62, AM t70.
[I]Mamboury's notes. [I] Bardill neg. 94.10.26a.
 ..
"~

CATALOGUE CATALOGUE

Accessory/\. AccessoryP 1. (260) X (200) X48, AM J2. 2. (222) X(190) X4J, AM 60. 735
SccKYP(). J. (.65) X(240) x46,AM98. 4· )90 xJ64 x45-5],AM 165. 1. IY1SBAKYE:Y
721
[I] Bardill negs. 94.2.[9 (1);94+5, 6 (2); 94·5·J5> J6 ());
I. AY2IAIIAliII
94·[0.15", I6a (4)·
lv(Bu('nIDvoc) at; pa() Ku() E1i()
AccessoryC
lv(BlIC'tlIDVOC) ,,: ~a() Ku() A. (a) Stamp, 160 x 28.
Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
(a) Stamp: 130XI6-I8. 727 Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri
J. [1N]rBVIUC Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I.
Unknown: I. (Beyazn), '9z8, (many) 1.
r . 370 x 360 x45, once in the Hagia Eirenecolleccion.
I. )80 x 370 x 51-5 5, stamped twice. AM 329 (old no. 656). ..,[lV(SI1<t\OOVOC)] y'pa() Ku() C 1.390 x )80/360 x 50.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
[1) Bardillnegs. 95·5-)2, 3J, J4, J5> J7· [I] Mamb~oury's notes.
(a) Stamp' ?xJ5.
(e) Stamp: 160 X20-30.
Cistern of Aecius: J.
AccessoryN Date: 416/17 or 431/2. See Part Il, Ch. s.eece. lb. 736
I. 420 X.400X45·
Palace of Antiochus: I. 1. IliIrIBAKAE:Y
[I] Mamboury's notes.
722 1. 370X360X55.
I. INBBAKYliI
iv(Bl1<tlIDVOC) Yl' pa() Ku() E,;( )
[I] Mamboury's notes.
lV(Ol1<tlIDVOC) W pa() Ku() v 728 (a) Stamp' 166 x 29.
1. INSBKYC 2. IliIE:IBVIUC Unknown: I.
(a) Stamp:!48x'5.
lv(Bl1<tlOOVOC) El' ~a() Ku() C I. ? x? x 50, iAM 78.3 PT.
Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
iv(BIK't\IDVOckll;' P() Kv() C
[I] Bardill's notes.
I. 37ox3Sox6o. (a) Stamp' '44 x J). (a) .Stamp: 1 J2 x 15.
[I] Mamhoury's notes. Unknown: I. Date: 4I61r7 or 43112. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb.
Palace of Antiochus: I.
737
1.)7ox)65 X5hAM451. 1. Y3YJlAII13li11
Accessory Fl [I] Bardill negs. 95.14.20a, 21a. I.? X? x45-50.
[I] Mamboury's notes. iv(BlKnIDvoc) et" pa( ) Ku() E1i()
723
I. IliIE:BAKYII 729 731 (no entry) (a) Rotunda and adjoining hall north of the Palace of Antiochus.
1. JY2IAIII.t.liIl [I) DAI (1st) neg. KB 6168.
lv(BlIC'tlIDVOC)" pa() Kv(). 732
lv(BmlIDVOC) B,' pa() Kv() C
(a) Stamp: 120 XIS. 1. IliI[ ... BAjKYC 738
Fenari isa Camii: I. (a) Stamp' J65 x J2. 1. ]BAKYE:Y
lv(Bl1<tlIDVOC) [ ... pa()) Ku() C
1. (J24) X(225) xJ9-p,AM 187· Date: 430/1 or 445/6 or 46011. See Part Il, Ch. I I, sect. 3. ] pa() Kv() E,;()
Hexagon complex in Giilhane. \X'ater source: 1. (a) Stamp: 1]5 x25.
[1] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari
1.400)(390)(50. Date: 414-18 or 429-)). See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb. (a) Stamp' (131) x28-Jo.
isa Camii', fig. 4000. 24. [3] BardiIl neg. 94.1 1.2Ia.
[I] Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 104, fig. Il9 no. 5. Palace of Antiochus: I. St George in the Mangana. Cistern beneath the church: I.

724 1. )85"385 x55. I.? x?x50.

I. INHBAKYII [I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 29, fig. J3 no. 2. [2]
730 Mamboury's notes.
lv(BlIC'tloovoc),(pa() Ku(). 1. IliIE:IBAIUC Mayor may not have carried accessory
(a) Srampi r J7 x 30. lv(Bu('tloovoc) et" pa() Kv() C 733
Unknown: r-c , 1. INE:IBAKY[ AccessoryK
(a) Stamp: 120 x 33.
1. iAM (t;:K) no. 74. 2.iAM(t;:K)no·9J·
Date: 416!r7 or 43112. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb. lv(Bl1<'tIIDVOC) El' pa() Ku[() 739
Notes: 1-1. One brick measures ? x? x 5 5.
Palace of Antiochus: I. 1. 2IY3Y2IA1I3Y11
[I] Mango's notes. (a) Stamp: 125 x 30.
1.39ox380x50.
Date: 416/17 or 431/2. See Part H. Ch. 9, sect. lb. lv(BI1<ttIDVOC) e' pa() Kv() E,;() K
[I] Mamboury's notes.
725 Palace of Amiochus: I. lv(BI1<ttIDVOC) e" pa() Ku() EuK{)
1. ]E:KVII (b) Stampr rao x28.
I.? x? X45.
Date: 416h70r 43112. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. lb. (a) Stamp,,82X]5.
)EKu(). [I] Mamboury's notes.
Palace of Antiochus: (numerous) I. T okludede Mescidi: I.
(a) Stamp' (I 10) x40. I·)90XJ85 X55· 1. iAM 94. 2. iAM 100.
Great Palace. Area Ab: I. [I] Mamboury's notes. Notes: 1-2. One brick measures 380 x 360 X45.
1. ?x? X45. (c) Stamp" 40 x34· KY()EY() [I] Mango's notes (from squeeze).
[1] Mamhoury's notes. Date: 416/17 or 431/2. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. lb.
Palace of Antiochus: r. No Accessory 740
726 I.J70xJ65 X5°·
1. 1Y1IABAKYE:YK

I. IIY2II( 734
[1] Mamhoury's notes. 1. INSBAKYE:Y lv(BI1<tIIDVOC) trr" pa() Ku() E,;() K
]I'Ku(). (d) S[amp"42X]5. iv(Bl1<'tIIDVOC) la' pa() Ku() E';K( j
lv(Bl1<tlIDVOC),'/~' pa() Ku() E,;()
(a) Stamp'? X25. Date: 416117 or 43112. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. lb.
The final letter could possibly be beta.
Date: 42617 or 441/2. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. IC.
(a) Gray read gamma in error, it seems, for nu.
Palace of Antiochus: 1-3.
Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum T auri (a) Stamp: 1]0 x 22.
Cisterns in Gulhane, near Bab-i Hiimfiyfin: 1. 1.390x385x55. 2·36ox?x55· 3·365x?x5°·
(Beyazlt),1928. Great Palace. Area Ac: 1.
1. 390 x390 x 60. [I) DAI (Ist) neg. KB '500. [2] Mango's notes.
[I] Gray, 'Bricks tamps', 56 no. 44. [2] Schneider, 1. J85 x385 X55.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
Unknown: 1-4. 'Zicgelsrempel', 264 no. I4h. [1] Mango's notes.
- --.----~-----------------

'.
"~

CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 279

KYP() 745 750 Palace of Antiochus: 1-2.

1. IYlMA, KYP I. INIBAKYP J.380X350X55· 2·370X360X45·

No Accessory or Accessory P iv(o,IC't,ffivoc) " par ) Kup() [I] Mamboury's nores (squeeze). [2] Mango's notes.
The! is perhaps a partially preserved beta.
74' iv(o,IC't,ffivoc) " pa() Ku() p Unknown: I.
iv(ouC'tlffivoc) 0' pap Kup()
1. qY)!AIlAJl.YlI 1. )67 x (jco) x50,AM "7.
iv(oll("tloovoc) 0' pa~ Ku() p (a) Stamp: J70 x 30.
ivo(,1<"t'wvoc) a' /la() Kup() Date: 426/7 or 441/2. See Part I1, Ch. 9, sect. le. [,] Bardill neg. 94.91.
(a) Stamp: 1)8 x )6.
ivo(lI(,tlwvoc) a'/la() Ku() p Cisterns in Gdlhace, near Bab-r Hiimayfln: I.
Palace of Antiochus: I. 754
I.36ox?x35· 1.INVIKYP
(a) Stamp: ,6) x )2. I.345X340X45· [I] Mamboury's notes.
Unknown: I. [I] Mamboury's notes. iv(o,IC't'wvoc) hi 0" Kup()
I. iAM(<;:K) no. 70, fragment, ? x? '45. 2. [ljNIBAKyq iv(ollctlwvoc) hi 0,' Ku() p
[I] Mango's notes.
[i]v(oll""ffivoc) ,'pa() Kup() Gamma altered to delta by the addition of a diagonal stroke.
(b) Stamp: ('40) x28.
[i]v(o,Ktlffivoc) ,'pa() Ku() p
Unknown: 1. 746 (a) Stampr r aj x j j.
I.? x? x 40-45, once in Robert College, AM 342. 1. [1]NE:BAKYb (a) Stamp: (105)X22. Date: 4I51I6 or 4301r. See Part I1, Ch. 9, sect. lb.
Irl Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Bardill negs. 95.6.150 16. [i]v(oUC'Ilffivoc) e' pa() Kup
Land Walls. Near tower 82. Palace of Antiochus: 1.
[r] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, 148 no. 4.2. I.J60x?x5°·
[i]~(oll('tlffivoc)" pa() Kui) ~
[>J DAI (1st) neg. 660) (cast). [)] Mamboury's notes (from [I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp: 1)0 X25. cast). [4] Mango's notes (from cast).
Great Palace. Area Ac: I. 755
742 I. ? x? X55. 1. INl\.IKYP
1. +INJl.BK)\ [I] Mamboury's notes. 75' iv(ollCtlwvoc) hi 0,' Kup()
+ iv(ollC'tlwvoc) 0' P() Kup() 1. INIBBAKYP iv(ollCtlffivoc) hi 0" Ku() p
+ ivo(lIC'tlwvoc) P'Kup() iv(ol1",ffivoc) 'P' pa() Kup( ) Inverted gamma altered to delta by the addition of a diagonal
The ligature of upsilon and rho suggests that the rho is part of the iv(o,1<'tlffivoc) lpopa() KuO p stroke.
747
name and not an accessory. 1. INSBAKYPS (3) Stamp: 190 x 21. (a) Stamp: 125 x25
(a) Ruins near Topalian Ham, in the area bounded by Hoca Ham Date: 428/9 or 443/4 or 45819. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. le. Date: 41 51I6 or 430/1. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb.
iv(om,ffivoc) $'/~'pa() Kup()s
Sokagl, Kaputcular Sokagi, and Kaurcioglu Sokagr. Byzantine drains along the Mese. Vaults of drains in the Forum Palace of Antiochus: 1.
iv(om,ffivoc) $'/~' pa() Ku() p s
[I] Meliopoulos, "Topothesia', 230 no. 5. [2] Schneider, of Constantine: (one). Opposite the fountain of Atik Ali Pasa I. 360 x? x 50.
The final letter is presumably an abbreviation sign or a space-filler. Camii: (one).
'Ziegelstempel', 265 no. 36 (erroneous). [I] Mango's notes.
Cp. 759.Ia. 1.38ox380x5°·
(a) Stamp: 150 x 24. lrl Mamboury's notes. 756
Myrelaion church: 1. I. INIJl.BAKyq

I.310X3Iox4o-45· iv(oll",ffivoc) '0' par ) Kup()

743 [I] Mamboury's notes. 752 iv(o,K't,ffivoc) 10' par ) Ku() p
1. INfBAKYP 1. IYlIBKYP
(a) Stamp: 110 x 28.
iv(ollctlwvoc) y' pa() Kup() iv(o,K't,ffivoc) 'P' Kup() Remains in the area bounded by Divan Yolu, Piyer Loci
iv(ollctlwvoc) y' pa() Ku() p iv(o,K't,ffivoc) ,po Ku() p
Caddesi, Doscluk Yurdu Sckagi, and KIod Parer Caddesi: I.
748
(a) Sramp. r jy x 26. (a) Stamp: I2 5 x 30. 1.)9OX)8p55·
I.IN2BAKYP
Underpass cutting near St Polyeuktos. Level 13:1-:I. Land \Valls. Tower 18: I. [I] Mamboury's notes.
I. No. 196,? x? x 52-58. iv(o,IC't,ffivoc) <;'/~'/la() Kup() I.350 x 350 x60.
[r] Hill, 'Bricksramps', 208, AI 5. [2] Sarachane archive neg. iv(o,IC't,ffivoc) <;'/~'!kt() Ku() p [I] Mamboury's notes. 757
1. INJl.IKYP
9·IO.6. (a) Stamp: 190 x )0. (b) Srampr rac x )5.
Great Palace. Area Ab: I. Land Walls. From either tower 17 or 18: I. i.v(~hnuDvoc) lit' Kvp()
I. 380x370x55. 1. ?x? X50' iV(Oll""ffivoc) 0" Ku() p
[I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes. (a) Date: late 4th century? See Part Il, Ch. 10 no. 3.
Stamp: 12 5 x 34.
744
I. fBAKYPIN Hippodrome. Masonry above the drain below the staircase:
753 (many) I.
y' pa() Kup() iv(o,>Ctlwvoc) 1. INVIBAKYP
749 1. 350X330X45.
y' pa() 1. IYlZBVKYP
Ku() p iv(ollC'Ilwvoc) iv(o,IC't,ffivoc) hi o,'pa() Kup() [I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp: 100 x 22. iv(o,lC'tliiivoc)~' pa() Kup() iv(ollC't,ffivoc) hi 0" pa() Ku( ) p
Land Walls. Outer Wall, Yeni Mevlevihane Kapi. iv(o,IC't,iiivoc)~' pa() Ku() p 758
Gamma altered to delta by the addition of a diagonal stroke. 1. IYlE:IBAKAP
[I] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmouer, 148 no. 4.1. (a) Stamp: 132 x27. (a) Stamp: 128 x 19. iv(o,K't'wvoc) pa() Kup( )
[2] DAI (Isr) neg. 6609 (cast). [)] Mamboury's notes (from <Bath' building beside the Myrclaion rotunda: (two).
£1'

cast). [4] Mango's notes (from cast).

Date: 415/16 or 430/1. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. rb. iv(o,IC't,ffivoc) £1' par ) Ku() p
[I] Talbot Ricc archive (rubbing).
 "~
•
CATALOGUE CATALOGUE

(a) Stamp: 151 x27· 764 AccessoryT (b) Stamp: 105 x47 (Ieft)-p (right)
Date: 4J61I7 or 431h. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb. I. INSBAKYPl Unknown: 1-1..
Palace of Antiochus: I. 770
iv(~lKtlrovoc) ,'/r,' pa( ) Kup() I I. INEIBAKAbl.
1.35° x 340 x 36, four fingermarks made diagonally across brick
1.360x?xSO.
iV(~l1("tlrovoc) ,'/r,' pa() KUPI() before stamp applied, AM Ill. 2. (26s) X(2S0) x 38, AM 312
[1] Mamboury's notes. iv(611<Il&VOC)El'pa( ) Kup(),
(old no. 157)'
(a) Stamp: 190 x J2.
(a) Stamp: 130X20. [I) Bardill negs. 94.8.28, 29 (I); 95-3.5'; 95.pIa, 22a (2).
759 Date: 422/3 or 423/4 or 43718 or 438/9. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect.
I. K)YPS Date: 416h7 or 43 tl z. See Part IT, Ch. 9, sect. lb. (c) Stamp:? x46.
le.
Palace of Antiochus: J. Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
K)up()s Cistern on Srraselviler Caddesi: I.
I. 370 x 370 x60. Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I.
K)u() p s r. 380x? X40.
[I] Mango's notes. I. Once in the Hagia Eirene collection.
[I] Mango's notes.
The final letter is presumably an abbreviation sign or a space-filler. (b) Stamp: 129 x 22. [I] Mamboury's notes.
Cp. 747.la. 765 Date: 416117 or 431/2. See Part IT, Ch. 9. sect. lb.
2. lSXAIQj"
I. INAIBAKYPI Palace of Antiochus: I.
(3) Land Walls. Between Oriilii kapi and Topkapr.
I. 380 x 370 x 50. KUPIIlKOU
[r] Mamboury's notes. iV(~I1<tlrovoc) ut" pa() Kup() I
[I] Marnboury's notes. [2]Mango'S notes. (a) Date: after S32. See Parr Il, Ch. 9, sect. 2C.
iV(~I1<tlrovoc) at' pa() KupI()
760 Baths ofZeuxippos. In or near Building I or 2.
I. )KYP (a) Stamp: 193 x 27.
[I] Gray, 'Bricksramps', SS no. 37. [2] Schneider.
Remains north of Cemal Nadir Sokagi. Building site opposite
) Kup() 'Ziegelstempel', 267 no. 67.
the post office: 1-4.
)I(u() p
Notes: 1-4. One brick in iAM. 773
(a) Stamp:? x 28. [r] Wulzinger, 'Subsrruktionsbauten', 381, fig. S no. 7. t KYPI() I. +KYPIAKlSll[

Myrelaion church.
See KYP( ) Accessory 1. +Kuptax:ou B[
[r] Mamboury's notes. 766
I. INllIBAPKYPI (a) Stamp: (120) x 50.
761 iV(~I1<tl&voe) ~,' ~ap() Kup() I Hippodrome. Loose: I.

I. lKYP I. ?x?x)S.
iV(~I1<tl&voe) ~,' pap() KupI()
) Kup() [I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp: 13 S X 22.
1 Ku() p
Remains in the area bounded by Divan Yolu, Piyer Lori KYPIAKOY
(a) Stamp: (80) x )0. Caddesi, Dostluk Yurdu Sokagl. and Klod Farer Caddesi: I. MUL TIPLE-LINE
Unknown: I. 1·320X?X4°. SINGLE-LINE
Once in Robert College, fragment, ? x ? x 50. WITH INDICTION
I. [I] Mamboury's notes, [2.] Mamboury, 'Nouvelle lecture', 123.
[r] Mango'S notes. KYPIA()
774
AccesroryN 771 I. +KYPI
AccessoryB
I. INfBVPKYPIA AKOY
767
762 I. INllIBAKYbN iV(~l"",rovoe) y' ~ap() Kupla() IN1l2I€
I. INBKAbB
(a) Stamp: 128 x 22 + KUptllKOU iv3(llCtlrovOC)S \€'
iV(~l1<tlroVOC)~,' ~,,() Kup() v
iv(~lI<tlrovoc) B" Kup() e Unknown: 1-2. (a) Stamp' 9SX 80.
(a) Land Walls. Wall between towers 12 and 13.
The square form of the final theta suggests that the indiction is I. 362 x(230) X4O-S0, stamped twice since first stamp shallow Great Palace. Area Ac: I.

probably original, and has not been created by altering an eta.

[I] Meyer-Plath and Sehneider, Landmauer, 148 no. 4+
and illegible, AM I4I. z . (200) x ()40) X4),AM )57. I.? x? x 30-40.
(3) Stamp: 120 x 30. [I) Bardill negs. 94.].1) (I); 95-7.6, 7, 8 (2). [I] Mamboury's notes.
AccessoryC (b) Stamp: (120)x25. (b) Sump: 94 x 79.
Land Walls. Wall between cowers 9 S and 96a: I.
Hagia Sophia. Exterior hole in east wall, loose fragment Unknown: I.
1.360x3Sox4S· 768
probably from adjoining wall: I. I. ? x? x )6-)9, AM )78.
[I] Mamboury's notes. I. INZBAKYPC
I. ?x?x40. [I) Bardill negs. 95.8.1), 14.
iv(~l1<tlrovoc) r,'Il<x() Ku~() e [I] Van Nice archive (rubbing),
Accessory I or no accessory
(a) Unknown.
763 [I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 87 no. IS. [2] Schneider,
WITHOUT INDICTION
I. INllBAKYPI
'Ziegelstempel', 264 no. 14f. KYPIAKOY KYPIAK(OY)
iV(~\I<t\rovoc)~' ~a() Kup(),
iV(~\I("tl';voc)~' ~a() Kup'() 769 775
I. IN€BAKYPC ;7~Xlqyll I. KYPl
(a) Sump: 190 x )0.
AK2
Sea Walls. Between the lighthouse tower and the monumental iV(~I1<tI&voe) E ~a() Kup( ) e KUPUIX:OU
staircase, east of area Fe: J. KUP\CXK(OU)S
(a) Stamp: 130X25. (a) Date: after 532. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ac.
J·360x360x4°. Great Palace. Area Ac: I. Baths of Zeuxippos. In or near Building I or 2. (a) Stamp: (76) x6).
Er] Mamboury and Wiegand,Kaiserpaliis£e, 16. [2] Schneider, I.? x? x60. [I] Gray, 'Brickstamps', S4 no. 2.6. [2] Schneider, Date: S07-1.2. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. z a.
'Ziegelstempcl', 264 no. I4d. [}] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes. 'Ziegelstempel', 267 no, 69. St Pclyeuktos. Level S02*: 1-2. Level 642: 3· Unknown: 4.
 .,
.,~

CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE

I. No. 1296. 2. No. 1333. 3· No. 293· 4. No. 1334. CRUCIFORM

783 (e) Stamp: (44) x(55).
Notes: 1-4. One brick measures ? x? X38.
J. ]KYPI Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site
[I] Hill, 'Bricksramps', 212, B24. [2] Sarachane archive neg. 779
I. S2!AIQY[2! ]AK2 B r , building north-west of church (debris): J.
9·II1a(3)·
]I1PE:2 1. ?x?x35,no.23' ..
K]uptu«ou)s
With traces of border. [I] GP I, pi. 14 no. 23. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous
The flaring of the stamp suggests that, when complete, it was Remainder, box 38, neg. 197. [3] Talbor Rice archive neg. as
cruciform. ~:llPl<:tK( OU)5 1tp£( c~u"t£pou)s [2].
KYPIAKOY ~ (a) Stamp:? x 36. (a) Sarachane: I. (I) Land Walls.
Date: 533-35. See Part 11, Ch. 9. sect. ab. I.No·76r. [I] Dethier, 'Makrikoy', 164no. J',pl. IA'no. 8. [aj Meyer-
776 Plath and Schneider. Landmauer, 150 no. 20.
I. KYPI Hagia Sophia. Constructions of the north-west court, large, [I] Sarachane archive neg. rO.3. 16a.

+ thick surrounding wall of Hagia Sophia: r.

AKOY r. ? x? X40. KYPIAK(OY)S DPE(C)SB(YTEPOY)
[I] Mamboury's notes. KYPIAKOY DP(EC)SB(YTEPOY)S
+ KUPlalCOU 784
(a) Stamp: 90 x 85. I. KYPIAK 786
[S]DPE:2B I. +KYPIA
Bogdan Sarayr. Near the walls of the church: I.
KI5DPSBS
I.? x? x40' KUptUK(OU J[s] npe(e)sp(udpou)
[r] Mamboury's notes. K;'ptaK(ou)[s],pE(ep~'EpoU)S p + KUptCXlCOU1tp(ec)s~(u"tEPOU)S
KYPIAKOY.6.IAKONOY (a) Sramp. r jo x 57. (3) Hebdomon (Bakrrkoy).
[I] Dethier, 'Makrikoy', 164 no. eo, pI. lA' no. 7 (top).
780
~ Great Palace. Area Ba:
r. ? x? X45.
I.

I. [+K]YPIA I [I] Mamboury and Wiegand, Kaiserpaliute, 12 no. 4 (where the

CIRCULAR [K]MIA2 787
location is said to be near the monumental staircase at the
[I]N~2H I. +KYPIAK
KYPIAKOY 'House of Justinian'). [2J Mamboury's notes.
I5DPSBS
[+K]Upta[K]OU ota(.6vou)s [i]vS(t.";;;voe)s~'
777 + ~UptCX1COU1tp(ec)s~(\)"tEPO\)S
I. tN (a) Stamp: (82) X90. KYPIAKOY DPE(CBYTEPOY)S
Unknown: I. (a) Stamp: 120 X75.
[K]YXPI
I. ? x? x 40-47, AM. 143 (old no. 192?). 785 Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
AKA[O]Y J. +KYPIA
iNp[ ..] . [I] Bardill neg. 94-7. I o. I. 340 x? x45.
KI5DPE:S [I] Mamboury's notes.
IC
+ KUPWKOU 1tP£(CPU"tEPOU)S (b) Stamp: 115-120 x 60-62.
e(EO)U xapte [K]UptUK[O]U (v(StKn;;;voe) [. Tokludede Mescidi: 1-3.
(a) Stamp' 98 x60.
(a) Stamp: 110 diameter. I.iAM44' 2. iAM 69. ).iAM8r.
St Euphemia in Hebdomon (Bakrrkoy) (location according to
Date: 502-33 or 5 17-20:or:532-35. See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. zd, Notes: 1-3. One brick measures 370 x 340 x40.
Sorlin-Dorigny, but no such church is known): I.
Ch.fo no.v. [I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze).
KYPIAKOY TIPECBYTEPOY I. MSBK no. unknown.
Remains.desrneyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagi: T. (c) Stamp: Approx. (80) x 58.
[I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 88 no. 26. [2J Lec1ercq,
x.? x?'K<f.f. KYPIAK(OY)S DPE(CBYTEPOY)S Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site
'Estampilles', col. 546 no. 9d. [)] DAI (Ist} neg. 2)40 (cast).
[r] Mamboury's notes. BI. north-east of church. wall north-west of pier 7, in situ: I.
[4J Mamboury's notes (from cast). Mango's notes (from cast).
781 I. no. 76.
J. KYPIAK (b) Stamp: 95 x 58.
[I] GP I, pl. 14 no. 76.
Balaban Aga Mescidi: 1.
2DPE:2 (d) Stamp: 1I8 x6),
I. 360 x 345 x40, iAM 107.
Kupu:;tx:( au)s 1tP£( c~U"t£PO"l)S Great Palace, excavations in Peristyle and Apsed Hall in
KYPIAK(OY)
[I] Mamboury's notes.
1953-55. In situ on fallen vault close to stone structure of
(3) Stamp: I) 5 x 70. (c) Stamp' 95 x 56.
ApsedHall: r.
778 Great Palace. Area Ab: I. Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38.
I .. ~I . AIQV2!:::>Y13 around central + 1.350 x 340 x 38, labelled no. 12.
I. 360 x330 x40. Mamboury records findspot as 'Ca': I.
[1] GP Il, 107, fig. 21 no. 7. [2] Mango, 'Review 1', 68 n. 2
EVC Kt)l?Hr~(ou) lB. (?) around central + [r] Mamboury's notes. I.36oX35ox45·
(mentioned).
[I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Several variants.
(d) Trace of upright of kappa in second line suggests ascription to
StWlP: approximately 94 diameter.
782 this type.
Date: after 475. See Part 11,Ch. 10 no. 14. I. KY[PIAK] 788
Stamp' (78) x )6. I. +KYPIAK
Kalenderhane Camii. Over the Diakonikon vault: l. Middle 2D[PE2] Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site OYDPSBS
step in hema: 2. Roof, filling wall: 3.
KU[ptClK( ou )]s ~[pe(c~u,ipou)s] Br:r.
I.())0)x(245)x40. 2.)75")15")6. ).(275)x(250)x)6, + KUptCXlCOU1tp(ec}s~(u"tEPOU)S
I. ?x?x40,no.43.
stamped twice. (a) Sarachanc: I.
[I] GP I, pI. 14 no. 4). [2] Russcll Papers, Miscellaneous (a) Sramp. r zo x60.
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', C2 (illustration compiled from I.No.J6S·
Remainder, box 38, neg. 214. [3J Talbot Rice archive neg. as Buyiikada (Prinkipo), St George Koudonas. Ayasma.
several variants). [I] Sarachane archive neg. 9.10.34.
[2]. [I] Mamboury's notes.
---~~--~------------------------~--I
'.
"~

284 CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE

KYPIAKOY nPECBY(TEPOY) WITH INDICTION (a) Stamp:r 14 x 28. 802

Land Walls. Silivri Kapi: 1. I. K]yqN€
789 793
I. )70 x )10 X4)-19, iAM 87.9.
I. +KYPlAK 1. INIlIIlAP€KYPIA K]up() NE()
[1] Bardill's notes.
lSnp€CBY lv(o,lCtl6ivoc) ~,' ~apE() KuplA(ou) (a) Stamp: (17) X20.
+ Kupuu,ou 1tpecpu(tEPOU) 798 Land \ValJs. Near tower 82.
(a) Stamp: 170 x 27. I. B]AKYdH
Date: 428/9 or 443/4 or 45819. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. le. [I] Meyer-Plath and Schneider. Landmauer, 148 no. 4.J.
(a) Stamp: ? x 60.
Miihiirdar Emin Pasa Sokagl: 1. p]a() Kup() <D,() [2] DAI (Isr) neg. 6610 (cast). [)] Mamboury's notes (from
Walls of Nessebar. Pavement no. 5 of tower no. 2.: I.
1.? X?X45' cast). Mango's notes (from cast).
1. 345 x 350 x?, dark brick. (a) Stamp: (106) x28.
er] Ognenova-Marinova, 'Briques', 113-J4 no. 15. lIS, fig. 108. [1] Marnboury's notes. [2] Mamboury, 'Nouvelle lecture', 123. Great Palace. excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site
803
(b) Stamp: 12ox61. B I, building north-east of church. pier 2, in situ: I.
I. B]AKYQN€
Great Palace. Area Ab: I. I. no. 86.
MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE CARRIED INDICTION
1.340 x320 x4°· [I] GP I, pI. '4 No. 86. ~]a() K~p() NE()
[I] Mamboury's notes. 794 (a) Stamp: (88) X22.
(c) Dethier possibly omitted to record the initial cross. The letter I. ]KYPIAB KYPI() <l>1() Unknown: I.
he illustrates as a lunare sigma was no doubt an epsilon. ] KupiA(OU) P 1. MSBK inv. 621 I. (70) X(IOO) x?
Hebdomon (Bakrrkoy). 799
\NZBVKYPI<DI [I] MSBK neg. 621 la. [2] DAI (1st) neg. 2344 (cast).
[I] Dethier, 'Makrikoy', 164 no. e', pI. lA' no. 7 (bottom}, The beta may be an indiction or an accessory. I.
(J] Mamboury's notes (from cast). [4] Mango's notes (from
(a) Stamp:? x )0. iv(o,lCtl6ivoc)~' ~a() Kup'() "',() cast).
Great Palace. AreaAc: I. (a) Stamp:r86 x )2.
I. ?X?X45.
'Bath' building beside the Myrelaion rotunda.
KYPIAKOY nPECBYTEPOY [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Penari isa [I] Talbot Rice, 'Bodrum Camii', 173, fig. II no. 6.
Camii', 183 no. 10 (mentioned). . .__
[2] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 264 no. '4e. [)] TalbotRice KYPI[
790 795 archive (rubbing).
I. KYPIAKOY
I. BAKYPIAa 804
]TIEllE
pa() KupiA(ou) 0 I. INIBAKYPI[
The typescript representation is taken from Meliopoulos. It
The delta may be an indiction or an accessory. iv(oum6ivoc) ,'pa( ) Kup'[
apparently represents a version of + KUP1.CX1(oU 1tP£C~U'tE:pou. KYP() MA() iv(ollm&ivoc) t" pa() Kup() t

(a) Ruins in Beylerbeyi (Sophianae palace?). (a) Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia. Court to the east of the apse:
(one). Under the threshold of the east door of the south aisle: 800 (a) Stamp: (171) x21.
[I] Meliopoulos, "I'opothesia', 229 no. 3. [2] Feissel,
(one). I. AMQV.lIAaIAJ.11 Vefa Kilise Camii. Foundation walls adjoining north facade of
'Inscriptions', 410 no. 11.3. [3] SEG 37 (1987) no. 1034.
[1] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari isa church. in Divan Efendi Sckagr (revealed during laying of
iv(oucn6ivoc) a,' pa() Kup() Ma( )
Camii', 183 no. 10 (mentioned). drains 9 June 19)1): (two) I.
(a) Srampr r Sy x j z. I'?X?X3cr35·
79' Unknown: 1. [1] Mamboury's notes.
I. Meliopoulos gives no indication of the layout of the stamp.
I. MSBKinv. 6191, ()7°) X)90 x?
+ KupwJ(ou npEcpUt£pou er] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 87 no. 14. [2] MSBK neg. 805
(a) Unknown. 6195'. [)] DAI (1st) neg. 2)47 (cast). [3] Mamboury's notes I. INllIEAP€KYPI[
[1] Meliopoulos, 'Niketiaton', 285. KYPI( ) <DI() (from cast). Mango's notes (from cast). iv(ollmOivoc) p,'jlape() Kopr]
(b) Stamp: 181 X)2.
iv(ollen6ivoc) p,'jlape() Kup() t
KY() <l>I() Unknown. r.
I. iAM (<;:K) no. 5', )80x)80 XII. (a) Sump: (180) x27.
796 [I] Mango's notes. Date: 428/9 or 44314 or 458/9. See Part H, Ch. 9, sect. le.
I. INSBKY<I>I Miihiirdar Emin Pasa Sokagt.
iv(o'lCtl6ivoc)~'/~'P() Ku() <I>,() [I] Mamboury's notes.
KYPli\(OY) (a) Stamp: 141 x28.
Fenari isa Camii: 1-2. KYP() NE()
WITHOUT INDICTION
I. )72 X(J40) X47-14, AM 176. 2. )90 x )16 x41-18, AM 21).
[I] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari WITH INDICTION KYP() T~()
792 •
I. Alqy.lI isa Camii', fig. 40 no. 25. [jj Bardill negs. 94.1 1.6a. 7a (I); 801 806
94.6.I)a (2). I. INIBAKyqN€
KupiA(OU) I. IN€KVPT€
iv(oum6ivoc),' pa() Kup() NE() iv(ouen6ivoc) e' Ku~() Te()
(a) Stamp: 1)1 X21 (lcfI)-) I (right). KYP() <l>1()
Unknown: I. (a) Stamp: 148 X2). (a) Stamp: 121 x)8.
1. ()41) X()2) X4D-48, AM 162. 797 Unknown: 1.
1. INBBAKYdH Great Palace. Are.a Ab: (several) 1-2.
[I] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari I. iAiVl (<;:K) no. 17, fragment, )61 x? x40' I. 360 x360x60. 2.36ox35ox50.
isa Carnii', fig. 39 no. 10. [3] Bardill neg. 94.10.Ila. po
iV(OllC"tl&iVOC) pa() Kup() "',() [I] Mango's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes.
 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE

KYP() <I>I() K(J)NCTANTINOY, K(J)(N)CTANTINOY (a) Stamp: 81 Xl8. (a) Stamp: 72 x?

Date: 49516 or poh I or 525/6. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad. Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
See KYPI() (!>I() See else KO(N)CTANTINOY, KONCTANTINOY. Tokludede Mescidi: 1-2. Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I.
KU>NCTANTINOY orKU>(N)CTANTINOY. dAM 65. 2. iAM 7I. I.380 x? x 50, once in che Hagia Eirene collection.
Notes: 1-2. One brick measures? x ? x 3 5. [I] Mamboury's notes. '
[t] Mamboury's notes. (b) Stamp: (75) x(55)·
Land Walls.
KYP[ Sr!jGLE-LrNE [I] DAI (Ist) neg. 6599 (cast). [2] Mamboury's notes (from
cast). [3] Mango's notes (from cast).
KU>N(CTANTINOY)
807 (c) Stamp~9ox55.
KU>NCTANTINOY
I. INB[I]BAKYP[ 8II Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
(V(Elm",VOC) ~[lr ~a Ku~[ 1. A+AKKWN 8'5 I. ? x? x45. •
!. +K(J)MCT
A+ ex 1C Krovfcrcv-dvou [I] Mamboury and Wiegand, Kaiserpaldste, 38 (top row, right).
(a) Unknown. AMTIMOY [2] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 267 no. 64C. [3] Mamboury's
[I] DAI (1st) neg. KB 5474. The significance oH. + u x is uncertain. [I]Nb.2 B notes,
(a) Stamp: ISOX30. + Kcovcccvelvco [i]v8(1K"tl&VOC)S~' (d) Stamp (99) x6).
Sea Walls. Near tower 8: I. Hagia Sophia. South-west corner, loose brick on vault exposed
(~) Stamp: 135 x85'
I. 370 x360 x40' when the roof over the washing fountains was removed.
er] Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 15 with n. 2, 16, fig. Unknown: I.
[I] Van Nice archive (rubbing).
KY() <I>I() 17. no. I. [2] Mamboury's notes, I. MSBK no. unknown. (e) Stamp: 99 x68.
[I] DAI (1st) neg. 2344 (cast). [2] Mamboury's notes (from Hagia Eirene. Southern side of atrium: I.
See KYPI() (!>I( )
cast). [3] Mango'S notes (from cast). I. 355 x355 x 50.

MULTIPLE-LINE
,.. .--- isa Kapr Mescidi. South wall: I.
I. Found in r96r, private ownership ofH. Hallensleben.
[I] George, St. Eirene,pl.
(f) Stamp: 101 x70'
re no. 10.

[I] Oriiken, isa Kap~ Mescidi, 50,375, pl. 14b. Date: 533-35. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ab.
WITH IND1CTION Hagia Sophia. Constructions of the north-west court: I.
KY[ I. ? x? x 53.
KU>NST(ANTINOY) 816
I. +[K(J)NCT] [I] Mamboury's notes.
WITH INDICTION 812 (g) Stamp: 101 x70'
ANTIN
1. Nct€ Unknown: I.
808 15INb.2H
I.IN1€KY[
iTI l. ?x?x42,AM245.

KU>N + [KwVCt]CXVtlVOU iv8{lKtl&VOC)s 11' [I] Bardill neg. 94.12.)).

iv(8u('tl&voc) te" Kc]
Kcovscfcvrfvou) 1\!6(\lC't\&voc) e" (a) Stamp: (52) X 77. (h) Stamp: 102 x70'
(a) Stamp: (71) X)). Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-)8. Site Date: 533-35. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. zb.
(a) North-east corner of the garden of Blachernai.
Myrelaion debris. BI, building north-west of church (debris): I. Unknown: I.
[r] Mamboury's notes.
[I] TalbotRice, 'Bodrum Camii', 17),fig.1I no. '5. [2]Talbot I. no. 29.
1.380 x 375 x47-53. three fingermarks making an Scshape
Rice archive (rubbing). [I] GP I, pl. 14 no. 29. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous applied before the stamp, AM 212.
KU>NCT(ANTINOY) Remainder, box 38, neg. 203. [3] Talboc Rice archive neg. as [I] Bardill negs. 94.6. loa, I la, I2a.
809 [,].
I. IM€IBAdIU[ Hagia Sophia. Constructions of the north-west court, large,
813 (b) Stamp: (87) x (60).
iv(Bum",voc) et' pa~() Ku] !. +K(J)NCTS thick surrounding wall: I.
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site
INb.SA I.? x? X40.
(a) Stamp: (I55) X)O. B I, building north-west of church (debris): r .
1. ? x ? x 40, no. 46.
[I] Marnboury's notes.
Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: I. + Kevcncvetvco)e iVO(llC'tl&VOC)S 0;'
I. ))0 x ()IO) x48. [I] GP I, pl. I4 no. 46. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous (i) Stamp: 102 x(62).
(a) Stamp: 1)5 x 56.
er] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', Azo. Remainder, box 38, neg. 216. [3J Talbot Rice archive neg. as Structures behind the Istanbul Archaeological Museum: I.
Unknown: 1-.1.
[2]. t.? x? x45.
1. 365 x 360 x43-47, AM 232. 2.370 x 365 x 40-44, AM 330.
[I]Ulker,Proje, 59.
[I] Bardill negs. 94.12.12, I) (I); 95.5.)8; 95.6.1, 2 (2).
Gl Stamp: 10) x(65).
MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE CARRIED INDICTION Hagia Sophia. South-west room, horologion.
KU>NCTANTINO(Y) [r] Van Nice archive (rubbing).
8,0 WITHOUT INDICTION
(k) Stamp: r05 X70'
I. +KY[
814 Date: 533-35. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. ab.
KU>NCTAN(TINOY)S
+Ku[ !. INb.2
Hagia Sophia. Constructions of the north-west court: I.

(a) Stamp: ? X)).

TIN02 817 1·370x37ox55·
CTAN 1. +K(J)N
Kucukyah. Port beside the sea: 1. [I] Mamboury's notes.
+K(J)N CTANS <I) Stamp: 105 x 70.
I.? X? X20.
[1] Mamboury's notes. + KrovctaV'tivo(u)s iv(o\lC't\&voc) 8' s + Kmvcrcvfrtvoojs Unknown: 1-3.
 ..~
288
•
CATALOGUE CATALOGUE

r.iAM«(:K) )5. 2. iAM«(:K) 35'. ). iAM «(:K) 47. KUJNCTAN(TINOY) (b) Stamp: 120 x 60. (b) Stampr roa x64.
Notes: 1-3. The bricks measure 370 x 370 x 50,380 x 370 x 50, Unknown: I. . Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38: I.
819
365 x36ox55· I.Once in Robert College, fragment, ? x ? x 45. I. Labelled no. 22.
1. +KUJN
lrl Mango's notes. [I] Mango's notes (rubbing). [1] Talbot Rice archive photo.
CTAN
(m) Stamp' (lOO) x (60). (c) Stamp' (75) (from left. to right of omega) x 58. (c) Stamp: 105 X62.
Hagia Sophia. South-east buttress. + Kcovcrcvrtivou) Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri Great Palace. Area Ac: 1.
[r] Van Nice archive (rubbing). (a) Stamp' 1 x 50. Length probably 65. (Beyazrt), 1928. Great wall to the south of, and parallel to, the I.370X360X65·
(n) Stamp: 107 x70' Walls of Nessebdr. Pavement no. 5 oftower no. 2: I. drain, and to the right of the southern base: 1. [I] Mamboury's notes.
Hagia Sophia. South-east buttress, second window sill below I. Fragment. 1.390X38ox4°. (d) Stamp' 11) x6).
top sill: I. Lying around in the approaches to or room of the [I] Ognenova-Marinova, 'Briques', 114-15 no. 21, II6, fig. 111. (I] Mamboury's notes. Unknown: I.
south-east buttress: 2. (b) Stamp' (75) x 58. (d) Stamp' (84) x (5 5)' 1. MSBK inv. 619). (270) x (280) x 1

1-2. One of the bricks measures 365 x 360 x? Unknown: I- [I] MSBK neg. 619)a. [2] DAI (1st) neg. 2)48 (cast).
Kalenderhane Camii. South-east chamber, floor: I.
[r]Antoniades,HagiaSophia,i. 83, fig. 9. [2] Swift,Hagia r. (177) x{r ro) X40. I. MSBKinv. 62}I, (no) x(I40) x? [3] Mamboury's notes (fr6rn cast). [4] Mango's notes (from
Sophia, 50 no. I. [3] Gray. 'Brickstamps', 51 n. I (almost [I] Peschlow, 'Bricksramps', B27. [I] MSBK neg. 62) la. [2] DAI (1st) neg. 2349 (cast). cast).
certainly referring to the same example as Antoniades and (c) Stamp' 108 x7J. [3J Mamboury's notes (from cast). [4] Mango's notes (from (e) Stamp: rt5'6).
Swift). [4] Bardill neg. 94.8.8 (I). cast). Great Palace, excavations in Peristyle and Apscd Hall in
(0) Stamp: 107 x60. Found in the process of opening a runnel from the central nave
(e) Stamp' 106 x(5)). 1953-55' In similar locations to k and I: I.
Unknown: I. of Hagia Eirene.
, Great Palace, excavations in Peristyle and Apsed Hall in I. Labelled no. 7.
[r] Ramazanoglu, Sointe-Irene, fig. 3. [2] Mamboury,
1. ()05) x(I75) x 52-60. AM 472. '953-55' r. Notes: General measurements 350 x 330 x 50.
'Noovelle lecture', 124. [3] Mamegris, 'Hagia Sophia', 289
[I] BardiJlnegs. 95.15-26. 27. 1.360 x? X40' labelled no. 3. [I] GPII. I07. fig. 21 no. + [2] Talbot Rice archive photo.
(mentioned as + Kcvcecvelvoo +). [4] Schneider, 'Review'
(p) Stamp: III x70' [I] Talbot Rice archive photo. [2] Mamboury's notes. (f) Srampr r r y x65'
(mentioned as +KONCTANTINOY).
Unknown: 1-4. (f) Stamp: 110 X6o. Unknown: I.
1. 370 x 362 x4Q-44, AM 221 (old no. 4). 2.380 x375 x47, AM Unknown: ]-2. Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. za. I. iAM unnumbered, (270) x (200) X40, brick carved with a face
226 (old no. 4). ).)80X)59x45.AM228. 4.)75'(225)x 1. 1x ? X42.AM 244. 2. (jco) x(t85) x45-5o.AM·4if Se Polyeuktos. Level 700*: I. Level 782: 2. and a fish.
40-5). AM 47r. [I] Bardill negs. 94.12.)2 (I); 95-1 5.)2-4 (2). r. No. 57!. 1. No. 262. [I] Mango and Sevcenko, 'Inscriptions', 24 no. 32. [2] SEC 28
[I] Bardill negs. 94.6.26a. 27a. 28a (I); 94.12.1. 2 (2). 5 ()); (cl) Stamp: Il2 x 80. Notes: 1-2. One brick measures? x? x 35. (1978) no. '59). [)] Dumbarton Oaks Photographic
94.14.15-18 (2);95-15-24. 25 (4)· Walls found in Alemdar Caddesi during laying of drains. Top [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 212, E25. [2] Sarachane archive neg. Collectionnegs. L67.3'65-6 (1. Sevcenko).
(q) Stamp' (9)) x 54. of the street: I. 5 .40. rea (2). (g) Stamp' rI 5 x 68.
Land Walls. W8)/84. I. 36ox36ox38.
(g) Unknown. Hagia Sophia. Exonarthex, repairs to paving beside second door
[I] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, 149 no. 12.2. [r] Mamboury's notes, [I] DAI (1st) neg. KB 5482. from north leading to narthex, opposite north jamb of door.
[2] DAI (1st) neg. 6599. [)] Mamboury's notes (from cast). (e) Stamp: Approx. 112 X72. (h) Stamp'(77)x(55). [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Van Nice archive (rubbing).
(r) Stamp' 1 x55. Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Sire Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site (h) Stamp' 1'5 x65'
Rumeli Hisan. Loose. BI: r. Unknown: I.
Br, building north-east of church, pier 7 in arch: 1-2. Site Br,
[r] Mamboury's notes. building north-east of church, pier I, in situ. I. ? x ? x 50, no. 5. I.? x? x45-50, AM24I.
(s) Ruins in Beylerbeyi (Sophianae palace?). [I] GP I. pI. '4 no. 5. [2] Russell Papers. Miscellaneous [I] Bardill neg. 94.12.28.
I. no. 45. 2. no. 83a.
[I] Meliopoulos, "I'opothesia', 229 no. 4. [2] Feissel, Remainder, box 38, neg. 185. [3] Talbot Rice archive neg. as (i) Sramp. r re xey.
[I] GP I. pI. '4 no. 45. 83'.
<Inscriptions', 410 no. 11+ [3J SEC 37 (1987) no. 1034· (f) Stamp' rI4 x 76. [2]. Unknown: I.
(t) Unknown. (i) Stamp' (95) x(56). I. 358 x35l X47-54,AM225'
Hagia Eirene. Southern side of atrium: I.
[I] DAI (1st) neg. KB 547). Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site [I] Bardill negs. 9+6')5". )6a.
r. )55 X)55 X44·
(u) Unknown, r. BI, building north-west of church (debris): 1. (j) Stamp: rI8 x6).
[r] Georgc,St. Eirene, pl. 16 no. 9.
1. iAM (unnumbered). 1. ?x?x40,no.6I. Unknown: I.
(g) Probably from the area of the excavations in ]946-47 between
[I] Dumbarton Oaks Photographic Collection neg. L72.751 [I] GP I, pl. 14 no. 61. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous I. MSBK inv. 6219, (100) x (140) x?
Hagia Sophia and Hngia Eircne: 1.
(I. Sevcenko). Remainder, box 38, neg. 226. [I] MSBK neg. 62120. [2] DAI (1st) neg. 2)48 (cast).
I. Once in the Hagia Eirene collection.

[I] Mamboury's notes. 0) Erenkoy. [3] Mamboury's notes (from cast). [4] Mango's notes (from
(h) Stamp' (45) x 80. [I] Meliopoulos, 'Ta Honoratou', 216 no. I. cast).
Hagia Sophia. Atrium, south wing, space below gallery. (k) Stamp' r r 8 x 62.
KUJNCTAN(TINOY)C
[I] Van Nice archive (rubbing). Great Palace, excavations in Peristyle and Apsed Hall in
8,8 KUJNCTANTIN(OY)S 1953-55. Fil1ing vaulted chambers adjoining the Apsed Hall to
I. +KUJN the south-west, 5-6 m. below top of vault: (numerous) I.
82,
CTANC 1. ? x ? x 58, labelled no. 6. 2. Labelled no. 22.
r. +KUJNCT
+ Korvcrcvrrivou)« 820 Notes: General measurements 3 50 x 330 x 50.
ANTINS
I. Probably the same as 817, 818, or 819 (5, C, or nothing terminates [I] Talbot Rice, Byzantines, 81, fig. 9. [2] Talbot Rice archive
(a) Saray Burnu: 1. + Krovc'tuV'tl.v(ou)s
the inscription). photo. [3] Mamboury's notes.
LiAM.
(a) Stamp' (85) x(55)· (I) Stamp' (101) x60.
[I] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stamp' (76) x 54.
Land Walls. Wal1 between towers 95 and 96a: I. Great Palace, excavations in Peristyle and Apsed Hall in 1953-
(b) Stampr co x ej , Kalcnderhnne Camii. Unknown: 1-2.
1. ? x? x30' 55. In filling of vaulted chambers adjoining the Apsed Hall to
Yalova. Dome of baths (Valide Hamanu): (numerous). r. (185) x (t05) x )8. 2. (2) 5) x (165) x 4).
[I] Mamboury's notes. the south-west, 5-6 m. below top of vault: (numerous) 1-2.
[1] Mamboury's notes. [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', B26.
 ..~.•
CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE

I. ? X ? X 46, labelled no. 6. 2. Mamboury records an example (a) Stamp: (60) X62.
K(J)NCTANTIN(OY)S or K(J)(N)CTANTIN(OY)S 830
measuring 360 x? x 55, labelled no. 6. Excavation of the Diakonissa complex near Istanbul
I. +K(J)
Notes: General measurements 350 x 330 x 50. University, 1943-46: I. 827
+K(J)[ [NsiT[S]
[I] T albot Rice archive photo. [2] Mamboury's notes. I. Mamboury states that the brick is in the Museum. I.
IN<l2
(m) Stamp: (Ioo)x6a. [I] Prrarh, 'Trois eglises', 1]2, 177, pl. 7(b) no. 8. A T[
Date: 5°7-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. H. [2] Mamboury's notes. + Kro[v(c)s]t(av'ivou)[s] iv6(11<IliOvoc)~' /~.
+ Kro[vcr]av,[iv(ou)s]
St Polyeukros. Level 736: l. Level 904: 2. (b) Stamp: II6x65· + Kro[(v)cr]av,[iv(ou)s] (a) Stamp: 85 diameter.
J. No. 315. 2. No. 373. Date: c.532/3. See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. ab. Great Palace. Area Ab, collapsed vault: I.
Notes: 1-2. One brick measures? x? x 3 5-40. It is Cp. 821 or 825.
•• Hagia Sophia. Wall with exedras, Caferiye Soka~. I.? x? X35.
questionable whether these two fragments bore the [I] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stamp: (58 mm. from Jeft side IO upright of tau) X62. [I] Maniboury's notes. [2] Mamboury and Wiegand,
impression of the same die. (c) Stamp: "3 x63' Hexagon complex in Giilhane. Nearby debris: I. Kaiserpaldste, 36 (mentioned).
[r] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 212, B26. [2] Sarachane archive negs. Unknown: •. I. ?x?x37.

HO.aoa (I), Hl.Ia (a). I. 370 x 342 x 36-42, AM 327. [I] Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 104, fig. 119 no. 2.
(n) Stamp: (89) x(54). [I] Bardill negs. 95.5-27, 28, 29. [2] Mamboury's notes. WITHOUT INDICTION
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site
K(J)NCTANTlNO(Y)
BI:J. 823
J.? x?x45,no. 8. r. +K(J)C CIRCULAR 8JI
Er] GPI,pl. ra no. 8. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous TAN t.HIIlQ
Remainder, box 38, neg. 187. [3] Talbot Rice archive neg. as WITH INDICTION CTAI1
+ Koo(v)ctav(·d.vou)
[a].
K(J)N(CTANTlNOY) KIDIIl
(a) Stamp: 75"75.
(0) Stamp: (lIO) x(65).
Great Palace. Area Ab: Kovcecvetvcrc)
Unknown: I.
I.
828
I.380 x360 x45. +KW (a) Stamp: 92 diameter.
r. iAM(<;:K)no. 78,? x? x40. I.

[I] Mango's notes.

[I] Mamboury's notes. N2IN Date: 507-22. See Part 11,Ch. 9, sect. 23.
(p) Hebdomon (Bakirkoy). <lE: St Polyeuktos. Level 279: I. Level jpj": 2. Level 678: 3. Level
824 700*: 4-6. Level 725*: 7. Level 737! 8. Level xjs: 9-10. Level
[I] Derhier, 'Makrikoy', 166 no. 1<;1,pl. lA' no. 15. + Krcvfcrcv'rivoujs iVO(1.K'tlrovOC)
E'
r. Probably the same as 812 or 823. 880'~: 11. Level 1015* (pier, eastern end, debris): 12. Level
(q) Stamp:? x65'
(a) Stamp: (75) x(66). . (a) Stamp: 74" 72. 1237r,: 13-14. Level t330A: If-16. Unknown: ]7-18.
Sea Walls. West of the monumental staircase and north of the
Myrelaion debris. Date: 496/7 or 5 I 1112 or 52617. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad. 1. No. '94· 2. No. 686. 3. No. 357. 4· No. 497· 5·No. 499·
railway, area Fa: l.
[I] Talbot Rice, 'Bodrum Camii', 173, fig. Il no. 13. [2] Talbor Tokludede Mescidi: r . 6. No. 502. 7. No. 3'4. 8. No. )66. 9. No. 333. 10. No. 3)5.
I. ? x? X45.
Rice archive (rubbing). 1.?X?X40,lAM58. 11. No. 614. 12. No. 1336. 13· No. 1224. 14. No. 1225.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Mango's notes (from squeeze). 15· No. 1151. 16. No. II72. 17. No. 258. 18. No. 421.
(r) Samanlr Dag: (two).
(b) Stamp: 92 x85. Notes: 1-18. One brick measures ? x? X39.
[I] Gedeon, 'Engraphci', 390.
Great Palace. Area Ab, in situ in collapsed vault: I. [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 215, C7. [2] Sarachane archive neg.
(5) Meliopoulos gives no indication of the layout of the K(J)(N)CTANTlN(OY)
I.395x?x4°. 5·39·35 (3)·
inscription.
Unknown.
825 [1] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mamboury and Wiegand, (b) Stamp: 95 diameter.
r. +K(J)CT Kaiserpaldste, 36 (mentioned). Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
[I] Meliopoulos, 'Niketiaron', 285.
ANTlNS (c) Stamp: 92 x 8c. l.? x? x50.
(t) Possibly of tills type.
Great Palace. Area Ab, collapsed vault: I. [t] Mamboury's notes.
Silivri. + Kro(v)ctavtlv(oU)S
1.380 x 375 x 50. (c) Date: c. 5)2/3. See Pan Il, Ch. 9,sect. ab.
Et] Dirimrekin, 'Selymbria', 33 no. 8. (a) Stamp: 125 x65. [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mamboury and W;egand, Hagia Sophia. Ruins in front of the west doors, demolished
(u) Possibly of this type, although the typescript representation Date: after 532. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. 2C.
shows A rather than A.
Kaiserpaliisce, 36 (mentioned). November 1873.
Baths of Zeuxippos.
(d) Stamp: 80 diameter. [I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 92 no. 48; pl, 14 no. 10.
Excavations near the University, in Btiyiik Resit Pasa Caddesi. [I] Schneider,'Ziegelsrempel', 267 no. 64b. [2] Mamboury and Land \Valls. Pteron.
[I] Schneider, 'Aquadukr', col. 75. \Viegand,Kaiserpa/a'ste, 38 (centre row, right). 2. H Q
[I] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, 149 no. 12.1.
(v) Possibly of this type, although the sketch shows A rather than [3] Mamboury's notes. CTAIIl
(2) DAI (1st) negs. 660a (cast) and KB 5476 (brick).
A. KIDIIl
In the area of the excavations undertaken in 1946-47 and
Krovcrcvrivolu}
1958-60 between Hagia Eirene and Hagia Sophia. K(J)NST(ANTlNOY)S
K(J)(N)CTANTlNOY
[I] Dirimtekin, 'Fouilles', 180no. I. (a) Stamp: 93 diameter.
829 Retaining wall and barrel vault between the church of the
826 I. +K(J)
r. +K(J)CTA Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia and the Basilica Cistern
N2T2
TINOY+ (Yerebatan Sarayt): r.
IN<lE:
K(J)(N)CTAN(T1NOY) I.? x? x50.
+ Kw(v)ctaVtlVOu + + Krov(c)S-r(a.V'tlVOU)S iVO(U('tlroVOC) E~ [I] Mamboury's notes.
822
(a) Stamp: 150 x 60. (b) Stamp: 93 diameter.
I. +K(J)C (a) Stamp: 80 x 84.
Great Palace. Area Ab, collapsed vault: J. Unknown: I.
TAIIl+ Great Palace. Area Ab, in situ in collapsed vault.
1.38ox?x50. I. Fragment, ? x? X 55, lAM 31.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mamboury and wicgand,
+ Kw(v)cto:v(·dvou) + [I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes.
Kaiserpaldste, 36 (mentioned).
------------------------------------------------------------------------~----------------------------------------------------~~

CATALOGUE CATALOGUE
.
,,~

293
3- Probably the same as type J or 2. 1. No. 28o. 2. No. J86. 3. No. 8°3. 4. No. 361. 5. No. 129. 1. No. 72. 2. No. 38. 3. No. 77.
(a) Stamp: J 10 diameter. 6. Found before excavations (possibly one of bricks 1-5). Notes: 1-3. One brick measures? x? x 34-37.
Great Palace. Area Ac: J. Notes: 1-5. One brick measures? x? x 22-30. :s: [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 217, D8. [2] Sarachane archive neg.
1. ?x?x40. [I] Dirimtekin, 'Sarachane', fig. q (right). [2] Hill, +KUJV1»[ 9.12.17 ()).
[I] Mamboury's notes. 'Brickstamps', 215, C8. [3] Sarachane archive neg. IO·3·I3a (5). (b) Stamp: 185 (72+ 41 + 72) x 60 (16 +27 + 17)'
8. INO Ruins on Saray Burnu (orphanage ofSt Paul?): 1.
+ Kcivfctcvcivcu) i.v8(lK-n&VOC)s [
4. LiV11T 1. (270) X (200) x 40-4).
~V1[AT]
CTVV1 (a) Stamp: (ra6) x(70). [I] Unger, 'Seraispitze', fig. 10 no. 6.
.• [K(J)NC]
KlIIV1 Date: 507-22. See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. aa.
[KroVctO:]V-rlVO(U) St Polyeukcos. Level 13 I (fallen vault, debris): I. Level 138
Kcovcruvcivofu)

(a) Stamp: 90 diameter.

Dethier, supposing the inscription to be in Latin. wrongly restored (fallen vault. debris): 2. Level 140 (fallen vault. debris): 3.
"'i
it as [A]NTONI[NIA]. Mango proposed the Greek 1. No. 63. 2!No·97· 3·No. 31. +1V1VSLSNAff
Rhegium (Kiiciik Cekmece). Bath to the south-west of the
[A]NTONI[Oy]. The facts that the stamp was circular (according Notes: 1-3. One brick measures? x? x 35-40. :s:
Acropolis: 1. [I] Hill, 'Bricks tamps', 1.18, DIO. [2J Sarachane archive neg.
to Derhier) and that the letters were arranged in straight lines The N is curious, since we would expect O'I, as on 834.1, 2; 835.1.
I.? x? x 50. 5-4t.r4 (I).
suggests that it was similar to type 7, and that only line 1 and two Hence:
[I] Mamboury's notes.
letters of line 2 survived. The stamp may not have belonged to type
KCDNC(T ANTINOY)
+ iVO(tKtlOOVOC)Sy'Kroy~('tav"ttvou) Pae()
7, since Dethier's typescript representation does not show the nu in
5. LiV11T
line I inverted. although this may be an oversight. (a) Stamp: ,80 (= 70 + )9 + 7') x(59)(= 1 +)4 + 1).
V1VT:) 8}4. '
Rubble in front of the Sea Walls on Saray Burnu: I.
KlIIV1 (a) Hebdomon (Bakrrkoy). I. "'i 1. (270) x (260) X 40-4).

Kcovcmvrivofu)
[I] Derhier, 'Makrikoy', 162 no. A'. [2] Mordtmann, +IW7USOQAff
[I] Unger, 'Seraispitze', fig. 10 no. 7.
(a) Stamp: 95 diameter.
Konssantinopel.ss, [3] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 84 no. s
IC. [4] Mango, 'Brick Stamps'j ar ,
Great Palace. Area Ab, pillars, collapsed vault: I.
+ iVO(lK"tl&VOC) P' Krovcrrcv'nvou) ~C(p() 837
1.370X360X45· 9· Probably the same as type I or 7. (a) Stamp: 192 x60. L "'i
+INJ'.2rSOPAffl
[I] Mamboury's notes. (a) Date: 507-12. See Part I1, Ch. 9, sect. aa. Date: 508/9, See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. la.
(b) Stamp: 90-93 diameter. St Polyeuktos. Level 98: I. Level 138 (fallen vault, debris): 2. St Polyeuktos. Level IJI (fallen vault, debris): 1-3. Level 140
s:
Rubble in front of Sea Walls onSaray Bumu: I. r. No. 248 . .2. No. 94. (fallen vault, debris): 4-7. Level 229: 8-11. Level60J'1-: 12. Wall + iv8(lKnrovoc)s y' pap() KrovC(-rO:V'tlVOU) t

1. 370 x 360 x40-50' [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 215, C7-8. west of slip road: 13-17. Unknown: 18-26. The significance of the final iota is unclear. It may be an accessory,
[IJ Unger, 'Seraispitze', fig. 10 no. 4a. [2] Schneider, LNo.5). 2.No.6o. ).No.67. 4.No.). 5.No.6. 6.No.9. although no similar stamp carries one.
'Ziegelsrempel', 267 no. 64f. 7. No. 21. 8. No. 230. 9. No. 235. 10. No. 240. II. No. 241.
(c) Stamp: 90-93 diameter. (a) Stamp: 190 X70.
12. No. 1374. 13· No. 130. 14. No. 132. 15. No. 133. 16. No.
Rubble in front of Sea Walls on Saray Burnu: I. Date: 509!rO. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. za.
139. 17· No. 140. 18. No. I365· 19. No. 1}66. 20. No. 1367.
I. 370 x36ox4Q-50. CRUCIFORM 11. No. 1368. 22. No. 1369. 13. No. 1370. 24. No. 1371. St Polyeuktos. Level 131 (fallen vault, debris): 1-7. Level 138
Ruins on Saray Bumu (orphanage of St Paul?). 25· No. 1372. 26. No. 1373. (fallen vault, debris): 8. Level 140 (fallen vault, debris): 9-13.
KCDN(CTANTINOY)
[I] Unger, 'Seraispitze', fig. 10 no. 4b. [2] Schneider, Notes: 1-26. One brick measures 365 x 3 55 x 40. Level 143 (fallen vault, debris): 14. Level 165: 15. Building A,
'Ziegelstempel', 267 no. 64f. 832 [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 2I7. D7. [2J Sarachane archive neg. conduit: 16. Unknown: 17.

6. LiV11T
1. "'i 4·6.20a. L No. 4). 2. No. 48. ). No. 49. 4- No. 50. 5. No. 59· 6. No.
+QAffS12J'.V1I+ 66. 7. No. 69· 8. No. 95. 9· No. 2. 10. No. 16. r r. No. 22.
[N]VTJ :s: 12. No. 25. 13. No. 29. 14. No. 182. 15. No. 82. J6. No. 34.
[N](J))1
+ i.v8(uc'tt&voc)s '(Krov(ctav'tivou) pap() + 17. No. 154.
Kevcecfv ]t([v ]0(") Notes: 1-17. One brick measures 375 x? X35-40.
(a) Stamp: 187 x 64- + (vo(UC'tl&voc) P' Kcvccrcvrfvoo)
(a) Stamp: 110 diameter.
~"p() [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 2IS, D9. [2] Sarachane archive negs.
Date: 509!J o. Sec Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. za.
Great Palace. Area Ac. (a) Stamp: 200 x 59. 9·6.24a (7), 10.2.)6 (r 5)'
St Polyeuktos. Level 131 (fallen vault. debris): 1-5. Level 138
[I] Mamboury's notes. (fallen vault, debris): 6--9. Levcl r ac (fallen vault. debris): 10-20. Date: 508/9. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. za. Land Walls. Tekfur Sarayr, west wall: (three).
St Polyeuktos. Unknown: I. [I] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, 150 no. 28.1, 28.2.
Level 142: 21-2. Level 216: 23. Level 233: 24. Level 272: 25-6.
7. IV1Q I.No. 143}. [2] DAI (1st) neg. 6595 () fragments).
Level 1324*: 27. Level 1371*: 28. Unknown: 29-30.
~V1VT [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 218, DI4.
1. No. 44· 2. No. 45· ). No. 47· 4· No. 64. 5· No. 65. 6. No.
KlIIV1C 838
80. 7, No. 81. 8. No. 89· 9. No. 91. 10. No. 4. H. No. 10.
Kccvctcvtlvofu) 1. Probably the same as 832.1, 834.1-2, 835.1.
12. No. II. 13. No. 14. 14. No. 18. IS. No. 24. 16. No. 26.
(a) Stamp: 80 diameter. 17· No. 36. 18. No. 165. 19. No. 166. 20. No. 167. 21. No. (a) Date: probably 508/9 or 509!ro. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. za.
Date: 507-12. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. za. 175· 22. No. 176. 23· No. 159· 24· NO·445· 25· No. 1139. St Polyeukros. Level 37: I. Level 13 I (fallen vault. debris): 2-7·
26. No. Il40. 27· No. 1277. 28. No. 1368. 29. No. 469. Level 140 (fallen vault, debris): 8-24. Level 143 (fallen vault,
Unknown: 1-2. + iv8(tK"tlOOVOC)S y' Kcrvcfccvt ivou) ~C(p()
30. No. 1364. • debris): 25. Level 165: 26. Level 229: 27-29. Wall west of slip
1.(225) x(295) x )0-)5> AM 476. 2. (285) x(250) x )6, AM 477.
Notes: I-30. One brick measures 365 x 35 5 x 35-43. (a) Stamp: (165) x 6). road: 30. Building A, conduit: 31. Unknown: 32-35.
[I] Bardill negs. 95.1 5-35,)7 (,),)8 (2). L No. )0). 2. No. 46. ). No. 55· 4· No. 56. 5. No. 58. 6. No.
[1] Harrison, 'Polyeuktos', pl, 269, fig. 6. [2] Hill, Date: 509110. See Part U, Ch. 9, sect. zn.
StPolyeuktos. Level 61: J. Level 332: 2. Level 392: }. 'Brickstamps', 217, D6. [3] Harrison, Temple, 71, fig. 74 (left). Sr Polyeuktos. Level 131 (fallen vault, debris): I. Level 140 61. 7. No. 71. 8. No. I. 9. No. 8. 10. No. I2. 11. No. 13·
Lcvcl yje: 4. Wall west of slip-road: 5. Unknown: 6. [4] Sarachane archive negs. 4·6. I 5 (7), 9.6.29a (26). (fallen vault, debris): I. Level 147: 3. 12. No. 15. [3. No. 17. 14· No. 19· IS· No. 20. 16. No. 23·
 -------------------~----------------------------------------------~~~I

294 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE

..
"~

295
17· No. 27· IS. No. 28. 19. No. 30. 20. No. 37. 21. No. 168. K<D(N)CTANTINOY K[ AE( )
22. No. 169. 23. No. 170. 24. No. 171. 25- No. 183_ 26. No.
87· 27· No . .2I6. 28. No. 233. 29. No. 238. 30. No. 138. See K(J)NCTANTINOY, K(J)(N)CTANTINOY and 845 85'
}1. No. 35· 32. No. 190. 33. No. 204. 34· No. 319- 35. No. KO(N)CTANTINOY, KONCTANTINOY, I. IVlfulK[ 1. INfBAAE:
)21. KQ)NCTANTINOY or K(J)(N)CTANTINOY.
ivo( \KtlooVOC)0" K[ (V(OlKtlooVOC)y" ~a() A£()
[J] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 2 J 7>D6-8.
(a) Stamp: (86) x j g, (a) Sramp. ree x aj.
Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri Date: 449/50. See Parr Il, Ch. 9, sect. re.
839
I. [~] (Beyazu}, 1928. Great wall to the south of, and parallel to, the St john of Sroudios. Nave floor, north strip, repair: 1.
drain, and [Q the right of the southern base: I. Paving of nave immediately south of the southern stylobate of
+IVlV2[ .8nQAH] K<D(N)CTANTI(N)OY
;s: I. ? x? X40. the bema, repair: 2.
[I] Mamboury's notes. I.370X37ox? 2·370x370x?
+ (vo( lKtlooVOC)s[. "Km ]v[ c(ecvttvou) ~ap( )] CIRCULAR
[I] Peschlow, Studioskirche,'(in preparation). [2] Bardillneg.
(a) Stamp: (109) x(5)). Left arm JZ high, 80 long. 842 846 96.2.24a.
Unknown: I. I. m I. IN8BAK[
852
I. Once in Robert College,? x? X40. K(J)XCT
(v(o",""oovoc) 9' ~a() K[ I. INSBAAE
[I] Mango's notes (rubbing). ANATH5
INPIB (a) Stamp: ? x28. iV(OlKnooVOC)<;' ~a() A£()
IC \ 'Unknown: 1-2.
(a) Stamp: 115 X30.
I. JAM (<;:K) no. 80. 2. JAM (<;:K) no. 80a.
8(eo)u X6:ptC Kro(v)c'tCXv'ti(v)ouiv(ouC'nwvoc) tW Notes: 1-2. One brick measures ? x? X45.
Retaining wall and barrel vault between the church of the
K(J)NCTAN(TINOY) Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia and the Basilica Cistern
(a) Stamp: 108 diameter. Iil Mango's notes. (Yerebaran Sarayr): I.
840 Date: 503/4 or 51 8/9 or 533/4. Sec Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad, Ch. 10
I. 370 X 370 x 50.
no. 7. ..-"" 847
1. "'
ro [I] Mamboury's notes.
Substructures south of Cemal Nadir Sokagi. Interior of I. +INIAK[
+KQ)VlPCT[A]N (b) Retaining wall and barrel vault between the church of the
substructure: 1-3.
;s: + iV(OllC'tlOOVOC) la' ~[ Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia and the Basilica Cistern
1-2. Loose. 3. Mortar impression.
(Yerebatan Sarayi): I.
Notes: 1-3. One brick measures 385 x? x 50. (a) Stamp: (IOO)XJ2.
I. 360X360X40-50.
+ Kcrvce]' et]v( eivoo) iv3( UC"ttrovoc)s "(' [r] Wulzinger, 'Substruktionsbauten', 381, fig. 8 no. 4. Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: I.
[IJ Kleiss, 'Grabungen', fig. 12.
(a) Stamp: 190C75 +40+ 1) x 58 (15 + 28 + 15). [2] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempcl', 268 no. 92. I. (275) x(2)5) x 55·
Date: 509/10. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. za. [IJ Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', A16. 853
St Polyeuktos. Level 22.9: 1-2. Level 692: 3. In mortar make-up 1. [1]VllllA VE:
843
between r r r S and II 19*: 4- Wall west of slip road: 5-6.
Unknown: 7-
1. m 848
I. INIBAK[
[i]v(o\Kt\oovoc) t" ~a( )AE()
K(J)XC[T] (a) Stamp: (147) x)o.
I. No. 218. 2. No. 228. 3. No. 245. 4. No. 1434 (mortar ANATI[li] iv(ol1<tloovoc) l" ~a( ) K[ Kalenderhane Camii. Apse of North Church, in situ: I.
impression). 5. No, 131. 6. No. 135· 7. No. 220.
INPI[.] (a) Stamp: (98) x )0. 1. ()55) x(250) x 50.
Notes: 1-7. One brick measures 375 x? x 3D-35.
IC Land Walls. [I] Peschlow, 'Bricksramps', An.
[r] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 218, Dr r . [2J Sarachane archive negs.
8(EO);; xap\c Kro(v)c[t]avtt(v)[ou] iv(o",""oovoc) \[ l [I] DAI (1st) neg. 6607 (cast). [2] Mamboury's notes (from
5.39.16 (6),10.).0 (7). 854
cast). Mango's notes (from cast). I. 3AVHllN[I]
(a) Date: early 6th century. See Part U, Ch. 10 no. 7.
Unknown. [i]V(OlKtlooVOC)r\" ~a() A£()
[I] DAI (Isr) neg. KB 5471.
849
1.INrIBAK[ (a) Stamp:(150)X27.
Land Walls.
iV(OlKtlooVOC)Yl"~a() K[
[I] DAI (1st) neg. 6608 (cast). [2] Mamboury's notes (from
(a) Stamp: 134 X2I.
K<DNCTANTINOY ITPECBYTEPOY cast). [3J Mango's notes (from cast).
Sea Walls. \'(fall between Koca Mustafa Pasa station (Samarya)
K .. and Narh Kapi.
84'
1. +KQ)[NCTA]N [I] Mamboury's notes. AEO()
844
AICAC[.]OC
1. IVlSBAK.
ITPE:Cil.vcz 850 855
(V(OlKtlooVOC)s'/~' ~a() K. I. INVIBAK[ I. +INE:IAEO
+ Kro[vcrc ]v( rtvoo) mcuc] . joc 1tPEC~U('tEpau)c 1;,'
(a) Stampr r yri x 34. iV(OlKtlooVOC)Ol" ~a( ) K[ + iV(OtlC'tlWVOC} El' Aeo()
The zeta may be an indiction or an accessory
Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum T auri (a) Stamp: ? x 20. (a) Stamp: 105 X35.
(a) Stamp: 1)5 x 70. (Beyazrt), 1928. Great wall to the south of, and parallel to, the Date: 430/1 or 445/6 or 460/1. See Part IT, Ch. I I, sect. 3. Date: 4r6/r7 or 43r12. Sec Part I1, Ch. 9, sect. lb.
Great Palace. Area Ab: r. drain, and to the right of the southern base: t. Hexagon complex in Gulhane. Hexagon: I. Palace of Antiochus: I.
t.? x?x55. I. 385 x 330 x 50. I.38ox?x50. I.330X33ox60.
[r] Mamboury's notes. [r] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes.
 CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE
297
AEON( ) AEON[ l.iAMl. a.iAM7. j.iAM9. 4·iAMra. 5· iAM J7· 6.iAM 867
p. 7· iAM6J. 8.iA.VlIJ). 9.iA..VlI44. IO.iAMI76. I.INliIBAAON
856 859 11. iAM 177. 12. iAM 178.
I. - INlI.BAPAE:ON I. A80N[ iv(BlKtlOivoe) Ol' pa() Aov()
Notes: 1-11.. Two bricks measure 380 x370 x450375 x365 X45.
0' iJap() Aoov()
iV(OlK"ClOivoe) AEOV[ [I] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stamp: (165) x as.
(a) Stamp: [85 x J7- (b) Stamp: '90x35. Unknown: I.
(a) Stamp: (55) XI7.
Tokludcde Mcscidi: 1-3. Date: 430/r or 445/6 or 460/1. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le. I. MSBK inv. 6aro, (8o) x(I9O) x?
Land Walls. Penrapyrgion, extension of Leo V.
dAM 95- a.iAM96. J.iAM97. Tokludede Mescidi: 1-5. [I] Schneider, "Ziegelsrempel', 265 no. 15. [2] MSBK ncg.
[I] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, 150 no. 21.
l. iAM 1. 2. lAM 2. 3. iA.'M: If. 4. iAM 20. 5. iAM 1I0. 6aroa. [3] DAI (Ist} neg. aJ47 (cast). [4] Mamboucy's notes
Notes: 1-3. One brick measures 380 x 380 x 55. [2] DAI (ISI) neg. 6600 (cast). [3] Mamboucy's notes (from
[r] Mango's notes (from squeeze). Notes: 1-5· One brick measures 380 x 365 x45. (from cast). [5J Mango's notes (from cast).
cast). [4] Mango's notes (from cast).
[I] Mamboury's notes. (b) Stamp: 198-200 xa4-26.
Date: 430/1 or 445/6 or 46~1. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le.
AccessoryN Balaban Aga Mescidi: 1-5.
AEONTIOY AO( ) See AON(). r.iAM44. a.iAMIJ5.38jXJSoX40' 3.iAMIsa. 4·iAM
155· 5. iAM I86,doublestamp.
CIRCULAR No accessory AccessoryY [I] Mango's notes (from squeeze). [2] Mamboury's notes.
860 See AOY(). (c) Stamp: 199-204 x 25-26.
857
[+] 1. INliBAAO Date: 430/1 or 445/6 or 460/1. See Part 1[. Ch. 9, sect. le.
AE:O
Balaban Aga Mescidi: 1-3.
iV(OtK"ClOivoc)o'~a() Ao() 1. iAM J4. a. iAM 80. J. iAM tI6.
NTIOY
(a) Stamp. rej X25. AOrO( ) Notes: 1-3. One brick measures 390 x 330 x 50.
l+l Aeov'riou
Near Facih Camii, in the area bounded by Nalbant Demir [I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Land Walls. Yedikule ruins. Sokagt, Biiyiik Karaman Caddesi, Aslanhane So~.ag>a.nd 864 (d) Stamp: 196 x a5.
[I] Meliopoulos, "Topothesia', 231 section B" no. 1. Camasrrci Sokagl: I. 1. INAIBAAOrO Date: 430h or 445/6 or 46011. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le.
t. 320 X320 x45. Museum. Tokludede Mescidi: 1-5.
+ iV(OlK"ClOivoe)Illl' ~a() Atryo()
[I] Mamboury's notes. I. iAM 33. 2.iAM12x. 3.iAMu3.4.iAMI24' 5.iAMu8.
AE:ON (a) Stamp: 155 X22. Notes: 1-5. Two bricks measure 385 x? x 50, 370 x350 x 50.
TIOY 86r Date: 412/13 or 427/8. See Part H, Ch. 9. sect. lb. [I] Mamboury's notes.
+ Aeovrlou I. INZBAPE:AO Palace of Amiochus: I.
I. 390 x 390 x 40.
868
(a) Sea Walls. Harbour of Sophia. iv(BucrtOivoe)~' ~apE() Ao( )
I. ]BAPAONE:lo
[I] Mango's notes.
[I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 85 no. 5. [2] Leclercq, (a) Stamp: 145 x 30.
(b) Stampt r yy x aa. ] pap( ) Aov( ) (iVOtK"ClOivoe)El' 0
'Estampilles', col. 545 no. 5· [j]Schneider, 'Ziegelsrempel', 267 Church of Christ Philanthropes. Near tower 10 of Sea Walls
Unknown: r.
no. 70. (,Tower ofTheophilus'): I. <a) Stamp: ? x a6.
I. 395 x395 x4°-43,AM248. Great Palace. AreaAc:
x.? x? x40. I.
J. + [I] Bardill negs. 94.13.35; 94.14.1, 2, 4. I. ?x? X45.
[I] Demangeland Mamboury, Manganes, fig. 60 no. 2.
A80J.1
[2] Mango, 'BrickStamps', 25 n. 74 (mentioned). [I] Mamboury's notes.
TIOY
(b) Stamp:? xaS.
+Aeovriou Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
I.? x? x 50.
AON()
(a) Stamp: 70-80 diameter.
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site [1] Mamboury's notes. AONfINOY
865
B2insitJ~: I.
1. ]NOA VffANI
862 SINGLE-LINE
I. 360 x 360 x 50, no. 80.
1. INHBAAO iV(Ol1t'tlOivoe)a'pa() AOY[()]
[I] GPI,pl. '4 no. 80.
iV(OlKtlOivoc)~' pa() Ao( ) (a) Stamp:? x p.
.. 1lJ.1rIN01\(+]
(a) Stampi r ya x 31. Palace. Area Ba.
m Unknown: 1. [I] Mamboury's notes. [+] Aovvivoo .
AE:OXN[T]
1·375 x 375 x 50, edges framed with lines made by three fingers, (a) Stamp: 205 x 32.
[1]A[lS] 866
mortar with large pieces of crushed brick adhering, iAM 8. Tokludede Mescidi: 1.
INP[ .. ] I. [IN]IABAAON
[I] Mamboury's notes. 1. iAM [20, ? x ? )<40.
[iCl [iv(OllmOivoe)] la' pa() Aov() [I] Mango's notes (from squeeze).
e( oo)u xap[le] Aoov[ ttoo] iV(OlK"ClOivoe)[.. ] 86}
I. INlilBAAO (a) SIamp:(ISo)XJj.
870
(3) Stamp: I08 estimated diameter. Unknown: 1.
I. [..... ]llJ.1I1NOA+
Date: 502-533 or 517-51oor 532-535. Sec Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. iV(OlK"ClOivoe)
Ol' pa() Ao() I. MSBK inv. 6196, 400 x 380 x?

ad. (a) Stamp: 193 x 35. [I] MSBK neg. 6I96a. [a] DAI (1st) neg. aJ5 I (cast). + A0':"'Y'iVQU [ ..... J
Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagl. Date: 430/1 or 445/6 or 460/1. See Part II, Ch. 9. sect. le. [3] Mamboury's notes (from cast). [4] Mango's notes (from (a) Stamp: (loa) x)'.
[I] Mamboury's notes. Balaban Aga Mesc.idi: 1-12. cast). TokludcdeMescidi: I.
--------------------------------------~--------------------------------,

CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE
299
I. iAM no. r r S. [r] Befevliev, Inschriften, 104 no. r54,pl. 58 no. r6r.
AOYK( )
[I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). [1,.]Mango's notes (from 881
I. +AOY
squeeze). 878 KAt.!
J. IJ,1ABAVOAK
!7I CIRCULAR AKONc
I. Yj0J,1nJ,10A[ iv(6ucnrovoc) a' fla() AOUK() + AoU)ciiou~.K6v(ou)c
]Aovyivo[u 875 (a) Stamp: 146x27.
I. A (a) Hagia Eirene. In situ in west wall of nave, spandrel between
Unknown: I.
(a) Stamp: (I6I)X)5. IN-Oli central and southern arch of narthex passage.
? x? x44-53, AM 374.
I.
Unknown: I. N [1] Peschlow, Irenenkirche, 224, fig. 30 no. 2.
I.? x? x 32-36, AM 416.
[I] BardiU negs. 95.8.5, 6.
1€[f]15
[r] Bardill negs. 95.lo.13a, 14a.
A6v[r]ou ivo(uctl&voc) ie"

(a) Stamp: I r6 diameter, 879 AOYI1IK( )

MULTIPLE-LINE Remains on ismeciye Caddesi. South group: 1. J. INBIBAAOYK
1.385 x 380)( 50. 882
!7' iv(6tK"ttrovoc) Pt' pa() Aoute()
[I] Mamboury's notes. J. KIIlVOA
I. +AON (a) Stamp: 150 x I 8.
rINOY , Land Walls. Yedikulei r. AOuntK()
+ Aovyivo'O I I. 380 x 380 x60. (a) Stamp: 105 x24.
[I] Mamboury's notes. Unknown: I.
(a) Stamp: t20 x65.
Remains in the area bounded by Divan Yolu, Piyer Loci ,. (b) Stamp: '45 x 18.
Land Walls. \'(fall between towers 95 and 96a:
I. JAM (<;:K) no. 55>295 X290X)5.
[I] Mango's notes.
Caddesi, Doscluk Yurdu Sokagl, and Klod Parer Caddesi: I. AOY( ) I.
I.? x?x40.
I. 37ox35oX 50.
876 [r] Mamboury's notes.
[I) Mamboury's notes.
J. INlfBAAOY

iv(6\K"ttrovoc) ty' pa() Aou() AY()

CIRCULAR
(a) Stamp: 180 X25' 883
87) Date: 429/30 or 444/5 or 459/60. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect, le. J. ]2BAAY()
J. tIT' Balaban Aga Mescidi: I. AOYKA .6.IAKONOY
AOXNf I. JAM 2). 2. JAM 69. j. i-AM t7J.
] c,'!~'pa() Au()
INAo[y] Notes: 1-3, One brick measures 375 )( 370 x45·
880 (a) Stamp: (t24) x26.
INPIB I. +AOY
[r] Mamboury's notes. Balaban Aga Mescidi: I.
le (b) Stampi r So x28.
KAlil
AKONS
I. ? x? x 6o, iA.1Iy12I.

e(£O)UX&l?l~ AOV"(lvo[u] i.v(SuC'ttiilvQc) tW Date: 429/30 or 444is or 459/60. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. re. [I] Mamboury's notes.
Balaban Aga Mescidi: I. + AoulCa olalCov(ou)s
(a) Stamp: I I4 diameter.
J. iAM 113, 380 x 350 x 55-65·
Date: early 6th century. See Part Il, Ch. 10 no. 7. (a) Stamp: (88) x 8).
[I] Mamboury's notes.
Unknown: I. Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38.
I. (210) x(I8o) x j r.purchased in Athens in 1901 by Kelsey, Mamboury gives location as 'Ad, large wall of mosaic corridor': A(O)YAI( )
Kelsey Museum of Archaeology, University of Michigan 877 I.

