GERO, Holy Images

7/25/2019 GERO, Holy Images

1/20

TALIA

CHRISTIANA

z6u

ANALECTA

'Winkler

1

I

i

:

Studies

n Liturgy

and Patristics

in

Honor of

edited

by

Hans-Jiirgen

Feulner,

lena

Velkovska,

and Robert

F. Taft,

S.J.

PONTIFICIO

STITUTO

ORIENTLE

PIAZZA

.MAruA

MAGGIORE,

I_00185 OMA

2000


2/20

. t 1 a "

e - a f

, ^ r d

- '

Q / '

ANALECTA

*. '

ORIENTALIA

CHRISTIANA

260

CROSSROAD

FCULTURES

Studies

n Liturgy and Patristics

n

Honor of Cabriele

Winkler

edited

by

Hans-Jrgen Feulner, Elena

Velkovska, and Robert F. Taft, S.J.

P O N T I F I C I OS T I T U T OO R I E N T A L E

PIMZAS.MARIAMAGGIORE,

I-OO1B5 OMA

2000

-l


3/20

ORIENTALIA

CHRISTIANA

ANALECTA

EDITOR

RobertF. Taft,

S.J.

ASSISTANT

TO THE

EDITOR

Stefano

Parenti

ASSOCIATE

EDITOR

Edward

G. Famrgia,

S.J.

WITH

The Professors

f the Pontifical

Oriental nstitute

SECRETARY

Bernardo

Armti,

S.J.

MANAGING

EDITOR

Jaroslaw

Dziewicki

All

correspondence

conceming manuscripts

should.

be addressed

o the Ed.itor;

all other con'espond.ence

o the

Mano.ging Ed.itor.

@ 2000 Pontificio

Istituto

Orientale. Roma.

All rights

reserved.

ISBN88-7210-325-8

Acknowledgements:

the Editors

gratefully

acknowledge receiving

from the Karlsruhe

Badische Landesbibliothek

the rights

to reproduce

the illustration

of the l2ll4th

c.

Artiphonale Monasticum,

Karlsruhe, Badische

Landesbibliothek,

AUG

perg.

60, ff. 2', in

Prof. Hansjakob Becker's

paper.

Finito .li sta'1|pare

nel

'tese

di

febbnio 2000 da a

npolitoqrufra 2000 s.a.s.

di De MaEisMs R.

I' C.

Via Tiento,46

-

00046

Grcuafenata

(Rott) -

Te|. e Fu

06.9410423

E. n ui I de n tugis /'is@p elag$. i

, '

|

L.

r , '


4/20

Table of Contents

List of Abbreviations

Letter

of

Archbishop

Khajag BARSAMTN

Introduction. GabricleWinkler

at Sixty. Vita et opera

Hans-Jrgen FEUTNER,

niversity of Tbingen,

List of Publications

of

Gabiele Winklcr

Luise ABRAMowsKr,

University of Tbingen, Narsai,

Ephrrim und.

Kyrill ber esu Verlnssenheitstuf.Matth. 27 46

Hansjakob BEcKER, University

of Mainz, Aspiciens

-

Aspiciebam.

Tradition

und Trandormation des Antiphonale

Offi.cii im Mittel-

a l t e r . , .

Gabriel BERToNIER,

CSO, St. Joseph'sAbbey,

Spencer Massachu-

setts

(USA),

Foar titurgical Kanons

of Elias I I of Jerusalem

. . . .

Heinzgerd BRAKMANN,

.-J.-Dlger-Institut, Bonn,

'1

ranawrl ro

Kupiou. Christi Lichtmess

im

frhchistlichen

Jerusalem . . . . . . .

Sebastian P. BRocK,

Oxford University, Toward.s

a Typology ol the

Epicleses in the West Syrian Anaphoras

.

Armenuhui DRoST-ABGARjANnd Hermann

GoLTz. Universitv of

Halle,

Eine armenische

bersetzung es Hymnos Akathistos.

Ein-

leitung,

Edition, deutsche bersetzung

und armenisch-griechisches

Glossar .

Hans-Jrgen FEULNER,

University of Ttibingen,

Zu d.en Editionen

orientalischerAnaphoren . .

Michael Daniel FNDIKYAN,

St. Nersess Armenian

Seminary, Ner,"

York,

On the Oigins and Early Evolution

of the Armenian

Office of

Sunrise .

Albert GRHARDS,

niversity of Bonn

,

Akklamationen

im Euchaistie-gebet.Funktion und Gestah m Liturgievergleich

Stephen GERo,University of Tbingen, What Were

he Holy Images of

the

Iconoclasts?

Gregor HANKE,

O,S.B,, Benediktinerabtei Plankstetten, Bavarta,

Der

Odenkanon des Tagzeitenitus Konstantinopels

im Licht der

BeitrdgeH,

Schneidersund O. Strunks

-

eine Relecture

. . . , . . . .

Andreas

HEINZ, Deutsches Liturgisches Institut

and University of

lrier, Sonntq.gsfrmmigkeit

n der heutigen Liturgie der

Syisch-

Maroniischen

Kirche . .

Sebasti JANERAS, arcelona, Saint Jean Chrysostomeet la Glande

Entre . .

7

9

1 l

3 l

43

1 5 1

173

193

z 5 l

3 1 5

33 1

395


5/20

O

TBLE

OF CONTENTS

Maxwell

E. JoHNsoN,

University

of Notre Dame,

Indiana

(USA),

Te

Oigins

of the Anaphoral

Sanctus and.

Epiclesis

Revisited.:

Th.

Contribution

of

GabrieleWinkler

and lts

Implications

-

Franz

KoHLScHETN,

niversity of Bamberg, Konturcn dcr Liturie-wksenschaft. Zur

Bercksichtigung

d.er stlichen

Liturgien

bei

en

Autoren

liturgiewissenschaftlicher

Handbiicher

Franz

Xayer

Schmid

(

1800-1

871 und

Johann Bqptist

Lft

(

80j

-j

870)

Christoph

MARKscHrEs,

University

of lena,

Origenes

und die

Kor-

mentietung

d.es

paulinischen

Rmerbiefs

-

einige Bemerkungen

2ur

ReTeption

von antiken

Kommentarlechniken

im

Christentum

des

d.ritten lahrhunderts

und. ihrer

Vorgeschichte

. ,

Reinhard

MEssNR,

University

of Innsbruck,

Zur

Euchaistie

in

den

Thomasalcten,

Zugleich

ein Beitrag

zur

Friihgeschichte

der euchan-

stischenEpiklese

Marcel METZGER, niversity

of Strasbourg,

pages

fminines

d.esCon-

s t i tu t ionsapos to l iques

. . . .

Stefano PRrNTr,

Pontificio

Istituto

Liturgico

Sant,Anselmo,

Rome,

Mesed. i

Meo( t toy

. . . . .

Thomas

Porr,

O.S.B., Abbaye

Sainte-Croix,

Chevetogne,

Belgium,

Rfortne

monastique

et yolution

litulgique.

La reforme

stoudiie

. -

. 557

Erich RENHART,

niversity

of Graz, Zu

einem

Gebetseinschub

n

der

ingercn

artnenischen

edaktion

erBasiliusanaphora

........

.

591

Charles

RrNoux,

O.S.B.,

Abbaye

d'En

Calcat, Frar'ce,

Le.

