Christopher Walter

Pictures of the clergy in the Theodore Psalter

In: Revue des études byzantines, tome 31, 1973. pp. 229-242.

Abstract
REB 31 1973Francep. 229-242
Ch. Walter, Pictures of the clergy in the Theodore Psalter. — The way of representing clerical dress and attributes in Londin. Add.
19352 is first considered analytically. Comparison with Vatican, gr. 1613 shows that the artist has a more precise and
standardized way of representing the different ranks of the hierarchy in Londin. Add. 19352. In consequence details of dress and
attributes have become for him a means of communication, such that an addition or omission may modify the significance of a
miniature.

Citer ce document / Cite this document :

Walter Christopher. Pictures of the clergy in the Theodore Psalter. In: Revue des études byzantines, tome 31, 1973. pp. 229-
242.

doi : 10.3406/rebyz.1973.1467

http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/rebyz_0766-5598_1973_num_31_1_1467
 PICTURES OF THE CLERGY
IN THE THEODORE PSALTER

Christopher WALTER

Four years ago I published in this review an article concerned with the
representation of Lazarus, the friend of Christ, as a bishop1. 1 was concerned
particularly with his appearance in the scene of the Supper at Bethany in the
Tetraevangelion Paris, gr. 14, f. 199, and in its derivatives2. In passing I noted
that this was not the only representation of a bishop in the Tetraevangelion ;
it is, however, the most striking. As is well-known the illuminators of this
manuscript were given to copying clichés without correcting the anomalies3 ;
thus may be explained the presence of bishops in the two Last Judgment
scenes (f. 51 v and 93*), of a bishop swinging a thurible at the obsequies of
John the Baptist (f. 76) and even of a bishop venerating an idol (f. 135V).
There seemed also to be ideological reasons, connected with the liturgical
revival of the xith century, for members of the clergy figuring in illustrations
of the New Testament. A far more striking case was that of the sister
manuscript in the British Museum, the Theodore Psalter (Londin. Add.
19352), illustrated in the Studios scriptorium in 1066. Père Mariés speaks of

1. Lazarus a Bishop, REB 27, 1969, p. 197-208. The painting, dated 1192, in the church
of the Panagia tou Arakou at Lagoudera (A. and Judith A. Stylianou, The Painted
Churches of Cyprus, Stourbridge 1964, p. 86 and 93, fig. 39) should be added to my reper
toire of this subject.
2. I have since been able to establish that Lazarus is represented in the same way in
Sucevitza 24, g. 267V (the version executed in Moldavia, 1595-1606), but not in Sucevitza
23 (executed for Alexander II after 1468), the illustration of which is very much abridged.
It is fitting to correct a gross error in my article, p. 199, n. 9. It is quite untrue to say that
John 12, the text concerning the Supper at Bethany, is omitted from the Lectionary cycle.
It occurs in the Dionysiou Lectionary (Athos, Dionys. 587, f. 50), and is illustrated by a
miniature comparable to that in the Florence Tetraevangelion ; Lazarus does not appear
as a bishop (cf. fig. 41 illustrating H. Buchthal's article, Early xrvth-century illumi
nations from Palermo, DOP 20, 1966, p. 103-118).
3. Suzy Dufrenne, Deux chefs-d'œuvre de la miniature du xie siècle, CA 17, 1967,
p. 178, η. 6.
230 CHR. WALTER

an « irruption » of saints into this Psalter4. Mile Sirarpie Der Nersessian

provides evidence for the process being more gradual5. Among the saints
who figure in the miniatures of the Theodore Psalter a considerable number
are bishops ; a small number are hieromonachoi, while, in liturgical scenes,
there also occur deacons and priests. It seemed worthwhile to subject
these pictures of the clergy to a more detailed examination, a project which
has been rendered much easier by Mile Der Nersessian 's excellent edition of
the manuscript6.
In my previous article I mentioned a further anomaly, which I did not
attempt to explain. Lazarus seems to be dressed in the miniature illustrating
Paris, gr. 74, f. 199, in a way that is unusual for a bishop. He has an omopho-
rion but no phelonion, nor, apparently, any other of the distinctive elements
of clerical dress. One wonders whether this anomaly is important. Did the
artist have a reason for omitting the other elements ? An answer to this
question is possible, but perhaps more convincing if it follows the detailed
examination of clerical dress in the related Studios manuscript that I under
takehere.
It might be well at this point to recapitulate for the benefit of the reader
who is less familiar with the subject the constituent elements of liturgical
costume as worn in the xith century in the Byzantine rite7. Adapted it
seems in most cases from lay costume, whether for ordinary wear or for
ceremonial occasions, the different items of clerical dress are attested in
literary sources before they are known to have been represented in painting.
Thus the Patriarch Nicephorus (806-815) sends Pope Leo as presents,
enumerated in an accompanying letter : a white sticharion and a brown

