Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum

Leibniz-Forschungsinstitut für Archäologie

OFFPRINT

RGZM – TAGUNGEN  Band 30

Alexandra Hilgner  ·  Susanne Greiff  ·  Dieter Quast (eds)

GEMSTONES IN THE FIRST MILLENNIUM AD

MINES, TRADE, WORKSHOPS AND SYMBOLISM

International Conference, October 20th - 22nd, 2015

Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum, Mainz

Verlag des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums   Mainz 2017

Das Vorhaben »Weltweites Zellwerk – Umbrüche in der kultu-
rellen Bedeutung frühmittelalterlichen Edelsteinschmucks vor
dem Hintergrund von Wirtschaftsgeschichte sowie Ideen- und
Technologietransfer« (FKZ: 01UO1313A) wird im Rahmen des
Programms »Die Sprache der Objekte – Materielle Kultur im
Kontext gesellschaftlicher Entwicklungen« vom Bundesminis-
terium für Bildung und Forschung gefördert.

Redaktion: Alexandra Hilgner, Claudia Nickel (RGZM);
Carola Murray-Seegert, Won Andres
Satz: Dieter Imhäuser, Hofheim a. T.
Umschlag: Claudia Nickel (RGZM); detail from the Catalan Atlas
(AD 1375) showing Marco Polo’s family travelling by camel cara-
van (image: public domain via Wikimedia Commons).
Bibliografische Information
der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek
Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in
der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie: Detaillierte bibliografische
Daten sind im Internet über http://dnb.d-nb.de abrufbar.
© 2017 Verlag des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums
Das Werk ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Die dadurch begründe-
ten Rechte, insbesondere die der Übersetzung, des Nachdrucks,
der Entnahme von Abbildungen, der Funk- und Fernsehsendung,
der Wiedergabe auf fotomechanischem (Fotokopie, Microkopie)
oder ähnlichem Wege und der Speicherung in Datenverarbei-
tungsanlagen, Ton- und Bildträgern bleiben, auch bei nur aus-
zugsweiser Verwertung, vorbehalten. Die Vergütungsansprüche
des §54, Abs.2, UrhG. werden durch die Verwertungsgesellschaft
Wort wahrgenommen.
Druck: Beltz Bad Langensalza GmbH
Printed in Germany.

ISBN 978-3-88467-271-6
ISSN 1862-4812
 CONTENTS

Preface �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������VII

Mines and Trade

Dieter Quast · Alexandra Hilgner · Susanne Greiff

Introduction: Mines and Trade������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  3

Borayin Larios
Elusive Gemstone Mines: the Red Garnet Industry in Contemporary Rajasthan ����������������������������������������  7

Brigitte Borell
Gemstones in Southeast Asia and Beyond: Trade along the Maritime Networks ������������������������������������  21

Eivind Heldaas Seland

Gemstones and Mineral Products in the Red Sea / Indian Ocean Trade of the First Millennium ����������������  45

Dieter Quast
Amber and Beaver Furs: Trade with Raw Material for the Production of Luxury Goods ��������������������������  59

Helena Hamerow
The Circulation of Garnets in the North Sea Zone, ca. 400-700 ������������������������������������������������������������  71

Gemstone Working

Judith Jordan · Elke Nieveler · Michael Schmauder

Introduction to Gemstone Working��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  87

John Ljungkvist  ·  Jonna Sarén Lundahl  ·  Per Frölund

Two Workshops with Garnet Crafts in Gamla Uppsala ��������������������������������������������������������������������������  91

Mark Horton · Nicole Boivin · Alison Crowther · Ben Gaskell · Chantal Radimilahy · Henry Wright

East Africa as a Source for Fatimid Rock Crystal. Workshops from Kenya to Madagascar ��������������������  103

Elise Morero · Jeremy Johns · Hara Procopiou · Roberto Vargiolu   Hassan Zahouani

The Manufacturing Techniques of Fatimid Rock Crystal Ewers ������������������������������������������������������������  119

Manfred Burianek  ·  Thomas Höltken

A Rock Crystal Workshop from Cologne ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  137

V
The Value and the Symbolic Meaning(s) of Gemstones

Kerstin Sobkowiak
An Introduction to the Value and the Symbolic Meaning(s) of Gemstones��������������������������������������������  151

Lisbet Thoresen
Archaeogemmology and Ancient Literary Sources on Gems and their Origins ��������������������������������������  155

James McHugh
The Symbolism of Gemstones in Indian Religions ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������  219

Michelle Beghelli
From the Bible to the Liber Pontificalis. Gems and Precious Stones in the Early Medieval Churches:
Combinations, Colours and Contexts ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  233

Nils C. Ritter
Gemstones in Pre-Islamic Persia: Social and Symbolic Meanings of Sasanian Seals ������������������������������  277

Antje Bosselmann-Ruickbie
The Symbolism of Byzantine Gemstones: Written Sources, Objects and
Sympathetic Magic in Byzantium ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  293

Poster Session

Kerstin Sobkowiak · Dieter Quast · Stefan Albrecht · Jörg Drauschke

Gemstones as Insignia ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  308

Jörg Drauschke · Annette Frey · Antonio Juárez Villena · Dieter Quast

Between Fashion and Meaning – Red Garnet and Style Changes from the 5th to the 7th Century ��������  310

Stefan Albrecht · Jörg Drauschke · Michael Franz · Dieter Quast · Jörg Gengnagel · Kerstin Sobko-

wiak  ·  Borayin Larios  ·  Judith Jordan  ·  Elke Nieveler  ·  Michael Schmauder  ·  Eszter Horváth  ·  Zsófia
Rácz · Sonngard Hartmann · Michael Rychlicki · Susanne Greiff
Garnet: Crisis along Trade Routes in the 7th Century? ��������������������������������������������������������������������������  312

Charlotte Hedenstierna-Jonson  ·  Alexandra Hilgner  ·  Antonio Juárez Villena

Garnet on the Peripheries of the Centres of Fashion ����������������������������������������������������������������������������  314

Stefan Albrecht · Julia Bolotina · Kerstin Sobkowiak

Gemstones in Heaven and Earth: Rivers of Opulence in Historical Sources ������������������������������������������  316

Elke Nieveler · Judith Jordan · Jutta Geisweid · Christiane Stempel · Eszter Horváth

Quality by its Definition ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  318

List of Contributors������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  320

VI
 PREFACE

The conference »Gemstones in the First Millennium AD« was organised in October 2015 in Mainz, Ger-
many, within the scope of the project »International Framework – Weltweites Zellwerk – Changes in the
cultural significance of early medieval gemstone jewellery considered against the background of economic
history and the transfer of ideas and technologies«. The project, the conference and this volume are gener-
ously sponsored by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). The project focuses on
garnet jewellery, a European phenomenon of the early Middle Ages. On the one hand, the social and sym-
bolic character of this jewellery style is scrutinised, while another part of the project focuses on eco-historical
questions. While the project’s results will be published in a separate volume, the present proceedings are
a collection of essays, mostly by external authors. Researchers from different countries, such as Germany,
England, the United States, Sweden, Norway and Italy and from various fields, such as archaeology, history,
philology as well as the natural sciences, contribute to this volume: they present their results on worldwide
gemstone research – including, but not focusing on garnet. These speakers, now authors, were selected to
help the project members widen their views and »think out of the box« for their own research as well as to
integrate their individual research results within a wider context. Trade flows and production methods, but
also utilisation and perception were discussed in a cross-cultural and diachronic approach, using gemstones
as an example. The conference aimed at three main questions that formed the sessions: »Mines and Trade«,
»Gemstone Working« as well as »The Value and the Symbolic Meaning(s) of Gemstones«. The structure
of this volume follows the structure of the conference. The chairs of the sessions and the editors of this
volume present each of these three chapters with an introduction to the topic. The chairs were chosen as
representatives of the three project’s joint-partners: The Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum (RGZM) in
Mainz, The LVR-LandesMuseum in Bonn and the South Asia Institute of Heidelberg University (SAI). The
RGZM has a strong background in provenancing garnets and thus presents the chapter »Mines and Trade«.
The LVR-LandesMuseum is focusing on technological questions within the project and therefore describes
»Gemstone Working«. The partners from the SAI are philologists and hence qualified to discuss »The Value
and the Symbolic Meaning(s) of Gemstones«.
Starting with the idea of bringing together experts from different fields and continents as well as positioning
ourselves within the scientific community, we received more than we had dared to wish for: with top-rank-
ing researchers from the wider field of gemstone studies, this conference included interesting presentations
in fields that, in the past, were often characterised by isolated research carried out by only few experts.
The stimulating discussions during the sessions created new networks and led to the exchange of thoughts
across the disciplines.
This conference was organised by colleagues from the RGZM, but our project partners from the SAI and
the LVR-LandesMuseum in Bonn played an important role in searching for and selecting the speakers. We
are very thankful for their support. We would also like to thank our student assistants Anna-Maria Bojzak,
­Michael Franz and Andrea Bersch, for helping to organise the conference days. Thanks are also due to
­Carola Murray-Seegert for proofreading, Dieter Imhäuser for designing the layout, Won Andres for help-
ing with copy-editing, and to the publishing house of the RGZM. Of course, our special thanks go to the
speakers and authors whose essays created this volume. We are now fortunate to be able to present these
contributions to a wider public.
The Editors
Alexandra Hilgner, Susanne Greiff & Dieter Quast

