eport to Convocation, 1908) deriving it, like the cope,
from the _birrus_, while Father Braun considers it, as well as the cope,
to be a modification of the _paenula_.[1] The phelonion (Arm.
_shurtshar_, Syr. _phaina_, Chald. _maaphra_ or _phaina_, Copt, _burnos,
felonion, kuklion_) is confined to the priests in the Armenian, Syrian,
Chaldaean and Coptic rites; in the Greek rite it is worn also by the
lectors. It is not in the East so specifically a eucharistic vestment as
in the West, but is worn at other solemn functions besides the liturgy,
e.g. marriages, processions, &c.

Until the 11th century the phelonion is always pictured as a perfectly
plain dark robe, but at this period the custom arose of decorating the
patriarchal phelonion with a number of crosses, whence its name of
[Greek: polystaurion]. By the 14th century the use of these polystauria
had been extended to metropolitans and later still to all bishops. The
purple or black phelonion, however, remained plain in all cases. The
Greeks and Greek Melchite metropolitans now wear the _sakkos_ instead of
the phelonion; and in the Russian, Ruthenian, Bulgarian and Italo-Greek
churches this vestment has superseded the phelonion in the case of all
bishops (see DALMATIC and VESTMENTS).

See J. Braun, S.J., _Die liturgische Gewandung_ (Freiburg im Breisgau,
1907), pp. 149-247, and the bibliography to the article VESTMENTS.
(W. A. P.)

FOOTNOTE:

[1] The writer is indebted to the courtesy of Father Braun for the
following note:--"That the Syrian _phaina_ was formerly a closed
mantle of the type of the bell chasuble is clearly proved by the
evidence of the miniatures of a Syrian pontifical (dated 1239) in the
Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris (cf. Bild 16, 112, 284, in _Die
liturgische Gewandung_). The liturgical vestments of the Armenians
are derived, like their rite, from the Greek rite; so that in this
case also there can be no doubt that the _shurtshar_ was originally
closed. The Coptic rite is in the same relation to the Syrian.
Moreover, it would be further necessary to prove that the _birrus_,
in contradistinction to the _paenula_, was always open in front;
whereas, _per contra_, the _paenula_, both as worn by soldiers and in
ordinary life, was, like the modern Arab _burnus_, often slit up the
front to the neck. For the rest, it is obvious that if the Syrian
_phaina_ was still quite closed i