I. IN€IIl'K€BAAO[y] I.? x? x40. 884

accession no. 2450.
I. INliIllAA YAI
[I] Bedel, Brickstamps, 69 no. 138 pl. 27 no. 138. iv(6tKnrovoc) El' + (in leaf or heart) K(Upt)E pa() Ao[u()] [1] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). [2] Baxter Papers,
Miscellaneous, MS )6966A (photo). iV(6umrovoc) 6t' pa() A(O)UAI()
(.) Stamp: '45 x'5·
(b) Stamp: 98 x 80.
Date: 416/t? or 43 111. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb. (a) Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia. Court to the east of the apse.
Balaban Aga Mescidi: I,
Palace of Antiochus: I. [r] Mamboury's notes.
I. iAM 136,? x? x40.
AONfOY I. 390 x 375 x 50.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
(c) Stamp: r02 xBI.
SINGLE-LINE
2. IN~Il'K€BAAOY Unknown: I.
A.
874 1v(6\"",rovoc) Et' + (in leaf or heart) K(Upt)E pa() Aou() I. iAM (c;K) no. 64, fragment, 370 x? x 5 5.
I. [I]NZBAPEAONfO [I] Mango's notes.
(a) Stamp: '45 X24. 885
(d) Date: C.5)2/). See Part H, Ch. 9, sect. ab.
[i]v(6l>c-tlrovoc) ~'pap£() A6vyo(u)
Date: 416/17 or 4}1/2. See PartIl, Ch. 9, sect. lb. 1. INIKVV.
Hagia Sophia. Ruins in front of the west doors, demolished
(a) Stamp: letters 25 mm. high. Palace of Antiochus: I. . ~'\.
iv(6uctlrovoc) t" ~a() AE[()]
November 1873.
Nessebfir: I. 1.400 x 380/350 x 55. round hobnails of the sole of a shoe lv(Suctlrovoc) t' pa() Ao[()]
[r] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 88 no. 22. [2] Leclcrcq,
I. Burgas Archaeological Museum no. 1373, (270) x (240) x46, imprinted on the brick.
'Estampilles', col. 546 no. 8c. [3] Schneider, 'Ziegelsrempel', [c} Stamp:(127)X26.
stamped twice. [1] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. 267 no. 7r. Date: 44I/2 (or 426/7). See Parr IT, Ch. r r, sect. 2.
 ..~.,
300 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE
30r
St Polyeuktos. Unknown: I. 890 (a) Stamp: (185) X)). (3) Stamp: 181 xJI.
I. No. lp, 380 x? x47-55. 1.]IBAMA Unknown: 1. Hagia Sophia. Floor of tunnel outside west window: I.
[I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 208, AI9. [2] Sarachane archive neg. I. ()50) X (290) x 14-45, AM )91. J. Brick possibly inserted in Turkish times.
]~' ~<>() M<>()
9.10•8. [I] Bardill negs. 95·9·), 4. [IJ Van Nice archive (rubbing).
(a) Stamp: (85) X22.
Land Walls. Tower 82. 4·INffXAN
[r] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmaner, 14900. 5·L iv(S1IctlOOvoc)W M<>()s
[2] DAI (Ist)neg. 6610 (cast). [)] Mamboury's notes (from 894
(a) Stamp: 210 x 30. l.]rXAN
cast). [4] Mango's notes (from cast)'
Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
]y'Ma()s
I. 370x370x35-45.
886 MA()S <a) Stamp: (I 58) x?
[IJ Mamboury's notes.
I. INt.. IABAA
Rhegium (Kiicriik Cekmece). Bath to the west of the Acropolis:
891 5·IVlffMAN I.
iVS{1K"tlOOVOC).
~<>'Ik;() A()
I. INAXA2
(a) Stamp: 1)7-1)9 X)5 (leftl-37 (right). iv(S""nOOvoc) W M<>()s I.?)(? X30.
iV(StK"tlWVOC) u" MaC)s [I] Marnboury's notes.
Unknown: 1-2. (a) Stamp: 210 x 30.
I. 367 x355 X41-50, AM )01. 2.370 x365 x 50,AM 319. (a) Stamp: 170 x28. Great Palace. Area Ab: I.

[I] Bardillnegs. 95-2.29a, )oa(I); 9j.J·25a, 26a (2);95-4.5', 6a Retaining wall and barrel vault between the church of the • I. 370 x37ox45,veryraised sides.
(I); 95.5.7, 8, 9 (2). Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia and the Basilica Cistern \ [I] Mamboury' s notes. 895
(Yerebacan Sarayr): I. I.INHXAN
I.360 x 360 x40'
iv(SucnOOvoc)~' M<>()s
[I] Mamboury's notes.
893 (a) Stamp: 210 x 3 5.
2.INAMA2 I. INrXAN
Date: 424/5 or 439/40. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. re.
M() iV(StlC'tl&VOC) a' MaC)s y' M<>()s
iv(8lK't1OOVOC) Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bab-r Htimdyfim (numerous) I.

1.? x? x40.
(a) Stamp: 210 x 32. (a) Stamp: 190 x 30.
887 [I] Mamboury's notes.
Great Palace. Area Ab: I. Theotokos in Chalkoprareia. Cistern destroyed in June 1916: I.
I. I-IBPM I. 375 x370x50. >.IVlHXAN
1. 37ox? X40'
Perhaps (ivS"nOOvoc)~' ~(<»p M() [r] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes.
iv(8utnOOvoc)~'M<>( )s
(b) Stamp: 190 x 29.
(a) Stamp: 80 x 20. ). INAMAS (a) Stamp- rgo x )0.
Rhegium (Kucuk Cekmece). Bath to the west of the Acropolis:
Sea Walls. Tower 10 in situ: I.
iV(StlC'tlWVOC) c" MaC )s I. Date: 424/5 or 4J9/40. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. re.
I·38ox350x4°' Cisterns in Gtilhane, near Bfib-r Humayun.
I. ? x ? X40.
er] Mamboury's notes. (3) Ruins near Topalian Ham, in the area bounded by Hoca Ham
[I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes.
Sokagl, Kapurcular Sokagt, and Kanrcioglu Sokagl.
888 [I] Meliopoulos, "Topothesia', 231 no. 7. [2] Schneider, (c) Stamp: 200 x 30.
3. Similar to types 1,2.
I. +IN6BAPM Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
Byzanz, 96.27 no. 3.
370 x360 x40. (a) Stamp:?x)5·
+ iv(S1IcuOOvoc) e' ~<>p() M() 892
I.

[r] Mamboury's notes. Date: 424/5 or 4J9/40' See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. le.
(a) Land Wails. I. INBXA2 (d) Stampr zoo x )0. Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bib-l Hiimdyfin.
[I] Dethier, 'Makrikoy', 167 no. KB' W, pI. lA' no. 22. Great Palace. Area Ab: (many) I. [I] Mamboury's notes.
iv(oumOOvoc) P' M<>()s
[2] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, 149 no. 8. I.J7ox360x5°·
(a) Stampr aoj x j j , [I] Mamboury's notes.
Great Palace. Area Ab, in situ in waIl at the bottom: I.
(e) Stamp: 187-200 x 30-33. 896
I. )85 x? X40' light brick. Great Palace. Area Ab: (numerous) 1-4. I. IVl6XAN
[I] Mamboury's notes.
I. }80 x ? x 40. 2.390 x 380 x 50. }. 37°)( 360 x SO. 4. 3)0 x ? x (v(811<uOOvoc)B" M<>()s
MA() (b) Stampr r j a X)O.
40.
Palace at Kii~iikyau. Upper floor. [I] Marnboury's notes. (a) Stamp: 180 x JO.
MA() [r] Mamboury's notes. Date: 425/6 or 440/1. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le.
a. IVlrXAN Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bfib-r Hiimayfm.
889 2.INBMAS
iV(S,1Ct,oovOC)y' M<>()s [I] Mamboury's notes.
I. INIBA.MA
W Ma()s
iV(SUC<1WVOC)
iv(S1IcrtOOvoc)l' ~<>()M<>() (a) Stampr ryo x )0. 2.IN6XAN
(a) Ruins near T opalian Ham, in the area bounded by Hoca Ham Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
(a) Stamp:I23x2I. Sokagi, Kaputcular Sokagi, and Kattrcibglu Sokagl. iv(Su<nOOvoc) B" M<>()s
I. J80 x? x40.
Fcthiye Camii: 1-2. [I] Meliopoulds, 'T opothesia', 231 no. 8. [2] Schneider, [I] Mamboury's notes. (3) Stamp: 174 x }o.
1. 370 x 370 x 50, stamp placed diagonally, off-centre, border Byzanz, 96.27 no. 4. Unknown: 1-2.
along 4 sides of brick. 2.360 x 360 x45-50· ).IVlrXA<n I. 382 x(368) X46,AM46. 2.380 x380 x43-5o,AM r08.
[I] Mango's notes. [2] Dumbarton Oaks Photographic ). ]INBXA'"
lV(OU('Cloovoc)l' Ma()s [I] Bardill negs. 94.).) (I); 94.8.)2 (2).
Collection neg. L62.4) (C. Mango) (I). ] iv(SumOOvoc) W Ma()s
 ..~
•
302 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE
303
).I!I18MAv> 899
2.IN.6.IMAv>
903
iv(oum&ivoc) 9' Ma()s l. INIBMAN iv(oucrtwvoc) Ot' MaC)s r.]IMA2

(a) Stamp" 79 x )0. iv(ollcn&ivoc) tW Ma()s (a) Stamp: r75 x )2. ]t'Ma()s
Unknown: T. (a) Stamp: 210 x30. Cistern near the Theocokos in the Chalkoprateia, destroyed in (a) Stamp:? X27.
J.365 x355 x 35-46, AM 4p· Unknown: I. June r9I6. Fallen vault in situ: I. Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
[t] Bardill ncgs. 95.14.22a, 23a. 1. iAM (t;:K) no. 53. )80 x? X)5. 1. 38ox380X55.
I.? x? X35.
[I] Mango's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes.

2.INIBMAv> '3·I!I1.6.IMAS
897 904
1. [I]NIMAN iv(oLKn&ivoc) tp' Ma( )s lV(OU('tlwvoc) ot'Ma()s 1.]IMAv>
[i]v(olK"ttwvoc) r" Ma( )s (a) Stamp: 165 x28. (a) Stamp: 210 x j z. ]t'Ma()s
(a) Stampt r So x j j. Palace of Amiochus: I. Great Palace. Area Ac: I.
(a) Stamp: (r33) x )0.
Barrel vaults found in 1929 when laying drains in Asu- Efendi I.? x? x35. I.370xJ70x45, Kalenderhane Camii. South wall, west window: 1.

Caddesi. [1] Mango's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes. 1. (260) x(I85) x 39.
[I] Mamboury's notes. (b) Stamp: 205 x )0. [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', A23 3.,
Remains on lsrneriye Caddesi. North group: 1.
2. 1Nl MAN
iv(oum&ivoc) t Ma()s
1.375 x36ox45·
[1] Mamboury's notes.
I 901
r. [IjNE:IMAN
905
1.]MAN
[i]V(OLK"WVOC) £t' Ma( )s ]Ma()s
(a) Stamp: t74 X29. 3. I!I1IBMAN
Beirut, hypocaust of Late Roman baths. (a) Stamp.{r joj x j r . (a) Stamp: (75) x )2.
lW Ma()s
I·
iV(OtK'ttOOVOC)
[I] Lauffray, 'Beryte', 31-2 (fig, I presumably at I: 2). Myrelaion debris. Unknown: I.
[2] Butcher and Thorpe, 'Beirut', 304. (a) Stamp: 184 x 26. [I] Talbot Rice, 'Bodrum Camii', 173, fig. II no. 16. [2] Talbot I. Once in Robert College, ? x ? x 40.
Date: 413114. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. la. Rice archive (rubbing). [I] Mango's notes.
). [I]!I1IMAN Theodosian Hagia Sophia. Back wall of Schneider's
2.INE:IMA2
[i]v(olK"ttwvoc) t' Ma()s propylaeum: I. 906
1.39ox38ox45· i.V(OlK'tlWVOC) £l'MaC)s 1.]MAN
(a) Land Walls. Tekfur Sarayr.
[I] Schneider, 'Sophienkirche', 84 no. I. [2] Schneider, (a) Stamp: [[8 X)). ] Ma()s
[r] Curtis, Broken Bits, ii, no. 69.
'Ziegelstempel', 265 no. 34. [3] Schneider, Westhof, 6 no. 2.
Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia. North wall of the church, (a) Stamp: (1[2) X)O.
4- INIMAS [4] Mamboury's notes. partially destroyed in june 1916: I.
Rhegium (Kucuk Cekmece). Bath to the west of the Acropolis:
iv(Bu«t&ivoc) i" Ma()s 4. I!I1IBMAN I.? x? X35, r.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp: t76 x )0. iv(otlC'tloovoc) tW MaC )s (b) Stamp: r75 X)5.
I·37ox360x35·
Barrel vaults found in 1929 when laying drains in A~lr Efendi [I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp: ,80 x )0. Theorokos in the Chalkoprateia. Cistern destroyed in June
Caddesi- r.
Great Palace. Area Ac: I. I916: I.
I.370X340X30.
[I] Mamboury's notes. I.380X37ox5°· 1.390xj5ox45·
[I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes.
5·INIMAv> MAfNOY
(c) Stamp: r85 X)5.
iv(Buc'n&voc) t" Ma()5 Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia. Cistern destroyed in June
MULTIPLE-LINE
1916: I.
(a) Stamp: 190 x 30. 900
1. IN.6.IMAv> I. 390 x350 x45. 907
Remains on Ismetiye Caddesi. North group: I.
[I] Mamboury's notes. 1. +MA
1. 370 x360 x40' iv(ot"'t&ivoc) ot'Ma()s
).INE:IMAv> fNOY
[I] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stamp: 200 X}2.
+ Mujvou
Walls west ofTicarethane Sokagi, and east of Tath su ile Act iV(OlK'tlWVOC) er" Ma()s
Hamamr r. (a) Stamp: 108 x69.
898 (a) Kalenderhane Camii.
I.? x? x40. Kalenderhane Camii. Near foundation of mihrab: I.
1. INIAMAv> [r] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps'i Az j b.
[I] Mamboury's notes. 1. 368 x 360 x 36,

iv(BuC'n&voc) tu" Ma()5 (b) Stamp: 202 x}2. [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', B29.
(a) Stamp: 202 x 30. Walls west of Ticarethane Sokagi, and east of Tath su ile Act 902 2. +MA
Remains on Ismetiye Caddesi. North group: I. Hamam. r. ]BMA2
Y0!l11
I·360X360X45· [I] Mamboury's notes.
JWMa()s + Mciyvou
[1] Mamboury's notes. (c) Date: 4151I6 or 43olI. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb.
(b) Stamp: 20P )0. Palace of Antiochus: I, (a) Stamp:? x32.
(a) Stamp: 104 x 56.
I. In situ in the wall of the circular room to the south of the apse Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
Unknown: I. Great Palace, Area Ac: 1.
containing the synthronon. 1.? x? x40'
1.370 x350 X40, iAM9' I.? x? x40'
[I] Mamboury's notes. [I) Mamboury's notes.
[1] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes.
 .,
·.~
•
CATALOGUE CATALOGUE

3. AM+ m 9lJ MArN(OY)S fIPEC(BYTEPOY)S

MArXNlS 1. fIPeCBS
rNOY
INAIB MArN2
+M&:yvou 9]6
P INt.2B
!. +MArN2
(a) Stamp: 90 x 48. IC
Unknown: r .
Mayv(ou)s 'PEC~(UtEpoU)S ivB(ummvoc)s~' nrecsa
r. (345) x(338) x 35, AM lIO (old no. lIO). .,8(EO)U xO:pl.C MO:"'f'JO\llY(~ll,tt&VOC) lP' (a) Hebdomon (Balarkiiy). + M.xyv( oo)s "pEC~(UtEPOU)!
[r] Bardill neg. 94.8.3°' (a) Date: early 6th century. See Part H, Ch. re no. 7· [I] Sorlin-Dorigny, <Inscriptions', 89 no. 30.
(2) Stamp: 100 x 50.
(b) Stamp: ? x 50. Hebdomon (Bakirkdy).
Kii~iikyah. Upper floor: I.
Great Palace. Area Ac: I.
[I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions" 92 no. 44. [2] Schneider,
I.? x? x 40.
'Ziegelstempel', 268 no. 9,· 9]2
I. ?X?X30' [r]Mamboury, <Mara',328 [zJFeissel, <Inscriptions', 419 no.
r. [fIP]eCB2
[1] Mamboury's notes. 30.1.
3. 8Y [MA]rN2
(c) Near Erenkiiy. M(x]A [IN]V2f
[I] Meliopoulos, Investigations, 9. [2] Feissel, 'Inscriptions' 9]7
rAm
41900.4. [Ma Jyv( ou)s [np ]£C~(UtEPOU)S [iv ]B( "c"mvoc)s y' !. +MArN[2]
INPI.
4. AM+ le (a) Stamp: ? x 75.
rIPE:CB[2]

Y0V11 E?(EO)i![x]~l?lC Mayvo\l iv(Bl1C'tuilyoc)1.- Great Palace. Area Ba: I. + Mayv[(ou)s] "pECP[(UtEPOU)S]
; 'I. ?x?x40.
+M6:yvOl)

(a) Sramp: ]05 x 47.

Great Palace. Area Ab:
r. 350 x350 x40.
[I] Mamhoury' 5 notes.
(a) Stamp: 114-116 diameter.
Date: early 6th century. See Part Il, Ch. 10 no. 7·
Unknown: I-
I [I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Sramp:(85)x50'
Land walls. In the casemate to the south of Topkapr.
[1] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Londmaner, 150, no. 22. I.
I.
[2] DAI (Ise)neg. 6597 (case). [3] Mamboury's notes (from
r. (r70) x('70) x4~5o,AM422.
[I] Bardill negs. 95·10.26a, 27a.
l- 9]3
r. [n]PECB2
case). [4] Mango's notes (from cast).

MAf[NO)
5. rNOY MAfN(OY)c TIPE(C)B(YTEPOY)S
Yt.[ ... ]
+MA
[.]p£C~(UtEpOU)S May[vo]u B[ ... ]
9]8
+M.xyvou ]. +MAfN
(a) Stamp: (120) X90. fIPeBS
(a) Several variants.
Stamp: approximately 109 x 70.
MAfNOY ITPECBYTEPOY Unknown: 1.
+ Mayv(ou)c .p'(C)~(UtEpOU)S
I. Once in Robert College, ? x? X40.
Date: possibly shortly after the middle of the 6th century. See
WITH INDICTION []] Mango's notes (rubbing). (a) Sramp: 90 x 60.
Pan H. Ch. II, sect. I I. .
Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
Kalenderhane Camii. Apse of North Church 12: 1-3. Apse of 909 I. 370x360x45.
North Church, in situ: 4. Unknown: 5-6· r. fIPeCB2 9]4 [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mamboury and Wiegand,
r. 360 X(283) x 37. 2.360 x 352 x 35>one break. 3.365 x(275) x MAfN2 !. [+]MA[r Kaiserpaliute, 36 (mentioned).
H, one break. 4.36SXH8x35· 5.(r03)x(97)x35· 6. (216) x INt.2[.] fIPeCIl[ (b) Stamp: 90 x 60.
{z ro) x37.
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', B28 (illustration compiled from
Moiyv(ou)s 'PEC~(UtEPOU)S ivB(,,,,,mvoc)s [. r [IN]t. .. Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
[+] Ma[yvou]'PEC~[U'EPOU iv]B. I.? x? x 50.
several variants). (a) Stamp: (!l5) x87'
Unknown: I. [r] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mamboury and Wiegand,
(b) Unknown. (3) Stamp: (95) x(70).
I. ? x? X41, once in Robert College, A.t\12I4 (old no. 3,3), Kaiserpoliute, 36 (mentioned).
[I] Meliopoulos, 'Nikzriaton', 28 5· Unknown: I.
[I]Mango's notes. [2] Bardill negs. 94·6.14a, 15a. (c) Sramp:9ox65.
I. Once in Robert College, fragment, ? x? X40.
Great Palace. Area Ab, surroundings: I.
(b) Stamp: [28 x 90. [r] Mango's notes (rubbing).
Great Palace. AIea Ab: I. I.370X360X45
[I] Mamboury's notes. (2] Mamboury and Wiegand,
CIRCULAR I. ?x?x50'
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mamboury and Wiegand, Kaiserpoldste, 36 (mentioned).
908 Kaiserpalaste, 36 (mentioned).
8Y MArNOY fIPE(C)SB(YTEPOY)S
WITHOUT INDICTION
MAI"XMS 9]0
r. fIPeCB2 9]9
INABl MAf(NOY) fIPE(CBYTEI'OY)S
r. [ .... ]MAr
I' MArNY
915 [N]OYfII'SBS
IC INt.2[.]
!. +MAr
S(EO)U X6:p~~
Marvol) iV(~t1(1l&VOC) l~' Moiyv(o)u 'PEC~(U"'pou)s ivB(u:-nmvoc)s [. r fIPeS
[.... ] M&Y[v]ou fIp(EC)S~(UtEPOU)S

(a) Scamp: 11 5 x 60.

(a) Stamp: J 10 diameter. (a) Stamp: 128 x85· + May(vou) 'P'(C~UtEPOU)S
Great Palace. AreaAb: Tokludede Mescidi: 1-3.
Date: 503/4 or p8h9 or 533/4' See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. ad. I.
(a) St Euphemia in Hebdomon (Bakrrkoy) (location according to !. iAM 26. 2. iAM 56. 3. iAM rcj.
Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagl: I. I.? x? X40'
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mamboury and Wiegand, Sorlin-Dorigrry, but no such church is known). Notes: 1-3. One brick measures 330 x? x 50.
J.? x? X35.
Kaiserpalane, 36 (mentioned). (I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 88 no. 27. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[1] Mamboury's notes.
 .,
.,~

CATALOGUE
306 CATALOGUE

MAfNOY nPE(C)BY(TEPOY)S MAKAPHOY 927 (a) Date: after 532. See Part 1I. Ch. 9. sect. 2C.
I. m Baths ofZeuxippos. In or near Building I or 2.
9.0 SeeMAKAPIOY, MAKAPHOY. MXAK
r. +MAfNOY [1] Gray. 'Bricksramps', 55 no. 35. [2] Schneider,
APAIOV 'Ziegelstempel', 267 no. 72.
np€BYv>
INPIf
+ Mayvou npe(c)~u(tipou)s IC
(a) Stamp:(IJ5)x48. 9(eo)U ;Oiptc MaKapiou iV(OtK"tlWVOC) r(
Unknown: 1-4.
(a) Date: early 6th century. See Part Il, Ch. 10 no. 7.
l.?x?x4o,AMI97. 2.(240)X(2J5)x4S.AM,69. 3·?x?x
Haydarpasa, near Selimye barracks.
27-)4, AM 392. 4. ? x? x 30-39, AM 443· MAKAPIOY, MAKAPHOY [I] Meliopoulos, "Anekdoroi', 7). [.] Schneider, MAMA
[I] Bardillnegs. 94·Ix.JJa(I); 95IJI (.); 95·9·5, 6 (3); 95·IJ.JI,
'Ziegelsrempel', 268 no. 94. [3] FeisseJ, 'Inscriptions', 408 no. 3.
)2(4)· SINGLE-LINE WITH INDICTION
(b) Hagia Eirene.ln siuc in putlog hole in north wall of narthex. [4]SEG J7 (I987)no. 10.6.

[I] Peschlow,lrenenkirche. 224. fig. 30 no. 1. 9'4 9.8 93'

r. +MAKAP[ x. m r. MAMA
~MClKClI?[iou] MAXK INf>.SIA
MAfNOY nPECB(YTEPOY)S APAIil Map.& iVO(lK"tlOOVOC)S ta'
(a) Stamp:(IJI)X17.
INPIf>.
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38: (two) (a) Date: 5)'/J. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect .• b.
921 I[C]
r. +MAfNlS r. Hagia Sophia. Ruins in front of west doors, demolished
np€CB2 f. ?x?x35,no'77'
I,. E?(eo)i,>xapl[C]
¥~~apiou iv(SuC't\oovoc) to' November r873.
[I] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous Remainder, box 38, negs. 266 [I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Letter', 130 no. 2.
+ Mayvou .pecP(UtEpOU)S (a) Stamp: r ro-r 1.4 diameter.
(I), J06. -
Date: early 6th century. See Part H, Ch. 10 no. 7.
(a) Stamp: 120 x 54.
Kariye Camii. Loose: I.
Date: 533-35. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ab.
r. ('44) X('I8) X)4, AM 40. (old no. 1017). WITHOUT INDICTION
Hagia Sophia. Debris from the collapsed barrel vault in the
MULTIPLE-LINE [I] Mango's notes (rubbing). [a] Bardill negs. 95.9.22, IJ.
substructures of the west wing of the Justinianic atrium: I. 933
I.370x?x5°· 925 I. +MA
[r] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 267 no. 74. [2] Schneider, r . MAKA MA
WesthoJ,.6 no. 7. [J] Mango's notes (from rubbing). PHOV
MAKE1>.() + McxJ.lCt
(b) Sramp-r jc x 56.
Mcocxpnou
Unknown: I. (a) Stamp: 78 x 87.
(a) Pendik. Tombs.
MAK(E)f>.()
r . iAM (<;:K) no. J9, J80 XJ70 x 55· Hagia Eirene. Southern side of atrium: I.

[I] Mango's notes. [r] Meliopoulos, 'Panreichion', 456 no. I. [2] I. Kale". 109.5· 929 I. J55 XJ55 x4J·
(J] Peissel, <Inscriptions', 425 (mentioned). r. 8f>.XAM [I] George,St. Eirene, pl. 16 no. 15. [2] Schneider,
(b) Stamp: 80 x 50. 'Ziegelstempel', 267 no. 73.
Max(e)B()9
Walls of Nessebfr. Pavement no. 5 of tower no. 2: 1-2.
MAfNOY nPECBY(TEPOY)S 934
1.350 x 345 x?, surface of brick has yellowish tint. 2.350 x 345 (a) Date: after 532. See Part II, Ch. 9. sect. 2C.
I. +MA
922 x ?, surface of brick has yellowish tint. Baths of Zeuxippos. In or near Building I or 2.
r. +MAfNOY [I] Ognenova-Marinova, 'Briques', III nos. 7. 8, 110, fig. 98, [I] Gray, 'Brickstamps', 55 no. 36. MA+
nP€CBYc Ill, fig. 99. + MaJ.lCt+
+ M6.yvo\) 7tPECPU(tEPOU)C MAKEt.()S (a) Stamp: 88 x75.
(a) Stamp: 125 x45. 930 Date: 533-35. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ab.
Great Palace. Behind Area Ac, outside the excavations: l. CIRCULAR MAK€V Hagia Sophia. Constructions of the north-west court, large
I.? x? X50. 2 surrounding wall of Hagia Sophia.
9.6 [I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze).
[1] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mamboury and \Viegand, MaK£B()s
M+A (b) Stamp: 90 x 70.
Ksiserpalaste, 36 (mentioned).
KAPI (a) Stamp: 14 5 x 35· Letters 2 S mm. high. Beneath Sogukcesme Sokagt: I.
+lS+ Silivri:
9'3 I. X.J55XJ5SX4J·
r. +MAfNDY INI€ I. 355 x345 x J5,stamp in lower left corner. [I] Mamboury's notes.
np€CBY. + Mcoccplcu iV(OlK"tlOOVOC) le' + + [I] Seure, 'Antiquites', 573, fig. 17 no. 2. (c) Stamp:9ox76.
+ M~"(Vou nptcpu(tepou) . Unknown: I.
For a fragment in similar style, see 1696.
MAKEf>.( ) or MAKEt.O( ) I. ('5) X(22I) X J4-4', AM 159.
Possibly a variant of 922.1. (a) Stamp: 108 diameter. [I] Bardill neg. 94.lo.5a.
(a) Hagia Eirene. Found in the process of opening a tunnel from In the area of the excavations undertaken in 1946-47 between 931
Hagia Eirene and Hagia Sophia: I. I. MAK€VO 2. +MA
the central nave of Hagia Eirene.
1.380 x 370 x45, once in the Hagia Eirene collection. MaK£B() 0
MA+
[r] Rarnnzanoglu, Sainte-Irene, fig. 5. [2] Mamboury,
'Nouvelle lecture', 125. [I] Mamboury's notes. MaK£Bo() + MaJ.lCt +
 CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE
(a) Stamp, 90 x 70. 939 CRUCIPORM TRIANGULAR
Beneath Sogukce~me Sokagt: I. I. INBIBAMAP
I.31jXJ5jX4)·
iv(Bumiilvoc) ~t' ~a() Map() 947
[I] Mamboury's notes.
I. +
(a) Stamp' 180 x 37.
INA
Date: 428/9 or 443/4 or 458/9. See PartlI, Ch. 9, sect. le.
lMAP
Byzantine drains along the Mese. Vaults of drains in the Forum
KOV:"
of Constantine: (one). Drains opposite the fountain of Auk Ali
Pasa Camii: (one). + iV(OtK"tlroVOC) m" M6:I?Kou +
MAP() 1.380x370x5°· iV(OtlC"tlroVOC) er" pex() Map( ) with monogram no. 7
(a) Stamp: do (base) x 90 (vertical height). Left-hand side 105 long.
[r] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stamp, 16j (? + JI+ /) x "9 (? + 26 + I). Right-hand side 110 long.
SINGLE-LINE
Date: C.45Q-75? See Part Il, Ch. 10 no, 6. Unknown: 1-). .•

WITH INDICTION
Beyazit, university excavations, loose in the earth inside a r. )41 x(246) x40. AM 74· a. (2)0) X(22S) x49. AM 71.
940 tomb, close to a cistern: I. 3· ()I2) x(263) x )8. AM 76.
Layout: abbreviation IN omitted r. IYlLIMVb r. )81 X)71 x41-48.AM 9). [I] Bardill negs. 94+34. 35.)6 (I); 94.1.I. 2 (2).) (3).
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Bardill negs. 94.5.29, 30.
935 iv(cSucnffivoc) Yl~~«::tp()
I. IfMAq
(a) Stamp: 140 x 30.
l1'Map() Unknown: I.
(a) Stamp: roS x 30-32. I. ()IO) x()p) x )8-43. AM 4I2.
Date: late 4th century? See Pan II, Ch. 10 no. 4. [I] Bardill negs. 91·Io.6a. 7a. MAPINOY
Unknown: 1-3. MAPTYPIOY
945
I. 3'0 x291 x 39. AM)8 (old nos. 634 and 548). 2. )01 x(I83) x
l. +MA+
40. AM 64· 3. )02 x (270) X)9.AM 429. 94' MULTIPLE-LINE
PINOY
[I] Bardill negs. 94-2.26. 27 (');94+' I. 12 (2); 91.1 q'.l' (). I. IN1lIBAMAP
+ Mcplvoo + 948
tv(Btlmiilvoc) Bt' ~a() Map( ) r. MAPTY
Layout: abbreviation IN included (a) Hebdomon {Bakrrkoy). +11lSBIT[
(a) Stamp' (ISl) X2S.
Date: 430h or 445/6 or 46oh. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. re. [I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 92 no. 47.
936 (b) Stamp' lOO x61' Maptu(ptOu) + i(v)B(tlcrtoovoc)s W n[
I. INBBAMAP Balaban Aga Mescidi: I-I I.
Cistern near Kariye Camii: r, The pi is perhaps an accessory.
r.iAM)I· a.iAM)9. ).iAMI7· 4·iAM6I. 5.iAM77'
iv(BtlCtliilvoc) po ~a() Map()
6.iAMSj. 7.iAMS8. 8.iAMII7' 9.iAMI21' Io.iAMI49'
l.? x? x35.
(a) Land Walls.
11. iAM 162. [r] Mango's notes.
(a) Stamp, 160 x )j. [I] Gcrrwald, 'Ziegelsrempei', 481 no.q. [2] Meyer-Plath and
Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia. North wall of the church, Notes: 1-11. Three bricks measure 390 x 370 x 50, 380 x 360 x Schneider. Landmeuer, 150 no. 23.
beside Zeynep Sultan Sokagl: I. 45d75 x350x50·
I.37ox?x50. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[r] Mamboury's notes. MAPKOY
CIRCULAR
942 MULTIPLE-LINE
937 I. INE:IBAMAP 949
1.IN1lSBAPMAP
iv(Btlmiilvoc) £I' ~a() Map()
WITH INDICTION tJY
ivB(umiilvoc) " ~ap( ) Map() MAXPT
(a) Stamp: 175 x25. 946
r. IN1l1 YPAIOY
(a) Stamp" S9 X) I.
Date: 43Ih or 446/7 or 46th. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. le. INPIB
Unknowru r. K21l1
Tokludedc Mescidi: 1-2, IC
I. 490 x490 x 50-53, marked with three fingers, AM 290. WK<;W
I. iAM). I. iAM '7.
[I] Bardill negs. 95-2.1a. 6a.
Notes: r-u. One brick measures 380 x 380 x 50. lv8lK(-tt&VOC)s 8l~M&plC(:)u 8(£o)u X&plC Mcproplou lP'
iv(8l1C'tlrovOC)

[I] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stamp' 88 x 78.

(a) Stamp: II 5 diameter.
Date: early 6th century. See Part Il, Ch. 10 no. 7.
938 Date: 520/1. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. za.
Unknown.
r.INHB~ St Polyeuktos. Collapsed staircase vault: 1-3.
[I] Laurent, 'Inscriptions') 229) fig. 3) 230 no. I. [2] Schneider,
iv(Bucniilvoc)~' ~a() Map() 943 r. No. 990. 2. No. 99 I. J. No. 99).
r. B]A MAq 'Ziegelstempel', 269 no. 95. [3] Talbot Rice archive photo.
Notes: 1-3. One brick measures 370 x? x 32-36.
(a) Stamp: 157 x 22.
~]aMapO (I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 214, B28. [2] Sarachane archive neg. z, 8Y
Date: 439/40 (or 424/5). See Part Il, Ch. I I,SeCt. 2.
9.II.J3 (I). MAXPT
St Polyeuktos. Unknown: 1. (a) Stamp' (77) XI7.
(b) Stamp' (70) x 79- YPAIOY
I. No. 150,370 x? x 50-60. Land Walls.
Unknown: I. INPIB
[I] Hill. <Bricks tamps' , 208, All. (2) Sarachane archive neg. [I] DAI (Ist)neg. 6608 (cast). [2] Mcmboury's notes (from
r. (2)0) x(I80) X)7.AM )9S. IC
9·7·9· cast). [3] Mango's notes (from cast).
[I] Bardill nogs. 9j.9.1 I. 16.
8(£0)u xaplcMap-ropiou iv(SlIcnrovoc) lP'
 ..~
•
310 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE
311
(a) Sump: 110 diameter. (a) Stamp: r 12 (~42 + J2 + J8) x (66)(= 20 + JO + 16) (a) Date: after 475. See Part Il, Ch. ro no. 12. MA[
Date: 50)/4 or 518/9 or 533/4. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. zd, Ch: 10 Unknown: t. Unknown.
no. 7. I. 390 x38ox45, iAM 12. [I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 84 no. 3. [2] Leclercq, MA{ ) or MA{ )S
Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir $Okagl: I. [I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). 'Esrampilles', col. 545 no. 3. [)] Mamboury, 'Chrisme', 456
no. 7. 958
I.? x? X45.
I. [I]NBHA[
[1] Mamboury's notes.
[i]v{ouC"tlrovoc) p'Ma[
950 MAYP( )
J. m (a) Stamp: ? x J5.
Saray Bu~nu.
MAXP[T]
954 [I] Mamboury's notes.
YPA[IOy]
I. INlUMAVP
INP[ .. ]
!rH ot'Maup() 959
le iv{oumrovoc)
I.]MA[
9{eo)uxaptC Map[<]up[iou] (v[{Ouenrovoc). Inverted gamma altered [0 delta by the addition of a diagonal MA~IMOY
]Ma[
stroke.
(a) Scamp: 115 diameter.
957 (a) Date: 413-15. 5eePartII,Ch. 9,sect. la.
Date: 502-33 or 5 17-20 or 532-35. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad, (a) Stamp: I2J x)5.
l. +MA[z] Theodosian Hagia Sophia. Back wall of Schneider's
Ch. ro no. 7. Date: 415/16 or 430/1. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb.
IMQY propylaeum.
Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Soka~. Window Palace of Antiochus: I. [t] Schneider, Westhof, 6 no. J.
of the substructures: I. Piers in Cemal Nadir Sokagl: 2. +M"[CJi~ou
I. 355 x33ox50.
1-2. One brick measures? x? x 45. [1] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). [2] Mango's notes. (a) Stamp: 92 x 50.
[1] Mamboucy's notes. Byzantine drains along the Mese. A little higher up Divan Yolu
Unknown: 1-2.
than Sefrali Sokagt: I.
95' I. (J)5)X{JIO)x44-47,AM 140. 2.AboutJ55 xJ)..l.x64, MA{ ), MA{ )S, MAP{ ), MAYP{ )
I.350X340X35·
J. 6[Y] stamped twice, Masonry Craft Museum, AnnapoTls, Maryland,
[I] Mamboury's notes. 960
MA[XPT] on loan from the General Shale Products Corporation,
I. U1E:MA[
YP[AIOY] Museum of Ancient Brick.
2. +MAz
IN[P .. ] [I] Bardill neg. 94.7.14 (I). iv(St1('tloovoc) e" Mc:[
. ·[IC] IMOY
(a) Stamp:? x28.
+Ma~il1ol)
8{eo)[uxaptc] Ma[p<]up[iou] iv[. Sea Walls. Near the monumental staircase, area Fb: I.

(a) Several variants. I.? x? x50.

(a) Date: early sth century. See Part I1, Ch. 10 no. 7.
Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
MAYPIKIOY Stamp: approximately 83 x72. [I] Mamboury's notes.
Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: (four) 1-4. Apse of North
t.? x? x55.
See MAYPIKYOY. Church: 5. 961
[I] Mamboury's notes.
I. (265) X(210) XJ8. 2. (270) xf r ro} xJ5. J. (2J5) X(225) x40. I. INIAMA[

4· (140) x{IJ5) x? 5· (JJ5) X{2IJ) x J8. iV(StK"tliOvoc)re" Ma[

[I] Peschlow, 'Bricks tamps', B30 (illustration compiled from
several variants). (a) Stamp: Approx. (I6o) x J6.
CRUCIFORM MAYPIKYOY
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site
BI, building north-east of church, pier I, in situ: 1.
952 955 J. +MA
l. Lno.85·
I. MAJ.bIKJ.OY + ~IM
[I] GP I, pl. r a no. 85.
'"
+INt..::ETYPI M~UI;Hciou +
OY+
« . +Ma~i~ou+ 962
(a) Stamp: (I75) x J6.
>< I. INlI.lMA[
Kalenderhane Camii. Diakonikon, window arch: 1. (a) Stamp: 88 x 79.
+ iVS(tltC1OOVOC) tjl'Ma'I>'tU!?{(ou) I. {joo] X{22J) x J6, broken. iv(Buctt&voc) St' Ma[
Unknown: 1-7.
(a) Stamp: 120{=?+J2+?)x70{=I+Jo+?) [I] Pescblow, 'Bricks tamps', A 59. I. J65 x J58 X40-45. A..>vI168. 2. (280) X(2)5) x 37-42,AM 186. (a) Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia. Court to the east of the apse.
Date: 50)/4 or 518/19 or 533/4. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. ad. j- j4jX{J25)x45-5hAM 28J. 4·AM284· 5.(250)X{I75)x [1] Mamboury's notes.
Remains on Ismetiye Caddesi. North group. J0-4o,AMJ07· 6. J65 xJ6jXJ8,AM )50. 7.(285) x225 x
[I] Mamboury's notes. 31-40, AM 371. 963
MAYPIT( ) [t] Bardill negs. 94.Io.22a, 2Ja{I); 94.I1.20a (2); 95.I.<2, IJ (J); I. B]AMV[
953
I. [.] 95·).4a; 94-4·I9a. 20a (5); 95·7.)) (7); 95·6.Jo (6). ~]a()Ma[
CIRCULAR In the area of the excavations undertaken in 1946-47 between
(a) Stamp: (6J) x JO.
I]N~2~TYM
. .« . Hagia Eirene and Hagia Sophia: J.
956 Cistern with 12 columns to the west ofSt George in the
0.. l. MA YPIT· IN~I around * r. 370 x 380 x45, once in the Hagia Eirene collection. Mangana: I.

i]vli(u<"tlrovoc)s ~[. rMapw~{l)o{u) MnujJl"t:()· lVO\(K'tlOOVOC) around * [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mamegris, 'Hagia Sophia', 289.
[3] Schneider, 'Review', 22 I.
I.? x? X45.
[1] Mamboury's notes.
 ..
.,~

312 CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE

MA[ MEr(AAI-IC)S EKKA(HCIAC)S I.360X350X5°· (b) Stamp: (IOJ) x 60.

[I] Mamboury's notes.
967 Hagia Sophia. North-east buttress, loose brick in room at
964 1. Mers (I) Stamp: '42 x (44). gallery-roof level: I.
I. +MA[ .. ) Hagia Sophia. North-west buttress, loose brick at gallery-roof
eKKAS 1. 360)(? )(40.
.IN[.) level: 1.
M€')'(nA11c)s 'ElCK).{Tlclac)s [r] Van Nice archive (rubbing).
+Mc<[ .. ).~v[. I. J65 XJ55 x4J. (c) Stamp: r05 x70.
(a) Stamp: 100 x67. [r] Van Nice archive (rubbing). Great Palace. Between areas Ab and Ac, below the 'Magnaura'.
(a) Stamp: (5J) x(5)).
Hagia Sophia. (m) Stamp: 143 x60. [1] Mamboury's notes.
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38: I.
[r] Mango's notes (from rubbing). Unknown: 1-2. (d) Stamp: 108 x72.
1. ? x? X35>llO. 14.
(b) Possibly same as c. I. iAM(<;:K) no. )4, J65 xJ50 x 50. 2. iAM (<;:K) no. 66, J80 x Hagia Ei;ene. Southern side of atrium.
[r] GP I, pl. 14 no. 14. [2} Russell Papers, Miscellaneous
Stamp: IO) X(70). J8ox50. [r] George, St. Eirene, pl. 16 no. 4.
Remainder, box 38, neg. 19I. [3] TalbotRice archive neg. as
Unknown: I. [I] Mango's notes. (c) Stamp:? x70'
[2].
I. 350 x 370 x 43-49, AM 299. (n) Stamp: '4SX 50. Great Palace. Area Ac: I.
[r] Bardill negs. 95.2.25a, 26a; 95.4.29a. Hagia Sophia. I. ?X?X55.
(c) Possibly same as b. [r] Mango's notes (from rubbing). [I] Mamboury's notes.
Stamp: 103 x 68. (0) Stamp: 146 x 50. (f) Stamp:? x 55.
MEr AAHC EKKAHCIAC Hagia Sophia. Remains of the wall behind the ticket-office, Date: 533-35. See Part Jl, Ch. 9, sect. ab. Palace of Antiochus: I.
south-west of the baptistery: r. , Hagia Sophia. Constructions of the north-west court: I. I.? x? X40.
WITH INDICTIONS I. 370 x350 x60. \ Unknown: 2. [r] Mamboury's notes.
[rJ Mamboury's notes. I. 35 5 x 35 5 x 50. 2. Fell from church in 1870, taken to Athens (g) Stamp: (58) x(55)'
965 (d) Stamp: I04 x70' by Mr. Rhankabe. Unknown: I.
I. +Mef2 Walls found in Alemdar Caddesi during laying of drains. Top [r] Mamboury's notes. [2] Lampakis, 'Christian Stamps', 5 I5. I. Brick shaped into a semicircle, and most of stamp chipped
eKKA2 of the street, next to the fountain at the junction with Cafcriye [31 Lampakis, Mane Dopbniou, 87 with n. 3· [4J Lampakis, away. Restored diameter 305. 42 thick, AM 270.
IN1I.2IA Sokagr: (several) I. '-~ Memoire, r c.fig. 15. [I] Bardill neg. 94.IJ.8.
+ ME')'(6:A.T\c)s 'ElcICA("dac)s ivo(tKtt&VOC)S to;" I. 360 x360 x40. (p) Unknown: I. (h) Stamp: (64) x 54-
[I] Mamboury's norcs. 1.350 x 300 x?; once in the Berlin Christian Museum, no. 7632 Hagia Sophia. North-west buttress, loose brick at gallery-roof
(a) Stamp: ror x 86.
(e) Stamp: 108 x6J. in inventory of 191 5. level.
Unknown- r.
Hagia Eirene. Southern side of atrium: I. [rJ Lampakis, 'Christian Scamps', 515 n. 4. [2] Lampakis, [r] Van Nice archive {rubbing).
I. (JI9) x(250) x45. AM 82 (old no. 45).
I.360X360X50. Mone Dapbniou, 87 n. 3.
[I) Bardill negs. 94.5.I2, IJ.
[r] George, St. Eirene, pl. 16 no. I. (q) Stamp: '47 x 52.
(b) Stamp: I02 x88.
(f) Stamp: I09 x 61. Hagia Eirene. Southern side of atrium: I.
Date: c. 532/3. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. zb. +MEr(AAHC)S EKKA(HCIAC)S
Unknown: I. I. 355 )(355 x 50.
Hagia Sophia. In situ in wall with exedras, Caferiye Sokagl: I.
I. (290) x (270) x 40-43, two stamps overstruck, AM 389.
T. 350 x 3 50 x 50 (45 in centre), white-red mortar ·of
crushed
[I] Bardill negs. 95·8.JJ, )4, J5, J7, J·8. (r)
[IJ George, St. Eirene, p]. 16 no. 2.
Stamp: '55 x60.
969
I. +MerS
brick and sand adhering.
(g) Stamp: I08 x 64. Date: 533-35. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ab. eKKAS
[r] Schneider, WesthoJ. 26 n. 1. [2] Mamboury, 'Nouvellc
Date: 533-35. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. zb. Hagia Sophia. Constructions of the north-west court: r.
lecture', 122, [3J Mango, 'Brick Stamps', 26. [4] Mamboury's + Mey(&l.~e)s 'EKKl.(~dc<e)s
Hagia Sophia. Constructions of the north-west court: J. I. ? x? x 55.
notes.
I.? x? x60. [I] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stamp: 92 x 64.
[I] Mamboury's notes. Date: 533-35. See PartIl, Ch. 9, sect. ab.
2. MErS
(h) Stamp: 108 x65. Hagia Sophia. Constructions of the north-west court: r.
eKKAS
WITHOUT INDICTION Unknown: r-7. I. Hagia Sophia collection, 360 X}50 x 50.
dAM (<;:K) 19,]80 x)60 x 55. 2. iAM (<;:K) 4J, J50 xJ50 x Mey(&l.~e)s 'EKKl.(~d(1e)s [I] Mamboury's notes.
MEr(AAHC)S EKKA(HCIAC)C
50. J. iAM (<;:K). 4- iAM (<;:K). 5. iAM (<;:K). 6.iAM (<;:K). (a) Stamp: 135 x60. (b) Date: 533-J 5· See Part 11, Ch. 9, seer. ab.
966 7. iAM(<;:K). Hagia Sophia. Debris from the collapsed barrel vault in the
Date: c. 532/3' See Pare Il, Ch. 9, sect. zb.
I. MerS Notes: 3-7. One brick measures 380 x 365 )(60. substructures of the west wing of the justinianic atrium:
Hagia Sophia. Ruins in front of west doors, demolished
eKKAe [1] Mango's notes. November r873: I. (numerous).

Mey(&l.~e)s 'EKKl.(~dc<e)e
(i) Stamp: (8I)x65.
1.370 x 365)( 55. Musee des Antiquites Nationales, Saint- [I] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 269 no. 96. [2] Schneider,
Hagia Sophia. North-west buttress, vertical face of hole for
Germain-en-Laye inv. 21103.
Westhof, 26 no. 4 (initial cross omitted).
(a) Stamp: 152 x60. timber in east jamb of opening into upper room above gallery (c) Stamp: I04 x75.
[r] Musee des Antiquires Nationales, Saint-Germain-en-Laye
Date: 533-35. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ab. roof. Hagia Sophia. Lying around in the approaches to or room of
(photo).
H;gia Sophia. Constructions of the north-west court: I. [I] Van Nice archive (rubbing). the south-east buttress.
I. ? x? X45. (j) Unknown: I. [r] Anroniades, HagiaSophia, i. 84, fig. r r. [2] Soteriou, Hagia
[I] Mamboury's notes. I. Hagia Sophia collection. Sophia.cs,
(b) Stamp: '40 x70' [1] Mnlerskos, 'Plinthos', 272, pl. 54-3. 968 (d) Stamp: IIJ x 69.
Great Palace. Lower piers of area Ac (mingled with yyr.rn): I. I. Probably the same as 966 or 967.
(k) Stamp: IJ 8 x 57. Unknown: I.
1.370X370X55· Date: 533-35. Sec Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ab. (a) Hagia Eirenc. Found in the process of opening a tunnel from I.)42 x (33 5) x 50, three fingermarks sweep around stamp, AM
[I] Mamboury's notes. Hagia Sophia. Constructions of the north-west court: I. the central nave of Hagia Eirene. 128 (old no. 4J).
[I] Rnmazanoglu, Sainte-Irene, fig. 6. [I) Bardill ncg. 94-7.5.
 ..~
..
CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE
(c) Stamp: 122 x6l. MEr(AAHC)S EKKA(HCIAC)S or +MEr(AAHC)S
GreatPabcc.AreaAc: r, EKKA(HCIAC)S
MaC) CRUCIFORM
l.360><360X55_
[I] Mamboury's notes. 970 See also MO( )orMO. (). 976
I. [ ..... ] I. MOY
(f) Stamp: 12) x64. 973
[E]KKAS +INt.S!A+
Hagia Eirene. Southern side of atrium: L I. INrt.IBAMO
I. 340 x 340 x 50. [+ME"'((aA~c)s 'E]Kk,A(~dac)s M01J() + iv8(\JcrlrovOC)Slex' +
[r] George,St. Eirene, p]. 16 no. 3.
iv(Sucurovoc) llrll S~' pa() Mo()
~a) Stamp: (7l) X(21) (a) Stamp: 149 x F.
(g) Stamp: 124 x6). Delta inserted between gamma and iota according to Mamboury's
Hagia Sophia. South-east buttress. Date: 517/18. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. za; Ch. 10 no. 10.
Hagia Sophia. Ruins by the porch at the east of Hagia Sophia: notes.
[I] Van Nice archive (rubbing). St Polyeuktcs. Level 159: I. Level 165: 2. Level 213*: 3. Level
I.
(a) Stamp: 12 5 x 20. 499: 4· Levd547 ..•.
: 5· Level er j": 6. Level 697*: 7. Level IOC)I: 8.
1.350)(340)(50. Date: 415/16 or 430h. See Part Il, Ch. 9, seer. lb. Level 1059: 9· LeveI1l59*: [0. Unknown: 1I-15.
[I] Salzenberg, Bandmemale, 64 no. a. [a] Lethaby and Palace of Antiocbus: (frequent) I- I. No. I6a. 2. No. 16l· ). N"o. 16). 4· No. 890· 5· No. 7l6.
Swainson, Sancta Sopbia, Il6 no. 2. [)] Swift, Hagia Sopbia, MEr AAHC EKKAHCIAC I.? x?x50. 6. No. 1375. 7. No. 822. 8. No. 622A. 9. No. 872. [0. No.
jo no. 3· [r] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. 1228. It. No. 806. 12. No. 808. 13.No.1314. 14. NO.IJ76.
(h) Stamp:!a4X7l. 971
I. HAA13M 15. No. 1)77·
Hagia Sophia. South-east buttress, third window sill below the [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 2l8, D 12. [2] Sarachane archive negs.
::JAI::JHA.lDI3::J
top sill, work of either Sinan or the Ecssati brothers. 5-4l.a7 (I), 9.12.ao(3).
[I] Bardillnegs. 94.8.1, a, l. [a] Van Nice archive (rubbing). MeyO:AllC 'EKKAllclaC (b) Stamp: (12a) x F.
MbC) or MO. C)
[3] Emerson and van Nice, 'Collapse'. 103. fig. 12. (a) Stampi r jy x l6. Date: early 6th century. See Part Il, Ch. ro no. 10.
(i) Stamp: Ial x6a. Great Palace. Lower piers of area Ac (mingled with 966.lb): I. See also MO(). Unknown: I.
Unknown: I. I. 38ox37ox50. r. MSBK no. unknown.

I
I. tAM(CK) no. 10.345 x36ox50. [I) Mamboury's notes. 974 [I] Sorlin-Dcrigny, <Inscriptions', 87 no. 19, pl 14 no. 5.
[I] Mango's notes. I. .OMffSV11
(b) Date: l))-)l. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. ab. [a] DA! {rst) neg. a))8 (cast). [)] Mamboury's notes (from
Gl Stamp: 12l x64· Hagia Sophia. Debris from the collapsed barrel vault in the iv(Smlrovoc) 1;' P() Mo() . cast). [4] Mango's notes (from cast).
Palace of Antiochus: I. substructures of the west wing of the justinianic atrium. iv(Smlrovoc) 1;' PC) Mo. ()
I.? x? X55. [I] Schneider, Westhof, 26 no. 6. The partially preserved letter, possibly tau, may have been an
[r] Mamboury's notes.
accessory.
(k) Unknown.
[rj Firatli, "Tuglalar', 13. (a) Stampr r je x )0. MO·C)
(I) Stamp: Ial X70. Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri
SeeMO()orMO.().
Date: 533-35. See Part n, Ch. 9. sect. ab. (Beyazrt), 1928. Great wall to the south of, and parallel to, the
Hagia Sophia. Constructions of the north-west COUrt:I. In drain, and to the right of the southern base: I.
situ in wall with exedras, Caferiye Sokagi: 2. r . ?x?x40.
I. ? X ? X 50. 2. White-red mortar of crushed bricks and sand [I] Mamboury's notes.
ME801>.OTOY M(J)CH
adhering, 3.50 X350 x 50.
[I:JMamboury;'s.notes.
See also 1685.U.
(m) Stamp: I)4X70. 977
I. H::JOJM2HV11
Unknown: 1-5. 972 MOYC)
I. iAM (<;:K) 46')7l x)60x60. 2. iAM(<;:K)46a, )60x)60x I. OfiDeE:M iv(~h1C"tl&VOC) 11' s MrociJ
55. ). iAM (<;:K) 67,)60 x )60 x lO. 4. iAM (<;:K) 44· 5. iAM +YOT SINGLE-LINE
(a) Stamp: I6l X)O.
(<;:K)44a. MrlloOOtou+ Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri
Notes: 4-5. One brick measures 360 x 360 x 55. 975
(a) Date: after 5J2. See Part 1I, Ch. 9, sect. 2C. I. INABAPMOY (Beyazn), J 928. Great wall to the south of, and parallel to, the
[I] Mango's notes.
Baths ofZeuxippos. 10 or near Building I or 2. drain, and to the right of the southern base: I.
(n) Stamp: (IOl) x(58). iv(Sucurovoc) a' pap() Mou()
[I] Gray, 'Bricksramps', 54 no. 19. [2] Schneider, I·380X38ox45·
Unknown: 1.
'Ziegelstempel', 267 no. 77. (a) Stamp: 166 x 22. [I] Mamboury'snotes.
I. (a80) x(a80) X4l-55, AM )16.
Date: 417iI8 or 432./). See Part Il, Cb. 9. sect. lb.
[I] Bardill negs. 9l.).I3', 14a; 9l.j.I, 2. a. Ofi[DeE:M] Palace of Antiochus: I. 978
(0) Unknown: I. +YO[T] I. 385 x J65 x 55, fingermarks with three fingers in form ofb. I. H::JOJMffHV11
I. iAM (<;K) no. 3, fragment, 370 x 370 x60.
[M.eo]S6[t]ou + See also 1736.IC.
[1] Mango's notes. iv(Sumrovoc)~' P() MOlcij
[1] Mamboury's notes.
(p) Date: <.jJ2/). See PanII, Ch. 9, sect. ab. (a) Stamp: (79) x (48). (a) Stamp: 16l X)O.
(b) Stamp: 164 x 22.
Hagia Sophia. Ruins in from of west entrance, demolished Kalenderhane Camii. Vault of Byzantine drain below apse of Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri
Date: 417/r8 or 4J2/3. See Part 11,Ch. 9, sect. lb.
November 187). North Church: I: (Beyazu), I928. Great wall to the south of, and parallel to, the
Palace of Antiochus: I.
[I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Letter', 130 no. 4. [2] Leclercq, I. (Ill) x(nl) X)I. drain, and to the right of the southern base: I.
I. ? x? X45, lamb's footprints on the face of brick, several.
'Estarnpilles', col. 546 no. I r. [I] Peschlow, 'Bricksramps', E7. 1.380 x 375 X40, white mortar with large fragments of brick
[I] Schneider, 'Martyrion', fig. 2. [a] DAl (1st) negs. KB
422.62I, KB 1499, K.B 1507 (last two are of same brick). adhering.
[)] Mango's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes.
 --------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------,-------~

"~
•
CATALOGUE CATALOGUE }17

M[ 985 Palace of Anciochus: I. (b) Stamp' 145 xa7,

I. IN€IM[ I. 380 x 375 x 50. Date: 415/r6 or 430/1. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb.
MA( ), MA( )S, MAP( ), MO( ), MOY( ), MWC( ) [I] Mango's notes. [a) DAI (1st) neg. KB 999. Palace of Anciochus: I.
iV(SllC'tl&VOC) El' M[
Unknown: r. I. 380x? X50.
979 (a) Stamp' {r ao) x )a.
L INBBAPH[ ... ] I. 375 x305 xp,AM 113. [I] Mamboury's notes.
Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia. Octagonal cryPt, north wall,
iv(OtK"tt&voc) r ~a~() M[ ... ] room A, material broken Out of blocked-up door. [1] Bardill negs. 94.8.) 5, )6; 94.9.1, a.
995
[I] Kleiss, 'Grabungen', fig. ab. 1.]N€C
(a) Stamp'(I60)X)5.
99
Hagia Sophia. North-cast ramp. paving probably laid in 1. ' INIA€BAN€() ]N,c()
Turkish period: I. 986
I.3IOX?x?
I. IN€IM[ iv(SlKn&voc) [~Ia' [En pa() NE() (a) Stamp: (50) xa5.
Land Walls. Wall between towers 95--96: I.
[r] Van Nice archive (rubbing). iV(StK'tl&VOC) at" M[ The indiction may have been altered from fifteen to one by the
I. ? X? X40-45. •
addition of an alpha between the superseded iota and epsilon.
(a) Stamp'(I)4)xa8. [I] Mamboury's notes.
980 'Bath' building beside the Myrelaion rotunda. Filling. (a) Stamp: 142 x 27.
L]BMA[ [1] Talbot Rice archive (rubbing). Date: 4121r3 or 427/8. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb.
WITHOUT INDICTION
tWMa[ Palace of Antiochus: r.

(a) Stamp,(85)xj2. J. 485 x 35 5/300 x 50. 996

[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. I. V1€C
Date: 4I3/14? See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ra.
Theodosian Hagia Sophia. Back wall of Schneider's portico. Unknown: I. NEC()
[I] Van Nice archive (rubbing). I. 380 X(2I2) X 6o, AM H.
(a) Stamp: 61 x)2.
NE() [I] Bardill neg. 94.a.ao. Fenari isa Camii: I.

981 I. (305) X (260), fingermarks applied across both diagonals of

L INfBAMA[ 987 the brick before stamp, AM 184.
1. [I]NBBANE
iV(OlKtt&VOC)y' pa() Ma[ [r] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari
[i]v(otJC'tt&voc) po pa() NE( ) isa Camii', fig. 40 no. 28. [3] Bardill negs. 94.II.I7a, I8a.
(a) Hagia Sophia. North-east buttress, gallery roof, passage
through west wall. (a) Land Walls". NEC( )
[I] Van Nice archive (rubbing). I. Louvre Museum.
[I] Leval, 'Archaiologika', 619 no. A". [a] Meyer-Plarh and WITH INDICTION
Schneider, Landmauer, 149 no. 6.
982 992
L]V1fM[ I. INt.BANEI: NE[
i]v(Otxtt&voc h'M[ 988
I. INfBAN€ iv(oumwvoc) 0' ~a() N,c()
997
(a) Stamprf t roj x jo. (a) Stamp: 150X25. 1.]AN€[
iv(otx'ttwvoc) y" pa( ) NE()
Unknown: I. Palace of Anriochus. Conduit beneath marble pavement,
(a) Stamp: 118 p]a()N,[
I. Once in Robert College, fragment, ? x? X45. X.29.
running parallel to the foundation walls of the sigma-plan
[r] Mango's notes. Underpass cutting near St Polyeuktos. Level 13 ": I. (a) Stamp: ? x )0.
portico: (sixteen) I.
I. No. 192,390 x 390 x 50-55. Sea Walls. Langa Bostaru, inner wall west of tower 68.
L4oox400X55·
[I] I-Iill, 'Brickstamps', 208, AIS. [2] Sarachane archive neg. [I] Mamboury's notes.
983 [I] Duyuran, 'Palace of jusrice Il', fig. 7a.
I. INIBM[ 9.10.5.

iv(omt&voc) tPOM[ 993

989 1. INSBN€C
(a) Stamp: (II2) X27. 1.INDHN€
St Polyeuktos. Level I272: I.
iv(otm&voc) ,'/C' ~() NEC() NI()
ivo(tX'ft&voc)~' NE()
r.No. 1236, ?x?x3Q-H. (a) Stamp:(I45)X)1.
[r] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 208, Ar6. [2] Sarachane archive neg. (a) Stamp: 128 x 3 8-40. - Unknown: I. 998
9·11.17a. Unknown: 1-2. I. ?x?X37,AM333' 1. INZBAPNI
I. 354 X)P x48, AM 4) (old no. 6a). a.)p x (276) x4'-47, [1] Bardill negs. 95.6.7, 8.
iv(omt&vac) C' pa~() Nt()
AM 178 (old no. 1)4).
984 (a) Stamp: 140 X)4.
I. INfIBAM[ [1] Bardill neg. 94.a.)) (I); 94.II.1 la (a). 994
1. INlt.BAN€C Unknown: I.
iv(8tK"tt&voc) 'Yt' pa( ) M[ I. Fragment,? x? X62,iAM H.
990 iv(oumwvac) to' pa() NEC()
(a) Stamp: (I2j) X22. 1. IN€I'VBAN€ [I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze).
Land Walls. (a) Stampr r a y x aj .
iV(SllCtlO>VOC) El' + (in a leaf or heart) ~(X() Ne() Date: 41 51r6 or 43olr. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. lb. 999
[r] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, 149 no. 5.2.
I. IV1I~MV11
[a] DAI (1st) neg. 6606 (cast). [)] Mamboury's notes (from (a) Stamp: 138-141 x25. Palace of Antiochus.
cast). [4] Mango's notes (from cast). Date: 416iI7 or 4JIh. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb. [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. iv(oum&voc) ta'pa() Nt()
 ,,~
•
CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 319
(3) Stamp: 138 X22. NIKH\llOPOY, NIKI\llOPOY N(I)KY<D(OPOY) NIKH\llOPOY KOMHTOC
Unknown: I.
1008
I. MSBK no. unknown. SINGLE-LINE 1010
I. ]. IBAN(Y<D
[I] DAI (1st) neg. 2J4t (cast). [2] Mamboury's notes (from I. +NIKH<DOP15
cast). [3] Mango's notes (from cast). NIKH<DO(POY) .]. I' ~aO N(I)KU~(6pou)
KOMHTOC2Z
1004 (a) Stamp: (87) (from upright of beta to right-hand end) x Jl. + Noncocoo ICOllll'COC
s S'
I. NIKH<DO Rhegium (Kucuk Cekmece). Large surrounding wall of
1000 (a) Stamp: t 52 x 78.
., Nl1''1~6(pou) Acropolis, beside the sea: I.
I. [IN]-"'[.]BAVlI()
I. ? x? X42. U nknown: I.
[iv(ollmoovoc)] o[~r ~a() NI() (a) Date: after 532. See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. ac.
[r] Mamboury's notes. I.? x ? X35-44,AM 84.
Baths of Zeuxippos. In or near Building I or 2: (very common).
(a) Stamp: ? x 30. (b) Stamp: (8) (from upright of beta to right-hand end) x28. [I] Bardill negs. 94.5.16, 17.
[I] Gray, 'Bricksramps', 55 no. 28.
Great Palace. Area Ab, collapsed vault: 1. Rhegium (Kiiciik Cekmece). Large surrounding wall of the
(b) Stamp:15)x4). Fethiye Camii.
I.? x? x45. Acropolis, centre, beside the sea.
Excavation near the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri [I] Van Nice archive (rubbing from Holt and Green).
[r] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes.
(Beyam),1957·
[I] Duyuran, 'Bayazit', pl. 6A.

NIKI\llOPOY
N[I]KI(<DOPOY) SeeNIKH<DOPOY, NIKI<DOPOY.

1005
NIKA( ), NIKAN( ) CRUCIFORM
I.]rIN[I]KI

NIKA() lrt'N[I]Kl(~6pou) I009

I. +IVI-"'2E:V1KI
1001 (a) Stamp: Il8 xz8 (end)-)5 (centre)
I. A.lIIVI+[ Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri + ivo(mloovoc)S ,N(I)KI()
NIKI\llOPOY KIPOY
(Beyazrt), 1928: I. (a) Stamp: Width of armis 3).
] + NIKaO 10Il
I.? x? X45. Unknown: I. I. SqO<DI.lIIVI
(a) Stamp: (70) (from left to right-hand upright ofN) x )2. [I] Mamboury's notes. I. iAM (<;:K) no. 79. [.. ]YOqI.lI
Date: 414-18 or 429-33. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb.
er] Mango's notes.
Palace of Antiochus: 1. NlKl~6p(ou)s KlPO\i[
(b) Stamp: 2I) x p.
l.35ox?x45· (a) Date: after 532. See Part n, Ch. 9, sect. 2C.
Date: 5 I r/12. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. za.
[I] Mamboury's notes. NIKI<DO(POY) Baths of Zeuxippos. From the west side of the apsidal end of
St Polyeuktos. Level 94: I. Level 124: 2. Level r65: 3. Level a j j:
4· Lcvcl484: 5· Level 700*: 6. Level p r j": 7. Level 735: 8. Level Building 2.
1006
I. INI-"'fNIKI<DO 785*: 9. Level BzS: 10. Level Sj r": II. Level 909*: 12. Level [r] Gray, 'Brickstamps', 53 no. 5. [2] Schneider,
920* (pier, eastern end, debris): 13. Leve!922':-: 14. Level 977''": 'Ziegelsrempel', 267 no. 78.
iV(OIK"tlOOVOC)
10' Irll NIKI~6(pou) 15-16. Level 994'f: 17. Level 1000*: 18. Leve! IOOI~': 19. Level
NIKAN() Indiction thirteen altered to fourteen by the insertion of a delta 1006':': 20. Level 1010: 21-4. Level 1029*: 25-6. Level 1058: 27.
between the iota and gamma. Level 1°92':-: 28. Level I109": 29. Level I I 11: 30. Level 1151*:
1002
31. Level 1204: )2-3· Level I266':': 34. Level 1268: 35. Level
I.IVlVVlIKAVI (a) Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri N[
(Bey.m),1928. 1297*: 36. Level IjJOA: 37· Level 1345: 38-9. Level 1359: 40-1.
h'il
iV(OllcrlOOVOC) Sr Nrccvf ) Pc
Level 1)62 42. Level [381: 43. Wall west of slip road: 44-5.
:
[I] Gray, 'Bricksramps', 56 no. 45. [2] Schneider, 1012
Gamma altered to delta by the addition of diagonal stroke. 'Ziegelstempel'j aej no. 35 (erroneous). [3] Mamboury, Unknown: 46-7. I. INBIN[
"Nouvelle lecture', 122 (erroneous). r. No. r99. 2. No. 118. J. No. 105· 4. No. 447. 5. No. 126).
(a) Stamp: 16) x )8. iV(OIK"tlffivoc)~1'N[
6. No. 527. 7. No. 470. 8. No. 49). 9. No. 26). 10. No. 508.
Hippodrome. Drain passing below the marble staircase: (many)
11. No. 5)7. 12. No. 443· I): No. 1033· 14· No. 1094. 15. No. (a) Stamp:? x25.
I.
471. 16. No. p6. 17· NQ. 533. 18. No. 6)2A. 19. No. 658. Great Palace. Area Ab, collapsed vault: r.
1. 360 x 340 x4o-45.
N(I)KH[ 20. No. 1)09. 21. No. 1107. 22.. No. 1I0S. 2.3. No. 1133. I. ?x? x40.
[r] Mamboury's notes.
24· No. 1138. 25. No. 1283. 26. No I284. 27. No. 1361. [r] Mamboury's notes.
1007
28. No. 643. 29· No. 574. 30. No. 608. 31. No. 1171. 32. No.
I. INE>HKH[ 1013
1003 1)11. 33. No. 1312. H·No.I)60. 35.No.I220. 36.No.I079.
9' N(I)",,[(~6pou)]
iV(OIK"tlOOVOC) I. IVlABAVI.
I. IVlBVlIKAVI 37· No. IIp. 38. No. 1280. 39. No. 1359. 40. No. 1238.
(a) Sramp.} x )0 .• 41. No. 1239. 42. No. IlI7· 43· No. 12)2. 44· No. 137. iv(oll<"tloovoc) a' ~a() N .
iV(OllC'tlroVQC) 9'NllCC1V()
Date: 425/6 or 440/1. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. IC. 45· No. I4I. 46. No. 632. 47. No. II8I.
(a) Stamp: 156x)5.
(3) Excavations near the Palace of Antiochus. Within the limits of Cisterns in Gi.ilhanc, near Bdb-r Humfiyfm: J. Notes: 1-47: One brick measures? x? x 35.
Kalenderhane Camii. G4/4: I.
the excavations undertaken at the end of 1950. [IJ Hill, 'Bricks tamps', 217, D2. [2J Sarachane archive neg.
I. 390X390X45 1. 370 x 370 x47.
[I] Duyuran, 'Palace of Justice I', 37. fig. 16. [I] Mamboury's notes.
5041.28(46).
[r] Peschlow, 'Bricksramps', A24.
320 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 32I
ONHCIMOY (a) Stamp: 107 x 70. (a) Stamp: ? x J5. ITA( )
Hebdomon (Bakrrkoy): I. Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
ONHCIMO(Y)S I. MSBKinv. 6222, (190) X (220) x? I. ? x? X35. No accessory
[r] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 89 no. 29. [2] Schneider. [I] Mamboury's notes.
1014 1026
I. +ONH 'Ziegclstempel', 267 no. 79. [)J MSBK neg. 62223. [4J DAI
L INl>.IBAfIA
CIMOS (1st) neg. 2343 (cast). [5] Mamboury's notes (from cast).
[6] Mango's notes (from cast). iv(811crtrovoc) 8,' ~a( ) fIa( )
+ 'CNnclllo(u)s (b) Stamp: (108) x(47).
.6
OPMIZ( ) (a) Stamp: r68 X24.