VII
ANTJE BOSSELMANN-RUICKBIE

THE SYMBOLISM OF BYZANTINE GEMSTONES: WRITTEN

SOURCES, OBJECTS AND SYMPATHETIC MAGIC IN BYZANTIUM

Byzantine writers continued the antique tradition of exploring the symbolism of precious stones. The in-
formation that we can gain from Byzantine texts on this subject can be divided into two major groups: the
first comprises information on gemstones as a method of imperial representation; the second comprises the
magical, ritual / religious 1, protective and healing properties attributed to gemstones 2. The aim of this paper
is to correlate information in the written sources with Byzantine gemstones of the second, much larger
group of Byzantine writings and compare the evidence with the concept of »sympathetic magic«.
The East Roman and then Byzantine Empire existed from roughly the 4th century AD until the Ottoman con-
quest in 1453, thus being the longest existing empire of the Middle Ages. This history was only interrupted
by the »Latin Occupation« of 1204 to 1261. In 1204, Constantinople was captured and plundered during
the Fourth Crusade. In the course of the occupation, many Byzantine objects were destroyed or dispersed:
objects made from metal were melted down, or brought to Europe. This means that the sheer number of
surviving luxury objects from Byzantium is relatively small. After the Latin Occupation, the Empire suffered
from economic problems and shrunk significantly, but eventually saw a new cultural heydey from the late
13th to mid-14th century in various arts, such as architecture, frescoes, mosaics and icons, the latter often
covered with elaborate metal frames.
The surviving Byzantine objects show that many different kinds of gemstones were used, either in the shape
of beads or cabochons (unfaceted, rounded shape) to be set in metal objects, such as insignia, weapons,
jewellery, reliquaries, crosses, metal icons and metal vessels. Gemstones were also carved to produce ves-
sels, small icons with a relief decoration (cameos) and seals with an image carved into them (intaglio). As in
other geographical and cultural areas, glass was also used instead of gemstones 3, which is not always easy
to differentiate by sight.
Emeralds, sapphires and amethysts were often used. Furthermore, we find a large amount of varieties of
chalcedony (agate, sardonyx, carnelian) and also rock crystal, garnet, jasper, hematite and lapis lazuli 4.
Other stones were used only rarely, such as aquamarine, chrysoprase and turquoise 5. In the case of tur-
quoise, a 10th-century Abbasid text by al-Washshā’ (d. 936) referring to the taste of wealthy women in
Baghdad might provide a clue as to the lack of turquoise (and other materials) in jewellery also in Byzantium:
»They criticize wearing rings filled with glass pieces, carnelian, silver rings, iron rings, rings in unpolished
metal and, equally, rings of turquoise, garnet, and small pearls, because all of those are better worn by men
and slaves and are not at all appropriate to women of refinement« 6.
Many of the carved Byzantine stones were decorated with Christian imagery 7 (fig. 1), as religious tokens
and expressions of the Christian faith of the owner. They were worn in the hope of protection, salvation
and healing. The assumed power of the object could work in two ways: first, through the intercession of
the depicted individuals (Christ, Virgin Mary, saints); second, through the material of the gemstone itself
as supposedly having magical properties. Apart from the gemstones with Christian imagery, a large group
of so-called »magical« gems has survived, particularly from the Late Antique and Early Byzantine period 8.
These are decorated with signs and symbols considered magical – also in combination with Christian im-
agery 9, signs and symbols, such as the Chi-Rho 10 – acclamations and exorcisms or ancient motifs such as

Gemstones in the First Millennium AD 293

 a b

Fig. 1  a-b Amethyst cameo set in silver-gilt mount, 12th-13th centuries, Vatopaidi Monastery, Mount Athos. – (© Vatopaidi Monastery,
Mount Athos, Greece, with kind permission).

the ouroboros, the snake biting its tail 11. Very common was the motif of the »Holy Rider«, often named
Solomon, killing a demon 12.
Byzantium had been a Christian state since Christianity was declared the state religion in AD 380; despite
that, superstition and magic – »a particular form of religious belief and activity which did not conform to
the doctrinally defined, dominant orthodox Christianity« 13 – were always a part of Byzantine life. People
across all social strata used to wear, for instance, amulets made of gemstones and metal 14. An often-quoted
example of magic being employed – even in court circles – is the 11th-century story of the otherwise pious
Empress Zoe. She used amulets and incantations in her desire to produce an heir, and an icon of Christ
that could supposedly foretell the future 15, as the minister and historian Michael Psellos recounted in his
Chronographia. In the late Byzantine period, magic and superstition were still a concern as can be judged by
written sources 16, notwithstanding the fact that the material culture of magic seems to have diminished 17.
However, there is evidence that magic in general, and amulets in particular, were still widespread amongst
the Byzantines up to the 15th century. In the 14th century, the Byzantine monk and writer Josephus Bryen-
nios complained about magic being used and amulets being worn by his contemporaries 18. A 14th-century
monk tried to bewitch the members of the synod to promote him to the bishopric 19, and cases of trials for
the possession of magic books are known from the written sources 20.
Strong magical beliefs have thus survived from Antiquity, including the tradition of believing in the prop-
erties of the materials from which amulets were made. This knowledge is very often transmitted through
written sources and not the objects themselves.

294 A. Bosselmann-Ruickbie  ·  The Symbolism of Byzantine Gemstones

 SOURCES, STATE OF RESEARCH AND PROBLEMS FACING RESEARCH

In the Eastern Roman and Byzantine Empire, several writers were engaged in discussing the symbolism and
also the properties of precious stones, mostly against the background of Christian allegoresis 21. The first
Christian book on stones was written by Epiphanios of Salamis in the late 4th century, an exegesis of Exodus
(28,17-20 par. 39, 10-13), in which the twelve stones on the High Priest’s breastplate were described 22.
Other biblical exegetes include Andrew of Caesarea, Archbishop of Cappadocia (563-637), who wrote a
commentary on the Book of Revelation and treated the twelve stones of Heavenly Jerusalem 23. In the 11th
century, Michael Psellos (1018-after 1081) 24 discussed precious stones and their healing properties in his
lapidum de virtutibus (Περὶ λίθων δυνάμεων) 25. Psellos was a Byzantine intellectual and writer who had made
a career in civil administration and taught Emperor Michael VII Doukas (1067-1078) 26. While Epiphanios and
Psellos mentioned the (assumed) properties of stones, other Lithika 27 are merely descriptive or even just an
enumeration of stones such as the 14th-century poem of Theodoros Meliteniotes: he described the bed of
Sophrosyne as being adorned with 224 precious stones, most of them not identifiable, without comment-
ing on them 28.
The written sources have been dealt with extensively by Christel Meier in her book »Gemma Spiritalis«
from 1977. In 2013, Eleutheria Avgoloupi published a book on the symbolism of imperial gemstones in
Byzantium 29 dealing with the textual evidence for precious stones; the author focused on stones used for
imperial representation, without making, however, a clear differentiation between Eastern and Western
traditions. Research has often emphasised the written sources and, for example, the problems connected
with the identification of the stones 30. As mentioned before, the aim of this paper is, however, to focus on
the objects made from or with precious stones. The question, then, is whether the stones were employed
intentionally, taking advantage of the stone’s alleged power. If so, then what were the intentions of the
producer, commissioner and beholder? Although one cannot find a comprehensive answer due to the lack
of applicable Byzantine sources, a few evidential cases can be presented.
As a general remark, the study of Byzantine precious stones is difficult. The sheer number of objects is rather
small, not only due to the losses incurred over the centuries but also due to changes in fashion: after the
9th century, enamels came into fashion and were often used instead of (but also combined with) precious
stones 31. Uncarved stones that have lost their context are impossible to label as Byzantine unless they come
from datable archaeological strata. Carved Byzantine stones (cameos and intaglios 32) are often no longer
in situ or have lost their original setting (if they had any in the first place, such as the amethyst cameo in
fig. 1). Their style is mostly difficult to judge due to the small size of the objects as well as their state of
preservation 33; therefore, precise dating presents difficulties. It is almost impossible to attribute Byzantine
gemstones to workshops because there is no direct archaeological or literary evidence providing evidence
for the provenance of carved gemstones. On the basis of the state of research, the place of production can
only be speculated, although Constantinople and Thessalonica are likely, especially due to the presence of
possible commissioners or clients for such pieces.
One of the major problems with regard to the study of Byzantine gemstones is that hardly any have been
analysed scientifically. Therefore, most of the descriptions in the literature are dependent on the knowledge,
experience and the eyesight of the scholar. One of the few exceptions is a 6th-7th-century collar from the
so-called Assiut Treasure in Egypt, the stones of which have been identified as sapphires, supposedly derived
from Sri Lanka 34.
In the Middle Ages, the most important characteristic of a gemstone was its colour 35. The identification
of stones mentioned by antique or medieval writers is not always clear 36, to say the least 37. The hyacinth,
for instance, is referred to in the Codex Iustinianus in what is probably the most often quoted passage on