A. L. Mariés, L'irruption des saints dans l'illustration du psautier byzantin, An. Boll.
68, 1950, p. 153-162.
5. Sirarpie Der Nersessian, L'illustration des psautiers grecs du Moyen Age, II, Paris
1970, p. 89 (hereafter cited as Der Nersessian). References to the miniatures are given by
the folio and figure numbers only.
6. A review of Mile Der Nersessian's work appeared in REB 30, 1972, p. 368-370.
I take the opportunity for thanking Mile Der Nersessian not only for reading and
criticizing the first draft of this article, but also for her generous and ready help on
many other occasions. I also thank the staff of the Department of Manuscripts at the
British Museum for having allowed me such frequent access to the Theodore Psalter. All
my observations concerning the detail of clerical dress have been controlled by firsthand
study of the manuscript.
7. T. Papas, Studien zur Geschichte der Messgewänder im byzantinischen Ritus, Munich
1965, is the best general study. P. Bernau akis, Les ornements liturgiques chez les Grecs,
EO 5, 1902, p. 129-139, is still useful for nomenclature. T. Papas gives full bibliographical
indications.
 PICTURES OF THE CLERGY IN THE THEODORE PSALTER 231

phelonion, both seamless, together with an epitrachelion and enchirion

decorated with gold8.
1. Sticharion. This garment, of great antiquity, is merely a tunic
common to both civil and clerical dress. Specialisation for a liturgical func
tion can only have been in terms of an archaic stylisation, of colour and
of ornamentation9.
2. Phelonion. The paenula, a thick upper garment, is also of great
antiquity, and is again common to both civil and clerical dress. Special
isation must have been in the same terms, particularly in the case of the
polystaurion with its pattern of crosses10.
3. Epitrachelion. The adjective έπιτραχήλιος is given by Liddell and
Scott as meaning on the neck11. A noun περιτραχήλιον also exists, meaning
a gorget or neckpiece12. A clarification for clerical use is provided by the
liturgical commentaries. So we read in the Historia mystagogica that the
epitrachelion is the faciale (towel) with which Christ, tied by the neck,
was dragged along by [to] the High Priest13. The epitrachelion seems to
have been the badge of office of the ιερεύς, of the priest empowered to
celebrate the liturgy. So in a Nomocanon published by Cotelier we read that
the priest who celebrated without an epitrachelion was a heretic14. Symeon
of Thessalonika also insists upon the sacerdotal quality of the epitrache
lion15.
4. Enchirion. The fourth item of clerical dress sent by Nicephorus to
Leo II was apparently, from its etymology, intended to be held in the hand.
It is in this sense — a handkerchief — that the word was used by Proclus
of Constantinople (died 446)16. But in ecclesiastical use, according to the

8. Στιχάριον λευκον καΐ φαινόλιον κάστανον αρραφα, έπιτραχήλιον καΐ έγχείριον, πεποι-
κιλμένα χρυσφ (Letter of Nicephorus to Leo III : PG 100, 200). Cf. Grumel, Regest
es, n° 382.
9. LSJ, p. 1646 ; Lampe, p. 1260 ; Ducange, col. 1449-1451. Cf. G. Soteriou, Περί
της έξοτερικης περιβολής των κληρικών, in Γρηγόριος ό Παλαμάς 3, 1919, ρ. 239-240.
10. J. WiCKHAM Legg, Church Ornaments and Their Civil Antecedents, Cambridge 1917,
p. 23 et seq. ; G. Soteriou, art. cit. note 9, p. 241.
11. LSJ, p. 667. The noun form seems to be of Christian origin. Cf. Lampe, p. 538.
12. LSJ, p. 139.
13. To έπιτραχήλιόν έστι τό φακιόλιον μεθ' οδ έπεφέρετο υπό του άρχιερέως δεδεμένος
επί τφ τραχήλω ο Χριστός (Historia mystagogica : F. E. Brightmah, Journal of Theo
logical Studies 9, 1908, p. 262). Cf. Historia ecclesiastica : PG 98, 393 ; S. Petrides,
Traités liturgiques de saint Maxime et de saint Germain traduits par Anastase le Biblio
thécaire, ROC 10, 1905, p. 350. For the date of this text (the visit of Anastasius to
Constantinople in 869-870 provides a terminus ante quern), cf. R. Bornert, Les com
mentaires byzantins de la divine liturgie, Paris 1966, p. 125 et seq.
14. J. B. Cotelier, Ecclesiae graecae monumenta, Paris 1677, p. 129.
15. Symeont of Thessalonika, Expositio de Sacro Templo, 59 : PG 155, 712-713.
16. Homily on the Annunciation (attributed to Basil of Seleucis) : PG 85, 448C.
232 CHR. WALTER

Historia ecclesiastica, the enchirion was tucked in the girdle and used for
wiping the hands. Although it was later to change in form into a stiff square
object, it would seem that originally the word epigonation was synonymous,
for both symbolize mystagogically the cloth used by Christ to wipe the
Apostles' feet17.
Literary testimonies also exist for the other constituents of clerical dress.
So in a letter addressed to Michael Cerularius (1043-1058) Peter of Antioch
points out that the Latins also wear the enchirion, epimanikia and epitra-
chelion. This seems to be the earliest literary reference to the epimanikia18.
5. Epimanikia. This hybrid word (the Latin term manica with a
Greek prefix έπι-) means literally on the sleeve and hence a kind of cuff.
In the text cited above Balsamon reserved the use of epimanikia together
with the enchirion to bishops. But in the xiith- or xmth-century Euchologion
in the National Library of Athens it is not specified whether the celebrant,
who puts on the epimanikia in preparation for the liturgy, is a priest or
bishop19.
A curious text in the Encomium of Anastasius the Persian, dating from
the vnth century, gives an account of a vision in which there appeared a
circle of men in shining robes. When the spectator saw that they wore the
omophorion, he understood that that they were bishops20.
6. Omophorion. Once again etymology makes it clear how this
garment was worn. It was borne on the shoulders. One thinks of the mapho-