Gloria in

excelsis Deo de l'glise armnienne 603

SAMIR

Khalil Samir,

S.J., Pontificio

Istituto

Orientale,

Rome, L'Encr-

clopdie

liturgique

d'Ibn Kabar

(t

1324)

et son

apologie

d'usagLs

coptes

..

619

Hans-Joachim

ScHULz,

University

of Wiirzburg,

Die Spiepelunp

ur-

kirchlicher

Taufmystagogie

und Taufpraxis

ii

tot S,S-

""

Ut

) o t o

657

Robert

F. TAFr,

S.J., Pontificio

Istituto

Orientale,

Rorne,

The

pr|pa-

tivtoy in

the 6/7th

c.

"Nanation

of the

Abbots

lohn and

Sooh-

ronius."

An Exercise

n Comparative

Liturg .

. . .

675

Robert W. THoMsoN,Oxford University, Saint Ephrem and an Arme-

nian Homily

on the

Passion

693

Elena VELKovsKA,

University

of Sien

I

"d.odiciprokcimena"

d.el

mat-

tutino cattedrale

bizantino

.

7Os

Boghos Levon

ZEKTYAN,

niversity

of Venice,

L'Armenia

tra Bizanzio

e I'Iran

dei Sasanidi

e momenti

delln

fondaTione

d.ell'id.eolosia

dell'Atnenia

cistiana

(secc.

V-VII).

Preliminari per

una sintesi

. . . 717

461

5 1 5


6/20

AASS

AB

ACO

L I S T

O F A B B R E V I A T I O N S

Acta Snctomm

(Antverpiae

et alibi

1643 f.)

Analecta

Bollandiana

Eduardus Schwrtz,

Acta Conciliorum

Oecuftenicorum

(Berli

r914 f f . )

Archiv

fur Orientforschung

Archiv fu

r Liturgiewissenschaft

Archives

de l'Orient

Chrtien

Bibliotheca

Ephemerides

Liturgicae. Subsidia

Franois

Halkin,

Biz'liotheca Hagiographica

Gtueca

(SH

8a, Bruxel-

les 1957r):

Auctaium BHG

(SH

47, Bruxelles

1969); Noeum

auctaium B}IG

(SH

65,

Bruxelles 1984)

Patjj Peeters,

Bibliotheca Hagiogrophica

On.erlalis

(Bmxelles

1910)

Bibliotieca

Orientalis

(Leiden

1943/44

f.)

Josephus Simonius

Assemanus,

Bibliotheca Oient(iis

Clementi4o-

Vaticana

(Ror'tae

l'119,1721,1725,

1728)

(rep.

Hildesheim 1975)

Frank Edward Brightman, Liturges Eastem and Westet'n,L Eastem

Liturgies

(Oxf

ord

| 896)

Bulletin

de la Socit

d'Archologie Copte

Byzantion

Byzantinische

Zeitschrift

Corpus Christianorum,

Series

Craeca

(Turnhout

1971 f

)

Corpus

Christianorum, Series

Latina

(Turnhout

1953

f.)

The Catholic Historicl

Review

Clavis

Patrut 1 Gtaecontm,5

vols. ed.

M. Geerard, F, Glorie

(Cor-

pus

Christianorum,

Tumhout

1974 f.)

Corpus

Scriptorum

christianomm

orientalium

(Lor"rvain

1903 f

)

Corpus

Scriptorum

Ecclesiasticontm

Latinorum

(Wien

1866 f.)

corpus Scriptorum

Historiae

Byzantinae

(Bonn

1828-1897)

Dictionnaire d'ArchologieChrtienne et de Liturgie

Henricus

Denzinger,

Ritus Orientalium...

I,

(Wuburg

1863-

1864)

Dictionnaire

d'Histoire et

de Gographie

Ecclsiastique

(Paris

1912 f.)

Aleksej

. Dmitrievskij,

opisaftie Liturgieskich

rukopisei

chrania-

Iichsia

bibliotekach

ptut

oslat)nago

ostoka,

I-II

(Kiev

1895,

1901)

III

(Petrograd

917)

Dumbarton Oaks

Papers

Epheme

des Liturgicae

Echos d'Orient

Franciscus

Xavenus

Funk, Didascala

et Constitutiones

Apostolo-

rulz I-II

(Paderborn

1905,

ep. Torino 1964)

Carl Brockelmann, Geschbhte der arabischen Uteratut (weirrl r

1898) I

(Leiden

1912)

Idem I-Il

(Leiden,

1943-1949)

1derfl,Supplementbnde

-III

(Leiden

1937, 193a, 1942)

Die

gdechischen

christlichen

Schriftsteller

(Leipzig/Berlin

1897

f

)

Jacobus

Goar,

Exyrot siee

Rituale

graecotum

(Venezia

1730'

reDr. Grz

1960)

Anton Baumstark,

Gescirhte

der syrbchen

Literatul

(Bor.r,

7922)

Handbuch der

Orientalistik

(Leiden-Kln

1952 f.)

Henry

Bradshaw Society

Irnikon

Jahrbuch der sterreichischen

byzantinischen

Gesellschft

(1951-

68)i Jahrbuch der sterreichischenByzantinistik

(wien

1969 f.)

Joumal of

Semitic Studies

fo

ALw

AOC

BELS

BHG

BHGAJBHGNA

BHO

Bio

BO

Brightman

BSAC

Byz

BZ

ccG

CCL

CHR

cPc

csco

CSEL

CSHB

DACL

Denzinger,

OC

DHGE

Dmitrievskij

DOP

EL

EO

Futk

l-ll

GAL

GAL2

GALS

GCS

Gor

CSL

HOr

HBS

lrn

JOB

JSSt


7/20

JTS

LOC

LO

LQF

The

Journal

of Theological

Studies

Eusbe

Rnaudot,

Ziturgiantm

Orientaliutn

Collectio,

2 vol.

(Frar-

turr 18472)

Liturgiegeschichtliche

Quellen

Liturgiegeschichtiche

Quellen und Forschungen,

deinde

Liturgie-

wissenschaftliche

O.

u. F.

0957 ff.)

The

Journal

of the

Society

for Armetian

Studies

Lexikon fta Theologieund Kirche (1930, 1957, 1993)

Johannes

Dominicus

|i1.ansl,

Sacroram

Conciliorumiova

et auplis_

sina

coe.rto

(Fenze

1759

ff.)

Monument

Cermaniae

Historica

inde

ab

anno

500 usoue

ad

annum

1500

Hannover

1826

f.)

Marcel

Metzger,

Izs

Cottstitutions

Apostoliques,

SC

320, 329,

336

(Paris

1985,

1986.

987)

Le Muson

Oriens

Christianus

Orientalia

CMstiana

Analecta

Orientalia

Christiana

Oriertalia

Christiana

Periodica

OstkircNiche

Studien

Orientalia Lovaniensia Periodic

Orientalische

Litemturzeituns

L'Orient

Syrien

Paulys

Realenzyklopdie

der

klassischen

Altertumswissenschft

ndX,rcviror

iiraws

oi itoi

Kai

ossor Kclv(ivv

AivaL

t9OE5)

Jacobus

Paulus

Migne,

Patrologia

Graeca

pris

tSSi_t

dOO)

{acobls

Paufus

Mign

e, Patologia

latina

(paris

l84l

_

1864)

Patrologia

Orientalis

(pris

1903 f.)

