Byzantium in the Iconoclast Era, c.680–850: A History, by Leslie Brubaker and John Haldon

Abstract

Although the title refers to the period between 680 and 850 as the ‘Iconoclast era’, the main aim of this book is to demonstrate that previous scholarship has exaggerated the importance of the controversy about religious images. The authors argue, firstly, that Iconoclasm was only one aspect in a much broader process of transformation, and secondly, that Iconoclasm itself was less significant than Iconophile sources would have us believe. The book is clearly intended to be a comprehensive treatment of the period. Owing to the specialisations of the two authors, the focus is on art history and on social, economic and administrative history, whereas literature is barely mentioned. Chapter One describes the changes that Byzantium experienced in the seventh century in order to provide a framework for the later developments. Here the authors first discuss broader social and economic trends before homing in on the cult of saints, their relics and their images. This section begins with the statement that ‘the structure of iconoclasm depends on belief in two inter-related concepts, hierarchy and intercession’, and then shows how these concepts developed between the fourth and the seventh centuries. This overview gives the impression that the cult of saints was universally accepted. The authors make no reference to the sixth-century treatise De statu animarum post mortem, whose author, Eustratius, was confronted with adversaries who claimed that the souls of the saints are inactive after death and can therefore neither appear to the living nor intercede for them with God. This oversight is all the more striking as this text has been analysed in detail by Jean Gouillard in his article ‘Léthargie des âmes’. If opposition to the cult of saints existed in the previous centuries, one will need to ask whether it was not also found during Iconoclasm. When the authors speak about ‘the structure of iconoclasm’ they evidently refer to the decisions of the Council of Hieria, which affirmed the belief in saints and their intercession. However, in later Iconophile sources Constantine V is credited with having rejected the cult of saints. The authors dismiss such claims, with the argument that the emperor would not have gone against the decisions of his own council. However, one can ask whether such a cavalier treatment of a substantial corpus of texts can be justified—in particular since Gouillard could show that a similar controversy erupted in the eleventh century, with arguments that are strikingly similar to the alleged views of Constantine.