17. To δέ έγχείριον τδ επί της ζώνης εστί το άπομάξαν τάς χείρας αύτοϋ λέντιον
(PG 98, 396). Theodore Balsamon, Responsa, n° 37 : Rhalli-Potli, Syntagma 4, Athens
1854, p. 478 (= PG 138, 988-989). The Response dates from 1193. By this date, therefore,
the term epigonation had superseded enchirion, although the epigonation had not yet the
form of stiff square board which it was later to assume. In the Commentarius liturgicus
attributed to Sophronius of Jerusalem the term enchirion is used (PG 873, 3988e). Bornert
hesitates between Sophronius II (before 1059 till after 1064) and Sophronius III (before
1235 to after 1273) as author of this commentary (op. cit. note 13, p. 211). It seems unli
kely that at the later date the term enchirion would have still been in use. We have, then,
an argument, albeit slight, in favour of an attribution of the commentary to Sophronius II.
18. Χρυσοφοροΰμεν δέ και αυτοί, έγχείρια καΐ έπιμάνικα καΐ έπιτραχήλια περιβεβλη
μένοι χρυσόπαστα (PG 120, 800^). Cf. Grumel, Regestes, n° 867. The letter dates
from 1054.
19. P. N. Trempelas, ΑΙ τρεις λειτουργίαι κατά τους έν 'Αθήναις κώδικας,
Athens 1935, ρ. 1-2. The right to wear epimanikia seems here to be attached to the cele
bration of the liturgy rather than to the order of priesthood in the hierarchy. It seems that
the sense of Ιερεύς is ambiguous ; sometimes it means celebrant and sometimes it is equi
valent to πρεσβύτερος.
20. Θεασάμενος αδθις περικειμένους ώμοφόρια μετετίθετο τήν διάνοιαν, επισκόπους
νοών τη εξηγήσει του σχήματος (Α. Pertusi, L'encomio di S. Anastasio martire persiano,
An. Boll. 76, 1958, p. 529"11 ; text dating from 631-632 : ibidem, p. 24). Cf. PG 92, 1708^.
Fig. 1. — Peter of Alexandria. Athos Dochiariou 5, f. 204v.

16
Fig. 2. — The just : John Chrysostom, Gregory of Nazian- Fig. 3. — Am
zen, Cosmas and Damian ( ?). Vatican, barb. gr. 372, f. 49. martyr. Vat
Fig. 4 and 5. — Marcian, presbyter and oeconomos of the Great Church. Va
Walters Art Gallery 521, f. 61.
Fig. 6. — Simoniac ordination. Mosq. Addit. gr. 129, f. 67V. Fig. 7. — Inventi
 PICTURES OF THE CLERGY IN THE THEODORE PSALTER 233

rion, the mantle worn by women over the shoulders and round the head21.
It is perhaps a simple error that Palladius uses the word omophoiion in
this sense in his Lausiac History22. The Historia ecclesiastica, after devel
oping the analogy between this woollen garment and the lost sheep borne on
his shoulders by Christ, also draws attention to the fact that the omophorion
was embroidered with crosses23. There are numerous literary testimonies
to the fact that the omophorion was the sign par excellence of the episcopal
state24.
As for deacons the Testamentum Domini, translated into Syriac in 6872 5,
indicates that the normal dress of deacons was the sticharion and the ora-
rion26.
7. Orarion. In the vth century Isidore of Pelusium was already
comparing the linen cloth borne by deacons in the liturgy with the towel
used by Christ to wipe the Apostles' feet27. But this was not, it seems, held
in the hand nor tucked in the girdle like the enchirion. It was rather the
attribute of a servant and laid over one shoulder. As such it bad figured in
pagan liturgies28.

That a person be dressed in a sticharion alone may indicate that he is a

member of the clergy. For example in the Theodore Psalter f. 80 v (fig. 129)
two persons are so dressed ; an epigraph specifies that they are παπάδες.
The addition of the phelonion may increase the probability but does not
give certainty. The distinguishing marks belong rather to the different ranks
of those in orders : the orarion which is worn only by the deacon ; the
epitrachelion which seems to be the sign of the ιερεύς rather than the πρεσβύ-

21. Lampe, p. 834 ; Ducange, col. 891-892.

22. So the edition of Cotelier and Fronton du Duc {PG 34, 1236), followed by Ducange
(col. 1789) and Lampe (p. 1556). But Butler gives μαφόριον (C. Butler, The Lausiac
History of Palladius, Cambridge 1904, p. 15318).
23. PG 98, 393-396 : [τό ώμοφόριον] έχει δέ καΐ σταυρούς.
24. T. Papas, op. cit. note 7, p. 218-222.
25. A. Franzen, Kirchenordnungen, LTK2 6, p. 239.
26. Testamentum Domini, edited by I. E. Rahmani, Mainz 1899, p. 83. For other texts,
cf. G. de Jerphanion, La plus ancienne représentation de l'oraison du diacre, La Voix
des Monuments (nouvelle série), Rome/Paris 1938, p. 280.
27. Isidore of Pelusium, Letter 136 : PG 78, 272e. Cf. R. Bornert, op. cit. note 13,
p. 76.
28. The orarion seems to be the liturgical vestment whose origins have been the most
thoroughly explored. Cf. G. Soteriou, To όράριον τοϋ διακόνου έν τη ανατολική
εκκλησία, in Επιστημονική έπετηρίς της θεολογικής σχολής του Άθήνησι Πανεπιστημίου
1, 1926, ρ. 405-449 ; G. de Jerphanion, art. cit. note 26, p. 279-282 ; D. Pallas,
Μελετήματα λειτουργικά-άρχαιολοχικά. Ι. Τό όράριον του διακόνου, EEBS 24, 1954,
ρ. 158-193.