Gemstones in the First Millennium AD 295

precious stones in the Eastern Roman Empire. In the 6th century, Emperor Iustinian I (527-565) passed a
collection of laws, in which he integrated legal rules of one of his predecessors, Theodosios II (408-450). In
one of the decrees (433, XII [XI]), it is stated that margaritae (pearls), smaragdi and hyacinthi are exclusively
reserved for imperial use 38. The identification of the hyacinth has been disputed. It has been identified with
different stones, mostly blue ones 39, such as sapphire, lapis lazuli and blueish amethyst. Other interpreters
identify the hyacinthi as the reddish tourmaline, ruby or garnet 40. Whatever the true identity of the hyacinth
mentioned in the 5th- and 6th-century laws, it is clear that the combination of pearls, emerald and the hya-
cinth were restricted to imperial use 41.
The example of the hyacinth highlights the difficulty in equating the written sources with the actual stones
employed for luxury items and amulets. Most of the time, what is mentioned in the written sources can only
be vaguely related to existing objects. Good examples are blue stones such as lapis lazuli, its component
lazurite and transparent sapphire. These were infrequently used throughout Byzantine history for jewellery,
seals, cameos and intaglios, and, in the case of lapis lazuli, even for small icons 42. Blue stones in general, but
especially the sapphire, were often related to heaven 43. Avgoloupi called the sapphire the »pietra celeste par
eccellenza« 44. Andrew of Caesarea in the late 6th/early 7th century, for example, described the sapphire as
being similar to heaven 45. Pliny the Elder, in the 1st century, remarked that the sapphire’s characteristic gold
flecks (he probably meant lapis lazuli) were reminiscent of the stark-spangled sky 46.
Despite the continuous mention of blue stones as symbols of heaven, it is difficult to find physical examples
that support the written sources. Therefore, we can only make vague assumptions. A good example for the
use of a blue stone is a small gold pectoral cross in the Benaki Museum in Athens dated to the 13th-14th
century 47. One side is covered with an inscription while a cross-shaped lapis lazuli is set on the other side.
Pectoral crosses made from bronze, silver and sometimes gold are very common in the middle and late
Byzantine period, between the 9th and 15th century 48. However, this particular piece uniquely uses a high-
quality lapis lazuli, a stone that was apparently not very fashionable in earlier phases of Byzantium, possibly
due to its opaqueness 49.
We can only speculate that the lapis lazuli on the Benaki cross was used to symbolise heaven, and beyond
that, the ascension of Christ. Unfortunately, as in so many other cases, the actual intention of the goldsmith
or the donor remains unknown. The same goes for a unique gem-encrusted reliquary of the True Cross in
Siena, Italy, dated to the 12th century (fig. 2) 50. Again, the blue stones (sapphires) might have symbolised
heaven, and the red stone in the centre of the cross (ruby) might have been understood as a symbol of the
blood of Christ, but ultimately this remains speculative.

Amethyst

In the case of the amethyst, however, a connection between the written sources and a specific object can
actually be made. The amethyst is one of the very few stones on which almost all authors from Antiquity
to the Middle Ages agree: its colour is reminiscent of wine and it is, therefore, related to the act of drink-
ing and becoming drunk. The supposed magical power is conveyed by the stone’s name: »a-methystos« in
Greek means »not inebriated« 51.
Amethyst has been described by many writers 52. Asclepiades of Samos (born ca. 320 BC) was the first to
mention the most often related characteristic of the amethyst: in a poem he described the amethyst as a
symbol of sobriety 53. In an epigram by Plato the Younger, the drinker Dionysus says »Let it either persuade
me to be sober, or let it learn to get drunk« 54. In his Natural History, Pliny also made the connection be-
tween the gemstone’s colour and wine, but ascribed to others the interpretation of it as protective against

296 A. Bosselmann-Ruickbie  ·  The Symbolism of Byzantine Gemstones

insobriety: »The falsehoods of the magicians would
persuade us that these stones are preventive of in-
ebriety, and that it is from this that they have derived
their name« 55. In the late 4th century, the Christian
writer Epiphanios of Salamis again mentioned the
amethyst’s wine-like colour and its relation to drunk-
enness 56, but reversed the usual meaning: »The
gem amethyst glows all around like a blazing fire in
which there is a white brilliancy and it has also the
colour of wine. … Its name is applied to it in accord-
ance with its power and potency, for those who look
on it become drunk [...]« 57. The 11th-century Byzan-
tine writer and historian Michael Psellos stated that
the amethyst is violet-blue, mitigates headaches and
makes wine drinkers and carousers abstinent and
sober, and that this led to the stone’s name 58.
Amethyst was used for Late Roman and Byzantine
intaglios and cameos, for example, the high-quality
amethyst cameo in London depicting Saint Deme-
trios and Saint George 59. It was also used to adorn
Byzantine goldsmiths’ works 60, for instance, in the
shape of droplet-shaped beads in the early Byzan-
tine period 61.
The most interesting amethyst in this context is a
cameo used for a small encolpium in the Vatopaidi
Fig. 2  Reliquary of the True Cross, 12th century, Tesoro di Santa
Monastery on Mount Athos (height 4.3 cm, fig. 1a- Maria della Scala, Siena. – (Photo A. Bosselmann-Ruickbie).
b) 62. It is set in a silver-gilt mount and is adorned
with precious stones and pearls. Based on the style
of the carving of the stone, the amulet and its frame can be dated to the 12th-13th century 63. The cameo
shows a depiction of the Virgin Mary belonging to the type of the Virgin Hagiosoritissa (»Αγιοσορίτισσα«),
»Virgin of the Holy Soros« 64. This type is often part of a Deesis, and Mary stretches out her hands to heaven
in order to intercede between humans and God. On the back, there is a depiction of a cross resting on a
stepped pedestal executed in niello 65. The ligatured inscription around the cross reads »Jesus Christ con-
quers« (»I[HCOY]C – X[PICTO]C / NI – KA«, in the sense of »Jesus Christ is victorious«).
The encolpium bears two inscriptions in majuscles on the rim and the reverse, each comprising two verses,
forming one epigram beginning on the rim 66: »APACA XEIPAC IKETIKAC, ΠΑΡΘΕΝΕ, ΗΝ ΛΙΘΟC AMEΘYCOC
EN ΧΛΟΗ ΓΡΑΦΕΙ» (»Da du die bittenden Hände erhoben hast, Jungfrau, (du) die der Amethyststein im
Grünen darstellt«, which approximately translates as »Having raised your suppliant hands, Virgin, whom
the amethyst depicts in the green«), followed by »MEΘHC ΜΕ ΠΑΘΩΝ ΕΞΑNΑΡΠΑCON, ΚΟΡΗ, Κ(AI) ΠPOC
ΧΛΟΩΔΗ ΤΡΥΦΕΡΟΝ CKHNOY ΤΟΠ(ΟΝ)« (»reiß mich los von der Trunkenheit der Leidenschaften, Maid,
und lagere mich an einem grünen lieblichen Ort«, approximately, »tear me away from the drunkenness of
passion, Virgin, and lay me in a green lovely place«).
The commissioner and / or owner of this pendant used it to pray for a place in paradise and to solicit interces-
sion from the Virgin Mary in order to be saved from »drunkenness«. However, what had been interpreted
as drunkenness in the sense of exaggerated alcohol consumption should now be seen as a metaphor for

Gemstones in the First Millennium AD 297

the »drunkenness of passion«. Nevertheless, the pun of AMEΘYCOC (amethyst) and MEΘHC (drunkenness)
refers to the stone’s properties mentioned in so many written sources.
Another interesting observation regarding the symbolism of gemstones can be made: EN ΧΛΟΗ is a refer-
ence to the green gemstones which surround – together with pearls – the amethyst cameo, which has to
be seen as a symbol of paradise mentioned in the second part of the inscription as ΧΛΟΩΔΗC ΤΟΠΟC
(green place). This is again one of the very few references in an inscription referring to a gemstone used on
an object.
In any case, to my knowledge, this the only Byzantine gemstone in which the name of the stone was actu-
ally mentioned in an accompanying inscription; furthermore, this is the only proof that the wearer of a pro-
tective encolpium / amulet – Albani called it a »curative amulet« 67 – was aware of the amethyst’s symbolism
and ascribed to it properties mentioned in many antique and Byzantine texts.

