Students must choose a single ancient artefact associated with monasticism and write an 800 word analysis of it. The choice of artefact is up to students, but it must be a single moveable artefact, i.e., it cannot be a monument or building, or a text written on an immoveable object such as a wall). It  may  be a pot, papyrus, codex, ostracon, icon, wooden tablet, or any object of daily life, such as a pen, inkwell, toy, or piece clothing. The artefact must have been excavated in monastery, or be certainly from one if it was purchased via the antiquities trade. Students may select any artefact mentioned in the sources placed on iLearn, or may source an artefact from elsewhere. Choose carefully, as an inappropriate choice will effect your mark.

Your artefact study should address the following points.

• What is the artefact?
• Where did it come from and how can we tell? I.e., what is its provenience (find spot) and/or provenance (collection history)?
• Where is the artefact now? Give full publication or collection details.
• When does it date to?
• What role did it play in the daily life of its community?
• What can we tell from it about the monastic community from which it came?

You must be able to say where the artefact is now and cite a source (either reprint or online) for it. Provide a bibliography of sources consulted at the end of your study.

Please choose one of the following archaeological project websites for evaluation (1000 words ±100):

(1) Excavations at Amheida: http://www.amheida.org/

or:

(2) Beni Hassan in Late Antiquity: https://www.monasticarchaeology.org/beni-hassan

or:

(3) Yale Monastic Archaeology Project South (Sohag): http://egyptology.yale.edu/expeditions/current-expeditions/yale-monastic-archaeology-project-south-sohag

Whichever website you choose, please discuss – briefly – most of the following points:

Background of the website

• Who is responsible? What is their relationship to the site? Do they identify themselves clearly (including funding agencies, affiliations etc.)?

Goals and methods

• Who do you think is the intended audience (e.g. colleagues, funding agencies, children, potential visitors, potential private sponsors)?
• Is a particular value system recognisable in the excavation (e.g. religious, aesthetic, political, humanitarian)? Does the website say why the  excavation exists? How does it present the group of artefacts/the site as particularly interesting/worthwhile? Does it make any reference to the modern situation in the area?
• Are questions of method addressed in the website? Does the  excavation subscribe to particular archaeological science methods?
• Does the site say anything about the preservation of the artefacts or the site?
• Contents organisation
• Is there too little/sufficient/too much information?
• Is the information clearly structured?
• Goals and methods: do they become clear from the description of the project?
• Pictures: is there a working relationship between text and pictures?
• Does one get access to further information?

Technical side

• Requirements: does the website load fast even with a low-speed internet connection? Does it load equally well in any browser?
• Do you approve of the choice of layout (e.g. clear, easy to distinguish between important and less important elements or else: too overloaded with information, too busy with gruesome colours and distracting gimmicks)?
• Graphics: do the pictures load quickly? Is the quality good?
• Links: Is the navigation easy to use? Do all of the links work? Is the hierarchy of links clearly structured (e.g. pesky little things like: can you navigate back and forth easily or do you need to use the “back” and “forward” buttons of your browser)?

Evaluation

• Does the website reach its goals?
• Have a brief glance at the other websites listed above. Overall, which one seems the best?
• If you have any suggestions for improvement, please include them in your paper.

Do not simply summarise the contents of the information on the website, briefly mentioning what the topic and the sub-topics are. Specific details should be discussed in order to make a comment or criticism.

Students will write an essay of 2000 words (± 200) on a particular aspect of Coptic art and archaeology, choosing from the questions below. The goal of this essay is to produce an analysis of a single topic directly connected to Coptic art and archaeology. As more archaeological sites have been excavated than other late antique sites in Egypt, questions related to monasteries are more common; but we have tried to incorporate material from other types of sites too.

How to proceed:

• First, chose a question from the list below.
  • What can we tell from a monastery's iconographic program about the liturgical life of the monastery and the historical circumstances in which it was created? Choose one the following monasteries: Red Monastery, St Antony, St Paul, Monastery of the Syrians, or Bawit.
  • What can we tell from the library of the White monastery about the way books were copied and used in the monastery?
  • Choose any two churches at different sites in Egypt built between 300 and 1000 CE and compare them: what accounts for the differences and similarities you observe?
  • In what ways is earlier space and architectural elements of previous buildings reused in late antique Egypt, and what are the implications of the spaces that are chosen? Compare two of the following sites: the village of Jeme (Medinet Habu); the monastery of St Jeremiah at Saqqara; the Monastery of Epiphanius at Thebes.
  • What can the ceramics found at late antique sites contexts tell us about daily life and trade? Compare two of the following sites: the village of Jeme (Medinet Habu); the monastery of St Jeremiah at Saqqara; the Monastery of Epiphanius at Thebes.

Then, select the appropriate bibliographical references from the bibliography provided on the iLearn page. Start your essay by a short historical overview concerning the subject chosen. Describe the sites, monuments or objects that you selected, trying to stick to the main thread. Finish the essay by a short conclusion. Give in a few words the general features of the sites, monuments or objects that you have chosen to study. If relevant, include images of the sites, monuments or objects that you described in the essay. Provide short captions for the pictures.

Please do not exceed the word limit. It is a virtue to be concise – and a much requested skill these days. Please note that there will be no reward for exceeding the limit. Note that footnotes and bibliography do not count in the word limit.

Ten percent (10%) of your mark will be based on the your participation in the online discussion forum on the iLearn site. The standard, length, of content of your weekly posts to the site are not assessed: all that is required is your participation, to develop your communication skills and ability to discuss historical problems and issues about the sources with your peers.