{"id":294669,"date":"2025-05-05T12:00:32","date_gmt":"2025-05-05T11:00:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/?p=294669"},"modified":"2025-05-19T13:07:06","modified_gmt":"2025-05-19T12:07:06","slug":"peace-symbolism-demystification-of-icons-iconodules-iconoclasts-and-iconography-part-1","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/2025\/05\/peace-symbolism-demystification-of-icons-iconodules-iconoclasts-and-iconography-part-1\/","title":{"rendered":"Peace Symbolism: Demystification of Icons, Iconodules, Iconoclasts and Iconography (Part 1)"},"content":{"rendered":"

This publication is suitable for general readership.\u00a0 It is written on the occasion of the passing on of His Holiness, Pope Francis, as the Head of the Catholic Church and ancient protagonist of religious ICONS, on Easter Monday, 21st<\/sup> April 2025, at 0735, Vatican time, in his residence, at Vatican\u2019s Santa Marta, in good faith. The author, who is a Muslim, humbly apologies if there are any inaccuracies or misconceptions.\u00a0 Readers are invited to comment on any points raised in the paper, with which they may be displeased.<\/em><\/p>\n

Parental guidance is recommended for minors, who may use this publication as a project, resource material<\/em><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

The Healing Icon; Jesus the Procrator<\/p><\/div>\n

\u00a0<\/strong>Introduction<\/strong><\/p>\n

Presently, the term icons[1]<\/a> conjure up an images of computer software or branding for the younger generation. However, in the medieval era, icons were associated with religious veneration of Biblical names, principally by the Orthodox Christian Church in the Byzantine Empire[2]<\/a>, centred around Constantinople, now called Istanbul.[3]<\/a> Constantinople<\/strong>, originally founded as Byzantium by the ancient Greeks in 657 BCE, became the capital of the Byzantine Empire in 330 CE under the Roman Emperor Constantine the Great. In 1453, it was conquered by the Ottoman Empire under Sultan Mehmed II,[4]<\/a> and later renamed\u00a0Istanbul.<\/strong><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The publication, the first part in a two-part series, examines the Byzantine Iconoclasm[5]<\/a> controversial watershed conflict over religious images between\u00a0Iconoclasts<\/strong>\u00a0(image-breakers) and\u00a0Iconodules<\/strong>\u00a0(image- protagonists and venerators). The author argues that the debate was not merely theological but a\u00a0struggle over imperial authority, cultural memory, and the very nature of Christian worship<\/strong>. By analyzing primary texts (e.g., Council of Nicaea II, writings of John of Damascus) and material evidence (mosaics, defaced icons), the study reveals how icons became proxies for larger battles about\u00a0divine representation, Islamic influence, and the limits of imperial power<\/strong>. \u00a0The paper also demystifies the origins of these icons, associated religious rituals, symbolism, veneration of the subject of the icons and contributions to global and regional peace during the medieval period of religionism and belligerence.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Eikonomach\u00eda<\/em>,\u00a0lit.<\/a>\u2009’image struggle’, ‘war on icons’) are two periods in the history of the\u00a0Byzantine Empire\u00a0[6]<\/a>when the use of\u00a0religious images\u00a0or\u00a0icons\u00a0was opposed by religious and imperial authorities within the\u00a0Ecumenical Patriarchate[7]<\/a>\u00a0(at the time still comprising the Roman-Latin and the Eastern-Orthodox traditions in subscribing to syncretism) and the temporal imperial hierarchy. The\u00a0First Iconoclasm<\/strong>[8]<\/a>, as it is sometimes called, occurred between about 726 and 787, while the\u00a0Second Iconoclasm<\/strong>\u00a0occurred between 814 and 842.[9]<\/a>\u00a0According to the traditional view, Byzantine Iconoclasm was started by a ban on religious images promulgated by the Byzantine Emperor[10]<\/a> Leo III the Isaurian,\u00a0and continued under his successors.[11]<\/a>\u00a0It was accompanied by widespread destruction of religious images and persecution of supporters of the veneration of images. The\u00a0Papacy[12]<\/a>,[13]<\/a> remained firmly in support of the use of religious images throughout the period, and the whole episode widened the\u00a0growing divergence\u00a0between the Byzantine and\u00a0Carolingian\u00a0traditions [14]<\/a>in what was still a unified European Church, as well as facilitating the reduction or removal of Byzantine political control over\u00a0parts of the Italian Peninsula.<\/p>\n

Iconoclasm\u00a0is the deliberate destruction within a culture of the culture’s own religious images and other symbols or monuments, usually for religious or political motives. People who engage in or support iconoclasm are called\u00a0iconoclasts<\/em>, Greek for ‘breakers of icons’ (\u03b5\u1f30\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03ba\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9), a term that has come to be applied figuratively to any person who breaks or disdains established\u00a0dogmata\u00a0or conventions. Conversely, people who revere or venerate religious images are derisively called “iconolaters” (\u03b5\u1f30\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03bb\u03ac\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c2). They are normally known as “iconodules[15]<\/a>” (\u03b5\u1f30\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03cc\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9), or “iconophiles” (\u03b5\u1f30\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03cc\u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9). These terms were, however, not a part of the Byzantine debate over images. They have been brought into common usage by modern historians (from the seventeenth century) and their application to Byzantium increased considerably in the late twentieth century. The Byzantine term for the debate over religious imagery,\u00a0iconomachy<\/em>, means “struggle over images” or “image struggle”. Some sources also say that the Iconoclasts were against intercession to the saints and denied the usage of relics; however, it is disputed.[16]<\/a><\/p>\n

Iconoclasm has generally been motivated theologically by the\u00a0Biblical commandment, which forbade the making, veneration and worshipping of “graven images, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:” (Exodus\u00a020:4-5,\u00a0Deuteronomy\u00a05:8-9, see also\u00a0biblical law in Christianity)[17]<\/a>. The two periods of iconoclasm in the Byzantine Empire during the 8th and 9th centuries made use of this theological theme in discussions over the propriety of images of holy figures, including Christ, the\u00a0Virgin Mary\u00a0(or\u00a0Theotokos)[18]<\/a> and saints. It was a debate triggered by changes in Orthodox worship, which were themselves generated by the major social and political upheavals of the seventh century for the Byzantine Empire.<\/p>\n

Traditional explanations for Byzantine iconoclasm have sometimes focused on the importance of\u00a0Islamic prohibitions against images\u00a0influencing Byzantine thought[19]<\/a>. According to\u00a0Arnold J. Toynbee,[20]<\/a>\u00a0for example, it was the prestige of\u00a0Islamic military successes\u00a0in the 7th and 8th centuries that motivated Byzantine Christians to adopt the Islamic position of rejecting and destroying devotional and liturgical images.[21]<\/a> The role of women and\u00a0monks\u00a0in supporting the veneration of images has also been asserted. Social and class-based arguments have been put forward, such as that iconoclasm created political and economic divisions in Byzantine society; that it was generally supported by the Eastern, poorer, non-Greek peoples of the Empire[6]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0who had to constantly deal with Arab raids. On the other hand, the wealthier Greeks of Constantinople and also the peoples of the Balkan and Italian provinces strongly opposed Iconoclasm[22]<\/a>.\u00a0The claim of such a geographical distribution has, however, been disputed.[7]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0Re-evaluation of the written and material evidence relating to the period of Byzantine Iconoclasm has challenged many of the basic assumptions and factual assertions of the traditional account.\u00a0Byzantine iconoclasm influenced the later\u00a0Protestant reformation[23]<\/a>.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Definition of an Icon[24]<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

An icon<\/strong> can refer to several things:<\/p>\n