Blood Stone – Hematite

The next examples of Byzantine gemstones are made of grey to greenish stones with reddish inclusions.
In the literature, they are described variously as heliotrope, hematite, bloodstone or blood jasper 68 – an-
other case in which the nomenclature is anything but well-defined. »Bloodstones« were often mentioned
by the ancient writers 69, such as Pliny the Elder (heliotropium) 70 and the Byzantine author Michael Psellos
(αἱματίτης) 71. All authors make reference to its connection with blood (Psellos mentions that it has the colour
of blood). The red inclusions are the characteristics that explain the stone’s popularity: the red dots could
easily be associated with the blood of Christ. It was a popular material for Eucharistic chalices in the East as
well as the West.
A Byzantine vessel, a recent acquisition of the Cleveland Museum of Art 72, was made of a green stone with
reddish inclusions that is described as »blood jasper (heliotrope)«. The stone is set in a gilt-copper mount.
It was dated to the 10th-11th centuries (but might be later). On the basis of the above-quoted sources and
its blood-red parts, it is tempting to assume that this vessel was a Eucharistic chalice. However, we cannot
be sure whether this vessel was actually used for the Eucharist since inscriptions on the mount, which often
present a proof, are missing 73. The blood jasper might give a hint to its religious use, but it might just as well
simply have been a luxury item. The height of 7.9 cm seems rather small for a Eucharistic chalice, but an
example in the Treasury of San Marco in Venice, bearing a Eucharistic inscription, measures only 11.5 cm 74.
A rather large group of middle Byzantine cameos was also made from stones that have the red inclusions in
common but were described differently in the literature. Regardless of the nomenclature, red inclusions are
the feature that would have made the stone valuable for the stone carver.
We can speculate on the basis of the written sources that those stones with red inclusions or veins were
perfect for the depiction of Christ – whether enthroned, as a bust or in the scene of the crucifixion – and
that the inclusions refer to his blood and therefore the passion. Middle Byzantine cameos, today in Saint
Petersburg and Geneva, show Christ Pantocrator and are identified as »bloodstones«. These examples
substantiate the assumption that these stones were used for depictions of Christ 75. Another example, in
the Victoria and Albert Museum in London, fits well with this concept: a »jasper« relief depiction of the
crucifixion (probably 10th century) 76. However, other cameos show different figures such as the Virgin Mary
or Saint George 77, which do not fit this pattern. Furthermore, none of the inscriptions make reference to
the stone comparable to the case of the amethyst.
There is one »bloodstone« that can bridge the gap between the written sources and the object: a Byzantine
intaglio made of a material described as hematite and dated to the 6th-7th century, which is today in the

298 A. Bosselmann-Ruickbie  ·  The Symbolism of Byzantine Gemstones

 a b

Fig. 3  a-b Intaglio showing Christ and the woman with blood issue, 6th-7th centuries, Metropolitan Museum, stone described as »hema-
tite«. – (© The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York).

Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York (fig. 3a-b). It shows a miracle of Jesus: the healing of the woman
with the issue of blood or in Greek haimorroousa (ἡ αἱμοῤῥοοῦσα, »bleeding woman«) as related in the
Gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke 78. While in a large crowd, Jesus was approached by a woman who
had suffered from a bleeding disorder for twelve years, which meant that she not only ruined by doctors’
bills but also considered impure and therefore socially isolated. According to the Gospels, she touched Jesus’
garments and was immediately healed. The nature of the actual medical condition that was translated in the
King James Version of the Bible as »issue of blood« is not evident. However, it is clear that it had to do with
blood. The inscription on the amulet reads: »And the woman being in a state of flowing of blood came,
having suffered and having spent much, she benefited nothing, but rather, had known the source of her
flow of blood was dried up in the name of her faith« 79 (front: »KE H ΓVNI/ OVCA PVCH E/MATOC ETI/
KE ΠOΛA [ΠVΘ]OVCA H KE EΔ Α/ΠANICA MIΔE/N OΦEΛEΘΟ [EI]/CA AΛA MAΛ [ΛON]/ HΔE/A/
MOVCA«; reverse: »[E]ΞHPAV/ΘH H ΠHΓH TO[V]/ VMATHCM/OV AVTHC ENTO/ [O] NOMATI T/HC
ΠICTEOC AV/TIC« 80).
Although we are not in the same comfortable position of having a direct link between the written sources
and the stone as in the example of the amethyst, it is safe to assume that the stone was particularly chosen
because of its colour and the well-known associations of its red veins or inclusions with blood, and since the
word »blood« is mentioned in the inscription (underlined in the quotation above).
Jacquelyn Tuerk has worked on the interpretation of this amulet, arguing that »The biblical narrative offers
a persuasive analogy to the personal narrative of the Byzantine woman’s own sickness, positing the pos-
sibility of a cure for the Byzantine woman through identity with the biblical woman« 81. According to Tuerk,
this is enhanced by the figure on the reverse: an orant between palm trees which is supposed to depict
the wearer. However, amuletic figures are nowhere else interpreted as »self-portraits« of the wearers; typi-

Gemstones in the First Millennium AD 299

 cally they depict a saint as intercessor. In this case, I
would argue that it is a continuation of the story: the
request for healing referring to the biblical woman
with the issue of blood as a supplicant on the front
of the amulet is then supported on the reverse by a
depiction of the healed woman (»[…] the source of
her flow of blood was dried up […]« as an orant.
Another example proves the medieval belief that
»bloodstone« was helpful against diseases related
to blood, but it comes with its own particular prob-
lems: an oval cameo in the Cabinet des Médailles
in Paris 82 shows a depiction of Christ Pantocrator
mounted in silver with an inscription in niello (fig. 4).
The cameo itself has been dated to the 10th or 11th
century, but the frame considered later and possi-
bly made in France on account of the shape of the
letters 83. The inscription reads as »Sortilegis vires et
fluxum tollo cruoris«, which translates as »I take the
power off the spells and stop the haemorrhage«.
This Latin inscription was dated to the 13th century,
hence later than the cameo.
This might be one of the many pieces that came
Fig. 4  Cameo with Christ Pantocrator (10th-11th centuries,
to the West after 1204. It might have received the
mount: France, 13th century (?), »jaspe sanguin« / »jaspe vert veiné
de rouge«. – (© Cabinet des Médailles, Paris). mount in France, but in my opinion, it is also possible
that the frame was added in Constantinople in the
th century when the city was under Latin occupation 84.
13
The Latin inscription on this cameo mount clearly refers to the magical properties of the amulet by men-
tioning the efficacy of the magicians to stop haemorrhage. As opposed to the aforementioned amethyst
amulet, the mount might not be contemporary, but even in this case, it is interesting that the properties of
the stone would have been known to the maker or commissioner of the mount.