17
234 CHR. WALTER

τερος and is hence common to both priest and bishop ; the omophorion
worn only by the bishop together with the epitrachelion, epimanikia and
enchirion.
Members of the clergy (and here I exclude all monks except the hiero-
monachos) figure in some forty of the miniatures which illustrate the
Theodore Psalter. In fifteen of these scenes a member of the clergy, whose
name is specified, is represented at prayer ; five scenes represent a liturgical
ceremony ; thirteen are concerned with the biography or the typical actions
of a saint, whose name is again specified ; three scenes represent the just at
prayer, one scene is allegorical and two are portraits.
The first consideration is whether the dress of the different members of
the clergy has been standardized in these miniatures. In the first group twelve
of the clerics named are bishops. Nine are represented similarly not only
as to their actual vestments but also as to the style and shape : sticharion,
phelonion, epitrachelion, omophorion and epimanikia, but in no case an
enchirion29. Three times, however, the bishop has no epimanikia30. Three
other members of the clergy are hieromonachoi31. Each of them is dressed
in the same fashion : sticharion, phelonion, epitrachelion ; it is worth
mentioning that this priestly rank is each time clearly attested in the hagio-
graphical sources32.
We may speak therefore of a relative standardization, which is true also
of the liturgical scenes. In four of them the bishop is represented in the same
way : sticharion, phelonion, epitrachelion, omophorion and epimanikia33.
The fifth case is that of a simoniac ordination ; there the bishop wears neither
epitrachelion nor epimanikia34. In one of these scenes there occur also two
priests, correctly dressed with sticharion, phelonion and epitrachelion
unlike the same scene in the Barberini Psalter (fig. 7). In this same scene
there is a deacon with a sticharion and orarion, as in two others35.

29. Athanasius f. 15 (fig. 27), Basil f. 20 (fig. 36), Abercius f. 32V (fig. 55), Gregory
Thaumaturge f. 79V (fig. 127), Spyridon f. 107v (fig. 176), Amphilocius f. 109 (fig. 179),
Blasius f. 112 (fig. 185), Epiphanius f. 149V (fig. 239), Clement f. 163 (fig. 262).
30. Patricius f. 76 (fig. 123), Gregory of Nyssa f. 90 (fig. 147), Abercius f. 95V (fig. 155).
31. Theodore Studite f. 88V (fig. 144), Modus f. 94 (fig. 153), Hermolaius f. 178V (fig.
281).
32. Theodore Studite παρά Ταρασίου χειροτονείται πρεσβύτερος (Syn. CP, 214-215) ;
Modus ίερομάρτυς (Syn. CP, 674) ; Hermolaius πρεσβύτερος (Syn. CP, 843).
33. Basil reading at a lectern f. 3V (fig. 6), Peter of Alexandria (?) distributing communi
on f. 37V (fig. 64), Invention of relics f. 8Γ (fig. 131), Exaltation of the Cross f. 13Γ
(fig. 212).
34. F. 88 (fig. 143).
35. Invention of relics f. 8Γ (fig. 131).
 PICTURES OF THE CLERGY IN THE THEODORE PSALTER 235

The same relative standardization occurs in the scenes which I have

classified as biographical or typical. In nine of them the bishops are dressed
in sticharion, phelonion, epitrachelion, omophorion and epimanikia36.
In three, however, the epimanikia are missing37.
It is worth singling out as a special case the biographical cycle of Gregory
of Agrigentum (f. 29 0- Here not only Gregory but also one of his accusers,
Sabinus, is represented in the standard way for a bishop. According to the
Life by Leontius, Sabinus was in fact a presbyter while the other accuser,
Crescentius, was a deacon38. In the Life by Symeon Metaphrastes, Sabinus
is also called a presbyter39. The miniatures in the Theodore Psalter attribute
no specific clerical status to Crescentius. They are, moreover, as Mile
Sirarpie Der Nersessian has observed, out of their correct order40. The
anomalies in clerical dress increase one's conviction that something curious
has happened here. The artist must have been working from models and not
copying directly from an illustrated text. The changes in the details of the
vestments must have been due to his own initiative.
In one of these scenes there also appears Theodore Studite pleading
for icons (f. 27 v)41. He is dressed again as a hieromonachos in sticharion,
phelonion and epitrachelion. Similarly in the Expulsion scene (f. 37*)
Arius is correctly dressed as a presbyter42.
In the groups of scenes where the just are represented in prayer there
seems, however, to have been less interest in correct or standard represen
tation of vestments43. In all these scenes dress seems to be defective in
some respect44. The only clearly identifiable bishop (f. 187*) has a patterned
sleeve but no epimanikia.

