Thank you for this, very informative and answers some questions I have had for a long time. Looking forward to the continuation of the iconoclasm discussion.
Islamic conquest of Damascus (634): The city was a major centre in the Byzantine Empire and its capture marked a key victory in the early Muslim campaigns in the Levant, which eventually led to the complete control of the region by Muslim forces and the beginning of the Islamic presence in Syria, which would soon expand further into the Byzantine heartlands, finally leading to its complete overthrow in 1453.
First Iconoclasm (726-787): Initiated by Emperor Leo III, who issued edicts against the veneration of icons, in part due to pressure from Islam, leading to widespread destruction of religious images and persecution of iconodules.
Christmas Day in 800: Pope Leo III crowned Charles, King of the Franks and Lombards, in Rome as Emperor of the Romans, symbolically reviving the Western Roman Empire.
Second Iconoclasm (814-842): After a period of restoration of icons under Empress Irene, Emperor Leo V reinstated iconoclasm.
**Second Council of Nicaea (843):** The final defeat of Iconoclasm came with its condemnation as a heresy by the Second Council of Nicaea. This event is celebrated in the Eastern Churches as “The Sunday of the Triumph of Orthodoxy,” on the first Sunday of Great Lent.
***
The Second Council of Nicaea was in **787**. The Sunday falling between Oct. 11 - 17 is the Sunday of the Fathers of the Seventh Ecumenical Council (Nicaea II) in 787 AD.
The final restoration of the Holy Icons is in 843.
So the correct timeline would look like this:
Timeline of Iconoclasm
Islamic conquest of Damascus (634): The city was a major centre in the Byzantine Empire and its capture marked a key victory in the early Muslim campaigns in the Levant, which eventually led to the complete control of the region by Muslim forces and the beginning of the Islamic presence in Syria, which would soon expand further into the Byzantine heartlands, finally leading to its complete overthrow in 1453.
First Iconoclasm (726-787): Initiated by Emperor Leo III, who issued edicts against the veneration of icons, in part due to pressure from Islam, leading to widespread destruction of religious images and persecution of iconodules.
Second Council of Nicaea (787): The condemnation as a heresy by the Second Council of Nicaea.
Christmas Day in 800: Pope Leo III crowned Charles, King of the Franks and Lombards, in Rome as Emperor of the Romans, symbolically reviving the Western Roman Empire.
Second Iconoclasm (814-842): After a period of restoration of icons under Empress Irene, Emperor Leo V reinstated iconoclasm.
Final defeat of Iconoclasm (843): This event is celebrated in the Eastern Churches as “The Sunday of the Triumph of Orthodoxy,” on the first Sunday of Great Lent.
***
In reality it is not about the images, but about the **nature** of Christ, His Incarnation.
Our Lord Jesus Christ is one Divine Person with **two natures**, Divine and human, in the unity of His Divine Person without confusion, without change, without division, without separation. (Council of Chalcedon, the Fourth Ecumenical Council in 451 AD).
Full dogmatic definition of the Council of Chalcedon:
Following the holy Fathers we teach with one voice that the Son [of God] and our Lord Jesus Christ is to be confessed as one and the same [Person], that he is perfect in Godhead and perfect in manhood, very God and very man, of a reasonable soul and [human] body consisting, consubstantial with the Father as touching his Godhead, and consubstantial with us as touching his manhood; made in all things like us, sin only excepted; begotten of his Father before the worlds according to his Godhead; but in these last days for us men and for our salvation born [into the world] of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God according to his manhood. This one and the same Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son [of God] must be confessed to be in two natures, unconfusedly, immutably, indivisibly, inseparably [united], and that without the distinction of natures being taken away by such union, but rather the peculiar property of each nature being preserved and being united in one Person and subsistence, not separated or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son and only-begotten, God the Word, our Lord Jesus Christ, as the Prophets of old time have spoken concerning him, and as the Lord Jesus Christ has taught us, and as the Creed of the Fathers has delivered to us.
And yes, I know Christ has two natures from the strict Christological definition. I was speaking more broadly colloquially: "the nature of Christ" is to be both God and man. We will talk about Christology and the controversies next week.