SYMPATHETIC MAGIC IN BYZANTIUM

The examples presented in this paper are rare cases from which can be deduced that the Byzantines were
aware of the complex relations between the material of an object intended for healing and protection and its
iconography, as well as the words and symbols inscribed on them 85, to achieve a desired goal. This can also
be assumed for some of the other examples cited above, such as blue stones symbolising heaven and also the
ascension of Christ, although there is no definite proof because, as a rule, the objects lack explicit inscriptions.
Nevertheless, it seems that the cases presented here demonstrate that the designers of the amulets pre-
sented above were aware of a conceptual relationship between the materiality and the visuality of an object.
This follows a concept known as »sympathetic magic«. The principles of this theoretical magical concept,
which can be widely applied to many magical and religious actions, are »first, that like produces like, or that
an effect resembles its cause; and, second, that things which have once been in contact with each other

300 A. Bosselmann-Ruickbie  ·  The Symbolism of Byzantine Gemstones

continue to act on each other at a distance after the physical contact has been severed« 86. A good example
of the latter principle is the Christian »contact relic«. Relics can be either part of a saint, such as bones, nails,
hair, etc. (primary relics), or an object that has been in contact with a saint during his / her lifetime, such as
garments, instruments of torture and execution, etc. (secondary relics), especially Jesus-related relics such as
splinters of the True Cross or the Holy Lance 87.
The Scottish social anthropologist Sir James George Frazer (1854-1941) systematised the concept of what
he called »sympathetic magic« 88 as operating through two principles, namely the »Law of Similarity« and
the »Law of Contagion«, in his work »The Golden Bough« 89, actually a series of books that strongly influ-
enced modern theories of magic and religion until today 90. However, concepts of »sympathetic relations«
were already known among the ancient Greeks, such as the Stoics and Platonists 91, usually referred to as
»sympatheia« (συμπάθεια). The principle itself is even older: »it is generally agreed that the belief in one
version or another of the laws of sympathy is as old as human society« 92. It was also known in Byzantium
but had to be adapted to the Christian belief system. Since the 2nd century AD, the notion of sympatheia
was used by the Church Fathers, such as St Basil and John Chrysostom 92. Katerina Ierodiakonou studied
the concept of sympathetic relations, sympatheia, in the writings of the 11th-century Byzantine philosopher,
politician and historian Michael Psellos 94. She concluded that »as a Christian, Psellos could not accept that
the sympathetic relations between the parts of the world are such that human beings may control the
power of the daemons for their own benefit« 95. In other words, any attempt to gain influence over the
world to achieve a personal goal in a magical way – by controlling demons – was not in line with orthodox
Christian belief. However, in the treatise on precious stones in which Psellos describes their powers of heal-
ing  96, »which very much sound like magical powers« 97, he states that the belief in the sympathetic powers
of healing of particular gemstones is not against orthodoxy 98. As Ierodiakonou’s study has shown, Psellos’
writings betray knowledge of earlier concepts of sympatheia and sympathetic magic, and an effort to bring
these in concordance with orthodox teachings. According to Psellos, only those practices were permitted
that were non-magical (in the sense that they intended to control demons, which would mean interfering
with the divine); instead, he approved of those practices that brought humans closer to God and purified
the soul so as to accept God’s will 99.
The gemstones that we have considered – protective objects made of amethyst and bloodstone – corrobo-
rate the textual evidence of a Byzantine awareness of the concepts of sympathetic relations, or sympathetic
magic. The example of Michael Psellos demonstrates that the concept was known, adapted to Christian
thought and able to explain a seemingly careless use of magical thinking by creating objects such as the
ones discussed above, which would fit most of the definitions of magical thinking according to cultural
anthropology and religious studies.
It must be remarked that church and state have tried to fight the »pagan« use of amulets, and magical
practices in general, from the time of Constantine I, the Great, in the 4th century. However, this was never
entirely successful, since the written sources and Byzantine laws prove an ongoing use of amulets 100. The
examples presented here have magical qualities, but Michael Psellos’ writings show that this use and the
belief in healing and protective properties of stones was still in accordance with Christian beliefs, especially
because the iconography was Christian, as were the inscriptions. Using such amulet-like objects was not at
all unorthodox and would have been appropriate for the highest-ranking customers. The amethyst pendant
with the Mother of God, for example, was a very valuable and high-quality object, and although we do not
know who commissioned or owned it, we must assume an aristocratic background for this person, from
whose possession it later passed into the hands of Vatopaidi Monastery on Mount Athos, the Holy Moun-
tain. Apparently, it was not considered a »magical« object, although at first glance it fits the categories of
cultural anthropologists’ definitions of »sympathetic magic«.