Proche-Orient

Chrrien

Patrologiasyriac,

I- l

(paris

1897,

I9O7

192?)

Revue

de

tudes

Armniennes

Reallexikon

der Byzantinistik

Revue des Etudes Byzantines

Relue

d'Histoire

Ecclsiastioue

Eusbe

Renudot,

Historia

i'atriarcharum

Aletcandinorum

Jacobi_

tarutu

(Pa\is

l7 13\

9.^l

M4ll

et M. Potlis,

1jwafl1a

d)r tEi@

ra) iep,t

tcctdral) (t:v

Afivcq,

1852-1859)

Recueil.des

Historiens

des Croisades

paris

1g64-1906)

Revue

d histoire

ecclsiastioue

Revue

de l'Orient

Chrtien

Rmische

Quartalschr-ift

Rivist

di Studi

Bizantini

e Neoelledcr

Recherches

de Science

Religieuse

Sources

Ch-rriennes

Paris

l94t

fl)

Subsidia Hagiographica (Bnrxelles 1886 f.)

Studi

e Testi

(Cirt

del Vaticano

t9O0

ff.)

Angelo

Mai,

Scriptorum

Vetetum

Nc",)a

Coltectio

l0 voll.

(Romae

1825-1838)

Jean-Bptiste

Chabot,

Stnod.icon

Otientale

ou Recueil

des

synodes

nestoriens

Pans

1902,

Theologische

Rer,rre

Theologische

QuartalscMft

Texte

und

Untersuchuneen

Vigiliae

Chrisrianae

Vizantijskj

Vremennik

Zeitschrift

der

deutscher

morgenlndischen

Gesellschaft

JSAS

LThKr-2'3

Mansi

MCH

Metzger

I-III

Mus

oc

ocA

och

ocP

OKS

OLP

oLz

os

Pauly-Wissowa

Pedalion

PG

PL

PO

POC

PS

REArm

RByz

REB

RHE

Renaudot,

HP

Rhallis-Potlis

RHC

RHE

ROC

RQ

RSBN

RSR

SC

SH

ST

SVNC

SynOr

ThR

ThQ

TU

VC

ZDMG


8/20

Stephen

Gero

Whct Were the Holy Imoges

oI the lconoclcsts?-

"The

holy images

ofthe

iconoclasts"

-

prima

facie the very

notion

seems to be self-contradictory. How

could the iconoclasts have holy

images? Were

they

not,

as the etymology of the designation

(i.e.

"image-breakers")

already shows, rather the destroyers

of images?

This is for instance exp ressly asserted in an

early, brief accounr,

which

is appended to a heresiological work

of John

Damascus;

the

passage,even if not written by John himself, surely dates from the

reign of Leo IIL Describing the activit ies

of

Leo's

partisans

the author

says.

They

are called iconoclasts

because ... they have

given

over the

holy and august images to being

broken and burned. In a like man-

ner,

they either scraped off or obliterated with

lime and black

paint

the images

on

walls".r

In a somewhat later account

(doubtfully

at-

tributed

to the

patriarch

Germanus, but at any rate written

before the

iconoclastic

council of 754),, though the explicit

designation

"icono-

clasl"

does not appear, the destructive activity

of the heretics is de-

-

Abbreviatio:rs:

GcIo, BI, vol. I

=

S-

Gero,

B)zartire lcotloclasm

(lltring

the Reigtl of I2o IIl,.Nith Par-

licltlar Attentiotl to l1eOental Sottrces

Louvain,

1973).

Gcrr, Bl, vol.

2

=

S. Gcro, Byzantine lcotlocktsltt tltting the Reigtl

(t

Constetltine V,

with Particular Attentiolr 10

he Oielltal

So&r'ces

Louvain,

1977).

GoIo,

Iconoclast ic

MovemcDt"

=

S. GeIo,

"The

Byznt ine conoclast ic

Movcmcnt: A

Sr:r'vey" rr L iZnc

dans la tlologie et l'urt

(Lcs

tudcs thologiques de Charnbsy,

vol.9,

Chanbsy/Gcmcva,990),

p.95

11.

Grabar,L'iconoclasne

=

A.

Grabar, L'ictttoclasnte bya.attt1. p tlossier archologique,

2nd

ed.

Paris,

1984).

Kilzinger, 11crllto = E. Kitzinger, Il culto del le nttnagin i. L'arte b:.antn clal cstiane-

simo clelle igini all'lcoroclasl la

(Florence,

1992).

Thiimmel, Bilderlehre

=

H.G. Thiimmcl, Die Fngeschchte der ostkirchlichen Bilder

lehrc.Texle

uru| Untersuchungen

ur

Zeit

vor dem Bilclerstreit

Berlin,

1992).

Th\immd, Bilderstreil

=

H.G. Thiimmel, Bldcrlehte utld Bilderstreit. Arbeiten

zur

Aus

einandersetaungiber die Ikone und hre Begriin(1ut1gtomehtnlich

im

8.

utttl 9.

.l

ahund erl

(W

irz.blr

g,

1991

.

IPG

94,773A8. On this

passage

ee Cero, BI, vol. l ,

p.

99 and B. Kotter, Die

Schiften

tles Johannesvon Damaskos. V. Liber tle haeresibus-Opet

polemice

(P'erl'ir,l

NewYork, 1981),

.

5.

I

SeeBl, vol. 1,

pp.

97-8. John Wortley,

("Iconoclasm

and

Lcipsanoclasm:

Leo III,

ConstaDtiDe and the Relics," By:arrinrsche Farschungen8

(1982)

258 [f) woulcl even

date l to

ca.7E0.


9/20

332

STEPHEN GERO

scribed in ample

detail:

"Those

who now

preach

this doctrine were

not satisfied

with removing the images of the saints on

panels,

but

they also wanted to destroy the corresponding

painted

decoration of

the most venerable temples. Moreover, they laid hands on the hon-

ored and

holy figurative table coverings of the holy sanctuaries ... be-

cause the

pictures

of the saints were found depicted on them".3 As a

complement to

such eighth-century descriptions, one can register, for

example,

a ninth-century account by the

patriarch

Nicephorus,

from

a

work of his, written

perhaps

around 820, describing the depreda-

tions of the iconoclastic

partisans

of

Leo V. After

asserting that the

iconoclasts denied altogether

the venerable tradition of the ancients

(a

charge, often

repeated, which comes very close to the modem use

of the term "iconoclast" to describe someone who attacks or ridicules

traditional institutions

and ways of thinking) Nicephorus continues:

"they

leveled to the

ground

the

holy

temples,

ruined

the altars,

burned the holy table coverings

in

the

middle

of the

marketplace

and

broke

... the holy vessels".a or

good

measure, we are told by the

pa-

triarch,

the miscreants even trampled on the cross of Christ and

made short shrift of all the venerable symbols of the Christian faith,

vouched for by the

pious

emperors and

priests

of the

past.