36. John the Almoner distributing alms f. 23V (fig. 42), Nicephorus and Theodore
Studite pleading for icons f. 27V (fig. 48), Gregory of Agrigentum dragged from his cell,
falsely accused and confronted with the prostitute f. 29V (fig. 51), Gregory Illuminator
leads the King of Armenia towards a church, hauled from a pit f. 48 (fig. 82), John Chrysos-
tom teaching f. 124y (fig. 202), Martyrdom of Ignatius f. 127 (fig. 203).
37. Iconoclasts obliterating icons f . 27V (fig. 48), Martyrdom of Eleutherius f . 40 (fig. 69),
John Chrysostom teaching f. 60 (fig. 97).
38. Leontius, Life : PG 98, 641s.
39. Symeon Metaphrastes, Life : PG 116, 236B.
40. Der Nersessian, p. 25 and 95-96.
41. Fig. 48.
42. Fig. 64. Mile Der Nersessian says en habits épiscopaux (p. 27), but it seems that
Arius was ordained only a presbyter (Theodoret, Historia ecclesiastica, ι : Parmentier,
p. 6» = PG 92, 885).
43. The Lord's bounty f. 53 (fig. 88), the just in prayer f. 82 (fig. 132), the just in prayer
f. 89 (fig. 145), Praising the Lord f. 187V (fig. 293).
44. F. 53, left hand person of lower group wears apparently an omophorion but no
crosses are visible ; f. 82, a similar figure. Mostly the persons in these scenes who seem
to make up a group of clerics, wear only the sticharion and phelonion.
236 CHR. WALTER

The scene of the hierarch at prayer before the City of God (f. 57 v) does
not enter easily into the previous categories. It is one of the group which
expresses most openly the ideology of Saint John Studios, the identification
of Constantinople with the City of God45. The hierarch, however, is not
represented as a bishop ; he is a priest dressed in sticharion, phelonion and
epitrachelion.
Finally there are the two portrait scenes, distinguished from the rest by
the fact that the figures are represented frontally and immobile. Nicephorus
as a bishop and Theodore Studite appear together (f. Π*)*6. Theodore,
as usual, is correctly dressed as a hieromonachos. Nicephorus has the stan
dard vestments of a bishop, with, possibly, the addition of an enchirion.
For the three hierarchs, however, the enchirion is sure, together with the
other vestments usual for a bishop (f. 35V)47.
For the majority of the miniatures of the Theodore Psalter in which
members of the clergy figure we may reasonably speak of standardisation.
This is evident not only for the relatively few representations of priests
and deacons, for whom, in any case, there was not much possibility of
variation, but also for the bishops. However in the case of the bishops
there are a number of minor variations ; it is necessary to decide whether
or not these variations were deliberate. Before considering them in detail
it would perhaps be as well to ask whether it was traditional in Byzantine
manuscript illumination to standardize the dress of members of the clergy,
particularly of bishops.
Two earlier manuscripts contain representations of members of the clergy
on the same scale as the Theodore Psalter. The Paris Gregory contains
numerous portraits as well as liturgical and biographical scenes. In all
these the bishops are dressed the same way : sticharion, phelonion and
omophorion48. No bishop wears epimanikia nor an enchirion. Moreover,
although the omophorion may sometimes hang forward and sometimes be

45. Fig. 94. Cf. Der Nersessian, p. 31, 71-73, 107.

46. Fig. 48. We have here an adaptation of a portrait type much in vogue after the
Triumph of Orthodoxy, itself an adaptation of an Antique prototype (cf. A. Grabar,
Viconodasme byzantin, Paris 1957, p. 218-219 and fig. 143, 144, 152 ; Der Nersessian,
P. 74).
47. Fig. 60.
48. H. Omont, Fac-similés des miniatures des plus anciens manuscrits grecs de la Biblio
thèque Nationale, Paris 1902, f. 43V pi. 23, f. 7Γ pi. 27 (portraits) ; f. 43V pi. 23, f. 52V
pi. 24, f. 67V pi. 25, f. 87V pi. 30, f. 332 pi. 47, f. 452 pi. 60 (liturgy) ; f. 104 pi. 31, f. 236
pi. 51, f. 355 pi. 50, f. 367V pi. 52, f. 409v pi. 54, f. 452 pi. 60 (biography). Cf. Nicole Thierry,
Le costume episcopal byzantin, REB 24, 1966, p. 309. Unfortunately Mme Thierry
does not distinguish between portraits and other pictures in which bishops are repre
sented. Had she done so her conclusions would have been even more valuable.
 PICTURES OF THE CLERGY IN THE THEODORE PSALTER 237

folded over the arm, it hardly differs from one miniature to another. The
impression which one forms is certainly of standardisation.
However the case is very different in the Menologion of Basil II. The scenes
in this manuscript are much closer in theme to those in the Theodore Psalter.
The same types recur : saints in prayer, martyrdoms, liturgical scenes and
portraits. However, although the same saints recur too, there are no evident
signs of a direct relationship between the two manuscripts.
When one examines the actual dress of the members of the clergy in the
Menologion, one is aware that it is far from being standardized49. To limit
our consideration only to saints recurring in both the Menologion and the
Psalter, of three represented at prayer Abercius (129) has neither epitra
chelion nor enchirion ; Gregory of Agrigentum (203) has an epitrachelion
but no enchirion; Theodore Studite (175) has no epitrachelion. Five
saints common to both manuscripts are represented in the Menologion as
martyrs : Anthimus (7) alone has an epitiachelion; Eleutherius (246),
Ignatius (258), Clement (346) and Blasius (390) have no epitrachelion;
none of the five has an enchirion. Eight of the saints common to both
manuscripts are represented in the form of a frontal portrait, each one hold
inga book : Gregory the Illuminator (74), Amphilocius (123) and Basil
(288) have neither epitrachelion nor enchirion ; Gregory of Nyssa (305),
Athanasius (329) and Gregory of Nazianzen (349) have an epitrachelion
but no enchirion; Gregory the Thaumaturge (188) and Spyridon (239)
have both epitrachelion and enchirion; Spyridon also wears his bonnet.
Striking as this diversity may seem, that in a picture of five of the seventy
apostles (160) is yet more striking. This series of portraits has all the air of a
clerical fashion parade : three bishops pose as orants ; one holds a scroll
and one a book ; two have a long hanging omophorion ; three have the
omophorion folded over the arm; only two have an epitrachelion.
Professor Weitzmann has explained certain anomalies of style in this
Menologion by the hypothesis that the artists used models from different
epochs without attempting to render them uniform50. This explanation is
generally accepted, but it does not entirely dispose of the difficulties raised
by variety of ecclesiastical dress. It seems that these pictures reflect an
actual diversity of fashions. From the standard costume reflected in the
miniatures of the Paris Gregory the Byzantine Church has passed into a
period of experiment, characteristic as one realises today of liturgical

