Inventing Byzantine Iconoclasm

by Leslie Brubaker

Byzantine 'iconoclasm' is famous and has influenced iconoclast movements from the English Reformation and French Revolution to Taliban, but it has also been woefully misunderstood: this book shows how and why the debate about images was more complicated, and more interesting, than it has been presented in the past. It explores how icons came to be so important, who opposed them, and how the debate about images played itself out over the years between c. 680 and 850. Many widely accepted assumptions about 'iconoclasm' - that it was an imperial initiative that resulted in widespread destruction of images, that the major promoters of icon veneration were monks, and that the era was one of cultural stagnation - are shown to be incorrect. Instead, the years of the image debates saw technological advances and intellectual shifts that, coupled with a growing economy, concluded with the emergence of medieval Byzantium as a strong and stable empire.

Genres: History, Religion

134 pages, Paperback

First published June 1, 2012

Reviews

[Christopher · Rating 3 out of 5]

In 2011, the Byzantinist Leslie Brubaker in collaboration with John Haldon wrote an monograph titled Byzantium in the Iconoclast Era that sought to challenge the conventional account of the debate over icons between circa 650 and 850. For readers who are daunted by the price of that Cambridge University Press hardcover and its length of nearly a thousand pages, Brubaker went on to write this book for Bristol Classical Press. At only 134 pages, much of which is taken up with maps, Further Reading lists or illustrations, this is an altogether more approachable book on the subject and a motivated reader can finish it in one setting.

The prevailing understanding of Byzantine iconoclasm is that it was instigated by Leo III, it was a period of massive destruction across the Byzantine world, that it greatly divided society, that it was a period of artistic stagnation, and that its fiercest opponents were monks and, possibly, women. Brubaker claims that every single one of these assumptions is incorrect. For example, she makes a case that the classic account of iconoclasm starting with the emperor Leo III removing the icon of Christ from the palace gate is fictitious. It was his successor Constantine V who got the ball rolling against icons, but his only action was to convene a council to discuss the matter, and there is no evidence of actual destruction of images. One ought to look past writings from decades after, which can be seen as politically motivated smear campaigns, and hold that instead of true iconoclasm, there was a much calmer "iconomachy".

Some of the findings announced to the general public here are interesting, but as someone with more than a passing interest in this subject, I'm not entirely content with the book. So many details were brought up but quickly passed over that I feel like I have to get the author's Byzantium in the Iconoclast Era anyway. Plus, writing for a Western and thus mainly Roman Catholic or Protestant audience, Brubaker seems unwilling to get into the specifics of Orthodox belief. However, Byzantine society was so defensive about Christological positions, and the icon controversy played into that, that those theological minutiae must indeed be delved into in order to give the reader a full account of the subject. Still, the long bibliographies and Further Reading lists provide at least some consolation for a reader wanting more.

[Langston Jones · Rating 3 out of 5]

Compelling. Honestly felt it could’ve been a little more in depth but I guess it is a shortened version for the general public of her 1000 page manuscript. Being new to the subject I learned a lot but was definitely left wanting more in some parts. The internet is honestly not too helpful when trying to fill in the gaps because most of the online sources take on the viewpoint that Brubaker is expressly arguing against. Though there are citations to additional readings at the end of every chapter if you are really interested. Anyway, it was really interesting to learn about what kinda stuff they were arguing about back then and how quickly people were ready to gouge your eyes out if you disagreed.

[José Luís Fernandes · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very informative book that debunks very shortly the existence of "iconoclasm" in the medieval Roman Empire and puts the controversy of iconomachy under a much more enlightening point of view. Its format is a bit awkward and the book is very short, but Leslie Brubaker makes her point very clearly.

[Nick Mount · Rating 4 out of 5]

A mercifully brief overview, probably the best short introduction to current views on the subject, even if does spend too much time talking about other aspects of Byzantine history—partly because Brubaker has helped dramatically reduce the time needed to talk about its iconoclasm in her far longer 2011 book with John Haldon by showing that there wasn't much of it.

[Ella · Rating 3 out of 5]

As other reviewers have said, this is far too brief, but it does make me want to check out Brubaker’s other work. Also, and this isn’t the book’s fault, the ebook I read clearly didn’t have image rights sorted out and so there were just blanks instead of plates. Which really impacts the delivery of a topic this visual.

[Iskender · Rating 2 out of 5]

More of a polemic with the earlier accounts of iconoclasm, rather than an intro into what iconoclasm was all about. And frankly I failed to see what the issues involved int he polemic were and why they were important

[Noé Hernández · Rating 5 out of 5]

A must in the field of Byzantine studies.

[Aniela Smoczyńska]

Trochę zagmatwana, ale można przeżyć. Nadal jednak nie wiem czy styl bizantyjski wziął się z upadku techniki czy ich preferencji.