(a) Stamp: 120 x64. Unknown: I.

Date: 430iI or 445/6 or 460h. See Part I1, Ch. 9) sect. le.
Sekbanbasi ibrahim Aga Mescidi. I. Once in Robert College. fragment. ? x ? x 36, AM 444. 1023 Balaban Aga Mescidi: 1-.2.
[rJEyice, 'Sekbanbasr', IS8,fig. 10. [I] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Bardill negs. 95.13.33. 34. 1. +TWNOP I. iAM 62. 2.iAMI2I.
Notes: 1-2. One brick measures 375 x 360 x45.
ONHCIMOY MIMzA [r] Mamboury's notes.

1015 + "tON 'OPlllS(SOU) a monogram no. 12 2. INl>.I·BAfIA

ON(H)C( ), ON(H)CI( )
I. +ONH It is uncertain whether the alpha is an indiction or an accessory. iv(811cnrovoc) 8,'· ~a() fIa()
CIMO
ON(H)C() (a) Stamp: 159 x 78.
Y (a) Stamp: 16) x 26.
. Unknown: 1-2. Date: 430/1 or 445/6 or 460/1. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le.
+ 'Ovnciuoo 1019 I. iAM (<;:K) 7'. 2. iAM (<;:K) 7la. TokludedeMescidi: 1-2.
I. +ONC2INl>.2f [IJ Mango's notes.
(a) Stamp: 105 x 70. LiAM)7·1.iAM42.
Great Palace. Area Ab, collapsed vault: 1. + 'Ov(~)c()s iv8(l1<tlrovoc)s y' (b) Deeply incised cross above inscription. Arms of cross 35 XIS. Notes: 1-2. One brick measures 380 x 375 x45.
I.? X?X50. Unknown: I. [I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp: 170 x40.
[r] Mamboury's notes. I. Once in Robert College, ? x ? x 33-35, AM J04.
Cistern on Nuruosmaniye Caddesi: I.
[I] Mango's notes. [2J Bardill negs. 95.2.37a; 95.3.oa, la, 19a,
1016 I.360X350X50.
20a; 95+13a, 15a.
I. [ ... J .. [1] Mamboury's notes.
(c) Date: CjJl/). See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. lb. Accessory A
[OJNHCI (b) Stamp: 17ox)8.
Hagia Sophia. Ruins in front of the west doors. demolished
[MJOY+ Great Palace. Area Ab: I. See 1558.la.
November 1873.
I.370x?x50.
[... J .. ['OJv~d[~Jou + [IJ Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Letter', 130 no. 6.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp: (58) x (60). (c) Stampi r So x j j .
Kalenderhane Camii. Roof, north-east corner: 1. Great Palace. Area Ab. collapsed vault: I. AccessoryN
I. (157) x (II6) x )5. I. 370 x? x45, very light. SeefIAN().
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', Bp. [I] Mamboury's notes. O[
1020 1024
ONHCIM[
I. +ONC2IN[ I. INIBAO[
AccessoryT
1017 + 'Ov(~)c( )s iv[ iv(81K'tlrovoc) t" ~a() 'q
I. +ONH See fIATO.
(a) Stamp:? x 40. (a) Stamp: 8p21.
CIM(.J
Great Palace. Area Ab: I. Palace of Antiochus: I.
+ 'Ovrtciujoo] I.? x? x30. I.? X? x40.
+ 'Oviciu] oo J [I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp:? x 54.
1021
Great hall attached to the rotunda north of the hexagon of
I. +ONC2INl>.[
Antiochus.
[I J Bardill neg. 96.2. 19a. + 'Ov(~)c()s iv8[ IT( ) DAN( )
(a) Stamp: (144) x )8.
For a name abbreviated to a single letter cp. <1>( ).
Kalenderhane Camii. Fill over vault of west cross-arm: I. 1027
I. (225) X (220) x )7. 1025 I. INSHBABfIAN
ONHGIMOY MON(AXOY) [1] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps'j Aaj. I. IN€I'!IK€BAfI iv(811crtrovoc)s~' ~a(~} fIavO
1018 iv(8ut'tlrovoc) £1' + (in leaf or heart) K(up')£ ~a( ) fI() iv(81l<tlrovoc)s~'~a(~} fIa()v
I. +ONH ON(H)CI()
(a) Stamp: 135 X22. Beta either carved or recorded in error for rho.
CIMO 1022
Date: 416h7 or 43 Ill. Sec Part I1, Ch. 9, sect. lb. (a) Stamp: 170 x 30.
NOMY I. +ONCIIB[
Palace of Antiochus: r , Great Palace. Area Ab, collapsed vault: (many) I.
+ 'Ovncipou Ilov(axou) + 'Ov(~)CI() I~ [ 1.380x380x5°· 1.385 x370x5°·
Line J reads from right to left. + 'Ov(~)c;() ;~ [ [I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes.
 -.~
.<
322 CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE 323
ITAITYAOY (b) Possibly same as a.
ITA TPOK1\.( ) 1037
Stamp: (IJ5) x26.
I. ]YAITIIf>.NI+
1028 Unknown: 1.
10}2

+
I.
I. 385 X(220) X47-57, imprints of hobnails, AM 109. + (v(8,,,,,Oivoc) 8' ~() TIau[()
I. INEITATPDKA
[I] Bardill neg. 94.8.j I. For ~() with this name cp. 1043.1.
(c) Stamp: 145 X22. iv(8,,,,nOivoc) [y1l8'TIo;<po,u.() + (v8(,,,,,o,voc) p-ITau[()
Date: 416/r7 or 4JlI2. See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. lb. Delta inscribed beneath superseded gamma. (a) Stamp: (161) x27.
Palace of Antiochus: I.
(a) Stamp: rIO x 26. Kalenderhane Camii. South wall, west window: I.

Monogram no. 55 (Mccuptxio'c) I.385X380X50. I. Brick lost.

+ TIo;,ruA.oUiv8(,,,,,Oivoc)s ie" ~() [r] Mamboury's notes. Land Walls. Near Silivri Kapr.
,() [I] Peschlow, 'Bricksramps', Al8 h.
[I] Mango, 'Brick Stamps', 20, fig. 2 (top).
The significance of the beta and epsilon in the ansae of the tabula is 2. INeI'I'KEEATIAT
uncertain. Unknown: I. 1038
iv(8umOivoc) et' + (in leaf or heart) K(up,)e ~a() ITa«) I. +I11ITIAV
I. (170) x(I69) x 45, AM J I (old no. possibly 4', 47, or 49).
(a) Stamp: tabula 126 X41 (100 overall height); roundel jj iv(8'KnOivoc) et' + (in leaf or heart) K(up,)e ~a( ) TIa() -r
[I] Bardill neg. 9402.t8.
diameter.
+ iv(ollcnrovoc) t' I1au()
(a) Stamptr 5 8 x 29.
Date: 582 or 59617. See Part Il, Ch. 5. sect. r a. Date: 416/17 or 431/2. See PartlI, Ch. 9, sect. lb. (a) Stamp: 200 X27.
Unknown: I. Sea Walls. Walls next to Boukoleon gate.
Palace of Antiochus: (numerous) I.
I. 337 x325 x48,AM4· [r] Mango's notes.
I.390X380X50.
[r] Bardill negs. 94.I.7a, Sa.
[I]DAI (1st) neg. KB '505. [2] Bardill and Grearrex,
(b) Stamp: tabula IJO X4J (IOJ overall height); roundel ye wide, 60 10}9
high. 'Anriochus', fig. 2B. [3] Mamboury's notes. I. +INILITAY
ITA Y( ), ITA Y 1\.( )
Date: 582. See Part Il, Ch. 5, sect. la and Ch. r r , sect. 7. Unknown: 1-2.
+ iV(OlK'tlOOVOC) l'( ITcm()
Excavation of the Diakonissa complex near Istanbul I. (200) x(Joo) x60,AM 27. 2. (288) x(244) x 44-57, AM J77. TIAY()
(a) Stamp: (175) x 21.
University, 1943-46. Cistern 2.5 m. north of Church B. [I] Bardill negs. 94.2.IJ (I); 95.8.II, 12 (2). ---
[r] Firath, 'Tuglalar', 12. [2] Firath, 'Trois eglises', 172, 177, pl. IO)} Date: 414/1 5 or 429/30. See Part II, Ch. 9. sect. rb.
I. [I]NAITAV Palace of Antiochus: r .
7(b) no.I. [J] Mamboury's notes.
(c) Date: 582 or 59617. See Part Il, Ch. 5. sect. ra. I.38oX36ox5°·
[i]v(8umOivoc) 0;' ITau()
Sea Walls. Pillars near the monumental staircase, between the
[I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze).
(a) SIamp:('47)Xj8. (b) Stamp: 181 X2I.
railway and the sea, area Fb: (several) 1.
Kalenderhane Camii, Unknown: I. Unknown: I.
1.350X350X5°·
I. (lJ 5) x(205) x40. 1.376 x365 X 36-40, AM rI2.
[r] Mamboury and Wiegand, Kaiserpalsste, 15 no. I.
ITATPIKIOY [r] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', A26. [I] Bardill neg. 94.8.)4.
[2] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 269 no. 103. [3] Mamboury,
'Chrisme', 456 no. 8 bis. [4] Mamboury's notes.
1030 1040
(d) Date: 582 or 59617. Sec Part Il, Ch. 5, sect. la. 1034
I. +TIA[TP) I. +INleTIAY
I. INf>.2rTIAY
Silivri. IKID[Y]
[r] Dirimrekin, 'Selymbria', 32 no. 5. (v8(,,,,,OivoC)5 -( TIau() + iV(OllC'tlOOVOC) te" ITcxu()
+ TIo;[<p]'KlO[U]
(e) Date: 582 or 59617. See Part Il, Ch. 5, sect. la. (a) Stamp: '72 x J9.
(a) Stamp: 152 x28.
Unknown. (a) Stamp: (80) x (58). Kalenderhane Camii. Bema, fill of north chamber: r.
Land Walls. Ayvausaray, corner of the Blachernai Walls,
[r] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 94 no. 60, pl. I4 no. 12. Rhegium (Kiiciik Cekmece). Large surrounding wall of the I. (J60) x(I60) XJ5, one break.
junction with the Sea Walls of the Golden Horn.
[2] Mango, 'Brick Stamps', 21, fig. 3 (top row, centre). Acropolis, beside the sea: 1. [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', A27 h.
[r] Mamboury's notes.
I.? x?x35.
[r] Mamboury's notes. 1041
"1035
I. ]INleTIAY
I. +INf>.2rTIAY
OAT() + lVO(lK'tlWVOc)sy'TIau()
] (v(8,,,,,Oivoc) t£'TIau()

(a) Stamp:(I59)xJ8.
[029 (it) Stamp: 155 x p.
Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: 1.
r. INel'l'KeBAITAT Unknown: I.
r. (2IJ) x (207) x J6.
I. 360 xHo x 55. iAM6.
(v(8'KnOivoc) et' + (in leaf or heart) K(up')' ~a() IT,,« ) [r] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', A27 a.
ITATPO( ) [r] Mamboury's notes.
iv(8,,,,,o,voc) et' + (in leaf or heart) K(Upl)' ~o;() ITa() 'r
1042
(a) Possibly same as h. 1031 10}6 r. ]rITAY
Stamp: I 54 x 26. l. BATIATPOf>. I. I]NV2rTIAY
Date: 416/r7 or 43112. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. rb. ]y'TIau()
~o;( ) Flcctpof ) 8 (]v8(,K"tOivoc)s r'ITau()
Palace of Antiochus: (numerous) I. (a) Stamp: ? x 28.
I. 390 x 370 x 50--60.
The delta may be an indiction or an accessory. (a) Stamp: 190 x 30. Unknown: I.
Notes: Several have imprints of hobnails. (a) Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia. Court to the east of the apse. Great Palace. Area Ac, below the Palace of Justice (ayasma?). dAM (<;:K)no. 77,? x? x JO.
[1] Mamboury's notes. [r] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mango's notes.
 ..~
324 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 325
1043 TIAYi\OY TIAYAOY TABULA ANSATA
I. YATIIIV[
1052
RECTANGULAR

+
]IX' fl()TIlXu() I. +nAYAOY
For!l( )with misname cp. 1037.1. +f1a:uA.ou
WITH INDICTION
(a) Stamp: (114) X)"
1048
(a) Stamp: (122) x az , +nAYAOV
Kalenderhane Camii. Berna, filling of north wall: I.
I. YOAYATIIIT2I11>111+ 'Bath' building beside the Myrelaion rotunda. Filling. IN1>2A
r. (nl) x (170) x )0. .•. [r] Talbot Rice archive (rubbing) .
Irl Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', Az8 a. + lVOllct(trovoc) fl' nauAou (b) Stamp: lIS X4'.
Monogram no. 55 (Mcuprcloo)
+ TIauMlU ivB(\JC'tlroVOC)S a'
Ca) Stamp: 220 X)7. Unknown: 1.
Tokludede Mescidi: 1-16. I. (260) x (360) x40,AM 63. (a) Date: 582/3' See Part Il, Ch. 50 sect. la and Ch. I I, sect. 7.
I.iAM4I. ,.iAMfS. ).iAM49. 4·iAMl'. 5.iA..\{15· [I] Bardill neg. 94+'°. Excavation of the Diakonissacomplex near Istanbul
1044
6.iAM6I. 7.iAM64' S.iAM76. 9.iAMS, ... ,O.iA..\{SI. (c) Land Walls. Tower 4', rubble. University, 1943-46. Cistern 2.5 m. north of Church B.
I. B]ATIAV
Il.iAM93' 12.iAM96. J3·iAMr02. 14.iAMr05. I5.iA1\1 [I] Dumbarton Oaks Photographic Collection neg. L67.969 [I] Firarh, <Trois eglises', 172, 17l, pl. 7(b) no. 2.
P]IX()TIlXu() no. 16. iAM 122. (1. Sevcenko). [2] Mamboucy's notes.
(a) St.rnp:(1It)X)9. Notes: 1-16. One brick measures 375 x355 x 35. (b) Stamp: tabula 117 x 47; roundel ez wide, 17 high.
Date: 507-22. See Part IT, Ch. 9. sect. za. [I] Mamboury's notes. Date: 582/3 or 597/8. See Part Il, Ch. 5. sect. la.
St Polyeuktos. Unknown: I. Unknown: 1-4.
I. No. 148, ? x? x40. 1049 I.H5X3I7x42,AMr9. 2.?x?x444.AM10r. 3·AM278.
[I] Hill, 'Bricksrarnps', 208, A2o. [2J Sarachane archive neg. I. [1]Nh.2TIAYAOY 4. (zro) x('OI) X4), AM 44 I.
1·)9·11. [i]VO(UctlroVOC)S TIa.ut..ou [I] Bardill negs. 94·',', ) (I); 94-S.22 (,); 9p·), 4 (); 9P)· 27,
TIAYAO[ ,S (4).
(a) Stamp: (160 from right-hand upright of nu to far right) X47
1053

+
2.
Date: 502-33 or 517-20 or 532-35. See Part H, Cli. 97Sect. zd. I. +TIAYAO[Y
Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagr. Walls
1045
positioned furthest north and lower down: I. +TInuAo[u
I. ]BATIAV +TIAVAOV
1.37° x 370 x 35, well-baked, mottled with yellow SpOts, (a) Stamp: (100) x )8. INMA
] PIX()TIIXU() [I] Mamboury's notes. Bcyazit, great wall to the north of the Diakonissa complex,
Monogram no. 55 (Mcuptxiou)
(a) Stamp: (I r r) X'9. debris in water conduit: I.
Land Walls. Near BI I. 1050
+ TIauA.ou ivB(tJC't'toovoc)s a'
r. ? x? X35.
[I] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, 149 no. 7· [,] DAI I. Timoni records the inscription as "Ii dhia Paulou', which seems to [I] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stamp: tabula 12.5 x 50; roundel zo wide x 60 high.
(Isr) neg. 660' (case). [)] Mamboury's notes (from case). be a misreading of Date: 582/3. See Parr Il, Ch. 5, sect. la and Ch. 11. sect. 7.
[4] Mango's notes (from cast). + I[N]1>SIATIA YAOY Excavation of the Diakonissa complex near Istanbul
University, 1943-46. Cistern 2..5 m. north of Church B: several.
+ i[v JB( UC1l&VOC)S Ut' nauA.ou
[I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Ruins in Beylerbeyi (Sophianae palace?).
TIAY()S MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE CARRIED INDICTION
Er] Timoni, Promenades, 2.236. [2] Meiiopoulos, "Topothesia',
229· [3] Dirimtekin, 'Beylerbey', II, 27. 1054
1046
I. +I!lt1>ITIA Y2 I. TI]AYAOY

+ iV(OtlCttroVQC) ~t" On1>()5 TI]IXUAoU TIAY[

(a) Stamp: "I x )6. (a) Stamp: (89) x 26.
WITHOUT INDICTION CRUCIFORM
Unknown: I. Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: I.
I. lAM (<;K) no. 21, 340 X340 X40. TIAYAO I. (221) x('OO)x4I. 1057
[I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Peschlow, 'Bricksramps', A60. I
1051
!It
I. +TIAYAO+
1>
+ TIlXuAo(u) + AITIAY[.
TIAYA() 1055
(a) Date: after 532. See Part H, Cb. 9, sect. 2C.
1047 Baths ofZeuxippos. In situ in the apse of Building 2.
I.]YOAYATI[ e
I. +IN1>2IrTIAYA [I] Gray, 'Brickstamps', 55 no. 33. [2] Schneider, ] TIIXUAoU[ A
'Ziegelstempel', 268 no. 82. lvB(\1C't\oovoc) m" nq.u[.]. ea
+ ivo(uc-nrovoc)s ry'TIa:oA.() (a) Stamp: (IIo) x )7.
(b) St Euphemia in Hebdomon (Bakirkoy) (location according
Date: 507-22. See Part H, Ch. 9. sect. la. (a) Stamp: Ijo (60 +)0 + 60) x Ioo()l +)0 + )1),
(a) Stamp: 210 X 40. to Sorlin-Dorigny, but no such church is known). St Polyeuktos. Level rooj": 1. Date: 502/3 or 5q/x8 or 532/3' See Part H, Ch. 9, sect. zd.
Kalcndcrhane Camii.ln east part of vault of north cross-arm: J. [I] Dethier, 'Makrikoy', 16) no. ,', p]. lA' no. 4. [,] Sorlin- 1. No. 752, ? x? X 38-41. Remains destroyed in 1924 near Ccmal Nadir SOkagl: 1.
I. ()60) x()OI) x44. Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 88 no. 23. [3] Lcclcrcq, 'Estampilles', [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 208, 1I0, A21. (2] Sarachane archive I.390X380X50.
[rj Peschlow, 'Bricksramps', AZ9. ' col. 546 no. 9a.
neg·5·42.15a. [I] Mamboury's notes.
 ,,~
•
)26 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 327
UNCERTAIN SHAPE z, INABArI€T (a) Land Walls. About 2,500 m. north-east of Topkapr (i.e. in the Accessory A
1058
iv(Bll('tlOOVOC) a' ~a() IT.«) i region of the Pentapyrgion).
1071
r. )rIAY[ [I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Marque', 315.
r.rETPOyA
(a) Stamp: 140 x 25.
)rIau[ Date: 417/18 or 432/3- See Part 11, Ch. 9. sect. lb. Accessory I Flerpoo c
Palace of Antiochus: I.
(a) Land Walls. Yedikule.
[1] Meliopoulos, 'Topothesia', 231 section B~no. 4.
r . 480
x 340/300
[r] Mamboury's
x 50.
notes.
I 1067
1. )AIT€TI
(a) Stamp: 1)6 x JJ (right-hand
Unknown: 1.

1. 330 X3JO x J5-50,

r
end )7 (centre).

AM 294 (old no. 2II? (last digit in

~]~() IT«( ) I
1062 doubt)).
r. INaaAIl€~ (a) Stamp: ? x 32. [1) Bardill negs. 95.'.t5a, I6a.
Binbirdirek cistern. East wall, in tambour.
ITE() iv(Btmrovoc) p- pa() rI«() [I] WuIzinger, 'Subsrruktionsbauten', 386, fig. la no. 4.
MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE CARRIED INDICTION
AccessoryK (a) Stamp: r65 x )0.
Remains in the area bounded by Divan Y olu, Piyer Loci l07l.
1059
r. .lI3rIVa.t..[ Caddesi, Doscluk Yurdu SOkagl, and Klod Farer Caddesi: I. 1. )rI€TPO[
I.400X390XH·
)B ~a( ) rIEK( )
)B ~() rI.() K
[1] Mamboury's notes.
I ITETPOY;
) Flecpo]

(a) Ruins near Topalian Ham, in {he area bounded by Hoca Ham
1063 Sokagl, Kapurcular Sokagi, and Kaurcioglu Soka~.
(a) Stampt r j j x j a.
1. +IN.t..2BBAIT€TU [I] Me1iopoulos, "Iopothesia', 230 no. 4. [2] Schneider,
Unknown: J. SINGLE-LINE
J. Fragment,? x? x 5 5. iAM. + ivB(IK<lroVOC)S P' ~a() rI.«)c
I. WITH INDICTION
'Ziegclstempel', 265 no. 36 (erroneous).
[r] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stamp: (1l0) X'7. I 1068
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 19W38, in
MULTIPLE-LINE
road outside dig: I. 1. N .t..2frI €TPo
I. 380 x 380 x40, no. 27. (i)vB( umrovoc)s y' rIEtpO( u) WITH INDICTION
ITEK( ) [rJ Russell Papers, Miscellaneous Remainder, box 38, neg. 201.
The complete reading is given in the brickstamp notebook. (a) Stamp: 195 X)5. Layout: Inscription arranged around cross formed thus-f-
SeeITEO. Church of Christ Philanthropes. Near cower 10 of Sea Walls No accessory
1064 (,Tower of Theophilus'): r.
1. +IT€T.t..S 1073
I.37ox?x45·
[I] Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, fig. 60 no. I. r. Fl € '-<
+ rIE<O B' s
[2] Mamboury's notes.
+ ;s:
ITEA~( ) TPW
(a) Stamp: 139-42 x 52-54.
Unknown: 1-6. + TI£'tp(ou) Ev(8uC'tlrovoc)y'
1060
r. ('15) x(r85) x40,AM 70. z , (265) x (227) X40,AM71. 1069
r. INIBBAIT€M (a) Stamp: 85 x 6,.
).)40 x('95) x 44-54, AM91. 4· (260) x(,68) x )5-42, AM9" r. rI)€TPO
iv(Bllt"OOVOC) IW ~aO ITu..a() Date: early 6th century. See Part Il, Ch. 10 no. 15.
5· ? x? x H, AM "9. 6. (210) x(I80) x )6-5', AM t j a. IlJE<PO(U) Unknown: I.
(3) Stamp: 190 x 21. [1) Bardillnegs. 94+" (r), 22 (2); 94·5·,6, '7 ()), ,8 (4); 95.1.2)
(a) Stamp: (46) x 29. I. ? x ? x 34, iAM 74.4 PT, once in Robert College.
Date: 503/4 or 51Bh9 or 533/4. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect.ad. (5)·
Kalenderhane Camii. B4 in baulk: I. [r] Mango's notes (rubbing).
Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagt: r , (b) Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
Hagia Soph..ia and Hagia Eirene: I. r. ('05) x(r87) x )9.
I. 370 x370 x40. 1074
Once in the Hagia Eirene collection. [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', A30.
[r] Mamboury's notes. I. I.[Il)€>
[I] Mamboury's notes. .•. ':'
;s:
(c) In the area of the excavations undertaken in 1946-47 and
1958-60 between Hagia Eirene and Hagia Sophia. [T] PW
ITET( ) [1] Dirimtekin, 'Pouillcs', 180 no. 3. WITHOUT INDICTION + [Il)E[')p(ou) tV(BlK<lrovOC) la'

1065 No accessory (a) Stamp: (65) x 58.

No accessory Date: early 6th century. See Part 11. Ch. no. 15.
1. +IYl2IrIT€T 1070
10

1061 Kalenderhane Camii. Exonarthex T'r/z: I.

+ iv(5n~'tl&voc)s W' il£'t() r. !5qnrr
r. INABArI€T r. (2' 5) x (218) x 4'.
(a) Unknown: 1. TIE'tPOU [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', EJ.
iv(Bll"'OOVOC) a' ~() IT ee ()
I. Once in the Hagia Eirene collection. (a) Stamp: 94 x )9.
(a) Stamp: r)8 x'4. [I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 95 no. 65. 1075
Date: 507-22. See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. aa.
Date: 417h8 or 432/3. Sec Part 11, Ch. 9. sect. lb. r. IT € pO
Sr Polyeuktos. Level j So": I.
Palace of Antiochus: 1. 1066
I. No. 1272,360 x? x 35-38.
+
I. 480 x 350/300 x 55. r. ]. BArI€T T p~
[I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 210, A23. [2] Sarachane archive neg.
[I] Mamboury's notes. ) . paO IT.,O + rIhp(ou) iv(BIK<lroVOC) 1P'
10.2·33·
 ..~
}28 CATALOGUE
•
CATALOGUE

(a) Stamp: 86 x 7J. (a) Several variants. (a) Stamp: 90 x 60. Accessory X
Date: 518/9. See Part H. Ch. 9, sect. la. Date: 519/20. See Pan 11, Ch. 9, sect. la. Date: 519120. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. 2:1.
StPolyeuktos. Level 165: I. Level 252: 2. Level 600: 3. Level St Polyeuktos. Level 924 (pier, eastern end, debris): I. Level 1083
St Pclyeuktos. Level zoo": 1. Level 702": 2. Level Sj j": 3. Level
700*: 4· lOSS: 2. Unknown: 3-4. I. IT € '"'
908: 4· Level pea": 5· Level 977':-: 6-S. Level cor: 9. Level tcoo": -} [is!
1. No. 101. 2. No. 746. 3. No. 714. 4. No. 526. I. No. 1054. 2. No. 1166. 3. No. r 399. 4. No. 1400. ro-r r. Level 1059: 12. Level 1109*: 13. Level Il36: 14. Level
Notes: 1-4. One brick measures Lx ? )(40. [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 220 EI4-15. T PX CV
1196: 15· Unknown: 16-18.
[r] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 220, E9. [2] Sarachanc archive ncg. + TIE'tp(OU) €v(ouC'ttoovoc) lY'X
4- IT € •.• I. No. 474. 2. No. 624. ).No.6.6. 4·No·405. 5.No.)87.
to.2-7()).
.• + Z 6. No. SI3· 7· No. 515· S. No. 567. 9. No. 1412. 10. No. 646A.
II. No, 637A. 1.1. No. 876. 13· No. 59!. 14· No. 397.
(a) Stamp: (90) x6) .
Date: 519/20. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. za.
T P CV 15· No. 468. 16. No. 360. 17. No. 1413. 18, No. 1431. St Polyeuktos. Level 515: I. Level Syj: 2. Level 898: 3. Level
The photograph shows a faint trace of a bar over the nu, iota and Notes: I-IS. One brick measures? x ? x ]2-35, 991: 4. Level 1000';': 5. Level tco t": 6-S. Level 1005": 9. Level
1076 (no entry)
gamma. [I] Hill, 'Bricksramps', 220, E16. [2] Sarachane archive neg. 1010: 10. Level 1121 CBapqstery', west wall, south end): 11.
10.2.18 (8). I. No. 64IA. 2. No. 663. 3. No. 643A. 4. No. 660. 5. No. 620A.
+ ITe"tp(ou) f.V(Ol1C11rovOc)
t1'
6. No. 644-'. 7. No. 656. 8. No. 680. 9. No. 862.
(a) Stamp: 8) x65. 10. No. 1I34. 11. No. 799.
1077
Date: 519/20. See Pan Il, Ch. 9, sect. aa. Notes: I-ll. One brick measures? x? x 30-40.
I. IT € '"'
St Polyeuktos. LevelS9S: 1. Level 1000*: 2. Levcl rcor": 3. Accessory '( [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps", 221, E19. [2] Sarachane archive neg.
{> ;s: Level 1010:4. Unknown: 5-13.
roga' 10.2.20 (7).
T PCV I. No. 684. 2. No. 672. ). No. 657. 4. No. 11)6. 5· No. 46).
I. IT € •.•
+ I1e'tp(ou) EV(OlK'tl&VOC) lY' 6. No. 1390. 7· No. 1391. 8. No. 1392. 9. No. 1393. 10. No.
+ [is!
1394· 11. No. 1395· 12. No. 1396. 13· No. 1397.
(a) Stamp: 91 x66. T PYCV Mayor may not have carried accessory
Notes: 1-13. One brick measures? x? x 30-35.
Date: 519/20. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. aa.
[I] Hill, 'Bricksramps', 220, El 3.:. [2] Sarachane a~c~; ncg. + TIE'tp(OU) £v(OUC'tloovoc)ty',:> 1084
StPolyeuktos. Level 898: I. Level 909*: 2. Level rocr ": 3. Level
10.2.12. r. IT € [.]
1005*: 4· Level 1362": 5. Unknown: 6. The photographs show little indication of (he accessory attested by
I. No. 68). 2. No. 414- ). No. ej a. 4- No. 846. 5· No. 1119. 1078
Hill. + [.]
[Z]
6. No. 1)98. LIT et.i (a) Stamp: (80) x(56). T P [CV]
Notes: 1-6. One brick measures ? x? x 40-45.
Er] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 220, £14. [2] Sarachane archive negs. {> ~I Date: 519/20. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. la.
St Polyeuktos. Level 920';' (pier, eastern end, debris): I. Level + Fletpfou) [£v(51Kn",voe) .. 1
10.2.14 (I), 10.2.15 (5). T P <rJ 937':-: 2. Level I054~': 3· Level 1059: 4. Unknown: 5-6. (a) Stamp: Approx. (66) x (70).
I. No. 917. 2. No. lOSS. 3. No. r065· 4· No. 881. 5. No. 1414. Date: 507-22. See Part H, Ch. 9, sect. aa.
IT € '"'
+ IT£,p(ou) iV(OI1<tl",VOC)[ .. 1
2.
{> [is!
6. No. 1415. St Polyeuktos. Level 15 S: I. Unknown: 2.
(a) Stamp: 85 x61. Notes: 1-0. One brick measures? x? x 32-40. I. No. 155. 2.No. 1423.
TPCV Date: 5°7-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. aa. [r} Hill, 'Bricksramps', 220, Er7. [2] Sarachane archive negs. Notes: 1-2. One brick measures ? x? X45.
+ I1hp(ou) EV(OtK'tUxwoc) St Polyeuktos. Level 272: I. 10.2.21 (4), 10.2.22 (I).
l."( [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 221, E20. [2] Sarachane archive neg.
I. No. 1142, ? x? x 40.
10.2.27 (r).
(a) Stamp: Approx. 95 x65. [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 220, EI2. [2] Sarachane archive neg.
Date: 519/20. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. za. 10.2.11.
St Polyeuktos. Level 844'f: r. Level 85 r": 2. Level 924 (pier,
1082 1085
eastern end, debris): 3-4. Level 925": 5. Level 977*: 6-7. Level 1079
I. ITY € '"' I. + flE'tp(OU) wirh indicciou lW/r{/to'
991: 8. Level 1000*: 9. Level 1059: 10. Level 1109*: 11-13. Level LIT€
[.] (a) Several variants.
r r r z: 14. Level 1362*: 15-17. Unknown: 18-21. + ;s:
I. No. 584' 2. No. 536. 3. No. lOp. 4· No. 1058. 5. No. 1027. + [Z]
T P CV
Date: c5 18-521. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. z a.
6. No. 488. 7. No. 492. 8. No. 661. 9. No. 6JJA. 10. No. 888. T P [CV] StPolyeuktos. Level 725''': I. Level xjy": 2. Level 924 (pier,
II. No. 635. 12. No. 1401. 13· No. 596. 14. No. 1402. IS. No. + TIE"tp(OU) f.V(OtK'ttWVOc)ty'"'! eastern end, debris): 3-4. Level 1005':-: 5- Level 1058: 6.
IT£,p(ou) [iV(OI1<tl",VOC) i.: Unknown: 7-1}.
Il13· 16. No. 1122. 17. No. 1125. 18. No. 631. 19. No. 1300. (a) Stamp: 84 x6).
20. No. 1403. 21. No. 1404.
(a) Stamp: (67) x68. I.No·33S. 2. No. 269. 3·No.1023· 4·No.105I. 5.No.S67.
Date: 519120. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. 201.
Notes: 1-21. One brick measures? x? x35-50. Date: early 6th century. See Part Il, Ch. 10 no. 15. 6. No. II65. 7. No. r405· 8. No. 1406. 9. No. 1407. 10. No.
St Polyeuktos. Level 43: I. Level 165: 2. Level 833 ": 3. Level
Fethiye Camii. 1408. II. No. 1409. 12.. No. 1410. 13. No.qII.
[I] Hill, 'Bricksramps', 220, El 5. [2] Sarachane archive negs. 912';': 4· Level cz , (pier, eastern end, debris): 5. Level 1000*: 6.
10.2.16(18) [I] Mango's notes. [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 221 EI4-20.
Level 1001*: 7. Level 1005';': 8. Level 13S0'"; 9. Unknown:
(b) Stamp: (7') X(6I). 10-17.
Date: early 6th century. See Part Il, Ch. 10 no. 15. I. No. 290. 2. No. Il2. 3. No. 629. 4. No. 627A. 5. No. 1059.
Layout: Inscription arranged around cross formed thus +
Accessoryll.
Unknown: 1. 6. No. 6J4A. 7. No. 626A. 8. No. 897. 9. No. 1164. 10. No. 1086
1. Brick cut to circular shape, 300 diameter X40 thick, AM 30 1080 645· IJ. No. 1416. 12..No. 1417. 13. No. 141S. 14. No. 1419. I. IT € '"
(old no. 92). I. ITf.€ 12 15· No. 1420. 16. No. 142r. 17. No.q22. 'I<
[I] Bardill neg. 94.2.17. + ~ Notes: 1-17. One brick measures 420 x? x 35-50. ;s:
T P CV [r] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 220, EI8. [2J Sarachane archive neg. T P CV
3. Same as type I or 2.
TIetp(ou) EV(OtK"tlrovOC)
lY' 0 10.2.19 (8).
+ IThp(ou) f.v(ou("tu:ovoc) t~'
 '.~
•
CATALOGUE
.3° CATALOGUE
33'
(a) Stamp: 86 x 62. 1089 205-13. Level 1380*: 214-15. Level 1381: 216-22. Unknown: Layout: Inscription not arranged around a cross
Date: early 6th century. See Part 11, Ch. 10 no. 15· r. -rr at 223-4·
1092
Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: J. + I. No. 79· 2. No. J06. 3. No. 275· 4· No. 276. 5. No. 285_
+€li1SIV
I. (248) x(197} "42. mm 6. No. 200. 7. No. 213. 8. No. 274. 9. No. 160. 10. No. 16I.
I.

IT€TPOY
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps'c Ea.
+ ITetp(ou} £v(BlImrovoc} 'W Il.No.181. r a. No. 76. 13.No.S4. 14. No. 86. 15.No.109.
16. No. lIS. 17. No. Il4· 18. No. 178. 19. No. 198. 20. No. + ev(OlK'tUOVOC)st~' Flerpou
(a) Stamp:96x75.
Il87· 2I.No.114I. 22.No.II44. 23.No.I251. 24.No.I2P. (3) Stamp: [12 x 57.
:087 Date: 518/19. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. aa.
25· No. 66S. 26. No. 807. 27· No. J04. 2S. No. 433. 29. No. Date: early 6th century. See Part Il, Ch. 10 no. IS.
IT € f> Se Polyeuktos. Level 851 *: I. Level 1072: 2. Unknown: 3·
409. 30. No. 449· 31. No. 246. 32. No. 478. lJ. No. 570. Kalendprhane Camii. Unknown: 1.
I. No. 538. 2. No. 1424. 3. No. 1425.
)4. No. 472. 35· No. 5)5. 36. 0.581. 37. No. )26. 38. No. I. (205) x(205} x 50.
+ Z Notes: 1-3. One brick measures? x? x 36.
530. 39· No. 465. 40. No. 55S. 41. No. 602. 42. No. 603. [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', B5.
T P tU [I] Hill, 'Bricksramps', 221, E12. [1] Sarachane archive negs.
43· No. 604· 44. No. 288. 45. No. 386. 46. No. )72. 47. No.
10.2.25 (I), 10.2.26.
+ DEt"p(OU) iv(5llC"ttOOVOC) l~V )79· 48.No·4I). 49· No. 437. 50. No. 4)8. p. No. 479.
1090
p. No. 481. 5). No. 544· 54· No. 547. 55· No. 548. 56. No.
(a) Stamp: 86 x 60. 1. IT €[.]

Date: poll. See Part II, Ch. 9. sect. za. 551· 57· No. 553· 58. No. 589. 59· No. 615. 60. No. 669.
St Polyeukros. Level Sjc": J. Unknown: 2.
+ ~ 61. No. )9)· 62. No. 412. 63. No. 382. 64. No. 390. 65. No.
WITHOUT INDICTION

I. No. 1)82. l.Ne. 1319.

T P tU 415. 66. No. 624A. 67· No. 907. 68.No.9II. 69.No.912. Layout: Inscription arranged around a cross formed thus +
Notes: 1-2. One brick measures? x? x 35. + ITe<p(ou} ev(Bl1cnrovoc} t[ r , • 70. No. 916. 71. No. 928. 72. No. 929. 73. No. 9)0. 74. No. No accessory
[1] Hill, 'Bricksramps', 220, E8. [2] Sarachane archive neg. 9)2. 75· No. 9)4· 76. No. to)4. 77. No. 1035. 78. No. 1[46.
(a) Stamp: (87) x61. 1093
79· No. II47· 80. No. lOll. 81. No. 1024. 82. No. 1°42.
to.2.6(2}. Date: 516-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. za. I. IT €
S3· No. 1043· S4· No. 1044. 85. No. l04S. 86. No. 1047.
StPolyeuktos. Leve1724: 1. Level 921"': 2. Level 1136: 3·
87· No. 1055· S8. No. I084. 89. No. 1036. 90. No. 713. +
I. No. 618. 2. No. Il45. 3. No. 1102. T P
91. No. 719. 92. No. 1090. 93· No. 491. 94. No. 514. 95. No .
...ayout: Inscription arranged around cross formed thus + Notes: 1-3. One brick measures? x? x 30-45. .___-
554· 96. No. 555· 97·No·7tl. 98.No.678. 99. No. 541. +IThp(ou}
[I] Hill, 'Bricksramps', 221, E21. [1] Sarachene archive negs.
(088 100. No. 709. IOI. No. 62JA. 101. No. 673. 103. No. 82S.
ro.a.aj ()}, 10.2.24 (I). (a) Date: after 532. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. 2C.
IT € 104. No. 829. 105. No. 858. 106. No. r r 53. 107. No. 1029.
Baths of Zeuxippos. In or near Building 1 or 2.
~ + Layout: Inscription arranged around a cross of various types.
10S. No. IOJO. 109. No. 103 I. 110. No. 1091. II I. No. 1092.
[I] Gray, 'Brickstamps', 55 no. 30. [2] Schneider,
112. No. 1110. Il3.No.II30. I14.No.113I. II5.No.Il32.
'Ziegelsrempel', 268 no. 83.
'" T P 1091 II6.No.IIJ5. I17.No.II37. 118.No.1155. II9.No.I068.
(b) Stamp: 90 X70.
+ ITe<p(ou) iv(BuC"ttrovoc} tW J. + Flerpfou) with indiction lWAy'/to'!none 120. No. 1070. Ill. No. 1071. 122. No. 1073. IlJ. No. 10I].
124. No. IOIS. 125. No. 1019. J.l6. No. 1020. 117. No. 868.
Date: early 6th century. See Part Il, Ch. 10 no. r s.
(a) Stamp: 89 x68. (a) Date: 507-22. See Part H, Ch. 9, sect. za. Ruins between the Giilhane hospital and the Topkapr Sarayr
Date: 518/19. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. za. St Polyeuktos. Level 32*: I. Level SS*: 2. Level 61: 3-5 Level 94: 118. No. 870. 129. No. 871. 130. No. 874. 131. No. 877.
fortification: I.
St Polyeuktos. Level 29S: I. Level Sj r": 2. Leve197I: 3. Level 6-8. Level 159: 9-10. Level 163*: 11. Level 164: 12. Level 165: 1)2. No. 878. I)). No. 879. 1)4. No. 880. IH. No. 882.
r , ?x?x40.
1081* (pier, western end, in situ): 4· Level 1292: 5. Unknown: 13-17. Level 172: IS. Level 217: 19. Level z j z: 20. Level 272: 1)6. No. 88). 1)7. No. 884. t38. No. 887. 1)9. No. 1256.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
6-8. 21-1. Level 484: 23-4. Level j rp: 25. Level 540: 26. Level 642: 140. No. 12SS. 141. No. 12S9. 142. No. 1260. 143. No. 1265.
I. No. 188. 2. No. 455. 3. No. 1288. 4· No. 725. 5·No. 1037. 27. Level 667: IS. Level 671: 29· Leve1674: 30. Level 692: 31. 144· No. 1267. 145· No. 1066. 146. No. 1039. 147. No. 720. 2. :3 IT
6. No. 138). 7. No. t)84· 8. No. 1)85· Level 700*: 32-3. Level 713*: 34-5· Level 710: 36. Level 725*: 14S. No. 721. 149· No. 723. 150. No. 72S. 151. No. 729. +
Notes: 1-8. One brick measures? x ? x 30-39· 37. Level 746*: 38. Level Sz S: J9· LeveI8J3*: 40-J· Level 837*: Ip. No. 730. I53·No·742. 154. No. 744. 155· No. 404. ~ b
[I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 220, EIO. [2] Sarachane archive neg. 44. Level 850: 45· Lcvel Bj j: 46. Leyel8w 47-50. Level Bey: 156. TO. 435. 157· 0.572. ISS.No.585. 159·No.S92. +IThp(ou}
10.2.8 (5). 51-7. LeyeI874*: 58. Level 878: 59· Level 898: 60. Level 906: 61. 160. No. 59). I6I. No. 595· t62. No. 597. 163. No. 598.
164. No. 599· 165. No. 607. 166. No. 611. 167. No. 612. (3) Stamp' to) x 71.
(b) Stamp:9t X71. Level 907: 61. Leve1908: 63-4. Level 909*: 65-6· Level 920*
168. No. 613. 169. No. 788. 170.1 0.790. 171. No. 791. Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. za.
Date: 518/19. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. za. (pier, eastern end. debris): 67-77. Level 921:!-:78-9. Level 924
172. No. 792. 173. No. 793· 174· No. 794. 175. No. 796. St Polyeuktos. Level S7*: I. Level 18 I: 2. Level 977*: J. Level
St Polyeuktos. Level 724: I. Level 908: 2. Level 991: 3. Level (pier, eastern end. debris): S~7' LeveI927~: 8S. Level cjj: 89·
176. No. 798. 177. No. 810. 178.No.SII. 179. No. 812. t059: 4·
1003: 4· Level 1010: 5. Level 1038: 6. Level 1059: 7· Level 1081* Level 950: 90· Level 95): 91. Leyel962*: 92. Level 977*: 9)--97·
I. No. 256. 2.No·4I. 3·No. 518. 4. No. 1255.
(pier, western end, debris): 8. Level 989: 9S, Level 991: 541. Level 992: 100. Level 1000*: 101. 180. No. 381. 181. No. 436. 182. No. 1159. IS3. No. 124S.
184. No. 1246. ISS. No. 1140. IS6. No. 1241. 187. No. 1227. Notes: 1-4. One brick measures? x? x 35-45.
I. No. 617. 2. 0.394. 3. No. 662. 4· No. 374. 5· No. 1109. Level 1003*: 102. Level 1005"'; 103-5. Level 1009*: 106. Level
188. No. 1214. 189. No. I2IS. 190. No. 1179. 191. No. 1I70. [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 2 I 8, E7. [2] Sarachane archive neg.
6. No. 1075. 7. No. 87). 8. No. 745· 1010: I07-IS. Level ror j " (pier, eastern end, debris): 119"-21.
192. No. 1038. 193. No. 1078. 194. No. IOS9. 195. No. 1097. 10.2·5 (4).
Notes: I-S. One brick measures? x? x 3 5-40. Level 1038: Il2. Level 1047*: 123-6. Level IOS9: Il7-44. Level
[I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 220, El J. [2] Sarachane archive negs. 1075"': 145. Level 1077: 146. Level 1081* (pier, western end, in 196. No. 1202. 197. No. 1203. 19S. No.n07. 199. No. 1212.
Accessory A
10.2., (5), ro.z ,IO (4)· situ): 147-52. Level 1081* (pier, western end, debris): 153-4· 200. No. 1201. 101. No. 1242. 202. No. 1243. 203. No. 1199.
(c) Several variants. Level 1100: 155. Level 1108: 156. Level I 109*: 157-64. Level 204. No. 1200. 205. No. I II2. 206. No. IllS. 207. No. 1I16. 1094
20S.No.IJ20.209· 0.1121. 210.No.II24. loll. No. 1126. I. :3 IT
Date: 518/19. See Part H, Ch. 9, sect. za. II I I: 16S-S. Level 1121 (,Baptistery', west wall, south end):
Sr Polyeuktos. Level 272: l. Level 702*: 2. Level 867: 3. Level 169-79. Level Il22: 180. Level 1129: 18 J, Level IJ J5: 182. Level 212. No. 1127. 21J.No.I12S. 214.No.1l6S. 2IS.No.IIS0. +
1003: 4. Level 1029*: 5· Unknown: 6-9· 1I44~': IS3-4' Level 1146: 185-6. Level II 59*: 187. Level r rej ": 216. No. 1160. 217. NO.1I6r. 218. No. 117S. 219. No. 1204. AP b
I. No. II43. 2. No. 617A. 3. No. 546. 4· No. 671. 5· No. 1286. 188-9. Level125S*: 190. Level 1259*: 191. Level 1291: 192. 210. No. 123!. 22t. No. 12)). 222. No. 1237. 223. No. 310. The inverted rho shown in Mamboury's sketch was perhaps an
6.No. I)86. 7.No. 1)87. 8.No. t)88. 9.No.I)89· Level 1297"': 193. Level 1306: 194-5· Level 1345= 196-9. Level 224· No. 464. inverted tau.
[I] Hill, 'Bricksramps', 220 EIo-I 1. 1346; 200. Level J348A: 101-2. Level 1357: 103-4. Level 1362"': [r] Hill, 'Bricksramps', 221, EI-22.
+ITt:p(ou} c
 ..~..
CATALOGUE CATALOGUE
\32 333
(a) Stamp: 101 x 70. I.No. 1188. 2. No. 251· 3. No. 727. 4· No. 743· ItO! (a) Date: after 532. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. 2C.
Date: early 6th century. See Part Il, Ch. 10 no. 15. Notes: 1-4. One brick measures? x ? x 3 5-40. I. Similar to I095-IIOO. Baths ofZeuxippos. In or near Building J or 2.
TokludedeMescidi: I.
[11 Hill, 'Bricksramps', 218, E3. [2] Sarachane archive neg. [I] Gray, 'Bricksramps', 53 no. 12.
(a) Several variants.
I.?X?X4htAM9I. 1.39.23 (.).
Date: 507-22. See Part il, Ch. 9, sect. aa.
[r] Mamboury's notes. Layout: Inscription not arranged around cross
St Pclyeuktos. Level 484: I. Level 910* (pier, eastern end,
Layout: Inscription arranged around cross formed thus + AccessoryN debris): 2. Level 101 S* (pier, eastern end, debris): 3. Level 1081* ll05

1098 (pier, western end, in situ): 4. Unknown: 5-6. I. +f1€

':Vo accessory
1.rIT:J€ I. No. 1261. 2. No. 935. 3. No. 1069. 4· No. 726. 5. No. 1380. TPOY
[095 -I- 6. No. 1381.
n € +Flerpou + 4

I.
[I1 PH [I] Hill, 'Brickseamps', 218EI-6.
+ (a) Stamp: 64 x 48.
T P + [I1Je[<]p(ou)v Probably from the area of the'tc:xcavations in 1946-47 between
(a) Stamp: (80) X70. Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: T.
+Fl •.•p(ou) Layout Inscription arranged around cross formed thus +
Date: 507-22. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. aa. I. Once in the Hagia Eirene collection.
(a) Stamp: 89 x 70. No Accessory [I] Mamboury' s notes.
Date: 507-12. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. za. St Polyeuktos. Level 158: I. Level 906: 2.
I101 (b) Stamp: 83-8j X49-P.
StPolyeuktos. Level 13 I (fallen vault, debris): 1, Level lOOS"': 2. I. No. 156. 2. No. 376.

Notes: 1-.2. One brick measures? x? x 40--45·

1. n ET Unknown: 1-2.
I. No. 52 .•. No. 8n· ,'I< I. )62 X(2!!) x3l-41,AM 387. 2.? x? x)8,AM 388.
Notes: 1-2. One brick measures ? x? X40. [11 HiU, 'Bricksramps', 218, E4. [.2]Sarachane archive neg.
10.2.1 (2).
P OY [I] Bardill negs. 9j.8.30 (I), 31, J2 (2).
Er] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 218, El. [2]Sarachane archive neg.
+ Flerpou
[0.1.)J (I). Unknown: I.
I. ([80) x(,,6) x38-44, AM 379.
.,- (a) Stamp: ga x 16.
I10G
I. +f1€T
AccessoryK [I] Bardill neg. 95.8.1j. Date: early 6th century. See Part 1I, Ch. 10 no. IS. POY+
Church at Yusa Tepesi: I.
1096
I. rr e Accessory 0
I I.360X340xSO.
+ ITE:tpOU +
(a) Unknown: I.
-I- [I] Eyice, 'Remarques', 194, fig. 3. [2] Mamboury's notes.
I. Once in the Hagia Eirene collection.
1099
T P2! a. n er
I. n [cl [I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 94 no. 57.
+ f1e<p(ou) K
+ +
z, +f1ET
(a) Stamp: 94 X71. T PO P OY
POY+
Date: 507-2.2. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect . za. + f1[e]w(ou) 0
+nE:tpOU
St Polyeuktos. Levels 12*: I. LeveIS!7:.2. Level 866: 3. Level +Flerpou+
(a) Stamp: Approx. 84 x 60. (a) Hebdomon (Bakrrkoy).
867: 4. Level 1005*: 5. Level 1015* (pier, eastern end, debris): 6. (a) Stamp: 110 x ?
Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. 23. Date: early 6th century. See Part Il, Ch. 10 no. 15.
Level 1081* (pier, western end, in situ): 7. Unknown: 8. Rumeli Hisan: T.
St Polyeuktos. Level 85 1*: I. Level 1081* (pier, western end, in [I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 92 no. 43, pI. ]4 no. 8.
I. No. 64jA .•. No. 629A. 3. No. HO. 4. No. 480. j. No. 8!9- I. Not in siw,? x? x60.
situ): 2. Unknown: 3-4. [2] Mango, <Brick Stamps', H, fig. 3 (top row, right).
6. No. 1067. 7. No. 724. 8. No. 1378. [I] Mamboury's notes.
Notes: 1-8. One brick measures? x ? x 3 5-40. I.NO.450 . .2.No. 722. 3· No. 753· 4. No. 1379·
Notes: 1-4. One brick measures? x? x40. 3. Probably the same as type I or 2.
[11 Hill, <Bricks tamps', 2 I 8, E2. [21 Sarachanc archive negs. Accessory A
10.1.34 (\), [O.I.Jj (2), 10.1.)6 (6).
[I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', .218, E5. [2] Sarachane archive neg. (a) Stamp: 94 x(j6).
IIo3
10.2.2 (2). Date: early 6th century. See Pan Il, Ch. IO no. IS.
(b) Stamp: 9j X71· I. n e[I1
Date: early 6th century. See Part Il, Ch. re no. IS· Hexagon complex in Giilhane. Water source.
>I< "'"
Ruins between the Giilhane hospital and the Topkapr Sarayr AccessoryY [I] Demange1 and Mamboury, Manganes, 104, fig. 119 no. I.
P OY
fortification: J. [2] Mamboury's notes.
I100
I.? x? x40. m[<]~oua
I. n € 1107
[I] Mamboury's notes. -I- (a) Stamp: 78 x p.
I. f1[ET]
Date: early 6th century. See Part Il, Ch. to no. IS.
T PY PII[+]
Accessory A Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
+f1"'p(ou)u I. 37S x 34S x40'
f1[ •••]pou[+]
1097
I. n e (a) Stamp: Approx. 84 x61. [I] Mamboury's notes. (a) Ruins at Kiio;:iikyah, upper floor: I.

+ Date: S07-12. See Part I1, Ch. 9, sect. 23. J. ?x? X40.

T Ph Sr Polyeuktos. Level 164: I. Level 165: 2-3. Level 725*: 4. Level [I] Mamboury's notes.
Accessory E?
738: j. Level8j9: 6. Level rccj ": 7. Unknown: 8-9·
+f1e,p(ou)~
1. No. 7j .•. No.JOO. 3· NO.1l6. 4· No. )62. j. No. 3)4· Ilo4
(a) Stamp: 8JX70. 6. No. 42>. 7. No. 832. 8. No. 2>3· 9· No. 486. I. rr er SINGLE-LINE OR MULTIPLE-LINE

Date: 5°7-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. aa. Notes: 1-9. One brick measures ? x? X35-42. + noS
St Polyeuktos. Level aj a: 1. Level 677: 2. Level 10811}(pier. [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 218, E6. [2] Sarachanc archive negs. P oe I. f1€T[
western end, in situ): 3. Level 1081* (pier, western end, debris): 10.2·3 (6), 10.2·4 (7)· f1hpo(u)8' rr.,[
4·
 ..~
•
CATALOGUE CATALOGUE
334 335
Ill2
TABULA ANSATA I1ETPOY 1..IAKONOY EYTOIXIANOY
(a) Stamp' (70) x J6.
Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. aa. 1. 6Y 1114
Se Polyeuktos. Level ej: J. D€TXPlS I.
IJ [8
INAIB I. rETqlS.lI.lA
I.NO.25S,?x?X45·
[r] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 210, An. [2] Sarachane archive neg. P E:YTOIXIAN
+ITE:TPOVI[N)
9·IJ·9a.
IC lI.l.lI.A+[ .. ) Flerpco 51a( xovou} Eu'tolXlav( ou)
~(EO}OXaP1C Fleepcc i.v(5uC'ttrovoc) l~'
Monogram no. 59. (a) Stamp' '4' x(4J).
(a) Stamp: 110 diameter. + Flerpou i[V]8{lK"tl&VOC)l~" a +[ Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: J.
Date: 503/4 or 51S/19 or 533/4. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad, Ch. I. (220) :«210) X34.
(a) Stamp: tabula (121) x 42; roundel aa x 34.
1ono·7 .. [I] Peschlow, 'Briekstamps',B4I.
CIRCULAR Remains 00 ismetiye Caddesi. North group: J.
Hagia Sophia. Reused to repair the Turkish wall, in a corner
(b) Stamp, (I17 from left-hand upright of pi to the right-hand side
and to the right of the alley as one faces the north entrance to of the iota in line r) x? •
DETPOY I.38oX370xso.
the narthex: I. Unknown: 1.
[r] Mamboury's notes.
II"9 I.? x? x40.
(b) Stamp: 108-113 diameter. I. (224) x(225) x48,AM '47.
1. IT E: Date: early 6th century. See Part Il, Cb. ro no. 7·
[I) Mango's notes (from rubbing).
[I) Bardill neg. 94-7.H.
INT.lI.
Unknown: 1. (c) Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
lSPY I. 39ox370x5S,iAM I. Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I.
Fleeoou ivo(uc'ttrovoc) a' [I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). I1EtpOY MAKONOY I. ? x ? X40, once in the Hagia Eirene collection.
(c) Stamp: 115 diameter. [I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp: 105 diameter.
Great Palace. Area Ab, collapsed vault. .
Date: 503/4 or 518/9 or 533/4. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad, Ch. 10 MULTIPLE-LINE (d) Date: after 532. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. 2C.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [.2]Mango and Hawkins, 'Penari Isa Baths ofZeuxippos. In or near Building 1 or 2.
~~·~~ns destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir S?~5~: J Il5 [r] Gray, 'Bricksramps', 55 no. 31 (omitting ligature of pi and
Camii', 183 no. 5 (mentioned).
[I] Mamboury's notes. I. ITE:TP. epsilon). [2] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 268 no. 88. [J) Mango,
(b) Stamp, 105 diameter. .lI.IACH
Great Palace. Area Ab, collapsed vault: (many) J.
'Brick Stamps', 25· [4] Manacorda, 'Belli laterizi', 147 n. 188 .
a. BY
Flerp . O\(I[(KOVOU)]C~
1. 350 x 350 x4<r50· .• .. rETXPlS
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango and Hawkins, Fenan Isa INAIB The final eta may have been either an indicticn or an accessory.
Camii', 183 no. 5 (mentioned). P (a) Scamp: 80 x65.
(c) Stamp: 108diameter (inner boundary). IC Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bfib-i Hilmayun. Upper storey: I.
Fenari isa Camii: 1. I1ETPOY MAKONOY AOYAHANOY
e(EO)U XaPlC TI€'tpOU i.V(5l1C"tl&VOC)
lP' I. 360 x3Go x40.
1.(240) X(240) x JO-Jj, AM 156. .•.
[r] Mamboury's notes. III9
[1] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Mango and Hawkins, Fenari (a) Stamp: I I 5 diameter.
isa Camii', fig. J9 no. 5· [J) Bardill neg. 94·IO.2O. Date: 503/4 or 5rS/19 or 533/4. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad, Ch. I. O)!AIlI.lSQT3:1
(d) Stamp: 110 diameter. YOJ.1.l>HAYOA
CRUCIFORM
Great Palace. Area Ab, collapsed vault. . ~:o;i~ destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagl. Oi-tpou 51alC6(vou) AouA-navou
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari Isa [1] Mamboury's notes. 1116
I. +ITET[POY)lI.IAK (a) Stamp' '45 X42.
Camii', IS3 no. 5 (mentioned).
Great Palace. Area Ab, collapsed vault, wall at the bottom: J.
(e) Stamp: 120 diameter. + n.,[pou) 0\(:«( ovou) I. }80 x 370 x 50, bright red colour.
TokludedeMescidi: to.
(a) Stamp: IJ2 x? Left-hand armis 25 mm. high. [I] Mamboury's notes.
I.?X?X4S,iAMSo. • .'
rr tj Unknown: r. (b) Stamp, (99) x45.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango and Hawkins, Feoan Isa
1. BY LiAM (<;K) no. 81. Unknown: I.
Camii', IS3 no. 5 (mentioned).
ITXE: [I] Mango's notes. I. Once in Robert College, ? x? x43-5o,AM lOO.
TPAOY [I) Mango's notes (rubbing). [2) Bardillneg. 94.8.2I.
IIIO (c) Stamp:? X40.
INPlf
ITE:
IC Hexagon complex in Giilhane. Nearby debris.
INT.lI. I1ETPOY 1..IAKONOY EYCTA8HOY [I] Mamboury's notes.
lSPIE: 8(EO)U XaPlC Flerpou lv(5l1C"tlroVOC)
ty'

(a) Stamp: II2 diameter. Ill7

Flecpoo iv5(u •..
'"ttrovoc) lE"
Date: early 6th century. See Part Il, Ch. 10 no. 7· I. rETPOY.lI.IAK
(a) Srarhp: 108 diameter. EYCTA8HOY
Balaban Aga Mescidi: I.
Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal adir Sokagl: I.
1. 370 x 370 x So, iAM 10. Fleepou 51alC(evoo} EuCt~9tlou
t.380x37ox50. . < .'
[I] Mamboury's notes.
I1ETPOY EYrENIOY
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango and Hawkins, Fenan Isa (a) Stamp" 49 x 49.
(b) Stamp: I I 5 diameter.
Camii', 183 no. 5 (mentioned). Unknown: 1-3. II20
Date: 504/5 or 5£9120 or 534'5· See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad, Ch.
1. ?x?x42,AM61. 2. 360 x(190) X34-47,AM 133. 3.(285)x I. [YO'lT)3[IT)
6(EO)Y XAPIC ITETPOY (I50) x4O-44,AM442. YJ.131Y3
~oe:o;i~~ destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokajr.
[I) Bardill negs. 94+7, 8 (I); 9PJ.29, JO (3). [fI)'['pou) EVyEV(io)u
Il II (no entry) [1] Mamboury's notes.
 ..~
•
CATALOGUE CATALOGUE
334 335
TABULA ANSATA
(a) Stamp: (70) ")6. 1112 ITETPOY MAKONOY EYTOIXIANOY
Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. la. 8Y 1114
St Polyeuktos. Level 6 I. s: rI€TXP!5 I.
lu8
INAIB I. fETqlll!..IA
~.NO·l.55. ?x?x45· .
[1) Hill, 'Brickstamps', 210,AH. [2] Sarachane archive neg. P e:YTOIXIAN
+rI€TPOYI[N]
9·II·9:l· IC Il&p01J Sta(lCovou) EU'tOlXtav(ou)
l!..Il!..A+[ .. ]
e(EO)U XaptC Fleepou I.V(StX'tlOOVOC) tP'
Monogram no. 59. (a) Stamp: 141 x(4l).
(a) Stamp: 110 diameter. h + rIEtpOU l[v]S(uC'tt",voc) tf" + [.. ] Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: I.
Date: 50}/4 or 518119 or 533/4. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad, C . I. (220) ~(2IO) Xl4.
(a) Stamp: tabula (12.1) X 42.; roundel aa x 34.
rc noz. [I] Peschlcw, 'Bricksram s', Rp.
CIRCULAR Hagia SapID:!.. Reused to repair the Turkish wall, in a corner
Remains on ismetiye Caddesi. North group: I. (b) Stamp: (117 from left-hand upright of pi to the right-hand side
and to the right of the alley as one faces the north entrance to of the iota in line I) x ?
IIETPOY I. 380x37ox50'
the narthex: I.
(I] Mamboury's notes. Unknown: I.
II09 (b) Stamp: 108-Il} diameter.
r. ?x?x40'
f. (224) X(225) <48, AM 147.
l. IIe: Date: early 6thcenrory. See Put H, Ch. re no. 7· [r] Mango" notes (from rubbing).
[I] Bardill neg. 9~.7.22.
INTl!..
Unknown: I. (c) Probably Irom the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
lSPY
1.390 x370 X55,iAM I. Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I.
nbpou lv5(llCtlOOVOC) a.' [I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). ITEtpOY liIAKONOY I. ? x ? x 40, once in the Hagia Eirene collection.

(a) Stamp: 105 diameter. (c) Stamp: lIS diameter. [I] Mamboury's notes.

I
Great Palace. }uea Ab. collapsed vault. . Date: 503/4 or 518/9 or 533/4. See Part II, Ch. 9. sect. ad, Ch. 10 MULTIPLE-LINE (d) Date: after 5 j a. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. 2C.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Penari Isa Baths of Zeuxippos. 10 or near Building 1 or 2..
Camii', 18) no. 5 (mentioned). ;~~:ms destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir S~~j~. 1115
[I] Gray, 'Brickstamps', 55 no. 3 I (omitting ligature of pi and
[I] Mamboury's notes. I. IIe:TP. epsilon). [2] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 268 no. 88. [l] Mango,
(b) Stamp: 105 diameter. l!..IACH
Great Palace. Ana Ab, collapsed vault: (many) I. 'Brick Stamps', 25. [4] Manacorda, 'Belli laterizi', 147 n. 188.
8Y
I. 350 x 3 50 x 40-50. .. mt~. St"[(K6vou)]c~
IETXPlS
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari Isa INAIB The final eta may have been either an indiction or an accessory.
Camii', 183 no. 5 (mentioned). P (a) Stamp: 80 x65.
(c) Stamp: 108 diameter (inner boundary). IC Cisterns in Gillhane, near Bab-J Hiimjiyfln. Upper storey: r.
Fenari Isa Carnii: I-
8(EO);;XaptC Fletpou lv(Sue,,",voc) t~'
ITETPOY MAKONOY AOYAHANOY
1·36ox360x4°'
f. (240) X(240) x lC>-J5, AM f56. .,'
[I] Mango's Dotes (rubbing). [2].Mango and Hawkins, Fenari [I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp: I I 5 diameter. Il19
isa Camii',lig. 19 no. 5. Isl
Bardill neg. 94.10.23. Date: 5o}/4 or 5 18119 or 53}/4' See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. ad, Ch. I. 02IAIl!..lSQT3:1
(d) Stamp: 110 diameter.
Great Palace. Area Ab, collapsed vault. .
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari Isa
~e:oa'~~ destroyed
[I]Mamboucy's
in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagl.
notes.
CRUCIFORM

IIl6
YOYl.bHA YOA
nE'tpO'U litQ1CO(V01J) AOUATlaVou'

Camii', 18} no. 5 (mentioned). I. +IIET[POy]l!..IAK (a) Stamp: 145 x42.

(e) Stamp: 120 diameter. GreatPaJace. AreaAb, collapsed vault, wall at the bottom: 1.
+ TIE't[pOUJ Suxx( QVOl) I. }80 X370 x 50, bright red colour.
TokludedeMescidi: I.
I.? x? X.H. iAM 80. . (a) Stamp: 132 x?Left-handarmis 2.5 mm. high. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Eenari Isa 1113 Unknown. r. (b) Stamp: (9) "45·
Camii', 183 no. 5 (mentioned).
I. 8Y dAM (<;:K) no. 81. Unknown: I.

IIXe: [I] Mango's notes. r. Once in Robert College, ? x? x 43-50, AM 100.

TPAOY [I] Mango" notes {rubbing]. [2] Bardill neg. 94.8.21.
1110
INPlr (c) Stamp: 1x40.
I. IIe:
IC Hexagon complex in Giilhane. Nearby debris.
INTl!.. ITETPOY liIAKONOY EYCTA8HOY
8(£0);; laptC IIEtpou lv(Sue,,",voc) \y' [I] Mamboury's notes.
lSPle:
(a) Stamp: 112 diameter. 1117
n€:tpo1J tvli(\1CtlOOVOC) re"
Date: early 6th century. See Pan IT, Ch. 10 no. 7· r. fETPOY l!..IAK
(a) Stamp: 108 diameter. . _ EYCTA8HOY
Balaban Aga Mescidi: 1.
Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagl: 1.
1.370 x )70 x 50, iAM 10. flE'tp01J filax(6vou) Euct~6Jiou
1.380 x 370 x 50. ., .. [I] Mamboury's notes. ITETPOY EYfENIOY
[1] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango and Hawkins, Eenari Isa (a) StamP!l49 "49.
(b) Stamp: Il5 diameter.
Camii', 183 no. 5 (mentioned). Unknown: 1-3. 1I20
Date: 504/5 or 519/20 or 534f5. See Part If, Ch. 9, sect.ad, Ch.
I.? x? X4l,AM6I. 2.)60 x(190) x}4-47,AM 1)). 3. (285)x I. [yO'IT]3[II]
8(EO)Y XAPIC IIETPOY Remains destroyed in 192.4 near Cemal Nadir Soka(1;t. [r j o} X4Q-44, AM 442. YYl31Y3
[I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Bardill negs. 94-4-7, 8 (I); 95-'l.29, jc (3). [I1]e[tpou] Etiy£v«(o)u
I II I (no entry)
 ..~
-e
CATALOGUE CATALOGUE
337
(a) Stamp: 114xZ4. IlETPOY MA[ ..)H I1ETPOY NA YK(AHPOY)S IlETPOY IlPECBYTEPOY
Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
r rz S
Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I. lI24
I. Once in the Hagia Eirene collection. s-rrm 1. DE:TPex "B
NAYK2 1. I1E:TP
[I] Mamboury's notes. H[ ... ]AM 15DPS
Fleepou vaUlc().,llPOU)s
+ D,"pou Ma[. .]~ DE'tpOU np( ec~u'tEpOU)S
(a) Stamp: 108 x 50.
(a) Date: C.532/3' See Part n, Ch. 9, sect. ab. (a) Stamp: 8) x 56.
..t' Hagia Sophia. Ruins in front of the west doors, demolished
T okludede Mescidi: I .
IlETPOY EYKA}.( ) 1. ? x ? x 50, iAM 66.
Date: shortly after the middle of the sixth century. See Part Il,
November 1873. Ch. 11, sect. I I.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Letter', 129 no. I. [z] Leclercq,
IIZI Kalenderhane Camii. Apse of North Church, in situ: I. Vault of
'Estampilles', col. 546 no. 10.
I. 15qT3D+ north cross-arm, filling: 2. •.
l.A2IY3 I1ETPOY NA YKA(HPOY) 1.)55 X))5 X41. 2.(200)X(I95)x4).
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', B36 a, b.
+ Fletpou EilK<lO() II29
1. D€TP/s (b) Stamp: 102 x 57.
(a) Stamp: 122 x48. IlETPOY NA YKAHPOY NAYKA Date: shortly after the middle of the sixth century. See Part Il,
Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between Ch. rr.eece. 11.
Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I. I1ETPO(Y) NA(Y)KA(HPOY)S DE:POU vauKA(t)pOU)
Kalenderhane Camii. Apse of North Church /2: 1-2. Vault of
I. Once in the Hagia Eirene collection. (ay Sr Euphemia in Hebdomon (Bakrrkoy) (location according to Byzantine drain below apse ofNonh Church: 3. North-east
1125
[I] Mamboury's notes. I. DE:TPO Sorlin-Dorigny, but no such church is known). corridor, north wall, door filling: 4.
NAKAS [I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 91 no. 37. [2] Schneider, 1. 348 X(22) X42- 2. (180) x(I75) x40. 3. (180) X(I20) x40.
'Ziegelsrempel', 268 no. 81. 4· (140) X(I25) X41.
DEtpo(u) va(u)KA(~pOU)s
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', B36 c-f.
IlETPOY EYCT(A)8IC, IlETPOY (a) Land Walls. Tekfur Sarayi. .---
I1ETPOY NA YKA(HPOY)S
[I] Gedeon, 'Engraphoi', 382. [2] Xenakis, 'Exaknboseis', Ix6
EYCT(A8)IC
no. 2. [3] Meliopoulos, 'T opothesia', 231 (mentioned). II30

I1ETPOY EYCT(A)8IC (JJ I. Kalch. 109.2. [4] Feissel, 'Inscriptions', 425 (mentioned). 1. +DE:Tl'CX
[5] SEG)7 (1987) no. 606. NAVKA2 IlETPOY TEO([>IAOY
IIZ2 (b) Stamp: 105 x 56.
+ DEtpO\) vauKA(~pou)s
I. 15TI3D+ Unknown: I. "34
::J18T::JY3 I.? X?X47,iAM(CK). (a) Stamp: 108 x 50. 1.15qT3D+
+ Flecoou Eucr(&)9lC [I] Mango's notes. Beyazrr, excavations north of the University in 1948: I. 1<I>03T
(c) St Euphemia in Hebdomon (Bakirkoy) (location according to I. 445 x 400 x40.
(a) Stamp:(I2)X)5. + I1,"POUTEO~(A.oU)
Sorlin-Dorigny, but no such church is known). [I] Mamboury's notes.
U nknown: I. (a) Stamp: I 10 X 30.
[I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 91 no. 36 (omitting the final
1.(2)0) X(205) x5o,AM99. In the area of the excavations undertaken in 1946-47 between
S). [2] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 268 no. 81.
[I] Bardill negs. 94.8.19, zo. Hagia Eirene and Hagia Sophia: I.
I. Once in the Hagia Eirene collection.
I1ETPO(Y) N AYK(AHPOY) UNCERTAIN SPELLING
I1ETPOY EYCT(A8)1C [I] Mamboury's notes.
II31 (b) Stamp: 1I0 X40.
1126
1I23
1. DE:TPO 1. +ITE:[TPOY]
I. 15qT3D+ Hagia Sophia. Remains of the wall behind the ticket-office,
YlAYK NAY[KAS]
::J1T::JY3 south-west of the baptistery: I.
D,"po(u) VO:UK(1.~pOU)
+ m[,pou] vo:u[KA(~pou)s] I. 370x36ox50.
+ Flecpou Eucr(&9)lC
(a) Stamp: (61) x 58. [I] Mango's notes (from rubbing).
(a) Pendik. Tomb opposite the church: (two).
(a) Date: after 532. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. 2C. Myrelaion debris.
[I] Xenakis, 'Exakribbseis', 116 no. 1. [2] L Kalch. 109.1. Unknown: 1-2.
Baths of Zeuxippos. From the west side of the apsidal end of [rj Talbor Rice, 'Bodrum Camii', In, fig. 11 no. 19. [aj Talbot
[3] Peissel, 'Inscriptions', 42 5. 1. )70 x)65 x 5j, AM 2!. 2. (190) X(220) X45-j2,AM 89.
Building a. Rice archive (rubbing). [I] Bardill negs. 94.2.6 (I), 94-5-24 (a).
[I] Gray, 'Brickstamps', 53 no. 4. [2] Schneider,
'Ziegelstempel', 268 no. 80. I1ETPO(Y) N AYK(AHPOY)S
IIZ7 II32

1. [+DE]TPO 1. DE:TP[OY]
[NA]YKS NAY[ ... ]
IlETPOY [ . )ONPIC
IlETPOY EYCT(A8)IC [+ m],po(u)[VO:]UK(~~pOU)s D"p[ou] vcc] ... ]

(a) Stamp: ? x 53. ll35

See DETPOY EYCT(A)81C, DETPOY EYCT(A8)1C. (a) Stamp: (70) x 55. r. 15U3D[.]
Land Walls. Rumeli Hisan. Loose: I.

I.? x?xp.
::JNNO[ .]
[I] DA1 (lst) neg. 6596 (cast). [2] Mamboury's notes (from
cast). [3] Mango's notes (from cast). [1] Mamboury's notes. [ .] Fleepou [ .]ovpte
 "~
..
CATALOGUE CATALOGUE
339
(3) Stamp: ? x 40. 1141 (a) Stamp: (124) x 29. 2. H18BAPTIOAf
Land Walls. Oriilii Kapu J. I.]ATIO 'Bath' building beside the Myrelaion rotunda.
I.? x? x40. iv(3m,oovoc) 8' ~ap() TIo() 'Ay( )
~]aOTIoO [I] Talbor Ricc, 'Bodrum Camii', 17), fig. Il no. 7.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Schneider, 'Ziegelsrempel', 265 no. 17. [3] Talbot Rice (a) Stamp: 154 X22.
(3) Stamp:? x 27. Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
archive (rubbing).
Binbirdirek cistern. I.? x? x35.
[r] Wulzinger, 'Substruktionsbaurcn', 386, fig. 10 no. 5. "47 [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fcnari Isa
t.)BATIOA Carnii', 183 no. 19 (mentioned).

Accessoryf ] paO TIoO A

IISI
rro() II42
(a) Stamp: ? x 30.
I. B]ATIOAf
I. LOTIAB1NI Great Palace. Area Ba: 1.

No accessory I. ? x? x 50. ~]aO TIoO 'AyO

iv(3,moovoclr' ~a() TIo() 't
[I] Mamboury's notes,
IIJ6 (a) From ruins, possibly of a theatre, below Hayriye Hanim Sokagl
(a) Stamp: 165 x a S.
I. INEBATIO at the junction with Kible Sokagt.
Unknown: I.
[I] Schneider, Byzanz, 93 no. IJ. [2] Schneider,
iv(lh1<ttoovoc) e' ~,,() TIo() I. iAM (CK) no. r6,fragment, 370 x? x40.
'Ziegelsrempel', 266 no. 47.
(a) Stamp: 169 x27, [I] Mango's notes.
Unknown: I.
I. )80 X)58 x 54--68,AM249.
Il43 rror : Ar() IIp
I. INSBTIOf
[I] Bardill negs. 94.1).)),)4; 94.14.5. t. B]ATIOAf
WITH INDICTION
iv(3tK'C'oovoc) ,'/~' ~( ) TIo( ) r
~]aO TIoO 'AyO
Il37 (a) Stamp: 141 x)4. "48 (a) Ruins in Beylerbeyi (Sophianae palace?).
Fenari Isa Camii: I. ..-"- I. INfBAUOVf
I. INAIBAPTIO [I] Meliopoulos, "Topothesia', 229.
I. ()50) X(2)0) x4I-5o,AM 161. iv(3umoovoclr' pa( ) TIo( ) 'Ar( )
iv(o,K'C'oovoc) at' ~"p() TIo() [I] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Penari
(a) Stamp: 126 x 26. Isa Camii', fig. 40 no. 19. [3] Bardill neg. 94.lo.8a.
(a) Stamp: 160 X2?
Unknown: I. (b) Stamp: 145 X)). Kalenderhane Camii. Covering of vault of north cross-arm: r.
I. )67 x(270) X4t.
I. iAM (<;K) no. 14,310 X310 x40. Unknown: I. rrOKIAl..OY
[I] Mango's notes. 1.370 x 370 x46, AM 302,
[r] Peschlow, 'Bricks camps', AJ2.
[1] Bardill negs. 95.2.3Ia, 33a; 95+7a, 8a.
"49 "53
t. IV1E:BAPTIOAf I. IV1m:TIOKIV AD
Il38
I. INIBBATIO AccessoryK iv(3umrovoc) E' pap() TIo() 'Ar() iv(3,moovoc) ,hll3'TI9Kta30(u)
iv(3,moovoc) 'W ~,,() TIo() II44 (a) Stamp: 142 x 20-22. Delta carved beneath superseded gamma.
(a) Stampr r 80 x25. I. KOTI'<;>AffI. Palace of Antiochus: I.
(a) Stamp: 215 x25 (ends)-) 6 (centre).
Great Palace. Area Ac: 1-2. . , ,'~aO '<;>TIoO K I.? x? X55. Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri
1·390x380x4o.2·36ox38ox60. [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Penari isa (Beyazrt), 1928. Great wall to the south of, and parallel to, the
(a) Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
Camii', I8} no. 19 (mentioned).
[I] Mamboury's notes. drain, and to the right of the southern base: (eight, complete or
1.380 x? x 50.
2. IV1E:BAPTIOAf fragmentary) I.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
1.380 x 370 X4D-45, mortar with crushed brick in small
Il39 iv(3,mwvoc) e" ~ap( ) TIo( ) 'Ar( )
I. OTIdA!lLl.IV11 quantity adhering.
Accessory A (a) Stamp: 15) X2). [I] Mamboury's notes.
iv(3tK'C'oovoc) ,3' ~ap() TIo() Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
II45
(a) Stampi r j a X2). I. INEBATIOA
r. )00 x300 x40.
Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: 1-2. . [I] Mamboury's notes. [2J Mango and Hawkins, 'Penari Isa
iv(3,moovoc) e' ~a() TIo( ) A Camii', 183 no. 19 (mentioned).
I. 375 x 360 x46, two breaks. 2·375 x 365 x43, one break.
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', A 3I. (a) Stamp: 120 x 30. (b) Stamp: (145) x 19-20, rrOAE( ) or nor )AE( )
Hagia Eirene. In situ in a window sill of western gallery: Unknown: I.
(several) I. I. ()))) x(2)8) x45-57, AM)58 (old no. 124). " 54
II40 I. INHBATIOA€
I. One brick measures 360 x355 x? [I] Bardill negs. 95-7.9,10.
I. INrIBATIO
[1] George, Se. Eirene, pl, 16 no. 21. [2] Schneider, iv(3umoovoc)~'~a() TIo() Ae()
iv(3tl<ttoovoc) r" ~a( ) TIo() 1150
'ZiegelstempeL', 264 no. re. iv(3umrovoc)~' ~a() TIoAe()
I. IN8BAPTIOAf
(3) Stamp: 180 x 3 I. (a) Stamp: 165 x 20.
1146 iv(3,mwvoc) 8' ~ap() TIo() 'Ay()
Land Walls. Yeni Mevlevihane Kapi: 1.
Palace of Antiochus: I.
I. INZBATIOA
I.? X? x 50,iAM 87.7 PT. (a) Hebdomon (Bakrrkoy). 1·370X37ox55·
[I] Bardill's notes. 1v(3,moovoc)~' ~a() TIo() A [r] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 91 no. 40. [I] Mango's notes.
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~----------,

,,~
.<

CATALOGUE

II60
I (a) Stamp: 185 xp.
CATALOGUE

IIPOK( )
341
"55
I. BIBAIlOAE 1. +IlqA] Excavation near the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri
YXPqNI] (Beyazrr), '957. 1I70
Pl' pa() Ilo() AE()
~IN( ... ] [I] Duyuran, 'Bayazit', pl. 6C. I. .llO'IIlA!lA.<l111
~l' paO IloAEO
(a) Stamp: (t'7)
Unknown: 1.
x j r.
+ no[A.]UXp~[vt]ou iV(O(tK't1WVOC)s.