Awesome post Hilary! It helps immensely to see the Birds Eye view of this intensely important period.
It’s such a tragedy that East and West did not unite at that time to save the lands from invasion.
I would love to get your take on Santa Maria Antica in Rome… since its icons were painted by Greek iconodules seeking refuge in Rome. It was an important sign of how Rome holds East and West together and to this day preserves some of the oldest depictions of Icon prototypes. (Harrowing of Hell, etc.)
Santa Maria Antiqua in the Forum? No. I didn't really go to see very much of the tourist stuff in Rome. I was really only there to do my job, so I didn't do a great deal of art-touristing when I worked there. I liked San Clemente and a few others, but since wasn't there to look at art, for the most part, I didn't really go anywhere I had to pay to see - since they charge a bloody arm and a leg to go down into the Roman Forum, I never bothered with it. (Though I did visit the Mamertine prison once). I wasn't doing this kind of work at that time, and for me commuting to the City was something I did because I had to. I actually passionately detest Rome and avoid going there as much as possible.
Thank for this well written, honest and informative article. As to the date discrepancy, we all make mistakes.
The “Carolingian Renaissance” brought about a Western refutation of ikons that relegated sacred images to "teaching tools."
They were not to be venerated (except for the Cross in certain places and Usages on Good
Friday or in private devotion). In the West the "honor" to be given to sacred images (and the rise of three dimensional images) was to simply remember the person depicted.
Votives in the form of candles, badges, medals and prayers might be offered before the images and intercession of the holy ones sought but the true purpose of ikons in worship, communion with the saints and forms of authentic veneration were lost. The physicality of veneration of ikons all but disappeared in the West except in private devotion.
I have rarely seen an Eastern lkon in a Western church venerated with a kiss or profound bows that signify the veneration given to the ikon passing through it to the one who is depicted.
There isn't the tradition of physical veneration of icons in the west, as you say (though perhaps there should and could be) but we do a little of it with statues. The tradition still exists in the Traditionalist parishes (SSPX, etc) of venerating the Bambino at Christmas time. We all do kiss the Crucifix at Good Friday, as you mentioned, but also at other times. But these survive only among the very devout, who are perishingly few in the Latin Church. Personally I feel extremely uncomfortable with the kissing statues thing, but I'm pretty sure that's a result of my cultural Englishness; we abhor external acts of affection even with our parents. Americans are constantly trying to hug everyone, and Italians to kiss everyone. Anglos, not so much.
A lot of blame for this can be laid on a really rotten translation of the declarations of Nicaea II from Greek into Latin that was widely circulated in the West for some years before a correct translation was made. One wonders if the the mistranslation, which out and out inverted some of the key declarations about icons and their place, saying they were basically idols to be worshipped, was deliberate on the part of the papal legate as he was building up the case to crown Charles. No way to tell at this distance of time, of course.
I sent my children to a Protestant Christian school, and in their many years of Bible study, they never once had any discussion at all on the Transfiguration. If it even got any mention, it was only to say "Well, Jesus was just proving he was God, in case they doubted." Move along, nothing to see here.
In many Orthodox countries, The Transfiguration is considered the 3rd most important of the Feasts of the year, falling only behind Theophany (Christ's baptism in the Jordan), and Pascha itself (Christmas's rise in prominence is a recent and very very Western thing). The Feast is considered theologically profound as not only did Christ reveal Himself as God, but revealed Himself as the God of the Living - Elijah had been taking bodily into Heaven, and Moses was perhaps also. Moreover, there is a line of speculation in the hymnography about the moment as being also when Moses beheld God's passing glory, in a moment outside of time itself.
St. Gregory Palamas pondered the Light of Tabor, and taught that the truly humble and prayerful might even be granted this same experience of Christ in the Uncreated Light (what I think you might refer to as the "Beatific Vision"). Disputes over Palamas's teachings were to be another major rift between East and West in the 1300s.
Thank you for this, very informative and answers some questions I have had for a long time. Looking forward to the continuation of the iconoclasm discussion.
Timeline of Iconoclasm
Islamic conquest of Damascus (634): The city was a major centre in the Byzantine Empire and its capture marked a key victory in the early Muslim campaigns in the Levant, which eventually led to the complete control of the region by Muslim forces and the beginning of the Islamic presence in Syria, which would soon expand further into the Byzantine heartlands, finally leading to its complete overthrow in 1453.