The foregoing are typical examples of the

very

one-sided

way in

which the Byzantine iconoclasts were represented n the literary tra-

dition of their iconophile opponents;

such descriptions are

paralleled

in the tendentious depictions, in some instances outright caricatures,

of the

iconoclasts in manuscript illustrations of the ninth century and

later,

wherein various iconoclasts, in

particular

John the Grammar-

ian, insult or deface

mages.5

Outright destruction, defacement

or forceful removal of ecclesias-

tical decoration did take

place

of

course, at time surely accompanied

by much violence;

it

should be

noted in this connection, however,

J

PG 98, 8OBC.

a

Duodecim capitula, ed.

A. Ppadopoulos Kerameus, AvdsKra Ispooo),upLlKq

ro1oo)"oyicq,vol. 1

(St.

Petersburg, l89l),

p.

458, lines 12 ff

=

ed.

A. Maj,,

Spicilegium

Romanum,vol. l0

(Rome,

1844),

.

154, ine 2 ab imo

-

p.

155, ine 7.

5

See Crabar,

L'iconoclasme,

pp.

225 ff and now K. Corrigan,

Visual Polemics in

the

Ninth-century Psallels

(Cambridge,

1992),

pp.27

ff, ll4 ff, For no

good

reason

Fernanda de' Maffei would identify the

iconoclastic

gthering

in the illustration of

Psalm 25 ir the

Khludov

psalter

(Moscow,

Hist. Mus.

gr.

129D, ol. 23v) s the coutcil

of

754, not

as

tht of 815, and accordingly the

presiding

figure

in imperial

garb

as

Constantine V, not as Sybatios-Constantine,

the son of Leo V

(lcona,

pittore

e arte al

Concilio Niceno

II

(Rome,

1974),

p.

95).


10/20

W1IATWERE THE HOLY IMAGES OF TIIE ICONOCLASTS? 333

that the iconoclstic

council of 754, while

forbidding

the

manufac-

ture and

veneralion of images, nowhere sanctions

their destruction

and

imposes strict safeguards on the

removal or alteration of deco-

rated liturgical vessels and fabrics.6 Still the iconoclasts did desewe,

with some

justice,

this name, bestowed

on them by their opponents,

though

of course they would

not have accepted it themselves

-

from

their

own

point

of view, not true

icons, images of holy

persons,

were

given

over to destruction, but rather objects

of reprehensible idolatry

and illegitimate

worship.

It stands

to reason that the iconophile

polemic

dwells with a hor-

rid fascination on

the direct assault upon hallowed

material symbols.

The inspired eloquence

and the wealth of detail

which

depict

the acts

of iconoclasm proper and the attendant persecution of the defenders

of image

worship are regrettably not matched by anything

like equal

attention

paid,

be

it even in malam

partem,

to those

features of wor-

ship and theological

thinking which the iconoclasts offered as

alter-

natives. Thus the

repeated destmction and subsequent

restoration,

on

imperial command, of the Chalce

image is described with much

pa-

thetic detail in the sources; that

in its

stead

a

plain

cross as the sym-

bol of iconoclastic

piety

came to

grace

the Chalce

gate,

most

prob-

ably already in the eighth

century,7and

quite

certainly in the

ninth, is

for the most part passedover in silence, except for some rather indi-

rect allusions.

The

portrait

of the iconoclasts

which is thus

presented

s an over-

-

whelmingly negative one; their

ctivity was ostensibly restricted tolf

the brutal destruction of sacred

objects and to the

persecution

of

ahe

orthodox, either because

of their inherent

wickedness or at best, be-

cause of a misguided understanding,

under the sinister

influence of

Jews and Arabs, of

what idolatry really meant. A

rejection of icon-

worship as idolatry, based

on bibl ical texts,E s indeed a constant

and

important iconoclastic theme. It appears already in the earliest

statements attributed

to Constantine of Nacolia and other

iconoclas-

For details see Gero, BI,

vol. 2,

pp.

87,

96, 107.

7

cero,

BI, vol. l,

pp.

113 ff and most recently

P. Speck,

"Td

rfl

ft.apiopato

nLrivo. IJberlegungen zur ulendekoration

der Chalke im achten Jahrhuldert,"

in B.

Borkopp

et al.

(eds.),

Studizn

a

t bt?pntinischen

Khnstgeschichte. Festschift

f

r Horst

Halletuleben

zum

65- Gebultstag

(Ansterdam,

1995),

pp.

211 ff.

8

On

this

subject

see the observtios of I.M.

Resnick,

"Idols

and images: early

definitions and controversies,"

Soboflost 7 (1985) 35 ff.


11/20

334

STEPHEN GRO

tic

bishops n Asia Minor in the 720's,e

nd, despite

occasional

quali-

fication,

keeps recurring throughout

the whole

period.

The removal

or, alternatively, the relocation

of images was

often

professedly

un-

dertaken to neutralize the temptation of the simpler sort of people to

worship

dead, soulless

matter. The strictures

against idolatry

are fur-

thermore frequently

connected

specifically with the illegitimacy

of

anthropomorphic

religious

art; but, interestingly,

at no

point

is there

a blanket condemnation

of all figurative representation,

based

on the

biblical commands,

attdbuted to Byzantine

conoclasts, n

conrrasr,

for instance, to those

(western)

opponents

of images, who,

according

to Bede,

writing in the 730's,

did draw such a conclusion.r0

he Byz-

antine i conoclasts' llogically

restrictive nterpretation

of the

biblical

prohibitions is in fact noted time and again by iconophilecontrover-

sialists; t

speaksof course mpressively

against the thesis

of direct

Jewishor Muslim

influence.rr

Although

the vehement rejection

of

"idolatry"

was undoLrbtedly

important

in

providing

the initial

impulse and

the continuous nspi-

ration of the iconoclastic

movement,

one should realize

hat it is but

the negativeaspect

of iconoclasm,

one side of the coin,

so to speak.

At least from the 750's

onward, if not trom

the very beginnings

of the

movement,

t came to

be combined with a

positive

mage doctrine,

based in part on the eucharisticsacrament.There may have been

perceived,

rorn early

on, an opposition between

he eucharisticcult

and

the worship of images;

hat the iconoclasts

egarded he latter as

a distraction from the celebration

of the mystery

of the eucharist can

be deduced fuom

some defensive comments

of the

patriarch

Germa-

nus.r2But it was

in the first

place

the emperor ConstantineV,

fol-

. 1 ' , 4 . '

lowed

by the

gfbishops

responsible

for drafting

the resolutions of

the council of 754,who

put

forth the doctrine

of the eucharistas

the

'Sec

Gero, BI, vol. 1,

pp.

85 ff and D. Stein,

"Biblische

Excgese und kirchliche

Lel-re im Fr

und Wider des byzanlinischen

Bilderstreits," in

Chr.

Dohncn/Th.

Sternberg

(eds.),

...ltein

Bildnis

machen. K,totst ntl TheoLogte

n Gesprch

Wtirzburg,

1987),

p.

69 t f .

1t

De tenrplo, ed. D. Hurst, Bedae

Venerabilisopeftr,

pars

II,

2A

(CCh,

ser. latina,

vol. 119,

umhout, 1969),

.212,

ines

8 ff.

rrOn

this mtter

see further my remarks in

"Iconoclastic

Movement",

pp.

98-9

nd

"Early

Contacts between Byzntium

amd the Arab Empire:

A

Review

and Some

Reconsiderations" in

Tl Fouth Intemational

Conlrenceon the History

of

Bilad

al-

Shan,vol. l

(Amman,

1987),

p.