(a) Stamp: (76) x 77.

I\ Il65
ivB(,lC'tl"'voc) a' po:() Flpoxt )
(a) Stamp: 180 XJl.
1.2.98 x298 X38,AM266. Unknown: I. 1. INrI+EAIlPO Retaining wall and barrel vault between the church of the
[I] Bardill neg. 94.1).12. 1. (165) x(292) X) 5-4'. lli\1 )75. iv(8u<tlrovoc) Yl' + pa() Ilpo() Theorokos in the Chalkoprareia and the Basilica Cistern
[,] Bardill aegs. 95.81, 8. (Yerebatan Sarayi): I.
II56 (a) Stamp' 18, x )0.
I.J7°XJ50X4°·
1. II1l1.IBVdUOVE Date: 429/}0 or 444/5 or 459160. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. re. [I]Mamboury's notes.
iv(Bumrovoc) [rIBl'
iv(B,,,,,rovOC) [rIBt'
pap() Ilo() AE()
pap() IloAE()
IIOY()
I Seker Abmet Pasa Sokagl:
I.370X36ox5°·
1.

[I] Mamboury's notes.

Inverted gamma altered to delta by the addition of a diagonal
ITTO( )
stroke. 1161
1. INHBAIlOY ,,66
(a) Stampt rao x 26. 1171
1. IVI,rrqaAIlqO
Kalenderhane Camii, Unknown: 1-6. iv(BllCtlOOVOC)~'pa() Ilou( ) I. IN.<lII1TD
I.390X39ox48.
41. 4· )90 x)8jX46.
l.400x400X43,tvlobreaks. 3·387x357x
5· )80 x()oo) '46. 6. )8jX(225) X4).
(a) Hagia Eirene:
I.
I.

Framed by fingermarks around 4 edges, and fingermarks

I iv(8umrovoc) y,' ppa( ) Ilpo()

q[A presumably in error, for 'lA3:. Cp. II67.r, 1490.1.

iv(B,,,,,roVOC) Bt'Il<o()

(a) Stamp, 125 x )8.

[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstarnps', AB. running through stamp.
[1] Mango's notes.
!" (a) Stamp: r80 x 28.
Retaining wall and barrel vault between the church of the
Date: late arh century? See Part Il, Ch. re no. 3.
Hippodrome. Inner wall of ambulatory found in 1950 near the

IIOA YXPONIOY
I Theotokos in the Chalkopraceia and the Basilica Cistern
(Yerebatan Sarayr): I.
Palace of Antiochus: I.
ox
1·35 340XH·
[I] Mamboury's notes.
I. 380 x35Y x3Y-40·
IIOYPIOY [r) Mamboury's notes. (b) Stamp, I)O x )8.
"57 Date: late 4th century? See Part Il, Ch. Iona. 3.
1. +IlOAV
II6z Hippodrome. Inner wall of ambulatory found in 19 yo near the
XPONIO II67
I. IN.<lISrm5PI~ Palace of Antiochus: (many) I.
VIN.<l2L 1. 111[.. qa]AIlqO
iVOt(lCnrovoc)s'(TIOUP10U J. JYO X330 x 50.
+ DOAuXPov{ou ivB(t.1C'tlroVOC)S"( Iv(B,moovoc) [..' pp]a() Ilpo() [I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp' '50 x 2) (centrej-ej (ends).
(a) Stamp' 121 x 79. q[Apresumably in error, for<rAa. Cp. II66.1, 14'90.1.
Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
Unknown: I.
I.390X37ox6o. (a) Stampr r Sc x27.
1.)77 X)70XH,AM9·
[1] Mamboury's notes. Unknown: I. IIY( )
[I] Bardillnegs. 94.I.I7a, IRa.
I. Fragment,? x? x43. iAMlO.
II58 [I] Mamboury's notes. SINGLE-LINE
I. +IlO[A]
No accessory
YXPO[NI] IIO[ II68
~IN.<l[.. ] II72
1. ]llVIlqO
]N.<lII1V
+ !fo[A]UXpo[v(]ou ivB[(lKnroVOC) . '] Il63
] ~aO IlpoO
1.

1. INEIBAPUO[ i]v(B,l<tlrovOC) Bl' Ilu()

(a) Stamp' (75) x79·
[v(litmrovoc) El' pap() Ilo[
(a) Stamp' (78) x )0.
Hagia Sophia. South-east buttress, upper room, loose: I. (a) Stamp' (I)5) X)).
Unknown: I.
I.? x? X45. Unknown: I.
(a) Stamp' '45 x )0. 1. (265) x(I70) x4o.AM )61.
[, ] Van Nice archive (rub bing). Great Palace. Area Ab: I. 1. ()05) x(250) X4°--47.AM408.
[,] Bardill negs. 95-7.15, ,6.
1.? x? x 50. [I] Bardill negs. 95·9.)4. 35·
II59
[r]Mamboury's notes.
I. +IlOA AccessoryH
II69
YXPONI 1. IlPOllA*IN.<lI
1173
~IN.<l[.. ]
Ilpo() po:() * iv(B,KtlrovOC) 8l' I.INrIlYH[
+ IloA,uXPoVlou ivB(ucn&voc) [.. ']
IIPO( ) Ilpo() pa() * [V8(,,,,,roVOC)" iv(BtlC'tlrovOC)y' Ilu() ~
(a) Stamp: 100 x 80.
(a) Stamp" 8o x 27. (a) Stamp: (142) XJ5.
Augusraion. South-west corner of Hagia Sophia in a mass of
II64 Kalenderhanc Camii. Unknown: I. Kalenderhane Camii. Baulk A71 5: I.
bricks. I. INllIBAIlPO 1. )75 x(345) X48. 1. (25)) X(I97) x 5).
[I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps", AH.
iv(Bumoovoc) pl'pa() Ilpo() [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps'j Aj j ,

~~_l ~------
 ..
'.~
CATALOGUE CATALOGUE
343

Accessory 8 Accessory M lIS) 1I89

I. INHPOY I. (J)QVIII1NI
"74 "78
I. 8YITJl.l1111 I. Il1lrITYM iv(5LK'tlrovOC)nPouf ) iv(omtrovoc)YL' pa() 'Pol()

iv(otlmrovoc) thlo'ITv() 8 iV(OIK'tl&VOC) 1')" nu( ) p. (a) Stamp: 15J X)7. (a) Stamp: (175) x 28.
Unknown: r. Land Walls. Tower 95: r.
Gamma superseded by delta carved beside it. (a) Between Fenerbabce and the vineyard of the Sarapata family,
I. J58 x J5 5 x 40-4), AM 254 (old no. 2). I.? x? x40.
200 paces from the shore.
(a) Stamp: 157 x48 (inner border 140 x 38). [I] Bardill neg. 94.IJ"7 [I] DAI (Ist) neg. 6608 (cast). [2] Mamboury's notes (from
[1] Sideropoulos, 'Byzantinai Epigraphai', 26-7, no. E' 2.
Dare: 4ph or 445/6 or 460/1. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. le. cast). [3] Mango's notes (from cast).
Tokludede Mescidi: 1-3. 'lI84
I.iAM78. 2.iAMlJO. J.iAMIJI. 1. YOQEll11 u9a
JBAPlli
Notes: 1-3. Two bricks measure 390 x 370 x 50, 380 x 380 x 50. iv(ot1<ttrovoc) e- Pov() 1.

[I] Mamboury's notes. I1[ ] pa() 'Pol()

(a) Stamp: 12J x J5.
(b) Stamp: 155 x48-5o(innerborder 140xJ7).
Unknown: I. (a) Stamp: (86) x 26.
Date: 430h or 445/6 or 460h. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le.
"79 I. lAM (\=K) no. r r.fragmenr, )60 x? x 50. Unknown: I.
Balaban Aga Mescidi: 1-4. I. +1Jl.SBIT[
I. iAM 148. 2. iAM 54. J. iAM IlJ. 4. iAM 180.
[I] Mango's notes. I. ? x ? x 44-48, AM 400.

+ i(v)o(tmrovoc)s WIT[ [I] Bardillneg. 95.9.19.

Notes: 1-4. Two bricks measure 370 x 365 x40; 380 x 370 x 40.
I185
[r] Mamboury's notes. (a) Land Walls. II91
I. INe!BAPOY
[I] Gocrwald, 'Ziegelsrempel', 485 no. 4. [,] Meyer-Plath and I. ](J)Q[
Schneider, Landmauer, 149 no. I I. iv(OtKnrovoc) Et' par ) pour )
Accessory A ] 'Pol[()
r r So (a) Stamp: 145 x28.
"75 Date: 4r61I7 or 43 rh. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. rb. (a) Date: 413-15. See Parr Il, Ch. 9, sect. ra.
I. II1VeIBAU[.]
I. INJl.rITYA Palace of Antiochus. Theodosian Hagia Sophia. Back wall of Schneider's
ivo(tK'Itrovoc) Et' pa() IT[ [I] DAI (1st) neg. KB '495. [2] Mango's notes. propylaeum.
(vo( tl,,,,rovoc) y' ITv( )A
(a) Theotokos in Chalkoprateia. Court to the east of the apse. [r] Schneider, WesthoJ, 6 no. 6with Corrigenda.
(a) Stamp: 142 x40.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
Ruins on Saray Burnu (orphanage ofSt Paul?). Room I: I.
I. 350 X 340 X?

[I] Unger, 'Seraispitze', fig. 10 no. 22. [2] Schneider, CA()

PCD( )
'Ziegelstempel', 265 no. 37.
No Accessory
PO() I186
I176 I. INABAP{J) 1192
I. INJl.HIT);'A USI I. INZBA[p]eCA
iv(5tmrovoc) et: pa() 'POl()
I. INJl.IPO iv(otK'ttrovoc)~' pa[p]E() Cct )
ivo( m:trovoc) ~'ITv( ) A
(a) Stamp: 132 x25.
iv(otKnrovoc) 5t' Po( ) (a) Stamp: 155 x '4.
(a) SIamp:r40xJ5. Date: 417/18 or 432/3. See Parr 11, Ch. 9, sect. rb.
Theotokos in Chalkoprateia. Church: I. (a) Stamp:125xJ5. Palace of Anriochus: (two) 1. Tombs in the Mangana region: I.
I.? x? x 55. Date: late 4th~century? See Pan Il, Ch. 10 no. 3. I. 380 x 380 x 50.
I.400X37oX55·
[I] Mamboury's notes. Palace of Antiochus. Restored pan: to the left of circular room [I] Mnmboury's notes. [r] Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 37. fig. 44 no. 3.
with chapel attached: I. Pentagonal room beside the [2] Mamboury's notes. [3] Mamboury, "Nouvelle lecture', 123.
Hippodrome: 1. lI87
"77 1. INSBAP{J)
1193
I. II1Jl.ILITY A I.350X340X40. 2. ?x?x50'
L IN8BACA
[I] Mamboury's notes. iv(otlenrovoc)" pa() 'POl()
(vo(tlmrovoc) ty'ITv() A iv(otK'ttrovoc) 8' pa() Ca()
(a) Stamp: 159 X46 (inner border 149 x4I). (a) Stamp: ? x 3 2.
(a) South of Bezzazr Cedrd Camii. Ruins (perhaps of a church)
Date: 429/30 or 444/5 or 459/60. See Parr Il, Ch. 9, sect. le.
Land Walls. Pentapyrgion, vicinity of Se Nicholcs.
near junction of Tacirhane Sokagr and Nargileci Sokagt.
Tokludede Mescidi: 1-2. TI] Mamboury's notes.
[r] Schneider, Byzanz, 94-5 no. 18.
I. iAM JO. 2. iAM 127.
POY()
lI8S
Notes: 1-2. One brick measures 370 x 3 5 5 x40. I194
u8z I. INSBAP{J) I. INAIBACA
[I] Mamboury's notes.
I. YOQA1IAl11 iv(omtrovoc) ,'It; pa() 'Pol( )
(b) Stamp: 162 X47(innerhorder 148 xJ8). iv(otK'ttrovoc) at'pa() Cct )
Date: 429/30 or 444/5 or 459160. See Parr Il, Ch. 9, sect. le. iv(5tlenrovoc) a' ~a() Pov() (a) Stamp: 160 x )0. (a) Stamp: '74 x JO.
Balaban Aga Mescidi: 1-6. Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri
(a) Stamp: '4J x J5. Date: 427/8 or 442/3 or 457/8. See Pare Il, Ch. 9, sect. r e.
dAM 20. 2. iAM 58. J. iAM 86. 4· iAM '440 5· iAM '47· Palace of Antiochus. Vault of channel extending under the (Beyazrt), 1928. Great wall to the south of, and parallel to, the Byzantine drains along the Mcse. Opposite Firuz Aga Camii:
6.iAMI59· foundation wall of the sigma-plan colonnade from the drain, and to the right of the southern base: I. (several) I.
Notes: 1-6. Two bricks measure 380 x 370 x40, 375 x 355 x 50. Binbirdirek cistern. I. 370 x 370 x 5 5, thick white mortar adhering. I.370X360x45·
[I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Duyuran, 'Palace of justice JI', fig. 7c. [r] Mamboury's notes. [r] Mamboury's notes.
 344 CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE
345
"95 AccessoryN AccessoryP
1. B]ACA() CAN( )0I()
1200 1.205
p]aOCaO r. YiA::lAaI31111 1. INBLBACAP 1210

(a) Stamp: ? x )0. iV(Olm&voc) Et' pa( ) Cc] ) v I. ]!3MA:JAffffllll

iv(ol>«I&voc) PI' ~a() Ca() p
Sea Walls. West of the monumental staircase and north of the iV(OI1<:n&voc)W pa() Cav() S[I()]
(a) Stamp: '75 X)). (a) Stamp: 170-173 X22-25.
railway, area Fa: I.
Date: 43lh or 44617 or 46112. See Part II, Ch. I I, sect. 3. Date: 428/9 or 443/4 or 45S/9. See Pan n, Ch. 9, sect. le. (a) Stamp: (I40) X24.
I.? x? x45.
Hexagon complex in Giilhane. Nearby debris: I. Water source: Byzantine drains along the Mese. Vaults of Byzantine drains in Unknown: I.
[I] Mamboury's notes. 2.
the Forum of Constantine: I. I. (202) x(r86) x4'-5O, AM )76.
1.?x?x4o.2,?x?x4°' I.38oX37S x jo. [r] Bardillnegs. 95.8.9, IO.
[r] Demange1 and Mamboury, Manganes, 104, fig. 119 no. 4. [r] Mamboury's notes.
AccessoryB [2] Mamboury's notes.
II96 Accessory c;:
1. INABAI:AB I206 I.2II

iv(olKt\&voc) a' pa() Ca() P AccessoryTI r. [1]lII€BACAC[ I. I!3NA:JAfflYlI

1201 [iHoml&voc) e' ~a( ) Ca()" [
(a) Stamp: 145 x 24. i~(OtX'It&voc) r' ~a() Cav() S~()
r. INHBACArI
Date: 417/18 or 432/3. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb. (a) Sr john of Sroudios. (a) Stamp: (I)O) x24.
Palace of Antiochus: (several) I.
iv(oI1C't1&voc)~' pa() CaO rt 'Date: 45 rh. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. IC. Unknown. t.
I. 37ox36ox50. (a) Stamp: 165 x26. [I] Mamboury's notes. I. 300 x305 X42,A1vf)21.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] DAI (Isr) neg. KB 996. Date: 439/40 (or 42415). See Parr Il, Ch. I I, sect. 2. [I] Bardill negs. 95. ).29a; 95.5-'2-14.
Sr Polyeuktos. Unknown: I.
AccessoryT
Unknown: I.
r. (260) x(I65) X42-52, AM96. J.NO.I5I,3Sox?xso. --~ 1207

[I] Bardill neg. 94.5-)). [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 210, A24. [2] Sarachane archive neg. r. INZffCA~
9.10.26.
iv(oom&voc) 1;'~() Ca() 'r 1212
I. ]lIIA::lAa!31111
120.2
(a) Stamp:142x35.
Accesscry I'
r. INAIBACArI Fenari Isa Camii.
iV(Otm&voc) e- ~a() Ca~() [SI()]

II97 [r] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2J Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari (a) Stamp: (rr7) X)I.
iv(oI1C't1&voc)at' pa( ) Ca() rt
r. INrBACAr isa Camii', fig. 40 no. 20. Unknownt t.
(a) Stamp: 168 X25. !.?x?X53-S5,AM423·
iv(olx<I&voc) y' pa() Ca() y Unknown: L
Date: 427/8 or 442/3 or 457/S, See Parr n, Ch. 9, sect. le. [I] Bardill neg. 95.Io.28a.
(a) Binbirdirek Cistern. In situ in south wall at a height half way up r. (,62) X(,62) x48-50, AM 4r7.
Byzantine drains along the Mese. Vaults of Byzantine drains in
the upper colonnade, near the modern staircase. the Forum of Consrantine.
[r] Bardill negs. 95.10.1 sa, 16a.
[I] Wulzinger. 'Substruktionsbauten', 386, fig. 10 no. 2. er] Mamboury's notes. 1208
[2] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 265 no. 19. r. ]CAT

II98 1203
] CaOt
r. INIBBACAr r. INlBBACArI
(a) Date: C.456/7. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. Id.
iV(OtlC'tl&voc) IP' pa( ) Ca() rt
iv(oum&voc) IP- pa( ) Ca()r Cistern of Aspar. South-west wall, lowest brick band, top CAITO( )
(a) Stamp: 190 x )0. (a) Stamp: 195 x 30. course: (two).
Great Palace. Area Ba: I.
Great Palace. Area Ac: I. [r]Bardil!. 1213

1.? x? x50. I.? X? x60. r. INZBACArIO

[I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari isa
iV(Ot>«I&voc) 1;' pa( ) Cano( )
Camii', 183-4 no. 20 (mentioned).
(b) Stamp- ryj x j y. (a) Stampr r j e X 24-
Great Palace. Area Ab: r. Date: 423/4 or 438/9. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. re.
Accessorys
I.380X380x50.2·400x380x60. CAB() Cistern on Siraselviler Caddesi.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Penari isa [I] Mamboury's notes.
"99 AccessoryB
r. IN"'IBACAS Camii', 183-4 no. 20 (mentioned). (b) Stamp: 174 X2).
1209 Date: 423/4 or 438/9. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. re.
iv(olX<\&voc) 01' pa() Ca() > I. INABACABB Cistern on Srrasclviler Caddesi.
1204
(a) Stamp: 190 x 30. (I] DAI (1st) inv. no. ))05A.
J. [IN]"'IBACArI iv(ollC'tl&voc) a' ~a() Ca~() p
Date: 430/1 or 445/6 or 460/1. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. IC. (c) Stamp: '74 X2).
Mercan Caddesi: I. [iv(ollC'II&voc)] 01' pa() Ca() n (a) Stamp:(IjI)X24. Date: 423/4 or 438/9. See PartII, Ch. 9, sect. le.
r , 370 x 370 x 50. (a) Land Walls. Yedikulc. Unknown: l. Cistern on Siraselviler Caddesi: I.

[I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Meliopoulos, "Ioporbesia', 231 section B' no. 3. 1. 370 x 370 x44-4S, AM 247. I. 395 x? X40.
[I] Bardill negs. 94.Ip,). [I] Mango's notes.
 "I,

346 CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE
CAITOYPOY CAC( ) or CACI( ) 347
COY() CRUCIFORM
MUL TIPLE- LINE 1217
1.]ICACI 1222 122.5
1214
IN.t.28 1. INIBBACOY 1. +CTe<I>VY1Sl
J. jt Ccctf )
BACAIT15 ]tCac() t iv(OtK'Itwvoc) tW ~a<) Cou( ) +Oteocvou

iv8(ucrtwvoc)~ W ~a() Ccrroufpou) •1'(:1) Stamp: So x 27. (3) Stamp: IS8 x 2S-30 . (a) Sramp- ? (I + 44 + 42) x 52 (8 +)6 + 8).
Cistern on Siraselviler Caddesi. Unknown: I. Unknown: I.
<a) Stamp: 92 x46 (right)-52 (left).
[r] Mamboury's notes. 1.390 x? x60, brick broken at one of extremities, worn on face I. ? x? x 39. AM 49 (old no. I39?, 189?, I99?).
Structures behind Istanbul Archaeological Museum: I.
as if used for paving, very clear stamp with letters raised 7-S [I] Bardill neg. 94.) 1-
I. 375 x? X45.
[1] Olker,Proje, 60.
mm., irregular line framing the edges of the brick, JAM: 6.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
(b) Date: after 532. See Part n,
Ch. 9, sect. 2C.
(b) Land Walls. Pentapyrgion, vicinity of St Nicholas: I.
Baths of Zeuxippos. In or near building I or 2.
(b) Stamp: '90 x 28. [r] Gray, 'Brickstamps', 55 no. 27. [2] Schneider,
I. ?x?x40.
Great Palace. Area Ab: 1. "Ziegelsrempel', 265 no. 3S.
[r] Mamboury's notes.
I. 390x360 x6o. (c) Silivri.
CA() TPI() (?)
(I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Dirimtekin, 'Selymbria', 32 no. 4.
1218 (c) Stamp: 195 X)O.
1. IN8BACATPI Great Palace. Area Ac, below the Palace of Just ice : (numerous)
1-2.
lv(8tKnwvoc) e ~a() Ca() Tpt() (?) I. 390 x 390 x 50. 2.390 x 380 x 60.

(3) Unknown. [I] Mamboury's notes.

CIRCULAR
[r] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 9r no. 3S.
1215
CTPATONIKOY
1. 8Y
122.6
CAXITO
1. [+C]TPATO
YPAC)y
INPIB COr [N]IKOYIN
.t.IK2G+
I[C] CAr 1223
8(£0)1> Xapt[c] Cuaoupcu lV(01.1C'tlWVQc) l~~
I+ C]~PO:to[ V]lKOU ivollC(-ncovoc)s ~'f~'+
1. [-]0:]+
1219 (a) Stamp: 1I9x72.
(a) Paluka read CAP in error for CATI. [ -]ITY1
r. INABACA[ Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
Date: 503/4 or 518/19 or 5331 4. See.Part H. Ch. 9. sect. zd. +Co[ -]v.[-]
iv(ot1<ttwvoc) a' pa() C~[ 1.lx?X)9,AM65·
Substructures south of CemalNadir Sokagi.
(a) Stamp: ? X4 5. [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Bardill neg. 94.4.13.
[I] Paluka, 'Ruinen', )6, figj. [2] Wulzinger, (a) Stamp: (173) X29.
Date: after 532. See Part I1, Ch. 9, sect. 2C.
'Substruktionshauten',381.no. I. Unknown: I.
Baths of Zeuxippos: I.
I. (294) x(I98) x4'-52, AM 4' 1.
1. ? x 1 X)O (middlel-J8 (edges).
[r] Bardill negs. 95·lo.4a, j a.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
1220

1216 1. INIBACA[
C(J.)( )
1. 8Y iv(8tK'Itwvoc) i" ~a( ) Car
CAXITO
(a) Date: 45617. Sce Part 1I, Ch. 9, sect. Id. 1227
YPAOY 1. IN.t.ISIffI:lU
INPlf Cistern of Aspar. South-west wall, lowest brick band, fifth CTE<DANOY
course up, in situ. iv8t(K'Itwvoc)s tp' COl()
IC
[I] Bardil/.
S(EO)U XO:P1C Cceroupou iV(OllC'tltOVDC) 1'Y~ (a) Stamp: 185 x jo.
1221 1224 Theorckos in the Chalkoprareia. Church: I.
(a) Stamp: r r a diameter.
1. INeIBACA[ 1. CTE<I>A I.390x?x5°·
Date: i04/5 or 519120 or 534/5' See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. ad, Ch. [I] Mamboury's notes.
rc no.p. iV(OtK'Itwvoc) et' pa( ) C«] Cn:qJa(vou)
Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagl: I. (a) Stamp:(II5)X28. 1228
(a) Gray's typescript representation shows-probably unreliably
1. 370 x? x 50. Unknown: J. given Mango's drawing (see b}--A rather than A. 1. B]AC(J)
[r] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Penari isa 1.Fragment, ? x? x 33, iAM 26. Date: after 532. See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. 2C. ~]a()COl()
Camii', 183-4 no. 20 (mentioned). [I] Mamboury's notes. Baths of Zeuxippos.
(a) Stamp: (54) x )4.
[1] Gray, 'Bricksramps', 55 no. 29.
Section of first Sea Wall beneath 'House of Justinian', excavated
(b) Unknown.
in T953.
[I] Mango, 'Brick Stamps', 20, fig. 2. (centre).
[I] CPII, '75, fig.)6 no. 4.
 ,,~
•
348 CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE 349
CQ)CANNAC (a) Stamp' '92 x26. (a) Stamp: 92 diameter. (a) Stamp: 190 x 28.
Date: 424/5 or 439/40 or 454/5. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le. Dace: after 475, See Part Il, Ch. 10 no. q. Date: 424/5 or 439/40. Sec Part I1, Ch. 9, sect. rc.
1229 Byzantine drains along the Mese. Vaults of the Byzantine Kalenderhane Camii. Over Diakonikon vault: (twelve). North Cisterns in Gillhane, near Bdb-i Hiimayun: I.
L C(J)CAN drains in the Forum of Constancine. wall, east side: (one). Roof, filling-wall: (two). B3h: (one). I.3S0X370x45·
NACIN [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mamboury, 'Nouvelle lecture', 123. North-east corridor, arch filling: (one). Apse vault, south side: [r] Mamboury's notes.
[1l.]21-1+
(one). Norm vault, east side: (one). Unknown: (nine). (b) Stamp- r Se x zy.
AccessoryB
Ccccuvvcc iV[S(~Ktl&VOC)]Sll' + I. 385 x 375 x47· 2.365 "360 x 30. 3.374< )6p 39. Unknown: I.
r;J2 [I] Peschlow, 'Bricksramps', C3. I. 350 x3J2 x)8, AM 356.
(a) Stamp' ? x 80.
I. INHBTlMOKB
Date: after 532. See Part II. Ch. 9. sect. zc. [I] Bafdill negs. 95·7-), 4, 5.
Great Palace, area Ea (Baths of Zeuxippos). (v(5ucrtrovoc)~' ~()Tt~OK() ~
1240
[r] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stamp,,8JX30.
I. CYITINI+
(b) Stamp' (I08) x78.
Unknown: I.
Date: 424/5 or 439/40 or 454/5. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le. TI(M)OK( ) + iv(5mtrovoc) t'Tpo()
Byzantine drains along the Mese. Opposite the fountain of Atik
I. (327) x()25) x 35-48, AM 142 (old no. 20I). Ali Pasa Camii: I. SeeTIMOK(), TI(M)OK(). (a) Stamp, 135 "35.
[t] Bardillneg. 94-7-12. I. 370 x 360-370 x 35. Date: 426/7 or 441/2. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. re.
[1] Mamboury's notes. Cisterns in Giilhanc, near Bab-r Hiimfiydn: I.
I. ?X?X40
[I] Mamboury's notes.
C[ TP()
1241
See r8I.Ia and 182.la. TI(M)OK()
1236 I.]AITPO
AccessoryB 1. ~NBTP
] <xt'TpoO
12)3 iv(5uC'ttrovoc) WTp()
I. INHBTIOKB (a) Stamp' (Il5) x28.
TEO.L\OAOY (a) Stamp: Approx. 88 x 30. Date: 427/8 or 442/3 or 457/B. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. re.
(v(5umrovoc)~' W) Tt(~)OK() ~ Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site Balaban Aga Mescidi: 1-2.
See8E01l.0YAOY, 8E01l.0AOY, 8E01l.(J)AOY,
(a) Stamp" 76 "26. BI, building north-cast of church, pier 2, in situ: 1. LiAM 7J. 2. iAM 74-
TE01l.0AOY.
Date: 424/5 or 439/40 or 454/5. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le. I. no, 87. Notes: 1-2. One brick measures? x? x 40,
Byzantine drains along the Mese. Vaults of the drains in the [,] GP I, pl. '4 no. 87. [I] Mamboury's notes.
Forum of Constantine: I,
1242
TI( ) 1.370X370X5°·
I. INIVBAPeTPO
[I] Mamboury's notes.
123° TPO() (v(5t1<ttrovoc) t[yi8'~apE() Tpo()
Mayor may not have carried accessory
I. I11SBATI Gamma altered to delta by the addition of a diagonal stroke.
1234 WITH INDICTION
(v(5t1<ttrovoc) ,'If,' ~<x() Tt() (a) Stamp' 163 x28.
I. NHBTIO[K.]
(a) Stamp' I)4 x 30. 1237 Date: 430/1 or 445/6 or 460/1. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le.
«()v(5t1<ttrovoc)~' ~() Tt(~)O[KO.]
1. +INBTPO+ Balaban Aga Mescidi: I.
Fenari isa Camii: I.
(a) Date: 424/5 or 439/40 or 454/5. See Part I1, Ch. 9. sect. le. I.?X?X45,iAM66.
I. 365 x (277) x4o-48,AM '75. + iv(8umrovoc) WTpo() +
Byzantine drains along the Mese. Opposite rhc fountain of Atik [r] Mamboury's notes,
er] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari (a) Stamp: r70x25,
Ali Pasa Camii: I.
isa Carnii', fig. 40 no. 21. [3] Bardill negs. 94.1 I .aa, 5a.
I. 35ox35ox40, Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia. North wall of the church, 1243
Unknown: 1-3. [I] Mamboury's notes. beside Zeynep Sultan Sokagr: I. I. ]BATPO
I. 374 x 365 x 52-60, AM 4'9. 2. (372) x (275) x 52, AM '79. 3. 1. 3Box360 x40.
] ~aO TpoO
388 x(345) X49-5),AM40I. [r] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Bardill negs. 95.IO.19a, 20a (,); 94.1 r.r za (2); 95.9.20, 21 (3). (a) Stamp:? X27,
1238 Date: 427-3 I or 442-46 or 457-61. See Part Il, Cb. 9, sect. le.
I. +IN1l.TPO+ Miihiirdar Emin Pasa Sokagl.
+ (V(5tK"OOvOC)5'Tpo() + [I] Mamboury's notes.

TIMOK\ ), TI(M)OK( ) (a) Stamp' '75 x 2).

TIMOKPITOY 1244
Date: 420/I or 43 5/6. Sec Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. re. I. B]APETPO
TIMOK() Cistern on Srraselviler Caddesi.
No accessory CIRCULAR [r] Mango's notes. ~]<XPEOT poO

1235 (a) Srampr Lx j j ,

1231 1239
2Y113~Tq)IOMIT around central + Biiyiikada (Prinkipo). Vaults (,Kamares'): I,
L INHBTIMOK I. I. 111VHTQO
I.? x? x45.
(v(5tJ""trovoc)~' ~() Tt~OK() TqlOKp(i)'Wl) iV(OlK1\&VOC) e" s around central + iv5( "",rovoc) ~'T poO [r] Mamboury's notes.
--- ---_._---- --_._------

"~
•
CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 351
TP08YNOY (a) Stamp: 220 x42. (a) Stamp: 1)8 x 58. [I] Schneider, 'Ziegelstcmpel', 268 no. 84 (erroneous).
Date: P7!t8. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. aa. Unknown: I. [,] MSBK neg. 6204a. [)] DAI (1st) neg. '))9 (cast).
1245 St Polyeuktos. Level j ye: 1. Level 725*: 2-3. Level 733: 4. Level 1. iAM (<;:K) no. 49, )70 x)60 x60. [4] Mamboury's notes (from cast). [5] Mango's notes (from
1. +TPO 977*: 5· Leve11005'': 6. Unknown: 7. er] Mango's notes. cast).
8YN1S 1. No. )08. a. NO.lJ9. ). No. )47. 4. No. 410. 5· No. 565. (b) Stamp: 1)0 x 55.
1257
+ Tcouwoo 6. No. 865. 7. No. 1)07. Date: 532/3. See Part H, Ch. 9, sect. ab.
t. +TPO[(J)IM]
Notes: 1-7. One brick measures? x? x 37-39. Hagia Sophia. Ruins in front of tbe west doors, demolished
(a) Stamp: (7') x 66. 1SIN1\.[S .. ]
., [r] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 210, A28. [2] Sarachane archive negs. November 1873: I.
Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. z a.
9.10,') (5),9.10.)) (). I. Muscc des Anciquires Nationales, Sainr-Gcrmain-en-Laye + Tpo[/fllll]ou iVS[{tKttroVOC)s.
St Polyeuktos. Level 365*: 1.
no. 21103. 365 x 355 x 55. (a) Stamp: (92) x6).
I. No. 754, ?x?x37·
TP(O)<DI( ) [I] Soriin-Dorigny, 'Letter', 130 no. 3. [2] Musee des
[r] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 214. B3 I. [2] Sarachane archive neg. Great Palace, excavations in Peristyle and Apsed Hall in
Antiquites Nationales, Sainr-Germain-en-Laye (photo).
9·7·)· 1250 1953-55. Conduir Ac I. •
(c) Stamp: I)I X62. I. Labelled no. I I.
1. +INLl.IATP(J)1
Hagia Eirene. Southern side of atrium: I.
[IIT albot Rice archive photo.
+ (vB(l1mrovoc) la'Tp(o)~(~ou) I.330Xnox50.
(a) Stamp: I 51 x )9. [r] George, St. Eirene, pl. 16 no. 14.
Date: 517!t8. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. za. 15
1253 +TPO<DIM
St Polyeuktos. Level 16S: 1-2. Level 434: 3. Level 667: 4. Level
TPO<DIMOY I. t+]TPO(J)IM INLl.S. +
700*: 5· Level 833*: 6. Level 84S*: 7· Level 859: 8. Level 874*: 9.
[1S]IN1l-Srf
Level 912*: 10. Level cao" (pier, eastern end, debris): 11-15. + Tooelpou ivo(lIC'Cuiwoc)s. +
SINGLE-LINE l+l Tpo~(~[ou] (VB(IK'tlroVOC)S
ly'
Level 1000*: 16. Level IOOr*: 17-25. Level 1°72: 26. Level 1074:
(a) Stamp: 109-II2 X7S-79.
TPO<l>I() 27-8. Level IC98'f: 29. Level 1362~·: 30. Wall west of slip road: (a) Date: 534/s.SeePartII,Ch.9,sect.2b.
31. Unknown: )2-3. __ ~ Unknown: 1-2.
Hagia Sophia. Stuccoed pillar at the northern end of the wall
1246 1. 365 x 358 x 46-5 5, animal print, AM 320. 2.365 362 x63,
I. No. 114. z . No. 117. 3. No. 1323 (duplicated number). that projects at right angles to the surviving section of the north
X
1.]8TPO<DI AM 298.
4· No. 4)4· 5· No. 568. 6. No. 627. 7. No. I I 54. 8. No. 402. wall of the justinianic atrium.
] e'TpO~I() 9· No. 666. 10. No. 681. 11. No. 903. Il. No. 904. 13. No. [I] Bardill negs. 95-2.' ja, '4a {a); 95.J.l7a, z Sa; 95.5.10, I I (I).
[I] Remezi, 'Sophienkirche', col. 178 (right). [,] Schneider,
(a) Stamp: (106) x z j . 910. 14· No. 914. 15. No. 915. 16. No. 638A. 17. No. 824. Westhof, 39 no. I. Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
18. No. 826. 19. No. 831. ao. No. 840. lI. No. 843. aa. No. Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: 1-2.
St J ohn of Stoudios: I.
r. ?x? X50. 856. ,). No. 860. '4. No. 86). '5. No. 866. ,6. No. 1269. 1254 I. ? x ? x 40, once in the Hagia Eirene collection. 2. Once in the
l7· No. 1085. 28. No. 1086. 29· No. 1289. 30. No. 1123. I. INLl.SIV+ Hagia Eirene collection.
[I] Peschlow, Studiosleircbe, (in preparation).
31. No. 136. 32. No. 317. 33· No. 1324. Tq~I[M1S] [I] Mamboury's notes.
Notes: 1-33. One brick measures 335 x? x 35-40.
TPO<I>IM() ivB(lmrovoc)s 1MB' + Tpo~(~ou)
[I] Hill, 'Bricksramps', 210, A26. [2] Sarachane archive neg. WITHOUT INDICTION
1247 9.10.11. Gamma altered to delta by rhe addition of a diagonal stroke.
1. TP] 0<1>IMIVlLl.A + (a) Stamp: (85) x 54. TPO<DIMOY

Tp]o~(~(ou) ivB(l1mrovoc) e, +
MULTIPLE-LINE
Kalendcrhane Camii. Unknown:
I. ('48) x(I70) x)8.
I.
1259
1. [.]TPO(J)
(a) Stamp: (10) x'4.
WITH INDICTION [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', B7. [IM]OY+
Date: 507/8 or 522/3. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. za.
St Polyeuktos. Level 642: I. TPO<l>IMOY 1255 [.] Tpoq>[(J.l]ou +
r. No. 266, ? x? x44. 1. +TPO(J)IM (a) Stamp: (85) x(56).
[r] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 210, A27. [2] Sarachane archive neg. I251
lSIN1l-SILl. Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. za.
9·1I.r7a. I. +TPO(J)I+
M1SIVlLl.26 + T pceiuco iVO(llCtt&VOC}s 10' St Polyeuktos. Level 83: I.
I. No. 297,? x? x43.
1248 (a) Stamp: [41 x66.
+ Tpoptpou iVO(lKlt&VOC)s 8' + [I] Hill, 'Bricksramps', 214. B32. [2] Sarachane archive neg.
1. +INLl.2ZTPO<DIM
Kalenderhane Camii. Vault of Byzantine drain below apse of
(a) Stamp: I) 5 x 60. 9·II.18a.
+ ivB(l1mrovoc)s I;'Tpo~(~(ou) North Church: I. Unknown: 2.
Unknown: I.
I.(170)X(I6o)x)I. 2.(2'5)X(I80)X48. 1260
(a) Stamp: "]x )9· I. MSBK inv. 619" )60 x (joo) x?
[I] Peschlow, 'Bricks tamps', B6. 1. +TPO
Peykhaoe Sokak: 1. [I] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 268 no. 84 (erroneous).
(J)IM1S
r. 397-";367 x 38, iAM (unnumbered). [,] MSBK neg. 6I9,a. [)] DAr (1st) neg. ')46 (cast). 1256
[1] Bardill's notes. [4] Mamboury's notes (from cast). [5] Mango's notes (from 1. +TPO(J)IM + TpOCPl~OU
cast). 1SINLl.SI€ (a) Stamp: (112) x66.
TPO<DIMOY Land walls. Wall between towers 88 and 89, in situ in the first
1252 + TPOCPll;l0U ivo(tlCtt&voc)s U~'
1249 I. +TPO<J)I
course of bricks.
(a) Scamp: 137 X6l. [I] Meyer-Plach and Schneider, Landmauer, 150 no. 24-
1. *'M.I<l>OUAILl.VlI* M1SIN1\.IA
Unknown: I.
* iVO(llC'ttroVOC) la' Tpoeluou * + TpO<Pl~OU iv3(llCtl&VOC) la' 1. MSBK inv. 6'04, (,80) x(po) x?
[,] DAI (Ist) neg. 660) (cast). [)] Mamboury's
cast). [4] Mango's notes (from cast).
notes (from
152 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE
.•
353
(b) Stamp: (69) x72. CRUCIFORM (a) Stamp:(tI5)x66. (c) Date: 5)3-)5· See Parr JI, Ch.9, sect. ab.
Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: I.
Unknown: I. Hagia Sophia. Debris from the collapsed barrel vault in the
1.(2)5)x(t85)X54· TPO<DIM(OY)
1. (240) X(220) x 4), AM 27t. substructures of the west wing of the justinianic atrium.
[1] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', E32. [t] Bardill ncgs. 94.13.6, 7. [I] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 268 no. 85. [2] Schneider,
1265
:261 I. ["-'] WesthoJ, 26 no. 5.
[IN]ll.2bOIDIM 1269
. +TPO -< 1. +TPY<D(J) 2. +TPYID
<DIMOY INll.SH []NOC
+ Tpoelpou f'iv]8(mt&voc)s ta'T[p]o~;~(ou) + Tpu<floo(voc) iVS(lK'tlOlVOC)S n' + T pu~[ ro[voc
(a) Land Walls. Near Yeni Mevlevihane Kapr. (a) Stamp: ? x 30. Possibly a variant of 1268. (a) Stamp: (IIO) x(75).
[I] Sorlin-Dorigny, <Inscriptions', 93 no. 54. Land Walls. Near Tekfur Sarayr: (two). Unknown: I.
(a) Date: after 532. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. 2C.
[I] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, 150 no. 29.2. I, Once in Robert College, ? x? x 37, AM 264.
Baths of Zeuxippos. In or near Building 1 or 2,
[2] DAI (Ist) neg. 6598 (cast). [3] Mango's notes (from cast). [1] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Bardill neg. 94.1).15.
(I] Gray, 'Brickstamps', 54 no, 17, [2] Schneider,
'Ziegelstempel', 265 no. 39· 3· [+]TPY<D
:IRCULAR TPO([>IMOY
[]NOC

262 1266 WITHOUT INDICTION [+]T pu~[ cojvoc

1.
ll.YlI+
OQTH
e 1270' (a) Stamp:? X62.
INll.I20MOY 1. [+]TP[Y] Great Palace. Area Ac: I.
[15M]I<D ["-'] <D(J)N I.? x? x35.
[b]
+ iVO(UC'tlOOVOC) T(Tp0I.pt[\lOU] [I] Mamboury's notes.
[+]Tp[u]<prov(oc)
iVOt(K'ttroVDC)S [Tp]O<fllIlDU
(a) Stamp: 80 diameter.
ivo(UC'ttroVDC) t"s [TP]Oq>lIlOU __ - (a) Hebdomon (Bakirkoy).
Date: 514/15. See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. aa.
(a) Stamp: 153 (60+)) +60) X82 (26+ 30+26).
[I] Dethier, 'Makrikoy', t66 no. If", p]. lA' no. 1r . [2] Sorlin-
St Polyeuktos. Level 74: I. Level IOOO*: 2. Unknown: 3.
Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 93 no. 53. TABULA ANSATA
I. No. 295. 2. No. 6r9A. 3. No. II9. Land Walls. Wall near Tekfur Sarayr: (two).
Notes: 1-3. One brick measures ? x? X40. [I] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, 150 no. 29.1. 1Z71 1273

+
[I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 215, C9. [2] Sarachane archive negs. [2] DAI (Ist) neg. 6594 (both casts apparenrlyfrom same die). t. +TPY
504t.25 (3),9.10.3. [ID(J)]NO

263 + Tpu[~rolvo(c) +TPV[<D(J)N]

YlI+ (a) Stamp: (too) x(64). M OCINll.2IE: .
rojrra Great Palace. Area Ac: I.
MI<D Monogram no, 55 {Muuptxiou)
TPO[ I. ? x? x)5,
+ Tpv[<prov]oc i.vo{tK'tt&voc)s te~}.t.
YO [I] Mamboury's notes.
1267 The significance of the mu and the indecipherable letter in the ansae
+ i~(OtK'tl&VOC) WTp[o]<ptJ.10U
1. TPO[ 1272 of the tabula is uncertain.
(a) Stamp: 100 diameter. t. +TPY<D
Tpo[ (a) Stamp: tabula 130 x44; roundel j j diameter.
Date: 508/9. See Part II, Ch. 9. sect. za. GlNOC
St Polyeuktos. Level 181: I. Level 483: 2. (a) Date: 5)3-35. See Parr JI, Ch. 9, sect. ab. Date: 582. See Part Il, Ch. 5, sect. la and Ch. 11, sect, 7,
+ Tpuqxovoc Excavation of the Diakonissa complex, Beyazrt. Cistern 2.5 m.
1. No. 40. 2. No. 1337. Hagia Sophia, constructions of the north-west court, large
surrounding wall: I. (a) Stamp: 10) x 70. north of Church B.
Notes: 1-2. One brick measures? x? x 34.
[r] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 215, CIO. [2] Sarachane archive neg. 1. ? x? X40. Unknown: I. [I] Mamboury's notes.
9·11.14a(1). [r] Mamboury's notes, LiAM (<;:K) no. 88, I x I x 40.
[1] Mango's notes.
264 (b) Stamp: los-r08 x 64.
m Unknown: 1-2.
TPX[O<D] t. (310) x(260) x 45>AM t04. 2. )78 x )60 x 40, AM 354 (old
IMAOY TY( )TP()
nO·70).
INP[ .. ] TPY<DCDNOC [t] Bardill negs. 94.8.25 (t); 95.6.) 5,)6 (2).
IC 1274
(c) Stamp: 112 X48. t. B]ATYTP
MUL TIPLE-LINE
e(£O)uxaptcTp[o~];~ou iv(otKttrovoc) [.. 1 Great Palace. Area Ac foundations,
[I] Mamboury's notes. P]~() TuO T pO
(a) Stamp: 110 diameter. WITH INDICTION
(d) Stamp: 112 x60. (a) Stamp: (91) X) t.
Date: 502-33 or 517-20 or 532-35. Sec Part Il, Ch. 9, sect, zd,
1268 Great Palace. Between area Ab and the Augustaion, corner of Kalcnderhane Camii. B7 filling in the cast wall, runnel entrance:
Ch. 10 no. 7.
1. [+T]PY<D(J)NS the great wall: T.
Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagi: I.
[IN]ll.SH+ I. 355 x355 x40· L(215)X(145)X51.
1. 380 x360x60.
[1] Marnboury's notes. [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', A63.
[I] Mamboury's notes. I+ T]pu~rov(oc)s [iv]o(tmrovoc)s~' +
 .,~

354 CATALOGUE
•
CATALOGUE
355
T[ (a) Stamp: 145 xq.
(b) The typescript representation does not show the zeta inverted. (a) Stamp: (70) ,,8.
Little cistern near the Thcorokos in the Chalkoprateia,
1275 Hagia Sophia. Ruins in front of the west doors, demolished Land Walls.
destroyed in Junc 1916.
I. INl>IT[ November 1873. [I] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, I49 no. 13.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 93 no. 50. [2) DAI (1st) neg. 6606 (cast). [)) Mamboury's notes (from
iv(ollC'uroVQc) Ot''!'[
(c) Stamp: 126 x90. cast). [4] Mango's notes (from cast).
(a) Stamp: (67) x 37. In the area of the excavations undertaken in 1946-47 between
Date: 41 5/t6 or 43011. See Part 11, Ch. 9. sect. rb. Hagia Eirenc and Hagia Sophia: 1.
Palace of Antiochus: (two) I. <D£InIMOY I.? x? X5),AM48.
1. ? x? X42. [I] Maletskos, 'Plinthos', 270, pl. 54.!, [2] Bardill negs. 94.3.5,
[r] Mamboury's notes. See <l>Hf>.IMOY, <l>Il>HMOY. 6.
cDI( )
1282
t. +KYPIABO See also (DI() or (DIf>.()
H8I(DHf>.!
1286
M15INl>2S
YI1( ) <DEP( ) I. I<I>AmNI
+ Kupt{tx} ~0~9(,)t <Dt10(1l0Ulvo(mtiiivoc)s ,'/~'
iV(OtlCttrovoc) t" ~tx() (Dt()
1276 1279 N?te alpha in error for epsilon in line I.
I. IN l>IBA YIT I. IJ.1BBA<I>E:PH (a) Stamp: '34"9.
(a) Stamp: 1)0 x 88. Excavations near Istanbul University 1943-46.
iv(otK"ttrovoc) Ot' ~tx() 'Yn() iv(otl<ttiiivoc) W ~a() <I>,p() 11 Yalova: J. [r] Frrath, 'Trois eglises', 172, 177. pl. 7(b) no. 6.
(a) Stamp: 17s-r8oxz8. (a) Stamp: r6) X)4. I. ? x? x40.
[I] Mamboury's notes. 1287
Date: 43o/r or 445/6 or 46olI. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. le. Hagia Sophia. North-east ramp, paving probably laid in
I. INt:IWKE:BA<I>I
Balaban Aga Mescidi: 1-6. Turkish period: I.
I. iAM )0. 2, iAM 49. ). iAM 100. 4. iAM 168. 5. iAM 169. I.)Iox?x? <l>If>.HM(OY) iv(8tlCttrovoc) Cl' + (in leaf or heart) K(upt), ~a() (Dt()
6.iAMI71. [I] Van Nice archive (rubbing).
1283 (a) Stamp: 140 x 24.
Notes: 1-6. Three bricks measure ace x 390 x40' 390/360 x 380 I. +INf>.. Date: 416h7 or 43 tl z, See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb.
x?,4oox365 x45· (DIf>.HM
[r] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes (from squeeze).
Palace of Antiochus: 1-2.

(b) Stamp: '78 x jo. + lVO(lK't"lWVOC). <I>lO~Il(OU) 1.400 x 380 x 50. 2.400 x 395 x 50
[I) DAI (Ist) neg. KB 1011. [,) Mango's notes. [)) Mango and
Date: 43o/r or 445/6 or 46oh. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. le. cDHnIMOY, cDlnHMOY (a) Scamp: (110) x (76).
TokludedeMescidi: 1-8.
Hawkins, 'Fenari isa Camii', 184 no. 25 (mentioned).
Unknown: I.
l.iAM5· 2.iAM7. 3·iAMIO. 4·iAMI6. 5.iAM,1. WITH INDICTION I. Once in Robert College,? x? x45.AM 263. Unknown: 1.
6. iAM 28. 7. iAM I16. 8. iAM t29. [I) Mango's notes (rubbing). [I) Bardill neg. 94.1).16. I. )89 x()40) x 50, AM 16.
<l>Hf>.()
Notes: 1-8, Two bricks measure 390 x 370 x 50, 390 x 390 x 50. [I) Bardill negs. 94.I.)3a, )4a.
[r] Mamboury's notes. 1280
WITHOUT INDICTION
I. 01l3IQY2I+
1277 (.)2f>.J.1II8H 1284
I. INll.lBAYIT
[f>.)H<I>2QA[ll) 1. +KYPIE:B[O)
iv(omtrovoc) hIT Ot' ~tx() 'Yn() + KuptC ~0~9(')t iv6(tmrovoc)s [. ') [~)ap()s <I>~[6((llou)) H8I<1>H[l>I) cDI( ) orcDln()
Gamma superseded by delta carved directly on top of it. (a) Stamp: (107) x90' + Kvpre ~[o)~9(,)t <Dt1[o((llou))
See also <l>I().
(a) Stamp: 178 x )0. Unknown: I. The bottom line of the stamp had perhaps broken off.
Date: 430/r or 445/6 or 460/1. See Part n, Ch. 9. sect. le. I. 390 x 387 x 47. AM 18. 1288
(a) Hagia Sophia. Ruins by the porch in the east wall. I. INf>.IBA(Dlf>.
TokludedeMescidi: I. [I] Bardill negs. 94.2.0, I.
[I] Salzenberg, Baudenkmale, 64 no. 3. [2] Lethaby and
I. iAM 32, 370 x? x 55. tv(8tmrovoc) Ot'~tx() <l>t()0
Swainson, Sancta Sophia, 156 no. 3· [3] Schneider,
[I] Mamboury's notes. <l>Hf>.IMOY
iv(otmrovoc) Ot' ~tx() <l>to()
'Ziegelstempel', 268 no. 89.
USI (b) Stamp: 105 x 57. (a) Stamp: 130 X25.
I. +KYPIE:BO Hagia Sophia. Land Walls. Near tower I la: I.
H81(DHf>.I [I] Mamboury's notes. I.? x? x50.
M15INf>.2S [I] Mamboury's notes.
D( )
+ Kupie ~o~9(,)t (D~0(1l0Uiv8("«iiivoc)s ,'/~'
For a name abbreviated to a single letter cp. TI(). (a) Srampi r jo x Rz.•
cD60N( )
Unknown: 1-3.
(278
·.INHBAb<l> LiAM (<;:K) 6. 2. iAM (<;:K) 6a. ). iAM (<;:K) eb. 1285
Notes: 1-3. Two bricks measure 380 x 370 x 50, 375 x 380 x 55. I. B)A(D60J.1 cDlnHMOY
iv(otJcttiiivoc)~' Btxp() <I>() [I] Mango's notes.
~)tx( ) (D90v( ) See (DHf>.IMOY, (Dlf>.HMOY.
 ---- -------------- ---------------~------------------------------------~----------~--------.

" •...
•
356 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 357
<I>IA( ) I. MSBKinv. 6209, (90) x (200) x? <I>IA9[ .]AO .. (a) Stamp' (I49) X) I.
[1] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 265 no. 21. [2] MSBK neg. Kalenderhane Camii. Covering of diakonikon vault: I.
Layout: BA terminates inscription 6209" [J] DAI (1st) neg. 2))7 (cast). [4] Mamboury's notes I298 I. (I90) x (I65) x J4.
1289 (from cast). [5] Mango's notes (from cast). I. +<DIAO[.] [I] Peschlow, 'Bricks tamps' , A6 5.
I. INA<DIA[ (c) Stamp' '45 XlJ. AO :.
Land Walls. In situ in wall between towers 3 and 4.
{v(olK'tliiivoc) a' <DlA[() ~a()] + <DlAO[.]l.o. +
[I] Mango's notes. [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari lsa Camii',
(a) Stamp' (8J) x26. 1&4 no. 25 (mentioned). (a) Stamp' 'J5 x 56.
.$
<I>PYrI()
Date: 432/3 or 447/8 or 462/3- See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. le. (d) Stamp' I45 X22. Hagia Sophia. Narthex, repairs to paving beside central door to
Balaban Aga Mescidi: 1. Sea Walls. Narh Kapr, curtain wall between the two towers: 1. exonarthex: I.
'303
r. ?X?X45,iAM67. I.38ox?x4°. 1·355 x 355 x?, fingermarks making ellipse around the stamp. I. IIIH<DPYrI
[r] Mamboury's notes. [r] Mamboury's nores. [I] Van Nice archive (rubbing).
iVO(lK"tlWVOC)~'<DPVYl()
12 90 I294 (a) Stamp: 103-105 X31-35.
I. INI<DIABA I. INVIBA<DIA
Land Walls. Tower 18: I.
{v(oumwvoc) t" <DlA() ~a() {v(ollmwvoc) hll Ol' ~a( ) <DlA() <I>I() TIY() I.350X350x45·
(a) Land Walls. Between Edirne Kapr and Tekfur Sarayi. Gamma altered to delta by the addition of a diagonal stroke. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mamboury, 'N ouvelle lecture', 123. I299
(a) Stamp' t45 X24. t.lDmv Unknown: I.
2. INI<DIABA Date: 41 5116 or 4301I. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb. I.? xl xJ9,AM 88.
<Dl() ITv()
Palace of Antiochus: I. [I] Bardillneg. 94.5-23.
{V(OlK"tlWVOC)
l' <DlA() ~a()
1·38ox37ox50 (a) Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia. Court to the east of the apse.
(a) Unknown. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. [3] Mango and
Er] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 85 no. 6. [2] Leciercq,
Hawkins, 'Fenari lsa Camii', 184 no. 25 (mentio'n'e03:
'Estampilles', col. 545 no. 6. <I>Y()
1295
I. INEIBA<DIA <I>AA() '304
Layout: name terminates inscription r. INHBA<DV
iV(OlK"tliiivoc)El' ~a() <DlA()
1300 {V(OlK"tliiivoc)~' ~a() <Dv()
1291
(a) Cistern to the north of the rotunda beside the Palace of r. Ai\<DABrI1I
t. IN2BA<DIA
Antiochus. (a) Stamp: '45 x JO.
iv(oumwvoc) y' ~a() <Dl.o()
,'If:; ~a() <DrA()
{V(OU,",lWVOC) [r] Naumann, 'Antiochus-Palast', 144. Unknown: I.

(a) Stamp: 175 x25.

(a) Stamp:II4x25. I. lAM «:K) no. 52, fingermarks made before stamping, 385 x
Unknown: 1- 360 X 6o.
Unknown: I.
I. MSBKinv. 6202, 360 x 370 x?, stamp partially destroyed by
t. J IJ x(265) x 40, AM 80 (old no. 54). [I] Mango's notes.

fingermarks. [I] Bardill neg. 9+5.9.

<I>IAA( )
[I] MSBK neg. 6202a. [2] DAI (Ist) neg. 2JJ7 (cast).
[3] Mamboury's notes (from cast). [4] Mango's notes (from I296
cast). <I>(J)( )
I. INIBAPtIAA
<I>OYTINOY
1292 {V(OlK"tlWVOC)
t" ~ap() <DlAa( ) 1305
t. INHBA<DIA See <DOY[ and <D(J)TINOY, <DOYTINOY. I. INABA<D(J)
(a) Stamp: 160 x 26.
{v(olmwvoc) ~'~a() <DlA() Unknown: I. {v(oumwvoc) a' ~a() <Dto()
I. MSBK inv. 6206, (240) x (jco) x?
(a) Stamp: 144 x 20. (a) Hebdomon (Bakirkoy). Hypogeum debris, presumably from
Unknown: I.
Er] Schneider, 'Ziegclstcmpcl', 26S n. IS (wrongly ascribed to the collapsed roof: I.
Talbot Rice, 'Bodrum Camii', 173). [2] Mamboury, 'Nouvelle <I>OY[
I.390X375 x45-55,AM 107. 1.365 x360x?
lecture', I '9. [J] MSBK neg. 6206a. [4] DAI (1st) neg. 2J47
[I] Bardill neg. 94.8.)), [I] Ebersolt and Macridy, 'Monuments', 391, fig. 25.
(cast). [5] Mamboury's notes (from cast). [6] Mango's notes IJOI
t. +[I]I1Ll.I<DOY[ [2] Mamboury, 'Pouilles 1', 239. [3] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel',
I293 (from cast).
263 no. IC, 265 no. 22. [4] Mango, 'Brick Stamps', 22.
I. IN6BA<DIA + [iJv(ouC"tlwvoc) Ol' <Dou[ (h) Stamp-rea x28.
I297 + [{JVO(lK"tlWVOC) l' <Dou[
{v(oumwvoc) 8' ~a( ) <DlA() Hebdomon (Bakrrkoy). Hypogeum: I.
I. INEIBA<DIAA
(a) Hebdomon (Bakirkoy). 1.37ox360x55·
(a) Stamp"44'2J.
iV(OlJCtlWVOC)
El' ~a() <DlAa() [I] Derhier, 'Makrikdy', t67 no. 16' pl. lA' no. I8. [I] Mamboury's notes.
Unknown: I.
r.iAM(~K) nO.48, J90 XJ75 x60. (a) Stamp: 170X25.
1302 I306
[I] Mamboury's notes. Great Palace. Area Ab, below the collapsed vault: I. I. INIBA<DW
I.]Ll.S<DOY.
(h) Stamp' '45 x 22- I.? x?x4S'
Unknown: I. [I] Mamboury's notes. Iv J?(lK'tlOOVOC)~' <Dou . {v(oumiiivoc) l' ~a() <Dto()
 --- ------ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~-------

,,~
..
CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 359

(a) Stamp' t45 xJ5. <D(J)TINOY, <DOYTINOY IJ16 (a) Stamp: (77) x 26.
Kalenderhane Camii. Vault of west cross-arm: I. B5/1: 2. I. +(I>CO[ Date: 422/J or 42J/4 or 437/8 or 438/9. See Part U, Ch. 9, sect.
Unknown: 3. SINGLE-LINE +<Doo[ r e.
1.(225) x(225) x 52. 2.(145)X(135)x52. 3·(I50)X(120)X52. Cistern on Siraselviler Caddesi.
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps'c Aj e. WITH INDICTION (a) Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between [I] Mango's notes.
Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I.
2.1NfBA(I>m 13II I. Once in the Hagia Eirene collection.
I. (I>]COTIN1HN[ [1] Mamboury's notes.
iv(o"cnOivoc) t" ~a() cDro()
..•.1D]ro·tivou iV[(OlK"t\&VOC) XA()
(a) Stamp: 159 x 22.
Date: 456/7. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. Id. (a) Stamp: (I77) X4I.
MULTIPLE-LINE 1322
Cistern of Aspar. South-west wall, lowest brick band, fifth Unknown: I.
I. AX11
course up, in situ: I. I. (J60) x(265) xJ7,AM 393· IJI7
I.375X362X? [I] Bardm negs. 95.9-7, 8. 1. ITCO<D+ ty'XaO
[I] Bardill (cast). 1"011 (a) Stamp: 99 x25·
WITHOUT INDICTION Date: late ath century? Sec Part Il, Ch. 10 no. 4.
+ <l>OO'tlVOU
Unknown: I.
<l>OYTINOY (a) Stamp:95X55'
I. JI2 x308 x42,AM 39.
'307 , Great Palace, AreaAb: I.
I. INIABA(I>ffi 1312 [I] Bardill negs. 94.2.28, 29.
I. . AYOI1ITYO(l>+ I.370X370X50
iV(OLKttOivoc)la' ~a() <l>ro() [I] Mamboury's notes.
+ ooceivoo Cl.
(a) Unknown.
(a) Starnpt z jo x j y.
[r] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 84 no. 4 (I have not seen XPEI( )
Dethier, La Turquie (I872), to which Sorlin-Dorigny refers).
Remains in Sefrali Caddesi. Masonry supporting ~~!:channel.
[I] Mamboury's notes. See also 1523·la, 1579.ra.
[2] Leclercq, 'Estampilles', col. 545 no. 4· <D[
<DCOTINOY '323
IJ18 I. BAXPE:I
I. INABA<I>[
1308 '3'3 ~aOXpElO
I. +<DCOTINOY iv(omtOivoc) a' ~a() <D[
I.]NfBA<I>ffi
(a) Stamp: '55 x 37·
i]V(OlKttOivoc) l' ~a() (l>ro()
+ (J)oo·dvou (a) Stamp: ? x 27. Unknown: 1-2.
(a) Date: after 5]2. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. 2C. Sea \Y/al1s. Large pillars near the monumental staircase, area Fb: 1. (183) x(178) x )8-46, AM I85 (old no. 88). 2. J'4 x 300 x
(a) Stamp' (141) x 30. I.
Baths of Zeuxippos. Eastern pillar at the south end of Room I 50-56, AM 17' (old no. 66).
Date: 449/50. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. IC.
in Building 2. I. ? x? x 50.
St john ofStoudios: 1-2. [I] Bardill negs. 94.10.3°30, 31:l (2); 94.11.1930 (I).
[I] Gray, 'Brickstamps', 53 no. 6. [2] Schneider, [I] Mamboury's notes.
1. ? x? X46. 2.? x? X46.
'Zicgelsrempel', 268 no. 86. 2. BAXPE:[I]
[I] Peschlow, Studioskirche, (in preparation). 1)19
I. INABAP<D[ ~aO XpC[tO]
MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE CARRIED INDICTION (a) Stamp: ? x 38.
iV(OtK'tlOivoc) a'~ap() <1>[
<l>OYTINOY Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
'309 (a) Stamp:(106)X26. Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I.
I. ]BV(I>CO T okludede Mescidi: I.
'3'4 I. Once in the Hagia Eirene collection.
] ~"O (l>roO I.]TYO(l>+ I.?x? x50,iAM 53. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze).
(a) Stamp' (82) x 30. +lDot)"t[ivou
Rhegium (Kiictik Cekmece). Large surrounding wall of the (3) Kozyatagr, west of Erenkoy. 1320
Acropolis, beside the sea: 1.
[I] Tsakalof, 'Saryros', 126. [2] Feissel, 'Inscriptions'j ar y no. I. ]<I>Aa:aI1I
I.? x? x 38-4°. XPHCTOY, XPICTOY
18. [3] SEG 37 (r987) no. I04I. iv(ol1mOivoc)~' ~,,() (1)[
[r] Mamboury's notes.
The name was possibly <Dw(). Cp. 1309. la, also found at Rhegium. SINGLE-LINE
<D{J)TINOY
(a) Stamp: (80) x 24. XPH()
1315 Rhegium (Kucdk Cekmece). Substructures near the ayasma: I.
1310 I. ](I>COTIN[OY
I.? x? x38. TJ24
I. ]BA<I>CO 1. INJl.IABAXPH
] Q>oo't1.v[ou [I] Mambcury's notes,
] ~aO (l>roO iVO(llttlOivoc) tu" ~a() Xp~()
(a) Stamp: (124 from upright of phi to right-hand upright of nu) x 1321
(a) Stamp' (95 from upright of beta to right-hand edge) x26. (a) Unknown.
4J· L INS<D[
Unknown: I·. Unknown: T. [I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 85 no. 9. [2] Schneider,
I. Fragment, 395 x? x 50, iAM r a. [v(~l1C'tlOivoc)S'/~' (1)[
I.? x?x35-40,AM446. 'Ziegelstempcl', 265 no. 23. [3] Mamboury, 'Nouvelle lecture',
[I] Mamboury's notes. 1289 and 1290 suggest [v(ol1C'ttOivoc)s'/~' <D[ll.() ~,,()].
[r] Bardill negs. 95,13.38; 95.14.oa, la, aa. 123.
 ..~
.<
CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE

XPHC() WITHOUT INDJCTION (a) Augustaion. Discovered in the narrow street running from Mayor may not have carried accessory
1325 Hagia Sophia to Sultan Ahmet Camii, near the Tribunal of
XPHCTOC 1337
L ]l>XPHC Commerce (the later Palace of Justice, burned down in 1933)'
1. +XPIC
1329 [I] Leval, 'Archaiologika', 617 no. y'.
]O'Xp~c() 1. +XPJ-!C TOY.
(b) Stamp' 80 x67.
A

(a) Stamp' (87) x27. ~O::> Unknowl 1: r. -e Xpiccou .

Kalenderhane Camii. Main church, north cross-arm, in cistern: I. Once in Robert College, ? x? x45,AM T96.
-e Xpitcroc (a) Stamp' (82) x 59.
(t] Mango's notes. (2] Bardill neg. 94.1 I.J2l. Great Palace. excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site
1. (150) x (150) x44. (a'Y Stamp: TOOx 70.
[+XP]IC B I, building north-west of church, debris: 1.
[I]Peschlow, 'Bricks tamps', A 37. Great Palace. Area Ab. Foundations of vault below the
[TO]Y+ I. No. 34.
collapsed vault: r.
[I] GP I, pl. 14 no. 34. (2] RusseIl Papers, Miscellaneous
l.37ox?x5°· Without border
XPHC ... Remainder, box 38, neg. 207 ..l3] Talbot.Rice archive neg. as
[I] Mamboury's notes.
[+Xp]lC["Ojii+ [2].
1326 (b) Stamp' 90 x(59).
XPHCTOY (a) Stamp' (50) x 55.
1. XPHC. Great Palace. excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38.
Land Walls. Tower 69a.
Xpnc . 1330 [r] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, 150 no. 25.2.
[I] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous Remainder, box 38, neg. 243.
I.XPHC [2] DAI (1st) neg. 6596 (cast). [)] Mamboury's notes (from
(a) Stamp: 110 X 30.
[T]O);' \ ' cast). [3] Mango's notes (from cast).
Date: 501-504 or 516-I9 or 531-34. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad. XPHCTOY or XPICTOY
Remains on Ismetiye Caddesi. North group. Xp~c["]O"
Accessory A 1338
[I] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stamp' 95 x 75.
')34 I.+XP[IC]
Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
I. +XPIC TOY.
I.? x? x 50.
TOYA + X~[lC]"oil .
[t] Mamboury's notes.
MULTIPLE-LINE +XPlCTOU 0; (a) Stamp: ? x 48.
1))'
(a) Stamp' la) x(p). Land Walls. Near tower 68a.
WITH INDICTION I. +XqHC
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site [I] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, 150 no. 25.r.
TOY
B I, building north-west of church, debris: r. [2] DAI (ISI) neg. 6596.
XPIC(TOY)
+Xpnctou I. ?x?x3o,no.37.
1327 (a) Stamp' 105 x70. [I] GP I, pl. 14 no. 37. (2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous
1.]XPIC
Great Palace. Area Ab, collapsed vault: 1. Remainder, box 38, neg. 210. [3] Talbot Rice archive ncg. as
]3172 [2].
1. 380x350x40. CRUCIFORM
XPlC(-tOU) s iv8(t1cuoovoc) e" [I] Mamboury's notes. (b) Stamp: (74) x 7J.

Note ligature of iota, nu, and delta in line 2.

Kalenderhane Camii. Exonarthex Zr: I. '339
1. (170) xf r jo) x)4. P
XPICTOY
(a) Stamp' (10) x 57. (I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', B33. HXK
Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri No accessory N
(Beyazn), 1928: 1. AccessoryK
13)2 Xp(l"ilC) V~K(ii-) (?)
I.? x?x35. I.+XPIC '335
[r] Gray, 'Brickstamps', 56 no. 43. [2] Schneider, 1. XPIC (a) Stamp' 75 x 77.
TOY
'Ziegelsrempel', 265 no. 40. [3] Mamboury's notes Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: I.
+XP1C'tOU
TOYK
I. ()5 5) x()05) x 5), one break.
XPlcrOU K
(I] Peschlow, 'Bricks tamps', D5.
(a) Stamp' 99 x 67.
XPICTOY (a) Date: after 5)2. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. 2C.
Kariye Camii: r.
4ccessory E 1. Once in Robert College, 350 x? x 50. Baths of Zeuxippos. In or near Building I or 2.
[I] Mango's notes (rubbing). [I] Gray, 'Brickstamps', 54 no, 25. (2] Schneider,
[328
'Ziegelstempel', 268 no. 87 (incomplete). TABULA ANSATA
L +XPIC
Unknown: 1-2.
TOY I. (JJo) x(246) X41-44, AM 158. 2. (JJ7) x (225) x )0-)7, AM Accessory N
IASE: '340
)64· 1336 I. XPHC

+ XPlC1:0U ui' 5 E [I] Bardill negs. 94.10.4a (I); 95.7.21, 22 (2). 1. +XPIC TOY[
(a) Stamp.Ej x ya. TOYIIl Xcncroc [
'333
Unknown: I. J. +XPIC +Xptcrcirv
(a) Stamp: (!I2) x(70).
1. MSBKinv. 6226, (190) x(l8o) x? TOY+ (a) Stamp,(75) x j a. Sea Walls. Near tower 16: I.
[I] MSBK neg. 6226a. [2] DAI (1st) neg. 2)49 (cast).
With border Unknown: T. I.? x? x30.
[3] Mamboury's notes (from cast). [4] Mango's notes (from
+XPlC'tOU+ I. (250) x{r So) x37. AM 124. [I] Demange1 and Mamboury,Manganes,77, 81, fig. 88 nO.4.
cast).
[I] Bardill negs. 95.1.18,19,20. [2] Mamboury's notes.
 --- -------------------- - -- ---------- ------------------ ---------------- ------------------

..~
•
CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE

X:PICTOY Balaban Aga Mescidi: l.

(c) Stamp: 69 x 64-
1.? x? x4o-4h iAM 102. Unknown: r.
iee XPHCTOY, XPICTOY. [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes.
I. )57 x(345) X4)-5 5, AM 414·
(d) Stamp: 72 x60. [r] Bardill ncg. 95.IO.loa.
Date: 533-35. See Part n, Ch. 9, sect. zb. (d) Stamp: 70 x64. Square border.
Hagia Sophia. Constructions of north- west court: I.
Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between Monogram no. 10.
I. 345 x? x50· Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I.
1>[ [I] Schneider, 'Zicgelsrempel', 269 no. 101. [2] Mamboury's (a) Stamp: (75 from upright of cross to right-hand edge) x 72.
I. Once in the Hagia Eircnc collection.
notes. Unknown: I.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
[34 I. Fragment, ? x? x 50, iAM 1.
' (e) Stamp: 75 x 64. (e) Stamp: 70 x65 .
r. +INVB<.ll[
Date: 532-37. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. zb. Unknown: 1-2.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
+1vo(um&voe) W(J)[ Hagia Sophia. North-east buttress, brick spanning upper (b) Rotunda and adjoining hall north of the Palace of Antiochus.
dAM(<;:K)jl. z.iAM(<;:K) )[3.
opening in north wall of room at gallery roof: I. [I] DAI(Ist)neg.KB 615~
(a) Ruins nearTopalian Ham, in the area bounded by Hoca Ham Notes: 1-2. One brick measures 35 5 x 3 55 x 55.
I. yoo x j yo x ? (c) Stamp: (78) x(64).
Sokagr, Kaputcular Sokagr, and Katircioglu Sokagi. [I] Mango's notes.
[I] Meliopoulos, 'T oporhesia', 231 no. 10. [I] Van Nice archive (rubbing). (f) Date: after 532. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. 2C.
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38: I.
(f) Hagia Sophia. South-west buttress, top of srair in vaulted room I.? x? x60,no.7I.
Baths ofZeuxippos. Wall of apse of Building 2.
at top of well: 1-2. [[] GPI,PI.14no·7l. [2] Mango, 'Brick Sramps'j z r.figj
[I] Gray, 'Brickscamps', 51 (mentioned. but not, as stated mere,
I.35oxJ40x50.2·36sx345x5°· (bottom row, centre left). [3] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous
; • included as no. 6 on p. 53).
[1] Van Nice archive (rubbing). Remainder, box 38, neg. 233. [4] Talbot Rice archive neg. as
MONOGRAMS [,].

RECTANGULAR 1345

Box monograms Without border.

