International congress of byzantine studies belgrade, 22 27 august 2016

Piotr Ł. Grotowski 
Pontifical University of John Paul II, Krakow, Poland; 
[e-mail]
A Shepherd’s Crook and a Stone Cut Out without Hands: 
The Changing Character of Attributes in the Iconography of Byzantine Saints
An attribute – an object associated by a textual source with a person with the aim of identifying 
and defining the depicted person – has been known in art since ancient Egyptian and Greek art. As 
observed by André Grabar, in Imperial Rome, it became an important element in official portraiture 
that determined the public status of the models. Early Christian Fathers were fully aware of its function 
and meaning. In his Exhortation to the Greeks (IV 56), Clement of Alexandria noticed: if one were to 
go round inspecting the paintings and statues, he would immediately recognize your gods from their 
undignified figures; Dionysus from his dress, Hephaestus from his handicraft, Demeter from her woe, 
Ino from her veil, Poseidon from his trident, Zeus from his swan. The pyre indicates Heracles, and if 
one sees a woman represented naked, he understands it is “golden” Aphrodite. Christian art created 
its own repository of symbols and signs that allowed beholders to identify a crowded pantheon of new 
heroes – prophets and saints. While some of the pictorial patterns (such as round and square halos, or 
St. Theodore’s dragon, which replaced Athena’s Erichthonius) were borrowed from pagan antiquity, 
their literary sources were generally Christian: the Bible, apocrypha and hagiographic legends. Between 
the fourth and sixth centuries, the structure of the new iconography became well established. Easy to 
understand, the system was widely accepted, as evidenced by the words of the sixth-century homily 
On the Cross and Transfiguration by Timothy of Jerusalem: How is it known who Moses is, and who 
Elias? Thanks to the signs (τεκμηρία). Elias is taking off on the chariot and Moses holds the Tablets of 
the Law. (PG 86, 261C, BHG 434h, CPG 7406). 
Following Iconoclasm, a significant change in the use of attributes in Byzantine art occurred. 
Objects held by saints were shown repeatedly and they identified them as belonging to a specific category 
(holy physicians, martyrs, iconophoroi – defenders of images, warriors, etc.) rather than revealing their 
individual identity. In some cases, symbols related to a specific event or saint (e.g. the Gospel codex in 
the hands of John Calybite, BHG 868–69) are vague and are not helpful in identifying depicted figures. 
This function was amply fulfilled by the inscription with the name, which at that time became almost 
mandatory. However, it would be a simplification to state that the descriptive function of attributes was 
abandoned in seeking to avoid redundancy and repetition in formulating visual messages. It should 
be interpreted conversely: Canon 82 of the Council in Trullo and the fact that religious symbols had 

---

565
replaced figurative art during Iconoclasm gave rise to an aversion to symbols in visual arts. On the other 
hand, inscriptions with names were unambiguous and they did not leave room for interpretations.
This is not to say that Byzantine artists abandoned attributes as a visual method of clarifying 
the subject. In some cases, e.g. depictions of personifications, they were not only used as traditional 
iconographic elements but also as the only acceptable means to identify a figure. Over time, objects 
held in hands by saints and prophets became more significant. The process was especially intensified 
in the Palaiologian period, probably under the influence of Western, Late Gothic art. Along with the 
reinvention of traditional attributes (e.g. St. Peter’s keys related to Mt 16:18–19), new ones appeared 
which were sometimes derived from very old hagiographic sources (e.g. St. Mercurius with a bow 
and three arrows, according to P’awstos Buzand, History of the Armenians, IV 10).