49. // Menologio di Basilio II, edited by C. StorNajolo, Vatican/Milan 1907. The

numbers which follow in the text refer both to the manuscript and to this edition.
50. K. Weitzmann, Illustrations in Roll and Codex, Princeton 1947 (reprinted 1970),
p. 200-205.
238 CHR. WALTER

renewal. But at the same time it seems that the artists were more concerned
in the Menologion with the aesthetic aspects of diversity than with its
significative possibilities. This is more evident in the case of priests. Theodore
Studite (175), as I have already noted, has no epitrachelion, although the
text refers explicitly to his ordination by Tarasius51. Faustus (19), presbyter
of the church of Alexandria, has been given not only an epitrachelion but
also epimanikia. On the other hand Marcianus (307), presbyter and oecono-
mos of the Great Church, has been represented with, apparently, an epitra
chelion visible around his neck, although the artist has not shown it falling
below the phelonion. The artists were therefore at no pains either to repre
sentpriests consistently or to assure that it was evident from his vestments
in each case that the saint was a priest (Fig. 4).
The Theodore Psalter witnesses to a return to consistency in the repre
sentation of clerical dress corresponding probably to a uniformisation of
practice. This practice, however, had changed in the period between the
execution of the Paris Gregory in the ixth century and that of the Psalter
in 1066. There are signs that this search for consistency was fairly widespread
in late xith-century miniature painting. It is true that the illustrations to the
Psalter Vatican, gr. 752, dated approximately to 1059 by its Paschal Tables,
is not consistent in its representation of bishops52. But in other liturgical
manuscripts we find that the predominant pattern for representing a bishop
is that of the Theodore Psalter53. On the other hand in the Leningrad
liturgical roll, which is normally associated with the Studios scriptorium,
Basil is represented without an epitracbelion54.

51. PG 117, 156.

52. E. T. De Wald, The Illustrations in the Manuscripts of the Septuagint. III.
Psalms and Odes. 2. Vaticanus graecus 752, Princeton 1942. Members of the clergy
figure in some twenty-five of the miniatures in this manuscript. Ordinarily the bishops
have an epitrachelion and an omophorion, although the epimanikia are less certain.
The bishop most often represented is Sylvester, who figures, however, sometimes with
an epitrachelion but no omophorion (f. 51, 142V). Once a bishop has an enchirion (f. 88V).
Two named bishops, Arethas (f. 51) and Amphilocius (f. 50v), are also represented without
an omophorion. K. Weitzmaîîn associates this Psalter with the Lectionary Athos Dionys.
587 (An imperial lectionary in the Monastery of Dionysiou, Revue des études sud-est
européennes 7, 1969, p. 247).
53. For example two liturgical editions of Gregory's Homilies, Mosq. 146 (G. Gala-
varis, Illustrations of the Liturgical Homilies of Gregory Nazianzenus, Princeton 1969.
fig. 1, 2, 14, 16, 17), Jerusalem Patriarch, taphou 14 (ibidem, fig. 99-101, 111, 114, 117-122) ;
a Lectionary and calendar, Vatican, gr. 1156 (cf. K. Weitzmann, Byzantine miniature
and icon painting, Studies in Classical and Byzantine Manuscript Illumination, Chicago
1971, fig. 298 and 299) ; a liturgical roll, Jerusalem Patriarch, staurou 109 (cf. A. Grabar,
Van de la fin de V Antiquité et du Moyen Age, III, Paris 1968, fig. 121, 125-127, 132).
54. Β. V. Farmakovskij, Vizantijskij pergamennyi rukopisnyi svitok s miniatujurami,
 PICTURES OF THE CLERGY IN THE THEODORE PSALTER 239

There are signs too that the single broadish epitrachelion hanging below
the phelonion had become accepted as the conventional way of representing
a priest or presbyter. Thus in the January volume of an imperial Menologion
now in the Walters Art Gallery, Marcianus, presbyter and oeconomos of
the Great Church, has been given the epitrachelion which is lacking in his
portrait in the Vatican Menologion55. In Vatican, gr. 1156, f. 268 v, Sisin-
nius, the hieromartyr, is represented as a priest. We may now perhaps
understand why in the Theodore Psalter, f. 57 v, the ιεράρχης is represented
with an epitrachelion, as a priest and not a bishop (Fig. 3-5).
Having established the general consistency of the Theodore Psalter in its
representations of clerical dress it would be as well to try to explain the
inconsistencies. For the absence or presence of epimanikia in episcopal
costume there does not seem to be a general explanation. It may be, for
example, in the picture of John Chrysostom (f. 60, fig. 97), that the artist
omitted the epimanikia because they would have clashed with the gold of
his book. On the other hand there seems to have been a deliberate intention
to render their dress defective in the case of heretic bishops. The Arians
(f. 107v, fig. 176) and the iconoclasts (f. 27V, fig. 48 ; f. 88, fig. 143) are
represented with bare arms. Omission was a general practice, it seems, to
indicate a defective state. The artist might also omit the epitrachelion, as
is the case with these two representations of iconoclast bishops, or the crosses
on the omophorion, as in the case of the Arians.
There was also the possibility of addition. We have noticed that in one
case three bishops wear an enchirion. The representation of bishops with
an enchirion was no innovation ; there are numerous examples in the Vatican
Menologion. It seems to be particularly common in frontal portraits of