Monogram
(a) Unknown.
no. 4. KUPlCOCQU
(?)
LtToE
Monogram no. 3. KUPUXKOU(?)
[I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 94 no. 62, pi. 14 no. 13. Octagonal border.
(a) Stamp: 70 x 64.
Monogram no. 10.
Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I. (a) Stamp: 86 x ?
Monogram no. I. Kupw:KOU (?)
I. Once in the Hagia Eirene collection. Land Walls. T ekfur Sarayi interior, bottom of wall near the
(a) Theotokos in me Chalkoprateia. [I] Mamboury's notes. Monogram no. 5. KUptaKOU (?) Gate of the Porphyrogenitus: (one). Unknown: (one).
[I] Leval, 'Archaiologika', 619-20, section IV. [2] Mango, (b) Stamp: 7' x6). [I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Date: c. 532/3. Sec Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. zb.
'Brick Stamps', 21, fig. 3 (bottom row, far right). Unknown: I. (b) Stamp-co xeg.
Hagia Sophia. Ruins in front of the west doors, demolished
I. )5P)47X47-56,AM 4'5 (old no. 18)). November 1873. Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946--47 between
[1] Bardill negs. 95.10.1 la, r aa. [I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 93 no. 49, pl. 14 no. 11. Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I.
(c) Stamp: 7J x65. I. Once in the Hagia Eirene collection.
Without border. Unknown: 1-3. 8. Monogram no. 1,20r3.KuptaKOU(?) [I] Mamboury's notes.
Monogram no. 2. KUptaKOU (?) dAM (<;:K) 2. 2. iAM (<;:K) aa. ). iAM (<;:K) ab. (a) Stamp: 7) x (65). (c) Stamp: inner borders at top and bottom are 57 apart.
Notes: J-3. Three bricks measure 340 x HO x 50, 370 x HO x 50, Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935:....38. Unknown: I.
(a) Stamp: 7J x68. I. ? x? x 30-36, AM 332.
355 x j ao x ao. Mamboury gives the location as 'Ca'.
Balaban Aga Mescidi: I.
[1] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). [2] Mango's notes. [r] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). [t] Bardill negs. 95.6,5, 6.
I.? x? x40,iAM92. (d) Unknown: 1.
[I] Mamboury's notes. 9· Monogram no. I, 2 or 3. KUPlUICOU(?) l. ('[5) x(195) x40,AM445.
5't~t (a) Hagia Sophia. Reused to repair the Turkish wall, in a corner [I] Bardill negs. 95-1)·35, )7.
and to the right of the alley as one faces the north entrance to
With border. IJ46
the narthex.
With border. Monogram no. 3. KUpW.KOU(?) 1. +MKOYBI
_ [I] Mamboury's notes.
KOVAAP
Monogram no. 2. Kuptmcoii (?) (a) Stamp: 67 x 61.
Fenari isa Camii: 1. + monogram no. II ICOU~lKOUA(1p(iou)
(a) Stamp: 70 x 64-
Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between I. 364 X (281) x 35-41, AM 18l. (a) Stamp: '45 x95.
1343
Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: 1.
1. Once in the Hagia Eirene collection.
[I] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fcnari
isa Camii', fig. 39 no, 6. [3] Sodini, 'L'Artisnnat', 74, fig. 1 no. l. tM: Perinthos (Marmara Ereglisi): I.
I. Stored in the barracks of Mar mar a Ereglisi.
[I] Mamboury's notes. 2. [4] Bardill neg. 94.11.14a. [I] Sayar,Perinthos, 389 no. 250, pl. 44, fig. 180.
(b) Stamp: 70 x65· (b) Stamp: 69 x 6) .• Monogram no. 9.
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Hagia Eircne. Southern side of atrium: 1-2.
(a) Stamp: 81 x66. '347
1. 355 XH2 X48. 2. HOx? x48. l. + M KOYBI
Mamboury gives location as 'Ca'. Unknown: I.
[r] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). [r] Gcorge, S!. Eirene, p]. 16 nos. 16 and 17. (2) Mango, 'Brick KOVAAPZ
Stamps', 21, fig. 3 (bottom row, centre right). l. ('90) x ([75) x )9-45, AM 4)9.
(c) Stamp: 70 x65· [I] Bardill negs. 95-1).2), '4. + monogram no. IJKOUptKOUAap(iou)s
 ..
,,~

CATALOGUE CATALOGUE

(a) Starnp: I)Ox85· (cl) Stamp: 8ax70. 1(220) x(205) x )0. 2. (188) x(I8 5) x 34. ;.(2)8) X(210) x )2. Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
Perinthos (Marmara Ereglisi): J, Toldudede Mescidi: 1-5. 4·(250)X(I56)X)9· 5·347 x(247) X)7· Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: 1.
I. Stored in the barracks of Marmara Ereglisi .. I. JAM 50. 2. iAM 59. ). iAM 67· 4· iAM 7J. 5· iAM 114· [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', E 5 (illustration compiled from 1. Once in the Hagia Eirene collection.
[r] Sayar,Perinthos, 389 no. 251, p]. 44. fig. 181. Notes: 1-5. One brick measures 370 x350 x45. several variants). [r] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
Byzantine drains along the Mese. Opposite Firuz Aga Camii.
[1] Mamboury's notes.
+'[4 1355
I
J
Monogram no. 16. Mcpxou.Mccccpioo. Mo-opicio» (?)
1359
Monogram no. 13. M6.pICOU, MUlCUPlOU, Mccupudou (?) (a) Stamp: 84 x 66. Monogram no. ZI.
Unknown: I.
I.TI5l
(a) Stamp: 90 x 85. (a) SIamp:(65) X(70).
I. (230) x (200) x 40-47. AM 219_
Christ Philanthropes. Vaults behind main vaults: I. Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site Monogram no. 30.
[I] Bardill neg. 94.6.2)a. BI:1.
I. 350 X345 X40. (a) Stamp: 70 x 6).
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Demangel and Mamboury, I. ? x? x 26, no. 16.
135' Land Walls. Outer wall at Silivri Kapt: I.
Manganes, 29. fig. J2 no. I. [3] Mango, 'Brick Stamps', 21, fig. [r] GP I, pl. 14 no. 16. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous
I. U.?, 1. MSBKinv. 6208,(110) x (140) x?
3 (bottom row, far left). Remainder, box 38, ncg. 193. [3] Talbot Rice archive neg. as
t\,AV er] Sorlin-Dorigny, <Inscriptions', 89 no. 32, pl. 14 no. 6.
, [2].
[2] MSBK neg. 6208a. [)] DAI (1st) neg. 2345 (cast).

1349
I. l+.?,
t~t
Monogram no. 17.
(a) Burgaz Adasi. Transfiguration
er] Albert, 'Antigoni', 39, fig.
church.
20.
[ [4] Mamboury's
cast).
notes (from cast). [5] Mango'S notes (from

(h) Land Walls. Wall between towers 67a-68a.

[I] Meyer-Plarh and Schneider, Landmauer, 150 no. 30.2.
Monogram no. 14. Ma.[p]ICOU, MaKCt[pJiou,

(a) Stamp: 93' 82.

Mcujpjudou (?) 1352
I Monogram no. 22. Kovctcvrivou, Kotvlcrcvrtvou (?)
[2] DAI (Ist) negs. 6596, 6597, 6606 (2 examples).
(c) Land Walls. \Vall between towers 6a and 7a.

Christ Philanthropos. Vaults behind main vaults, on the left of

the railway after the passage that goes to the sea, in situ: I.
Monogram no. 18.
I (a) Stamp: 72 x 77.
Date: 507-22. See Part H, Ch. 9, sect. za.
[I] Mamboury's notes.

I.? x? X35. St Polyeuktos. Level 434: 1. Level eoa: 2. Level 700*: 3.

(a) Stamp: 82 x72. Unknown: 4. 1360
[r] Mamboury's notes. [2] Demangel and Mamboury,
Manganes, 29. fig. J2 no. 2. Kalenderhane Camii. B3/3: I. I No. 759. 2. No. 529. ). No. 250. 4- No. 689. I.~
I. (213) x(I70) x 39. dog's paw print obscures stamp. Notes: 1-4. One brick measures? x? x 39.
(h) Stamp: 93'(82).
Unknowm t. [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', E6. [r] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 21 I, BI I. [2] Sarachane archive neg.
Monogram no. 26. 'Icocvvjou]
I. MSBKinv. 6216,(1)0) x(I50) x? 9.12.12 (2).
1353 (a) Stamp: 82 x 65.
[I] MSBK neg. 6216a. [2] DAI (1st) neg. 2)49 (cast).
[3] Mamboury's notes (from cast). [4] Mango's notes (from
cast). I1clt '357

IN
Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown:
1.(2))) x(I66) X)5.
[1] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', E8.
I.

Monogram no. 19.

(a) Stamp: 88 X6I Monogram no. 23.

Hebdomon (Bakirkoy). Underground passage going inland (a) Stamp: 101 x 57.
from the sea to the site of a ruined palace: I. Unknown: I. Cruciform monograms
I.? x? X43. I. ? x? x3I, AM: 29. All cruciform monograms are dated to after 518. See Part Il, Ch. 5,
Monogram no. 15. Mcocoo. Mcocxpioo, Mccuptxiou (?)
[I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Bardill neg. 94.2.16. sect. la.
(a) Stamp: 77 x 69· (h) Stamp: 80 x75. (b) Stamp: r r z x 57.
Kariye Camii. Between parekklesion and diakonikon doorway: Great Palace. Area Ab. East of the Acropolis: I.
l. [I] Mamboury's notes. 1. ? x? X30.

I. 340 xHox37,AM 115· [r] Mamboury's notes.

[I] Mango's notes (rubbing) [2] Bardill ncgs. 94-9·4, 5· 1354
Monogram no. 45. I'cetoo
[3] Dumbarton Oaks Photographic Collection Hre.acj.
(h) Stamp: 81 X72. (a) Stamp: 72 x68.
Date: 532-37. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. ab. Date: after 5 18 and possibly after c. 530. See Part Il, Ch. 5, sect.
Monogram no. 20.
Hagia Sophia. North-west ramp, hole in wall of second landing
below the north gallery. (a) Several variants. Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38.
Monogram no. 24.
[I] Van Nice archive (rubbing). Stamp: approximately 57 x 58. Room north-west of Hall G, debris: I.
(c) Stamp: 82 x70. Date: possibly shortly after the middle of the 6th century. See (a) Stamp: 82-84 X68-70. I.? x? x45,no. 75.
Unknown: 1. PartH,Ch. r r.sect. 11. Unknown: I. [I] GPl, pl. 14 no. 75. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous
I. iAM (<;:K) no. 8, )80 x )80 x 50. Kalenderhane Camii. Apse of North Church: 1,4. 5· A712: 3· 1(215) x(I75) X42, AM 94 (old no. I82). Remainder, box 38, neg. 236. [3] Talbot Rice archive neg. as
[1] Mango's notes. Unknown: 2. [I] Bardill neg. 94.5.) I. [2].
 ..~
.<

CATALOGUE CATALOGUE

(b) Stamp: 79 X79· 1. (298) x(245) x45, AM 77. 2. (260) x(2)5) X)5> AM Jp. 1368
Date: after 518 and possibly after c. 530. See Part Il, Ch. 5, sect. ).)48 x(240) x44, AM)5' (old no. 661 or 199?).
[I] Bardill negs. 94·504 (I); 95.6.)1,)2 (2). I. [I]NirA
Unknown: 1-2.
Monogram no, 44, ral<j.l (?)
Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
I. (295) x(I90) x 29-)4, AM 280 (old no. 150?)' 2. AM 279. Monogram no. 43. 'Iro6:(vvou) [i]VO(ll(tlOOVoc)a'
Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eircnc: I, (3) Stamp: 5 I X 82.
[I] Bardill negs. 95.1.1, 2 (I). I. ? x? x 40, once in the Hagia Eirene collection. (a) Stamp: 128 x 96.
(c) Stamp: 80 X70' Date: late 6th century. See Part I1, Ch. r I, sect. 8.
[I] Mamboury's notes. Date: after 518 and possibly after c. 530. See Pare I1, Ch. 5, sect.
Date: after 5r8 and possibly after c. 530. See Parr Ll, Ch. 5, sect. Great Palace. excavations in Peristyle and Apsed Hall in
la. 1953-5 «.Ln situ in the cistern below the south-west portico in
Great Palace. Area Ab.
same wall as 20I.la: (numerous) 1-2.
Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
I.350 x350 x 50, labelled no. 8. 2.? x? X42.
I. )80 x?
X45.
Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: 1. [r] Mamboury's notes.
1. 365 x 355 x 40, once in the Hagia Eirene collection.
Notes: Published measurements of bricks in this location: 340 x
(I] Mamboury's notes. 340 x40, 1369
(d) Stamp: 80 X72. [I] CPII, 107, fig. 21 no.). [,] Mango, 'Review 1', 68 1. I +f'
Date: after 518 and possibly after c. 530. See Part 11, Ch. 5, sect. (mentioned). [3] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous Remainder, IN J[ .. ]
Monogram no. 46. Fceiou
la. box 35, neg. unnumbered. [4] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp: 72 x 80. Monogram no. 53. iv(ollcnwvoc) [, .]
Unknown: 1-7.
Date: after 518 and possibly after c. 530. See Part Il, Ch. 5, sect. (a) Stamp: 92 x75.
dAM (<;:K) 4. 2. JAM (<;:K) 4a. ). JAM (<;:K) 4b. 4. JAM
la. Date: after 518 and possibly after c. 530. See Part II, Ch. 5. sect.
(<;:K) 40. 5. JAM (<;:K) ad. 6. JAM (<;:K) 4e. 7. JAM (<;:K) 41.
Hagia Sophia. South-east buttress, third window sill below the ra.
Notes: 1-7. Two bricks measure 360 x 360 x 50, 370 x360 x40'
top sill, work of either Sinan or the Fossati brothers. Great Palace. Area Ac.
[I] Mango's notes.
[I] Bardill negs. 94.8,3, 4. [2] Emerson and van Nice, [x] Mamboury's notes.
(e) Stamp: 81 X72.
'Collapse', 103, fig. 12 (just visible).
Date: after 518 and possibly after c 530. See Part Il, Ch. 5. sect.
(b) Stamp: 75 x69. ..-/'"" Monogram no. 48. f.w[p]y([ou] (?) 1370
la.
Date: after 518 and possibly after c. 530. See Part I1, Ch. 5, sect,
HagiaEirene. Southern side of atrium: I. (a) Sramp.? x75.
ra.
I. 355 x355 x5 Q, Date: c. 532/3. See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. ab.
Hagia Eirene. Southern side of atrium, Monogram no. 50. + 'I[ro]6:(vvo)u (?)
[I] George,St. Eirene,pl. re no. 19. [2] Mango, 'Brick Stamps', Hagia Sophia. Byzantine drains of Caferiye Sokagi.
Er] George,St. Eirene,pl. r e no. 18.
21, fig. 3 (top row, left). [r] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stamp: 70 x?
(c) Stamp: 7P?
(f) Baths of Zeuxippos. In or near building I or 2. Date: after 518 and possibly after c. 530. See Part Il, Ch. 5. sect.
Date: after 518 and possibly after c. 530. See Part I1, Ch. 5, sect.
Date: after 532. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. 2C (also Ch. 5>sect, la). la.
la.
[I] Gray, 'Brickstamps', 53 no. 2. [2] Schneider, Sea Walls, Narh Kapr, south tower.
Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
'Ziegelstempel', 269 no. 102. [I] Mamboury's notes.
Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I. 1366
(g) Sorlin-Dorigny and Schneider assumed that the monogram was
I. ? x? x40, once in the Hagia Eirene collection.
Latin, reading FOCA. 1371
[I] Mamboury's notes.
Date: after 5 I 8 and possibly after c. 530. See Part Il, Ch. 5, sect.
(d) Stamp: (77) x(69)·
la. Monogram no, 49, Feoovlou (?)
Date: after 518 and possibly after c. 530, See Part Il, Ch. 5. sect.
Er] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 94 no. 63. [2] Schneider, Monogram no. 52, Eucep{ou (?)
la. (a) Date: after 518 and possibly after c. 530. See Pare II, Ch. 5, sect.
'Ziegelstempel', 269 no. roo.
Unknown: r. ra. (a) Stamp: 74 x 80.
(h) Date: after 518 and possibly after c 530. See Part Il, Ch. 5, sect.
I. ?x?x37,AM272. Hebdomon (Bakrrkoy). Date: after 518 and possibly after c. 530. See Part Il, Ch. 5, sect.
la.
[I] Bardill negs. 94.I).5. [I] Derhier, 'Makrikdy', 165 no. lE', p]. lA' no. 10.
In the area of the excavations undertaken in 1946-47 and
(e) Stamp: (70) x 7'. Unknown: I.
1958-60 between Hagia Eirene and Hagia Sophia.
Date: after 518 and possibly after c. 5 30. See Part Il, Ch. 5. sect. I. 372 x)68 x45,AM 166.
[I] Dirimtekin, 'Fouilles', r So no. 8.
la. [r] Bardill negs. 94.Io.17a, 18a.
Unknown: I.
Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
r. (220) X('OO) x )5-)9, AM 4)7·
Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I.
[I] Bardill negs. 95-1).I9, 20.
1362 I. ? x? X40, once in the Hagia Eirene collection.
(f) Stamp: 75 X75·
[I] Mamboury's notes.
Date: after 518 and possibly after c. 530. See Part Il, Ch. 5. sect.
la. Monogram no. 42, fal<j.l iVO(lKtlOOVOC)S
a'
Monogram no. 47. I'cetoo Unknown: I. (a) Stamp: about 102 X76.
dAM (<;:K) no. )8, )60 X)50 x 55. Dace: after 518 and possibly after c 530, See Part I1, Ch. 5, sect,
The horizontal bar of the gamma has been omitted by the die-
[I] Mango's notes. Multiple monograms
cutter. ra.

I.+~+
(g) Date: after 518 .rnd possibly after C.530. See Part Il, Ch. 5. sect, Unknown: r. 1372
(a) Stamp: 72-76 x 71. r a. I. About 356 x 356 x SI, General Shale Products Corporation,
Date: after 5r8 and possibly after c. 530. See Part Il, Ch. 5, sect. In the area of the excavations undertaken in 1946-47 and Museum of Ancient Brick.
la. 1958-60 between Hagia Eirene and Hagia Sophia. [I] Suffer, 'Museum of Ancient Brick', 64.
Unknown: 1-3. [I] Dirimtekin, 'Fouilles', r8ono. 7. Monogram nos, 51,32,56, Oeoccvco Ent Mcuptxiou
- ---------------------_.
------------------------------------------------------------------,

CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE
(a) Stamp' 127 x6J. ? bd [Mnuprciou] (b) Stamp' 67 diameter.
(a) Date: after 532. See Part [I, Ch. 9, sect. 2C.
Date: S82-60l. See Part Il, Ch. 5, sect. la. ? btl [MClU(p )t~iou] Kalenderhane Camii. North-east upper chamber, east facade: 1.
Great Palace, area Ea (Baths of Zeuxippos).
Unknown: 1-3. (a) Stamp' (74) x 69. Unknown: 2-3. [1] Mamboury's notes.
1. (290) X(214) x42, AM 72 (old no. 15). 2.)40 x(t80) xJ8, Date: 582-602. See Part Il, Ch. 5, sect. la. I. J6jX J5 5X41, two breaks. 2. (260) X(215) x J6. J. (110) x (b) Stamp: 114 diameter.
AM4J. 3-340X)20X37-40,AM 151· Unknown: I. (84) xJ6. Unknown: 1-2.
[I] Bardill negs. 94·4-2J, 24 (1);9402.Jt (2); 94.7-27-JO(J). 1.? X? x 38-40, AM 200. [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps", C6. J.?x?X39,AM85· 2.?x?x4o-45,AM86.
(b) Date: c.S8z-S82/3_ See Part Il, Ch. 5. sect. la and Ch. r r.secr. 7. [,] Bardill negs. 94.6.", p. (c) Stamp: 68 diameter.
[t] Bardillnegs. 94.5-'9 (I); 94.5.20 (2).
Excavation of the Diakonissa complex near Istanbul Date: S07-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. aa. (c) Probably from the area of the excavations in 1946-47 between
University,1943-46. St Polyeuktos. Level 1121 {Baptistery', west wall, north end): Hagia Sophia and Hagia Eirene: I.
[I] Firarh, 'Trois eglises', 172, 177. pl. 7(b) no. 3. I.
I. Once in the Hagia Eirene collection.
[2] Mamboury's notes. I. No. 787, 365 x 35 S x 40. [I] Mamboury's notes.
(c) Stamp: 128 x6z. [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 21 5, CI6. [2] Sarachane archive neg.
Date: S8z-602. See PartII,Ch. 5. sect. la. [ ].6.. (fragmentary monogram) and monogram no. 57. [ ].6.. 9·II·S3.
Unknowru r , M[a]u(p),Ki(o)u (d) The Pappears to have been omitted from Mango's drawing.
1. iAM (<;K) no. H, fragment, ? x ? x 45. Stamp: 70 diameter.
(a) Stamp'(70)x55.
[r] Mango's nores. Unknown: I.
Date: C582-582/3. See Part Il, Ch. 5, sect. la and Cb. I I, sect. 7. Monogram no. 25.
(d) Stamp' (JI8) x64. I. iAM (CK) no. 24,fragment,? X? x3S.
Beyazit, excavations of 1943-46, reused in masonry of a church:
Date: 582-602. See Part H, Ch. 5. sect. la. (a) Unknown.
1. ,[.,t] Mango's notes.
Kalenderhane Camii. C 3 filling along north wall: I. [I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 84 no. 2, pi. 14 no. 1
I. ? x? x 37-40, AM 194.
1. (25) X(220) x40. 1379 [2] Leclercq, 'Estampilles', col. 545 no. 2.
[I] Bardill neg. 94· I 1.30a. [2] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', E4- t I. Indecipherable monogram.
(e) Stamp' 127 x6J. (a) Stamp: 68 estimated diameter.
Date: 582-602. See PanII, Ch. 5, sect. la.
Unknown: I. CIRCULAR . ,--,/ Kalenderhane Camii. Vault of Byzantine
North Church: I.
drain below apse of

I.? x? x 4.2-44. Monogram no. 33.

Box monograms I. (110) x(80) x40.
[r] Wulzinger, Baudenemider, 41 pl. 20 (middle), [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', C7. (a) Stamp: 67 outer diameter. 56 inner diameter.
[2] Wulzinger's notes. 1377 Tok.1udede Mescidi: I.
(f) Date: 582-602. See Part Il, Ch. 5, sect. la. I. t@t 1380
1. ? x ? x 50, iAM 86.
Haydarpasa. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[1] Meliopoulos, 'Anekdoroi', 73. [2] Feissel, 'Inscriptions', Monogram no. 29. + Da:uAo\l +
408 no. 2.2. [J]SEG l7 (t987) no. 1025. Monogram no. 34.
(a) Stamp: 80 diameter.
I.+~+
Land Walls. (a) Stamp: 75 diameter.
1373 :!+i
[1]DAI(Ist)ncg.6605· Unknown: I.

(b) Stamp: 70 diameter. Monogram no. 40.

I. iAM (<;K) no. 9J,? x? x75.
Byzantine drains along the Mese. Vaults of the drains in the [I] Mango' s notes. (a) Stamp: 103 diameter.
Forum of Constantine: (several). Unknown: I.
Monograms I X, 32, 55. Ma() (?) E7tt Mau(p)lKtOU Byzantine drains along the Mese. Corner of Divan Yolu and
[I] Mamboury's notes. J. 340 X (}3o) x41,AM 22.
(a) Date: 582-602. See Part Il, Ch. 5, sect. ra. Ticarethane Sokagr.
(c) Stamp: 77 diameter. [I] Bardill neg. 94.2-7.
Haydarpasa. [I] DAI (Ist) neg. KB H54.
Kelenderhene Camii. Roof filling wall: (one). North-east
[I] Meliopoulos, "Anekdotoi', 73. [2] Feissel, 'Inscriptions', corridor, north of apse: (one). Unknown: (two). 1386
!J81
408 no. 2.1. [J] SEG J7 (t987) no. 1025. t. J70 x(J50) XJ9. 2. (128) x(95) X41. J. (290) x(160) x42, two
breaks. 4· (175) x(IJ5) x48.
1374
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', CS.
Monogram no. 35. Monogram no. 36. Perhaps Tilc VECXC Fletpou. The name Fletpou, at
(d) Stamp' 78 diameter.
least, seems likely, on the grounds that many other stamps from the
Unknown: I. (a) Stamp: 62 diameter. superstructures of St Polyeuktos bore this name.
1. iAM (<::K) no. 20, fragment,? x? X40. Unknown: I.
Lost monogram and monogram nos. 32, 55. [?] E1tt Mau(p )tKtOU [I] Mango's notes. (a) Stamp: 103 diameter.
r. iAM (<;K) no. 17,fragment,J65 x ? x 50.
[I] Mango's notes. Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. za.
(a) Date: ~8f-602 See Part Il, Ch 5. sect la
(b) U nknown. St Polyeuktos. Level 165: I. Level 288: 2. Level 307: 3. Level
GreayPalace, next to the domes of area Ab I.
[I] DAI (1st) neg. KB 5489- 382: 4· Level 539: 5· Level 667: 6. Level 692: 7. Level 700*: 8.
I. )l)·X50
Level 720: 9· Level 725*: 10. Level 837*: I I. Level 851*: 12-13.
[I] N{amhoury' s notes
Lcvel8S9: 14-16. Level 867: 17. Level 920* (pier, eastern end.
Monogram no. 3 r.
1375 \ debris): 18-19. Level 1010:20. Level 1038: 21. Level 1345: 22.
(a) Stamp: 63 diameter vertically. Unknown: 23-4.
I'N~[I Fenari isa Camii: l.
I. ?x?x40,AM79.
I. No. 108. 2. No. 1426. 3. No. 789. 4. No. 886. 5. No. 1429.
6. No. 432· 7· No. 301. 8. No. 1427. 9. No. 1428. 10. No.
Monogram nos. 41.)2 [and 55 or 56) [1] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari 343· J 1. No. 289. 12. No. 451. 13. No. 456. 14. No. 427.
isa Camii', fig. J9 no. 8. [J] Berdill negs. 94.5.7, 8. Monogram no. 21. iv(BtK'tlCi'WOC)
~#

'5. No. 4JO. 16. No. 4J9. '7· No. 545· 18. No. 9J I. 19. No.
 ..
,,~

370 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE

371
933. 20. No. IIOS. 21. No. 1074. 22. No. 1281. 23- No. 3)0. 16. No. 408. 17. No. 511. 18. No. 506. 19· No. 483. 1392 5· (2}0) x(I85) x 5o,AM 20}. 6. (215) X(200) X46-jI,
1339· 24· No. 1340. 20. No. 560. z i . No. 310. 22. No. 588. 23· No. 453. 24. No. I. [monogram]
AM 204. 7· (250)X(I}8) x44,AM205· 8.?x?x52,AM206.
Notes: 1-24. One brick measures ? x? x 37-50. 458. 25. No. }78. 26. No. }85· 27· No. }99. 28. No. 400. [-)N~.[-) 9· 380 x270 x 50, AM 208. 10.388 x 382 x 60-63, AM 207.
[I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 215. C13. [2] Sarachane archive neg. 29. No. 406. 30. No. 418. P·NO·5p· 32. No. 377· 33·No.
[- i)vo(uc,,&voc). r-i H. (275) x(T86) x 52-57, AM 209. 12.}78 X(225) x47-50, AM
9·n.T}('). 938. 34· No. 1057· 35· NO.J06I. 36. No. 625A. 37. No. 852. 210. 13.368 x(195) X42,AM 211. 14·AM 274· 15 . .Alv:I275.
38. No. 1093. 39. No. 1077· 40. No. 1254. 41. No. 1257. Similar to 1391.
16. AM 276. T7.AM277. 18.(250) X(I90) X48-5}, AM}08.
42. No. 1266. 43. No. 644· (a) Sarachane: I. 19· (210) x(160) x45, AM 309. 20. (202) x(I80) x48, AM 310.
[I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 21 5 CI3-I 5. [2] Sarachane archive. I.No.p. 21. 365 x (290) x46, AM JI I. 22.370 X332 x45-50, AM 335.
Monogram no. 37. Perhaps TIle vecc Flerpou. The name TIE:tpOU, at Er] Sarachane archive neg. IO.3.25a. 2}.? x? X,5D-55,AM 3}6. 24. (260) X(2I5) X47-50, AM }}7.
least, seems likely, on the grounds that many other stamps from the 25· (242) X(21j) x46-52, AM }}8. 26. (265) x(I85) x 50, AM
superstructures of St Pclycukros bore this name. 1388 I}93
339· 27· ? x? X 47-P, AM 340.
(a) Stamp: 103 diameter.
I. Monogram no. 36 or 37.
I'l*[ [I) Bardill negs. 94.}.I9, 20, 2\ (I); 94.6.6a, 7' (4).
Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. za. (a) Stamp: 95 diameter.
Landing stage at Saray Burnu: Monogram no. 6.
St Polyeuktos. Level z ya: I. Level 724: 2. Level 725*: 3. Level J.
I. (250) X(2IO) X 35-40. TlxaplC 1395
833*: 4· Level 837*: 5. Level 85J*: 6-7· Level 859: 8-15. Level
[I] Unger, 'Scraispitze', fig, re no. 3. I.~
909*: 16. Leve1920* (pier, eastern end, debris); 17-18. Level (a) Stamp: 82 diameter.
924 (pier, eastern end, debris): 19-21. Level 1206: 22. Level Dare: 5°7-22. See Pan Il, Ch. 9, sect. aa.
1252*: 23· Unknown: 24-JI· Monogram no. 6o.
;St Polyeuktos. Level 924 (pier, eastern end, debris): I. Level
I. No. II86. 2. No. 619. 3. No. 322. 4. No. 636. 5·No·305· Il2I ('Baptistery', west wall, north end): 2-17. Level 1440: IS. (a) Stamp: 60 diameter.
6. No. «8. 7. No. 460. 8. No. }96. 9. No. 42}. 10. No. 424.
IM I. No. 1064. 2. No. 76}. j , No. 765. 4. No. 767. 5. No. 768. Date: after 5 18 and possibly after c. 530. See Part JI, Ch. 5, sect.

r
11. No. 425. 12. No. 426. 13. No. 428. 14. No. 429. 15· No. 6. No. 771. 7· No. 772. 8. No. 77}. 9. No. 77+ 10. No. 776. la.
440. 16. No. 384. 17. No. 918. 18. No. 924. 19. No. 1021. XI. No. 778. 12. No. 780. 13. No. 781. 14. No. 782. 15. No. Byzantine drains along the Mese. Vaults of the drains in the
M=~nm=}L _
.10. No. 1050 . .21. No. 1056. 22. No. 420. 23. No. 1149· 784. T6. No. 785. 17. No. 786. 18. No. 1}}8. Forum of Constantine .
Perhaps the same as 1386.2 (monogram no. 37) but err<m.eously
.24. No. 646. 25.No.1341. 26. No. 1342. 27. No. 1343· Notes: 1-18. One brick measures 360 x 350 X42 . [IJ Mamboury's notes.
recorded.
28. No. 1344. 29. No. I}45. }O. No. 1346. }1. No. T347· [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 21 5, e12. [2J Sarachane archive neg.
Notes: 1-31. One brick measures ? x? X42-58. (a) Stamp: J08 diameter.
9·11.6a.
[I] Hill, 'Brickstamps'c z r y, CI4. [2] Harrison, Temple, 71,fig. Great Palace. Isolated vault, area Ff: I.
Cb) Stamp: 78 diameter.
74 (bottom right). [3] Sarachane archive neg. 10.2.)2 (21). I. 360 x 3 50 x 50.
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site
(b) Stamp: 102 diameter. [I] Marnboury's notes.
B2: I.
Date: 5°7-22. See Part 1I, Ch. 9, sect. za. I. ?x?x35,no.62.
CHRISTOGRAMS
St Polyeukros. Level 165: I. Level aej": 2. Level 700*: 3. Level [r] GPl, p]. 14 no. 62. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous
725*: 4· Level 729*: 5· Level 733: 6. Level 83)*: 7· Level 859: 8. Christograms may be placed in general terms in the 6th century. Sec
Remainder, box 38, neg. 229. [3] Talbor Rice archive neg. as
Level 867: 9. Level pr z": 10. Level 1005*: 11. Level 1074: 12. Part 1I, Ch. 10 no.
9.
[2). ,
Level 1298: 13. Level 1379: 14· Unknown: 15-17.
I. No. 102. 2. No. 819. 3. No. 475. 4. No. 342. 5· No. 398. Monogram no. 39. Six arms
Cruciform monograms
6. No. }51. 7. No. 625. 8. No. }91. 9. No. 549. 10. No. 665· (a) Interior of a cistern east of Bnlaban Aga Mescidi, in the area 1396
All cruciform monograms are dated to after 5 18. See Part Il, Ch. 5,
11. No. 838. 12. No. 1295. 13. No. 1351. 14· No. 1352· bounded by Biiyiik Resit Pasa Caddesi, Zeynep Kamil SOkagl, I. Six-armed Christogram.
sect. la,
15. No. 1348. 16. No. 1349· 17· No. 1350. Harikzedeler Sokagr, and Vidinli Tevfik Pap Caddesi: I.
(a) Note trace of outer circle as on h.
Notes: 1-17. One brick measures ? x? x 35-45. I.? X? x40' 1394
[I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 215, CI5. [2] Harrison,
74 (top row, right).
Temple, 71, fig.
[3] Sarachane archive neg. 10.2.29 (IO).
[I] Mamboury's notes.
I1c Stamp: 65 diameter.
Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. za.
St Polyeuktos. Unknown: 1-2.
,sM I. No. 757. 2. No. 1082.
1387
I. Several variants of monogram nos. 36 and 37. Monogram no. 54· 'Iooccwrcvou (anno mundiy 5J.L' Notes: 1-2. One brick measures? x ? x 34.
[I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 217, C20. [2J Sarachane archive neg.
(a) Date: 507-22. See Part 1I, Ch. 9, sect. za. (a) Stamp: 70-74 diameter. 5041.8(1).
StPolyeuktos. Level 61: I. Level 86: 2-3. Level Bp": 4. Level Date: 53 tl z. See Part Il, Ch. 5, sect. la.
IN~H (b) Note trace of outer circle as on a.
465'~: 5. Level 594'f: 6. Level 962: 7. Level 700*: 8-9. Level
Monogram no. 28. iVO{lK'tU:ovoc)TJ' Great Palace. Area Ac: I. Stamp: 67 diameter.
713": 10. Level 720: II-12. Level 724: 13. Level 725*: 14-15.
1.38ox375 x 60. Unknown: I.
Level 733: 16. Level 74S*: 17. Level 830*: 18. Level 831*: 19· (a) Stamp: 109 diameter. [r] Mamboury's notes. I. MSBK inv. 6100, (360) x 400 x?
Le';eI833'~: .10. Level 837*: 21. Level 844*: 22. Level Ej r": Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. z a.
[I] Mamboury, 'Chrisme', 454no. 2. [2] MSBKneg. 6200a .
23-4· Level 859: 25-30. Level 867: 31. Level 906: 32. Level 920" St Polyeuktos. Leve165: 1. Level 725": 2. Level 859: 3. Level . In the area of the excavations undertaken in 1946-47 and
[}) DAI (1st) neg. 2}45 (cast). [4) Mamboury's notes (from
(pier, eastern end, debris): 33. Level 924 (pier, eastern end, 908: 4· Level 1206: 5-6. Unknown: 7. 1958-60 between Hagia Eirene and Hagia Sophia: (several).
cast). [5J Mango's notes (from cast).
debris): 34-5. Level 1003: 36. Level r ooj": 37. Level 1037: 3S. I. No. 26t. 2:No.380. 3. No. 416. 4· No. 442. 5. No. 419. [r) Mango's nores (from squeeze). [2) DAI (1st) ncg. R6TOO,
(c) Stamp: 70 diameter.
Level 1038: 39. Level 1059: 40-2. Level II 13: 43· 6. No. 1317. 7· No. I337A. inv. 38,372, inv. 38.373.
Date: 502-33 or 517-20 or 532-35. See Part I1, Ch. 9, sect. ad.
I. No. 279. 2. No. 264. 3· No. 307. 4· No. 252· 5· No. Il75· Notes: 1-7. One brick measures? x? x 39. Unknown: 1-27. Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagl: 1.
6. No. 710. 7. No. 247. 8. No. 476. 9. No. 52}. 10. No. 751· [r] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 21 5, CrI. [2] Sarachane archive negs. I. 347 x(nI) x45,AM 56. 2. (280) x(265) x 50, AM 135. I·390x38ox60.
11. No. 579. 12. No. 58o. 13. No. 616. 14. No. 313. 15. No. 9. I I.3I (2), 10.3.27a (I). }. (} 55) x(I90) x 52-55, AM 1}6. 4· (285) x(25 5) x }5-40, AM [I] Mamboury, 'Chrisme', 454 no. I. [2] Mamboury's notes.
 ..~
•
372 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 373

(d) Stamp: 7S diameter. Nores: 1-5. One brick measures jpc x? X45. (c) Silivri. CROSSES
Date: 532-37. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. ab. [I] Mango's notes. [I] Dirimtekin, 'Selymbria', 3) no. 7.
Hagia Sophia. North-east buttress, brick spanning narrow slit (g) Possibly the same as h. (d) Stamp: 82 diameter.
at second landing above gallery roof: I. Stamp: 69 diameter. Retaining wal1 and barrel vault between the church of the
I.? x? X45. Dare: 507-22. See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. za. Theotokos in the Chalkoprareia and the Basilica Cistern
(a) Stamp: 80 x75, cross 37 x48.
[I] Van Nice archive (rubbing). St Polyeuktos. Level 13*: I. Leve1685: 2. Level 725*: 3. {Yerebatan Sarayi]: I.
Date: ath century. See Pan Il, Ch. 10 no. 2.
(e) Stamp: 81 diameter. Unknown: 4-0. I.? x? xJO.
Hippodrome. Vault of drain below staircase at pier 4: (several)
Kalcndcrbane Camii. A7/J: 1. 1. No. 187. 2. No. I}!J. J. No. JS6. 4· No. '}!4· S. No. [I] Mamboury, 'Chrisme'.457 no. 10. [2] Mamboury's notes. 1.
I. (26S) X(2J5) x 14. I}!S. 6. No. I}!6.
1·36ox355 x55·
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', G4. Notes: 1-0. One brick measures 380 x? x J7-41. Notes: several bricks with this scamp also bore horseshoe-
(f) Stamp: H radius. [I] Hill, 'Bricksramps', 21 51Cl 7. [2.] Sarachane archive neg. shaped fingermarks made with 4 fingers (174 1.2a).
V nknown: J. 9.10.7. 1400
[I] Mamboury's notes. •
I. (210) X(200) X60, AM J90. J. Eight-armed Christogram with splaying at the ends of me arms.
(h) Possibly the same as g. (b) Dare-see a.
[I] Bardill negs. 9S.9.I, 2. Dots between arms of star weakly impressed, and omitted from (a) Stamp: 88 estimated outer diameter. Excavations near the Palace of Antiochus. Within [he limits of
(g) Stamp: 62 diameter. Unger' s drawing. Kalenderhane Camii. Exonarthex: I.
the excavations undertaken at the end of 1950.
Kalenderhane Camii. Roof, fill wall: I.
Stamp: 65 diameter. I. (I 50) X{II5) x J9, stamped twice side by side. [I] Duyuran, 'Palace of Justice 1', 37. fig. 15.
I. (J6s) x(24S) X4S. In front of the Sea Walls on Saray Burnu: I. [I] Pescblow, 'Brickstamps', Gr.
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', G3. 1. (200) X(I90) X}!. (b) Stamp: 114 diameter.
(b) Great Palace. Area Ac. [I] Dnger, 'Seraispirze', fig. re no. 2. [2] Mamboury, Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. aa.
[1] Mamboury .' Chrisme', 454 no. 3. [2] Mamboury's notes. 'Chrisme', 457 no. 11. SePolyeukros. Level 65: I. Level 8],"; 2. Level 94: 3. Level 227: (a) Stamp: (67) across.
(i) Ruins near T opalian Ham, in the area bounded by Hoca Ham 4· Level 229: 5· Level 473: 6. Level 665: 7. Level 700"': 8. Level Date: 507-22.. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. za.
Eight arms Sokagr, Kaputcular Sokagt, and Kaurcioglu Sokagl. . 702 ": 9. Level 72 5*: 10-1 I. Level 782: 12. Level 82.8: 13. Level St Polyeukros. Level 920* (pier, eastern end, debris): I.
[I] Meliopculos, "Topothesia', 23 I no. I I. [2] M~'lnrboury, 831*: 14. Level Sj j": 15-17. Lcvel Rj r": 18. Level 859: 19. I. No. 906,? x? x35-45.
1397
I. Eight-armed Christogram with dots between arms. 'Chrisme', 457 no. 12. Level 909*: 20. Level 977*: 21-4. Level 1000*: 25. Level 1001''': [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 217, C2I. [2] Sarachane archive neg.
(j) Several variants. 26. Level 1005*: 27-)4. Level 1298: H· Level 1345: 36. North 9.11.25.
(a) Stamp: 80 diameter.
Stamp: approximately 82 diameter. aisle, demolished wall: J7. Unknown: 38.
Date: 5°7-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. za. Kalenderhane Camii. C3/): I. Overdiakonikon: 2. Narthex, I. No. 254. 2. No. 265. 3. No. 207. 4. No. 283. 5. No. 206.
St Polyeuktos. Level 909: I. Level I I2I (,Baptistery', west wall,
south-west corner: 3· Unknown: 4· 6. No. Ill7. 7· No. HI. 8. No. l24. 9. No. 623. 10. No. HO.
north end): 2-8.
r.(2IS)X(I7S)xJ7· 2.(29S)X(I8S)xJ9· J. (92) x(80) xH 11. No. 1358. 12. No. 294. 13. No. 503. 14. No. 482. 15. No. (a) Rotunda and adjoining hall north of the Palace of Antiochus.
1. No. 4'7. 2. No. 762. J. No. 764. 4. No. 766. S. No. 769.
4. (I8S) x (I4S) X40· S61. 16. No. 600. 17· No. 642A. 18. No. 414. 19. No. 395. [1] DAI (1st) neg. KB 6161.
6. No. 777· 7· No. 779. 8. No. 78J (waSIJ27). [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', G2 (illustration compiled from 10. No. 388. 21. No. 490. 22. No. 517. 2). No. 56J. 24. No.
Notes: 1-8. One brick measures ? x? x 30-45.
several variants). S66. 25. No. 667. 26. No. 6S4. 27. No. 82S. 28. No. 8Jo.
[r] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 217, CI9. [2] Sarachane archive neg.
29· No. 8J6. JO. No. 842. JI. No. 844. J2. No. 848. J). No.
9.10.20 (8). 1398 851· 34· No. 864. 35· No. 1157. 36. No. 121 I. J7. No. 1009.
(b) Stamp: 8odiamerer. r. Eight-armed Chrisrogram without dots between arms. J8. No. 6JJ.
Grear Palace, excavations in rhe Peristyle area in 1935-)8. Site
(a) Stamp: 70 outer diameter, 61 inner diameter. Notes: 1-38. One brick measures ? x? X29-J3. 8EOY XAPIC without name
BI:1.
TokludedeMescidi: 1-2. [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 217, CI8. [2] Sarachane archive neg.
l. ?x?x2o,no.42.
r.iAM 77. 2. iAM 104· j.40.2p(S)· MULTIPLE-LINE
[1] GP I, pl. 14 no. 42. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous
Notes: I-~. One brick measures? x? x45. (c) Stamp: r 11 outer diameter, 97 inner diameter. Span of arms 70
Remainder, box 38, neg. 213. Cl] TalborRice archive neg. as 1405
[I] Mamboury, 'Chrisme',4s8 no. 13. mm.
[2]. 1. 38+
(b) Unknown. Tokludede Mescidi: I.
(c) Stamp: 80 diameter.
I. iAM 88,? x? x40
XVO
[,] DAI (1st) neg. KB 1492.
Byzantine drains along the Mese. Vaults of the drains opposite ::>NA
(c) Stamp: diameter irregular, 8<>-90. [IJ Mamboury, 'Chrisme', 457 no. 9· [2J Mamboury's notes.
Arik All Pasa Camii: I.
Structures behind Istanbul Archaeological Museum. + e~ouX~p1.(::
1.35° x 350 x50
[I] Ulker,Proje, 62. (a) Land Walls. Loose near tower J7 (September 1967).
[I] Mamboury, 'Chrisrne', 458 no. 15. [2] Mamboury's notes.
(d) Stamp: 67 diameter. [I] Dumbarton Oaks Photographic Collection neg. L67 .97 I
(d) Stamp: 8o diameter. Seven arms
Kalenderhane Camii. A4/I: I. (I. Seveenko).
Great Palace. Area Ac: I.
1. (22S) X(190) XJJ. 1401
I. ?x?x50.
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', G6. I. Seven-armed Christogram.
[I] M:roboury, 'Chrisrne', 458 no. 14. [2] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Scamp: 6) diameter. CRUCIFORM
(e) Unknown.
1399 Kalenderhane Camii. B3/3:
[1] DAI (Ist)neg. KB S486. I.
1406
I. Eight-armed Christogram with a dot at the end of each arm.
(f) Several variants. I. ('4S) X(IOS) x H· I. mXA[PIC]
Stamp: Diameters vary between 65 and 90 mm. (a) Stamp: approx 89 diameter. [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', G5.
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in [935-J8. 8(£0)ii Xa[ptc]
Unknown: 1-8.
dAM (<;:K) 22. 2. iAM (<;:K) 223. J. iAM (<;:K) aab. [I] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous Remainder, box 38, neg. 267. (3) Sarachanc: 1.
4. iAM(<;:K)22C. 5.iAM(<;:K)22d. 6. iAM (<;:K) 23. (b) Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 19J5-)8. I. No. 1060.

7. iAM(<;:K)2p. 8. iAM(<;:K)2Jb. [I] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous Remainder. box 38, neg. 348. [I] Sarachane archive neg. 9.11.3°.
 ..
" - ,

CATALOGUE CATALOGUE
374 375

(b) Stamp: (I 22) X49 (height of left arm). (a) Stamp: IIp 59. (a) Ruins in Beylerbeyi (Sophianae palace?). 1421

Vicinity of Cistern of Mocius: I. Kalenderhane Camii. Over Diakonikon vault, south side: I.
[r] Meliopoulos, "Topcthesia', 229 no. 5. [2] Meliopoulos, I. +IN.ll.SI
I. ?X?X3s,AM62. Unknown: (one). 'Panteichion', 416 no. 4. [)]1. Kalch. 109.8. [4] Feissel,
"!' iVO(UCtlIDVDC)S
t"
[I] Maletskos, 'Plinrhos', a70, pI. 53,), [a] Bardillneg. 94+9· I. 348 xH8 x? 'Inscriptions', 410 no. 11·5, and 42S. [S] SEC 37 (1987) no.
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', B40. 1°34· (a) Stamp: r r 5 X)).
Great Palace. Terrace piers between area Ba and area Ab: I.

1412 I. ?x? X40.

I. KYPIE: [I] Mamboury's notes.
UNCERTAIN SHAPE BOH81
IN.t..IKTIWNOC without name 1422
Kupte po~e(e), 13S.ll.NIA+
'407 I.

I. +6Y[ Possibly a second type of 1409. SINGLE-LINE

+ a iVO{l~l&VOC)S er'
+ 6(eo)ii [xaplC] (a) Stamp: 95 x67. WITH INDICTION (a) Date: after 532. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. 2C.
(a) Sarachane: I. Structures behind the Istanbul Archaeological Museum: I.
Baths ofZeuxippos. In situ between a wall at lA and B
I. No. 1328 (duplicated number). J.? x? x 55. 14'7
I. IN.ll.2fBA (presumably Building I).
[I] Sarachane archive neg. 9.10. I 9. [I] Dlker, Proje, 17.
[I] Gray, 'Bricksramps', 54 no. 24.
ivB(,1<:"t,rovoc)sl' ~a()

(a) Stamp: (1I0) X40. 142)

I. IN.ll.21E:
Date: 509110. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. la.
THC NEAC (IN.t..IKTIWNOC ?) St Polyeuktos. Level 129: 3. Level 596: 2. Unknown: 3. iv4S(lIcnrovoc)s re"

KYPIE BOH8EI without name I. No. 174. 2. No. 692. 3· No. 197.
without name (a) Date: after 532. See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. ac.
Notes: One brick measures? x ? x 40-50.
Baths of Zeuxippos. In or near Building 1 or 2.
[I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 208, A6. [2] Sarachane archive neg.
'408 SINGLE-LINE [I] Gray, 'Bricksramps', 53 no. 7.
I. 81H 9.10.27.
U1E:IKE:BO '4'3 '424
I. J:AHVl::HT + 1418 I. IVl+E:I
iv(BuC"tlrovoc) et" K(up,)e p01\8(e), I. IN.ll.E:S
+ 'tilc v~ac(i.vOll('ttrovOC?) iv(oucurovoc) + et'
Line I reads from right to left, but the iota and theta are transposed. iVO(lK'tl&VOC) es
(a) Pendik. Tombs. (a) Stamp: I2 5 x 3 I.
(a) Stampr r aa x 53. (a) Stamp: 165 XJ5.
[I] Meliopoulos, 'Panteichion', 456 no. 3. [2J I. Kalch. 109·7· Kalenderhane Camii. G416: I.
Unknown: 1. Unknown: I.
[)] Feissel, 'Inscriptions', 425 (mentioned). I. 381 x()15) x46.
I. MSBKinv. 6220,(90) x(I80) x 1 I. 381 x(3'5) x4Q-lO,AM 267.
[I] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', a68 no. 90. [a] MSBK neg.
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', A54'
'4'4 [I] Bardill neg. 94.1).II.
622oa. [3] DAI (1st) neg. 2)50- [4] Mamboury's notes (from I. [T]HCN:A[I:]
cast). [5] Mango's notes (from cast). 14'9
['[]ilc vec]c] (ivoucnrovoc?)
1. 32L\l113
'409 (a) Stamp: (83) x44· WITHOUT INDICTION
I. [KYP]IE: ivS(uC'!lrovoc)s e"
Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: I.

[BO]H8[1] 1. (roo) x(88) "5. (3) Stamp: I12 X4I. '425

I. IN.ll.IKTOY
[Kup]te[poJil8(e)[,] [r] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', A62. Unknown: 1-2.

I.?x?x28-33.AM36S. 2.365 x(3I2)x3I,AM366. iv5hC'tou

(a) Ruins at Ku,ukyah.
'4'5 [I] Bardillnegs. 91.7.2), 24 (I), 25, 26 (2). (a) Stamp: 172 x 52.
[I] Mamboury's notes. I. THCVlE:2 (b) Stamp:? X41. Unknown: l.

1410 'tile vE(ac)s (ivouC'urovoc?) Land Wall. Pentapyrgion, vicinity of St Nicholas: I.

I. iAM (<;:K) no. 40.

I. H6H I. 36ox36ox35. [I] Mango's notes.

(a) Stamp: 120 x 52.
+KE:'[BO] [I] Mamboury's notes. (B) Stamp: (1)0) x 53.
Kalenderhane Camii. Diakonikon floor: I. South bema, filling
+ K(up,)e [POJilfh] wall: 2. Unknown: 3-4. Kalenderhane Camii. Roof, fill wall: 1.
1410
1. (270) x (240) x 37, rwo breaks. 2. ()o)) x(165) XH· 3. (170) x t.(215) x{I60) X)2.
(a) Stamp: (7a) x 51. I.INZBAP
(130) x ao. 4. (140) x(I)I)x40' [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', A56.
Great Palace, excavations in Peristyle and Apsed Hall in iv(Bucnrovoc) ~- pap( )
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', A6 I.
'953-51: I. 1426
The name abbreviation Bap() is not otherwise attested, so the
1. Labelled no. 20. I. +HVl.ll.2
reading iv(B,1<:"tlrovoc)~-Bap() seems less likely (cp. 166.Ia).
[I] T albor Rice archive photo. MULTIPLE-LINE +ijVO(llC'tlroVOC)S
(a) Date: See Part Il, Ch. 8, sect. zc.
14II Hagia Eirene.ln situ in puclog hole on the nave side of the (a) Stamp: 100 x()8).
'4,6
I. amQY2I Kalendcrhane Camii. Floor: Unknown
I. THC northern central pillar of the east wall of the west gallery. I. 2.

IBHO NEA [I] Peschlow, Irenenkirche, 224. fig. 30 no. 6. [2] Manacorda, 1.)50X(230)X40.2.)68X()20)X35·
Kuple po~e(e), 'Belli latcrizi', 146 n. 182. [I] Pes eh low, 'Bricks tamps',
A55.
'[llC VEO:(C) (iVOtK'tlroVOC?)
 ..~
CATALOGUE
•
CATALOGUE 377
MULTIPLE-LINE (a) Stamp: (78) x 55. (a) Date: after 5J2. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. 2C. 1440
Kalenderhane Camii. H513 sounding: (one). Baths ofZeuxippos. In or near Building I or 2. <:
WITH INDICTION
[I] Peschlow, 'Bricks tamps', B42. [I] Gray, 'Bricks tamps', 54 no. 14. "[ .]2T.lI[1D(!I+
'427 ::1
AccessoryK
l. +€N"
+ lv5ucr(lroVOC)' [.]5' x:\.
IKSZ+ '4)2
WITH INDJCTION
I. +E"IT The significance of the pi and lambda is uncertain. Cp. 1437.1,
+ iVSUC(tlrovOC)S~' + I44I.I,1442.I,I53I.I.
.,oN<><K
'437
(a) Stamp: III x6l..
+ '(V)51(K)-t«()ovoc K ono (a) Stamp: '52 (= 60 +)2 + 60) x80(= 25 + 30 + 25)'
Date: 5 I 3h 4· See Part II, Ch. 9, sect. 23.
+AI2"liIl+ Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagi: J.
(a) Stamp: (144) x64. 011.0
StPolyeuktos. Level 828: I. Leve1859: 2. I. 375 x? x 50.
Date: 5°7-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. aa.
I. No. 5°4.2. No. 403. + ivS(ucnrovoc)s la" + 11:"- [r] Mamboury's notes.
St Polyeukros. Level 165: I. Level aj j: 2. Level 434: 3. Level
Notes: 1-2. One brick measures? x? X 26-q.
600: 4. Level 83 1*: S. The significance of lines I and) is unclear. For the letters pi and
[r] Hill, 'Bricks tamps', 2[ 4. B 33. [.2.] Sarachane archive neg. '44'
9.rz.8 (2).
I. No. 123. 2. No. 444. 3. No. 755· 4· No. 704. 5. No. 641. lambda, cp. 1440.1, 1441.1, 1442.1, ISJ 1.1. I. <:
Notes: 1-5. One brick measures? x ? x 30-40. 3ICT.lI.t.liIl+
Fenari isa Camii: (two} (a) Stamp: 172 (= 57 + 57 + 58) x47 (= 10 + 27 + 10).
I. [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 214, Bj4. [2] Sarachane archive negs. J
Date: early 6th century. See Pan 11, Ch. 10 no. 10.
l. (2)7) x(195) xj2,AM 'll. 9.7.6 (4),9·7-7 (3), 9.10.14 (5)·
Unknown: 1-5. ~ ~V8Uct(liilvoc)s lE"It)..
[r] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari (b) Unknown.
dAM (<;;K) la. 2. iAM (<;;K) lb. ). iA..V!(<;;K) IC. 4.iAM
i,a Camii', fig.)9 no. 9· [)] Bardill neg. 94.lo.)a. [I] Papadopoulos Kerameus, "Ihrace', 73. The significance of the pi and lambda is uncertain. Cp. 1437.1,
(<;;K) rd 5.iAM (<;;K) le.
1440.I,1442.1,ISJI.1.
1428 AccessoryN Notes: 1-5. Two bricks measure 370 x 360 x 40, J60 x 360 x4S.
l. +U1"1 [I] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stamp: '55 (69 + )0 + 56) x70 (20 +)0 + 20).
KTSn '433 Unknown: I.
(b) Stamp: approximately 169 (= 57 + 60 + 55) X()6)(= 8 + 28 + 1)
I. +lliI1l[l] l. )90 x )80 x4h iAM 8.
+ iVSUC't(l&VOC)S "\,1'
Date: early 6th century. See Part 11, Ch. to no. 10.
KTSliI [I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze).
Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: I.
(a) Stamp: 9JX6). + ivB[l]K1:(trovoc)s v l. 348 x345 x34.
Unknown: I. '442
[I] Peschlow, 'Bricks tamps', D2 b (illustration compiled from ff2H"IA[
1. iAM (CK) no. 12, fragment, 360 x? x 30. (a) Stamp: dimensions of inner, raised border are 86 x 50. I.

Unknown: I. several variants). nil.

[I] Mango's notes. (c) Several variants.
1. ? x? xj5, AM438.
Date: early 6th century. See Part II, Ch. 10 no. 10. Possibly ~,~(v)B(u<t1rovoc) '" l-J« A
[I] Bardill negs. 95.13.21, 22.
WITHOUT INDICTION Kalenderhane Camii. Nave, under marble floor: I. Unknown: The beta seems to be an accessory. The significance of the pi and
2. lambda is uncertain. Cp. 14J7.I, 1440.1, 1441.1, I SJI.I.
No accessory 1.)53X350X31. 2.()25)X(21))X)l.
(a) Great Palace. Area Ac: I.

'429 CRUCIFORM [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', D2 a, c (illustration compiled from

I. ?x? x30.
l. +€N" several variants).
[I] Mamboury's notes.
IKTOY WITHOUT INDICTION (d) Date: early srh century. SeePartII,Ch. Iona. 10.
Sarachane: I. '443
+ EvlHlCtol) No accessory
I. No. 1)23 (duplicated number).
(a) Stamp: 1I8 x6).
Ka1enderhane Camii. Unknown: I.
'434
I. €N+VIK
[I] Sarachane archive neg. 9.6.3 I. "
3.t.liIAH

Interpretation uncertain.
I.? x? x35.
EV + BiK('mu)
[I] Peschlcw, 'Brickstamps', B37. '438 (a) Stamp: (78) x 70.
(a) Date: after 5 J2. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. 2C. I. +IN"SIA+ Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site
'430 Baths ofZeuxippos. In situ. in the apse of Building 2. B2 (loose): I.
l. €Nft[I] + i.vB(llC'n&voc)s la' +
[I] Gray, 'Brickstamps', 55 no. 32. I.? x? x 40, no. 21.
KT[C)y] (a) Date: early 6th century. See Part 11, Ch. 10 no. 10.
[1] GP I, pI. 14 no. 21. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous
M[(]",[ou]
'435 Cistern of Aetius. On cop of wall: I.
I. +liI"€N Remainder, box 38, neg. 196. [J] Talbot Rice archive neg. as
I. 150x?x50.
[2].
(a) Stamp: (87) x 66. [r] Curtis and Aristarches, 'Anekdoeoi', 20 no. 9'. [2]
Inrerpreration uncertain. (b) Stamp: 122 (=)2+ 54 + )6) x72 (= 20 +)6 + 16).
Kalenderhane Camii. Vault of west cross-arm, filling: I.
Forchheimer and Strzygowski, \Vasserbehiilter, 49, 159.
(a) Rotunda and adjoining hall north of the Palace of Amiochus. Unknown: I.
r. ?X'"'?x36.
[I] Pcschlow, 'Bricksramps', B38. [I] DAI (1st) neg. KB 6t58. I. iAM (CK) no. 97, fragment,? x? x 30.
[I] Mango's notes.
AccessoryN
1439
'431 L ] .. 12t>.[liIl+]
I. IT.lII["YEI] '444
1436 l+ i.V]B(lKtuj)Voc)s 1.'. I. +IN"12E
N::>O[NO] I. liI.lIl1D(!1
[,v5]",,([ ov ]?CS (a) Grcat Palace. Area Ac. + ivlh(IC"urovoc)s e"
ivBtK(n&voc) v
[I] Mamboury's notes. Cp. '445.
 -------
------------
---------
..
-- ..
---------------------------------------------------------------0--------,

CATALOGUE
.•
,,~

CATALOGUE 379
(a) Stamp: (168)(= 55 + 66 +P) x 56 (= ?+40+ I). (3) Stamp: (105 from left-hand edge to right-hand upright of third
Unknown: 1. 1I1) X)2.
MISSING, INDECIPHERABLE, I46,
I. INfBAP[
1. MSBK inv. 6213. (120) x(250) x? Date: C.3I7-40? See Part Il, Ch. 10 no. I. OR UNCERTAIN NAME
[I) MSBKneg. 621)a. [2) DAI (1st) neg. 2))9 (cast). Balaban Aga Mcscidi: J-2. iV(OtK'tlii>VOC) y' ~,,~[
[3] Mamboury's notes (from cast). [4] Mango's notes (from l.iAM94·2.iAMI05· SINGLE-LINE
(3) Stamp:? X25.
cast). Notes: J-2. One brick measures 370 x 360 x45 Land Walls. Tekfur Sarayi, interior: I.
(b) Hagia Eirene. Found in the process of opening a tunnel from [I] Mamboury's notes, 1455
I. UA21l.1I11+ I. ? x? x40.
the central nave of Hagia Eirene.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Ramazanoglu, Sainte-Irene, fig. 4. [2] Mamboury, '449"
I. DDDNNN[
+ ~v~(tK'ttiilvoc)s a' ~[a
'Nouvelle lecture', Il2. '462
(a) Little cistern near the Theorokos in the Chalkoprateia,
(Trium) d(ominorum) n(ostrorum) [ 1.INfB[A
destroyed in June 1916.
[445 (a) Date: C.317-40? See Part Il, Ch. r o no. I. [I] Mamboury's notes. iv(ouatii>voc) t: ~["
r. +I[N1l.12.)
Erenkoy. (a) Stamp: I x )0.
+ i[vot(xnii>voc)s·l Meliopoulos, "Fa Honoratou', 216 no. 2. '456 Land Walls. Tower 16: 1.
I. INAB[A
The suggested restoration is based on comparison with 1444.1. The I.? x? x 50.
1450
two stamps may not, however, have shared the same indiction
I. [D)DDNN[
i.V(~lKtt&VOC) 0: ~[a [r] Mamboury's notes.
number.
(a) Stamp:? x25.
[(Trium)) d(ominorum) n(ostrorum) [ '463
(a) Stamp: (64)(= 55 +? +?) x (51)(= 14 + J7 +?) I Ruins at Kuciikyah. Upper floor. I. INfBAPE[
Kalenderhane Camii. Vault of Byzantine drain below apse of Dethier assumed, probably incorrectly, that the inscription [I) Mamboury, 'Mad, ,328 (mentioned). [2) Mamboury's
North Church: I. DDNN was complete and that it referred to Valenrinian and notes. iv(otK'ttii>voc) y' ~"P€( ) [
I. ? x? X39. Valens. (a) Inside a hypogeum on the approach to Fethiye Camii.
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', D4' (a) Date: c 317-40 ? See Part Il, Ch. 10 no. J. '457 [1] Curris and Arisrarches, 'Anekdotci', 36 no. PM~~.
Hebdomon (Bakrrkoy). I. [I)NABA. [2] Curtis, Broken Bits, ii, no. 59. [3] Mango, 'Brick Stamps', 25
[I] Dethier, 'Makrikoy', 162 no. A'. [2] Sorlin-Dorigny, [i)v(oucttii>voc) «: ~,,(), n. 74 (mentioned). [4] Blondal, Varangians, 188.
'Inscriptions', 84 no. la. [3] Leclercq, 'Esrampilles', col. 545
(a) Stamp: (2) I) x jo. '464
no. I. [4] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempcl', 264 no. If.
Kalenderhane Camii. Apse vault, south side: I. I. INfBAPM[
r • (290) x(2)5) x)4.
'45' iv(otmii>voc) y' ~"p() M[
}THER STAMPS WITHOUT NAMES I. )INDXIII [r] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps'j Aj S.
iv(otmii>voc) y' ~"p() N[
Presumably a fragment of a longer inscription reading (a) Stamp: ? x 28.
[446 1458
DDDNNNINDXIII.
:. DDDlI1l11l1111111 I. IlI1BBAP[ Unknown: I.
[(Trium) d(ominorum) n(ostrorum)] ind(ictione) XIII I. Fragment,? x? x40,iAM 3.
(Trium) d(ominorum) n{ostrorum} in( diction e) I iV(OlKtlii>VOC) W ~,,~[ [I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Erenkoy.
Gray's unlikely reading of the.numeral as iota (referring to a tenth (a) Stamp: (90) x 28.
[1] Mcliopoulos, 'Ta Hcnoratou', 216 no. 3.
indiction) is disproved by, similar-stamps with unambiguous Land Walls. '465
[I) DAI (1st) neg. 6598 (cast). [2] Mamboury's notes (from I. INll.B[A
Roman' numeralsf raj.n ra; 14p.lar '452
I. )XIII cast). [3] Mango's notes (from cast). iv(olKn&voc} ~'~[a
(a) Date; }27/8.' zSee Parr.Il-Ch. 10.no. I.
Baths of Zeuxipposs.imor.near Building I or 2. [(Trium) d(ominomm) ntostroruni) in(dictione)] XIII (cp. 1446.1) (a) Stamp: (72) x26.
'459
[I] Gray, 'BrickstamBs·:;s6 no. 48. [2] Schneider, [(Trium) d(ominorum) ntostrorum) ind(ictione)] XIII (cp. 1451.1) I. INBBA[
Land Walls.
'Ziegelstempel', 264 no ..rg. [,3] Manacorda, 'Bolli laterizi', 145 [I) DAI (ISI) neg. 6605 (cast). [2) Mamboury's notes (from
(a) Hebdomon (Bakrrkdy).
0.168. iv(oumii>voc) W ~,,[ cast). [3] Mango's notes (from cast).
[r] Dethier, 'Makrikcy', 161 no. A'. [2] Sorlin-Dorigny,
'Inscriptions', 84 no. lb. (a) Stamp: (I10) x26.
'447 Land Walls. '466
I. INll.BA[
. DDDlI1l11l11[ [[) DAI (1st) neg. 6608 (cast). [2) Mamboury's notes (from
'453
I. IOT:::>HQX cast). [3] Mango's notes (from cast). iv(otmii>voc) 0' ~,,[
(Trium) d(ominorum) n(ostrorum) (1
IQ::M15l11IlI1
(a) Stamp: (10) X)1. (a) Silivri.
Xpncroro) iV{Ol1crlOOVOC)l'VOVIlEpt 1460 [I] Dirimrekin, 'Selymbria', 33 no. 6.
Date: C.317-40 ? See Part Il, Ch. 10 no. I: I. INfBAJ\[
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. (a) Stamp: 6) X)).
iv(oumii>voc) y' ~,,() A[ 1467
Marnboury gives the location as 'B'; T. Miihiirdar Emin Pasa SOkagl. I. INll.BAPE[ .. )A
I.360X35ox45· [I] Mamboury's notes (rubbing).
iv(oumii>voc) y' ~,,() t.[
[I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). iV(OtlC'tlii>vOC) y' ~,,( ) A[ iV(OtK'tlii>VOC) S' ~"P€ [.. [c
1454 (a) Stamp: (I2o) XJ2. (a) Stamp: 141 x 32.
I.+A(J)
'448 Unknown: I. Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: I.
. DDDlI1l11l11[ (a) Silivri. r • iAM (<;:K) no. 86. r , ()IO) X (joo) x 51.

(Trium) diominorum} n(ostrorum) [ [I] Seure, 'Antiquites', 573, fig. 17 no. 7. [r] Mango's notes. [I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', A41.
 ..~
•
CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE

1468 '474 1480 1486

.. IQAff3Y1I[ I. lNAH[
r. [I]N6B[ I. INBI[
] iV(Ollcrt&VOC) t' pap() ivb(u .."tl&VOC)
t . 11' [
[i]v(Su",,&voc) e' P[ iv(ourn&voc) p,' [
(a) Scamp:(171)X20. (a) ScamP:(II2)X)2.
(a) Stamp: 92 x 24. (a) Scamp: (48) x 18.
Date: 451/2. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. re. Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri
Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri Land Walls.
Sr john ofStoudios. Heap of rubble beside the church: I. (Beyazn), 1928: I.
{Beyazrr), 1928: l. [I] DAl (Ist) neg. 660) [cast]. [2] Mamboury's notes (from
r. (295) x(265) x )8-42. I.? x? x42.
T. ? x? x )8, mortar with large pieces of brick adhering. cast). [3] Mango's notes (from cast).
[I] Peschlow,Studioskirche, (in preparation). [I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Mamboury's notes.

1481
'487
1469 1475 I. INIBVbIV[ l. IY1IEIl[A
r. INSBAP€[ .]1 r. [IN]AIKT6[
iv(Sucn&voc) ,'~ap() la[ iv(SuC'tl&voc) 'W p[a
iV(Ollcrt&VOC) <;' papt() [.]l [iv]o,,",,(Uilvoc) 8' [
(a) Stamp: (155) X) I. (a) Stamp: (90) X)2.
(a) Sramp. r 2 5 x 29. (a} Stamp: ? x 24. Kalenderhane Camli. Vault over west cross-arm, filling: I. Land Walls.
Fenari isa Camii. Church of Christ Philanthropes. Near tower 10 of Sea \"'{falls r. (2)0) x(I95) "48. [I] DAI (ISI) neg. 6609 (cast). [2] Mamboury's notes (from
[I] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari (,Tower ofTheophilus'): r. Er]Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', A46. cast). [3] Mango's notes (from cast).
isa Camii', fig. 39,00. 14. [3] Sodini, 'L'Arrisanar', 74. fig. I no. I.? x? X35.
4· [I] Demangel and Mamboury, Manganer, fig. 60 no. 3. '482
[2] Mamboury's notes. I.INIA[
'488
iv(ol1c'tlrovoc) re" [ I. [1]NlBBA[
'470
r. IN2BO[ 1476 (no entry) (a) Stamp: (97) x 29. [i]v(ouC"Cl&voc) 'P' pa[()
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. (3) Stamp: (100) x )0.
iV(Sllcrt&VOC) <;'1t;' pta) 0[
Room north-west of Hall G (debris): I.
Great Palace. Between areas Ab and Ac: (several) I.
(a) Sea Walls. West of the monumental staircase and north of the I. ? x ? x 40, no. 69. I. ?x?x58-6o.
railway, area Fa: I. 1477 [I] GP I, p]. 14 69. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous
no.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
I. ?x?x50. I.]8BAP[ Remainder, box 38, neg. 232. [3] Talbcr Rice archive neg. as
[1] Mamboury's notes. ]8' Bcp] [2J.

(a) Date: 425/6 or 440/r. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le. 1483
'489
Cisterns in Gtilhane, near B1ib-1 Hiimfiyfln. Upper storey: I. lNIlIBA[
I. I. INIABA[
'47' I.? x? X)5. iV(SIlC't'&VOC) p,' pa[
I. INASBV[ i.V(3lK'tlroVOC) re" P<;>:[
[I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp. I x28.
ivS(ll"n&voc) <;'1t;' pa[ (a) Stamp: (I15) x 29.
Unknown: I.
(a) Scamp: (84) x 2). Section of the first Sea Wall beneath the 'House of Justinian"
I. iAM (CK) no. 99,fragment, ? x? X40'
Myrelaion, debris. excavated in 1953.
1478 [I] Mango's notes.
[I] Talbot Rice, 'Bodrum Camii', '7), fig. 11 no. '7. [2] Talbot I. +INB[ [I] GP n, '7l< fig.)6 no. 2.
Rice archive (rubbing).
+ iv(Sum&voc) e' [ '484
I.]AIHANI '490
(a) Stamp: ?X)5. I.I]IlflQaA[
Date: 425/6 or 440/1. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. le. tv(3\1cnrovoc) m" pa[
'472 iV(S'lC'tI&VOC) 1" ppa[
I. INSBA[ Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bih-l HiimayUn. (a) Stamp: (1)0) x )0.
[1] Mamboury's notes. Land Walls. qaA, presumably in error for <JAa. Cp. 1166.1, 1167.1.
iV(Sllcrt&VOC) <;'/t;' pa[()
[I] DAI (Ist) neg. 6609 [cast). [2] Mamboury's notes (from (a) Stamp:? X25.
(a) Stamp: (79) X)).
cast). (J] Mango's notes (from cast). Unknown: I.
Myrelaion debris.
'479 I. Fragment, ? x:? X45, iAM.
[I] Talbor Rice archive (rubbing). I. IN8BA[ 1485 [I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze).
iv(S,.:n&voc) e' P",[ I. INIB[

(a) Scamp: (86) x 29. iv(lhK'tlWVOC) lW [

'473
I. IY1VIS .. nI]IlE Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site '49'
(3) Stamp: (77) X27.
I. lY1flIlA[
82: I. Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38.
ivfit(K."ttii)Voc} ~'/~' .. 7ttVE
I.? x? x jc.no. 63. Room north-west of Hall G (debris): I. iV(S'lC'tI&VOC) 1" pa[
For nINE cp. 286.1, 289.1, 448.1. [I] GP I, pl. '4 no. 6). [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous I.? x? X40' neg. 74. (a) Scamp: (98) x 26.
(a) Rotunda and adjoining hall north of the Palace of Antiochus. Remainder, box 38, neg. 230. [3] Talbot Rice archive neg. as [I] GP I, pl. 14 no. 74. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous Unknown: I.

[I]DAI(Ist) neg. KB 6166. [2]. Remainder, box 38, neg. 235. [3] Talbor Rice archive neg. as I. Once in Robcrt College,fragment,? X? XJ5.
[2]. [I] Mango's notes (rubbing).
 ,,~
•
CATALOGUE CATALOGUE

1492 '497 1502 1508

J. [I]NnBA[ I. H111IBV[ 1. IN€I8[ I. [_]Ol1VH+
[i]v{lhmwvoc) YI' Be] iv(SlIC'tt&voc) Ot' par iV(OllCtlOOVOC) £1' <?[ + ~vo{l1ctlwvoc)O [-]

(a) Stamp: (7) x 19· (a) Stamp: (88) Xl7. (a) Stamp: «5) x)4. (a) Stamp: (140) X45. Letters 30 high.
Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri Myrclaion debris. Excavation of the monumental arch in rhe Forum Tauri Silivri: I.
(Beyazrt), 1928: I. [1] Talbot Rice archive (rubbing). (Beyaztc), 1943. Beside the north pier: I. 1.360 x 345 x?, line made with pointed object 45 mm. from
1.? x? x40' I. ? x? x42. edges of brick.
[1] Mamboury's notes. [r] Mamboury's notes. [I] Seure, 'Aruiquices', 574, fig. 17 no. 6.

'498
1493 1. ]. AHIl1ll1[I]
qOJ '509
L INnB[ [i]v{OIKnwvoc) ot'~" . 1. INE:Ill[ I. ].2111>11

iV{OIK"tIWVOC) yt' ~[ (a) Stamp: (r r I) x (j a). iV(OtK'ttroVOC) er" pea lV(SUC'tlOOVOC) 0\' s . [
(a) Stamp: ? x JO. Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site iVOt(1C'ttOOVOC)s. [
(a) Stamp: (94) x JO.
Great Palace. Area Ac: BI:r.
I. Kalenderhane Camii. Roof, fill wall: L (a) Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site
I.? x? x 35-40. I. ?x?x30,no. J.
1. (t90) x{I60) x 45. BI, building north-east of church, pier 4, in situ: I.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [I] GPI,pl. 14 no. I. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous
[I] Peschlow, 'Bricksramps', ~9. I. no. 88.
Remainder, box 38, ncg. 182. [3] Talbot Rice archive neg. as
[2].
[I] GP I, pl. '4 no. 88.