First Iconoclasm (726-787): Initiated by Emperor Leo III, who issued edicts against the veneration of icons, in part due to pressure from Islam, leading to widespread destruction of religious images and persecution of iconodules.
Christmas Day in 800: Pope Leo III crowned Charles, King of the Franks and Lombards, in Rome as Emperor of the Romans, symbolically reviving the Western Roman Empire.
Second Iconoclasm (814-842): After a period of restoration of icons under Empress Irene, Emperor Leo V reinstated iconoclasm.
**Second Council of Nicaea (843):** The final defeat of Iconoclasm came with its condemnation as a heresy by the Second Council of Nicaea. This event is celebrated in the Eastern Churches as “The Sunday of the Triumph of Orthodoxy,” on the first Sunday of Great Lent.
***
The Second Council of Nicaea was in **787**. The Sunday falling between Oct. 11 - 17 is the Sunday of the Fathers of the Seventh Ecumenical Council (Nicaea II) in 787 AD.
The final restoration of the Holy Icons is in 843.
So the correct timeline would look like this:
Timeline of Iconoclasm
Islamic conquest of Damascus (634): The city was a major centre in the Byzantine Empire and its capture marked a key victory in the early Muslim campaigns in the Levant, which eventually led to the complete control of the region by Muslim forces and the beginning of the Islamic presence in Syria, which would soon expand further into the Byzantine heartlands, finally leading to its complete overthrow in 1453.
First Iconoclasm (726-787): Initiated by Emperor Leo III, who issued edicts against the veneration of icons, in part due to pressure from Islam, leading to widespread destruction of religious images and persecution of iconodules.
Second Council of Nicaea (787): The condemnation as a heresy by the Second Council of Nicaea.
Christmas Day in 800: Pope Leo III crowned Charles, King of the Franks and Lombards, in Rome as Emperor of the Romans, symbolically reviving the Western Roman Empire.
Second Iconoclasm (814-842): After a period of restoration of icons under Empress Irene, Emperor Leo V reinstated iconoclasm.
Final defeat of Iconoclasm (843): This event is celebrated in the Eastern Churches as “The Sunday of the Triumph of Orthodoxy,” on the first Sunday of Great Lent.
***
In reality it is not about the images, but about the **nature** of Christ, His Incarnation.
Our Lord Jesus Christ is one Divine Person with **two natures**, Divine and human, in the unity of His Divine Person without confusion, without change, without division, without separation. (Council of Chalcedon, the Fourth Ecumenical Council in 451 AD).
Full dogmatic definition of the Council of Chalcedon:
Following the holy Fathers we teach with one voice that the Son [of God] and our Lord Jesus Christ is to be confessed as one and the same [Person], that he is perfect in Godhead and perfect in manhood, very God and very man, of a reasonable soul and [human] body consisting, consubstantial with the Father as touching his Godhead, and consubstantial with us as touching his manhood; made in all things like us, sin only excepted; begotten of his Father before the worlds according to his Godhead; but in these last days for us men and for our salvation born [into the world] of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God according to his manhood. This one and the same Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son [of God] must be confessed to be in two natures, unconfusedly, immutably, indivisibly, inseparably [united], and that without the distinction of natures being taken away by such union, but rather the peculiar property of each nature being preserved and being united in one Person and subsistence, not separated or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son and only-begotten, God the Word, our Lord Jesus Christ, as the Prophets of old time have spoken concerning him, and as the Lord Jesus Christ has taught us, and as the Creed of the Fathers has delivered to us.
Source: New Advent
Hope this helps. Otherwise <3 .
I keep getting that date wrong. Weird. Thanks.
You're welcome ! :-)
And yes, I know Christ has two natures from the strict Christological definition. I was speaking more broadly colloquially: "the nature of Christ" is to be both God and man. We will talk about Christology and the controversies next week.
You're not getting them far wrong. I mean, 843 is correct as the final closure to the iconoclasms, which makes it easy to confuse with Nicaea II.
That's probably why I keep mistaking that particular date.