128 f .

r2

PG 98. t84AB.


12/20

WIIAT

WERE THE

HOLY IMGS

OF THE ICONOCNSTS?

335

true image

of Christ;t3

this, apart

from the polemical

accent,

was

of

course in

itself no

theological

novelty.ra

The immediate

source

seems

to have

been Eusebius

of

Caesarea,who

in his

famous

letter

to the

empress Constantia expounded the eucharistic image doctrine as parr

of his sustained

argument

against

the making

of material

images

of

Christ.r5

According

to the iconoclasts

it

is in the

consecrated

eucharistic

elements

that

one can see

the image

of Christ.

The eucharistic

bread

is

the eirv

of the body

of Christ, it

depicts

His flesh, it

is the 16zro

f

His

body. Through

sacerdotal

consecration

the eucharistic

elements

are transferred

from

the domain

of the

hand-made,

r

1rpofiotnrov,

o

that made

without

hands, t

dlerporoirpov;

this

formulation, probably

original to Constantine V, is surely directed against the widespread

veneration

of miraculously produced

images

of

Christ. In

the refine-

ment

and elaboration

of this doctrine

in t]rre

oros

of 754 the

connec-

tion

with the

idolatry

theme is

made explicit

-

the

eucharist

is the

"unlying

image"

of

Christ's body,

transferred

through

the

sacerdotal

prayer

from

the sphere

ofthe

profane,

rd rorvv,

to that

of the

holy, r

dyrov.This

is by divine

intent

an image

'ot

fashioned

in the

form

of

a man",

so that

idolatry

may not even

by stealth

be introduced.

This

exposition

of

the eucharistic

image

doctrine

is coupled

with

polemic

against the pseudonymous images of the iconophiles; these have ner-

ther the

sanction

of biblical

and

patristic

tradition

nor

-

and

this

seems

o be the

crucial

point

-

have

they been

consecrated

bv means

of a holy prayer

to effect

the

passage

rom the

sphere

of the

profane

to that

of the holy;

instead,

the ftoros

concludes,

the so-called

icons

13

For details

see Gero, BI,

vol. 2,

pp.

45

ff, l0l ff.

14

See S. Gero,

"The Eucharistic

Doctrine

of the Byzntine

Iconoclasts

and lts

Sources,"

BZ 68

(1975)

4

ff; M.

Gesteira carz. La

Eucar-istia,

dimagen

de

Cristo?

Ante el 12.o Centenario del Concilio 2.o de Nicea," Revistaespafrolade teotogte 4j

(1987).281

ff, esp. 292

ff; J.N. Prs,

"La

cne

est-elle a Vrai

icne du

Chrisr?

(Aux

origines du

dogme eucharistique),"

Eladas

thologiques

et rcligieuses

63

(1988)

529 ff.

For

a study of the

issues involved

plced

in

a broader

"history

of ideas',

context see

S.

Michalski,

"Bild,

Spiegelbild,

Figura,

Representtio.

Ikonittsbegriffe

im

Spannungs-

feld

zwischen Bilderfrage

und Abendmahlskontroverse,"

AHC 20

(1988)

458 ff,

esp.

463 11.

ls

See S.

Gero,

"The

Tme

Image of

Christ Eusebius'Irtter

to

Constanti Recon-

sidered,"

JTS, n.s.

32(1981),

p.

467t

Chr. Schnborn,

Die

Chstus-Ikone

(Schaffhau-

sen, 1984),

pp.

67 ff;

Ch. Murray,

"Le pmblme

de l'iconophobie

et les

premiers

sicles chrtiens,"

in F. Bcespflug

/ N. Lossky

(eds.),

Nr'cle 11,

7gZ-1987. Do

ze

sicles

d.'images

eligieuses

(Paris,

1987),

pp.

44

ff. Cf. S. Gero,

"Aggiornamento

bibliografico,,ir Kitzinger

,

Il

cuho,

p.

lO9.


13/20

336 STEPHEN GERO

remain common and worthless,

just

as the

painter

made them. Here

we are confronted

with

the iconoclasts' mature criteria for discerning

a true

holy image

-

it is validated

by the authority of tradition, it is

of a non-anthropomorphic character, and it is properly consecrated,

in order to effect the descent and the indwelling of the Holy

Spirit.

The doctrine of the eucharistic image, though not explicitly

men-

tioned in the extant fragments of the second iconoclastic council

in

8i5,

did in

all

likehood retain

currency throughout the whole

period

and the

formula

"eirv (or

runo) of His body" as applied to the

eucharist seems to have

gained

the status of an iconoclastic shibbo-

leth;r6 thus Theodore of Studios cites the iconoclastic

statement that

Christ can be represented

-

but only in accordance with

the words

"Do this in remembrance of me"; such an image is true and such a

depiction is sacred.rT

The eucharistic icon, despite all the safeguards, s

of course still

an outwardly material image; as a complement

to

it

a

purely

spiritual

doctrine, the so-called

"ethical

theory

of

images"tE

s also at times

proffered.

Rather than depicting

the bodily traits of Christ or the

saints

"in

lifeless and speechless cons" one should

attempt to imitate

their conduct and thus form living images of their virtues. Normally,

the means of emulation is the

perusal

of

ecclesiastically

approved

writings; at times there seems to be a more direct, almost mystical

dimension to the formtion

of

the image

of Christ in the soul,

through the sanctification

of

the Holy

Spirit.'e The language used

here

(pprp


14/20

WHAT

WER TH

HOLY IMCES

OF TH

ICONOCLASTS?

337

of the

passage

n

this context

is refuted

at

great

length

by Nicephorus.

According

to

the iconoclasts'

version

of the

fifth-century patristic

tes-

timonium,

from

the letter

of Nilus

to Olympiodorus,

only

the

plain

cross should be depicted in the sanctuary and the rest of the church

should be whitewashed.2r

The iconoclasts

also adduced

a

staremenr

of Epiphanius,

according

to which

no

church decoration

other than

the

plain

cross s permitted.r2

But it

is however quite

clear that

for the

most

part

the iconoclastic policy

tolerated

or

even encouraged

abun-

dant zoomorphic

and floral

decoration

as adiaphora;

in

particular

the

possibility

that

1j*(he

object

of idolatry

for

the faithful

could

be a

. . . - -

theriomorphia

representation

by itself

was no

longer

envisaged.ri

The

iconoclasts

were

apparently

unwilling

to

engage n

a debate

about

the

symbolic depiction of the Savior as agnus Del versus a realistrc, an-

thropomorphic

one, as

posed

in

the

f:famous

eighty-second

canon

of

the council

in Trullo;2a

he

text was

dismissed

by them

either

as

being

an enactment

of all too recent

vintagezs

or,

alternatively,

as

one

of heretical provenience.26

This

brings

us to the

subject

of the cross

as

a sacred

symbol

for

the iconoclasts.

A cross replaced

the

Chalce

Christ image,

which

was

removed

by imperial

command,

already

at

the outset,

in the

early

eighth

century.2?There

is

abundant

and reliable

archaeolosical

evi-

2r

Text

no. 43 in

Thtmmel,

Bilde lehre

(pp.