Gemstones in the First Millennium AD 301

Notes
  1) On the problems of these designations see Spieser 2014, esp.
337.
  2) This much larger group has been divided into three subgroups
by S. Michel in her chapter »Wirkungsbereiche und Inhalte«
(Michel 2004, 36-220; this translates to »spheres of actions
and contents«): 1. Regeneration and divine protection, 2.
Means of healing and prophylaxis, 3. Emotions banned in
stone.
  3) See for example Antonaras 2003. – Drauschke 2010, 50.
  4) See for example Bosselmann-Ruickbie 2011, 77-79. – Sterli-
gova / Barkov 2013, nos 27-49.
 5) See Bosselmann-Ruickbie 2011, 78-79. – Examples for tur-
quoise and chrysoprase gems from the late Byzantine period:
Sterligova / Barkov 2013, nos 41. 46. 47.
  6) al-Washshā’, Kitāb (2004), 173-174. – al-Washshā’, Kitāb
(1886), 127-129. See Dospěl Williams forthcoming.
  7) Wentzel 1978a. – Wentzel 1978b.
  8) Spier 2007, 81-86. – See also the standard work of Bonner
1950 and Michel 2001. – Michel 2004.
  9) For example Spier 2007, no. 443 (Crucifixion). – Spieser 2014,
342 f.
10) Spier 2007, no. 461 (magical symbols in combination with chi-
rho).
11) Spier 2007, no. 460bis.
12) Puhle / Köster 2012, no. II.25 (A. Bosselmann-Ruickbie).
13) Greenfield 1995, 118. The definition of magic – particularly
in contrast to, or comparison with, religion – is far from clear
and has been discussed in many academic disciplines, such as
anthropology, sociology, theology or religious studies. For an
overview see Frenschkowski 2010, 871-876.
14) See Maguire 1995 (collection of essays). – For an overview on
Byzantine magical amulets see Bosselmann-Ruickbie forth-
coming.
15) See for this story Duffy 1995, 88-89, with references to edi-
tions of the written sources.
16) Greenfield 1995, esp. 132.
17) See on this subject Bosselmann-Ruickbie forthcoming.
18) Rochow 1970, 491 and nt. 4.
19) Troianos 1990, 51.
20) See the case of the 14th-century doctor, astrologer and priest
Demetrios Chlorus: Mavroudi 2006, 85.
21) For an overview of the sources see Avgoloupi 2013, 15-43.
22) Blake / de Vis 1934. – Albrecht / Manukyan 2014. – On this sub-
ject see also Zwickel 2002.
23) Andreas Caesarensis 1863, Commentarius in Apokalypsin, cols
215-458. – Fries 1980, 10. – Constantinou 2011.
24) Kazhdan 1991, 1754 f.
25) Psellus 1894.
302 A. Bosselmann-Ruickbie  ·  The Symbolism of Byzantine Gemstones
26) Kazhdan 1991, 1754. Book illumination showing Michael
Psellos teaching the Byzantine Emperor Michael VII Doukas (r.
1067-1078): Codex 234, f. 245a, Mount Athos, Pantocrator
Monastery (late 12th century), see Spatharakis 1976, fig. 174.
27) Overview in Schönauer 1996, 61-67.
28) Ibidem esp. 103.
29) Avgoloupi 2013.
30) For example Drauschke 2010, 50-51. – See the current project
of S. Albrecht, Granat in byzantinischen Texten (http://web.
rgzm.de/forschung/forschungsfelder/a/article/granat-in-byzan
tinischen-texten.html).
31) For an example see Bosselmann-Ruickbie 2011, no. 1.
32) See Wentzel 1978a. – Wentzel 1978b.
33) For example the noses of Christ, Virgin Mary or saints often
seem abraded, maybe because the owner would rub the stone
while praying. Cutler has suggested that this has been the case
for ivories (Cutler 1994, 23-25), and this might apply to gem-
stone icons from Byzantium as well.
34) Niemeyer 1997, 205. – Niemeyer 1998, 91.
35) Meier 1977, 142-147, esp. 142; also on colour allegoresis in
general
36) See the example the description of the bed of Sophrosyne
adorned with over 200 gemstones in the poem of Theodoros
Meliteniotes. Only a fraction of those stones can be correlated
with modern nomenclature (Schönauer 1996, 103-148).
37) See for example Drauschke 2010, 50-51.
38) The use of the materials for private jewellery and smaller items
was not affected; however, the combinations of green and
probably red stones in combination with pearls was a combi-
nation that signalled to the beholder »imperial«.
39) See footnote 43.
40) See again Drauschke 2010, 50-51.
41) However, the argumentum e contrario cannot be employed:
not all jewellery or regalia which employ gemstones accord-
ing to the legislation are automatically to be seen as imperial
objects.
42) For example lapis lazuli: Ross 1965, no. 12. – Hellenkemper
1984, no. 35. – Durand / Gaborit-Chopin 1992, no. 196 (J. Du-
rand). – Evans / Wixom 1997, no. 129 (S. Taft). – Bosselmann-
Ruickbie 2011, 79 and fig. 19. – Sapphire: Forsyth 2013, 179 f.
– Horn forthcoming. – Dumbarton Oaks Collection, Washing-
ton, D.C., inv. no. BZ.1936.17 (sapphire cameo with the bust
of Christ).
43) Meier 1977, 157-161, esp. 157. For the discussion of the iden-
tification of the hyacinth and its colour see Drauschke 2010,
50-51.
44) Avgoloupi 2013, 150. Overview of the sources on the sapphire
ibidem 150-160 and 250-252.
45) Andreas Caesarensis 1863, 435. – See Fries 1980, 150.
46) Bostock / Riley 1855; Pliny NH 37, 39.
47) Georgoula 1999, no. 132 (A. Ballian).
48) Wegerich-Bauer 2002. – Pitarakis 2006.
49) Its qualities were, however, appreciated in another context: it
was ground and used in paintwork, for example for the icon
of the Virgin in the 14th century, today in Freising, Germany
(Baumstark 1998, no 84 [Marcell Restle], esp. p. 246.
50) Bellosi 1996, no. 4.
51) Storer 1920, 14.
52) Overview of sources: Avgoloupi 2013, 64-72 and 234-235. –
Mostly antique and Western sources: Lecouteux 2012, 47-49.
53) Asclepiades of Samos, chap. XXX, 14: »Kleopatra’s Ring« (also
attributed to Antipater of Thessalonica): »Drunkenness am I
– a gem worked by a subtle hand. I am graven in amethyst,
and the subject and the stone are ill-assorted. But I am the pre-
cious property of Kleopatra, and on the finger of a Queen even
»drunkenness« should be sober« (comment by the author on
the same page: »A play on the words methe, drunkenness,
and a-methe, not drunkenness, and amethyst«). See Burges
1854, 369 f.
54) Burges 1854, 369: DCXXXVIII: »Plato the Younger on a Figure
of Bacchus Engraved upon an Amethyst. The stone is an Am-
ethyst; but I, the tippler Bacchus, say – ›Let it either persuade
me to be sober; or let it learn to get drunk‹«.
55) Bostock / Riley 1855; Pliny NH 37, 40.
56) Blake / de Vis 1934, 120.
57) Ibidem. However, the passage on the stone’s potential to make
people drunk cannot be found in the Armenian version of the
Manuscript, preserved in the Codex Vaticanus Borgianus Ar-
menus 31, see Albrecht / Manukyan 2014, 62.
58) Psellus 1894, 889 f.
59) Forsyth 2013, 179 f. Other examples: Durand / Gaborit-Chopin
1992, no. 185 (M. Avisseau), no. 186 (J. Durand).
60) For example Bosselmann-Ruickbie 2011, no. 2c.
61) Drauschke 2010.
62) Albani 2003. – Karakatsanis 1997, no. 9.10 (Katia Loverdou-
Tsigarida). – Ikonomaki-Papadopoulos / Pitarakis /  Loverdou-Tsi-
garidas 2001, no. 20 (K. Loverdou-Tsigaridas). The stone was
here described as »probably an amethyst«. Apparently, it has
not yet been analysed but the inscription (see below) mentions
that it is an amethyst. This means that the stone was regarded
as such at the time when it was carved. I would like to thank
Father Palamas (Vatopaidi Monastery, Mount Athos) for the
kind permission to publish the pendant in this essay.
63) Ikonomaki-Papadopoulos / Pitarakis / Loverdou-Tsigaridas 2001.
– Albani 2003, 403. 409. – The date of the frame is disputed:
D’Aiuto 2007, 421, suggested a 15th-16th century date, fol-
lowed by Rhoby 2010, 205. However, judging from the style
of the frame with its setting of gemstones and pearls, a date
contemporary to the cameo is not unlikely (compare, for ex-
ample, a gold pendant with a sapphire cameo, frame c. 12th-
14th centuries [Rus’] in the Metropolitan Museum, New York:
The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, Fall 2007, 12).
64) Ševčenko 1991, 2171.
65) Not blue enamel as mentioned by Loverdou-Tsigaridas (Ikon-
omaki-Papadopoulos / Pitarakis / Loverdou-Tsigaridas 2001, no.
20 (K. Loverdou-Tsigaridas) and Albani 2003, 403.
66) Rhoby 2010, 204-206, no Me36 (see here also for the fol-
lowing discussion of the inscription,with reference to D’Aiuto’s
study [D’Aiuto 2007]). Translation into English by the author,
on the basis of Rhoby’s German translation of the epigram
(Rhoby 2010, 205).
67) Albani 2013, 409.
68) For the modern nomenclature see Schumann, 104 (bloodstone
and hematite), 180 (blood jasper = heliotrope).
69) Overview of sources: Avgoloupi 2013, 57-64 and 233. – Most-
ly antique and Western sources: Lecouteux 2012, 162-164.
70) Bostock / Riley 1855, Pliny the Elder, Natural History 37, chap.
60. Pliny mentions heliotrope as well as hematite, and calls
the greenish stone with red streaks heliotrope: »Heliotropium
is found in Æthiopia, Africa, and Cyprus: it is of a leek-green
colour, streaked with blood-red veins. It has been thus named,
from the circumstance that, if placed in a vessel of water and
exposed to the full light of the sun, it changes to a reflected
colour like that of blood. … Hæmatitis of the very finest qual-
ity, comes from Æthiopia, but it is found in Arabia and Africa
as well. It is a stone of a blood-red colour […]«.
71) Psellus 1894, 889 f.
72) Fliegel 2014, 14.
73) See for example Hellenkemper 1984, no. 15 (D. Alcouffe / M.
E. Frazer; chalice with Eucharistic inscription).
74) Ibidem. Other objects seen as Byzantine chalices due to their
typical shape (although lacking a Eucharistic inscription) have
a height of over 20 cm: ibidem no. 10 (25 cm high), 11 (22.5
cm).
75) For example Evans / Wixom 1997, no. 127 (S. Taft), no. 128,
131 (M. Georgopoulos).
76) Williamson 1996, 38-39 (»jasper«).
77) For example Virgin Mary: Evans / Wixom 1997, no. 134 (R. G.
Ousterhout), no. 135 (M. Georgopoulos). – Dalton 1915, no.
11. – Saint George: Cleveland Museum of Art, Dudley P. Allen
Fund 1959.41.
78) Mark 5:21-43, Matthew 9:18-26, Luke 8:40-56.
79) Quoted after Tuerk 1999, 25.
80) Tuerk 1999, 25 and nt. 2. I have quoted here after L. Kötzsche
in Weitzmann 1978, no. 398 (L. Kötzsche).
81) Tuerk 1999, 25.
82) Durand / Gaborit-Chopin 1992, no. 191 (M. Avisseau). – Albani
2003, 407 f. and fig. 5.
83) However, Avisseau (in Durand / Gaborit-Chopin 1992, no. 191)
added a possible date in the 13th century with a question
mark.
84) The text style argues for an origin of the inscription (respec-
tively its original) in the 13th, maybe late 12th century. Thus an
origin during the Latin occupation of Constantinople seems
absolutely possible. I am grateful to Clemens Bayer M. A.
(Bonn / Lüttich) for advice on dating the inscription.
85) On the importance of inscriptions on magical objects in Byzan-
tium see Foskolou 2014.
86) Frazer 1922, chapter III: Sympathetic Magic, §1: The Principles
of Magic, p. 11.
Gemstones in the First Millennium AD 303
87) See for example Montgomery 2012.
88) However, drawing on works earlier 19th
-century anthropolo-
gists such as Edward Tyler (1832-1917), see Tyler 1878, esp.
278. I thank Dr Leo Ruickbie for pointing this out to me and
discussing questions of theories of magic in 19th-century an-
thropology, ethnology and religious studies.
89) First publication in 1890 (two volumes), second publication in
1900 (three volumes), third and most comprehensive publica-
tion 1906-1915 (twelve volumes). The edition referred to here
is the 1922 abridged edition: Frazer 1922.
90) For a good overview on Frazer’s »Law of Similarity« and his
theories see Ruickbie 2010. For a short overview on theories
of magic in religious and cultural studies see Frenschkowski
2010, cols 871-873.
Sources
Albrecht / Manukyan 2014: F. Albrecht / A. Manukyan (eds), Epipha-
nius von Salamis, Über die zwölf Steine im hohepriesterlichen