An excellent comment. Would that the dogma of the Hypostatic Union were taught intensely, day in and day out, to all Catholics worldwide!
Awesome post Hilary! It helps immensely to see the Birds Eye view of this intensely important period.
It’s such a tragedy that East and West did not unite at that time to save the lands from invasion.
I would love to get your take on Santa Maria Antica in Rome… since its icons were painted by Greek iconodules seeking refuge in Rome. It was an important sign of how Rome holds East and West together and to this day preserves some of the oldest depictions of Icon prototypes. (Harrowing of Hell, etc.)
Santa Maria Antiqua in the Forum? No. I didn't really go to see very much of the tourist stuff in Rome. I was really only there to do my job, so I didn't do a great deal of art-touristing when I worked there. I liked San Clemente and a few others, but since wasn't there to look at art, for the most part, I didn't really go anywhere I had to pay to see - since they charge a bloody arm and a leg to go down into the Roman Forum, I never bothered with it. (Though I did visit the Mamertine prison once). I wasn't doing this kind of work at that time, and for me commuting to the City was something I did because I had to. I actually passionately detest Rome and avoid going there as much as possible.
https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiesa_di_Santa_Maria_Antiqua
Very informative videos too - I now know way more about St John of Damacene and his brilliant contributions to Christianity and icons. I had no idea.
Thank for this well written, honest and informative article. As to the date discrepancy, we all make mistakes.
The “Carolingian Renaissance” brought about a Western refutation of ikons that relegated sacred images to "teaching tools."
They were not to be venerated (except for the Cross in certain places and Usages on Good
Friday or in private devotion). In the West the "honor" to be given to sacred images (and the rise of three dimensional images) was to simply remember the person depicted.
Votives in the form of candles, badges, medals and prayers might be offered before the images and intercession of the holy ones sought but the true purpose of ikons in worship, communion with the saints and forms of authentic veneration were lost. The physicality of veneration of ikons all but disappeared in the West except in private devotion.
I have rarely seen an Eastern lkon in a Western church venerated with a kiss or profound bows that signify the veneration given to the ikon passing through it to the one who is depicted.
There isn't the tradition of physical veneration of icons in the west, as you say (though perhaps there should and could be) but we do a little of it with statues. The tradition still exists in the Traditionalist parishes (SSPX, etc) of venerating the Bambino at Christmas time. We all do kiss the Crucifix at Good Friday, as you mentioned, but also at other times. But these survive only among the very devout, who are perishingly few in the Latin Church. Personally I feel extremely uncomfortable with the kissing statues thing, but I'm pretty sure that's a result of my cultural Englishness; we abhor external acts of affection even with our parents. Americans are constantly trying to hug everyone, and Italians to kiss everyone. Anglos, not so much.
A lot of blame for this can be laid on a really rotten translation of the declarations of Nicaea II from Greek into Latin that was widely circulated in the West for some years before a correct translation was made. One wonders if the the mistranslation, which out and out inverted some of the key declarations about icons and their place, saying they were basically idols to be worshipped, was deliberate on the part of the papal legate as he was building up the case to crown Charles. No way to tell at this distance of time, of course.
I sent my children to a Protestant Christian school, and in their many years of Bible study, they never once had any discussion at all on the Transfiguration. If it even got any mention, it was only to say "Well, Jesus was just proving he was God, in case they doubted." Move along, nothing to see here.
In many Orthodox countries, The Transfiguration is considered the 3rd most important of the Feasts of the year, falling only behind Theophany (Christ's baptism in the Jordan), and Pascha itself (Christmas's rise in prominence is a recent and very very Western thing). The Feast is considered theologically profound as not only did Christ reveal Himself as God, but revealed Himself as the God of the Living - Elijah had been taking bodily into Heaven, and Moses was perhaps also. Moreover, there is a line of speculation in the hymnography about the moment as being also when Moses beheld God's passing glory, in a moment outside of time itself.
St. Gregory Palamas pondered the Light of Tabor, and taught that the truly humble and prayerful might even be granted this same experience of Christ in the Uncreated Light (what I think you might refer to as the "Beatific Vision"). Disputes over Palamas's teachings were to be another major rift between East and West in the 1300s.