'494
I. INl1I. [ '504
I. INE:lllA[ 151°
The fifth letter may be a kind of space-filler (cp. 218, 291).
1499 iV(OtlC1l&VOC) et' par I. + IN112[
iv(ollcnoovoc) Bt'. [ I. Y3[.]+IllIl1I
(a) Stamp: (106) x JO. + ivo(ucttrovoc)s [
(a) Stamp.f r r jj x jo. iV{OIK"tliOvoc) OI' + [ ] Eu() Kalenderhane Camii. A6h: I. (a) Stamp: (Sz} X4'.
Section of the first Sea Wall beneath the 'House of Justinian', (a) Stamp: (I 57) x J7. I. (227) x (lIO) x 51. 'Bath' building beside the Myrelaion rotunda.
excavated in 1953. Kalenderhane Camii. In the masonry of the superstructure of [rJ Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', A50. [1] Talbot Rice, 'Bodrum Camii', 173, fig. II no. 9. [2] Talbot
[I] GP n, 175, fig. J6 no. J. the Ottoman kitchen: I. Rice archive (rubbing).
1. (JJo) X{HO) X47.
Er] PeschIow, 'Brickstamps', A47 a. '505
'495 (b) Stamp:(149)xJ5. I. III1E:mV[ 1511
I.INVIBA[ I. €II1V[
Kalenderhane Camii. In the masonry of the superstructure of iV(OlIC11COVOC) et' ~a[
iV{OIK"tIWVOC) hI OI' ~u[ the Ottoman kitchen: 1. EVS[(tlctlCOVOC)
(a) Stamp:(118)XlJ.
Gamma altered to delta by the addition of a diagonal stroke. 1. J80 x{l05) X47.
Kalenderhane Camii. G3/4: I. (a) Stamp: (80) X(40).
[lJ Peschlow, 'Bricks ramps', A47 h.
In the Great Palace brickstamp notebook it is suggested that I. J87 X{l97) x 50. Unknown: I.
another fragment with the name Ca() may have joined with this. (rJ Pcschlow, 'Brickstamps', Ap. I. ? x? X35, once in Robert College, AM 122.
The additional suggestion that both were fragments of roof tiles [I] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Bardill negs. 95.1.21, 22.
seems unlikely given the thickness. 1500
1. E:II1VIE:[ '506
(a) Stamp: (IIO) x{l5).
I. +III1IE:IY. 1512
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in r93 5-38. Site EVO(l.1C'U&voc)
ie" [
I. €Nt..[
Ba (debris): 1. (a) Stamp: (90) x{JI).
+ iv(ouC'ttoovoc) 11::' Iu .
r.?x?x40,no.25· Unknown: I. (a) Stamp:{IjI)X{JI). €:VO[(llcttOOVOC)
er] GP I, pl. 14 no. 25. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous I. Once in Robert College, ? x ? X3.2. Kalenderhane Cnmii. Unknown: I. (a) Stamp: (lOO) x 50.
Remainder, box 38, neg. 199 and neg. 240 for the possible [r] Mango's notes (rubbing). I. (HO) X{I85) x JJ. Unknown: I.
joining piece. [3] T albot Rice archive neg. as [2 J. [r] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', A52. I. Once in Robert College, ? x? x 27.
[I] Mango's notes (rubbing).
'507
'496 1501 I. +HlI1l1[

1. [IN]l1IBA[ 1. IN€IWK€[
+ TtVO[(tlC1l00VOC) '513
[iV{OIK"tlWVOC)] OI' ~a[ iv(ollctlOOVoc) £1' + (in leaf or heart) K(upt)£ [ .INt..[
Letters 23 mm. high.
(a) Stamp:(85)XJO. (a) Stamp: (8I) x '4.. . iVS[(lK'ttOOVOC)
(a) Silivri: r .
Land Walls. Land Walls.
I. Fragment, double frame made with fingers. (a) Ruins in Beylerbeyi (Sophianac palace?).
[I] DAI (Ist) neg. 66to{cast). [z] Mamboury's notes (from [I] DAI (1st) neg. 6605 (cast). Ell Mamboury's notes (from
[I} Seure, 'Antiquires', 573, fig. 17 no. 5. [r] Dirimtekin, 'Beylcrbey', 13, 29 no. 6.
cast). [3] Mango's notes (from cast). cast). [3] Mango's notes (from cast).
 .,
CATALOGUE CATALOGUE

1520 1527 1533

'5'4 r.]NIE[
I. ]. 2aY1[I] I. ]YACTE I. ]1Y11

[i]~5(l1cniiivoc)s (a) Stamp: (78) x J2. iv(Sucnoovoc) y[' i]V(StK'tlOOVOC)

re" [
\Valls found in Alemdar Caddesi during laying of drains. Top <a) Stamp: (66) x 37.
(a) Stamp:(80)X32. (a) Stamp: ? x 30.
of the street, next to the fountain at the junction with Caferiye Date: 416/17 or 43 1/2. See Part Il,Ch. 9. seer. rb.
Rhegium [Kiiciik Cekmece). Bath. to the south-west of the Land Walls. Pentapyrgion, vicinity of St Nicholas: I.
Sckagr. Palace of Antiochus: I.
Acropolis: I. I.? x? X50 .
., [I] Mamboury's notes. 1.33° x ? x 40.
I.? X? X30. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Mamboury's notes. 1521
I. ]YfiIC 1528 1534
'515 (a) Stamp:(49)X2S. I.]POAE 1. I I.
I. ]fiY11
Walls found in Alemdar Caddesi during laying of drains. ]pOA£() iv(SlK'nOOvoc) t .
ivS[(1.1C'tt&voc) Opposite Hagia Sophia: (several).
iv(5IlCtliiivoc) 0(' (3) Stamp: ?x25. (a) Stamp: ? x 30.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
Great Palace. Area Ab: I. Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
(a) Stamp: ? x 40. I.JIOx?x35·
1522 t.? x? X 6o.
Land Walls. Wall between towers 95 and 96a: J.
I. ++[ [I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes.
J. 38ox38ox40'
[I] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stamp: ? (7.5 from left to upright of right-hand cross) x40·
Theorokos in Chalkoprareia. North wall of the church, beside 1535
1529
Zeynep Sultan Sokagt. I. ]APE:C[ 1.]Ea
'5'6
I. INa[ [1] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stamp: ? x 20.
]apec[
~]ap~() C[ Great Palace. Area Ac: I.
i.vB[(tlC'tlOOVOC) 1523
I. ? x? X45.
iv(5IlCtliiivoc) 0[' I. BAX[ (a) Stamp: ? x 24.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bfib-i Humdyun. ~a()X[ Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri
[1] Mamboury's notes. (Beyazrt), 1928: I.
For a possible completion, cp. 1)23.1-2, 1579.13. 1536
I. ? x? x40.
(3) Stamp:? x 28. 50 from left to centre of X 1.]Na ... iI.[
(5'7 [I] Mamboury's notes.
Sea Walls. Pillars near the monumental staircase, between the (a) Stamp:? xlS.
I. +IY1VI[
railway and the sea, area Fb: 1. Theotokos in Chalkoprateia. Church: I.
+1v51[ I.? x? x45. 1530 1.370 x? )(35
+ lVO{UCU&voc) 1.[' [1] Mamboury's notes. I. [I]Y1E:I[ .. ]€IKYPI+
[I] Mamboury's notes.
+ iv(oucnoovQc) ~h'
[ [iJv(5lK<liiivoc) et" [ .. ] £I Kue~() t
(a) Scamp:(8s)xJ5. 1524
I. IY1E:[ (a) Stamp: (132) X32. 1537
Great Palace. Area Ac: I.
Unknown: J. 1.]<I>
1. ?X?X55. iv(Sucrtoovoc) E['
I. Once in Robert College, ? x ? x 50. (a) Stamp:? x J5.
[1] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp: I x 10. [1] Mango's notes (rubbing). Land \Valls. Wall between towers 94 and 95: I.
Sea Walls. West of the monumental staircase and north of the
J.? x?x40.
(5'8 railway, area Fa: I. [I] Mamboury's notes.
(.INB[ I. ?x?x50.
1531
[I] Mamboury's notes.
I. ]9nOAO
iv(511ctliiivoc) ~['
The pi and lambda may suggest a connection with 1437.1, 144°.1, 1538
(a) Stamp:? )(42. 1. llY1[
1525 1441.1,1442.1.
Walls found in Alemdar Caddesi during laying of drains. Top 1.].YABf[ (a) Stamp: ? x p.
of the Street, next to the fountain at the junction with Caferiye (a) Stamp: ? x I 8.
(a) Stamp:? x 30. Great Palace. Area Ab, collapsed vault.
Sokagl: 1. Unknown: I.
Sea \Valls. \Vest of the monumental staircase and north of the [I] Mamboury's notes.
1.360x350x5°· I. Fragment. 390X ? x55,iAM.
railway. area Fa: I. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
I. ?x?x40. 1539
[I] Mamboury's notes. 1. INB .. 2.
(519
(.INIB[ 1526
1532
1. +IY1A[
iv(St1c'ttoovoc) a.:. s .
iv(511cniiivoc) If [ 1.]OC (3) Stamp: 12 5 x 30.
+ iv(Sll':nwvoc) o]"
iv(5IlCtliiivoc) I' ~[a() Possibly KJoc() Walls found in Alemdar Caddesi during laying of drains. Top
(a) Stamp: 'x 3S. of the street. next to the fountain at the junction with Caferiye
(a) Sea Walls. West of the monumental staircase and north of the (a) Stamp:(8s)xll· Great Palace. Area Ac: I. SOkagl: I.
railway,areaFa: I. Excavation of the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri I.?)(? x45. f. 370 x370 )(40.
I.? X? x 55. (BeyaZ1t),I928. [1] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [1] Mamboury's notes.
 .,
..
,,~

CATALOGUE CATALOGUE

[I] Firatli, 'Trois eglises', I72. 177. pl. 7(b} no. 9· (a) Stamp: (80) x 27.
1540 1554
[2] Mamboury's notes. 1. 2[;201 Karakilise. On the sea-shore: I.
I. Ho .. B[.J
t • Fragment,? x? X25, yellowish clay.
(a) Stamp: 15 j x a8. (a) Ruins in Beylerbeyi (Sophianae palaces).
1546 [I] Mango's notes.
Fenari Isa Camii: J. [I] Dirimrekin, 'Beylcrbey', 13.29 no. I.
L JMOIM
I.? x? x40.
[r] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Mango and Hawkins, 'Pcnari (a) Stamp: ? x 20. 70 from centre of mu to right-hand of delta. 1555 1563
Binbirdirek cistern. In situ in south wall, towards the east, in 1. 2APASI I. IY1[;I. [
isa Camii', fig. 40 no. 22.
top of tambour: I. (a) Ruins in Bcylcrbeyi (Sophianae palace i). iV(Ol1C'Cl&VOC) Ol' ~[
1541 I. (190) x(265) x 52. [r] Dirimtekin, 'Beylerbey', 13,29 no, 5.
[r] Wulzinger, 'Substruktionsbauten', 386, fig. 10 no. 3· (a) Stamp:? x28.
I. INE:BA.
1556 Cisterns in Giilhane, near Bdb-i Hamayao. Floor above the
[2] Wulzinger's notes.
iV(OIK'tl&VOC)" ~u() . 1. JITA:I[ cistern.
(a) Stamp: 150X32. (I] Mamboury's notes.
1547 ]<0..[
Ruins on Saray Burnu (orphanage of St Paul?): 1.
I. + I2KL2 . BI
1. 380 x (250) x 30-45. (a) Ruins in Bcylerbeyi (Sophianae palace ?).
1564
[1] Unger, 'Seraispicze', fig. 10 no. 15· (a) Stamp: 130 x45, [IJ Dirimrekin, 'Beylerbey', 13,29 no. 7, 1. INZ[
Excavation near the monumental arch in the Forum Tauri
iV(OlK'tl&VOC) ~'[
1542 (Beyazlt),1957·
1551
I. .XO ... Y1I [IJ Duyuran, 'Bayazit', p]. 6B. I. INIB[ (a) Stamp: (60) X)).
Unknownr r.
(a) Stamp.f r j yj x jo. i.v(on;:'Clwvoc) l' ~[
I. ? x? x35, once in Robert College, AM 305·
Ruins on Saray Burnu (orphanage of St Paul?): 1548
I.
I. HNXKaX
iV(OlK'tl&VOC) IP' [ [I] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2] Bardill negs. 95·3·2a; 95,4·16a,
I. (2)0) X(245) x ao.
(a) Ruins in Beylerbeyi (Sophianae palacej). 17a.
[r] Unger, 'Seraispitze', fig. 10 no. 19· (a) Between Fenerbahce and the vineyard of the Sarapaja family,
200 paces from the shore. [I) Dirimtekin, 'Beylerbey', 13. 29 no. 4·
(b) Stamp: 158 x28. .,>-/

Ruins on Saray Burnu (orphanage of St Paul?): I. [I] Sideropoulos, 'Byzanrinai Epigraphai', 26-7, no. E' 2, 1565
I. XrA3
I. (225) x(18a) x4°-45· 1558
[r] Unger, 'Seraispitze', fig. 10 no. 20. I. AAIT[ .]NI+ (a) Stamp: 140 x ?
1549
(c) Stamp: 184 x28. 1. JI·BAP[ + iV(OlKn&VOC) [. 'J ITu() ).(1) Myrelaion church. Substructures: 1.
Ruins onSaray Burnu (orphanage of St Paul?): 1. r. ? x? x6o.
Jt'. pup[ (a) Ruins near Topalian Ham, in the area bounded by Hoca Ham
I.362X35ox4°. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Unger, 'Seraispitze', fig. 10 no. 18. (a) I-Icbdaman (Bakirkcy). Sokagi, Kaputcular Sokagi, and Kanrcioglu Sokagi.
[r] Dethier, 'Makrikoy', r67 no, KA', p]. lA' no. 20. [r] Meliopoulos, "Topothesia', 23 I no, 9.
1566
1543 [2] Schneider, 'Ziegelstcmpel', 266 no. 61.
1. A3I
I. MAAAO
1559
(a) Stamp: 8{" 40.
For perhaps the same name cp. 1605· 155° I. Indecipherable
Unknown: I.
1. I8E:2
(a) Stamp: 160 x 30. (a) Ruins near Topalian Ham, in the area bounded by Hoca Ham I. MSBKinv. 6224, (120) x(r80) x?
Ruins on Saray Burnu (orphanage of St Paul?): I. (a) Hcbdaman (Bakirkoy). SOkagl. Kaputcular Sokagi, and Kanrcioglu Sokagr. [IJ MSBK neg. 6224a. [2J DAI (1st) neg. 2)4). [)J Mambaury's
I.290X285 x4C>-45· [rj Dethier, 'Makrikoy', 163 no. Z',p!. lA' no. 5· [I] Meliopoulos, "Toporhesia', 230 no. 3, notes (from cast). [4] Mango's notes (from cast).
[r] Unger, 'Seraispitze', fig. re no. 21.

155' 1560 1567

1544 I. JAEA[ 1. +INSIV[ I. J[;PHTO
I. [;HITOTAT15
(a) Hebdaman (Bakukoy). + i.V(OUC'Cl&VOC)~ l~' [ (a) Stamp: (89) x 26.
Of[1to'Ca:mu [I] Dethier, 'Makrikoy', 166 no. 12', pl. IA' no. 16.
(a) Ruins in Beylerbeyi (Sophianae palace?). Myrelaion, debris.
(a) Date: after 532. See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. ac. [IJ Talbat Rice archive (rubbing).
- [r] Meliopoulos, "Ioporhesia', 229 no. I. [2] Feissel,
Baths of Zeuxippos. In or near Building 1 or 2. 1552 'Inscriptions', 410 no. 11.1. (3] SEG 37 (1987) no. 1034,
[r] Gray, 'Brickstamps', 54 no. 16. [2] Schneider, 1. +[ ..... JNIKOC
1568
'Ziegelstempel', 264no. rh. [3] Manacorda, 'Belli Iaterizi', 146
(a) Ruins in Beylerbeyi (Sophianae palace?). I. IN[ .... JCO
n.I7J· [1] Meliopouios, "Iopothesin', 229 no. 2. [2] Feissel, 1561
1. JrIT0A[ (a) Stamp: 147" 26.
'Inscriptions" 410 no. 11.2. [3] SEG 37 (1987) no. 1034, Remains in the area bounded by Divan Yolu, Piyer Loci
1545 (a) Between Fenerbahce and the vineyard of the Sarapata family,
I. ]TE:PIOY Caddesi, Dosrluk Yurdu Sokagi, and Klod Farer Caddesi: 1.
200 paces from the shore,
1553 I.390X380X60.
]~EPl.OU
I. [IJN .... ME:
[I] Sideropoulos, 'Byzanrinai Epigraphai', 26-7 no. E' 2,
[I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp: (lI4) x 52· (a) Hagia Eirenc. In situ in a putlog hole on the gallery side in the
Excavation of the Diakonissa complex near Istanbul northern central pillar of the east wall of west gallery. 1562
University, 1943-46: I. [r] Peschlow, Irenenkirche, 224. fig, 30 no. 7. I. J0Y10V[

I. Mamboury states that the brick is in the Museum.

 ., ,,~
•
CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE
(3) Stamp: (93) x JJ.
1576 1584
Unknown: T. I. 3IAA[ '591
LiAM.
I.)'" I. )IBA[
(a) Great Palace. Area Ab. (3) Stamp: (52) x 3 I.
[I] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). ),'po[
[r] Mamboury's notes. Sarachane: I.
J.No.!JI3,?x?x35· (a) Stamp: (67) <25.
1570 Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38: J,
'577 [I] Sarachane archive neg. 9, I O. 22.
I. INI[.')BA. L ?x?x45,no,15,
I.~)UJI[
[v(OtKniiivoc) ,[. ') po( ) . 1585 [r] GP Lpl. 14 no, 15. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous
(a) Stamp:(60)X28. I. + IYlM. Remainder, box 38, neg. 192. [3] Talbot Rice Archive neg. as
(a) Stamp: 150 x 24. Land Walls. W88a/89a. [2).
Unknown: I.
[I] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, 149 no. IS. + {vo(uC'nrovoc) t . T
I. iAM (<;:K) 50,390 x ? x 50. [2) DAI (Isr) neg. 660) (cast). ll) Mamboury's notes (from (a) Sarachane.
[I] Mamboury's notes. cast). [4] Mango's notes (from cast). 1592
[I] Sarachane archive neg. IO.3,J la.
1. INV[
1578 1586
1571 t.)1l.sAP[ (3) Stamp: 97 x 24-
I. BAITO[ .. )Alr I. YHV[
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38: I.
)8(tJcrtiiivoc)s 0' ~[ L ? x ? x 40, no. 10,
po() ITo[ .. )Oty (a) Sarachane.
(a) Sarachane. . ' [I] Sarachane archive neg. 10,3.34a, [I] GP I, pl. 14 no, la. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous
(3) Stamp: 128 x 56.
[r] Sarachane archive neg. 10.).20a. Remainder, box 38, neg, 188, [3] Talbot Rice archive neg, as
Unknown: I. [2).
1587
I. iAM(<;:K) no. 63, fragment,? x? X47. I. + EI2L[
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. '579
I. )AXP[ (a) Sarachane: I.
'593
LNo.129J, 1.)INI[
For a possible completion, cp. 1323.1-2, 1523.1a.
1572 [I] Sarachane archive neg. 9,1 I.20a,
I. HHH[ (a) Sarachane: 1. ) iv(Otl<ttiiivoc) t[
No. ) iV(OtK"ttiiivoc) ~[
(a) Stamp:? X25.
1. 1062.
'588
[I] Sarachane archive neg. 10.3.19a. l.)HAM+ (a) Stamp: (100) X40.
Unknown: I.
dAM (<;:K) no. t02,? x? X45. (3) Stamp: (110) X45. Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site
[r] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. BI:!.
1580 Date: 507-22. See Part II, Ch. 9, sect, aa.
I. ) .. ON~ St Polyeuktos. L? x? x ao-ncg. 2.

Level er: I. Level 424: 2-3. Level 484: 4' Level 725*: 5-6. Level [I] GP I, pl. 14 no. 2. [2] Russel1 Papers, Miscellaneous
1573 (a) Sarachane: I.
729: 7· Level 738: 8, Levcl78s*: 9, Level Sj j: 10, Level 1010: II. Remainder, box 38, neg. 183. [3] Telbot Rice archive neg. as
I.)ICAA I. No. 676.
[2).
Unknown: 12.
[r] Sarachane archive neg. 9.10.13.
(a) Stamp-j x aj. I. No. 354- 2. No. 804. 3. No. 805. 4· No. t247. 5. No. 351.
Unknown: I. 6. No. 353. 7· No. 370. 8. No. 336. 9. No. 298. to. No. 350.
I. iAM (<;:K) no. 76, ? x ? x 50. 1581 It. No. 1031. 12, No. 195,
'594
1. + 1Nl>. +
[r] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. l. )AES Notes: One brick measures? x? x 25.
(a) Stamp:? x35. [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 210, A32. [2] Sarachane archive neg. + ~,:,?(u(,ttrovoc) +
Sarachane: I. rO.3.28a (r r). (a) Stamp:(l24)xJJ.
1574
1. No. 1303. Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site
I. IN8B[A ... )K
er] Sarachane archive neg. 10.3.323.. 1589 BI, north-west of church (debris): I.
iV(Otl<ttiiivoc) 8' P[o() .. )K I. )td . IHA YI[
X.?x?x30,no·4I.
(a) Stamp: 142 x 32. (a) Rotunda and adjoining hall north of the hexagon of Antiochus. [I] GP I, pl. 14 no. 41. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous
Unknown: I.
'582
I.INf[ [r) DAI (1st) neg. KB 6r64. Remainder, box 38, neg. 212. [3] Talbot Rice archive neg. as
I. iAM (~K) no. 65. diagonal fingermarks running across the [2).
iV(Oll<'t'U'i)VOC) y['
stampd75 x37ox55. '590
[r] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. l. )2l>.YlI
(a) Sarachane.
[I] Sarachane archive neg. 10,>.2Ia. '595
{VO(ll<'tlroVOC)~[ 1.)OY
'575 (3) Stamp: (r47) x 30.
(a) Stamp: (43)x31.
L YOlr31f3UJY 1583 Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38, Site
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site
I. )+K B I, building north-west of church (debris): L
Possibly a mangled Fecopviou (?) BI:r.
)+K() r. ? x ? x 40, no. 39.
(a) Stampr r j j x ae. r. ? x? x 50, no. 56.
[I] GP I, pi. 14 no. 39. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous
Cistern on Divani Ali Sokagl. (a) Sarachane: 1. [I] GP I, pl. 14 no. 56. [2J RusselI Papers, Miscellaneous
Remainder, box 38, neg. 21 I. [3] Talbot Rice archive neg. as
I. 39ox37ox46. I. No. 287. Remainder, box 38, neg. 223. [3] Talbot Rice archive neg. as
[2).
[2).
[r] Mamboury's notes. [I] Sarachane archive neg. 10.3.35;),
 .,~
•
CATALOGUE 391
CATALOGUE
390
1608 (a) Great Palace. Area Ac, below the Palace of Justice: I.
1602
1596 325 x315 x40.
J. YOA. I. .3211.111 2 1.
INSHBA.AM [I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp: (75) X)3. iVS(llC'tlWVOC)S El.
(v(S'K"iDvoc}s~' ~a() a~(}s
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-)8: I. 1615
(a) Stamp: "7 x J'. (3) Stamp: 170 x28.
I.? xi X}O.
I. INIllAYPAKY
Kalenderhane Camii. FJ/GJ/J: r.
Great Palace. Area Ba: J.
[I] GPI, pl. 14 no. IJ. [,] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous I. ('40) X(2Ij} x 4'. (v(Su""iDvoc) " ~a() 'Ypa(} Ku(}
Remainder, box 38, neg. J89. [3] Talbot Rice archive neg. as
r. ? x? x48.
~ [r] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', A44. (v(Su",iDvoc) ,~' Aupa(} Ku(}
[,]. [I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp: 170 X2S.
1609 Unknown: 1.
1597 I.]a.. ••.K[.] I.iAM (C;:K) no. J7, J80 xJ70Xjj.
1603
I.]BA[ I. INc[ (I] Mango'S notes.
]!l<xOK[.]
] ~a[O iv(oll('ttWVoc) e]" The abbreviated name was possibly KK(). Cp. 634.1 and 637.1. 1616
(a) Stamp: 79 x()5}. (a) Stamp:(60}x26. I. BACOITAIE
(a) Stamp: (77) x z S.
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38: I.
Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: I. Date: 427-65. See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. le. ~aO CO~A.lE (/)
1.?x?x25.no.I2. I. (ISO) X(I52} X4j. Balaban Aga Mescidi: I.
[r] GP I, pl. 14 no. 12. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous (a) Stamp: 125 x25.
[r] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', A45· .1. iAM 18,? x? x45.
Remainder, box 38, neg. 190. [3] Talbot Rice archiveneg. as Great Palace. Area Ba: I.
. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[,]. L320X3Iox4°.
[1] Mamboury and Wiegand, Kaiserpaldste, 12 no. I (where the

J598
1604
I. 1NL!.
,. 1610
I. +ll1c[
location is said to be near the monumental staircase at the
'House ofJuscinian'). [2] Mamboury's notes.
I. ]AI1I[
(v(8"c"iDvoc}"(t' ~[
+ i,:,(B1K't\WVOC) Er
iv(BllC'tl&VOC) 0.['
(a) Great Palace. Area Ac: I.
1617
(a) Stamp: (74) x 'j. I. ]BAPSINSC
(a) Stamp: (9') x'9· I. ? x? x30.
Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: I.
Kalenderhane Camii. Diakonikon, east bema door, from wall: [I] Mamboury's notes. ] ~ap(}s (v(SumiDvoc}s c
I. (a jc) X(I70) X40.
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', A53· (a) Great Palace. Area Ba: 1.
1611
I. JSo x(21j} X4I. 1.? x? x60.
[I] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps'c Ajc. I. Indecipherable.
(I] Mamboury and Wiegand, Kaiserpaliiste, 12 no. 2 (where the
(a) Stamp: IJj x,6. location is said to be near the monumental staircase at the
1605 Date: 501-504 or 516-19 or 53 I-H· See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. ad.
1599 'House of Justinian'). [2] Mamboury's notes.
I. Derhier reads IM . BA . MAA1I.C
J.INf[ Remains on Ismetiye Caddesi. North group: r.
Second letter was presumably nu rather than mu. For perhaps the 1.395 x35ox40. 1618
iv(lh'K"ttrovoc) y('
same name cp. r 543. [I] Mamboury's notes. I. ]BAPcN6[
(a) Stamp: (7j) x '7·
(v(S"""iDvoc) [.: ] ~a(} [.] ~aA.S~ ]~ap'(}NS(I}
Kalenclerhane Camii. Unknown: I. 1612

I. (J7j) X(I90) X4S, (a) Near Laleli Camii, just beyond the end of the tramway, on the l. II1IBAYA[ (a) Land Walls. Tcpkap r.
[1] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', 1\40. eastern part of the hill, at the corner of the road. [1] Gedeon, 'Engraphoi', 382.
(v(SumiDvoc) t ~a(} Ye]
[I] Mendel, Sculptures grecques, 538 (quoting Dethier,Journal iv(Su('tlrovoc) tW ~'!~t. 1619
Manuscrir, fo. 77. no. 358 dated 23. 04.1880/°5.°5.1880.)
1600 (a) Stamp: / x 40. I. ]ABAC[
I. ].1I.I1I[ South of the 'bath' building beside the Myrelaion rotunda, (v(Su,,,iDvoc) la' ~a(} C[
(v(Sl1c"iDvoc) e. r 1606
towards the sea: J.
(v(Su""iDvoc) la' Boc[
I.360x35ox45.
(a) Stamp: (70) x()5}. 1. ]VAOIT[ (a) Exakionion.
(I] Mamboury's notes.
Kalenclerhane Camii. In the masonry of the superstructure of [I] Gedeon, 'Engraphoi', 382.
(a) Near Facih Camii.
the Ottoman kitchen: 1.
[I] Mordunann, Konstantinopel, 37. [2] Sorlin-Dorigny, 16'3
(JIj) x(2Ij} x jj.
l. 1620
"Inscriptions', 89 no. 31. [3] Mamboury, 'Mara', 329 I. II1BHEV
[I] Peschlow, 'Bricksramps', A42. I. [I]NHBAITE[
(mentioned). (v(Suc"iDvoc) S' HE« (/)
[(]v(S'K'niDvoc)~' ~a(} IT,[(}
1601 (a) Stamp: 138 x30.
Unknown: 1-2.
Sorlin-Dorigny may have read n for r.
I. IN1I..[
1607 LiAM (C;:K) J'. z . iAM (C;:K) Jaa. (a) Land Walls. Between Edime Kapr and Tckfur Sarayr.
(v(Sm,iDvoc) S ', [
r• ]VB Notes: 1-2. One brick measures 350 x 340 x45· [r'[Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Marque', 316n. I .
(a) Stamp: (66) x JO. (a) Stamp:(j6}xJj. (I] Mamboury's notes. (2] Mango's notes.
1621
Kalenderhanc Camii. Exonarthex, TI/2: I.
Augustaion. South-west corner of Hagia Sophia: J.
1614 I.]1I.NI+
I. (r aj} X(100} q8. l.? x?x35. I. ] .• [ .• ].BIB
er] Pescblow, 'Brickstamps', A43· [r] Mamboury's notes. + ivB[(uC'tloovoc)
 CATALOGUE
.•
,,~

392 CATALOGUE
393
(a) Blachernai. From one of the four substructures of Emir Buhari 1629 1636 Date: 431/2 or 44617 or 461/2. See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. le.
Tekkesi. I. IN+IllA[ r. IL1IBA[ Balaban Aga Mescidi: 1.
[I] Papadopoulos, Blachernes, 145. 1.? x? x40,iAM 16.
iV(btlcnffivoc) + t" ~(l[ lV(StK'tlffivoc) t' ~(l[
[1J Mamboury's notes.
1622 (a) Stamp: (97) x (20). (a) Date: 45617. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. Id.
I.]V01>.lIJX[ Unknown: I. Cistern of Aspar. South-west side.
I. Once in Robert College, ? x ? x 40. t643
(a) Unknown: [I] Mamboury's notes.
1.
[r] Mango's notes (rubbing).
1. INlfBA[
I. Once in the Hagia Eirene collection.
iv(8uC'tlroVOC) t'y' ~a[
[I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 95 no. 64- 1637
1630 r. INBBA[ (a) Stamp: (105) x 28.
1623 I. INEIBA. Unknown: 1-2.
iv(otK<\rovoc) P' ~a[
I.]HAMAPO[ iV(OtK'tHI:lVOC) et' Be . r.iAMz3.2.iAM69.
(a) Stamp: ? x 50. [r] Mamboury's notes. •
The first letter is H or M, penultimate P or r, last Oor S. (a) Forum Tauri. Remains in Sair Efendi Sokagl! I.

(a) Ruins in Beylerbeyi (Sophianae palace?). [r] Schneider, 'Aquadukr', col. 75. I.? x? X40.
1644
[r] Sideropoulos, 'Autonomos', 122. [2] Feissel, 'Inscriptions', [r] Mamboury's notes.
1. INN[
4r8 no. 29·1. [3] SEG 37 (r987) no. r oj a. 1631
I. MAYH'c 1638
iV(O\1mrovoc) M 0[\'
1624 I. ·INBB. Gamma altered to delta by the addition Of a vertical and a diagonal
(a) Stamp: 122 x 35. Letters 25 mm. high.
I. IW[ ... ]AA YPN stroke. Cp. 27.1.
Silivri: 1. iV(O\Knrovoc) P' P . [
(a) Date: 448-P. I. 345 x 34 5 x 3 So stamp almost central. (a) Stamp: (70) x28.
(a) Stamp: ? x 28.
St John of Stoudios. [x] Seure, 'Antiquires', 573, fig. 17 no. I. Date: probably 43o/r or 44516 or 460/1. See Part n, Ch. 9, sect.
Myrclaionchurch. West part: I.
[I] Curtis and Aristarchcs, 'Anekdotoi', r r no. K~'. le.
I.? x? x40.
1632 Balaban Aga Mescidi: 1.
1625 [r] Mamboury's notes.
1. INfEAP[ 1.iAM75·
I. IN1>.AI:frre
[I] Mamboury's notes.
iV(O\1mrovoc) y' ~a~[ 1639
ivo{tKnOOvoc) a'1Jyzte
(a) Stamp:? x38. I. INIABA[
(a) Unknown: I. 1645
Blachernai. Large vaults behind the enclosure wall on iv(lhK"tlroVOC) ~a[()
I. Once in the Hagia Eirene collection.
\0:'
l.]lDNI
Derviszade Sokagi.
[I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 95 no. 66. (a) Stamp: (75) x 20. iVO(t1C'tlroVOC) y['
[rJ Mamboury's notes.
Palace of Antiochus: 1.

I.? x? X45. (a) Stamp: ? x 30.

1626
I. ]321AI1>.NI 1633 [I] Mamboury's notes. Hexagon complex in Giilhane. Hexagon: I.
1. +INr[ I. ? x? X42.
ivo(uc'tt&voc) tu" K(upl)e [ [r] Marnboury's notes.
+ iv(oueurovoc) yE' 1640
(a) Land Walls. W62a/6p.
(a) Stamp:? x 33. 1. INEI[
Er] Meyer-Plath and Schneider, Landmauer, 149 no. 10. 1646
Blachernai. Ayvaz Efendi Caddesi. Egrikapr Caddesi. iv(otJcnoovoc) Et' [ I. IN1>.I[
1627 [I] Mam boury' s notes.
(a) Stamp: (39) x 20. iV(Ot1C'ttrovoc) Ol' [
I. INABAHIOY Date: 416/r7 or 43 rh. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb.
1634 Palace of Antiochus. (a) Hippodrome. Inner wall of ambulatory found in 1950 near the
Paluka's reading is uncertain.
1. ]S Palace of Antiochus.
[r] Mamboury's notes.
iv(8umrovoc) a' ~a() 'H(A)iou (?) [r] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp:? x 35.
(a) Cistern near the Basilica Cistern (Yerebatan Sarayi). Inlet to Land Walls. Pentapyrgion, vicinity of St Nicholas: I.
1641
cistern. I. ? x? x40' I. INZKA[ 1647
[r] Paluka, 'Zisterne', 599. [I] Marnboury's notes. I.IN1>.I[
iv(B\1mrovoc) ~'~a[
iV(Ol1C'ttroVOC) s.:[
1635 (a) Stamp: (95) X26.
(a) Stamp:(I23)x35.
I. AIlS21>.111 Palace of Antiochus: I.
I. ? x? x 50.
Hippodrome. Inner wall of ambulatory found in 1950 near the
It seems unlikely that the Latin U was correctly read.
ivo(\Jmrovoc)s~' ~u() Palace of Antiochus: I.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
Possibly KUp(\)E 1. 335 x330 x 50.
(a) Stamp:I52x25.
(a) Date: after 532. See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. ac. [I] Mamboury's notes.
Unknown: 1-2 .. 1642
Baths of Zeuxippos. In or near Building I or 2. r.iAM 2. 2. iAM 4. I. IL1E:I[
[r] Gray, 'Brickstamps', 55 no. 39. [2] Schneider, Notes: 1-2. One brick measures? x? x40. 1648
iv(ol1C'uoovoc) Et' [ I. IN1>.S[
'Zicgelsrempel', 267 no. 68. [I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp: ? x 32. iv8(lK'Ct&VOC)s [
 '.~
•
94 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 395
(3) Stamp: 210 x 30. 1655 t661 (0) Stamp: ? x 60.
Great Palace. Area Ab, collapsed vault. 1. [1]NllBVC[ 1. INIBAIP<DHL Land Walls. Tekfur Sarayr, interior: I.
I.37ox?x40 [i]v(5""n&voc) 5'!la() C[ I.? x? X40.
iv(5,,,,,,&voc),' ~«() ?
er] Mamboury's notes. [i]~(5,,<tl&voc) 5' fuc[ [I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Stamp: '45 Xl8.
'49 (a) Stamp: ? x )0. Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
+INS[ Ruins between the Giilhane hospital and the Topkapr Sarayr I.38oX350x5°· 1668
fortification: 1. [rJ Mamboury's notes.
+ iv(8tK't\rovoc)s [ 1. ].
J I. ?x?x55.
]M.OV
(a) Date: 423-27 or 438-42. See Pan Il, Ch. 9. sect. le. [IJ Mamboury's notes. 1662
Cisterns in Galhane, near Bgb-r Hiimayfln. Possibly .6.6~vo\,l with mu and nu in ligature, assuming mat the
I.]AEr
[1] Mamboury's notes. trace of the vertical in the first line is incorrectly recorded.
1656 (a) Excavation of the Diakonissa complex near Istanbul
1. [I] 1llA (0) Stamp: (87) x (40).
'50 University, [943-46: I.
Ruins on Saray Burnu (orphanage of St Paul?): I.
+INS[ [i]v(5"m&voc) 5,' A() 1.?x?xf5.
I. (235) X(200) X40-45.
+ iv(ol1cn&voc)~ [ [i]v5(um&voc),' A() [I J Mamboury's notes.
[IJ Unger, 'Seraispirze', fig. 10 no. 5.
[i]v(5um&voc) 5' I).{)
(a) Date: 423-27 or 438-42. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. le. 1663
Cisterns in Galhane, near Bab-r Hiimjiyun: I. (a) Stamp: (5) X)5·
1.]~2V 1669
I.}50 x350 x30. Rhegium (Kiirriik Cekmece). Large surrounding wall of the
Acropolis, beside sea: I. (0) Stamp: /X)5. 1. +TH[CN]
[1] Mamboury's notes.
L ?X?X30. Biiyiikada (Prinkipo). Vaults ('Kamares'). €AC[-]
1l(!)[-]
'51 [I] Mamboury's notes. ," [IJ Mamboury's notes.
INEBA[ Hi\[cv]E«c(iv5umiOvoc I) [-]5ro[-]
1664
iv(8t'K"tt&voc) e" !la[ 1657 (3) Hebdomon (Bakrrkoy).
1. INll[ .... ]IT
I.]ITll
(a) Stamp: 100 x 28. [I] Dechicr, 'Makrikoy', 162 no. 11', pl.La", no. 15'.
iv(5,><"[,&voc) 5[' .... ]_
Retaining wall and barrel vault between the church of the (a) Stamp: / x )0. (b) Hebdomon (Bakrrkoy).
Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia and the Basilica Cistern Myrelaion church. East part: I. (a) Stampr r 86 x )0. [I] Derhier, 'Makrikoy', 162 no. 1\', p]. lA' ,no. re".
(Yerebutan Sarayr). I.310X3IOX5°· Tokludede Mescidi: I. (c) Hebdomon (Bakirkoy).
[1] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes. I.380 x380 x45, iAM 1I6. [IJ Dethier, 'Makrikoy', 162 no. b.', p]. lA' no. 1 y'.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
;p
In 1658 1665 1670
1. ]€AIAKCH' 1. +TH[-]
1. ]VEVIT
(3) Stamp: 70 x25.
]E« ',:,'KCTlP (I) [ -]
Retaining wall and barrel vault between the church of the (a) Sea Walls. Degirmenkapr.
[ -]
Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia and the Basilica Cistern (a) Stamp: (95) (from end of horizontal bar of epsilon to right-hand [rJ Mamboury's notes.
(Yerebacan Sara yr). edge) x )6. + tij[c viae (ivf5lK'tlOOVOC ?)-]
[I] Mamboury's notes. Palace of Antiochus: I. 1666 (a) Hebdoman (Bakrrkoy},
I. ? x? x60. 1. ]BAfPO
[I] Derhier, 'Makrikoy', I62na.1l', pl.IA' DO. IW.
'53 [rJ Mamboury's notes. [2] Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel', 267 75.
The most likely readings would seem to be: DO.
INJUll[-]
] !laO r pO 0 (/)
ivS(,I<t\&voc) ,5' r-i 1659 ] $«0 fpo() (/) 1671
(a) Stamp:? x28. 1. INBIT[ ... ]LAh [+THC]N
(a) Stamp: (125) x )6.
Date: 430/1 or 445/6 or 460/1. See Pan Il, Ch. 11, sect. 3. [EAC .. ]
iv(5ucn&voc) W IT[ ... ]yup Walls found in Alemdar Caddesi during laying of drains. Wall
Hexagon complex in Giilhane. Hexagon: 1.
above the fountain on the left at the top of the street: (several).
[ - ]
(a) Stamp: 190 x 30.
I.380X360X45· [+-riic] v[E«' (iv5um&voc 1)-]
Sea WaIls. Langa Bosram, inner wall, west of tower 68: I. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
I.380X380X65· (a) Hebdomon (Bakrrkoy).
'54 [I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Dethier, 'Maknkoy', 162 no. 11', pl.IA' no. I~'.
]110
]50 1660 MULTIPLE-LINE 1672
I. Die bore no inscription.
I.]Nt.[
(a) Stamp: (74) x 54. 1667 ]T2C[
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site (a) Stamp: 100 x 55.• I.]N-6N
Br, building north-west of church (debris): I. Great Palace. Area Ab, near the aqueduct at the corner of the [i]v5[ - [ts C[
]2H
J.?x?x2o,no·3°· great wall: I. (3) Land Walls. Pentapyrgicn, vicinity of St Nicholas : I.
[-]v<xv[ -]s~'
[I] GP I, pl. 14 no. 30. [2] Russcll Papers, Miscellaneous l.? x? X45. I. ?x? X40.

Remainder, box 38, neg. 204. [I] Mamboury's nores. The eta may be an indiction or an accessory. [IJ Mamboury's notes .
•1

l
 "~
•
CATALOGUE
CATALOGUE
397
[67} 1680 (a) Stamp' (41) x(54).
r. B~ l\E 1. N[ Kalenderhane Camii. North aisle, filling wall, middle: I. ]
e€[ 1. (175) x(165) x 39.
(a) Stamp' 135 x55· .OY+
I[ [r] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', B43.
Great Palace. Area Ab: I.
(a) Sea Walls. West of the monumental staircase and north of the
I.360X350X35· (a) Burgaz Adasr. Transfiguration church.
railway.urea Fa: 1.
[r] Mamboury's notes. [I] Albcrt, 'Amigoni', 39. 1687 I.? x? x45.
1. I. t.211
[r] Mamboury's notes.
[674 s KOCN
[.]0 1681
~~8(tK"!tiOvoc)s0' ~oc() v
]IS Indecipherable. 1694
(a) Burgaz Adasi. Transfiguration church. (a) Stamp' 85 x 80. 1. H2 .. 01
Either [+ t.]o[~v [ou or [+ t.l]O[~~O]ou
Ruins on Saray Bumu (orphanage ofSt Paul?): I. S
[I] Alben, 'Amigoni', 39.
(a) Ruins at Kiiciikyah, upper floor: I. r . 350 x 3 50 x 50.
(a) Ruins in Beylerbeyi (Sopbianae palace?).
I. ? X? X40. lrl Mamboury's notes.
1682 [I] Dirimtekin, 'Beylerbey', 13,29 no. 3.
[r] Mamboury's notes.
1. ]ABA
1688 (no entry)
[675 ]PIS
r.]POrJ)(J)
]a ~a[ -]eou 16811' CIRCULAR
] .. [..] 1. NY
(a) Sarachane: J.
jpoqxo] -] .. [.. ] NO 1695
1. No. 473.
t. ]:~qA
(a) Stamp' (90) x 1 [1] Sarachane archive ncg. 9.10.36. r- (:1.) Hagia Sophia. Lower part of window on south-west side of ]AL1
St George in the Mangana. Entrance passage to the cistern, Horologion: 1.
,~.-
]+H2
beside the road. I. 360x360x45.
[r] Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes, 29. fig. H no. 3· 1683 [r] Dirimtekin, 'Room', 15 and 40. ApE[ -]va[ -] s n' + [-]
[2] Mamboury's notes.
1. +THCN
(a) Stamp: 8 I diameter.
~A[C
t 1690 Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site
[676 + -rilcv~C![c (iVOlK1trovOC?)-] j~J
1. ISIAIQ BI:I.
r. +H[ r.?x?x30,no·47·
(a) Date: 507-22. See Part H, Ch, 9, sect. z a. Meliopoulos' curious typescript arrangement was perhaps intended
CiMA [I] GP I,p1. 14 no. 47. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous
St Polyeuktos. Level 725*: I. to represent a monogram.
Possibly a badly recorded stamp reading + 'Ovnctpoo. 1.NO·355· Remainder, box 38, neg. 217. [3J Talbot Rice archive neg. as
(a) Caddebosraru, Bagdad Caddesi. [2].
(a) Great Palace. Area Ac: I. [I] Sarachane archive.
[I] Meliopoulos, 'Rufinianai', 282 no. 3. [2J Feissel,
I.? x? X40.
'Inscriptions', 418 no. 28.3. [3] SEC 37 (1987) no. 1038.
er] Mamboury's notes. 1696
1684
1. [ •••• ]
1.+K[ 1691
[677 + IS +
1. +H11€1
r. XIAI[ +K[ INE
INt.A[ AIOY+
(a) Rotunda and adjoining hall north of the Palace of Antiochus. ... [eo + + iv(otlc'tlrovoc) e"
XI1.,,[-] (/) iVO(I1<tlWVOC) -r [I] DAI (1st) neg. KB 6160. + ~(V)O(lK'tIWVOC)e~'l1(ou (1) +
The stamp is in the same style as one bearing the name Mcoccotou
(a) Several variants.
(a) Date' 533-35. See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. ab. (see 9,6).
Stamp: approximately 87 x 58.
Hagia Sophia. Debris from the collapsed barrel vault in the
1685 Kalenderhane Camii. Apse of North Church, in situ: 1-2. (a) Stamp: estimated diameter 104.
substructures of the west wing of the justinianic atrium: I.
1. -I-J Unknown: 3. Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-)8: I.
I.? x?x55. OTOV 1.365X350X4I. 2·355x350x45· 3·(240)X(U5)X39· I.? x? x ao.no. 84.
er] Schneider, Westho[. 26 no. 10.
+ [-]OtOU [I] Peschlow, 'Bricks tamps' ,B44 (illustration compiled from [I] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous Remainder, box 38, neg. 349.
1678 Perhaps + [ME90o]otOU (cp. 972.1-2). several variants).
r. ]PC
(a) Stamp: (SI) x 35. A fragment of the stamp was lost after initial 1692 1697
]Ai5
recording. Consequently, the illustration shows even less than 1. [t.]HO 1. ]OYP + IN 11[ around central ss
(a) Hebqomonfbakirkoy). what is recorded here. [MHt.O]Y The name was perhaps GEOOOUp(ov), Floopuou), or Cceroopfou).
[rj Dcrhicr, 'Makrikoy', 167 no. KB'cx',pl. lA' no. 21. Kalenderhane Camii. Unknown: I.
[l1]ryo[~~Oo]u (1) (a) Stamp: 110 diameter.
r. (235) x(230) x 38, broken into three pieces.
[1] Peschlow, 'Bricksramps', B4 5. (a) Stamp'? x 50. Date: after 475. Sec Part H, Ch. 10 no. 12.
1679
1.]AC(J) Rhegium (Kucuk Cekmece). Substructures sou m of the Sea Walls. West of the monumental staircase and north of the
ayasma: I. railway, area Fa: I.
]H[.:]H 1686
1. ? x? x38. J.? x? X50.
(a) Burgaz Adasi. Transfiguration church. 1. [-]YlC
[I] Mamboury's notes. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[t] Albert, 'Antigoni', 39. t-r.
 ..
.,~

CATALOGUE CATALOGUE 399

1698 CRUCIFORM 1707 17II

I. [- ]<;:+~[- ] around central * I.

N
I I
].1
'703
[ • ]C + €[ • ] around central * I. I fo I
[ - ]~ + $[ -] around central * ].1 BAYP€ [.lE.
(a) Date: after 475. See Part Il, Ch. 10 no. 12.
I C A

Land Walls. Back of tower BI4 (south): I.

[.... ] C [.]

·1. Found in 1877. Once in Robert College. .,

[.]
[.]
Y [.]
[r] Mango's notes (rubbing).
o [.] ,
[.]
(V(Oll<tlooVOC)
". pape() (V(01<1:1ooVOC)
~[ .r e. A[ ... ]
iv(ollctt&voc) t[' - ]
(a) Long Walls of Constantinople. (a) Stamp, (55) (= 1+ 28 + 20) X (125)(= 64 + )7+ /)
(a) SS Sergius and Bacchus. [I] Seure, 'Anriquires', 573, fig. 17 no. 8. [2J Mamboury, Kalenderhane Camii. Unlciown: I.
1699 [I] Meliopoulos, "Topothesia', 231 section I" no. 2. "Nouvelle Iecrure'j r z j. r. (2<0) x (r90) x )9.
I. + [I]NfoJK2 + [ ..... ] around central * [IJ Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', D3.

+ [i]volx(·n&voc)s +[ .... ] around central * 1708

I. +I].1V[
1712
(a) Stamp: I I I diameter. The lower half of the wooden die has I. A
+\vo[
broken away. 17°4 A].1IA[
Cp. 832.t, 834.1, 83P.
Date: after 475. See PartII, Ch. 10 no. 12. I. [.] a
Blachernai, excavations of July-August 1958: I. [.] (a) Date: 507-5 I 2. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. aa.
(a) Stamp: Mamboury estimated 150 x 100.
I. )85 x)69 x 59, AM 5. Sr Polyeuktos. Level 140 (fallen vault. debris): I.
Date: 502-33 or 517-20 or 532-35. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. zd.
[r] Dirimtekin, 'Blachernes', 22, 31 no. 7. [2] Bardill ncgs. I].1BB I. No. 172.
Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagl. Piers of
94.1.9a, loa. v [I] Sarachane archive.
the water conduit,
[r] Mamboury's notes.
[.] '709
[.]
[ .. ]. iV(OI""looVOC)W Bc . [.] [.]
'7'3
I. ~
1700 [.]
I. + INMK[ ]2 around central * (a) Unknown.
[I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 87 no. 18, pl. 14 no. 4. B[ ... ]
INMANllNH
~
+ iVOtK[ ]5 around central * foI
].1 Probably either badly recorded or falsified to arrive at the name of
(a) Stamp: 110 diameter. an Emperor. Paluka and Wulzinger read ivo(uc'tlrovoc)~'
I
Date: after 475. See Parr Il, Ch. 10 no. 12. 'Avo(po)v~K(o)u. Possibly (vo(mloovoc) 1,,'N ..
Tokludede Mescidi. (V(OI""IOOvOC)
ot' p[aO ..... ]
'705 (a) Stamp: 150 x ?
[r] Mamboury, 'Chrisme', 456 no. 8. [2] Mamboury's notes. I. I (a) Stamp' 66 (= r8 + 30+ r8) x(96) (= 78 + 1 + 1).
Date: 502-33 or 517-20 or 532-35. See Part H, Ch. 9. sect. ad.
N Date: 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9. sect. 23.
Substructures south of Cemal Nadir Sokagr.
r St Polycuktos. Level 138 (fallen vault, debris): I. Level 65 5: 2..
[I] Paluka, 'Ruinen', 37, fig. 4. [2] Wulzinger,
foI[ .. ] I. No. 93. 2. No. 738.
'Substruktionsbauten', J8r no. 2.
1701 [.] Notes: One brick measures? x ? x 40.
I. Very unclear. [.] [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 218. DI3. [2J Sarachane archive neg.
[.] 504r.r(2).
(a) Sarachane.
[I] Sarachane archive neg. IO.3.26a. iV(OI""looVOC)y' St] . ] 1710
~
INIABA
(a) Stamp' approximately (100)(= 68 + J2 + 1) x (40)(= 40 + 1 + 1). S
Remains destroyed in 1924 near Cemal Nadir Sokagi. A Monogram no. 8. iV(O~K'tt&VOC) re" pa()
[I] Mamboury's notes. A The fourth arm of the cross, which would have carried the name,
1.[.] has broken off. Cp. 186.r, 944.l.
1702
I. .. [ - ]~?MIaround central cross. [.]
[.] (a) Date: C.45D-75? See Part Il, Ch. 10 no. 6.
(a) Stamp: 85 diameter. Unknown.
[.]
Date 507-22. See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. aa, Ch. 10 no. 14. 1706 [I] Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions', 87 no. 17, pl. 14 no. 3.
[.... ]. y. A(u)l;a() (1)
St Polyeuktos. Level 1077: I. Level 1345: 2. I. TI[
1. No. 1040. 2.. No. 1210. +IM[ . (a) Stamp' (98) (= 70 + 1 + 1) x(59)(=? + 32+ 1). '7'5
T. INfo2HBA
Notes: One brick measures ? x? x 30. Date: 5°7-22. See Part n, Ch. 9, sect. za.
(a) Stamp: left arm yo mm. high at left-hand end.
[I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 217, c», [2] Sarachane archiveneg. St Polycuktos. Level IOOlr.<: 1. (vo(lm&ivoc)s ~'paO
Unknown: I.
9·11.19a(2.). 1.No. 6J6A,? x? X40. (a) 'SS Karpos and Papylos', pudog hole in left-hand side of
I.iAM(CK) no. 95, fragment,? x? X40.
[I] Hill, 'Bricks tamps', 217. DI. [2] Sarachane archive neg. rotunda upon entering.
[I] Mango's notes.
5·41.11. [I] Bardill.
 ..~
·0

400 CATALOGUE CATALOGUE

401
TABULA ANSATA 1721 1728 (a) Stamp: reo x 22.
I. AA€3:'Nt. 1. + KAAAAEA Date: 414-18 or 429-3). See Part Il, Ch. 9, sect. lb.
1716
I. [-]0[-] 'AkS.xvB(pou) +K.v.a).£a Palace of Antiochus: I.
I. Ridge tile. 590 x 300 x 30, curvature 48 mm. deep, stamp on
[ -]INt.2I[ (a) Stamp: 220 x40. (a) Stamp: 120 x 30.
hollow side.
[ - ]o[ - ] ivB(lIetl.,voc)s ,[' Unknown: t. Date: 4I4-t8 or .P9-33. See Part n, Ch. 9, sect. lb.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
I. iAM (<;:K) 59, ? x ? 22-50. Palace of Antiochus: I.
Name probably [fE]o[pyiou] or [t.,]o[~~Bou]. [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mango's notes. 1. 590 x 300 x 30, curvature of 48.
(a) Stamp: 70 (from Ito I) x ? [r] Mamboury's notes (squeeze). 1735
Rhegium (Kii,iik Cekmece). Acropolis: I. 1722 I.]AE
I.? x? xH. I. :lAM,:nqA '729
1. KOCMAC[
(a) Stamp: (87) x42.
[r] Mamboury's notes. (a) Stamp" 57" 10. Date: 507-22. See Part 11, Ch. 9, sect. la.
Unknown: I. Kocuec ] St Polyeukrcs. Level 1068:;-: 1. •
'7'7 I. iAM (<;:K) no. 8}. I. No. 1290,21-25 mm. thick.

+
I. (a) Sump: ? x 30; upright of kappa to right of sigma 120.
[I] Mango's notes. Eenari isa Camii: 1. [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 22 I, F 3. [2] Sarachane archive neg.
I. iAi\1 box no. 368;? x? X20. 9·II.20.
[.]ANCN '723 [I] Mango's notes (rubbing). [2J Mango and Hawkins, 'Penari
[..... ]i . I. +B[ ... ]C+ "Isa Camii', fig. 40 no. 26.
Monogram no. 58 (Maupudou)
[.]av":'[ ..... ]s(l)

(a) Stamp:tabula(II7}x?;roundel5ox70.
Date: 582-602. See Part H, Ch. 5. sect. la.
(a) Stamp: 1 I 8 x 30.
Fenari isa Camii:
1. ?x?xr6-zz.

[1] Mamboury's
I.

notes.
[ '730
I.+KYcH.[
+Ku()cH.[(?)
FINGERMARKED BRICKS

Unknown: I. (a) Theodosian Hagia Sophia. Back wall of Schneider's

1736 Loops SIMILARTO l5 L,GATURE
I.(150) x(I50) x44,AM 87 (old no. 166). 1724 propylacum. 1. Fingermarks made with 3 fingers
I. IVlA8H[.]
[I] Bardill negs. 94.5.21, 22. [I] Schneider, WesthoJ, 6, fig. I.
(a) Great Palace. WaU'M' next to area Ab. South wall of areaAc: 1.
iv(8'K<lroVOC)u'e,,[.]
1.360 x 360 x? Arrow made with a tool. Lines made with tool,
'73
(a) Stamp: (140) x B. 1.
'+] .... ]3A+ parallel to sides of brick.
Fethiye Camii: I. [I] Mamboury's notes.
ROOF TILES 1. Fragmentary corner of thin tile, 30 mm. thick, slightly
(a) Stamp: (I}}) x26. (b) Palace of Antiochus: I.
curved. Date: 507-22. See Parr H, Ch. 9. sect. za.
1.380 x 375 x45. Lines made with tool, parallel to sides of
1718 St Polyeuktos. Level 852: 1. brick.
[I] Mango's notes.
I. HVI 1. No. 367, 17-22 mm. thick.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
liv(lhK"tu:Ovoc) [r] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 221. F2. [2] Sarachane archive neg. (c) Palace of Antiochus: I.
'725
I. +80MA 9.10.)2.
1. 385 x 365 x 55. Also bears stamp 975.13.
(a) Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 193 5-}8. Site
+ eOlln +
[I] Mamboury's notes.
B I, building north-west of church. debris: I. '732
I. TPY<D(J)NOC (d) In the area of the excavations undertaken in 1946-47 and
1.(182) x88 X20, no. 3. (a) Stamp' 91 x }O. 1958-60 between Hagia Eirene and Hagia Sophia.
[I] GP I, pl. 14no.}. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous Kalenderhane Camii. Roof, fill wall: 1. Tpucpcovoc
[I] Dirimtekin, 'Pouilles', 180 no. 9.
Remainder, box )8, neg. 18.4_ [jj Talbot Rice archive neg. as I. (195) x(162) X22, slighdyconvex form, heavily striated on
(a) Stamp: 175 x '9. (e) Unknown: I.
[2]. one side. Unknown: l. J. 350 x 350 x45.linesincised 35-40 mm from edge of brick,
[r] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', A58. I. iAM (<;:K) no. 26. AM 58.
'7'9
I.]YWIK. [I] Mango's notes. [I] Bardill negs. 94+1, 2.
1726
(a) Stamp: 79 x 19. I. +VKY '733
Great Palace, excavations in the Peristyle area in 1935-38. Site I. <DK[ '737 CROSS OR CHI
(a) Stamp: (75) x 24.
Br , building north-west of church (debris): I.
Rhegium {Kilciik Cekmece). Substructures south of the (a) Stamp: (}9) X4I.
1. Fingermarks made with two fingers
1. ?x?x27.no.7
ayasma: 1. Date: 507-22. See Part H, Ch. 9, sect. za. (a) Great Palace. Wall 'M' next to area Ab. South wall of areaAc:
[I] GP I, pl. 14 no. 7. [2] Russell Papers, Miscellaneous I.
I.? x? X20. St Polyeukros. Level 781: I. Level 871*: 2. 1.3oox300X?
Remainder, box 38, neg. 186. [jj Talbot Rice archive neg. as
[I] Mamboury's notes. I. No. 286. 2. No. 577. [I] Mamboury's notes.
[2].
Notes: One tile measures 17 mm. thick. (b) Unknown: I.
172.0 '727 [I] Hill, 'Brickstamps', 221, FI. [2] Sarachane archive neg. I.)l4 x293 X38-45,AM 151.
I. A:J.AAA)!
1.1'< 9.Io.}I (2). [I] Bardill negs. 94.7.}', }2.
(a) Stamp: 91 x 60. KaUEa (c) Unknown: I.
'734 1.307 x 305 x 37-43, stamped twice with an uncatalogued
Kaienderhane Camii. Unknown: I. (a) Early cemetery near Galata Mevlevi Tekkesi: J. I.]AAA
1.225 x 12) X I) (thickness) X40 (max. height of curvature). stamp,AM425·
I. 125 x30.
]Ua [1] Bardill ncgs. 95.lo.3Ia, j aa.
[1] Peschlow, 'Brickstamps', FI. [I] Mamboury'snotes.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------,
..~
•
CATALOGUE CATALOGUE

Fingermarks made with three fingers

2. 1741 HORSESHOE
FINGERMARKED TILES TOOL-MADE IMPRESSIONS
(a) Great Palace. Area Ab: I. I. Fingermarks made with three fingers
I. 290)(270X55. '746 Loops 1748 FOUR-ARMED CROSS
(a) Date: ath century. See Parr n, Ch. 10 no. 2.
[1] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mamboury and Wiegand, J. Fingermarks made with two fingers 1.
Hippodrome. Pier 6. Drain below staircase of pier 4.
Kaiserpalaste, 36 (mentioned). (a) Stamp: two intersecting impressions 86 and 89 mm. long x 16
Notes: Average size 370 x350 x 55. (a) Early cemetery near Galata Mevlcvi Tckkesi: I.
(b) Little cistern near the Theotokos in the Chalkopraceia,
[t] Mamboury's notes. r.630x380x3°· mm. wide.
destroyed in June 1916: I. Unknown: 1.
I.Joox30ox?
[I] Mamboury's notes.
2.,Fingermarks made with four fingers J. (255)' (2)2) '40, AM 405·
[I] Mamboury's notes. '1. Fingermarks made with three fingers
(a) Date: qrh century. See Part II, Ch. ro no. 2. [J) Bardill neg. 95.9.29.

3. Fingermarks made with four fingers Hippodrome. Pier 6. Drain below staircase of pier 4: (a) Early cemetery near Galara Mevlevi Tekkesi: I.
1749 SIX-ARMED STAR
(numerous). t. (600) x 380 x? Borders down longer edges of tile.
(a) Unknown: '- Notes: Average size 370 x 3 50 x 60. Some bricks also carried [I] Mamboury's notes.
I. 327 X 322 x 47-57, AM 256. stamp I402.la. (b) Early cemetery near Galata Mevlevi T ekkesi: I. (a) Stamp: three intersecting impressions each measuring I I 5 x9
[rj Bardill neg_ 94.J3.25. [I] Mamboury's notes. 750 x440.
I.
mm.
(b) Hippodrome. Pier 6:1. Unknown: I.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
I. 260X260 x So. 1742 THETA AND PHI 338 x 335 x43,AM 106.
(c) Early cemetery near GalataMevlevi Tekkesi: 1. I.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [r] BardiU neg. 94.8.27.
Ir ?x3°O.
I. Fingermarks made with one finger
I[r] Mamboury's notes.
(3) Unknown: 1.

I
1738 STRAIGHT LINE (d) Early cemetery near Galata Mevlevi Tekkesi: I.
I. 335 x 325 x 37, AM 1I4. I. 650 x 380/360 x25-40 (curvature 40).
J. Fingermarks made with three fingers i-
[r] Maletskos, 'Plinchos', 273, pl. 54+ [2) Bardill neg. 94·9·3· [I] Mamboury's notes.
(a) Rotunda beside the Myrelaion church: [, (e) Early cemetery near Galata Mevlevi Tekkesi.
1.310X310X45· '743 PHI . ,~ ... [I] Mamboury's notes .
[I] Mamboury's notes. I. Fingermarks made with two fingers (f) Unknown: 1.
(b) Great Palace. Area Ab. 1.335 X214, fingermarked and then stamped with uncatalogued
(a) Great Palace. Wall 'M' next to area Ab. South wall of area Ac: I.
I,300X300x45·2·300X280x5°· I. 300 x 300 x?
die measuring c. 102 x28. AM 403.
[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mamboury and Wicgand, [r) Bardill negs. 95.9.24, 25, 26.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
Kaiserpoliute, 36 (mentioned).
2. Fingermarks mode with three fingers '747 CHI
2. Fingermarks made with four fingers I. Fingermarks made with three fingers
(a) Great Palace. Area Ab: 1.

(a) Palace of Antiochus: I. I.290X290x5°· (a) Early cemetery near Galata Mcvlevi Tekkesi: I.
I.380X380X50. [I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mamboury and Wiegand, 1.? x330X25.
[I] Mamboury's notes. Kaiserpaldste, 36 (mentioned). [1] Mamboury's notes.

'744 PSI
'739 WAVY LINE
I. Fingermarks made with two fingers
I. Fingermarks made with two fi~gers
(a) Great Palace. \'(faU'M' next to area Ab. South wall of area Ac.
(3) Hippodrome: 1.
[I] Mamboury's notes.
I. 350 x 300 x 50.
[I] Mamboury's notes. 2. Fingermarks made with three fingers

(a) Great Palace. Area Ab: I.

1740 SEMICIRCLE OR SIGMA I. 290 x 290 x?

[I] Mamboury's notes. [2] Mamboury and Wiegand,

I. Fingermarks made with three fingers
Kaiserpaldste, 36 (mentioned).
(a) Myrelaion rotunda: l.
Rotunda beside the Myrelaion church: I. '745 0 AND l5
I. 310 x 300 x40-45. I. Fingermarks made with two fingers
[I] Mamboury's notes.
(b) Palace of Antiochus: I. (a) Great Palace. Wall 'M' next to area Ab, south wall of areaAc: I.

1.380 x 375 x45. Mark made with a tool, parallel to the sides of I.36ox}60x?
the brick. [I] Mamboucy's notes.
[I] Mamboury'snotes. (b) Tokludcde Mescidi: 1.
(c) Palace of Antiochus: I.
1.385 x360 X45, border 40-45 mm. wide around brick. lAM
1.315 X}05 x40. 29·
[r] Mamboury's notes. [J] Mamboury's notes.

l
 ..~.,

INDEX

Numbers in bold type refer to Figures

Abbakias, archistrategos 9 Aubay, E. 160,162 Bevlerbeyi viii, 3, 9, 40, I

Abundantius named on Roman brickstamps 15 Athalaric, named on Roman bricksrarnps 15 .see also p~l;ce, Sophianae
Acacian schism 115 Athens Bizye, see VIZ!!
Acimusluk Sokagi 73 n. 45 Agora I}9 B1achernai H, 38, 39. 121, 123 n. 24,160,2
acropolis (Saray Bumu) 28, 101 Inspectorate of Antiquities 164 Blondal, S. 164
Addas, magister 77 Atik Ali Pasa Camii 77,78 Bodrum Camii (Myrelaion) 42,71.102, IH, 163,2
Aelian, praerorian prefect ro r Anicus.parriarch 55 Bolognesi,E. 1}6n. 168. 147
aeraria praestatia (copper tax) 11 Attila Il} Bonitus named on Roman bricks tamps 15
Aeschines, statue base of 67-8 Augustaion 30.}2.34,}5.}6,64,2 Book of Ceremonies 62, 134
Aethcriu's 33 Awguscales 16 Bosphorus 3
Aetius, Plavius 60 auraria praestatio (gold tax) 12 Bozdogan Kemeri Caddcsi I}I D. 128
AfrikaHaru 7}n'4' Aurelian.consul 125 n. 4} Brctt,G. 101.n.16
Ahmer I, tomb of 67,7 Aurelian, praetorian prefect In brick

r AlayKo~kii Caddesi
Alemdar Caddesi 6
7J

Alexandria, grain supply from 35

Austrian Academy
Avars 40
AyasofyaMuseum
of Sciences

46,60, I}l-}.
134

144, 160-1. 162

added to mortar
boot-prints
5}
and animal-prints
density of 4, I.}
on 6

AlexiusIII 143 donation of 9. 18,22

I Alexius, son-in-law ofTheophilus

Amantius,parakoimomenos
Amastrianon 2
33
39 pa()
Bab-I
ix, 8.9-10.
Hiimdyfin
21-}.45.99,
75.10
100. 10I. [19, 153 drying of 6
fingermarks on 6.7,27-8,118, J48
Bakarharu 7J n. 41 firing of 5,6
Amorium 3 nf, [01 Baksrkcy viii,}, 8, I floating 4 n. 14
Ampelios.senator 1)-14 see also Hebdomon inscribed a n. 13

I
Anadolu Kavagl } Bakrac Sokagr 80 importation of 4
Anastasia, mother-in-law of Justin II 39 Balaban Aga Mescidi ix, 33, 70-2, 82, 90, 99, 1I0-n, levy of by state I}. 14, 15. 19, 1.5
Anastasian walls, see Long Walls ofThrace 119,153.157,159,2 mineralogical study of 153
I Anaseesius I 31,33. }6, 62, 68, 112, 115,127,16 Bares H moulds and moulding of 5,6 n. 43
Anasrasius II 41 Barbaro,N·5 preferred over stone 1.8
Andreossy, Count A. F. viii Barber Institute of Pine Arts 69 n. 174, 16} production sites of 4-5
Andronicus n 45,73 Barsauma 125 reuse of 25 n. 9, 1.7, 40, 41-1.. 49-50, 8I. 101.. 105.
Aadronicus III 45,7J BasilI 9,41,45.75 1I6, Il7. u4. 126, 11.9, I}3, 144-5. 146, 147, 149,
Anemas, tower of 42 Basilica 32.46,78
Anemodoulion 30,119,2 see also cistern of the Basilica
'1'
Roman
AniciaJuliana 33,34.40,62, 114,1 q. US, Il6 bath manufacture of 6 n, 67, 13-16
Anicia julicna, wife of Quinces Anicius Arcadianae 3°.35.36,55 proportion stamped 1.4
Hermogenianus Olybrius 15 in Blachernai }8 shipping of 4-5
Ankara, baths 28 D. 16 on CemalNadir Sokagr j-j Storage of. see portus Licini
annus mwruli dating system 46-7 of Constantius (Theodosius) 31,40 saleof r z, I}, 14. I9.1.0,2}
Amhcmius ofTral!es }6 of Dagistheus }2, }5. }6.40 shipping of 3,4-5
Anthemius, praeecrian prefecr 31,45,59, III of Eudokia }I sizes of 5,48, 101.-6, 118, 119, n6, r a S, 129-30,
Amigonc, see Burgaz nearForumTauri 38 I}3. 131, 136, 138. I4I, 141., 14}. 144, 145--6, J48,
Antioch Il5,1}9 of Honorius 3r 150, Ip. I5}, 167-8
Antiochus.praepositJIs. see palace of Antiochus near Kalenderhane Camii 150.15T stamping of, see bricks tamping
aqueducts 30, }4, }8, 77 ofZeuxippos 16.35, }6, }8. 40. 67-9, 74, 90,111, stockpiling of. 19.26,49-50;' 107, 109, Il I, r ra, II5,
of Hadrian }O, 3 5 II5 n. 19, II6-I7, 1I8. 121, 143. 151,2,6,7 I}3, 147; see also brick, reuse of
of Valens 30, }8.40. 150, lp, 1 pCH)JeaA.IOV (batch of 3,000 bricks) 21,2} storage and supply of- 1.}-6
Aran, B. ID2, 105 Baxeer.]. H. 134,139.163 storage of 13,19,25,26
Arcadia, domus of Jl Beirut 3,140, I surface treatment of 5-6
Arcadius 11.28, }O, 31, }2. 35. 55. p. [07, 122, Belisarius H tool-made marks 6,165
'lO Belting, H.
59,1°7,108,127 unstamped 6,1.4
brickstamps of 14 Bcrger, A. Il9, I}I n. u8 brickmakers 21,40
Areobindus 62,II5,116,I6 Beronicianus on Roman brickstamps 16 brickmaking
Aristarchcs, S. 22., 164 Besevliev, V. 164 on Church land 18
arms factories 10,11.14 Bethlehem, church of the nativity 38 D. 189 contracts for 17,19; see also locatio conductio
army 10 Betsch, W. E. 54.73 fuel for 4
arsenal }8.39 Bcyazu 130 on imperial land 15,18
Arrcpoleia 119 see also Forum of Theodosics I; 'I'hcorokos of the see also kilns
A~ir Efendi Caddesi 72,8 Diakonissa brickstamping 6, 19. 24
Aspar, Plavius Ardabur, magister miiitum 61 Beykoz 5. I beginning of 1.8"j.2
 ..~
.•
INDEX INDEX

dies for 6-7,.11, 133;seeauo brickstamps marble 12 ofDivamAliSokagll.18-30,2 Se Pclyecktos 52,53,68,74,143 Emesa 60 Gaz.ikoy 5,'
end of 39. ,12. l.p porphyry 37,40n . .139.47 cf Fildarm 39, 106 n. 37, 146
SS Sergius and Bacchus 52-3.68 emptio 'Venditio, see briekmaking contracts Gedeoa, M.I. 9,164
purpose of, see bricksramps, copper tax, see eeraria prcestatio Ephesus 41 Gedikpasa Caddesi underpass 77 n. 79.78
function and interpre- Proccnnesian 40 in Gillhane p, 75-7, 90,101 n. 9, 110, 119,2,10
Corbett,S. 102n. 16 church of Srjohn
ration of reuse of 41 of Jesus n n. 43 28,127 n. 24 Genoedius, patriarch 3J
terms used to describe process 2.1 Thessalian (verd antique) 37,41. 1}2 ofMocius Jl,35,45,I6I,2
Corinch-Lechaion 1.17 n. 74 church of Theorokos 109 George, W. S. viii, ix
also bricksramps, Cotyaeum,Phrygia 3t,I25 council of 108,109 GlUes,P.6o
bricksramps mortar 3, P, 53. 102; SU mortar cf Modesrcs 77
abbreviation j3a() on, see 1Ja.(} impressions ofNakilbendSokap 18 Courtauld Institute 69 n. 174 Epiphanies, archdeacon 108 gold tax, see allrari..,paeslatio
abbreviation sign on 99, lOO, 101, 166 requistionsof 1.1 of Peristyle of Great Palace 10.1 n. 16. 136-8, 145, Crispus,Caesar lI8 eques, sums on Roman brickstamps 17 Golden Gare
sand 12 Croke.B. 1.13 Erenkcy 3. I of Constamine 2
accesscry leners cn I9,2~I.25.IOO,165 19
binominal, see brickscarnps, names transportation of 10, r r, 12 .•• cross estates of Theodosiw I 30,32,34 n. 12.3.60,123 n. 14, 124,
ofPhiloxenus )1,35> 129,~
SU also brick; construction techniques in inscription 99, tOO, 101 of Church 17, 18 127 0.82,1.
catalogue of 165-8 ofPhocas 39
, within leaf or heart 108-9 designated to supply bricks 12 Golden Horn, bridge over 36
chrcnclogyof 46-5.1,82-10.1. lp, 167 Buondelmonti, C. 129 of Ssraselviler Caddesi ix,80-1, 101 n.9, IIO, ItI,
dating systems on, see annus mundi; indiction see also Liber Insularum 157,159.2,14
without inscription lIB of emperor, see Mm:ls dwina Gordia 39
currency, debasement of to Eubulus,patn'cius 77 Goths 130
disrriburicn in a srructure 10, 2~--6, I I 1-12 Burgaz 3,42,136,1 near Yerebatan SarayJ 45
BiiyiikReJitPa~aCaddesi 131,17 city councils 10 CuruS,C.G.22.164 Euchaira 125 Gcrrwald.]. 45
earliest cruciform examples of 119
Biiyiikada, see Prinkipo city prefects Cyclades ';1 Eudokia P-2, H,40.j8. 125 Grabar.A. H
earliese examples cf 27.118 10

Biiyiikdere 5, clarissimus(rank) 17 Cynegius, praetorian prefect I1 Eudoxia, statue of 30 Grado, St Euphemia 40

earliest monograms on 119 I

Byzantine Institute 70 Cyril of Alexandria 108,109 Eudoxius, patriarch H grain

editorial conventions for publishing 166 clay 3-i, 5 I

Byzantium 27 deposits listed in schedules CyrusofPanopolis 31,32,58. Il3 n. 21, l.1s,I.16, 151 Eusebia 31 storage of 30,40; see also Tenedos
formulae on 18-19,21, lOO. 1I8, 1I9, IlO I2.
function and interpretation of 8--10.18, 19-20 clergy Cyzicus 41 Eusebius 54 supply of IOd5d6,40
Caddebostaru 3, J on brickstamps 8,16 Euscarhius of Epiphania 58 Gratian It
geographical distribution of finds of 3
indictions on, see ivSucruilvoc; indiction daring sys- Caesanus, Flavius 3 I engaged in commerce 18
Dagron, r;;. 54 Eutychius, monastery of 61 Gray.B·9
Caesarius, praetcrian prefect 11 renting land 18 Damatrys {Samandira] 39,47 Exokionion 9,77 Great Church, see Hagia Sophia
rem
latest examples of 102,121 caespites n Codex Tbecdosianus tU
Dareius,parricius 77 Great Palace 32,34,42.,108, 127,2
Daskalakis Mathews, A.-C. 73 [ebricae 12 Apsed Hall 24.34,41,102 n. 16, 134-6, 143-5.
ligatures on 100 Caferiye Sokagl, wall in 64.66,116,6 coloni 11
De Cerimoniis, see Book of Ceremonies FatihCamii 9 145-7.2,18,19
monograms on, see monograms; Christograms Cameron,AJ. 55,112,114 colonnaded streets 3o.}2, 5 5, I I I r- decurions 16 Fe1ix,praepositus 108 n. 7 area Aa 27,147-8,6,20
mortar impressions of 7,26,61 Cameron, Av. 146 see also Mese
mould-made 6n'43,28 Campania, lime from t.1 column (monumental) defensor as tenant 17 Fenari isaCamii X,41-2, 157. 161 area Ab 1.7,41,147-50,161,6,1.0
Degirmenalu 3,42 Fenerbahce 3, I area Ac 47, 147-50,6,20
multiple impressions of 6 Candidus 32-3 of Arcadius 30, H, 55
names on ix, 8-10, 16-19, 22, 82-102, 165 canon (rent) 17 of Goths 28,2
Demangel, R. 126 /erarU! praestatio (iron tax) 1.1 area Db 1430.295
Demirci 5 Festus, Lucius Lanius 82 area Fb 147,18
bincminnl 9,18,19,21 capltt (heading) 11 ofJustinII 38
clergy 8.16 caput, capiratio10, r r, 12
dipoulatOS 16 FethiyeCamii 22,42,61 Chalke 33, H. 47, 2
of Justinian I 3h53
donors 9 Cassiodorus 13,14 ofPhocas 39,129
Despotius, senator 13-14 figlinae (clay-pits) 13-14,15,17,19,26 Chrysocriklinos 38,39,147.2
emperors ix,8,15,r8,22,45.101-2 Cassius on Roman bncksramps 16, 121 of Theodosius I 28,30
Dethier, P. A. viii, 8, 9, 2.1, 45, 66, 101 concession of imperial 14, 15 cisterns and bakery 34; see also cistern
females 16 Casson, S. 67 comitiua sacrarum largitionllm 10,12
Deuteron )8 Domitianae 14 Covered Hippodrome 38
official 10 Catologus SeplIlchromnl 71 commutation 12
Deutsches Archaologisches Instirue Faurianae 14 Dnphne 38,39
surnames 16 Cemal Nadir Sckagi ix,2I,45, 52, 72-5, 90, lOO, 117, .corldttctor(contractor) for making bricks 12.14, 17.
Berlin 164 Marcianae 14 excavations in 162-3, 153 o. 6
Istanbul x, 73, 80, 13 I, 157-9, 164 Flrath,n.62, IJI, IH fortifications of 39, 147
titles and ranks 16,99,100 119, no, 151,2, 8.9 18,19
Palaiologan 8 Chalcedon 57,71 Constans 118
diakonos 16 fire 30 fountain ofjusdnian 11 147
monasteryofTheorokos 39 Diegesu 4,4t of 404 32, 54, 55 Justinianos 39
records of 153,166 Constantine I the Great 8,27,45> 54, 68, 69, 77, r cr,
dies, see bricks tamping Of40678 Magnaura 39
Roman 3 n. I. 14-16, 17, .13, 82,121 see also Kadlkoy 118,119,128,129,148
binominal .11 Chalcocondylas 5 mausoleum of 9,37,54,71
Digest 10,17 Of448 JI Paved Way 136,138, 14t, 142,143, 145, 19
Diocletian of464 H pavilions ofTheophilus 39
dares on 20n. 157 Chalke, see Great Palace wall of )0,60,77, 12.1, 123 n.21,2.
papal 16n. 108, 16n. Il3, 1:11 Chalkoprareia 73, 78 Constanrine 1I 27,1 I 8
palace at Split 39 of 475 }2.78 ptridromoi H
reforms of 10 Of498 78 Peristyle ix, 24, 34->41.102 n. 16, 134-43,lH,
represenring a contract 17 charcoal burning 12 n. 63 Constanrine IV 1.42
Dirimtekin,F. Ion. 34, IF, 160 of 509 78 145-7,2,18,19
Romano-British 20 Christograms 16, 18, 28 n. 16, 100. 120 Constantine V 39 n. 2.10.40, 130
see also monograms Divan Yclu 77,78 of 513 78 portico of scholarii.proteaores, and canditLtti 64
serifs. sec style of script Constantine VI 39 n. 2.10
ChristPantcpoptes 61 Constantine VII Porphyrogenirus 134
setalsoMese of 532 78 SiteBI l44n'3to
shape of 21,99, lOO, 101, 102, 165
Christ Pantocrator, see Zeyrek Camii Ccnsrantine.praercrianprefecr 12.3,124,128
divine wisdom 55 see also Nika riots Triklinosof I9couch!:!s 34
size of 167
style of 19-20,21.99-102. 15.1.167 Christodorus of Coprus 68, I I 5 n. 2.9 Ccnstandne, usurper in West 58
dominus, domina 17,19,20.21,23,25,4.1,119 Firuz Aga Camii 77,78 Gregcire, H. 45-6
style of script 6,73,100. I 19 Cbrisrorckos 109 Ccnsrandncple
Domninus,patdcius 77 Forchheimer, P. 45,61,74,75,80, ItO Gregory of Tours 34,62, I I2
porticoes of 30 forests 5 Giilhane hexagon ix, 126-8, 1., 10
Turkish 1:10 Chronicon Pascbsle 28,54,55,60,61.64,109,12.9 building history 28--41
types of 165-6 Chrysaphius 31,1.15 foundation and inauguration of 54. Il8
domus diuina 17,!S formula census (schedule) 10 Gurlitt, C. 70
Chryseros 108,109 donors on bricks tamps 9 Forrunarus, Caius Nunnidius 82
variants of 153.166-8 population 40,41
Chrysotriklinos, Set Great Palace Dcwney, G. 37 Forty Martyrs church 3 I, 38, 39. 129 Hadrian 30
visibility of 7 siege in 626 1.13 n. 21
drains of the Mese ix, 77-8, 82, 90, 110, 120, 159 Forum HagiaEirene viii, 9, 3.1, 36, 39,41,45, 54, 102, 127 n.
Brcdribb, G. 20-1 <;:iIclik J street system 73,75
DumbanonOaks 56,64,160,163 of Arcadius 3°,31,55,2 74,146, 159,2,10
Bronze T etrapylon, see Anemodoulion <;ifteSaray, 128-9n. 94 Constanrius 1I 8,27>450 14, 56, 71, 101, 107, 118
see also cistern of DivaOl Ali Sok.tgl Dorres 30.1,6n.o of the bull (Dovis) 2 brick collection 16J
Bryas 39; su also Kiic;iikyah construction techniques 52-3,ln
building materials <;ini1i Ko~kii,see Istanbul Archaeological Museum Duyuran, R. 56.59, IC9 of Cons tan tine 30,3h77,78,129,2 capitals at 74
BalabanAgaMescidi 70,71
cistern(s) of Leo I )2 excavations south of ix,46,47,157.16o, 161
acquisition for private projects u baths of Zeuxippos 68-9,74
earthquake ofMarcian 32,2 monograms on capitals 48-9,4
acquisition for state projects 10-12 ofAetius 31,}5,IOln.9,110,2 Cemal Nadir Sckagi 73,74
oh6 January 447 Il2-3, 128 of Theodosius I (ForumTauri) ix,28.30, )1, 39,71, HagiaSophia(GreatChurch) 8,126,138,143,157,
capitals j'5. 74. 75, u" 132,136 of Aspar .10,}2, 3h 61-2,90,109,110,128,1 SO, centring 36-7
of 25 September 478 124 12.9,130, 134,77 n. 79, 2, 17 161,163,164,2,6
reuse of 35.40 rp,1 cisterns in Giilhane 75
of 526 at Antioch 139 Foss,C·46 atrium demolition in 1873 viii,45
monograms on 48-9,4 of AUrUrkBulvan 38 n, 193 cramps p, 0,61,138, 141,144
OfSS4 1.14 Fossati 66 brick kilns owned by 9
lead P,S} ofthe Basilica viii, 35036, 40 n. 239.2,6 Great Palace 143,143-4,145,148
ofbarhs of Zeuxippos 67.6 e of 557 Hn. I23,64, I24, 128 Fuat Pa~a Caddesi 78, 11 bricks in 4,25 n. 9
lime Hagia Sophia 36-7.51, n, 56,74
of rs Ocrober SS8 130 capitals at I}2
burning limestone for 4 n. 17, 1.1 inBeY3ZIt{ForumTauri) 17 Kalenderhane Camii I So, 15 J
Ebersolt.]. 71 Galaca, potters' quarter 5 columns in 41
supply for Rome 12 inBeyaur,betweenChurcbesAandC 132 u,ndWalls 52,56
in Beyazn, north of Church B 13.1,133 palace of Antiochus Sol Ecclesius, bishop of Ravenna 116 n. 37 Galbius }2-3 of Constant ius ::q,4S. 55, 56, 107
limestone 12,52-3
Emerson, W. 40,105 Galcrius 71 construction techniques in j a, 53, 56,74
reuse of 41, IoU ofBinbirdirek viii,3J n. 93, 59, 109, 129,2 StJohnofStoudios 52,53
Hagia Sophia
of Justinian
(Great Church) (cont.)
H,J5, )6-7, )8, 40, 56, 64-7. 82,90,
ivoucrtrovoc
abbreviation for 99,100
INDEX