Brustschild (De duodecim gemmis rationalis). Gorgias Eastern
Christian Studies 37 (Piscataway NJ 2014).
al-Washshā’, Kitāb (2004): al-Washshā’, Le Livre du Brocart (al-
Kitāb al-Muwashshā). Translation, Commentary, ed. S. Bouhlal
(Paris 2004).
Kitāb (1886): al-Washshā’ Kitāb al-Muwashshā. ed. T. Brünnow
(Leiden 1886).
Andreas Caesarensis 1863: Andreas Caesarensis Episkopos Cappa-
dociae, Opera Omnia. MPG 106 (Paris 1863).
Blake / de Vis 1934: R. P. Blake / H. de Vis (ed., trans.), Epiphanios De
gemmis, ed. and trans. (London 1934).
Bostock / Riley 1855: J. Bostock / H. T. Riley, The Natural History of
Pliny (London 1855).
References
Albani 2003: J. Albani, Remarks on an Encolpium in the Vatopedi
Monastery. Deltion tēs Christianikēs Archaiologikēs Etaireias 24,
2003, 403-409 (Greek with English Summary).
Antonaras 2003: A. Antonaras, The Use of Glass in Byzantine Jew-
ellery. The Evidence from Northern Greece (Fourth-Sixteenth
Centuries). In: Annales du 16e Congrès AIHV (London 2003)
331-334.
Avgoloupi 2013: E. Avgoloupi, Simbologia delle gemme imperiali
bizantine nella tradizione simbolica mediterranea delle pietre
preziose (secoli I-XV d. C.). Quaderni della Rivista di Bizantinistica
16 (Spoleto 2013).
Baumstark 1998: R. Baumstark (ed.), Rom und Byzanz. Schatzkam-
merstücke aus bayerischen Sammlungen [exhibition cat. Bayer-
isches Nationalmuseum] (München 1998).
304 A. Bosselmann-Ruickbie  ·  The Symbolism of Byzantine Gemstones
  91) See Ierodiakonou 2006, 99-106, for a concise overview on
the ancient Greek concepts of »sympatheia«.
  92) Ierodiakonou 2006, 97.
 93) Ibidem 98.
 93) Ibidem passim.
 95) Ibidem 108.
  96) Psellus 1894.
  97) Ierodiakonou 2006, 108.
 98) Ibidem 109.
 99) Ibidem.
100) See Bosselmann-Ruickbie forthcoming.
Burges 1854: G. Burges (ed.), The Greek Anthology (London 1854).
Codex Iustinianus. Corpus iuris civilis II. Ed. by P. Krüger (Berlin
14
1967).
Codex Theodosianus. Ed. by G. F. Hänel (Bonn 1842).
Constantinou 2011: E. S. Constantinou (trans.), Andrew of Cae-
sarea, Commentary on the Apocalypse. Fathers of the Church
Series 123 (Washington, D.C. 2011).
Psellus 1894: M. Psellus, De Lapidum Virtutibus, MPG 122, col.
0887 (Paris 1894) 883-900.
Schönauer 1996: S. Schönauer, Untersuchungen zum Steinkatalog
des Sophrosyne-Gedichtes des Meliteniotes mit kritischer Edition
der Verse 1107-1247 (Wiesbaden 1996).
Storer 1920: E. Storer (trans.), The Windflowers of Asklepiades and
the Poems of Poseidippos (London 1920).
Bellosi 1996: L. Bellosi (ed.), L’Oro di Siena. Il Tesoro di Santa Maria
della Scala, Ospedale di Santa Maria della Scala, Siena (Milano
1996).
Bonner 1950: C. Bonner, Studies in Magical Amulets, Chiefly Grae­
co-Egyptian (Ann Arbor 1950).
Bosselmann-Ruickbie 2011: A. Bosselmann-Ruickbie, Byzantini­
scher Schmuck des 9. bis frühen 13. Jahrhunderts. Untersu-
chungen zum metallenen dekorativen Körperschmuck der mit-
telbyzantinischen Zeit anhand datierter Funde aus Bulgarien und
Griechenland. Spätantike – Frühes Christentum – Byzanz 28
(Wies­baden 2011).
forthcoming: A. Bosselmann-Ruickbie, Protection Against Evil in
Byzantium: Magical Amulets from the Early to the Late Byzantine
Period In: J. Noble / D. Zamani (eds), Visions of Enchantment.
Proceedings of the Conference held in Cambridge, 17-18 March
2014 (forthcoming).
Cutler 1994: A. Cutler, The Hand of the Master: Craftsmanship,
Ivory, and Society in Byzantium (9th-11th Centuries) (Princeton NJ
1994).
D’Aiuto 2007: F. D’Aiuto, Dodecasillabi su un encolpio con cameo
d’ametista del monastero di Vatopedi. Nea Rōmē 4, 2007, 413-
439.
Dalton 1915: O. M. Dalton, Catalogue of the Engraved Gems of
the Post-Classical Periods in the Department of British and Me-
diaeval Antiquities and Ethnography in the British Museum (Lon-
don 1915).
Dospěl Williams forthcoming: E. Dospěl Williams, Dressing a Part:
Jewelry as Fashion in the Medieval Middle East. In: Z. Chitwood /
J. Pahlitzsch (eds), Ambassadors, Artists and Translators. Byzan-
tine Relations with the Near East (9th to 14th Centuries) (forth-
coming).
Drauschke 2010: J. Drauschke, Byzantine Jewellery? Amethyst
Beads in East and West during the Early Byzantine Period. In: C.
Entwistle / N. Adams (ed.), Intelligible Beauty. Recent Research
on Byzantine Jewellery. British Museum Occasional Papers 178
(London 2010) 50-60.
Duffy 1995: J. Duffy, Reactions of Two Byzantine Intellectuals to
the Theory and Practise of Magic: Michael Psellos and Michael
Italikos. In: Maguire 1995, 83-98.
Durand / Gaborit-Chopin 1992: J. Durand / D. Gaborit-Chopin (eds),
Byzance: l’art byzantin dans les collections publiques françaises
[exhibition cat.] (Paris 1992).
Evans / Wixom 1997: H. C. Evans / W. D. Wixom, The Glory of Byz-
antium: Art and Culture of the Middle Byzantine Era A.D. 843-
1261 [exhibition cat.] (New York 1997).
Fliegel 2014: S. Fliegel, Calyx (Chalice) 10th-11th Century. The
Cleveland Museum of Art Members Magazine 54, 2014 (2013
Acquisitions, March / April 2014) 14.
Forsyth 2013: H. Forsyth, London’s Lost Jewels: The Cheapside
Hoard (London 2013).
Foskolou 2014: V. Foskolou, The Magic of the Written Word: The
Evidence of Inscriptions on Byzantine Magical Amulets. Deltion
of the Christian Archaeological Society 35, 2014, 329-348.
Frazer 1922: G. J. Frazer, The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and
Religion (New York 1922).
1890: G. Frazer, The Golden Bough: A Study in Comparative Re-
ligion (London 1890).
Frenschkowski 2010: M. Frenschkowski, Magie. In: Reallexikon für
Antike und Christentum 23 (Stuttgart 2010), 857-957.
Fries 1980: G. Fries, Edelsteine im Mittelalter (Hildesheim 1980).
Georgoula 1999: E. Georgoula (ed.), Greek Jewellery from the
Benaki Museum Collection [exhibition cat.] (Athens 1999).
Greenfield 1995: R. P. H. Greenfield, A Contribution to the Study of
Palaeologan Magic. In: Maguire 1995, 117-153.
Hellenkemper 1984: H. Hellenkemper (ed.), Der Schatz von San
Marco in Venedig [exhibition cat. Cologne] (Milan 1984).
Horn forthcoming: M. Horn, The »Touching of St. Thomas«: A Pro-
posal for a New Dating of a Byzantine Sapphire Cameo from
the Cheapside Hoard. In: A. Bosselmann-Ruickbie (ed.), New
Research on Late Byzantine Goldsmiths’ Works (13th-15th Cen-
turies), proceedings of the conference held in Mainz, Germany,
29-30 October 2015 (forthcoming).
Ierodiakonou 2006: K. Ierodiakonou, The Greek Concept of Sym-
patheia and Its Byzantine Appropriation in Michael Psellos. In: P.
Mag­dalino / M. Mavroudi (eds), The Occult Sciences in Byzan-
tium (Geneva 2006).
Ikonomaki-Papadopoulos / Pitarakis / Loverdou-Tsigaridas 2001: Y.
Iko­­nomaki-Papadopoulos / B. Pitarakis / K. Loverdou-Tsigarida:
Enkolpia: The Holy and Great Monastery of Vatopaidi (Mount
Athos 2001).
Karakatsanis 1997: A. Karakatsanis (ed.), Treasures of Mount Athos
[exhibition cat.] (Thessaloniki 1997).
Kazhdan 1991: A. P. Kazhdan, Michael Psellos. In: Oxford Diction-
ary of Byzantium 3 (New York, Oxford 1991) 1754-1755.
Lecouteux 2012: C. Lecouteux, A Lapidary of Sacred Stones: Their
Magical and Medicinal Powers Based on the Earliest Sources
(Rochester 2012).
Maguire 1995: H. Maguire (ed.), Byzantine Magic (Washington,
D.C. 1995).
Mavroudi 2006: M. Mavroudi, Occult Science and Society in Byz-
antium: Considerations for Future Research. In: P. Magdalino /
M. Mavroudi (eds), The Occult Sciences in Byzantium (Geneva
2006).
Meier 1977: C. Meier, Methode und Gebrauch der Edelstein­
allegorese vom frühen Christentum bis ins 18. Jahrhundert
(Münster 1977).
Michel 1995: S. Michel, Medizinisch-magische Amulettgemmen.
Schutz und Heilung durch Zauber und edle Steine in der Antike.
Antike Welt 26/5, 1995, 379-387.
2001: S. Michel, Die Magischen Gemmen im British Museum
(London 2001).
2004: S. Michel, Die Magischen Gemmen. Zu Bildern und Zau-
berformeln auf geschnittenen Steinen der Antike und Neuzeit.
Studien aus dem Warburg-Haus 7 (Berlin 2004).
Montgomery 2012: S. Montgomery, Contact Relics. In: L. Taylor / L.
A. Craig / J. Block Friedman / K. Gower / T. M. Izbicki / R. Tekippe
(eds), Encyclopedia of Medieval Pilgrimage (Leiden 2010). First
online publication Leiden 2012: http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/2213-
2139_emp_SIM_00235 (2.1.2017).
Niemeyer 1997: B. Niemeyer, Der lunulaförmige Halsschmuck aus
Assiût in der Berliner Antiken­samm­lung: Eine goldschmiedetech-
nische Untersuchung. Jahrbuch der Berliner Museen 39, 1997,
191-206.
1998: B. Niemeyer, A Byzantine Gold Collar from Assiût: A Tech-
nological Study. Jewellery Studies 8, 1998, 87-96.
Pitarakis 2006: B. Pitarakis, Les croix-reliquiares pectorals byzan-
tines en bronze. Bibliothèque des Cahiers Archéologiques 16
(Paris 2006).
Puhle / Köster 2012: M. Puhle / G. Köster (eds), Otto der Große und
das Römische Reich. Kaisertum von der Antike zum Mittelalter
[exhibition cat. Magdeburg] (Regensburg 2012).
Rhoby 2010: A. Rhoby, Byzantinische Epigramme in inschriftlicher
Überlieferung 2: Byzantinische Epigramme auf Ikonen und Ob-
jekten der Kleinkunst (Vienna 2010).
Rochow 1970: I. Rochow, Zu »heidnischen« Bräuchen bei der Be­
völkerung des Byzantinischen Reiches im 7. Jahrhundert, vor al-
lem aufgrund der Bestimmungen des Trullanum. Klio 60, 1970,
483-497.
Gemstones in the First Millennium AD 305
Ross 1965: M. C. Ross, Catalogue of the Byzantine and Early Me-
dieval Antiquities in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection 2. Jewelry,
Enamels, and Art of the Migration Period (Wa­shing­ton, D.C.
1965).
Ruickbie 2010: L. Ruickbie, Sympathy from the Devil. Paranormal
Review 49, 2010, 56-59.
Schumann 1994: W. Schumann, BLV Steine- und Mineralienführer
(München 41994).
Sevcenko 1991: N. P. Sevcenko, Virgin Hagiosoritissa. In: Oxford
Dictionary of Byzantium 3 (New York, Oxford 1991) 2171.
Spatharakis 1976: I. Spatharakis, The Portrait in Byzantine Illumi-
nated Manuscripts (Leiden 1976).
Spier 2007: J. Spier, Late Antique and Early Christian Gems. Spät­
antike – Frühes Christentum – Byzanz 20 (Wiesbaden 2007).
Spieser 2014: J.-M. Spieser, Christianisme et magie du IIIe au VIIe
siècle. In: V. Dasen / J.-M. Spieser (eds), Les savoirs magiques
et leur transmission de l’Antiquité à la Renaissance. Micrologus’
Library 60 (Florence 2014), 333-351.
Sterligova / Barkov 2013: I. A. Sterligova / A. G. Barkov (eds), Byz-
antine Antiquities. Works of Art from the Fourth to the Fifteenth
Centuries in the Collection of the Moscow Kremlin Museums
(Moscow 2013).
Troianos 1990: S. N. Troianos, Zauberei und Giftmischerei in mittel­
byzantinischer Zeit. In: G. Prinzing / D. Simon (eds), Fest und
Alltag in Byzanz (München 1990) 37-51.
Tuerk 1999: J. Tuerk, An Early Byzantine Inscribed Amulet and Its
Narratives. Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 23, 1999, 25-
42.
Tyler 1878: E. B. Tyler, Researches into the Early History of Mankind
and the Development of Civilization (Boston 1878).
Wegerich-Bauer 2002: B. Wegerich-Bauer, Enkolpien [unpublished
PhD thesis University of Mainz 2002].
Weitzmann 1979: K. Weitzmann (ed.), Age of Spirtuality: Late An-
tique and Early Christian Art, Third to Seventh Centuries [exhibi-
tion cat.] (New York 1979).
Wentzel 1978a: H. Wentzel, Kameen. Reallexikon zur Byzantini­
schen Kunst 3 (Stuttgart 1978) col. 903-927.
1978b: H. Wentzel, Intaglio. Reallexikon zur Byzantinischen
Kunst 3 (Stuttgart 1978) col. 498-505.
Williamson 1996: P. Williamson (ed.), European Sculpture at the
Victoria and Albert Museum (London 1996).
Zwickel 2002: W. Zwickel, Die Edelsteine im Brustschild des Hohen-
priesters und beim himmlischen Jerusalem. In: W. Zwickel (ed.),
Edelsteine in der Bibel (Mainz 2002) 50-70.

