Many Works of Art Have Been Subject to Over the Centuries From the Iconoclasm
Effigy one. Apa Abraham, c. 590–600, watercolor on console, Egyptian (Bode Museum, Berlin)
The word icon refers to many different things today. For instance, we apply this word to refer to the small graphic symbols in our software and to powerful cultural figures (hither's a listing of 300 "Cultural Icons").
Nevertheless, these unlike meanings retain a connection to the word'due south original pregnant. Icon is Greek for "image" or "painting" and during the medieval era, this meant a religious paradigm on a wooden panel used for prayer and devotion. More specifically, icons came to typify the art of the Orthodox Christian Church building.
Iconoclasm refers to the destruction of images or hostility toward visual representations in general. In a more specificly, the word is used for the Iconoclastic Controversy that shook the Byzantine Empire for more than 100 years.
Figure 2. Christ Pantocrator (The Ruler of the Universe), Catacombs of Commodilla, fourth century
Open up hostility toward religious representations began in 726 when Emperor Leo III publicly took a position confronting icons; this resulted in their removal from churches and their destruction. There had been many previous theological disputes over visual representations, their theological foundations and legitimacy. Nevertheless, none of these caused the tremendous social, political and cultural upheaval of the Iconoclastic Controversy.
Some historians believe that by prohibiting icons, the Emperor sought to integrate Muslim and Jewish populations. Both Muslims and Jews perceived Christian images (that existed from the earliest times of Christianity) as idols and in direct opposition to the Old Testament prohibition of visual representations. The get-go commandment states,
Yous shall have no other gods earlier me. Y'all shall not make for yourself a carved prototype—any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or in the globe beneath, or that is in the waters under the earth. You shall not adore them, nor serve them (Exodus 20:three–5).
Some other theory suggests that the prohibition was an effort to restrain the growing wealth and ability of the monasteries. They produced the icons and were a primary target of the violence of the Iconoclastic Controversy. Other scholars offer a less political motive, suggesting that the prohibition was primarily religious, an try to correct the wayward practice of worshiping images.
The trigger for Leo III's prohibition may accept even been the huge volcanic eruption in 726 in the Aegean Ocean interpreted as a sign of God's acrimony over the veneration of icons. There is no i unproblematic answer to this complex event. What we practice know is that the prohibition essentially caused a civil war which shook the political, social and religious spheres of the empire. The disharmonize pitted the emperor and sure loftier church officials (patriarchs, bishops) who supported iconoclasm, confronting other bishops, lower clergy, laity and monks, who defended the icons.
Figure 3. Khludov Psalter (detail), 9th century. The epitome represents the Iconoclast theologian, John the Grammarian, and an iconoclast bishop destroying an image of Christ. (State Historical Museum, Moscow)
The original theological basis for iconoclasm was fairly weak. Arguments relied more often than not on the Old Testament prohibition (quoted above). But it was articulate that this prohibition was not accented since God as well instructs how to make three dimensional representations of the Cherubim (heavenly spirits or angels) for the Ark of the Covenant, which is also quoted in the Old Testament, only a couple of chapters after the passage that prohibits images (Exodus 25:18–20).
Emperor Constantine V gave a more nuanced theological rationale for iconoclasm. He claimed that each visual representation of Christ necessarily ends in a heresy since Christ, according to generally accustomed Christian dogmas, is simultaneously God and man, united without separation, and whatsoever visual delineation of Christ either separates these natures, representing Christ's humanity alone, or confuses them.
Figure 4. Madonna with Christ, 9th century, mosaic, Hagia Sophia (Istanbul). This mosaic follows the iconoclastic crisis and revives stylistic elements from early on Christian art.
The iconophile (pro-icon) counter-argument was nigh assuredly articulated by St. John of Damascus and St. Theodore the Studite. They claimed that the iconoclast arguments were simply dislocated. Images of Christ do not depict natures, being either Divine or man, but a concrete person—Jesus Christ, the incarnate Son of God. They claimed that in Christ the meaning of the Old Testament prohibition is revealed: God prohibited whatsoever representation of God (or anything that could be worshiped as a god) because it was incommunicable to depict the invisible God. Any such representation would thus be an idol, substantially a fake representation or false god. But in Christ'southward person, God became visible, as a physical human being, so painting Christ is necessary equally a proof that God truly, not seemingly, became homo. The fact that one tin describe Christ witnesses God's incarnation.
The first phase of iconoclasm ended in 787, when the Seventh Ecumenical (universal) Council of bishops, met in Nicaea. This quango affirmed the view of the iconophiles, ordering all right-believing (orthodox) Christians to respect holy icons, prohibiting at the same time their adoration as idolatry. Emperor Leo 5 initiated a second period of iconoclasm in 814, but in 843, Empress of Theodora proclaimed the restoration of icons and affirmed the decisions of the Seventh Ecumenical council. This effect is still historic in the Orthodox Church as the Feast of Orthodoxy.
Source: https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-arthistory1/chapter/iconoclasm/