Kii~iik Cekmece (Rhegion)

Kiir;iikyah ).9,41,1
),8, I Manuel, monastery of 6 I natliCIIlarii, see naJlkleros
INDEX '.
Philoxenus.magister 77,129
marble, see building materials NeaAnchialos 117 n. 74 Phocas 8, )9. 42.101. 129, t)O, 142, 146
105.108,111, JI6, 117, 110, Ill, 142, 145, lp, absence of abbreviation for 119 Kupu: ~eEl 120 Marcellinus 122. 12) NeachurchofBasilI9.75 Pieper, F. 164
152,159 absence of numeral after T 10 Kynegion 5 Marci:rn )),119.120 Necrotogium Irnperatorum 71 Pirane 4 n. 14
meaning of name, Stt divine wisdom indiaio (requistion) 10, t7, 19 Kyriakos, patriarch 1)4 Marcian, clergyman J2-) Nessebar, see Mesembria Pictakia )0,32
monogn.1nS on capitals 48-9, 1)7, 4 indiction dating system ix, 1 S, 50-I. Table 2 Mucus Ulpius Anicetianus 81 Nestorius 108,109. [2) plague 40, 12)
museum ar.see Ay.asofyaMuseum inclusicu cn brickstamps 8,10. 19, 20, 99-101, 165 labour For public works 10
Marina, doml($ of 31 Nicepborus II Phocas J9,I47 Porez, Euphrasius' basilic. 40
patriarchalpalace )8,64 omissiononbricknamps t8, 19, lOO-I, It7 Lampakis, G. 164 Maritime Gate, see Sea Walls Nicephorus Botaneiates 73 n. 4) portico
Skeuophylakion 56 n.)9 reversal of two-letter numbers 99 LandWalls 8-c;, 26,28, )o-l,)4n. 12), J7-8, )9,41,
Marmua Ereglisi ),164,1 Nika riots 18,)4. )6. 45, 46, 47. 64, 68, 77, 78 inBlachernai 38
of Tbecd os ius II ix, 2.0, 2.7, 2.8,)0, )2, H, 40, 54--6. significance of frequency distribution 26 45, ~ I, 550 S6, 81, 10S. 108, 110, 112-5, !28,
Martindale.J. S9 notarios 16,17 ofDomninus 77,78,129,2
64,90,101, 102n. 16, t07, 109, 110, 119,152 Iohannes on Roman brickseemps 16 157-8.160,2 Martiny, G. 10,1)9,140 Notitia Urbis Constnntinopo/ilanae )1, HJ-4, 117, Troadesian 3 I, 1.
Hakkr Tank Us Sokagl 7) Iovinus 58 Ayvansacay Gate 8r Marryrics, archimandrire 45 IS0,l51 portus Licini I). 26
Halleasleben, H. 164 iron tax, see feraria praestatio BdgratKapl{Xyloke.rkos} 12) masons'marks 129 possessor IJ
HmimEliSobg17) ishak Pata 164 Blachernai Gate 8r
Mathews,T.F·S6,7J.lllol)1 Oba Soka~ 80 post office, excavation near 72. 7.t, 8
harbour IsidoreofMilerus )6 construction techniques in 51., 56
Maurice 9,18, )7, )8, 42, 47-8,69, 10S. 119. 120-1, Octagon 78 pottery •
of Boukoleon 147 Isidore the Younger 37,64 Golden Gate. see Golden Glue
1)0,131, IB, IJ8, Lf2. 144,146,1.47,151.) officina amphora 140
ofJulian(Sophi:l) -1»2..)8,77,2 Isidorus, city prefect )J Heraelian walls 124 Maurus,patn'ci,~s 77 Ciandiana t6. HI manufacture in Galata 5
of Ne or ion 4,40, 2 ismetiyeCaddesi 78-9,90, lOO, 117, 2, 11 Kerko Porta 28 n. 16 mausoleum Domitiana 14 Phocaean Red Slip IJ8-40,141
of Prosphorion 4,2 Istanbul I (jriilii Kapl 122, 12';
of Cons ran Line I 9,)7054,71 Fauriana 14 unguentarium 140
of Theodosius I 4,40,2 Istanbul Arch.aeologicalMuseum 70.72,81,152,157. Pteron III
ofJustinian I 37 MaTciana 14 praetorian prefecture to. 11, 12
Harikzadeler Sokagl 70 162.,164 Yeni Mevlevihane Kapr (Polyandrion Gate) 12J, see also Rome officinator(operatorofworkshop) 15,17,19,21,250 praetorium
Harrison, E. 162 Istranca mountains )0 "4 Muimian t08 42,82.119 near Hagia Eirene 46
Harrison,R.M. 45,62,6). Ill, 112. 116, 126, 162. illgum, iugatio 10, It, 12 Laurens named on Roman brickstamps IS Mehme'tII 5 Ognenova Marinova.L. 10n.34 near Forum of Constantine 78
Heskoy 5,J9 Iusrus, named on Roman brickstamps 1S' 18 Laurent, V. 16) Melania 125 Olybrius, Quinrus Anicius Hermogenianus 15 presbuteros 16
Hawkios,E.J.W. x,161 Iviron rnonastery ..•n.18 L.ausus,praepositlls 108
t MeJiopoulos 9 Olybrius, Quintus Clodius Hermogenianus 15 primipileres 16
Haydarpasa ), r Iznik, Koimesis church 146 see also palace of Lausus
MercanCaddesi 52,79-80,82,90,99. ItO, 2, 11, 12. Olympiodorus 58,59 Prinkipo ), )8, .p, I
Hayes,J.W.IJ9 Lavra monastery 4 n. IS
'l Ordu Caddesi 1)0, t31, 17 Priseus of Panium 58
Hebdomon 34,60,71 Jan.in.R·55 lead seals 22,47 MercatiAnonymolls 125 Ortabpl75 Probus,patricius 77
see a/m Bakrrkcy jerusalem.Anastasis 47.71,125 leases, emphyteuric 17 .. ..,..r...•••
Mese 28, re. 60, 7t, 73, 77-8, IIO. It 1,129, 130, IJI, Oraculer Caddesi 78, JI Pcocopius 18,33,)4,35,36,37,46,57. u4
Hecuba, statue base of 67-8 JobSt,W.146 Lemnos 57,71 134,159,2 Ostia 153 professio (declaration) IQ-IJ -
h€goltmenos 16 John, comes sacrarttm largitionum 404-5 57 Leol )3.71,1I9,124.QI Mesembria(Nesseb:ir) ),6,41,164, I Promotus 28,1)0
Helen,T.24 [usrin I 62,77,112, rIG, 140 LcoIIl 39n.220 metal ores 12 palace, see also Great Palace Prcrasius, magister 77
Hellenkemper Salies 1)6-7,1)8,141,146 buildings of D-4 Leo IV )9 n, 220
Metellus named on Roman bricks tamps 15 of Antiochus ix, 21, 26, )2, 52, 56-60, 71, 90, 99, public obligations 14, IS
Hendy,M.62 Justin Iand Justinian, church of )4, 114 Leo V )9 n. 220 Meyer-Plath, B. 157 1°):,107--9, IIo. 1 It, 119, Il6, 1:::7, u8, 1}8, Ip., public works 10--12
Heraclianus 58 JustinII )7,40,53,106,114, 138, 144, 146, r j r Leo Grammaticus 64 MichaellI )9 n. 220 157, 159,161,1.,) Pulchcria 31-2,55,56.58,107,108, n6
Heraclius 39,45, 119, Ill, 124. 146 Justinian I 8,18,28,36, )7, 62,116,124,130,142,144. Leval,A.164
Milion 36.77 n. 79 of the Boukoleon 147 dcmus of J I. 58 n. 56
monogr.ams of 47, J '48 Liber bIS/I!aTllTn 127 mines 10,11. at Bryes )9 Pusaeus (consul of 467?) 124
Herculius, praetcrian prefect of Illyricum II brickstamps naming 46 Liberius, praetorian prefect 13 mints 10,12,14 Pylae, see Karakilise
at Damatrys )9,47
Hero of Alexandria, Gecmctrica II buildings of 33-7,45 Licinia Eudoxia 125
Miranda, S. 1)7. q6 in the Deuteron )8
Hero of Byzantium, Geodesia 61 column of )St 53 Licinius, depot of, see portus Licini Miechell, W.J. 102,105 at Forum Tauri JJ QasrlbnWardan 1)2
Hiereia )4.)8 mausoleum of )7 Life of Daniel the StyJite 124 n. ) 5 Modesrus.patricius 77 atHiereia 34,)8
see also Fenerbabce monograms of 46,48-9,4 Liggett, R. S. 102, 105 moenia(monuments) I) of Hormisdas )4,36 Raboulas 3J
HiII,S.J.lo,20,6).IIJ JustinianII 39,41.147 lime, see building materials
monachos 16 of I ucundianac H Rameaanoglu.M. 45,46,56 n. )2. 157, 160, 161
Hippodrome Ut, 27, )0,)2,56,59.73,78,102,105. limestone, see building materials
monogram(s) 8,28 n. 16,47--9.100.101.119. t36-7, of Justice (formerly Ottoman University) 147,6,20 reletlatio (tax relief) 12
118, tJ9, u8.13'" 148.2, 5,18 Kadlkoy ) locatio conductio 12,25 138,145. Lj.7,Table 27,),4 Karianae J9 respriuata 10
Hoca Kasun Koprii Soka&t 7J,8 Kainopclis )0.2 see a/so brickmaking contracts
see also palace of
of Beronicianus 16 of La usus )2, 102,2; Antiochus Rhegion, see Kii~iik Cekmece
Holum, K. 59,107 Kalenderhane Camii x.)1. 40, 42, 53. 106, 138, ISO-I. loouor r a, 17, 18. 19 on bricks from Thesseloniki 19 of Nicephorus Botaneiares 7) n. 43 Rhodanus,patricilH 77
Holy Apostles 9. )7, )8.54.71,2 > Long,J. SS of Justinian 46,48-9,4 atPrinkipo )8 Rhodes 4
honorati 16 Kalojan 60 LongW.allsofThnce 1,),)2,124
ofMaurice 9,18,47-8, 10S. 1I9, ID, 3
nO-I, ofStMamas JJ Robert Ccllege 157,160,162
Honorarus 10 n. 40 Ksrakilise j Louloudies 3 n. 1,6 n. 43 of Volusus or Volwianus 15 Sophiae )8, J9 Romanus I 4 S. 7)
Honcrius 11,1)0 KariyeCamii 42,157,160 Lucifer.Sradus Marcius 82. see also Christograms Sophiaaae )8 RomanuslI 45
Hormisdas, estate of 18 Kastrn Pasa 5 Mordtmann,A. D. viii, !l7. 158. 159. 164 Pala.iologoi 101 RomanusIII 7J
see also palace of Honnisd.as Kaz.hdan,A. 41 Macedonian dyn.asty 20 n. I S9 mortar, see building materials Palatine Anthology 60,62,114 Rome
horologion )6.)8 K.E abbreviation 108-9 monogn.mof 9
Miifid,A. 70.71 Paluka,B. 45073,74 csprure of in arc S8
Horrea A/exandrina }O Kclsey Museum of Archaeology 164 Maccdonius 3t Miihiirdar Emin PapSokagl 80. 11, IJ Panteichion, see Pendik limesupply 12
Horrenm Tbeodosianum JO Kelsey, F. W. 164 Macridy, T. 71
Miiller-Wiener, W. 54. I27,1J! Pantikapaion (Kertch) II Malborgheno arch I I 8
Hoskcy S,1 Keramikos, Kecamareion 5 M.agnus M.aximus JO
munera r r-cr a, '7 Papadopoulos.J. B. 7) mausoleum
hospice )6. )8. 45. 46, 2 Kilise Camii, see Ve!.a Kilise Camii Mainstone, R. 54
mllriarchos 16,17 park near Arcadianae baths )5 of Consramina 70
'House of Justinian',
Hiibsch 66
see Sea Walls kilns 21 n. 164
location of 4-5
MalaI.as 57,58.59,
Malchus 12.4 n. J 5
107, 122 Musee des Anriquites Naeicnales, Sainr-Germain-en- Paspares, A. G. 70 of Gordians er or de'Schiavi) 70
Laye 159 Patria J8,62,7I,77,12J,129,134 of Helena 70
Huns l22n.9,12.) owned by church 8.9 Maletskos, A. M. 160
Museedu Louvre 164 patriarchal palace, see Hagia Scphia ofMaxentius 70
KJeiss.W. 77 n. 79, 159 Marnboury, E. viii-x, 9, 10,22,27,450 59, 64, 67, 70, Musellius.praepofitlls 107-8 Paul, apostle 9 Sabina 5
Igoatius, patriarch 9 komeJ 16 73,75,77,78,79,80,81,82,101,1°5,108,118. Museum fur Spitantike und Byzantinische Kunst, Paulina Jj S Crcce in Gerusalemme 120
illatio(levy) 1) as tenant 17 120,126,128,129,1)0,1)1,1)3,1)7, I48, IS),
Berlin viii, 157, 159 Pendik J, I SS Cosmas and Damian 118
,Ratio carbonis (charcoal tax) I r, 13 ko"biko/(Iarios 16 160.161,167 Museum of Ancient Brick, T enncssee 164 Perge )n.I,6n'4) sand supply II
IlIus, consul J2 Kcaratcr.see Thectokos of the Kouraror notes of 157.119 Myrelaion, see Bodrum Camii Perinthos, see Marmara Ereglisi Tiber.River I)
Imperial Palace, see Great Palace Kozyatagl ) Mango, C. ix,9, 10.22., 25. J6,41, 60.73,77. 109, IIr, Myroceraton monastery )9 Peschlow, U. 61,102, 150n. 36). 159 transport supply 12
imrahor Camii, see StJohn of Stoudios Krautheimer, R. 16,54,56,107. 1l0. IJ2 111,129,1]6,1)7,146,14.],160. !61, 162, 16) Pen-ion 61 roof tiles 5,IJ
incili Ko~kii 1%7 Krirovoulos 5 nores ol 157 nal/kliros 10,16-17 Philadelphion 71, r j a, 2 Rufinianai.see Caddebosram
Incirkdy, claypits 5 Krum 41 Manuell [43
N.aumann, R. 59. Il7, 130, 164 Philippicus )9 Ruflnus, buildings of J 1
 '.";

INDEX INDEX

Hagia Sophia (Great Church) (cont.) {VSlI,tU6lVOC Kii«;iik Cekmece (Rhegicc) 3.8, I
Manuel, monastery of 61 na'fJiCldan'i,see nl.1J,kieros Philcxeous, magirter 77.129
ofjustinian H, H, 36-7, 311,40. 56. 64-7, h.90• abbreviation for 9,,100 Kii(jiikyah 3,9,41.1 marble. fee building materials Nea Anchialos 127 n. 74 Phocas 8, )9, 41. 101, 129. 130, 142.146
105, loB. Ill, Il6, I17. no, 12.1,142., 1.• 5. lp, absence of abbreviation for 119 KUP1£ IJonSE1 120 Mwcellincs J 22, I2 3 Nea church of Basil I 9,75 Pieper, F. 164
If2,I59 absence of numeral after 12.0 Kynegion 5 Marcian 33,1l9.Il.O Necrologillm Imperatorttm 71 Pitane 4 n. 14
meaning of name, ree divine wisdom indictio (requistion) 10,17.19 Kyriakcs.paniarch IH Marcian, clergyman p-) Nessebar, ree Mesembria Pirtakia 30,J2
mcnogreus cneapiuls 48-9.137 •.• indictiondatingsystem ix, IS. SO-I, Table 1. Mucus Ulpius Anicetianus h. Nestorius 108,10,,123 plague -40, I2.3
museum at, su Ayasofya Museum inclusion on brickstamps 8,10,19.20, 99-101,165 labour for public works 10 Marina, domm of 3 I Nicephorus n Phocas 39,147 Poree. Euphrasius' basilica 40
patriarchal
Skeuophyb.kion
ofTheodosius
palace 38,64
f6n. 39
Il ix, 20, 27, 2B. 30,}2, 33. 40. H-6,
omission on brickstamps
reversal of two-letter
IB, 19, 100-1, 117
numbers 9'
significance of frequency d~tribution 2.6
Lampakis, G. 16,
Land Wa.lls 8-9.26,28,)0-1,34
45,51,55,56, Bt. 105,108,110,122-5.
n. 113, 3]-8. 39,
I1B,
,I. Maritime Gate, see Sea Walls
Marmara Ereglisi 3,164, I
Nicephorus
Nika riots 11.34.36,
Botaneiates 73 n. 43
i5, .;6, 1-7, 64, 68, 77. 78
portico
inBlachernai 38
Martindale,j. 5' notaries 16,17 ofDomninus 77,78,12,,2-
64.90.101,1020.16.107.109, r ic, 129. Ip. Iohannes OD Roman brickstamps 16 157-8•160,2 .Martiny, G. 10,139,140 Notisia Urbis Constantinopo/itanae 31,123-,,127> Troadesian 3 I. 2.
Hakki Tank U. Sobg. 7J Iovinus 51 Ayvansaray Gale 8t Marryrics, archimandrite 45 qO,lf1 porue Licini 13.26
Hallenslebea, H. 164 iron tu, see feraria prllestl.1tio Belgrsr Kapl (Xylokerkos) 113 masons' marks 12.9 possessor 13
Hanim Eli Sokagl 73 ishakP~a 161- Blacherna.i Gale 81
Mathews,T.F. S6.73. 127. IJI Oba Sokap 10 poS[ office, C%f2varion near 71,7,. I
harbour Isidore ofMilerus 36 ccnscucdcn techniques in P.56 Maurice 9.18.37,38,41..47-8,69.105.119.120-[. Octagon 78 ponery
ofBoukoleon 147 Isidore the Younger 37,64 . Golden Gate, see Golden Gate officina amphora t40
130.131.133,138,1,2,1+4.146.147, lp, 3
ofJulia.n(Sophia) 4.32.38.77.2 Isidcrcs.ciey prefece 31 Heraclian walls 12, Mauros,patricim 77 CiallJianl.1 16.12.1 manufacture in Galau 5
ofNeorion 4,40,1. ismetiye Caddesi 78-9, ,0,100. Il7, 2. II Kerko POrta 28 n. t6 mausoleum Domitiana 14 PhocaeanRedSlip 13B-40,1-41
of Pros ph or ion 4.2 Istanbul I Criilii Kapl 1 H, 124 Fallriana 11- unguentarium t40
ofConstantineI 9.37,54,71
ofTheodosius I .•...
40, 2 Istanbul Archaeological Museum 70, 72. 8 I. I p. 157, Preron Il.I ofJuninian I 37 Mffrcuma 14 praercriac prefecture 10, I1, I2
Harikzadeler Sokagl 70 162,164 Yeni Mevlevihane Kapl (Polyandrion Gate) 123. ree also Rome officinator(operatorofworkshop) 15.17,19.21. 2J, praetorium
Harrison,E. t61.
Harrison.R. M •.• So 62, 63. Ill, 112. II6, 126. 161-
istranca mountains
iugllm, iugl.1tio 10,
30
rr , 12
"4
Laurens named on Roman bricks lamps 15 ~~;~I 15°8
,2.82,119
Ognenova. Marinova, L. la n, H
near Hagia Eirene 46
near Forum of Consraatiae 78
Haskdy 5.39 Iusecs, named on Roman brickstamps 1 s, 11 Laurem,V.16) Melania 125 Olybrius, Quintus ADicius Hermogenianus IS presbllteros 16
Hawkins.E.].W. %,161 Ivircn monasrery 4n.18 Lausus,praeposiws 108 primipilares 16
t Meliopoulos 9 Olybrius, Quintus Clodius Hermcgeniaous IS
HaydarpaJa 3.1 Iznik, Kcimesis church 146 ste also palace cf Lausus Mercan Caddesi P. 79-110, 82, 90. 99, r ro, 2, rr, 12, Olympiodorus 58,59 Prinkipo 3dl,41.1
Hayes,j.W.I}9 Lavra monastery 4 D. 11
IJ Ordu Caddesi 130,131,17 Priscus ofPanium 58
Hebdomon 34.60.71 j,nio.R. 55 lead seals H,-4] UercatiAnonymour 125 Orrc kapi 7S Probus,pl.1triciuf 77
see also BakJrkoy [ercsslem, Anastasis 47.71,125 leases, empbyteuric 17 . '~_'" Criiculer Caddesi 78,11
Mese 2.8,3°,60.71,73.77-8, 110,11 1,12,,130, 131, Procoplus 18.33. H, 3 5. 36, 37, 46, 57, 124
Heccba, statue base of 67-8 jobs; W. 146 Lemnos 57,71 13 .•...159.2 Ostia 113 pro/wio (declaration) 10-11 -
higollmenos 16 john, comes sacrarum largitionum 404-5 57 Leol33,71,119,114,151 Mesernbria (Nessebdr) 3,6,41, 164, I Prornorus 18,130
Helen.T.24 justinI 62.77.112, Jl6.140 Leo 1lI 39 a. 110 metal ores 11 palace, see also Great Palace Prcrasius, magister 77
Hellenkemper Salies 136-7,138,141.146 buildings of 33-4 Leo rv 39 D. 210 Merellus named on Roman bricksesmps If of Anciochus ix, 21, 26,32, 51., 56-60, 71.9°, 9', public obligations 14, IS
Hendy.M.62 Justin Iand justinian, church of 34, 114 Leo V }9 n. 110 Meyer-Plath, B. 157 101, t07-9, 110, lII, II9, 126, 12.7, 128, 138, 152., public works ro-ta
Heraclianus 58 JusrinlI 37,4°, D, 106, 124. 138, 144. 146, Ip Leo Grammaticus 64 Michael Il 39 n. no Pulcheria 31-2., IS, 56, 58, 107. 108. 12.6
157, If9, 161.2., 3
Heraclius 39, 4f. u9, UI. 124. 146 jusrinian I 11,Ill, 21, 36, 37, 62, II6, u4, 130, 142, J44, Leval,A.164
Milion 36,77 n. 79 of the Boukoleon 147 domlHof 31,5I1n.56
monograms of 47,3 14 a Liber Insuinmm 12.7 mines 10,12. at Bryas 39 Pusaeus (consul of 467?) 1:2.4
Herculius, praecorianprefectofIllyricum II bridutarnps naming 46 Liberius.prsercrienprefece 13 mints 10, r a, 14 Pylae, Set Karakilise
at Damaerys 39,47
Hero of Alexandria, Geometrica I I buildings of 33-7.45 Licinia Eudoxia 125
Mirandil..S. 137.146 in the Deuteron 311
Hero ofByzanrium, Geodesia 61 colwnn of H, D Licinius, pon»s Licini
depot of, see M.itchell,W.J.I02.,lOS atForumTauri 33 QasrIbnWardan 1}:2
HiereiaH.38 mausoleum of 37 Life o/Daniel cheStylire 12.4 n. 35 Modesrus.patricius 77 at Hiereia Hd8
see also Penerbahce monograms of 46,41-9,4 Liggecr, R. S. 101.105 moenia (monuments} 13 ofHormisdas 34.36 Raboulas 33
Hill,S.]. 10.20,63,111 Jusriniw 11 39, ,1,147 lime.see building materials monachor 16 ofIuc:undianae H Ramazanoglu.M. 45,46, 56n. 31. 157, 160, 161
Hippodrome ix, 27, 30, 32. 56, 59, 73, 78,102, 10f, limestone, see building materials monogram(s) 8.28 n. 16, 47-9. 100, 101, It,. 136-7, ofJustice (formerly Ottoman University) 147.6,2.0 reiroatio (tu:: relief) 12
u8.IJ9,12B,IH.I-4B,2,5,18 KadLkoy 3 locatio conduaio 12,25 138. 11-5, 147.Table 27.3,4 Karianae 39 respriuata 10
Hoca Kasun Koprii Soka~ 73.8 Kainopolis 30, 1 su allo brickmaking contracts ofBeronicianus 16 of Lausus )2.102,2; see also palace of Antiochus Rhegion, see Kii~k Cekmece
Holum, K. 59,107 Kalenderhane Carnii x, 31.40,.42. 53, lOO, 138, 150-1, locatcr 12, 17. IS, I' on bricks from Thessaloniki I, ofNicephorus Boraneiates 73 n.';3 Rhodanus,patn·ci.lIs 77
Holy Apostles ',37.38,54.71.2 > Long.J. SS o{Justinian 46,48-9.4 atPrinkipo 31 Rhodes 4
hononui 16 Kalojan 60 LongWalIsofThrace 1,3,)2,12..4
ofMaurice 9, IS, 47'"8, 105. J 1,.120-1,133,3 ofStMamas 33 Robert College 157.160,162
Honontus·Ion.40 Karaki.lise 3 Louloudies 3 n. I, 6 n. 43 ofVolusus or Volusianus t 5 Sophiae 3B,39 Romanusl45.73
Honorius n,I30 'Kariye Camli 42.157. [60 Lucifer, Statius Marcius h see also Chrinograms Sophianae 38 RomanuslI 45
Hcrmlsdas, esUte of IB KasunPaia 5
ue also
hcrologion
palace of Hormisdas
36,]8
Kazbdw,A.
KE abbreviation
41
108-9
Macedoniandynascy
monogram of 9
20n.159
Mordtmwn,A.D. viii, 127.158,
mortar. su building materials
Mlifid. A. 70,71
159.16.; Palaiologoi
Palatine Anthology
Paluka,B·45.73,74
101
60,61, u, RomwusIII
Rome
73

c:a.prureofin,1058
HOrTeaAlexandrina 30 Kelsey Museum of Archaeology 164 Macedonius }I MiihiirdarEmin Pap. Sokagl 80,11,13 Panreichicn, see Pendik lime supply 12
Horrenm Tbecdosiannm 30 Kelsey, F. W. 16, Macridy, T. 71 Miiller-Wiener, W. H. 127, 131 Pantikapa.ion {Kerrch) 22 Malborgbetto arch 118
Ho~koy 5.1 Keramikos, Keramareion 5 Magnus Maximus 30 munerl.1 11-12,17 Papadopouios,j. B. 7J mausoleum
hospice 36038,,5.46.2 Kilise Camii, see Vela Kilise Carnii Mainstone, R. Si
muritfrchos16,17 park near Arcadianae baths 35 of Consrantina 70
'House ofjustinian'. ree Sea Walls kilns 21 n. 164 Mal;t}as 57.58,59,107.122 Musee des Antiquites Nationales, Saint-Germain-en- of Gordiaas rfor de'Schiwi) 70
Paspates, A. G. 70
Hilbsch 66 location of ,-s Malchus 11, n. 3S
Laye 159 Patria 3B, 62, 71, 77, 12.3.12" IH of Helene 70
Huns 122•.n.,.123 ownedbychurch 8,9 Malctskos, A. M. 160 Musee du Louvre 161- patriarchal palace, sec Hagia Sophia ofMaxentius 70
Kleiss, W. 77 n. 79, IS' Mamboury. E. viii-x." 10, 22. 27•.•.5, 5', 64.67.7°, Musellius,praepositlls 107-8 Paul, apostle , Sabina S
Ignarius, patriarch , komes t6 73,75,77.71.7,.80, Sr. 82.• 101, lOS, loB, Its, Museum fur Sp;irantike und Byzantiniscbe Kunst, Paulina 33 S Crcce in Gerusalemme 120
ilIatio{levy) 13 astenant 17 110, u6, 118, 129, 130, 131,133.137, 14B, 153, SS Cosmas and Damian 118
Berlin vili,157, 159 Pendik 3,1
iIIatiocarbonis(charcoaltax) It,l3 koubikou[l.1rior 16 160,161,167 Museum of Ancient Brick, Teanesree 16, sand supply 11
Perge 3 n. 1,6n·43
lllus, consul J2 Kouruor, su Thectckos of the Kourator notes of 157,15' Myreiaion, see Bodrum Camii Perimhos, see Marmara Ereglisi Tiber,River 13
Imperial Palace, see Great Palace Kozyara~ 3 Mango. C. ix." to, 22, 25, 36, 41, 60, 73. 77. t09, Ill. Myroceratcnmonastery 39 PeschJow.U.61,t02,150n·36),15' trwsport supply r a
imnhor Camii, see Stjohn of Stoudios Krautbeimer,R. 16,54,56,107. rao, IJ2 r r a, 129, 1)6.137, 146.147, 160, 161,161, 16) Perrion 61 roof tiles 5,13
incili KOikii 11.7 Krlrovoolos 5 notes of 157 nal/kliros 10, t6-17 Rufinianai,see Caddebosranr
Philadelphion 71.134.1
Incirkdy, claypits 5 Krum 41 Manuell 143 Naumann,R. 59,127,130,164 Philippicus 39 Rufinus, buildings of 3 I
 ..~
410 INDEX
•
INDEX 4II
Russell,D.16) StTheodoreofMarci:m 33 Stoudios, consul 32 Unger,E. 119 Virgin 55 Wiegand, T. 67
Russian Archaeological Instirure 60 St Thecdore of Sphcrscius J8 see also Se Iohn of Stoudios University, Ottoman, see Palace of Justice see also Theorokos Wulff,O.66
St Thyrsus 31 Strategion 30,2 Urbicius,praepositlts 33,77 Vitalian 115,16 Wulz.inger, K. 72,74,75,127, 16J-4
Sabinianus I) St Zac.harias, relics of 54 Striker,C.L. 150n.363 Uzun C;ar~1 Caddesi 78,12.9 Vitruvius 4 n. 14
sacra scrinia 17 SS Cosmas and Damian Strzygowski,J. 45,61.74.75,80,110 see alIo portico of Domninus viae 30
Saffer.B. 164 near Blachernai 33 Sultan Ahmet Camii 18 Yalova J,I
Volusian 125
StAkakios 54 m tois Dareiou 38 Sultan Selim Camii 6 r Yaz.dgerdI 57
vslees 30, 115 Volusus or Volusianus, named on brickstamps 15
Sr Anastasia ofMarcian 33 SS K2rpOS and Papylos 102 superindicdce, see munera Yedikule 9
Valeminian II 11 Von Premerstein, A. 62
5t Andrews University archive 162-) SS Peter and Mark in Blachernai 33 Symmachus, named on Roman brickstamps 15 Valeminian III 12,125 Yeni Mevlevihane kapi H n. 123, 37-8
Sr Anne of Degistbecs 39 SS Peter and Paul Synaxarion of Constantinople 123 VanMi.llingen,A. 70, U7 Wuge,F.O.139
Yenikoy 5, I
St Autonomos 9 n. 24 near Chalcedon 31 Synesius of Cyrene 57 Yerebatan Sarayl, see cistern of the Basilica
Van Nice, R. x, .• n. 7, 40, 56, 64, 105 W:t1kerTrust 134
St Clement,Ankan. 1)2 at rhe orphanage ofSt Paul J8 archive of 163 Walker,M.66
YUlia Tepesi },1
St Daniel at Scsthenion 33 in the palace of Hormisdas 34,36,125 D.4}.2 la Armatofl, almshouse and bath. 39 Varangians 1.2
see also St Panteleimon
Wall of Ccostandne, see Consramine I
StDiomedes 9 SS Sergius and Bacchus 36,37. I2.0, 137,2. tdbU/drillS as tenant 17 Vavassore, G. A. 5,38 n. I,9} Ward-Perkins, B. 107
Sr Eirene of Marci:w at Perama 33 construction techniques in 52-}, 68 Talbct Rice, D. Ion. H. 2.2,24,67, IH, 136, 1}7, 1]8, veanarii (carters) 12 Ward-Perkins,J.B. 56,144, LH Zenc )2,33, 124
Sc Euphemia monograms on capitals 48-9, 4 143, 144,146, !62 vera Kilise Camii 42 water pipes 5 Zeyeep Sultan Sckagi 101
near the Hippodrome, S6-7.71;sualso palace of Sallusrius 58 archive of 163 Verina 33.34,71,101,111 water supply JI Zeyrek Camii 42.. 61
Antiochus Sallcsnus, prefect 77 Talbct Rice.N, 164 Vickers,M.J.20 JU also aqueducts; cisterns; water pipes Zonaras 58
in Perrion 61 salt deposits 12. tax lisrs 1,9 fJirmagnificus{rank} 17 Whitby, M. 124 Zoticon 38
relics cf 71 Salzenberg, W. viii IU obligations 23
St Euthymius [% 5 Samandsra, see Damarrys taxation in kind 10-12
Sr George )8 SamanhDag 3 teatro on Vavasscre panorama 38 n. 193
St George in Mangana 42 Samson, hospice of. see Hagia Eirene, excavations Tekfur Sarayi 12.2 n. I
Se Isidore of Marcian 33 south of Tenedos, granary on 35,36
Se john at Ephesus 37.48--9.7+,1)2
Srjchn.head cf 60
Scjchn
5tJohn
in Hebdomon
of IlIus 33
8,36,37,55
Sarachane
archive
61.161
162.
Saray Burnu, see acropolis
Satyrcs, see Kut;iikYOlh
-n;cvto.c
Texier, C.
theatre,
Theodora,
18,25,12.0
66
see teatra
wife of Justinian 36,137
I.
Sr john in Oxeia Ijl Schneider,A. M, 9,10,11,45,55,56,59,64,71,101, monograms of 49,4 '~...,./"
St john ofStoudios 8,26,32.40 n. 239, 60-1, 90, 105. 1°7, [17, IJl, 13&, 157, IS9, 161 statue of 35
109, 110, 119. Il7 n. 74, uS, 150 n. 370, IP.. 160, school near Forty Martyrs 39 Theodora, wife ofThcophilus 39
1 Scombrus, magister 77 Theodore Anagnostes 58,59
construction techniques in 52,53 scrinium Il,I3 Theodore T eganistes, prefect H
St John the Theologian at the Hippodrome 39 scrinium armomm 12 Tbeodoric 13,14,15,18,12.0,J21
StJoseph, relics of 54 Scythians 130n, lI8 Theodorus, city prefect (52.0) 114
St julian 78 Sea cf Marmam 3.4,5,1,2. Theodosius J 8,11,28,30,35,36,41.,12.5,12.7 n. 82.,
St Laurcnce in Pulcherianae 32.,61,12.6 SeaWalls 31.39,12.3 n.21, u6, 12.7, Il8,2, 18 ')0
relics of 34 'House of Justinian' 40-1,102,147.164, tR Theodosius II 8,27, JO,31, 55, 56, 57,64, 101, 109,
St Lazarus (in the Topoi) 127 Koca Mustab Palia 11.J n. 21 110,122, 12J, 11.5. 12.6
relics of 71 Maritime Gate 147.1& Theoduius,senator 1}-14
St Mamas at Xylokerkos 8,9,}9 Narh Kapr 12.Jn.2.l Theophanes 28,36-7, }8, 57, 58, 59, (07. 108. IlO, iH
St Mark near the Forum Tauri 134 Yeni Kepi I2.J n. 1.1 Theophilus 39
Sr Mary Periblepros 60 Sebastianus 58 Thectckos 109
StMatrona,monasteryof 61 $eft.a1i Sokagl 77,78 in Blachernai 34,36, J8, 81,124
Sc Michael at Anaplous }6 Sehzadc Carnii 62.,150 at Bryas 39
St Micbael at Bryas 39 $eker Ahmet Pata Sokagl 79 in the Chalkoprareic 33, J8, 52., 71, 101, 105, 119, 2
StMocius 54 Senate House at Augusuion 30, H, 35. 36. 47,54, of the Diakonissa ix, 39,47,l}I-4, 16!>-1, 2
StNichoI3satMYr:l.{Demre) lp, I.f6 6, girdle of 33
St Panteleimon 39.41 senators 11,16,17 Hodegerria 12.7
St Paul. orphanage of }8, ,p Septimius Severcs 68 of the Kourator 33,71, Ill, IH
see dUO acropolis Serdica 6 n. 43 Kyriotissa, see Kalenderhane Camii
SrPerer.monsstery cl -45 Sevcenko.I. 61,lll,II2., 163 monastery at Chalcedon 39
St Phocas (St John the Theologian) at the Hippodrome Sige,church of Archangels 131 Pammakariscos, see Fethiye Camii
)9 Sigma 60 3ttaAreobindoll 39
St Polyeuktos x, 10, 2.0, 2.4. 2.6. J3, H. }6. 40. 62.-.", 82.. ~iJe ~ ofUrbicius H
90,101. UI, IrI-16. Il7. 11.0. 12.1. l2.9. lp, 1}4, Silivri 3.' Thessaloniki 3 n. I, 6n·4J, 19n. 152.. 20.27,71
IJ6, I}7, 138,139-40. 14}, 150, 1St. 152.,2 Simkes ham 130 Thessaly, brickstamps from 18 n. 146
construction techniques in 51..53,68,74 Sinop 3,5 Thrace, brickmakers from 40
density of bricks 4 Srraselviler Caddesi 8°.90 Tiber, see Rome
ofEudokia 32., 125-6 skribon 16,17 Tiberius II 37.38,47,146
monograms on capitals 48 n. 39. 49, 4 skriniarios 16,17 Timoni, A. viii,9
relics of 32- SOCr:l.tCS 54, 12.2. Timothy, patriarch 115
Sr Sabas 62. Sogancl Sokagl 80 Tokludede Mescidi ix, 42, 81, 81..9°,99.100, 110-11,
StSamuel 55 Sorlin-Dorigny, A. viii, 8-9, 4So 66. 101, 159, 164 117.119,110,153,157,159,2.
St Srephen in Consrantinianae 3} SorosinBlache;nai 33,H Topkapr palace 75
St Srephen in Daphne 32..127 Sozomen 55,58,59 • tribwta 13
St Stephen, relics of JI-2., 33, 12.5, 126 Sphendonc, sce Hippodrome Troas 41
Se Stratonikos of Marcian 33 Split,palaceofDiocletian 39 Tuzla 3,1
St Symeon at Sosthnion 33 Stephen.praepositus 39
Sr Theodore at Rhegion 8 Stevenson, R. B. K. 139 Ulpian 10
 .,~
•
INDEX TO THE MAIN NAME HEADINGS IN THE CATALOGUE 413
EYNOMI() 224 eEOt..UlPOY t..lflOTATOY 241 KAH() 256
EYfl() 224 6EOJ'.UlTOY t..HflOTATOY 241 KO() 256
INDEX TO THE MAIN NAME HEADINGS EYflOCI() 224 6EOt..[ 241 KOI() 256
EYCEBIOY 224 BEO() EKA() 24' KOIP[ 256
IN THE CATALOGUE EYCTA() 225
EYCTA() EYTP() 225
6EOC() 24'
6EO<DIAOY,6(E)Ul<DIAOY 242
KOKHOY 256
KON() 257
EYCTAel() 2~5 6EO[ 242 KONONOC 257
EYCTA<Dl() 225 6EUlt..OYPOY 242 KO C() 257
EYT() 225 6EUlJ'.UlPHTOY 242 KO CTANTINOY 257
EYTOYXHOY 227 6EUlt..UlPOY t..lflOTATOY 242 KOC() 257
BEPKIOY 169' APTEM() 182 fPHf() 205 EYTYXIOY, EYTYXHOY, 6E[ 242 KO(N)CTA TINOY,
BI(), ABIP() 170 AP[ 182 fPHfOPIOY 205 EYTOYXHOY 227 6Y() EY() 24) KONCTJ\NTINOY 258
BAHfllOY 171 AP[ 18) fY() 206 EYTYXIOY 228 6YPCIAC 24) KO(N)CTANTINOY,
r() 171 ACB. () 18) fYM() 206 EY[ 228 eUl() 24) KONCTANTINOY,
rABONIKOY 171 ACK() 18) fY[ 206 E[ 228 6UlMA 243 KUlNCTANTINOY,
rAflHTOY 171 ACKAEflIOY 18) f[ 206 ZI[ 229 6(E)Ul<DIAOY 243 KUl(N)CTANTINOY 272
ror i 171 ACKAHflIOY, ACKAEnlOY 18) t..AN() 207 ZUl() 229 6[ 24) KPITINNOY 27)
roro 172 AT() 184 t..H() 207 ZUlTIKOY 229 IAX() 244 KY() 27)
rOPACTOY 173 ATA() 184 J'.HMH(), t..HMHTP() 207 H() 2jO IAXI() 244 KY() EY() 277
~.()I7) ATTAAOY 184 J'.HMHTPIOY, J'.IMITPIOY 207 Hf[ 2)0 IA[ 245 KYP() 278
iYOEIY (1) 17) AY() 185 t..HMO() 208 I HE() 2)0 It..[ 245 KYPI() 281
(AKIOY 17) AY() 185 J'.HMOt..() 209 He() 2)0 IAA() 245 KYPIAKOY 28,
GJ'.() 17) AYPHAIOY ,85 t..HMOC(), t..JMOC() 209 HAI(), EAI() 2)0 IAAPIOY 245 KYPIAKOY t..IAKONOY 282
(Y(), AKYA() 17) AY~ANTIOY,AY~ENTIOY 185 i\HOMH.6..0Y 209 . ,.....",.-
HAIANOY 2)1 IAIANOY 246 KYPIAKOY flPECBYTEPOY 282
\E() 174 AY~ENTIOY 191 J'.H[ 209 HAI( ) EKAH() 2)1 IOA() 246 KYPIA(OY) 284
\E~ANJ'.POY 174 AY[ 191 J'.I() 209 HAIOJ'.(). HAAIOJ'.() 2)2 IOANNOY, IOAN(N)OY 246 KYPI() <DI() 284
\ Y() 174 A<D() 192 J'.IMITPIOY HAAIOt..() 2)2 IOY() 246 KYP() MA() 285
\. K[ 174 A. E() 192 t..IMOC() 210 HAIOY 2)2 IOYAN(N)OY NOTAPIOY 247 KYP() NE() 285
~Ai) 174 A[ 192 IdO() 210 HAYOY 2)) IOYAN(N)OY ONOKTHTOY 247 KYPI[ 285
"ATOAIOY 175 BA() 19) J'.IOfE() 210 HMH() 2)) IOY( )KY() 247 KYP() TE() 285
"rIAOY 175 BAC(). BACI() 19) t..IOMHt..OY, t..HOMHt..OY 21 I KYP() ,j,i() 286
HPA() 2)) IOYAIANOY 247
"t..PEA 175 BACHAIKOY 195 t..IOC, t..IOY 21) I-IPAKAHC 2)) IOYA[ 248 KYP[ 286
,t..PEA t..IAKONOY, BACIAIKOY, BACHAIKOY 195 t..JO[ 214 HClt..OPIOY KOMITOC 2JJ IOYOfNOY 248 KY() <DI() 286
\Nt..PEOY t..IAKONOY 176 BOCflOPIAC, BOC<DOPIAC 196 J'.O() 214 HCY() 2JJ IOYCTINIANOY 248 KY[ 286
't..PEOY 177 BOC<DOPIAC '97 t..OMN() 215 H[ 234 IOY[ 249 KUlNCTANTINOY,
,t..PEOY t..IAKONOY 178 f A() 197 t..OMNOY 215 eA() 234 ICIJ'.() 249 KUl(N)CTANTINOY 286
't..PEOY HfOYMENOY 178 fAEIOY 197 t..OMNOY J'.IAK(ONOY) 217 BE() 2)5 ICIJ'.OPIOY KOMHTOC 250 KUlNCTANTINOY
,t..PEOY N(?) 178 fAHOY AMANOY 197 t..POCEPIA 217 eEM() 2)5 IX() 250 flPECBYTEPOY 294
-IB() 178 fAHOYTPO<DIMOY 197 t..Ul() 217 BEO() 2)6 IUl() 250 KUl(N)CTANTINOY 294
-IeEMIOY 178 fAIOY,fAEIOY,fEIOY 197 t..[ 218 BEO() 2)6 IUlA() 250 KUl(N)CTANTI(N)OY 294
-IeH. () 179 fAIOY AMANOY 199 EAI() 218 BEOt..() 2)6 IUlANNOY,IOANNOY 250 K .. 294
-Iel() 179 fAIOY [M]YPIAPXOY 199 EAAAt..lOY 218 6EO() t..IAKO(NOY) 2)7 IUlANNOY HfOYMENOY 252 K[ 295
le[ 179 r AIOY TPO<DIMOY' 199 EAA[ .. ] 218 BEOt..OAOY 2)7 IUlANNOY KOAOKY 60Y 252 AE() 295
H() 179 fE() 199 EAA[-]ICIM[ 219 6EOt..OPOY 2)7 IUlANNOY NA YKAHPOY 252 AEO() 295
ITIOXOY 179 fEIOY 200 EAfl()' 219' 6EOJ'.OCIOY KOMHTOC 237 IUlANNOYNOTAPIOY 25) AEON() 296
INTUlN[I]OY 179 fEA() 200 EAfll() 219 6EOt..OYAOY,6EOt..OAOY, IUlANNOY ONOKTHTOY 25) AEONTIOY 296
le) '79 . fEAA() 200 EflH<DANIOY 219 6EOJ'.UlAOY, TEOt..OAOY 2)7 IUlANNOY CKPI() 253 AEON[ 296
IHPIOY 180 fEAACIOY 200 Efll() 219 eEOJ'.OYPOY 2)8 IUlANNOY [.].K[ ... ]A[.]K[ .... ] 25) AO() 296
() 180 fEOPrIOY 201 KA() ;54 . .
EfllJ'.IOY flPECBYTEPOY 220 6EOt..O[ 2)8 AOfO() 297
EC() 180 fEUlP(flOY) 202 EflITP() 220 6EOJ'.Ul() 2)8 KA()' 254 AON() 297
I() 180 fEUlPflOY CKP() 202 EflIlDA IOY, EflH<DANIOY 220 BEOt..UlAOY 2)8 KAA(), KAAH() 254 AONrINOY 297
Iq 181 fH() 20) EPMIA flPECBYTEPOY 221 BEOt..UlPHTOY, KAAAfPOY 255 AONfOY 298
lCTAINETOY 181 fI() 20) EPMOfE() 221 6EOt..UlPITOY, KAAATATUlNOC AOY() 298
ICTENETOY, fP() 20) EV() 221 6EUlt..UlPHTOY 2)8 flPECBYTEPOY 255 AOYK() 299
,PICTAINETOY 181 fPA() 20) EYAff() 22) 6EOJ'.UlPITOY 2)9 KAAH() 255 AOYKA J'.IAKONOY 299
O() ,82 fPAfl() 205 EYAfP() 22) 6EOt..UlPOY, BEOt..OPOY, KAA() KY() 255 AOYflIK() 299
T() 182 fPA[ 205 EY6i) 224 6EOt..OYPOY, BEUlJ'.OYPOY 2)9 K()K() 255 A Y() 299
414 INDEX TO THE MAIN NAME HEADINGS IN THE CATALOGUE

i\(O)Y 1\1() 299 nAY[ )25 Tl() )48

1\ 299 nE() )26 TlMOK(), Tl(M)OK() )48
flEK() )26 TlMOKPITOY )48
A 300
M() 300 nEAA() )26 Tl(M)OK() )49
INDEX TO THE FINDSPOTS IN THE CATALOGUE
MA() 300 flET() 326 TP() )49
MAfNOY 303 flETPOY )27 TPO() )49
MAfNOY nPECBYTEPOY 304 nETPOY llIAKONOY 335 TP08YNOY 350
MAKAPHOY 306 nETPOY llIAKONOY TPO<DIMOY 350
MAKAPIOY, MAKAPl-lOY 306 EYCTA8HOY 335 .., TPO[ JP ,Many sites listed in this index are discussed in the main text, where the was discovered along the length of the road, to the north of its central
MAKEll() 307 nETPOY llJAKONOY TPY<D(J)NOC 3P accompanying footnotes cite the most important bibliography. In the axis, at a deprli of 4 m. A vaulted cistern measuring 2 x J m. was found
MAMA 307 EYTOIXIANOY 335 TY()TP() 353 case of these and other sites, some further bibliography may be found half way along the road, and three oblique and parallel sections of
MAP() 308 flETPOY llIAKONOY T[ 354 under the catalogue entries citing bricks tamps from those sites. The wall were discovered at the east en~ of me street.
MAPINOY 309 AOYAl-lANOY 335 Yn() 354 bibliographical references cited in the catalogue are, however, intended 202.Ib,666.Ia
MAPKOY 309 nETPOY EYfENIOY )) 5 <D() 354 primarily as an indication of the place of publication of the brickstamps. Augustaion
MAPTYPIOY 309 flETPOY EYKA1l() 336 $EI1l1MOY 354 For specialized bibliography, reference may be made to the standard 1159.13, 1333.la, 1607·la
MAYP() 310 nETPOY EYCT(A)8IC, $EP() 354 works on the topography and archaeology of Constantinople: Miiller- base of the column of Justinian (Bardill, CLausus', 83 n.67)
MA YPIKIOY JIO nETPOY EYCT(A8)IC ))6 $H1l1MOY,$I1ll-lMOY 354 Wiener, Bildlexikon; Kleiss, Plan; and Schneider, Byzanz. Where, how- Mass of brick masonry rising about 1 m. above the Byzantine level,
MAYPIKYOY 310 nETPOY EYCT(A8)IC 336 $80N() 355 ever, the site is not discussed in the main text, or where available not far from an iron manhole cover of the drains. Found in 1935, [0
MA YPlT() 310 nETPOY MA[ .. ]H 336 $l() 355 infonhation is meagre or not easily located, site descriptions and biblio- the left, under the trees before entering the court of Hagia Sophia
MA':OIMOY 311 nETPOY NAYKAHPOY 336 $l() 01 $11l() 35 5 graphic details have been given in this index. from the south. Although Mamboury identified this with the base of
MA[ 311 nETPOY nPECBYTEPOY 337 <D11lHMOY 355 the column ofjusrinian, his conclusion is difficult to accept without a
MA[ 312 flETPOY TEO$IAOY 337 $IA() 356 1- Acropolis precise indication of the location of the masonry. The impression
MEfAAHC EKKAl-lCIAC 312 flETPOY [.]ONPIC 337 $IAA() 356 see Saray Burnu given by Mamboury's description 'is that the masonry was too far
ME801l0TOY 314 nor) 338 $IAO[.]AO. 357 .. .. ~~ Alemdar Caddesi north [0 have belonged to the column. The site on which the monu-
MO() 315 flO() Af() J39 <DI()'ny() 357 406.13, 43I.ra, 819.ld, 967.ld, Ip8.Ia, Ipo.la, IFI.ra, 1539.13, ment stood can be determined accurately, since it was replaced by a
MO()oIMO.() 31j nOKIA1l0Y 339 <DAA() 357 1666.13 Turkish water-tower that appears in drawings and photographs (see
MOY() 31j nOAE() olnO() AE() 339 <DOYTlNOY 357 Antiochus, palace of Bardill, 'Lausus', 78 n. 45 and Stichel, 'Sechs kolossale Saulen').
MO.() 315 n01\YXPONIOY )40 $OY[ 357 hexagon 5o.la
M(J)CH 315 nOY() )40 $PYf!() 357 18.ra, 28.la, 37.la, 108.13, IOS.23, 17I.Ja, 210.la, 235.13, 236.13, Balaban Aga Mescidi
M[ JI6 nOYPIOY)40 $Y() 357 2 37.la, 249. 13, 26S.Ja, 268.lb, 272.13, 272.H, 293.13,327.13, 327.lb, 26.13,27.13, 52.lb, 52.IC, 53.1:1, ej.rb, 159.13,3°1.1:1,37°.13,376.13,
NE() 316 nor )40 $(J)() 357 328.13,328.1 b, 332.13, 332.1 b, 333. I a, 348.la, 360.Ia, 361.la, 362.13, 410.Ia,418.la, 4I8.Ib, 4I8.Id,419·Ia, 4j6.Ia, 593·la, 597.13, 597.23,
NEC() JI7 nroc: )40 $(J)TlNOY, $OYTlNOY 358 363.13,363.23,363.33,384.1 a, 423.13, 491.23, 496.13, 503.13, 542.13, 666.In, 666.40, 666.4ee, 666.14C, 667.13, 669.lb, 785.1b, 86j.la,
NE[ 317 nsoxn )41 $[ 359 622.13,623.13, 624.la, 625.13, 627.13, 627.lb, 653.13, 667.lf, 705.13, 867.lb, 867.IC, 876.13, 876.lb, 880.lb, 883.Ia, 941.13, 1026.la,
Nl() 317 rrror j 341 XA() 359 707.ra, 711.13, 712.13, 713.ra, 714·ra, 73o.ra, 73o.rb, 730.]C, 73o.ld, r r r j.aa, Il74.rb, 1I77.rb, 12.p.la, Il42.Ia, 1276.13, 12.89.13,
NIKA(), NIKAN() 318 ny() )41 XPEI() 359 730.re, 730.23, 732.13, 733.13, 745.13, 753·ra,754·ta, 7H.Ja, 758.13, 1342.23, 1342.jC, 1448.13, 1609.la, 1642.13, 1644.13
NIKH$OPOY, NIK1$OPOY JI8 H] )42 XPl-lCTOY,XPICTOY 359 llo.ta, no.lb, 855.13, 864.13, 8n.13, 877.2a, 899.23, 9oo.lC, 954.13, Basilica, retaining wall of (Kleiss, C eue Befunde', figs. 2, 4;Kleiss,
NIKH$OPOY KOMHTOC 319 PO() )42 XPICTOY 362 968.lf, 969·lj, 973·la, 975.13, 975·lb, 990.13, 991.13, 992.13, 994.13, 'Grabungen', 2))-)4; Mullel-Wienel, Bildlexileon, fig. 58 (B); Bardill,
NIK1$OPOY 319 POY() 342 (J)[ 362 994.Jb, IOOI.I3, rccj.m, 1024.13, 1025.13, I029.ra, r029.lc, 1029.23, CLausus', 78 n. 46)
NIK1$OPOY KIPOY 319 P(J)() J43 Monograms 362 1039.Ia, 1001.13, 1061.13, 1149.la, ]154.13, r181.13, 1182.13, acj.rb, 8jl.23, 852.13, 8p.lb, 891.13, 1166.13, 1I70.I3, Ij99.1d,
N[ 319 CA() )43 Christograms 371 n85.13, 1186.13, 1196.la, 1275.13, 1287.Ia, 1294.13, 1344 .r b, 1651.13,1652.13
ONHCIMOY )20 CAB() 345 Crosses 373 1402.lb, 1533.13, 1639.13, 1640.la, 1641.13, ]658.13, ]728.13, Beirut
ONHCIMOY MON(AXOY) 320 CAN()8I() )45 8EOY XAPIC without name 373 1734.13, I736.lb,I736.IC, 1738.23, 174o.1b, 174o.IC 247.la, 247.lb, 897·2a
ON(l-l)C(), ON(H)Cl() )20 CAflO() )45 KYPIE BOl-l8EI without name J74 rotunda and adjoining hall north of hexagon (Miil1er- Wiener, Bild- Bcyazit
OPMIZ() )21 CAnOYPOY )46 THCNEAC lexikon 238-9; Bardill, 'Lausus") 309.Ia, 564.13, 1630.la
O[ 321 CAC() 01 CACI() )46 (INllIKTl(J)NOC ?)wiclIOU' 87.13, J42.Ja, 475.Ja, 618.lf, 667.1g, 737.13, 10 ll. la, 1295.13, arch of Forum of Theodosius I (Forum Tauri)
n() 321 CA() TPI() (?) 346 name 374 1404.13,143 5.1a, 1473.13, 1589.13, 1684.13 40. ra, 264.ra, 35I.I3, 367.13, 582.I3, 582.IC, 582.ld, 582.2a, 6p.la,
nA() )21 CAr )46 !N1lIKTl(J)NOCwi,hou'name J75 Archaeological Museum 666.4C, 666'4jj, 667.133, 680.13, 734.13, 735.ra, S20.le, 844.la,
nAN() 321 COY() )47 Other stamps without names 378 see Istanbul Archaeological Museum 845.]3,974.13,977.13,978.13, rooa.rb, rooc.r a, 1006.13, 1153.la,
nAnYAOY 322 Cor )47 Missing, indecipherable, or uncertain name Asir Elendi Caddesi (see also Cema! adir Sokagi} u64·H1, IJ88.ra, 1327.I3, 1474.13, 1480.r3, 1492.13, 1502.13,
nAT() )22 CTE$ANOY )47 379 Bricks found (during the laying of drains) in a series of large vaults 1516.13,1519.13,1547.13
nATPIKIOY )22 CTPATONIKOY )47 Roof tiles 400 oriented almost north-south and located in Asir Efendi Caddesi just tomb (Miiller-Wiener, Bildlexikon 219)
nATPO() )22 C(J)() 347 Fingermarked bricks 401 to the east of its junction with Hoca Kasrm Koprii Sokagl (fig. 8). 944.1•
nATPOKA() )23 C(J)CANNAC )48 Fingermarked tiles 403 Mamboury's sketches are dated 15 July 1929. Beylerbeyi (Dirimtekin, 'Beylerbey')
nAY(),nAYA() )23 C[ )48 i'oo[-~adc impressions 403 897.10,897.4' 584.13,644.13,676,53, 790.]a, 817.IS, 1050.1:1, 1151.13, 1416.13,
nAYAOY )24 TE01l0AOY 348 Atik Ali Pasa Caddesi l5Ij.13, 1552.13, 15S4.Ia, 1555.ra, 1556.13, IH7·13, I 560.la,
Walls recorded by Mamboury on 12 November 1930, during the lay- 1623·13,1694·Ia
ing of drains along AtikAli Pasa Caddesi. A stone wall, 1.2 m. wide, Bezzazr Cedid Camii, ruins south of
 "~
•
INDEX TO THE FINDSPOTS IN THE CATALOGUE INDEX TO THE FINDSPOTS IN THE CATALOGUE

1193.13 59.13, 126'5a, 126.6a, 148.33, 148'3b, 148.43, 148'5a, Ip.la, r j r.rb, 498.13, 516.13, 54I.la, 68S·1b, 72o.la, 723·J3, 796.13, 996.13, 666'4P, 666'4Q, 66S.rf, 674.1g, 675.23, 740.Ia, 746.Ia, 769.", 774. la,
Blachernai (Miiller-Wiener, Bildlexikon. 301-7) 1575·Ia II09·1C, 1143.13, U07·13, 123o.1a, 1)42.53, ]378.13, 1427.13, 794.13,82 I .IC, 831.33, 831.63, 868.13,899.43,900.3:1.,9°7.23, 907.3b,
~42.lb, 24.2,13, 242.IC, 461.IC, 462.13, 463.13, 465.1 a, 466.13, 467.13, in Great Palace, below Peristyle 1469·ra, 1540.13, 1723.13, 1729.la 922.13, 966.lb, 968.le, 969.le, 971.13, 1036.13, Ill8.Ia, 1203.]3,
476.Ia, 660.]f, 709.13, Sn.Ia, 1621.13, r6J2.r3. 1633.13, 1699.13 see Great Palace Fenerbahce 1222.IC, 1271.13, 1272.IC, 1272.3a, 1369.13, 1394.13, 1396.lh,
Bodrum Camii (Miiller- Wienec, Bildlexikon, 10)-7) in Giilhane, near Bjb-i Humfiyun IS 5.13,373.13, 11 78.la, 1548.13, 156 I. la 1397·ld, 1439.13, 1442.13, 1493.13, 1517.13, 1532.13, 1535·la,
36.13, 107.1a, 218.13, 227.Ib, 298.13, 300.lb, JI6.13, 334.13, H3.13. 15.13,85.101, 85.lb, 85.ld, 176.la, 178.la, 17B.lb, J79.la, 184.13, Fethiye Camii (Mtiller-Wiener, Bildlexikon, 132-5) 1610.Ja, 1614.13, 1676.13
354.13,392.13, 657.1b,660.u, 681.1d, 747.13. 760.1a, 808.13, 824.[3, 243·Ia, 245.13, 246.la, 246.23, 41 CIa, 434.13, 454.13, 45 5·Ja, 455·2a, 129.13,320.13,356.13,45°.13,464.13, 544.13,649.IC, 889.la, 1010.Ta, area Ba
901.13, Illl.la,147l.Ia, 1472.Ia, 1497.1 a, 1565.13, 1567.13, ,638.13, j59·Ia, 482.]3, 482.]b, 483.13,484.J3, 485.13, 509.Id, 556.13, 578.13, 1079·Ia,1724·13 7.13,9.13,33.13,34.13,94. 13, 284.Ia, 667.ldd, 784.13, 865.13,912.13,
1657.1;\,1738.13,1740.13 654.13,701.13,706.13, 726.la, 750.13, 895.13, 895·2a, 895.33, 896.la, hypogeum near 1198.1:1.,1608.]3,1616.I3,16I7·la
<Bath' building near l007·la, IIl5.la, 1239.13, 1240.13, 1477.]a, 1478.13, I5I6.1a, 1463.13 area Ea
44.13,218.23,324.13, 334·Ia,4J2.Ia, 457.13,568,13,629.13,749.13, I 563.Ia, 1649.13, 1650.la Forum Tauri, Forum of Theodosius I see Zeuxippos, baths of
799.Ia,986.I3, IOp.J3,1I46.Ia, 1510.13, 1612.13 near Kariye Camii see Beyazn areaFf
Bogdan Sarayi (Miiller- Wiener, Bildlexikon, r08) 94pb Galata Mevlevi Tekkesi, early cemetery near (Mamboury, 'Fouilles Ill', 289.13
776.]3 of Mocius 43') between area Ba and area Ab, terrace piers
Boyacr Ahmet Sckeg., hypogeum west of (Bardill, 'Lausus', 71 n. 20, 175·IC,1406·lb Byzantine cemetery found berween istiklil Caddesi and Galata 14.21·la
fig. 3) on Nuruosmaniye Caddesi (Miillcr-Wiener, Bildlexikon, fig. 393, Mevlevi Tekkesi when foundations were laid for a marriage parlour cistern below Peristyle
666.1,529.13, no.Ta, HI.Ta cistern F7h; Kleiss, Plan, Fundortnummer 70; Schneider, Byzanz, in October 1946. The excavated plot was 15.j m. east of the east wall 201.13,1364.13
Bryas, palace of Cistern E; Forchheimer and Strzygowski, Wasserbehiilter, 90-91, of a photographic studio on istiklil Caddesi, and on the south side of Peristyle and Apsed Hall
see Kii~iikyah 224; Kouppas, 'Oikodome', 52) Yeniyol Sokagi. It was 2.1 m. in width, extending for over 13 m. 55.13,63.13. ?S.13, 109.[3, 113·lb, 189.2a, 222.]d, 23J.lb, 273.la,
Burgaz Adasr, Transfiguration church (Ouscerhour and Akyiirek, ]97.13, ]019.13 perpendicular to Yeniyol Sckagr. Byzantine walls and several burials, 287.13,370.23, 372.lb, 376.13, 380.Ia, 380.23, 380.2b, 517.13, 513·lb,
'Burgazada'} west of St George in the Mangana particularly of children, were discovered. The tombs were formed 546.IC, 571.la, 575.lb, 618.1b, 618.IC, 618.Ie, 619.13, 620.13, 666.ld,
62.Ia, 1351.1:\, 1679.13, 1680.13, 1681.13 963.13 from two curved tiles (c. 600 x 300 x 40 mm. (reducing to 25 mm. at the 666.", 666.1U, 6664, 666.4t, 666·4bb, 666.4dd, 666.14a, 666''5a,
Biiyiikada (Prinkipo), St George Koudonas near the Theotokos in the Chalkoprateia centre of the long sides)), touching along their shorter edges to form 667.1 b, 667.ICC, 669.1C, 676'3b, 676.3e, 676.5b, 78 5.1C, 78 y.rd, 785.1C,
788.la 507·la, 1455.13 an inverted V over the body. The apex was covered bya small, curved 787.1C, 787.Id, 798.13, 816.13, 8]6.Ib, 819.1e, Sao.re, 820.lh, 820. xi,
Btiyiikada (Prinkipo), vaults {Kamares') on Srraselviler Caddesi tile. The Byzantine burials were between 0.5 and 0.8 m below street- 821.lb, 82I.Ie, 82I.lk, 82Ld, 821.1n, 857.33, 880.la, 924.la, 961.13,
600.lb, 1244.13, 1663.13 13.13, 14·Ia, 35.n, 84.13, 84.lb, 130.13, 350.13, 452.1a, 453.la, level, and the Mevlevi burials between 1.2 and 1.5 m below the street. 964.1:1, 1063.1:1., 1236.13, u57·Ia, IH4·13, 1337.13, 1337·lb,
Caddebostaru 460.13,481.13, 481.Ib, 48I.IC, 509.lb, pO.la, 51 1.141,700.141,764.13, 1727.13, 1746.Ia, 1746.23, 1746.2b, 1746.2C, 1746.2d, ]746.2e, 1342.3b, 1342.83, 1344·IC, 135S.I:l, I36L13, 1393·Ib, 1397·lb,
199.13,200.13,1690.13 1213.13, 1213.lb, 1213.1C, 1217.13, 1238.13, Ipl.13 1747.13 1399.13, 1399·lb, 1410.1:\, 1443·1a, 1447·Ja, 1479.13, 1482.1:1.,
Cemal Nadir Sokagl, remains near (see also Asir Efendi Caddesi) in Si~hane Great Church 1485.13, 1495.1:1., 1498.la, 1509.1a, 1590.13, 1591.13, 1592.13,
j r.rb, 47.13, 51.13, Sa.r a, 117.13, I22.lb, 123.13, 126.13, '39.13, 63J.rb see Sophia, Hagia 1593.13, 1594.13, 1595.13, 1596.la, 1597.13, 1654.13, 1695.1:1.,
148.23, 149.1 b, 149.IC, 192.la, 193.IC, 194.13,310.13,3 r t.m, 3 I 8.la, Diakonissa, church of the Thcocokos Great Palace 1696.1:\,1718.13,1719.13
319.13,508.13,518.13,602.13, 657.IC, 657.ld, 765.13, 777.13, 842.13, see University excavations area Aa Giilhane (see also Cisterns in Gulhane, Hexagon in Giilhane)
858.13, 908.la, 949.23, 950.13, 1049.la, 1057.la, 1060.13, 1I10.13, Drains 572•1:\ ruins north of hospital
J1l2.IC, 1I1l.23, IJI3.rb, r a r y.ra, IlI6.13, 1264.13, 1396.IC, see Mese area Ab 668.1b
1440.13, 1705.la, 1712.13, 1713.13 Eirene, Hagia 5.13, 5.lb, 43.13, 140.13, 141.13, 145.13, 167.]3, 180.13, 196.13, ruins south of hospital
Chalkoprareia, church of the Theotokos (see also Basilica) (Mtiller- church of (Muller- Wiener, Bildlexikon, I I 2-17) 203·3b, 208.1a, 251.lb, 277.la, 279.13, 296.13, 306.lb, 306.IC, 308.13, 183.13,429.13, I093.lb, 1096.lb, 1566.13
Wiener, Bildlexileon, 76-8) 10pf,19r.Ia,194.ra, H7.1b, 666.4r, 666'5b, 667.10, 667.1Y, 674·1k, 337·3b, 370.1 b, 386.2a, 386.2b, 386.2C, 386.2d, -4 14.1 a, 41 6.13, 426.13, Haydarpasa
256.Ja, 285.13, 397.13,425.la, 479.13,506.1:'1,519.13,795.13,884.13, 674.xr, 676.3k. 676'5e, 817.le, 8I9.IC, 819.If, 881.13, 920.Ib, 923.la, 427.13,441.13,442.13,443.13,448.13,477.13,490.13, 497.13, 499.13, 231.le,927·13, 1372.rf, 1373·J:l
893.13, 900.23, 901.la, 901.2b, 901.2C, 936.Ia, 962.13, 985.13, 933.13, 967.IC, 967.IQ, 968.la, 968.ld, 969. If, 1145.13, lJ6I.13, 555.la, 55Pb, 595·la, 616.13, 650.xa, 666.1h, 666.", 666.6b, Hayriye Hanim Sokagl
1031.13, 1176.13, 1180.13, 1227.13, 1237.13, 1278.13, 1299.13, 12p.IC, 1342.5b, 1361.IC, 1363.lb, 1420.13, 1444.lb, 1553.la 666.173,667.11, 674.lf, 676.3d, 677.13, 685.13,69 I .r a, 722.1 a, 725.13, see Kible Sokagl
1342.13,1522.13, ]06.I3,1737·2b excavation south of (1946-47 and 19j8-6o, Hospice of Samson?) 748.13, 781.la, 787.13, 789.1b, 806.13, S17.le, 823.13, 826.la, 828.lb, Hebdomon (Bakirkoy) (Demangel, L 'Hebdomon)
Christ Philanthropes, church of 54.13, 55.lb, 93.1a, 191.Ja, 203.3C, 221.13, 226.13, 226.2a, 400.13, S28.le, 829.13, 83°.13, 83 I. 1b, 831.53, 841.13, 861.lb, 891.23, 892. la, 20.IC, 58.13,69.13, 7o.la, 81.13, 81.23, 125.23, 126.8c, 126.8d, J48.1b,
861.13,1068.13,1348.13,1349.13,1475.13 461.1h, 509.IC, 512.13, 586.ra, 6p.13, 666.la3, 666.6a, 666.73, 892.43, 892.53, 893·IC, 893.ld, 893. le, 893.23, 902.13, 903.13, 907.4a, 165.13, 190.ra, 290.la, 344·ra, 375.Ja, SI7.lb, 536.ld, 573.13, 582.33,
Cistern 666.14b, 667.1m, 667.1n, 667.1S, 669.1d, 674·1h, 674.d, 674·1n, 909.lb, 910.Ia, 918.13, 918.Ib, 918.1C, 951.13, 1000.13, IOU.13, 662.13, 666.IY, 666.llc, 68I.Ib, 684.13, 715.la, 785.13, 786.13,
of Actius (Muller- Wiener, Bildlexikon, 278) 674·IS, 6]5.Ib, 675·P, 676,33, 678.2b, 73o.ld, 772.IC, 817.13, 819·lg, 1015.J3, 1019.lb, 1019.IC, 1020.13, 1022.13, 1027.13, !l03.13, 789.JC, 821.1P, 831.83, 908.23, 911.13, 915.13, 945.Ia, 1018.13,
349·13,480.13,727·13,1438.la 82I.IV, 926.13, 957.3a, 1064.lb, 1064.IC, 1I05.13, I I 18.IC, 1120.13, JI09.13, r rcc.rb, r rcc.rd, II19·13, 1144.13, 1l47.13, II49·2a, rcj r.rb, 1102.23, I125.le, 1129.13, II50.la, Il7o.la, 1301.13,
of Aspar (Muller- Wiener, Bildlexikon, 279) 1121.13, 1134.13, 1258.13, 1281.1C, 13'6.13, 1323.23, 1342.33, r rjo.ra, 1I62.ra, 1l63.13, 1203.lh, 1222.lb, 1226.la, 1272.Id, 1305.ra, 1305·1b, 1353.Ia, 1366.la, 1450.13, 1452.13, 1548.13,
266.13, 563.Ia, 563.lb, 1208.13, 1220.13, 1306.23, 1636.13 1342.43, 1342.5d, 1345.lb, 1358.13, 1361.IC, 136I.lh, 1362.1a, 1297.13, 1317.1a, 1329.13, 1330.Ia, 1331.13, 13S3.lb, 1368.13, 1550.13, 1551.13, 1669.Ia, 1669.lb, J669.1C, 1670.13, 167I.13,
near Balaban Aga Mescidi 1363.le, 1363.lg, 1371.la, 1382.IC, 1394.13, 1736.ld 1374.13, 1528.13, 1534.13, In8.la, 1576.13, 1648.13, 1660.13, 1678.13
I 390.Ja Erenkoy 1661.13,1673.13,1737.23, 1738.lb, 1743.23, 1744.23 Hexagon in Giilhane (Muller- \Viener, Bildlexikon, 42-3)
near the B-asilica Cistern (Yerebatan Sarayr} 599.13,6143.13, 666.2b, 820.lj, 907.3C, 1314.13, 1449.13, 1451.13 between areas Ab and Ac 161.13,382.2:1.,382.33,383.13,383.23,404.13, 437.13,566.13,569.13,
t627·Ia Exakionion 252.1:1., 337.23, 683.13, 968.IC, 1488.13, 1736.13, 1737.1:1., 1743.13, 729.13,827.13,85°.1:1., 1l06.33, III9.IC, 1200.13, ,645.13, 1653.13
of Binbirdirek 1619·la 1744·13,1745·la Hippodrome (Muller- Wiener, Bildlexikon, 64-71)
241.13,374.13, 1067.13, 1l4I. 13, JI97.la, 1546.13 Fatih Camii (Miillcr-\'ifiener, Bildlexikon, 405-12) area Ac 29.13, 276.23, 552.13, 559.13, 560.13, 666.12:1., 757.1:\, 773.13,
on Boyacr Ahmer Sokagl (Bardill, 'Lausus', 73, fig. 2) 366.13, 546.1C, 860.13, 1606.13 37.23,79.23, 85·1C, 104.13, 164.13, 169.13, 172.1:1., 176.lb, 222.13, 1002.13, 1I7L1a, r r y r.rb, 1402.13, 1646.13, 1647.13, 1737.3b,
198.Ia Fenari iS3 Camii (Miiller-Wiener, Bildlexikon, J 26-31) 251.13,255.13,267.13,276.]3,292.13, 296.Ib, 296.23, 330.13, 413.13, 1739.13,1741.13,1741.23
00 Divfiru Ali Sokag' 25.13,74.13,92.13,98.13,112.13,209.13, 32G.ta, 337.4b, 346.13, 415.13,421.13,424. la, 473.1:'1, 486. la, 486.2:\, 487.1:1.,661.1:\,663.1 b, incili Ko~kii, tomb near
 ..~
•
INDEX TO THE FINDSPOTS IN THE CATALOGUE
INDEX TO THE FINDSPOTS IN THE CATALOGUE