Summary

Just as their ancient predecessors, the Byzantines were interested in the symbolism of precious stones and their proper-
ties of healing and protection. Although we are informed about the properties of gemstones through written sources,
only a few examples corroborate these texts with inscriptions referring to the materiality of the gemstone. A 12th-/13th-
century amethyst cameo in Vatopaidi Monastery on Mount Athos (fig. 2a-b) that is set in a silver-gilt frame refers in
its inscription to the gemstone’s name and its assumed ability to protect the wearer from inebriation. Bloodstone was
related to blood because of its colour. An early Byzantine cameo in the Metropolitan Museum of New York (fig. 3a-b)
demonstrates the relation between the materiality of the stone and the iconography as well as the inscription, since it
shows the »Woman with the issue of blood« mentioned in the Bible. In other cases, the properties of precious stones
and their symbolism can only be deduced, for example, when a red transparent stone is set in the centre of a cross,
possibly referring to the blood of Christ, on whose symbolised instrument of torture the stone is placed.
This demonstrates what is known from written sources, especially Michael Psellos’ writings, that the Byzantines were
aware of the much older concept of sympathetic relations, of the concept of »like affects like«, or in the social anthro-
pologist Frazer’s (1854-1941) coinage, »sympathetic magic«. The amulets fit Frazer’s »Law of Similarity« category of
»sympathetic magic«: the physical similarities of the gemstones – violet like wine, dotted with red like blood – are
the key to their interpretation, which can be corroborated by their inscriptions. Byzantine philosophers such as Psellos
adapted these concepts to Christian orthodox teachings and consequently had no issue with the amuletic use of
gemstones.

306 A. Bosselmann-Ruickbie  ·  The Symbolism of Byzantine Gemstones