3l}-ll);

seenow also

for the

text, as it

circulated

in the early

ninth century,

J.M. Featherstone

(ed,.),

Nicephot

patiarcha.e

Constantinopolitani

Refutatio

et Eversio

Delinitionis

synodalis

Aanl 8jS

(

CCh,

ser.

graeca,

vol.

33, Tumhout,

1997\,

p.

248,line

2l

-

p.

250,

line 7. Thmmel

opts for the

authenticity

and

p

ority of the iconoclastic

version

(see

his

,,Neilos

von

Ankyra

ber

die

Bilder" BZ 71

(1978)

10ff

and Bilderlehte, pp.78lO

by contrast

Alan

Cameron, in

a contribution

overlooked

by Thtmmel,

claims to have

discovered

in an

eighth-

century compilation

an

iconophile fiagment

fiom

another

work by Nilus,

under

the

alias

"AnclTianus" ("A

Quotatio

fTom

S. Nilus of Anc5,ra

n an Iconodule

Tract?,,JTS,

n.s. 27

(1976\

128 ff;

cf. the

same author's

"The

Authenticity

of the

Letters of

St Nilus

of Ancyra," GRBS 17 (1976) 189 fO. This lasr marter ii still sub judice; cf. Av.

Cameron /

J, Hetrill.,

Coftstantinople

in the Earlt

Eighth Century:

The

patustaseis

Syntomoi

Chronikai

(Leiden,

1984),

p.

184.

22

Epistula ad Iheodosium,

textrro.37 ir,'Ihtimmel,

Bild.erlehre

p.

301, ines

36 ff).

23

For the

discussion

of a text from

Theodore of

Studios to

this effect see

Gero. BI.

vo l . 2 . 116 .

o te1 7 .

24

Text no. 79

1 Thnrr,mel,

Bildertehre

p.374);

G. Nedungatt

/ J.M. Featherstone

(ed.s.),

he Council

in TflUo

Resited

(Fiome,

1995),p.

162, ine 20

-

p.

164,line5.

, 5

pc

99 ,380D.

26

For details

see Gero,

"Iconoclastic

Movement",

p.

103,note

50.

27

See above, note

7. I find Marie-France uzpy's attempt to dismiss the evtden-tial value

of the

whole dossier

of eighth-

artd ninth-century

texts

pertaining

to this key


15/20

338

srEpHEN

ERo

dence for the

cross as monumental

church

decoration

in the icono-

clastic

period:28

or instance

the extant

mosaic

cross in the

bema of

the church

of Hagia Eirene in

Constantinople,

which

should

be dated

after the earthquake of 740;2ehe original cross in Hagia Sophia in

Thessalonica,

still recognizable

behind

the

present

(eleventh-cen-

tury?) image

of the Virgin;30

he second,

"cruciform"

stage in

the apse

decoration in the

church

of the Dormition

in Nicaea.3r

Literary

evr-

dence

provides

welcome

confirmation

of this

point.

The

previously-

noted iconoclastic

version

of the Nilus

text sanctioning

a

single cross

as ecclesiastical

decoration

was

arguably regarded

as having

a

pre-

scriptive

force;32

hus according

to a recently-published,

previously

unknown

early

hagiographical

text

Constantine V

replaced

the rmage

of the Virgin in the apse of the Chalkoprateia church with a plain

cross.33 conophile polemic

admitted,

however

reluctantly,

that

the

iconoclasts

held the

sign of the

cross in respect,

though

with

the

qualification

that the

heretics

did not hesitate

to

destrov the

cross

eve[t

("La

destruction

de I'icne

du Chrisr

de la Chalc

par

Lon III:

propagande

ou

rali l? Byz

60

(

990)445

m

quitc

unconvincing.

28

See in

general

R. Cormack,

"The

Arts during the Age of Iconoclasm.. in A.

Bryer

/ J. Hejn, lconoclasra

(Birmingham,

197?),

pp.

35 ff.

29

See W.S.

George,The

Church

of Saiftt Eirene

at Constantinople

(London,

l9t2),

pp.

48

ff and

U.

Peschlow,

Die

fterzenkirche

n Istambul.

lIfttersuchunlen

zur

Architek-

f t i l

(Ti ibingen,

197'1).

.

22.

30

For detils

see M. K alliga,

Die Hagio

Sophia ton Thessalonike

Wrzburg,

1935),

pp.

59 ff;

R. Cormack,

"The

Apse

Mosaics of

S. Sophia at Thessaloniki,',

eX,tiov {q

Xprmrcvrxi

Apxoro),oltxg

Eroirg,

ser.4, vol. 10

(1980-81)

112

ff , esp. 117;

O.

Demus,

'Zur

Datierung

der Apsismosaiken

der Hagia

Sophi in Thessalonike,,,

n

O.

Feld

/ U. Peschlow,

Studien

zur

sptitantiken

und

byzantinischen


16/20

WI{AT WERE

THE HOLY

IMAGS OF

fiIE ICONOCLSTS?

339

when

it appeared

as cruciform

decoration

associated

in some

wavs

with icons.34

Does

the cross fall

specifically

into the

category

of sacred rmages,

according to the iconoclasts?Exceptionally, we should be in a favor-

able

situation to find

an answer,

since,

in addition

to a number

of

brief allusions,

several iconoclastic poems

in

praise

of the

cross are

extant;

these are in

part

accompanied

by rival verses

and

a

prose

commentary

from the pen

of Theodore

of

Studios.3s

The technical

questions

of the

occasion of composition,

dating and

authorship

of

these texts

must be left

aside now;

those

aspects

of the material

which are

here discussed

are equally

applicable

to the eighth

and

the

ninth century

situation. The

cross in

the iconoclastic poems

.is re-

garded both as what one would call today a purely religious symbol

and

as the

"political"

emblem

of Byzantine

imperial

victory

over the

enemy.36

In

this

period

the

triumph

of the cross

was in

particular,

though

not exclusively,

an

anti-Muslim

theme;

according

to several

Armenian

sources, tl-re

emperor Leo

III tumed

back the

tide

of the

Muslim besiegers

of Constantinople

by bearing

the cross

into

battle

as his victorious

standard).37

he

depiction

of the cross

is referred

to

either as

tr-lno f the

cross or as

dmo out court.

(The

terminology

of

rnoq s, as we

have seen,

also used

to describe

the eucharistic

image;

but no direct connection is made, in the iconoclastic poems or else-

where,

between the

image of

the cross and

the eucharist

per

se).38

According

to the iconoclastic poems

and kindred

texts,

the cross is

a holy object,

it can and

should

be

venerated.

The depiction

of the

3a

Nicephorus,

Adr.,ersus

cotamachos,

ed. J.B.

pitra,

Spicilegiurn

Solesmeftse, vol.

4

(Paris,

1858),

.280, l ires

5 f f .

3s

For

details see Gero, BI, vol.

1,

pp.

113

f.

36

See J. Moorhead,

"Iconoclasm,

the Cross

and the Imperial

Imge," Byz

55

(1985) 165 ff nd K.C. Inneme, "Some Notes on Icons and Relics," irr Byzantifte East,

Iatin West. Art-Histoical

Studes

in Honor of K rt

Weitzftann

(prirceton,

1995),

pp.

519 ff.

On the central role

of the cross in

imperil ceremodal

more

generally

see

Th]'l-mrrLel,Bildersteit,

pp.