39·la Klod Farer Caddesi, remains west of

t a.rb, Il.IC, 116.Ia, 222.lb, 281.13, 337.4a, 583.13, 585.la, 587.Ia, 10.13, 95·la, 143.101, 144.1;1, 57o.Ib, 613.101, 614.13,743.13, 782.1a,
Kapi Mescidi (Miiller-Wiener, Bildlexikon, 118-19) see Piycr Loti Caddesi
587·lb, 588.la, 589·Ia, 589·lb, 589.IC, 589·ld, 590.la, 590.lb, 59o•IC, 783.13,988.101,1392.13,14°6.101, 1407·la, 1437·ld, 1578.la, 1579.la,
15·1a Kiiciik Cekmece
59o.ld, 590.IC, 59o.rf, 591.13, 59I.lb, 648.13, 648.lb, 649.13, 789.la, 1580.13, 1581.1:1, 1582.101, 1583.13, 1584.13, 1585.13, 1586.13,
ietiye Caddesi, remains on see Rhegion
819.13, 874.la, 925·lb 1587·13,1682.la
2I.IC, 125.ra, r z y.zb, 125.33, 125.43, 126.23, J26'3b, 126.4a, 126.73, Kiicukyah (Bryas Sarayii')
Pendik Sar01YBumu, finds on
26.8c, 127.la, 135.ra, 148.13, 148.6a, 656.13, 657.1:1, 875.la, 897.5a, 133.la, 134.13, 136.13, 666.nb, Src.r a, 892.Ib, 916.la, r rcy.ra,
200.lb, 307.l:1, 925.Ia, 1126.13, 14I3.la 678.2C, 818.13, 958.13, 1357. I b, 1388.xa
98.Ia, 899.2b, 952.Ia, r r ra.ra, 1326.13, 161I.Ia 14°9·Ia,1456.1:1,1674·1:1
Pcrinthos (Marmara Ereglisi) ruins on (orphanage ofSt Paul?)
mbul Archaeological Museum, structures to the south-cast of Kursunla
Baths of Alexander?) (Miiller-Wiener, Bildlexikon, figs. r S, 27. 28; if.
67 5d 567.ra, 1346.13, 1347.13 1l8.l:1, 168.13, 186.la, 364.1a, 38 5 .t a, 396.13, 472.101, 618.ld, 639.Ia,
Peykhane Sokak 835·Ib, 1175.13,1541.101,1 54l.la, 1542.1 b, I 542.IC, I 543.Ia, 1668.Ia,
-can, Topleapi Sarayi 136-40, plan jb.pls. 142-4; Dlker,Proje) Kyriotissa, church of the Theotokos
1248.la 1687·Ia
33.la, 612.1a, 666.IX, 817.Ii, 1214.1a, 1398.IC, 14I2.Ia see Kalenderhane Camii
Philanthropes, church of Christ Sea Walls ac
.n, Stoudios' church of St (Muller- Wiener, Bildlexikon, 147-52) Laleli Camii (near)
see Christ Philanthropes, church of 79.1'.79.)0, 8)1.5b, 8)1.5c, 8)6.1~, 1)97.lh
ec Stoudios, church ofStJohn of 1605.1:1
Piyer Loti Caddesi, remains east of (Bardiil, 'Lausus', fig. 2, 73 n. 23) Sea Walls (see also Saray Burnu, Sea Walls at) (Muller-Wiener, Bild-
hkoy Land Walls (Miiller-Wiener, Bildlexikon, 286-307)
61.101,124.13, 124·Ib, 13I.la, 345·la, 542.23, 542.33, 581.1a, 66o. Id, lexileon, 3°8-19)
B·1b 67.13,74.13, 76.la, 77.13, 1l0.1a, 158.la, 170.13, 189.la, 217.la,
666.li, 756.Ia, 766.13, 872.13, 1062.la, 1568.101 5·ld, 16.101,ao.rb, 27.IC, 39·1a, 47.rb, 56. la, r rj.ra, 132.13, 193.lb,
.enderhane Camii 219.la. 222.IC, 278.13, 302.13, 303.13, 306.13, 3 n.13, 314.1 b, 317.13,
Polyeukros, church ofSt (see also Sarachane) 214·la, 223·la, 230.13,241. IC, 248.la, 294.ra, 335.13, 386.101, 391.Ia,
.IC, 12.1a, r z.ra, 32.1a, 49.la, 71.la, 100.la, 105.la, 120.13, 126.93, )29.Ia, 337'53,377.13, 382.la, 395.la, 398.13, 449.la, 496.1 b, 5°4.13,
zo.ra, a r.ra, 22.13, 88.la, 89.101,90.13, 9I.I3o, 103.101, 1I9.Ia, 137.la, 435·Ja, 492.la, 500.la, 553·ta, 554·ra, 580.ra, 596.la, 596.Ib, 600.IC,
55.13,207.13,213.13,231.13, 232.la, 233.la, 257.la, 258.Ia, 275·Ia, 514.13, 543.la, 54 5·Ja, 547.1 a, 549.13, 575.13, 594.1 b, 63o.Ia, 6)2.1 b,
162.,~, 187.la, 203.IC, 216.la, 282.la, 338.101, 34°.101, 342.la, 347.la, 601.1a, 621.la, 636.la, 649.lb, 665.501, 666.lb, 666.93, 666.IIa,
Sj.ra, 306.1d, 325.la, 339.la, 389.13, 389.2a, 390.13, 394.13, 401.Ia, 636.1 b, 638.13, 64°.13, 642.1 a, 646.la, 655 .ra, 661.23, 666.lg, 666.IV,
368.ta, 369.13, 4°7.101, 469.la, 471.Ia~ 53 r.r a, 534·Ia, 535. la, 536.130, 668.23, 672.Ia, 693.la, 708.la, 763.la, 8II.la, 82 I.lq, 849.1a, 857.2a,
01.2',417.1., 417.lb, 429.1b, 546.tf, 546.lg, 557.1., 576.ld, 616.1b, 666.4CC, 676.6a, 695' la, 697.1:1,715.23,716.]:1,7] 8.Ja, 719.1 3, 744.Ia,
536.IC, 537·la, 538.101, 54o.Ia, 558. la, 633. 130,658.la, 660.lb, 660.201, 887.13,960.13, 997·la, 1028.IC, 1038.Ia, 1195.13, 1228.la, 1293.ld,
·16.IC, 618.la, 628.la, 637.la, 660.IC, 660.1e, 665.5b, 666.lj, 666.10, 750.2a, 7p.la, 7p.lb, 759.la, 76l.13, 767.13, 785.1f, 797.13, 802.13,
664.13, 665.130, 665·2a, 665'301, 665.430, 666.u, 666.4a, 666'4b, 1318.la, I340.Ia, 1370.13, 1389·Ia, 1470.la, 1483.13, 1494·la,
66.4d, 666.4h, 666.4hh, 676.4" 679.1., 680.)', 681.IC, 682.1., 817.lb, 8I7.IQ, 821.1a, 828.ld, 837.la, 848.1:1, 854.1:1, 857.13, 8S9.Ia,
666.1330, 667·lbb, 67l.Ib, 673.la, 68I.Ia, 681.23, 687.la, 694.1:1, 1519.13, 1523·la, Ip4·Ia, 1525·la, 1659.13, 1665·1a, 1693.13,
88.ta, 717.13,778.13, 809.la, 819.lb. 820.la, 847.13, 90I.3a. 904.la, 879.13, 879.1b, 888.]3, 890.13, 897.33, 917.13, 943.13, 948.la, 984.la,
775.13,820.1£,821. 1 m, 83 r.m, 831.73,83 1.9a, 832.ra, 833.13, 834.la, 1697·Ia
07.13, 955.1a, 1013.1a, 1016.la, 1021.13, 1033.la, 1037.la, 1040.Ia, 987.la, 995.13, 1032.la, 1034.13, 1045.13, 10p.IC, IoS8.13j'lo66.la,
834·2a, 835· la, 837.la, 838.Ia, 840. la, 885' la, 938.Ia, 946.la, 976.101, Sekbanbasi ibrahim Aga Mescidi (Muller- Wiener, Bildlexikon, 196-7)
041.13, 1°43.13, 1047.la, 1054.1a, 1069.13, 1074.la, 1086.13, 1125.13, r r ay.ta, 1135.13, 1140.la, II79.13, 1187.13, 1I89·13,
983·la, rooc.rb, 1044·1a, lo55·la, I07o.Ia, 1075·la, 1077.la, 1077·2a, 68.1a, 147.13, 678.lb, 1014-13
°92.13, r r r Sa a, r r j j.ra, II33.lb, 1139.13, 1148.13, 11 56.la, l204.1a, I214.lb, 1260.13, 1261.13, 1265.13, u66.1:l, u85.13,
1077.3a, 1°77.43, 1078.la, 1080.la, 1081.Ia, 1082.la, ]083.Ia, Sergius and Bacchus, church of SS (Miiller-Wiener, Bildlexikon, 177-
169.13, 1173.la, 1235.la, 1.254.13, I260.lb, 1274.la, 1302.la, 1288.1a, 129°.13, 1293.IC, 1303.la, 1333.23, IH8.13, 1345.la,
1084·la, 1085.la, 1087.13, 1088.130, 1088.1b, loS8.IC, 1089.la, 8))
306.la, r j z y.ra, 1334.lb, 1339.la, 13p.13, 1354.13, 1360.13, 1359.13, I359·lb, 1359.IC, 1377·la, 1405.13, 1419.]b, 1458.Ia,
109°.13, 1°91•101, 1093.201, 1095.13, 1096.101, 1°97.13, 1098.101, 127·2a, 276.lb, 1703·Ia
37l.ld, 1377.IC, 1378.lb, 1396.le, 1396.lg, 1397.lj, 1398.ld, 1459.la, 1461.13, 1462:1, 1465.13, 1484.13, 1486.13, 1487.13, 1496.la,
1099·la, 1100.13, 1I01.Ia, IJ08.la, 1201.101, 1245.la, 1247.13, Silivri
4°°.13. 1401.13, I411.la, 1414.la, 1415.la, 1424.la, 1425.lb, 1501.13, Ip5.la, Ip7.la, 1537.13, 1577.13, 1618.1:1, 1620.1:1,
1249.13, ra jo-ra, 1259.101, 1262.101, 1263.13, 1356.13, 1378.IC, 385.23, 451.101, 667.IQ, 676.ld, 678.Ia, Sz r.r t, 93o.Ia, 1028.ld,
426.Ia, 1429·la, 1430.la, 1431.Ia, 1437·lb, 1437·IC, 1457.13, 1626.ta, 1634.la, 1667.13, 1672.13, 1698.13
1386.13, 1386.23, IJ86.2b, 1)87.la, 1391.13, 1393.101, 1396.la, I225·IC, I399·lc, 1454.la, 1466.la, 1507.Ia, 1508.13, 1631.13
467.la, 1481.Ia, 1499.Ia, 1499.Ib, 1503.13, 15°4.13, 15°5.13, Lausus, palace of (so-called)
1397.101, 1397·Ig, I400.lb, 1403·ra, 1417.13, 1427.13, 1432.101, Singer Han, Beyazn
506.13, 1598.13, 1599.13, 1600.13, 1601.Ia, 1602.13, 16°3.13, see Antiochus, palace of
1588.la, 1683·la, 17°1.13, 1702.la, 1708.la, 1709.130, 1710.101, II4·Ia,212.Ia
6°4.13, 1685.Ia, 1686.13, 1711.13, 1720.la, 1725.Ia Long Walls (Crow and Ricci, 'Long Wall')
1731.13,1733·I:1,1735·la Sogan Aga (for the church in this area, see MilIler-Wiener, 'Hagios
lath 666.8a,1707·la
Pylae Agathonikos?'; Berger, Patria, 585, 593; Mango, Deueloppement, 69;
62.23 Mangana region
sec Karakilise Berger, 'Regionen', 368-9)
-Iorth; Church In· 13
Rhegian (Kucfik Cekmece) (Mufid Mansel, 'Rhegian') 4°5.101, 562.Ia
.r.rb, 73.la, 306.ld, 674·IQ, 853·1a, 9°7.53, 957.23, 972.23,1133.13, church of St George in the
6.1a, 154.130,265.13,299.13, )05.13, 428.130, 536.lb, 831.43, 893.lb, Sogukcesme Sokagi
I33.lb, 1255.13, 1354.13, 1379.Ia, 1445.13, 1691.Ja 188.ta, 297.la, 666.)3, 666.4S, 671.1 b, 68I.le, 738.13, 1675.Ja
894.13,906.101,1008.13, rcca.rb, 1030.I;1,1309.la, r j ao.r a, 1514.Ia, 9)4·1b,934·2•
-akilise (Pylae) (Mamboury in Mango, 'Helenopolis', 151-3) cistern
1656.101, 169l.la, 1716.13, 1726.la Seftali Caddesi, remains in
562.Ia see Cistern west of St George in the Mangana
Rumeli Hisan 1312•la
-iye Camii (see also cistern near Kariye Camii) (Muller- Wiener, tombs
336.101,666'4gg, SI7.U, 1106.201,1 r j a.r a Seker Ahmet Pasa Sokagl, remains in
ilexikon, 159-6)) 138.13,474.13,1192.13
Sait Efendi Sokagi, ruins north of (Mamboury, 'Fouilles 1', 246) 1165.13
15.lb, 666.l.2d, 928.Ia, r yj a.r a, 1350.13 Mercan Caddesi
Mamboury records that, in 1921, west of the Bodrum Camii and its Sophia, Hagia
:pos and Papylos, so-called church of SS (Muller- Wiener, Bild- II99·ra
rotunda, and on the north side of Sait Efendi Sokag', beside Kizlar justinianic church of
'kon, 186-7) Mese, Byzantine drains of the
Agasl Hamarm, were found two column bases similar to those r.r a, 3.13, .a.ra, 8.lb, 11.13, 128.101, 166.la, 203.2d, 203.2e, 203.2g,
715.13 25.2b, 42.Ia, 202.13, 2Il.Ia, 388.13, 420.13, 502.13, 576.1C, 577.13,
supporting the porphyry columns in the exedras of Hagia Sophia. A 203.2h, 203·2i, 203.33, 205.1a, aori.r a, aaj.rb, 228.la, 229.13, 270. la,
ieli Mescidi (Muller- Wiener, Bildlexikon, 166-8) 577.lb, 631.1a, 641.la, 666.IQ, 751.I:1, 939.la, 957.13, 1194.13,
mosaic of large black and white cubes was also found. Mamboury 337·IC, H7·1d, 337.301,355·la, 440.13, 533·la, 561.13, 574.la, 6°3·Ia,
46.1d 120l.1a, I205.la, 1231.]3, 12)2.13, I233·xa, 1234.1:1, 1358.13,
recovered one fragmentary stamped brick. (On his sketch plan of this 604.la, 6°5.101, 606.13, 608.13, 618.la, 663.101, 665.6a, 666.1f, 666.11,
ise Camii 1377.lb, 1380.1:1, 1395.13, 1397·IC
area, Mamboury also shows a ruin with an apse at the junction of Saic 666.1Z, 666.4C, 666.4j, 666.40, 666.4U, 666.4W, 666.4Y, 666.4Z,
ee Vefa Kili~e Camii Mesembria
Efendi Sokagl and Ihtisap Agasl Sokagr.) 666.4aa, 666·4bb, 666.4ff, 666.4ii, 666.5', 666.14d, 666.16a. 667.1d,
.le Sokagi (Berger, 'Vavassore', 346 no. 23) sce Nessebfir
Miihiirdar Emin Pasa Sokagi
1637·Ia 667.lh, 667.1(, 667.lt, 667.IU, 667.IX, 667.lii, 668.1 b, 668. Id, 668.le,
turns, possibly of a theatre, below Hayriye Hanim SOkagl at the
Samanlr Dag 674-lb, 674.IC, 674·ld, 674·1j, 674·IP, 674.1t, 674.1U. 674.IV, 674.1W,
unction with Kible SOkagl 25 ..23,46.13, ISI.13, 50i.! b, 577.IC, 793.13, 805.la, Il43. 13, 1453.13
821.a 674·1X, 675.10, 675.53, 676.1" 676.)c, 676.)h, 676.5c, 676.6b, 676.6d,
Ip.13 Myrelaion
Sancakrar Mescidi (Muller- Wiener, Bildlexikon, 194-5) 69°.13,692.13, 696.la, 77I.Ib, 779.la, 817.ld, 817.lf, 8I7.lh, 817.lj,
.lar Agasl Hamarm See Bodrum Camii
215.13 817·Ik, 8I7.lm, 817.In, 819·lh, 821.rg, 822.Ib, 831.IC, 88o. Id,
cc Sait Efendi Sokagi Nessebar
Sarachane (see also Polyeuktos, church of St) 893.33, 9ll.1a, 932.13, 934.Ia, 965·Ib, 966.13, 967·la, 967·IC, 967·Ig,
 ..~
•
INDEX TO THE FINDSPOTS IN THE CATALOGUE

967.ri, 967·rk, 967.11, 967. m, 967.10, 967.Ir. 967.2a, 968.rb, 968.rh, 24o.1a, 24J.lb, 617.la, 742.13, 891.)3, 892.2a, I072.ra, IHI.ra,
969·Ia, 969·lb, 969·le, 969.lg, 969.lh, 969.11, 969.IP, 97o.la, 971.1b, 1397·li, 1558.13, 1559.13
979.13, 981.la, I023·IC,III4.ra, II24·Ia, II34·Ib, I158.1a, up..lh, Tuzla
1253.1a, 1267.1a, 1272.rc, 1279.13, U8I.lb, 1284.la, I284.1b, 666.14e INDEX TO THE PUBLISHED BRICKSTAMPS
1298.13, f342.3d, IHz·le, 1342.3f, 1}42.7a, 1342.9:1, I35o.Ib, StGlykeria
1363.1:1,1365.13, 1396.rd, 1677.Ja, 1689.13 680.2b,68I.) IN THE CATALOGUE
Thcodosian church of University excavations
86.13, I11.la, 254.13, 286.1a, 456.la, 548.1:1, 899.3a, 959.13, 980.la, ", church complex (Theotokos of the Diakcnissa)
II9I.I:l, IJ3o.ra 102.13, J 53.1 b, 24 5.1b, 2 59.1 a, 3 13.IC, 676.IC, 678.2d, 82 LIU, 822.13, The publications containing references to bricks tamps are listed nO.2 932.la
Sophianae Palace 1028.lb, 1056.la, 1056.23, 1I30.Ia, l273.la, 1286.la, 1372.lb, according to their dates of publication. nO·3 1252·lb
see Beylerbeyi 1376.la, 1545.la, 1662.13
nO·4 969.IP
Stoudios, church ofStJohn of great wall to the north of the church complex Tlmoni, Promenades (1844) no. sa666.lz
24·Ia, 173.13, 174.la, 177.la, 491.la, 594.la, 8p.la, 1206.ra, 582.1e, 582.2b, 609.1., 666'4k, 666'41, 666.12C, 667.1gg, 667.1hh, 2.236 1050.la no.j b 667·lii
I246.Ia. 1308.1:1, 1468.1a, 1624·la 676.)f, 676.)j, 105)·la
Salzeuberg, Baudenkmale (1854) no.j c 665.63
Sultan Ahmet Vefa Kilise Camii (Miiller-Wiener, Bildlexikon, 169-71)
64no.1 675·IV no.j d 676.6d
48.Ia 45.13,4.22.13,804.13
64 no. 2 969.lg no.6 1023.IC
Tath su ile ACl Hamam, walls east of Yalova
64 no, 3 1284.13 nO.7 223.lb
see Ticarethane Sokagr 1282.13
Ded~ier, 'Makrikoy' (1871) Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Inscriptions' (1876)
Ticarethane Sokagr, walls east of Tatli su ile act Hamam and west of Valide Hamanu (Mamboury, Tourists' Istanbul, 602)
(Bardill, 'Lausus', 80n. 64) 161 no, A' 1452.13 Note that the paragraph preceding stamp no. 48 should re/er to nos.
Repairs were made to the dome of the bath building in 1939.
162no.A' 831.8a 48-5 I, not nos. 49-52, and that the text a/stamp 39 has not been printed
900.la, 9°°. rh SI8.Ih
Tiyatro Araligl Sokagr, Beyazit 162 no. A' 1450.13 la 1450.ra
Yusa Tepesi church
162 no.A", pl. lA' no. I Sa.ra rb (XIIIth Legion) 14j2.I.
493·Ia II02.la
Zeuxippos, baths of (including Great Palace area Ea) ,,.....,.~ 162 no. /J..', pl. IA~ no. let.' 20.IC le (]NTONID 8JI.8.
Tokludede Mescidi
162 no. /J..', pl. lA~ no. IW 167°.13 2, pl. 14 no. I 1383.la
8.13,19.13, az.rb, ya.ra, 53.lb, 99.la, 193.13, 25o.la, 304·1a, 378.13, r a.rd, 4I.la, 64.la, 66.la, 96.la, t j a-r a, 263.13, 280.13, 313.13,
162 no. /J..', pI. lA~ no. Ir' 1669.IC ) 956•la
418.IC, 458.13, 494.13, pl.ra, 532.la, 5ja.rb, 546.1 b, 661.1 b, 666.lt, 31 I-r a, J2 3.13, 337·3c, 372.1a, 444·la, 475·lb, 478.13, 539.13, 572.23,
162 no. /J..~,pl. lA' no. 10' 1669.13 4 13°7.13
67o.Ia, 673.1 b, 739.13, 787.1 b, 814.13, 828.13, 856.13, 863.1 b, 867.ld, 6°7.13,615.13, 619·IC, 649.ld, 666.IC, 667.IZ, 668.13, 675.IC, 675.43,
162 no. /J..', pi. lA' no. re 1669.Ib 5 857.23
869·Ia, 870.13, 919.Ia, 942.Ia, 1026.2a, 1048.13, 1094.13, 1109.Ie, 675.63, 698.13, 772.la, 772.23, 825.13, 929·la, 931.13, 972.13,
162 no. /J..',p1.LA' no. 1<;' 344.13 6 129o.2a
I128:la, II74.13, 1177.la, 1276.rb, 1277.13, 1319.13, 135o.ld, 1004.1:1, ror r.ra, rot r-ru, 1093.13, 1]04.13, rr rs.rd, II23.13,
1384.13, 1398.la, 14oo.IC, 1664.la, I700.la, 1745·Ib 1223.13, 1224.13, Il25.lb, 1229.13, 1269.13, J313·13, 1335.13,
162 no. /J..',pI. lA' no. IS'167r.za 7 j oo.r a
162 no. /J..',pl. lA' no. 11,- 81.23 8 710.13
Topalian Haru, ruins near 1342.Sf, 1361.1f, 1382.13, 1422.13, 1423.13, 1434.la, 1436.la,
163 no. E', pi. lA' no. 2 69.13 9 IJ24·13
Ruins in the area bounded by Hoca Ham Sokagr, Kaputcular Sokagt, 1446.13,1544.13,1628.13
and Kanrcioglu Sokagi 163 no. E', pl.La" no. 3 70.13 598.1•
163 no.r;', pl. lA'no. 4 rcj r.rb 662.13
163 no. Z', pl. lA' no. 5 1550.13 12 715.13
164 no. I-I", pl.IA' no. 6 582.)a 13 576.13
164 no. eo,
pl.IA- no. 7 (top) 786.1. 14 800.13
164 no. 8', pl. LA' no. 7 (bottom) 789.IC 15 768.la
164 no. I-,pl.!A'no. 8 785o'f 16, pl. I4 no. 2 15o.la
164 no. lA', p]. lA' no. 9 n6.ld 17, pl. 14 no. 3 171+13
165 no. IB',pi. lA' no. 10 1366.13 18,pl.14no·4 17°4·la
166 no. IT', pl. lA' no. I I 1270.13 '9, pl. r q no. 5 976.lb
166 no. l/J..', pl. lA' no. 12 290.1a 20 337.ld
166 no. IE-, pl. lA-no. r4 ))7.5a 2°3.33
166 no. 1<;',pl. lA' no. 15 Sa r.rp 880.Id
166 no. IZ',pl. IA'no. 16 15p.I3 23 1051.lb
r67no.IH·,pI.IA·no.17 r6pa 24 69.13
167 no. r8', pl. LA' no. IS 130I.13 25 70.13
167 no, K', pi. lA' no. 19 190.ra 26 785.13
167 no. K', pi. lA' no. 19' 189.13 27 915.13
167 no. KA',pl. lA' no. 20 1549.13 28 58.la
167 no. KJ3'a',pl. lA' no. 21 1678.13 29 1018.1a
167 no. KB'p-, pl. lA' no. 22 888.1a 30 911.13
Mord trnann, Konstancinopel (1873) 31 J606.1a
p.I8 831.83 32,Pl. 14nO.6 I359·ra
p. 37 1606.13 33 329·Ja
J4 57)·la
Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Letter' (r874)
35 3°9.13
no. I 1124. la
 --------------- -------.-- --------------------------------------------------~-------

..~
•
INDEX TO THE PUBLISHED BRICKSTAMPS IN THE CATALOGUE INDEX TO THE PUBLISHED BRICKSTAMPS IN THE CATALOGUE 423
422

Curtis, Broken Bits, i (c. I 887) Meliopoulcs, 'Anekdotoi' (1905) Meliopouios, "Ta Honoratou' (1908)
36 I125·le
37 11l.9·IU no.c j 239.13 73 927·la 2I6no.1 820.tj
38 1218.1a 73 1373·Ia 216 no. 2 1449.la
Curtis, Broken Bits, ii (C.1891)
39 (inscription not printed) not catalogued 73 1372.If 216 no.) 14p.la
no. 59 1463.13
73 231.IC
40 115o.1a no.69 897·)' Sideridcs, 'Remarks' (1908)
4I,Pl.14ll0·7 517·rb 74 553·lb 218 no. 3 666.2b
no.Bo 312.1<1
42 684·la Antoniades, HagiaSophia, j (1907) 218 no. 4 599. r a
Leval, 'Archaiclogika' (1888)
43. pl. 14 no. 8 1102.2a 1>16 600.1b
8) fig. 9 817·m
Xenakis, 'Exakribdseis' (1910)
44 908.23 83 n.)6 276.lb
6r7~· 5l7.1b 1I6no. I II26.I3
45 666.12C 84 fig. 10 666.43a
61lY' 1333.13 rr6 no. 2 II25.la
46 375.1:1 84 fig. 1 I 969.IC
619 no. A' 987.1a rr6 no. 3 617.13
47 945·la 84fig.12 I.13
619 no. B' 398.13 116 no. 4 200.lb
48, pI. 1400. IO 831.IC 84 fig. I) 20).2h
619-620 section IV 1342.]3 George, St. Eirene (1912)
49, pI. 14 no. II 1342.73 84 fig. 14 r66.13
Gedeon, 'Engraphoi' (1889) pl. 16 no. I 967.le
50 uSI.rb Meliopoulos, "Topothesia' (1907)
)82 546.ld pl. 16 no. 2 967.IQ
51 574·la 229 1050.X3
)82(]API(J)AND 60].1. pl. 16 no. ) 969.d
52 582·3a 229 676'5a
)82 (fIETPOYNAYKAHPOY) Il25.la pl. t6 no. 4 968.ld
53 1270.la
)82 (BAPEN8) 6r8.1'
229 I I 52.la
pl. ,6 no. 5 666.5b
54 1261.13 229 no. 1 1560.13
)82 (ABAC) 619.1. pl. ,6 no. 6 666.4'
55 p6.lb 229no.2 1552.13
390 821.Ir pl. ,6 no. 7 674-lk
56 I13.la 229 no. 3 790.13
Lampakis, Mone Dephniow (1889) pl. 16 no. 8 674.U
57 IIo6.Ta 229 no. 4 S17.IS
87withn. 3 (Athens) 967.10 p]. 16 no. 9 819.lf
58 r6S·Ja 229 no. 5 1416.13
87 n.) (Berlin) 967.IP pl. 16 no. 10 817.le
59 189.13 230no. I 617.1a pl. re no. 11 667.10
60, pl. 14 no. 12 I028.IC Albert, 'Antigoni' (1891) 230 no. 2 24I.Ib
pl. 16 no. 12 337.lb
61, pl. 14 no. 9 536.ld 38 62.Ja 230 no. 3 1559.13 pl. 16 no. 13 20).2f
62, pl. 14 no. 13 1342.6a 39 1679.]3 2)0 no. 4 1°72.13 pl. 16 no. 14 up.le
6) 1)61.lg 39 ]680.13 2)0 no. 5 742.13
p]. re no. 15 933.13
64 r622.Ia 39 ]681.13 231 section B' no. I 857.13
pl. 16 no. 16 1342.Sb
65 1065·1a 39 fig. 20 13p.la zj r section B' no.u 547.13
pl. 16 no. 17 I342.Sb
66 1625.la Sideropoulos, 'Byzanrinai Epigraphai' (1891) aj r section Bt no.q 1204.13
p]. 16 no. 18 136).lb
67 697·1a 26 section I" no. 2 576.lb 231 secrion Btno.a 1058.la
pl. 16 no. 19 136I.le
Sorlin-Dorigny, 'Marque' (I876) 26-7, no. £'2 JJ78.ra 231 scction I'<uo. I 127.23
pl. 16 no. 20 294.13
)15 ]BAfIeT 1066.1a 26-7,no.E'2 J548.13 2JI section I" no. 2 1703.Ia
pl. 16 no. 21 II45.la
) 16 n. I ]NHBAllE[ 1620 .r a 26-7, no. £'2 1561.13 231 r rz j.ra Imencioncd)
2JI no. 6 240.13
Seure, 'Antiq uices' (1912)
Paspates, Byzantinai Meletai (1877)
Forchhcimer and Strzygowski, \Vasserbehiilter (1893)
23 I no. 7 891.)3 573 fig. 17 no. I 1631.13
45,160 I75.IC
)66 )74.10 573 fig. 17 no. 2 93o.Ja
49 1438.1• 231 no. 8 892.23
)66 689.10 573 fig. 17 no. J 667·Iq
zj t no.y I558.Ia
Lerhaby and Swainson, Sancta Sophia (I 894) 573 fig. 17 no. 4 678.1a
Mordtmann, 'Diomedes' (1880) 231 no. 10 1)4I.I3
156 no. 1 674.IV 573 fig. 17 no. 5 15°7.13
23 no. I 3I4.Ib 2)1 no, II 1397'xi
156 no. 2 969.lg 573 fig. 17 no. 6 1508.13
23 no. 2 309.la
156 no. 3 128 4.13 Meliopoulos, "Nikeriaton' (1907)
573 fig. 17 no. 7 1454.13
Lampakis, 'Christian Stamps' (r883) Paluka, 'Ruinen' (1895) 285 907·5b 573 fig. 17 no. 8 17°7.13
5' 5 (Athens) 967.10 285 79I.Xa
36fig.) 12]5·la Van Millingen, Churches (1912)
5' 5 n. 4 (Berlin) 967.1 p 285 82I.IS
)7 fig. 4 171).la 79 no. I 276.Ib
Curds and Aristarches, 'Anekdoroi' (1885) Paluka, 'Zisteme' (1895) Meliopoulos, 'Rufinianai' (1907)
79 no. 2 not catalogued (Turkish)
I I no. KE' 239.1:'1 282 no. 1 199.13
599 1627.13 Meliopoulos, 'Panteichion' (1913)
II no. Kt;" 1624.13 282 no. 2 200.13
Van Millingen, Walls (1899) 456nO. I 925.13
20 no. 9'· 1438.13
282 no. 3 1690.13
265 312.13 (mentioned) 456no.2 307·la
36 no. PM~' 1463.ra Gottwald, 'Ziegelsrempel' (1908)
Meliopoulos, 'Auxentiou' (1900) 456no.3 141).13
Sideropoulos, "Autonomos' (1886) 485 no. t 77.13
64 n. 4 659.13 456 no. 4 1416.la
485 no. 2 543.13
122 584.13 Schuchhardt, 'AnastasIus-Mauer' (1901) Tsakalof, 'Saryros' (191)
485 no. )/4 948.13, II79·13
122 1623.1:\ r rj fig. 9 66.8a I26 1314.13
485 no. 5 )9·ra
Papadopoulos Keramcus, 'Thrace' (1886) Lampakis, Mtmoire' (1902) 485 no. 6 rSS.13 Wulzinger, 'Substruktionsbauten' (1913)
73 1432.lb 15 fig. 15 967.10 485 no. 7 not catalogued (Turkish) J8I,fig.8no.I 1215.13
 ·.'!"
•
INDEX TO THE PUBLISHED BRICKSTAMPS IN THE CATALOGUE INDEX TO THE PUBLISHED BRICKSTAMPS IN THE CATALOGUE

381, fig. 8 no. 2 1713.13 col. 546 no. 7 500.13 55oo.JI r r i S.rd no.26_4 303.1a
38r, fig. 8 no. 3 194.la col. 546 no. 8a 337.1d 55 no. J2 1434.13 no. 27. I 74.13
381,fig.8no.4 842.1;\ col. 546 no. 8b 203.3a 55 no. 3J 1°51.13 no. 27.2 377·ra
)81, fig. 8 no. 5 657.ld col. 546 no. 8c 880.Id 55 no. J4 698.13 no. 27.3 398.13
381, fig. 8 no. 6 r08.la col. 546 no. 9a toj r.rb 55 no. 35 93I.13 no. 28.1 837.13
38r,fig.8no·7 76r·13 col. 546 no. 9b 69.13 55 no.)6 9l9·r3 no. 28.2 837.la
382 193.Ib (mentioned) col. 54600. 9c 70.1:'1 55 no. 37 772.l3 no. 29.1 1266.1a
386, fig. 10 no. 1 24I.Ja "col. 546 no. 9d 785.13 55no·38 675·6a no. 29.2 1265.13
386, fig. ro no. 2 1197.1:1 co1.546no·ge 715.13 55 no. 39 1628.1:1 nO·30.1 312.13
386, fig. ro no.j 1546.1a col. 54600.10 1124.la 55 no. 40 66.13 no. )0.2 1359.lb
386, fig. ro no.a 1067.la col. 546 no. 1 I 969.IP 55no'41 Ip.la Talbot Rice, 'Bodrum Camii' (1933)
386, fig. 10 no. 5 1141.13 Du Mesnil du Buisson (1924-25) 56 no. 42 582.le
no. I 334.ra
390, fig. 15 198.13 92 (non vidi) 247.13 56 no. 43 13l7.l:1 nO.2 629.la
Mendel, Sculptures grecques (1914) Papadopoulos, 'Note' (1925) 56 no. 44 734.13
nO·3 432.13
538 16°5.13 56 no. 45 1006.13
)41 46I.IC nO·4 457.ra
Unger, 'Seraispitze' (1916) 56 no. 46 478.13
Wulzinger, Baudenhmaler (1925) no. 5 568.13
fig. 10 no. 2 1397.lh 56 no. 47 649.ld
38,41,pI.2O(top) 153·1a no.6 799.13
fig. 10 no.) 1388.13 56 no. 48 1446.la
nO·7 II46.ra
41 p]. '0 (middle) r j ya.re
fig. 10 no. 43 83I.5b 56 no. 49 475.1b no.8 44.13
41 p]. 20 (bottom) 24I.I3
fig.lono·4b 83I.5C Meyer-Plarh and Schneider, Landmauer (1933) no.9 I 510. la
Papadopoulos, Blecbemes (1928) no. I 76.la
fig. 10 no. 5 1668.la no. 10 218.23
145 162I.1:l
fig. la no. 6 835.lb nO.2.1 549.13 no. Il 36.la
146 no. I 476.13 00.2.2 547.la
fig. 10 no. 7 836.la 316.13
146 no. 2 463.13 00·3 646.1a
fig. 10 no. 8a 186.13 no. I) 824. r a
fig. la no. 8b 168.1a Gray, 'Brickstamps' (1929) nO·4·1 744.13 no.14 227.lb
fig. la no. 9 396.Ia 510. I 203.2i nO·4·2 750.23 no. 15 808. la
fig. la no. 10 472.la SI n. I 817.In nO.4.3 802.13 nO.16 90I.13
fig. ro no. JI 385.la 53 no. I 6I5·Ia nO·4·4 767.13 no.17 1471.13
fig. 10 no. 12 118.13 53 no. 2 I361.If no. 5.1 890.13 no. 18 657.lh
fig. rono. 13 364.13 53 no. 3 280.la no. 5.2 984·1a nO.19 1131.13
fig. r o no. 14 639.la 53 no. 4 IJ23·I3 no.6 987.la
Mamboury and Wiegand, Kaiserpalaste (1934)
fig. r o no. 15 1541.13 53 no. 5 ror r.r a nO·7 1045·la
3 no. I 3J 5·ra
fig. ro no. 16 79.13 53 no. 6 I31}.l3 no.8 888.13
3 no. 2 56.13
fig. rono. 17 79.33 53 no. 7 1423.13 nO·9 504.la 12 no. I 1616.13
fig. re no. 18 1542.IC 53 no. 8 263.13 00.10 1626.13
12 no. 2 1617.1a
fig. 10 no. 19 1542.la 53no·9 572•2a no. II 1179.13
12 no. 3 667.Idd
figro no.uo 1542.Ib 53 no. 10 64.13 nO.12.I 828.ld
12no·4 784.13
fig. ro no. 21 1543.la 53 no. 11 337.3c nO.12.2 817. Iq
15 no. 1 I028.IC
fig. r o nov z z 1175.la 53 no. 12 II04.13 no. 12.) 666.IV
15 no. 2 193.lb
54 no. 13 667·IZ no. I) )285.1:l
Soteriou, Hagia Sophia (1917) 16 763.Ia
54 no. 14 1436.13 nO.14 278.13
64 666.4aa, r.ra, 203.2h, 969.IC 20 (centre, centre) 248.13
54 no. 15 96.13 no. 15 )06.13
Mamboury, 'Mara' (1920) 20 (centre, right) 223.la
54 no. 16 1544.13 no.16 543.1:'1 20 (bottom) ac.rb
328 (Magnus Presbyteros)916.la 54 no. 17 1269.13 nO.17 575.13
),8 (BAAYSA) 136.xa, 1456.10 20 (top) 665-5"
54 no. 18 539.13 no. 18 1577.1a
329 (nOA Y) 1606.1" (mentioned) ao Icencre.Iefr) 553.13
54 no. 19 972.la no. 19 676.63
36 828.lb, c, 8l9.la, 830.la, 909.lb, 910.13, 918.la, b, c, 922.13,
Meliopoulos, 'Investigations' (1921) 54 no. 20 323.la no. 20 785.1f
1737·2a, 1738.lb, 1743.23, 1744.2a (mentioned)
9 907·3C,614:l·ra 54 no. 21 607.la nO.21 859.13
)8 (top right) 817.It
Ebersolt and Macridy, 'Monuments' (1922) 54no.22 }15·13 no. 22.1 917.1a
)8 (cop left) 666.1h
391, fig. z5 13°5.13 54 no. 23 444·13 nO.22.2 632.lb
38 (centre left) 41.1a
54 no. 24 14ll.I3 no. 23 948.13
Leclercq, 'Estampilles' (1922) )8 (botcom left) 675'lC
54no.25 1335.13 nO.24 U60.13
col. 545 no. I 145o.1:l 38 (centre right) 825.ra
54 no. 26 77l.la nO.25·1 I3J8.1a
col. 545 no. 2 1383·la )8 (bottom right) 12.1d
55 no. 27 1225.lb no. 25.2 1333.23
col. 545 no. 3 956.la 40 (cop) 560.1"
55 no. 28 1°°4.13 no. 26.1 514.13
col. 545 no. 4 1307·la 40 (bottom) 29·1a
55 no. 29 )224·1<\ no.26.2 640.13
col. 545 no. 5 I 57.2a 43 29.13
55 novjc 1093·1a no. 26.3 642.1a
col. 546 no. 6 1290.2a Laurent, 'Inscriptions' (1936)
 ..~
INDEX TO THE PUBLISHED BRICKSTAMPS IN THE CATALOGUE
•
INDEX TO THE PUBLISHED BRICKSTAMPS IN THE CATALOGUE
229 fig. 3.2)0 no. I 949.13 26S no. 22 IJOS.J3
229.230 no. 2. 193.td 26s no. 23 IJ24·13 267 no. 73 933·Ia 84 fig. 92 (top)(and P' 78) 668.2.
26sno.24 8.la 267 no. 74 92I.I3 84 fig. 92 {botromjfand p. 78 wirh n. 2) 596.10
Mamboury, 'Fouilles I' ([9)6)
265 no. 25 96.1:1 267 no. 75 167o.la 90. n. 4 404.13 (mentioned). 406.la (mentioned)
239 1305·1a
265 no. 26 168.1:1 267 no. 76 not catalogued 104, fig. 119. no. I 1106.33
Mamboury, "Tchifte Serail' (1936) 267 no. 77 972.la
265 no. 27 J9.I3 I04,fig. 119. no. 1 827.13
[72 (top) 59." 267 no. 78 1011.13
265 no. 28 ll8.1a 104. fig. 119. no. 3 569.]3
172 (bottom) 67.Ia 267 no. 79 1018.13
.l65 no. 29 315.13 I04.fig. 119. no. 4 1200.13
(7) (top) 64·ra 268 no. 80 !I23.1a
26S no. 30 396.13 104. fig. 1I9.no. 5 729.13
(7) (bottom} 66.[a 268 no. 81 I125.1C.1129.13
265 no. 313 527.Ib Remezi, 'Sophienkirche' ([9)9)
Schneider, 'Sophienkirche' (19)6) 265 no. 31b 508.13 268 no. 82 1°51.13
col. 178 left 676'5C
84 no. I 899.3a 265 no. J2 617.13 268 no. 8) 1093.13
col. 178 right 1253.1a
84 no. 2. 86.13 265 no. 33 456.13 268 no. 84 Up.13 (erroneous). I256.u (erroneous)
268 no. 85 1272.Ie Swift, H agia Sophia (r 940)
Schneider, Byzanz (1936) 265 no. l4 899· P
268 no. 86 1313.13 yo no. I 817.ln
94-95 no. 18 1193·la 265 no. 35 1006.13
268 no. 87 1335.Ja 50 no. 2 666.433
93 no. 1) 1151.13 26s no. 36 1°72.13 (erroneous). 742.13 (erroneous)
268 no. 88 I118.Id 50 no.) 969.1g
95 sect. 18 not catalogued 26S no. 37 !I7S·13
268 no. 89 1284.13 50 no. 4 166.1a
96.2700.1 241.Ib 26S no. 38 I225.Ib
265 no. 39 Il69·I3(erroneous) 268 no. 90 1408.13 Schneider, lVertho[(1941)
96.27 no. 2 240.13
265 no. 40 1327.13 268 no. 91 193.13 6no.l 86.13
,6.27 no. 3 891.)3
266 no. 41 r a.rd 268 no. 92 842. I 3 6 no. 2 899.)3
,6.27 no. 4 892.23
266 no. 42 56.la 268 no. 93 908.23 6 no. 3 959.13
96.27 no. 5 617·la
266 no. 43 4I.13 268 no. 94 927.13 6no·4 456.13
Schneider, 'Ziegelstempel' (1937)
266 no. 44 58. la 269110.95 949.13 6no. 5 III.l:l
263 no. la 76.13
266 no. 45 69.la ,69no·96 969··b 6 no. 6 with Corrigenda 119I.X3
263 no. rh 77.la
269no.97 SI.13 6 no. 7 with Corrigenda 286.13
266 no. 46 79.1 a
263 no. IC 13°5.13
266 no. 47 r r j r.ra 269 no. 98 ac.rb 6 fig. I 1730.la
264 no. Id 294.13
266 no. 48 165.1a 269 no. 99 309·la 26 no. 1 666'53
26400. re 1145.1a
266 no. 49 113.13 269 no. 100 I36I.Ig ,6 no. 2 676.)h
264 no. rf 1450.13
266 no. 50 203.2i 269 no. 101 IH2.3d 26 no. 3 337.IC
264 no. rg 1446.Ia
26600. P 366.13 269 no. 102 136I.If 26 no. 4 969.lb
264 no. rh 1544.13
266 no. 52 337·IC 269 no. 103 1028.IC 26 no. 5 I272.IC
264 no. 2. 29.13
26600·53 475.la Demangel and Mamboury, Manganes (1939) 26 no. 6 97I.tb
264 no. J 86.Ia
266 no. 54 478.Ia 16. fig. 16 (and 15 with n. 2) 47.lb 26 no. 7 921.la
264 no. 4 rrs.ro
266 no. SS 444.1a 16, fig. 17 no. I (and 15 with n. 2) 811.13 26 no. 8 603.13
264 no. 5 175·JC
266no·56 517·lb 16, fig. 17 no. 2 (and 15 with n. 2) 5.ld 26 no. 9 674.1;
264 no. 6a 240.13, 24I.I3 (apparently erroneous)
266 no. 57 546.Ie, 539.13 16, fig. 17 no. 3 (and r 5 with n. 2) 666.113 26 no. 10 1677.13
264 no. Gb 24I.Ib
266 no. 58 H3.13 26 no. I I 228.13
264 no. 7 220. r a 16. fig. 17 no. 4 (and IS with n. 2) 666.lb
266 no. 59 582.le 29. fig. 31 no. I 666,33 26 n. I 965.tb
264 no. 8 335.13
266 no. 60 573.13 29, fig. 31 00.2 67I.lb 39 no. I 1253.1a
264 no. 9 364.13
266 no. 6J 1549.13 29, fig. ). noj 666.4' 39 no. 2 676'5C
264 no. 10 S98.1a
266 no. 62 615.13 29,fig.)1 nO.4 681.le Emerson and van Nice. 'Preliminary Report' (1943)
264 no. r r soo.la
266 no. 6) 649 .• d 29. fig. 32 no. I 1348.13 416 n. 30 674.1U
264 no. I2 7°4.13
264 no. IJ 662.13 267 no. 64a 675.63 29. fig. J2 no. 21349.13 Schneider, 'Marryrion' (I943)
267 no. 64b 82.5.13 29.6g. J3 no. I 297.I:l
264 no. 143 710.13 fig.2 975.1b
267 no. 64C Sq.IC 29,fig·)3no.2 738.la
264 no. J4b 734.la Lauffray, 'Beryre' (1944-45)
267 no. 64d 666'5a '9, fig.)) no.) [675.1a
264 no. 14c 715.13 31 fig. I. 897.23
267 no. 64e 665.53 29. fig. 33 no. 4 188.13
264 no. 14d 76J.13 J2 247·Ia
267 no. 64f' 8p.5b, c 37. fig. 44 no. I 138.13
264 no. 14e 799.13
267 no. 65 698.13 37, fig. 44 no. 2 474.13 Schneider, 'Aquadukr' (1944-45)
264 no. "4f 768.la
267 no. 66 not catalogued 37, fig. 44 no. 3 1192.13 Col.J5 1630.13,245.lb,821.IU
265 no. IS 867.1:1.
267 no. 67 772.2'J. fig. 60 no. 1 1068.13 Col. 76 678.Ib, 68.la, 147.13
26S no. 16 26J.I:1
267 no. 68 X628.I'J. fig. 60 no. 2 861.13 Ramazanoglu, Sainte-Irine (I946)
26S no. 17 Jl46.1:1.
267 no. 69 772.13 fig. 60 no. 3 1475.13 fig.2 667.'y
265 no. J8 1296.13
267 no. 70 857.201 8, fig. 88 no. I (and p. 77) 492 . ra fig.) 8'9.«
265 no. 19 1197.13
267 no. 71 8S0.Id 8 I fig. 88 no. 2 (and p. 77) 666.9' fig·4 '444·'1.
265 no. 20 J8I.la
267 no. 72 9Jl.1a 8dig. 88 no.) (and p. 77) 649.lb fig. 5 923.1a
265 no. 21 129J.lb
8dig.88 no.afand p. 77) 1)40 .r a fig.6 968.[,
 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~------------------,

"~
•
INDEX TO THE PUBLISHED BRICKSTAMPS IN THE CATALOGUE INDEX TO THE PUBLISHED BRICKSTAMPS IN THE CATALOGUE

Velkov, 'Basilica' (1946) pl.qno·76 787·IC 21 fig. 3 (bottom centre left) 1344.1C 107 fig. 11 no. 7 787.Id
69 no. 1 589.1d p]. 14 no. 79 )80.2b 21 fig. 3 (bottom centre right) I342.5b 107fig.2Ino.8 6I8.le
69 no. 2 684.1b p]. 14 no. 80 857.)3. 1 I fig. 3 (bottom far right) 1341.la 175,fig·36no.1 580.la
69 no. 3 590.If PI.I4no.83a,45 819·IC fig·4 3Il.Ia 175,fig·36no.2 1483·ra
69 no. 4 590.ld PI.14no.85 961.13 2) (IOYCTINIANOY NIKHTOY) 586.1a 175, fig. 36 no. 3 1494·Ia
69 no. 5 281.13 Pl.14oo.86 798.13 Emerson and van Nice, 'Collapse' (1951) 175,fig.36no.4 1228.la
GP 1(1947) Pl.14no.87 I236.la 103 fig. 12 969.lh 175,fig. je no. 5 27·IC
pl. 14 no. 1 1498.la ..ipLI400.88 15°9.13 103 fig. r z (just visible) 1363.I3 Dirimtekin, 'Beylerbey' (1959)
pl. 14 no. 2 1593.la Mamegris, 'Hagia Sophia' (1947) Frrath, 'Trois eglises' (195 r) I 1,27 IQ.5o.ra
pl. 14 no. 3 1718.la 289 667·IY, 819·IC, 957.33 172,177 p]. 7(b) no. I 1028.1b 13, 29 no. I 1554.la
pl. 14 no. 5 Sao.r h 172,177 pl. 7(b) no. 1 1056.la 13,19no.2 644·ra
Frratlr, "Tuglalar' (1948)
pl. 14 no. 7 1719·Ja 1028.lb 172,177 pl. 7(b) no.) 1)72.1b 13,19 no. 3 1694·la
pl. 14 no. S 8.11. III 172,177 pl. 7(b) no. 4 676.1C 13,19no·4 1557·la
I) 678.2d
pI. 14 no. 10 1592.13
I) 969.1k 172, 177 pl. 7(b) no. 5 102.1' 13,29no·5 1555·la
p]. 14 no. r r 1596.1a 172,177 p]. 7(b) no. 6 I286.Ia 13,29no.6 I5I3·la
Mamboury, 'Chrisme' (1949)
pl. 14 no. 12 I597.1a 172,177 pl. 7(b) no. 7 259·la 13,29no·7 1556.la
454 no. 1 1396.~c
pl. 14 no. 14 964.13 '12, '77 p]. 7(b) no. 8 822.1. Dirimtekin, 'Blachernes' (1959)
454 DO. 2 1396.lb
p]. 14 no. 15 1591.1a .'72, 177 pl. 7(b) no. 9 1545,la 22,31 no. I 462.13
454no·3 1396.lh
p]. 14 no. 16 1355.la 172, 177 pl. 7(b) no. 10 678.2d 12,31 no. 2 242.lb
pl. 14 no. 17 75.Ia 455nO·4 74.13
Duyuran, 'Palace of Justice I' (1952) 22,31 no. 3 242.IC
pI. 14"0. 19 575.lb 455no·5 377·la
455 no.6 398.la 37 fig. 15 1402.lb 22,31 no. 4 466.13
p]. 14 no. 21 1443.H1 22,31 no. 5 465·la
456 no. 7 956.13 37 fig. 16 1003.la
pl. r a no. 23 785.le 22,31 no. 6 467.Ia
456 no. 8 17°0.13 Schneider, 'Review' (1952)
p]. 14 no. 24 667.ICC
456 no. 8 bis 1028.1C 22,31 no. 7 1699·la
pl. 14 no. 25 1495.la 221 667.IY, SI9·IC, 957.3a
457 no. 9 1400.IC Eyice, 'Palais de Bryas' (1959)
pl, 14 no. 26 287.la Duyuran, 'Palace of Justice Il' (1953)
457 no. 10 1399.ld 86 not catalogued
pI. 14 no. 28 517.13 fig·7a 992.1:1
457 no. II 1397.Ih Dirimtekin, 'Room' (1960)
pl. 14 no. 29 816.13 fig.7C 1182.la
457 no. 12 1397·Ii 15 and 40 1689.la
pl. 14 no. 30 1654.13 Ramazanoglu, 'Irenen-Kirche' (1953)
458 no. 13 1398.13
pl. 14 no. J2 667·lb 2)4 and fig. 9 586.Ia Dirimtekin, 'Sarachane' (1960)
458 no. 14 1397·ld
pl. 14 no. 33 380.2a fig. 14 (left) '4).la
458 no. 15 1397.1C Eyice, 'Sekbanbasi' (1954)
pl. 14 no. 34 1337·1a fig. 14 (right) 8)1.7'
458 nos. 16, 17 not catalogued (Turkish, and not, as Mamboury 158fig.10 IOI4·Ia
pl. 14 no. J5 273.13
believed, two different stamps) Mango, 'Review l' (1960)
pl. 14 no. 36 380.la Eyice, 'Remarques' (1955)
459 no. 18 508.13 68 1364.la (mentioned)
pl. 14 no. 37 1334.ra 194 fig. 3 II02.la
68 n. 2 787.ld (mentioned)
pl. 14 no. 39 1590.13 Mamboury, 'Nouvelle lecture' (1949) Maletskos, 'Plinthos' (1955)
P1.14no.41 1594.13 II9 1296.1:1 Dirimrekin, 'Fouilles' (1962)
270,Pl. n.1 j ro.r a
228.13 82I.IV
pI. 14 no. 42 1)97.lb 270. pl. 53.2 193.IC
pl, 14 no. 4) 78pd 396.13 67pb
270, pl. 53.3 I406.lb
pl. 14"0. 44 676.)b 122 1006.13, 13.13,427.13,965.1 b, 1444.1 b, 396.la nO·3 1064.IC
27°, pi. 54.1 12S!.IC
pl. 14 no. 45 see pl. 14 no. 833 123 123 J. I 3,94.13, 52.1 a-c, 32 3.13, 153.1:1,766.13,793.1 a, not cat- nO·4 674.15
270 (8H1MKAIn) 512.1a (mentioned)
pl. 14 no. 46 816.lb alogued, 1707.13, 1192.13, 1324.13, 662.Ia, 129°.13 nO.5 666.13a
271, pi. 54.2 I53.lb
124 53.13.629.13,323.1:1, 667·IY. 819.IC no.6 226.2a
pl. 14 no. 47 1695·la 272, pl. 54.) 967·Ij
pl. 14 no. 49 r rj.rb 125 923.13 no. 7 1363.lg
273, pi. 54·4 1742.Ia
pl. 14 no. 50 666.1U no.8 1361.lh
Mango, 'Brick Stamps' (1950) Duyumn, 'Bayazn' (1958) nO·9 1736.ld
pl. 14 no. 51 666.14a The many stamps referred to in this article had generally been previously pI.
6A 1004.Ib
TalbotRice, Byzantines (1962)
pl. 14 no. 52 676·5b published. and should be located according to the references given by p]. 6B 1547.la
p]. 14 no. 56 1595.13 Mango. The published brickstamps for which Mango gives no reference, 8rfig.9 Sar.rk
pl. 6C lI64.ra
pl. 14 no. 57 676.)e and the previously unpublished brickstamps are asfollows: Besevliev, InschriJten (1964)
p]. 14 no.-61 820.li 19 fig. la not catalogued (Turkish)
GPII(1958)
103 no. 153 a p]. 54 no. 151 590.le
p]. 14 no. 62 1393.lb 106 203.3b (mentioned)
19 fig. I b net catalogued (Turkish) 103 no. 153 bp!' 55 no. 152 589.13
pl. 14 no. 63 1479.13 107 fig. 21 no. 1 57J.Ia
20 fig. 2 (top) 1°32.13 103 no. 153 c pl. 55 no. 153 589.lb
pl. 14 no. 69 1482.la I07fig. 21 no. 2 10J.Ia
20 fig. 2 (bottom) )17.la 103 no. ID d pl. 55 no. 154 591.13
pl. r a no. 71 J344.IC 107 fig. 21 no. 3 1364.I3
21 fig. 3 (top left) 1361.le r03no.l53ep1.56no.155 588.la
pl. 14 no. 73 372.1b 107 fig. 21 no. 4 82I.le
21 fig. 3 (top centre) I028.le 103 no. 153 f pl. 56 no. 156 590.ld
pl. r a no. 74 1485.Ia 107 fig. 21 no. 5 212.ld
21 fig. 3 (top right) 1102.2a 103 no. 153 g p]. 56 no. 157 589.IC
pl. 14 no. 75 J36I.Ja 107 fig. 21 no. 6 523.rb
21 fig. 3 (bottom far left} 1348.13 103 no. 153 g' pl. 57 no. 158 59o.IC
 "~
•
INDEX TO THE PUBLISHED BRICKSTAMPS IN THE CATALOGUE INDEX TO THE PUBLISHED BRICKSTAMPS IN THE CATALOGUE 43I
430

ID) no. 153 h pl. 57 no. 159 648.lb )6 n. 17 666.8a AI B25 820.1f
10300.153 i.pl. 57uo. 160 281.Ia Ognenova-Marinova, 'Briques' (1969) A2 B26 811.Im
104 no. 154PI. 58no.161 874.13 109 no. I, 1I0 fig. 95 59o.la A3 90.13 B27 694.13
105 p]. 58 no. ,62 483.13 A4 88.13 B18 946.13
JII nos. 2 and 3 590.Ib
Dirimtekin, 'Selymbria' (1965) III 00·4. lIofig·96 587.13
AS 216.13 B29 342.13
I I I no. 5 587.lb A6 1417.13 B)o 672.lb
32 no. 1 676.ld
32 no. 2. 4p.I3 III no. 6, llofjg·97 585.13 A7 347.13 B31 1245·ra
A8 )68.1a B32 1259.13
32 no. 3 385.23 I.LI nos. 7 and 8. I 10 fig. 98. I1I fig. 99 925.lb
1II 00. 9. 112 fig. 100 I2.Ib A9 )69·la B33 1427.13
32 no. 4 1225·le
HI no. 10, I12 fig. 101 H.IC Ale 407.Ia B34 1432:13
32 no. 5 I028.Id
111-2005.11 and I2,IIZfig. 102 649.ra All 469.la Cl 119.13
33 no. 6 1466.13
113 no. 13. fig. 103. 114 figs. 104 and 105 222.lb An 471.la C2 538.la
33 no. 7 1399·IC
113 no. 14, lIS figs. 106. 107 648.la AI3 Ho.la C) 53pa
33 no. 8 8n.It
11)-400.15,115 fig. 108 789.Ia Al4 633.13 C4 535·la
Harrison, 'Polyeuktos' (1965)
II4 nos. 16, 17. 18, 19, I IS fig. 109 337·4a AI5 743.13 C5 !36.la
pl. 269 fig. 6. 8)2.13 AI6 983.Ia C6 !36.le
11400.20, 116 fig. 110 116.13
Naumann, 'Anriochus-Palast' (1965) Al7 938.la C7 831.Ia
114-5 no. 21, JI6 fig. III 819.13
144 I295·Ia 116 (mentioned) 591.1 b A,8 988.la C8 8)1.7a
Pasadaios, Mnimeia (1965) 11.19 88pa C9 1262.1a
Eyiee, 'Tuzla' (1972-73)
I) pl. )a',~' 2'5.13 A20 1044.13 CIO 1263.13
J5 with pl. 21 666.14e
Alr lOSS.la Cr r 1391.13
Kleiss, 'Grabungen' (1966)
Saffer, 'Museum of Ancient Brick' (197) A22 1108.13 CI2 1393.13
fig.43 2S6.Ia
64 1367·la A2) 107o.la Cl) 1386.13
fig·4b 985·la
Oriiken, j sa Kapt M escidi (1974) A24 1201.13 CI4 1386.23
fig. I2 8p.lb
50')75 pl. 14b 81 pa A25 89.13 CI5 I)86.2b
Mango and Hawkins, 'Fenari Isa Camii' (1968) A26 125°.13 CI6 1)78.le
no. I 74J.ra Peschlow, Irenenkirche (1977)
A27 I247·Ia CI7 1)97·lg
nO.2 98.13 224 fig. jo no. I 920.lb
A28 1249.la CI8 1400.lb
no. 3 91,X3 224 fig. 30 no. 2 88Lla
A19 I03·Ia CI9 1)97·Ia
nO·4 54I.Ia 224 fig. 30 no. 3 676'5c
A30 90.la C20 1396.Ia
nO.5 I I09.IC (I 1°9.13, b, d, e, I1IO.la mentioned) 224 fig.)o no. 4 676.)k
A31 162.la C21 14°3.13
224 fig. 30 no. 5 666.14b
no.6 1342'53 A)2 1588.la Cll 1702.13
224 fig. 30 no. 6 1420.13
nO·7 ))7·4b A33 91.13 DI I7IO.1a
no.8 137S.Ta 224 fig. 30 no. 7 1553.1 a
BI 20.1:1 D2 IOO9.lb
224 fig. 30 no. 8 29I.13
nO·9 1427.13 B2 137.13 D) 558.13
ne-re 792.13 (794.13, 795.13 mentioned) Blondal, Vamngians (1978)
B3 187·la D4 614.1:1
nO.II 516.13 188 1463.13 B4 203·IC D5 687·la
nO.12 209.1a(Zlo.Iamentioned) Mango and Sevcenko, 'Inscriptions' (1978) B5 282.13 D6 832.13
no.u j 25.13 (26.13, 27.13, b, 28.13, 31.Ib mentioned) 24 no. 32 821.lf B6 ll8.la D7 8)4·"
nO.14 1469.13 B7 )40.Ia D8 8)5.la
Sodini, 'L'Artisanat' (1979)
no. 15 326.13 B8 531.la D9 8)7.13
74 fig. I no. I 98.13
no.16 346.13 (345.13, 348.13, 349.13 mentioned) B9 664·la DIO Sj j.r a
74 fig. I no. 2 1342.53
no.I7 498.13 (496.13, b, 497.13, 499.13 mentioned) Bro 658.13 DII 840.13
74 fig. I no.) ll7.4b
no.18 25.13 BII 1356.13 Du 976.13
74 fig. I no. -4 1469.Ia
nO.19 I143.13 (I149.I3. 23,1150.23 mentioned) BIl 665.13 DI3 17°9.1:1
nO.20 12°7.13 (1203.Ia. b, 1216.Ia mentioned) I. Kalch. (1980)
BI3 665.23 DI4 834·"
nO.21 1230.Ia 109.1 II26.Ia
BI4 666.4a El 1°95.13-
nO.22 1540.la 109.2 1125.13
BI5 681.13 E2 1096.13
no. 23 720.13 109.3 617.13
BI6 665.P E3 1097.13
nO.24 723.13 109.4 200.13
BI7 665·4a E4 1098.13
no.25 796.13 (1287.13, 1293.IC, 1294.13 mentioned) 109·5 925.13
Br8 666.rr E5 1°99.13
00.26 1729.13 109.6 3°7.13
BI9 666·4b £6 r rco.m
nO.27 112.13 109.7 1413.13
B20 666.133 E7 1093.2:1
00.28 996.13 109.8 1416.13
B21 667.lbb E8 1087.13
Firatlr, "Important Finds' (1969) Bodel, Briclestamps (198)) Baa 660.lb E9 1°75.13
r Sa.Fig. z 631.1b 69DO.138pI.27no.I)8 873.13 B2) 67J.Ia EIe 1088.1a
Harrisoo, 'Long Wall' (1969) Hill, 'Brickstamps' (1986) B24 775.la Ell 1088.lb
 ._-----------------------------------------------------------------------------.

..
"~

432 INDEX TO THE PUBLISHED BRTCKSTAMPS IN THE CATALOGUE INDEX TO THE PUBLISHED BRICKSTAMPS IN THE CATALOGUE 433
En 1078.la 61 611.la AlIC 389·2a A6) 1274·la
E13 1°77.43 62 1398.IC All a, b 417.13 A64 126.93
EI4 I077·la 6) 44).la AI2 c, d 417·Ib A6! 1302.13
EIS 1077·2a Harrison, Temple (1989) AI) 557·la BI 5·IC
EI6 1080.13 7dig. 74 (bottom right) 1)86.z. AI4 561..23 Ba 71.13
E17 [081.1a 7dig. 74 (top right) 1)86.zb AIj !76.1d B) 275·la
EIS 1082.13
71 fig. 74 (left) Sj a.r a AI6 847.13 B43, b 660.IC
EI9 1083.1;\ AI7 637.13 B4C 660.lc
Mango, 'Spolia' (199!)
£20 1084.13 AT8 628.Ia B! 1092.la
649 n. 36 580.13
E21 1090.13 AI9 717.13 B6 1255·Ia
E22 1089.13 Ism, 'Perinthos' (1996) Azo 809·1a B7 1254.13
Fr 1733.13 384. fig. 4 not catalogued AZI 213·Ia B8 ra.ra
F2 1731,13 Bardill and Greatrex, 'Anciocbus' (1997) An 85j.Ia B9 4T.Tb
F) 17)!.13 fig.2A 327.13 A23a 904·la Bro 283.13
BIl-2I 681.23 fig. 2B I01.9.2a Aaj b 901.}3 joe.td
BlI
C4-6 1l7·la Butcher and Thorpe, 'Beirut' (1997) AZ4 IOI3·1a BIla 616.Tb
C7-8 8) I.9a 304 897·23,l47·lb Az! 1021.1a B12b 616.IC
ell-IS 1387.13 Sayar,Pennlhos (1998) Az~ 1033·la BI) 618.13
D6--8 8)8.l3 A27a 1041.la BI4 666.lj
389no.250,Pl.44fig.I80 1346.Ia
EI-6 r ror.ra A'7b 1040.13 BI! 666·4h
389no.2p,pl.44fig.I81 1347.13
Ero-r r regg.rc A28a 1043·Ia BI6 666.10
Feissel, 'Edifices' (2000)
£14-15 1°77.33 Az8b 1037·1a BI7 666·4d
9T no. TO his 586.Ta
£[4-20 1085·la AZ9 1°47.13 BI8 666'4hh
£1-22 I09I.13 93 no. 24 587.13, b, 588.13, 589.13, b, C; 59o.la, b•. c.•~A·e.591.la
Ajc 1069.13 BI9 681.1C
(mentioned)
Miil1er-Wiener, 'Hagios Agathonikos?' (1986) A)I 1139.13 Bzo 68~.ra
Manacorda, 'Belli larerizi' (2000) A)z II48.Ia BZI 66!.!b
18 fig. 4 4°5.13
The stamps mentioned on pp. 145-8 were all previously published and A)) 1I56.la Baa 679·ra
Eeissel, 'Inscriptions' (1987)
should be located according to the references given by Manacorda. Note, A14 Ir69·la Bz) 674-lq
408 no. 2.1 1373.13 however, the following stamps in particular: A)j II73·la BZ4 680.)a
408 no. 2.2 1372.If
145 n. 168 1446.la A)6 1}06.la Bz! 676.4'
408 no. 2.3 23I.IC
146n.l77 539.13,1544.13 A)7 1325·la B,6 820.13
408 no. 3 9.27·la
146n.182 142o•1a A)8 1457·la BZ7 819·lb
409 no. 5 !!J.Ib 147 n. 188 r r rs.rd A)9 1598.la Bz8 907·!3
410no. ILl 1560.13
147 (EpiDiomedous Eparchou Romes) 309.la Aio 1599·la BZ9
410 no. II.2 1552.13 9°7.13
Ousterhour, Ahunbay, and Ahunhay, 'First Report' (2000) A41 1467·la Bjc 957.23
41000.11.3 790•Ia
268 fig. II not catalogued A4Z I6co.13 B)I 1016.13
41000.11.4 817.15
268 fig. 12 not catalogued A4) I6oI.13 Bj a u60.lh
410 no. 11.5 1416.13
A44 1602.la BJ) 1)J4.lb
415 no. 18 J314.I3 Eyice, 'Hagia Glykeria' (2001)
zozfig.9(upperlefI) 681.) A4! 1603·Ia B)4 207·la
.•
pS no. 28.1 199.la
418 no. 28.2 200.1a zoz fig. 9 (lower left) 680.zb A46 1481.Ja BJ! a j46.If
A47' 1499·la B)! b 146.1g
418 no. 28,3 1690.13 Pasinli, 'Biiyiik Saray' (2001)
Ai7b 1499·lb B)6a,b 1133.13
418 no. 29.1 1623.13 75-78 not catalogued Ai8 Bje c-I 1133·lb
418 no. 29.2 58.•pa
Pescblow, 'Bricksramps' A49 1503·la B)7 1429.13
418 no. z9.) 666.lbb
Al 17.la A!o B)8
419 no. 29·4
419 no. 29.5
907·3c
6143.1:1
A2 )2.I:l .\. AjI
1504·Ia
15°5.13 B)9
1430.13
))9.13
A) 7).la AI' 15c6.la B40 1411.13
419no.30.1 916.13
A4 1°5.13 An 16°4.13 B41 1I18.la
419 no. 30.2 136.la
A5 155.13 Aj4 1424.13 B4Z I43J.Ja
421 no. 35 659·1a
A6 257.la A!! 1426•13 B4) 1686.13
425 1126.1:1. I125.la, 617.la, 200.13, 925.1:1, 307.13, 1413.13,
A7 258.Ia A!6 1425·lb B44 J69I.Ja
14(6.13 (mentioned)
A8 325.la A!7 120.1:1 B4! ,685.13
4z7-8no.44 eee.rb
A9 )94.1. A!8 1725.13 Cl 4z9·lb
Ulkcr, Proje (1987) AIoa 401.13 A59 955·Ja c, 778.1•
57 1412.13 AIO b 401.2:1 Mo I054·Ia C) 1l35·Ia
58 66.IX Ar r a 389.Ia A61 49.1:1
1415·la C4
59 817.li All b 390.1:1 A6z 1414.13 C! 1377·IC
60 12]4.1:1
 i
432 INDEX TO THE PUBLISHED BRICKSTAMPS IN THE CATALOGUE
1i INDEX TO THE PUllLISHED llRICKSTAMPS IN THE CATALOGUE 433
E12 tOl8.la 61 6U.13 I Allc 389.2a A63 I274·Ia
EI3 1°77.43 62 1398.IC '. An 3, b 417.ra
i A64 126.9a
EI4 1°77.13 6} 443.1. I An c, d 417.1 b A65 1302.13
EIS I077.2.'J. Harrison, Temple (1989) !, A]3 557·]a B] 5.]e
EI6 1080.13 AI4 562.23 B2 7I.13
71 fig. 74 (bottom right) 1386.20
E17 1081,13 AIS S76.Id
7' fig. 74 (top right) '386.2b B3 275.13
EIS 1082.13 AI6 847.ra Ba a.b 660.IC
71 fig. 74 (left) 832·la
EI9 1083.13 AI7 637.]3 B-1c 660.rc
Mango, 'Spolia' (199S)
Eac lo84.Ia A]S 628.]3 BS 1092.Ja
649 n. 36 580.13
El-I 1°90,13 A]9 717·]a B6 1255.Ia
E22 Io89.Ja Ism, 'Perinthos' (!996) A20 S09.]3 B7 1254.13
Ft 173l.la 384, fig. 4 nOI catalogued A2] 213.13 B8 12.r3
F2 I73I.n Bardill and Greatrex, < Antiochus' (1997) A22 Sn.13 B9 4I.1b
F) 1735:13 fig.2A 327.13 A23 a 904.Ia Bro 283.13
BU-21 681.23 fig.2D I029.2a
A23 b 9°1.33 BIl 306.Id
C4-6 537.Ia Butcher and Tborpe, 'Beirut' (1997) A24 ]013.la B12a 616.rb
C7-8 8p·9· 304 897·23,247·]b A2.~ 102].13 BIl b 616.]c
ell-IS 1387.13 A2~ 1033.la BI3 6IS.13
Sayar, Perintbos (1998)
D6-8 838.1. A27a 1041.13 B14 666.1j
389no.250,P1.44fig.180 I)46.Ia
EI-6 lIOl.Ia A27 b 104°.]3 BlS 666.4h
389 no. 2P, pLH fig. 181 1)47.la
Ero-r r JOSS.IC A28 a 1043.Ia B,6 666.10
Peissel, "Edifices' (2000)
EI4-]5 1°77.33 A28 b 1°37.13 BI7 666·4d
E14-20 1085.13
91 no. 10 his 586.Ia
A19 I047·Ia B,8 666.4hh
EI-;n 1°91.13
93 no. 24 587.13, b, 588.13, 589.13, b, c; 590.13, b,.c_.~9...•e, 591.13
A30 1069.]3 BI9 6S].lc
(mentioned)
Miiller-Wiener, 'Hagios Agarhonikos?' (1986) A3 I 1139.]3 B20 6S2.13
Manacorda, 'Belli larerizi' (2000) A32 Il48.Ia
18 fig. 4 40S.Ia BH 66S.Sb
The stamps mentioned on pp. J 45-8 were all previously published and A33 1156.]3 B22 679.xa
Eeissel, 'Inscriptions' (1987)
should be located according to the references given by Manacorda. Note, AJ4. II69·ra B23 674·1q
408 no . .2.1 I373.Ia
however, the following stamps in particular: A35 Il73·I3 B24 6S0.3a
408 no. 2 •.2 I371.xf
145 n. 168 1446.la A36 I306.Ia B2S 676.4.
408 no. 2.3 .23I,IC
146n.l77 539·Ia,If44·13

I.
408 no. 3 927.13 A37 IJ25·13 B26 820.13
146 n. 182 1410.la
409 no·s 113.Ib A38 '4S7·ra B27 819·1b
I47n.188 IIIS.Id AJ9 'S98.ra
410no. ILl 1560.13 B28 9°7.53
147 (EpiDiomedous Eparchou Rome!) 309.Ia A40 1599.13
410no. ILl I5p.Ia B29 9°7.13
.pone. [1.3 790.13 Ousrerhout, Ahunbay, and Ahunbay, <First Report' (2000) I1 A4I I467·ia B30 957.23
.pono.IJ.4 SI7.IS 268 fig. I I not catalogued ! A..j.2 1600.]a B31 1016.13
410DO.II.5 1,p6.Ia 268 fig. 12 not catalogued A43 1601.]3 B32 raee.rb
.•
p 5 no. 18 1314.13 Eyice, 'Hagia Glykeria' (lOCH) A44 1602.13 B33 1334·1b
418no.28.1 199·Ia 202 fig. 9 (upper left) 681.3 A45 16°3.13 B34 207·Ia
202 fig. 9 (lower left) 680.2b A46 I.48I.Ia B3S a 146.1f
418 no. 28.2 200.13
418 no. 28.) 1690.Ia A47 a 1499·1a B3S b 146.1g
Pasinli, 'Biiyiik Saray' (2001)
418 no. 29.1 r623.Ia A47 b I499·1b B36 a, b Il33.Ia
7S-78 not catalogued A..j.8 100.13
418 no. 29.2 584.13 B36 c-f II33.1b
Peschlow, 'Bricks tamps' A49 ,s03·1• B37 1429.]3
418 no. 29.3 666.Ibb
A] 17.13 A50 ]504·Ia B38 I43o.Ia
419 no. 29·4 907.3c
A2 }2.13 Ap ]505.I:l B39 339·ra
.419Do . .29.5 6143,13
A} 73.1. Ap 1506.]3 B40 14Il•13
419 no. 30.1 916.13
419 no. 30.2 136.1a
A4 I05·la An 16°4.13 B4] IlIS.la
A5 IH·I3 A54 1424·ra B42 1431.13
421 no. 35 659.Ja
A6 257.Ja A55 ]426.ra B43 1686.1.
425 1126"13,, 1125.ta. 617.12, 200.13, 925.13, 307.]a, ]'P3.l:I,
A7 258.13 AS6 '42pb B44 169I.Ia
1416.]3 (mentioned)
A8 325.]3 AS7 B4S J68pa
427-8 no. 44 600.]b
A9 394·1a A58 1725·la C, 429.Ib
Ulker,Proje (1987) Arc a 401.Ia AS9 911·Ta Cl. 778.13
57 1-4Il.Ia AIO b 40].23 A60 I054.Ia C3 1235.13
l8 66.IX All a 3S9.13 A61 ]415.13 C4 49.1.
59 817·]i All b 39o.la A62 t.p4.Ia Cs '377·'C
60 I214.Ia
34 INDEX TO THE PUBLISHED BRICKSTAMPS IN THE CATALOGUE I
i
C6 1378.1b Fr 1720.13 \ TABLE '7. Index to the Monograms in the Catalogue
C7 1379.13 GI 1400.13
Dr 688.13 G2 1397.lj Monogram no. Monogram Catalogue nos. Monogram no. Monogram Catalogue nos.
DJ. a, C 1437.IC G3 1396.lg
D2 b
DJ
1437.1b
I7II,la
G4
GS
1396.Ie
140I.Ia ,u- [34]..la, 8a, 93 JJ Pr I384·Ia
D4
D5
1445.13
1339.13
G6
Peschlow,
1398.1d
Studioskirche
t~ 134:1.23, la-f. 8a, 93 34
-n- 1)80.]3
El a 231.13
24.13 t~ 1342·4a-c, 5a-f, 8a, 93 35 .Ifr 1381.13, h
El b 232.Ja
Er C 233.Ia
El. [o86.1a
In·xa
174.13
177.13
m 1)42.6a 36 ~ 1)86.Ia, 1)8~.xa, 1)88.la
t~l 1341..73 ~ 1386.2a, b, 1387.13, 1388.la
EJ I074·Ia 491.13 37
E4 1372.1d
E5 1)54.13
594.13 1*[ 139J,Ia, b 38 ~ 1389.13
8p.la
E6 13P.xa 1246.ta
J(:t 186.13,944·13 39
~+"
1390.13
E7
E8
972.2.
1360.13
1)08.1a
q68.la
:RI: 17I4·Ia 40
.~. 138pa
t1lst 1H3·la 41 H 1375.13
I le ~ 1344·ra-C.1345·Ia-d 42
of. 1367.13
i)(J I346.xa, IJ47.Ia, 1373.13 '<I:'
43 1368.13
,,.....,,"
M
*
12 1023.13, b, c

I) ~. 1348.13
44

45
4--
1364.13

1361.la-h

14 ;~. 1)49.13, b ~
46 1363·13-g

15 M 135o.Ia-d 47 + 1362.13
;~
16
.{4.
1350.23

1351.13
48 *'4< 1365.13

'7 49 1366.13
18 W [Jp.la 50 + 1370.13
19 1clt
'fis}
1353.13, b 5' + 1372.13-£

zr

~
~t
1354.13

1355·Ia

1356.Ia
52

53 *
If"
1<
1371.1a

1369.13

54 1394.13
2)

24
1'1'
tMlt
1)57.13, b

I358.Ia
55 + 226.1a, aa, 2)0.13, b, aa, ja,
231.1a, b, c, ~S9.la, .13, 312.13,
3 t j.ra, h, C,3 14·1a, hi 31 S·la,
25 ~ 1382.13
316.13,513.13, lo.z8.13-e, los6.la,
h, aa, I273.I:il, 1373.ta, 1374.13,
26 ~ 1360.13
137S·la
27 N 1381.xa-c
4<
28 M IJ9I.Ia
56
$
1372.13-£.137S·la

57 1376.1a
t$"t
29

30 ~
1377·13-d

1359.13-<::
58 + 1717·la

I lA 59 "t 1114.13
I: )1 1378.13-<1
60 >kl' 1395.13
&rt
.r
I: )2 137l.·Ia-f,
IllS·la
1373.13, 1374.13,
61
'* 3°9.13
 "~

Pi. 1. U ppec side of a sixth-century Constantinopolitan stamped brick (AM 230 with stamp 667.rff).

'l

.1

Pi. H. Underside of brick in PI. 1.

 .•

.. ,,
Pl. IV. Palace of Antiochus (C.4I 5-30); circular room attached to hexagon;

Pl. Ill. Land Walls (405-I3), original construction technique, tower I7·
 "~

•
r
"

,
r
i .

PI. VI (above). Theotokos in

the Chalkoprateia (probably
C-457-474), interior.Iooking
north-east.

PI. VII (left). St Polyeuktos

(c.s 10-21), platform of
church, looking west along
the north passage beneath the
north aisle.

f'
i
I

i,
['
PI. V Stoudios' basilica of St john (Q5o), interior looking east.
l'
I] ,~
 ..~
.<

PI. IX (above). Theodosian

Hagia Sophia (C.4I I-I5),
propylaeum and rear wall
of the atrium.

PI. X (left). Theodosian

Hagia Sophia, detail of
masonry in the rear wall
of the atrium.

PI. VIII. SSSergius and Bacchus (probably 530-36), exterior of apse.

 I
I

1. XI. Baths of
euxippos (c.sJ2),
sterior of the apse of
uilding 2, and the

I
rest wall of Room 1.

"I. XII. Plan and eleva- I,

.on of the Ba!aban Aga
-1escidi.

PI. XIII. Facade of the substructures on the south side of Cemal Nadir PI. XIV. Room I of the substructures on the south
Sokagi. side of Cernal Nadir Sokagi, looking south-west.

LipnffS!.
.0£ __
[:J .hdi. t:lbUJJJ.

CJ A~Zmo~r

l.
PI. xv. Room IV of the
mbstrucrurcs on the
iouth side of Cernal
Nadir Sokagi.
..•
PI. XVII (left). Ionic impost capital in
Room IX of the substructures on the
south side of Cemal Nadir SOkagl.

[
I
PI. XVIII (below). Vaulted structures
found in Mercan Caddesi in I968.

[:

'I. XVI. Impost capitals

n Room IV of the sub-
itructures on the south
.ide of Cema! Nadir
;()kagl.
[
 PI. XIX. Vaulted structures
found in Mercan Caddesi in
1968.

.1
PI. XX. The cistern on
Siraselviler Caddesi.

i
~ .

i
I•

[I!
U