The main thesis of Richard Bayliss' work is a detailed examination of the conversion of temples to churches in the Late Roman Empire. This is first considered in general terms, then by paying detailed attention to temple conversion in the late Roman provinces of Cilicia I, II and Isauria (henceforth Cilicia). The churches in these provinces have been the subject of a recent synthetic volume by Stephen Hill.[[1]] The first part of the work surveys the problems in converting temples to churches. Bayliss usefully defines three categories. The first two of these are the direct conversion of a standing building and the indirect conversion, where the construction of a church was influenced in some way (orientation, planning) by a temple. The third category is the 'temple-spolia-church,' where material from a temple was reused in a church. There is an extensive discussion of the legal situation regarding temples after the introduction of state-supported Christianity, followed by a practical discussion of how temples could be destroyed. Subsequent chapters provide a discussion of how temple conversions took place and what can be said about the chronology.
The Cilician section contains studies of 14 sites, starting from cases of certain conversion (Seleucia, Diocaesarea) to the least certain (Anazarbus, Kadirli). There are a number of useful conclusions, in most cases informed by site visits in 1993 and 1998. Of the sites studied, only the conversions at Seleucia, Diocaesarea, Sebaste, and the cliff top site at the Corycian Cave can be considered certain. Since Bayliss' text was completed, Detlev Wannagat (Freiburg) has carried out architectural survey work at Diocaesarea.[[2]] At Ayas, much new work has taken place, with recent excavation at Gough's church.[[3]] In the case of the church of St. Mary at Cennet ve Cehennem, careful on site observation is used to suggest an earlier podium of some sort underneath the church, perhaps for a small temple or a statue (84-85). However, I am less convinced by his reluctance to accept 'Syrian' features here, on the grounds that they are "a feature of the Cilician plain, not western Cilicia" (85); not enough churches in western Cilicia are well enough preserved to make such statements with confidence. And as Bayliss himself accepts, this clashes with his compelling reconstruction of the church at Diocaesarea with a Syrian style narthex. This does suggest that some 'Syrian' (or east Cilician) architectural features drifted westwards.
The second group of churches are those where conversion has been suggested, but is doubted by Bayliss. In each case, the evidence is clearly set out and considered. In the case of Cambazli, Bayliss suggests that there is no reason to think that there was a previous temple and interprets that the precinct wall was a fortification. His rejection of the arguments concerning reused material is sound. But none of his arguments address the peculiar orientation of the church vis-a-vis the precinct wall. In the parallels he cites, at Meryemlik and Anderin in Syria, not only is the church centered within the precinct, but the presence of towers on the wall suggests military planning. There are no towers at Cambazli. Similarly, the suggestion that Cambazli must be compared with "substantial extra mural pilgrimage and probably monastic complexes" like those of St. Thecla at Meryemlik and St. Nicholas at Myra is debatable (92). A good state of preservation does not mean that site had special significance, while the lack of literary record or any named saint for Cambazli suggests its significance was local.[[4]] The cliff top church at Kanlidivane is quickly and correctly rejected as a temple.
All these comments should be taken as disagreements over small points of detail, and do not substantially affect Bayliss' main arguments. Throughout, the quality of the drawings and plans is good, though the photographs are often muddy. Bayliss' architectural skills are in much evidence, especially in the reconstruction drawings. During the data compilation, a database was used; including screenshots of this, but no CD (or making the data web-available) is a missed opportunity. This is doubly unfortunate as the lists of data provided at the rear of the work are often very vague. In some cases, the use made of texts is often limited; nor does the primary bibliography inspire confidence. Thus great use is made of Mark the Deacon's Life of Porphyry of Gaza. Although Bayliss is aware of the controversies surrounding the text, he does not feel inclined to engage with it. This is a strong contrast to his vigorous efforts to come to terms with the Theodosian Code, where he rejects a simplistic interpretation of legislation permitting churches to be built out of temples.
The end result is a substantial clarification of the development of the Christianized landscape of Cilicia, and by extension the rest of the Empire. However, although many churches were converted from temples, they would have been dwarfed in numbers by the thousands of entirely new churches constructed within the Roman Empire in the fifth and sixth centuries..
NOTES:
[[1]] S. Hill, The early Byzantine churches of Cilicia and Isauria (Aldershot, 1996); review by G. Mietke, Byzantinische Zeitschrift 92 (1999): 120-124.
[[2]] D. Wannagat et al., "Neue Forschungen in Uzuncaburc 2001-2004, Archaeologischer Anzeiger 2005." (forthcoming).
[[3]] E. Equini Schneider, Elaiussa Sebaste 2 (Rome, 2003).
[[4]] cf. S. Davis, The Cult of St Thecla: A Tradition of women's piety in Late Antiquity (Oxford, 2003).