IRAIK 6, 1900, fig. 2 (This roll, formerly in the collection of the Russian Archaeological
Institute in Constantinople and believed to have been lost at the time of the Revolution,
is now in the Library of the Academy of Sciences at Leningrad ; cf. V. Lazarev, Storia
della pittura bizantina, Turin 1967, p. 253, n. 51) ; cf. Suzy Dufrenne, art. cit. note 3,
p. 190-191.
55. Th. D. Mosconas, Histoire étrange d'un manuscrit enluminé alexandrin du xie
siècle, perdu et retrouvé, Publications de VInstitut d'études orientales de la Bibliothèque
Patriarcale d'Alexandrie \2, Alexandria 1963, fig. 8. Mlle Der Nersessian attributes this
manuscript to the reign of Michael IV (1034-1041) ; cf. Early Christian and Byzantine
Art, Walters Art Gallery, Baltimore 1947, p. 139. K. Weitzmann points out the family
relationship between this manuscript, the Lectionary Athos Dionys. 587 and Vatican gr.
1613 {art. cit. note 53, p. 278, fig. 166 and Narrative and Liturgical Gospel illustrations,
ibidem, p. 258, fig. 246). However the artist responsible for the Dionysiou Lectionary also
tends to standardize his vestments, and in this respect is closer to the artist responsible
for the Theodore Psalter. Cf. especially the portraits of Nicolas and Gregory of Nazianzen,
f. 124V and 143.
240 CHR. WALTER

saints. A fine example of such a portrait occurs in the Menologion Athos

Dochiariou 5, f. 204 v56 (Fig. 1). Peter of Alexandria's epitrachelion is
portrayed clearly above and below the phelonion ; one epimanikia is visible,
and a particularly large enchirion hangs from his right side. Portraits of this
kind are rare in the Theodore Psalter, and this is perhaps why it is only
in the group of Three Hierarchs (f. 35 v, fig. 60) that the enchirion is surely
portrayed.
The choice of this group is perhaps interesting for itself. The Three
Hierarchs represent the just and illustrate Psalm 32, 1. They therefore
replace the anonymous inconsistently represented just of other miniatures.
But in the Barberini Psalter, Vatican. Barb. gr. 372, f. 49 (Fig. 2), four named
saints have also replaced the anonymous just. They are, however, not exactly
the same. In fact they are four saints, none portrait types. Three are named :
John Chrysostom, Gregory Theologos, Cosmas. The fourth is presumably
Damian. Possibly this choice had already been made in the model since the
Barberini Psalter seems to reflect an earlier state of the illuminations than
does the Theodore Psalter. Why, then, the change in the Theodore Psalter ?
It seems that the office of the Three Hierarchs, composed by John Maurop
ous,had recently been instituted, possibly about 1046 57. We have, then,
here in this portrait group one of the earliest examples of the representation
together of the Three Hierarchs.
Each of the hierarchs holds in his hands a book. This, in the present
context, is to be considered an attribute58. As such it has a venerable history
in iconography. Used first in representations of pagan philosophers, it is
taken up in Christian iconography as an attribute of a doctor, whether

56. V. Lazarev, op. cit. note 54, p. 212, 260 n. 127.

57. P. Lamerand, La fête des trois hiérarques dans l'église grecque, Bessarione 4,
1898, p. 170. The earliest reference given to this feast by H. Delehaye is that in the
Venetian Menaea of 1595 (Syn. CP 433-43452~55). A. Ehrhard accepts the xith-century
date for this feast and the attribution of the offices to John Mauropous (Überlieferung
und Bestand der hagiographischen und homiletischen Literatur der griechischen Kirche, I, 2,
Leipzig 1936, p. 551). However the earliest Metaphrastian Menologia in which John
Mauropous's Encomium is included date from the xivth century (Vatican, gr. 453 dated
1381/2, ibidem, p. 552 and Oxford Bodleian. Barocci 192, ibidem, p. 550).
58. The significance of attributes in iconography has hardly been discussed. The
manuals are, to put it mildly, summary (K. Künstle, Ikonographie der Heiligen, Frei
burg im Breisgau 1926, p. 605 ; L. Réau, Iconographie de Vart chrétien, I, Paris 1955,
p. 425). Three articles by G. de Jerphanion, reprinted in La Voix des Monuments (nouv
elle série), Rome/Paris 1938, remain the essential work : Le «thorakion», caractéris
tique iconographique du onzième siècle, p. 263-278 ; L'attribut des diacres dans l'art
du Moyen Age en Orient, p. 283-296 ; Les caractéristiques et attributs des saints dans la
peinture cappadocienne, p. 297-322. Unfortunately Père de Jerphanion's use of this
terminology, caractéristique and attribut, varies from one article to the other.
 PICTURES OF THE CLERGY IN THE THEODORE PSALTER 241