182 ff.

37

BI. vol.

1,

pp.

37 tr,13111.

See now

also dte irteresting,

but, to my mind,

all too

speculative suggesrions

ofy'M. van

Esbroeck

on the subject

of

Io

III and the rme-

nians

("Le

discours du

Citlolicos Sahak

III en 691 et

quelques

documents

armniens

annexes

au

Quinisexte,"

in

Nedungatt / Fe

atherstote, Coutoil

in Trullo,

pp,

3Sj trL

38

Pace J.D. Breckenridge's

earlier

suggestion that

a tertium

comparationis could

be the

common cmciform

eucharistic

bread stamp

("The

Iconoclasts'

Image of

Chiist," Gesla

1l

(1973)

6);

see further Gero, BI, vol.

2,

p.

102, note

160 and

now K.

Parry,

Depicting the Word- Btzantiw lcohophilc Thought of the Eighth aid. Ninth Cen-

Irnes

(Leiden,

1996),

pp.

178 ff.


17/20

340

STEPHEN

GERO

cross is set in

conscious

opposition

to illegitimate

anthropomorphic

images;

t is asserted

hat

the depiction

of the

cross only

is sanctioned

by divine law.

The cross

in

question

is identified

with

its

prororype,

the True Cross, in a direcl and unsophisticated fashion; we should

worship

the

cross because

of the

One who was

crucified

upon it.

The

identity

of form

suffices; neither,

it was generally

agreed,

a consecra-

tion

nor the

provision

with

an inscription,

a

title, is regarded

as

nec-

essary.3e

n short,

the cross

is a sacred

and authentic

symbol, though

in no

text is it called

"icon

of Christ"

or suchlike.

To my

mind it

is

unlikely

that

the cross in

church

decoration

would

have been

ac-

cepted

by the iconoclasts

without

further

ado

as kind

of bstract

equivalent

to the image

of

Christ; admittedly

in

some

aniconic rural

churches, in Asia Minor, the cross in a medaillon is apparently em-

ployed

as a sort

of

primitive "shorthand"

for

Christ

and the

four

evangelists,

and

even for

Old Testament ptriarchs.ao

The representa-

tion of

the

plain

cross is

a holy symbol,

has

a numinous quality

ab-

sent from

the basically

neutral

zoomorphic

and floral

decoration,ar

but it

was not

regarded

as being

commensurable

with

the

eucharistic

icon, the

only true

image

of Christ.

39

Theodore

of

Studios, PC

99, 361A-D.

On this

point

see

further

S. Gero,

,.John

the Crammarian, the Last Iconoclastic patriarch of Constantinople,

The Man

and the

Legend,"

Bu(owrvrt,

Nordisk

tidsknft

fr

bysanrinologi

3-4

(t9ji-75)

27-8

ard

Thtm-

tr)el, Bildetstreit, p.

150.

.

40

See J. LafontaiDe-Dosogne,

Pour

une

problmatique

de la

peinture

d,glise

byzantine

l'poque

iconoclaste,"

DOP 4l

(1987)

329 ff and D.I.

pallas,

,,Une

note

sur

la

dcoration

de la chapelle

de Haghios

Basileios

de

Sinasos,,,Byz 48

(1978)

219 ff.

The decortion

of this last church

has

been most recently

dated

to the

second half

of

the ninth

century

(N,

Teteriatnikov,

"The

Frescoes

of the Chapel

of St. Basil

in

Cappadocia:

Their

Date and

Context Reconsi

dered.,"

Cahiers

atchotogiques

0

(lgg2\

99 ff): but

one, admittedly problematic,

inscription

accompanying

the triumphant

cross

does, according

to the

most likely

reading, reflect

iconoclastic

sentiments

(for

details see N. Thierry, "Mentalit et formulation iconoclastesen Atatolie," Joumal des

savants, 1976,

awil-juin,

p.

90).

See further

eadem,

,,Le

culte de la

croix dans

l,empire

byzantin du VIIe

sicle

au Xe dns

ses rapports

avec la

guerre

contre

l,infidle.

Nou-

veaux

tmoignages

archologiques,"

Rivkta

di

studi bizantini

e sla?i 1

(1981)

205

ff

and

"L'iconoclasme

en Cappadocie

d'aprs

les

sources

archologiques.

Origines

et

modalits,"

ii Rtyonfieme grec.

Homfiages

Charles

Delvoye

(Bn_rssels,

9g2),

pp.

389 ff.

4l

For

a cautious

evalution

of the

prima

facie

seductive hlpothesis

of the icono-

clastic

origin of Middle

Byzantine

aniconic

church

decoration

found in

CaDDaoocla

and several slands

(in

particular

Naxos)

see D.I.

pallas,

..Les

dcoration

anicniques

des glises

dans les

les de I'archipel,"

in

O. Feld /

U.

peschlow

(eds.)

Stud/en

zut

splantiken und

byTantinischen

tunst Friedich

wilhelm

Dechmann gewid.met,

pt,

2(Bonn, 1986), p. 171 f .


18/20

WHAT WER THE

HOLY IMAGES

OFTHE ICONOCLASTS?

341,

The

question

of the imperial

images, n the penumbra

between the

sacred

and the secular,

should of course

be also addressed.

Unfortu-

nately there

are no authenticated

contemporary

imperial

portraits

extant from the iconoclastic period, apart from those on coins. Now,

the legitimacy

of the veneration

of the imperial

image was

not called

into

question

by either

of the

parties

and

any disrespect

shown

ro rt

was

punished

severely.a2

he mtter was

nonetheless

charged

with

tension;

iconophile controversialists,

throwing

the charge

of idolatry

back in

the teeth of their

opponents,

compare

the iconoclastic

em-

perors,

Constantine

V in

particular,

to Nebuchadnezzar.a3

he assimi-

lation

to biblical

evildoers of this

stripe is carried

to n

extreme in

a

very

curious text,

the Apocalypse

of Leo of

Constantinople

where the

transgression of Constantine V is described as his setting up in the

palace

his

own image,

to be worshipped

as that

of an earthly

god,

alongside

those of Christ

and the Virginlaa

Now,

though the

evidence

on this

point

is scarce

and ambiguous,as

t is likely

that images

of the

iconoclastic

emperors

were installed

in churches,

though

hardly as

a

kind

of central

cult image, as

some iconophile

sources would

imply.

One

can think of mosaic

depictions

of an

offertory

procession

such

as

that

of Justinian and Theodora

in

San Vitale, or

the one of

Constan-

tine VI and Irene

in the church

of the Virgin

of Pege.a6

urther it

is

quite possible that the theme of the imperial triumph directly con-

nected with

the cross was

also depicted, perhaps

along the lines

of

images

of Constantine

the Great and Helena

with

the True Cross,

the

iconography

of which

can arguably

be traced back

to seventh-century

models.

Another

alternative

(for

which there is

in fact abundant

evi-

dence

from the minor

arts) is the plain

cross, with

a medaillon por-

trait of the emperor placed

at the intersection.a?

More

problematic,

to

a2

E.g. Nlcephorus,

Adversus conomachos,

ed. Pitra,

p.

275, lines 34-6,

a3So e. g. Nicephorus, Antiftheticus I,PG lOO,276C.

