No Graven Image?: Israelite Aniconism in Its Ancient Near Eastern Context

by Tryggve N.D. Mettinger

An important book about a remarkable phenomenon. This is the first in-depth study of Israelite aniconism in the light of comparative material from the ancient Near East. In an introductory chapter Dr. Mettinger introduces a distinction between de facto aniconism and programmatic prohibition of images. He then goes on to demonstrate that de facto aniconism was a conventional practice in several West Semitic cultures. Finally, he sketches the development from West Semitic aniconism (with aniconic stelae as symbols of the divine) to Israelite iconoclasm.

252 pages, Paperback

First published September 10, 1995

Reviews

[samantha · Rating 5 out of 5]

Tryggve N. D. Mettinger, No Graven Image?: Israelite Aniconism in Its Ancient Near Eastern Context,
Coniectanea Biblica. Old Testament Series ; 42. (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1995).
• Introduction
o Old Testament texts from the time around the exile, notably the polemics against idols,2
seem to imply that Israel herself looked upon her aniconism as one of her defining
features. 13
o Second, Israel's notions of God manifest themselves by means of various media: in texts
(language), rites (gestures and body language) and iconography (art). If we compare
what is found in Israelite iconography with the relevant descriptions and proscriptions of
the Hebrew Bible, a remarkable phenomenon, a paradox indeed, immediately strikes the
eye: while Israel shows extreme hesitation in the artistic realm towards anthropomorphic
representations of the deity, the literary level of expression, attested in the literature of
the Hebrew Bible, abounds with anthropomorphisms.15
o The veto on images is primarily directed against images of foreign gods anstands in the
service of the first commandment, but even so the prohibition implies that images of
Yhwh are also excluded 16
o THE HOLY OF HOLIES empty throne imagery in Jerusaelm and in another temple in
Arad massseboth
§ The empty throne in Jerusalem's temple and the masseboth at Arad are just two
different attestations of Israelite aniconism and together indicate that there was
indeed an aniconic tradition centuries before the express interdict on images.
o DEF
§ I shall thus use the term "aniconism" as referring to cults where there is no iconic
representation of the deity (anthropomorphic or theriomorphic)24 serving as the
dominant or central cu/tic symbol, 25 that is, where we are concerned wit either
(a) an aniconic symbol or (b) sacred emptiness. I shall call the first of these two
types "material aniconism" and the second "empty-space an icon ism".
§ FORMS
• 1. representations of deities
• 2. Votaries or representations of worshippers
§ Aniconism is epiphanic. helps epiphanic.
• 2. Mesopotamia and Egypt
o Totem or emblem dominanted before OB. Then icons rly come in
o This resurgence of such symbols, denoted as kakkum, "weapon", or lurinnum, "emblem",
"standard",8 is especially strong in the second half of the second millennium and lives on
in the first millennium alongside with the production of new cult stat- ues.
o Fetishes appear
§ In army encampments in fields 41
§ Kassite ANICONIC symbolic figures of sockets, mounts, horns, utensils. 45
they leave things empty
• 7 Israelite Aniconism: The Question of Its Origin
o Aniconism is most probably a late development
o Teraphim, probably ancestor figurines 137
o Israel develops a form of aniconism ·that is laid down in a solemn interdict on images.
The literary formulation of this interdict is late (around the time of the Exile), but there is
a history of aniconic practice behind this programmatic formulation. 140

[Sarah · Rating 3 out of 5]

Argues Israelitecult was aniconic due largely to a broader West Semitic religious heritage