Christ, an Evangelist, an Apostle or a bishop59. Its significance is therefore

clear in a portrait, but is this the case in other scenes ?
When a bishop is represented in prayer, he does not hold a book. Obviousl
y he cannot at once hold a book and extend both arms. In liturgical scenes,
whether distributing communion (f. 37 v, fig. 64) or presiding at the inven
tionof relics (f. 81 v, fig. 131), the bishop does hold a book ; it may be regar
dedas part of the liturgical décor. But in other scenes it is possible that the
book is attributed with a particular intention of underlining the orthodoxy
of the person who holds it. Thus John the Almoner (f. 23 v, fig. 42) was
renowned not only for his generosity but also for his assiduity in bringing
infidels to the Lord60. Gregory of Agrigentum (f. 29 v, fig. 51) is the just
man slandered61. Finally Nicephorus and Theodore Studite (f. 27 v, fig. 48)
were the patrons par excellence of orthodoxy. Since Theodore Studite
was not a bishop, the book in his hand can only signify his orthodoxy.
Moreover, even the scene mentioned above of a bishop distributing com
munion is contrasted with the expulsion of Arius the heretic from the
church.
If this interpretation is right, it is clear why the simoniac bishop (f. 88,
fig. 143) does not hold a book. In fact it has been replaced by a dish of
coins. The inference must be that in his spirit avarice has replaced ortho
doxy62 (Fig. 6).
The analysis and discussion in these pages may seem trivial, but it is
nevertheless necessary if serious progress is to be made in the discipline of
iconography. Relative to linguistics iconography is an underdeveloped
science. Its claim to be treated as a department of semiology has not yet
been established63. It is clear in what I have said above that iconography
has its special problems. Art is ambivalent ; it is at once aesthetic and signi-

59. A. Grabar, Christian Iconography, A Study of its Origins, New York 1968, p. 32,
fig. 21 and 22.
60. Πολλούς των απίστων έπί τόν Κύριον έπιστρέψας (Syn. CP, 216-217).
61. Cf. above.
62. This iconographical subject has, of course, a long history, appearing in the Chludov
Psalter (f. 67V) as well as the Barberini Psalter (f. 110v).
63. For example : « Les syntagmes iconiques, fondés sur une représentation plus ou
moins analogique de la scène réelle sont infiniment plus difficiles à découper... » (R.
Barthes, Eléments de sémiologie, in Le degré zéro de récriture2, Paris 1964, p. 137) ;
« Parler de grammaire picturale et de sémantique publicitaire, décréter que les arts plas
tiques sont a priori des langages, risque... d'enfermer les chercheurs dans l'impressionnisme
et la métaphore littéraires... » (G. Mounin, Linguistique et sémiologie, in Introduction
à la sémiologie, Paris 1970, p. 71) ; « Liées aux gestes, aux attitudes corporelles comme
aux usages sociaux de la couleur et des rapports spatiaux, les formes expressives de la
242 CHR. WALTER

ficative. The artist has the constant possibility of passing from one register
to the other. Nevertheless, when he chooses to be significative, it seems that
he submits to rules which may be established. It has been maintained that
the pictorial arts do not lend themselves to linguistic analysis because
there is not a « temporal » sequence in the message which they communic
ate64. Such a sequence does, however, exist in the beholder's mind. He
is required first to seize a general idea by means of a topos65. This may be
exemplified in the present manuscript by the prayer scenes. An analytical
development of the topos follows ; this is exemplified by the details of clerical
dress. There may then follow a synthetical development, if, for example,
the cleric in question is holding a book.
It is, of course, difficult to establish « unities of expression » for a means
of communication which was always liable to lapse into the aesthetic.
On the other hand it seems that a case can be argued for a greater and a
lesser sensitivity to the correspondence between a picture sign and the corre
sponding reality ; this is exemplified by the use of the epitrachelion to signify
a hieromonachos or a priest. It is also possible to define with some precision
the significance of an addition or an omission. The artist retained, however,
even in the rigorous tradition of Byzantine iconography a certain liberty
of expression. This is exemplified by the example with which I began :
the representation of Lazarus with an omophorion but no other episcopal
vestment. Lazarus, it must be recalled, was primarily the friend of Christ,
and therefore a New Testament character. Consequently he is dressed in a
simple tunic. To have hidden this tunic would have been equivalent to the
elimination of one point of reference for Lazarus. Therefore, rather than
add a phelonion, the artist was content to give him only the essential sign
of episcopal rank, the omophorion66. Can we deny that he was an adept
at the art of communication ?

peinture pure se laissent difficilement codifier en un lexique, ou dans une légende analogue
à celle de la cartographie... » (R. Passeront, Clefs pour la peinture, Paris 1969, p. 133).
64. G. Mounin, op. cit. note 63, p. 66.
65. For the significance in iconography of this word topos, cf. the article by A. Grabar,
Les illustrations de la Chronique de Jean Skylitzès à la Bibliothèque Nationale de Madrid,
CA 21, 1971, p. 197-200.
66. Since this article went to press I have noticed some further examples of figures in
apostolic dress wearing also, as the unique sign of their episcopal status, an omophorion.
The most striking are the two series of the Seventy Apostles at Mistra (Suzy Dufrenne,
Les programmes iconographiques des églises byzantines de Mistra, Paris 1970, p. 10,
43-44, 61 ; schémas X, XVII). To these should be added the enamel of James, Brother
of the Lord, incorporated in an icon at the Hermitage (Alice Banck, Byzantine Art in
the Collections of the USSR, fig. 186, 188).