44

R. Maisano

(ed.),

L'apocalkse

apocifa di lzone

di Constaninopoli

(Naples,

1975),

.

72, ines 14-16;

.73,

ines4-6;

p.

77,

ines 14,15.

as

SeeGero,

BI,

vol.

2,

p.

11?.

a

The mosaic

is known only from

a description in

a later

(lOth-cent.?)

anonynrous

collection

of miracles

(De

sacrk aedibus

dcque miraculis Deiparae

ad Fontem

(BHG

1072),

preserved

n one mnuscript

(yatic.

gr.822);

texti Acta SanctotL|rl

Novembi'

tomus III

(Brussels,

1910),

p.

880, ine l0

ab imo ff).

a1

J. Der,

"Das

Kaiserbild im Kieuz.

Ein Beitrag zur

politischen

Theologie

des

frtiheren

Mittelalters,"

SchweizerBeitrtige

zur

AllEemeinenGeschichte

13

(1955)

48

ff,

esp.

pp.

65 ff. There is in particular a gold-leaf cross fTom Benevento with the coin

portrait

of Leo III extant

(p.

79 and

plte

IX,

6). See also Kl. Wessel, "Der

ntichrist


19/20

STEPHEN GERO

my mind, is the

assertion sometimes made in modern

scholarly lit-

erature,4s

hat

purely

secular scenes involving

the emperor, in

par-

ticular hippodrome races, were commissioned

for churches;

a well-

known text from the Vita Stephani Junlons, routinely adduced in this

context,ae nly attests the iconoclasts' preference

or

care for such rep-

resentations but does not necessarily

refer to ecclesiastical

ornament

proper.

Two late, twelfth-century

chronicles say

that Constantine V

substituted hippodrome and

hunting scenes for the

holy images in

churches,sobut this rests, I

think on the incorrect interpretation

of

the earlier material foom the Vita

Stephani- In any

case the imperial

portraits

by themselves did not

belong to the category

of consecrated

holy images.5'

As their formulation of the eucharistic image doctrine shows, the

iconoclasts had a very keen

sense of the radical

distinction between

the sacred and the

profane.

They had in

pafticular

precise

concep-

tion of churches

as

holy places,

and, as Nicephorus

reports,

they ar-

ticulated

the reason for this

sanctity in the following way:

churches

are holy

becauseof the sacrifices which

are

performed

there

(a

refer-

ence of course

to the eucharistic liturgy)

and,

perhaps

even more

significantly,

because of the

prayers

and invocations

pronounced

at

the time

of their foundation.s2t is

thus entirely appropriate

hat, for

instance, the inscriptions in the bema arch surrounding the monu-

mental

apse cross in Hagia

Eirene should

emphasize the

sanctity of

the house of

God so erected, using

biblical

quotations,

which

have a

clear

affinity to the liturgical

formulas for

the dedication of

churches.sl

m Kreuz.

Ein Beitrag zur Polemik Humberts

von Silva

Candida," in Eikon uncl Lo-

gos.

Beitrge

zur

Erforschung

by4antinischerK hurtrad.itionen,

vol. 2

(Halle,

1981),

p.

329.

The

combination of cross

ard imperial effigy is of

course standard in the nu,

mismalic iconography of this and the immediately preceding periods (see M. Restle,

Kunst

und byaantitlische Mnzpriigung

ron Justinian I.

bi-s

zum

Biaerstreit

(Athes,

1964),

p.

101 t) .

aB

In

particular

Grabar, L'iconoclasme,

p.

181.

Cf. Gero, BI, vol. 2,

pp.

I 11 ft

4e

PG 100, lll3A

=

ed. M.,Fr. Auzpy, I4

vte d'Etienne le Jeune

par

Etienne b

Dincre

Aldershot,

997),

.

l21, l ines 16 f .

s0

Constantine Manasses,

Compendium chronicum, PG 127,

383A; Michael Glycas,

Annales,PG 158,528CD.

eealsoGero,BI, vol.2,

p.

117.

sr

Thus it hardly occsions

surprise thaT the holos

of the iconoclastic council

of

754 does not

mention images

of the emperors.

52

PG 1o0,4'17c.

-'

See George,Srirt Eireae,

pp.

50 t.


20/20

WI{AT WERE

THE HOLY

IIVTAGESOF TIIE

ICONOChSTS?

343

The

central ritual

act of consecration

necessary

for

creating

the

holy

space of

the church is

also the hallmark

of the

one legitimate

and holy image

of Christ, the

eucharist. The

idea of

a consecration

acclmplished through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is also in the

background

of the

"ethical

theory

of

images",

the making

of living,

spiritual

images through

the emulation

of the virtues

of the saints.

A

formal consecration

is not

regarded

as being necessary

or

the cross,

since it is in

a way inherently

identical

with the

original;

of course

the

cross and

the eucharist

share the quality

of

being non-anthropomor-

phic,

non-idolatrous

material

sacred

objects, the

counterpoise

to the

unconsecrated,

counterfeit

images

of the iconophiles.5a

The

resulh of the

foregoing

survey can

be summed

up in the

fol-

lowing fashion. As the pendant to their rejection of what they per-

ceived

to be a demonically-inspired

and

-

for

church and

empire

-

utterly

harmful latter-day

upsurge

of idolatry in

the

guise

of the illicit

worship

of anthropomorphic

images,

the iconoclasts presented

the

consecrated eucharistic

element{ as constituting

the only true

and

venerable

image

of Christ. This-r)vas

urther

combined,

on

the one

hand,

with the

notion of the

exclusively

spiritual and

ethical

"iconic"

imitation

of the virtues

of the

saints, and,

on the other

hand, with

the

unassailable

cult ofthe plain

cross,

which was

not only the

symbol

of

the Savior par excellence,but also of the divine sanction for the per-

son and

deeds of the

triumphant

orthodox Christian

emperor

-

an

ideological

construct, which,

in its

sincere concern

for correc

wor-

ship, in

its rigid,

yet

shrewdly selective

raditionalism,

and even

in its

unresolved

contradictions,

is typically

and

profoundly

Byzantine.

Orientalisches Seminar

Eberhard-Karls-Universitt

Tbinsen

Mnzgasse

30

D-72070 Tbingen, Germany

Stephen

Gero

54

In

this context it should

be

recalled

that the ritual

consecration

of icons was in-

troduced at a much

later

period;

for

details see J.G. Passarelli, "Sulla preghiera

di

benedizione delle iconi,"

in Collectanea tzantina

(OCA,

vol. 204,

Rome, 1977),

pp.

239

ff. For

some

"popular"

accourts,

presewed

only in S)riac

and Arabic, but

ultimately

of Byzantine

iconoclastic

proverience,

which

are directed against

the alleged

antiq-

uity and wonder-working powers

of irdividual images

see S. cero,

"The

Resurgence

of

Byzantine

Iconoclasm

in the Ninth

Century, according

to a Syriac Source,"

Speca-

lum

5l

(1976)

2-3 ad

p.

4,

note 3l; cf. Sydney

H. criffith,

"Eutychius

of Alexandria

o the Emperor Theophilus

and Iconoclasm in Byzantium: A Tenth-Century Moment

in Christian Apologetics

in Arabic,"

Byz 52

(1982)

154

tr.

Documents

GERO, Holy Images