Strictly speaking, the adjective Coptic, when it is applied to art, should be confined to the Christian art of Egypt from the time when the Christian faith may be recognized as the established religion of the country among both the Greek-speaking and Egyptian-speaking elements of the population. In this sense Coptic art is essentially that reflected in the stone reliefs, wood carvings, and wall paintings of the monasteries of Egypt, the earliest foundations of which date from the 4th and 5th centuries ce. It is, however, common practice to include within Coptic art all forms of artistic expression that, like the so-called Coptic textiles, need have no religious intent or purpose. The term has also been further extended to denote stylistic characteristics that can be traced back to the 2nd and 3rd centuries ce and perhaps earlier.

A specifically Christian art was slow in developing: when it did emerge, it was not the product of a school of Christian artists inventing new forms of expression. It continued the style current in the country, evolving from the late antique art of Egypt, in which themes derived from Hellenistic and Roman art may or may not have been given new allegorical significance. There is little direct legacy from the art of pharaonic Egypt either in the style of execution or in the choice of decorative themes. The most obvious survival in Christian iconography is the peculiar looped form of cross derived from the ancient Egyptian writing of the word for life (ankh). Less convincing is the connection postulated between the concept of Maria lactans (representations of the Virgin nursing her child) and bronze and terra-cotta statues of the ancient Egyptian goddess Isis suckling the infant sun god Horus or between representations of saints on horseback and some late figures of the adult Horus in an identical pose.

The extent to which Egypt may have exerted a major creative influence on Christian art is uncertain in the absence of material remains of the Christian period from Alexandria, the great metropolis of Egypt from the time of the Ptolemies and a city that played an important and, at times, decisive role in the intellectual life of the early church. A series of Christian ivory carvings, of unrecorded provenance, is frequently referred to as Alexandrian on stylistic considerations and adduced as proof of a continuing artistic skill in the Hellenistic tradition.

Objects found in the hinterland depart from the Classical canons of proportion and mode of representation. Political and economic conditions in Egypt from the time of its incorporation in the Roman and, later, Byzantine empires doubtless account for much of the provincial appearance of Egyptian and Coptic art and the emergence of a freer, more popular folk style. Lack of the kind and degree of patronage that had been given by the pharaohs, Ptolemies, and, to some extent, Roman emperors to the old religion of Egypt meant an impoverishment of schools of skilled craftsmen, avoidance of costlier materials, and a decline in the high standard of finish. Particularly noticeable is the absence of carving in the round, of work of monumental scale, and of the use of the harder ornamental stones that had been characteristic of pharaonic art.

Characteristic Coptic stylistic features are to be observed in tombstones from the Delta site of Terenuthis. These depict the dead man frontally posed beneath a gabled pediment of mixed architectural style, hands extended at right angles from the body and bent upward from the elbow in the orans (praying) position, a pose that appeared frequently in the earliest Christian art in Rome. There is no firm evidence, however, that the community was Christian. Similarly, the series of architectural elements carved in relief from Oxyrhynchus and Heracleopolis may not all be from Christian buildings. The earlier material from Heracleopolis, dating probably from the 4th century, is notable for its figure subjects drawn from classical mythology, carved in a deep relief that leaves them almost freestanding, producing an effective play of light and shade. As such reliefs were painted, the absence of fine detail in the carving was less noticeable.

Much of the material available for a study of Coptic sculpture has not been found in context, and, in the absence of assured information concerning its provenance and of circumstantial evidence for dating (even in the cases of pieces from known sites), it is impossible to provide a detailed account of the development of Coptic sculpture. The most successful carvings are probably the impressive variety of decorated capitals, particularly from the monasteries of Apa Jeremias at Ṣaqqārah and of Apa Apollo at Bāwīṭ. Among them are basket-shaped examples decorated with plaitwork, vine and acanthus leaves, and animal heads. The form interprets a style introduced into Constantinople by the emperor Justinian I, and it is clear that, in the hinterland of Egypt, there was during the 6th century certain artistic influence on Coptic art from Byzantium, despite religious and political differences. Contemporary Byzantine influence seems to have been at work on other architectural elements at Bāwīṭ, as, for example, in the finely carved limestone pilaster depicting, on one side, a geometric and floral pattern surmounted by a saint and, on the other, vine scrolls and birds below an archangel.