Iconoclasm - Flood Encyclopaedia of Islam 3 (original) (raw)
Related papers
(2017): "The First Iconoclasm in Islam: A New History of the Edict of Yazīd II (AH 104/AD 723"
Der Islam, 2017
This article offers a revised history of the iconoclastic edict of the Umayyad caliph Yazīd II, which was promulgated in 104/723. This edict is often interpreted as a precursor of Byzantine iconoclasm and as a forerunner of the Islamic doctrine of images. Yet this focus on later developments has obscured the law's original purpose and meaning. This essay attempts to examine the issue anew by analyzing the written and archaeological evidence for the edict. In addition to presenting new sources and a revised dating, it situates Yazīd's actions in the context of early dhimmī legislation; apocalyptic anxieties at the Umayyad court; concerns about social mixing between Muslims and Christians; the caliph's sphere of activity in Transjordan; the emergence of a prohibition on images in Islamic thought; and the practice of Muslim prayer in churches.
An essay analyzing the destructive actions orchestrated by the Islamic State (IS) toward historical artefacts and sites. These actions are coined iconoclasm or heritage destruction and are argued by authors Benjamin Isakhan and José Antonio González Zarandon to have ideological implications. The main claim within their essay is that it is both political and religious ideologies associated with IS' acts of iconoclasm that must be understood when analyzing violence perpetrated by the group (Isakhan). This is in opposition of what the authors claim to be mainstream media categorizing these actions as irrational barbarism. The authors use this essay as a platform of explicating the two main categories of political and religious layers of IS' iconoclasm, these categories being Symbolic Sectarianism and Pre-Monotheistic Iconoclasm. The latter refers to attacks against pagan religious culture; for instance, Greco-Roman artefacts found in IS occupied territory. While the former refers to the destruction of sites with significance to sects in Islam that do not subscribe to IS' strict religious parameters within the Wahhabi and Sallahi Islamic traditions. These actions, argued by the authors, are the means by which IS attempts to achieve the ends of a homogenous Islamic state (Isakhan).
Iconoclasm – A Geographical Viewpoint
European Review
Iconoclasm mainly concerns the destruction of icons, based on the Commandment of the Bible ‘Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image…’ (Exodus 20:4). Iconoclasm can be presented in two different ways. One is that of an ‘inside aspect’, taking place within a given religious system. The other is an ‘outside aspect’, through which a religious system destroys the religious symbols of another religion. Dealing mainly with the ‘outside aspect’, one may find many religious sites which were destroyed or had their functions changed while these were occupied by another religious group. The holy city of Jerusalem, which lived under different religious regimes, can present this phenomenon, as each regime changed the landscape of the city according to its own perspective.
(2021) "Images and Iconoclasm in Islam, ca. 600-850"
A Companion to Byzantine Iconoclasm, 2021
PROOFS of an essay on early Muslim attitudes towards figural art as well as incidences of iconoclasm. Explores evidence from the Quran, numismatics, Umayyad religious architecture, the iconoclastic edict of Yazid II, iconoclastic mosaics from Palestine, and other topics. A Companion to Byzantine Iconoclasm, Mike Humphreys, ed., Leiden: Brill, 2021, 497-537 https://brill.com/view/title/34427
Scholars have offered a number of explanations for the emergence of Byzantine iconoclasm, including medieval class struggle, reaction to the excessive use of figural art in the church, and administrative responses to the martial victories of the Arab forces under the direction of the Rashidun and Umayyad caliphs. One of the more controversial theories concerning the origin of Byzantine iconoclasm suggests that early Islam inoculated Byzantium with aniconic sentiment by forcing Byzantine Christians to consider the association of iconolatry with idolatry. The origins of Byzantine iconoclasm nevertheless remain obscure, and, as Peter Brown observed (1973), “the Iconoclast controversy is in the grip of a crisis of over-explanation.” In contrast, the aniconism of Islam during its formative stages remains an almost uncontested fact, and closer scrutiny of the phenomenon is lacking in the scholarly literature on the subject. Despite the early report of Muḥammad cleansing the Kaʿbah of idols, however, figurative representation appears in descriptions of mosques (Wāsiṭ), in the capitals forming the miḥrāb of the Al-Aqsa Mosque, and other sacred structures dating from the pre-Marwanid period. This paper will revisit the issue of figural representation in Byzantine Christianity and early Islam, but from a different angle, by focusing on caliphate-imperial relations (ca. 692-723) as a catalyst for both Byzantine iconoclasm and Islamic aniconism. My contention is that, beginning with Justinian II’s institution of gold solidi bearing the bust of Christ, a series of tit-for-tat exchanges occurred between Byzantine emperors and Umayyad caliphs that culminated in a “contest of images” which discouraged figurative representation in religious settings. In time, the Edict of Yazīd (722/723) and Council of Hieria (754) attempted to ratify the state-sponsored aniconism of the Marwanid caliphs and iconoclasm of the Byzantine emperors, respectively. Thus, the aniconic monuments of the Marwanid era, such as the Dome of the Rock (692/698?) and Great Mosque of Damascus (712) can be compared with the iconoclastic program of Leo III and Constantine V (e.g., the aniconic miliaresion coin struck in 720, et al). Relying on data gathered from Umayyad and Byzantine numismatics, Arabic papyrology, pre-Marwanid mosaics and sacred architecture, imperial correspondence, ḥadīth studies, and other documentary evidence, this paper seeks to demonstrate that official attitudes of the period (ca. 692-723) toward figurative representation firmly served as instruments of imperial politics. While shedding light on their origins, this paper will also attempt to establish a connection between Byzantine iconoclasm and the aniconism of early Islam.
This course aims to consider the historical phenomenon of image destruction, using several instances of iconoclasm as case studies. The course will address the destruction of images and art in three distinct modes: audiences or groups attacking art; artists attacking art; and art that uses destruction to tell new stories. Students will explore instances of religious, political, philosophical, and artistic image destruction. The first two-thirds of the course will investigate the historical period of Byzantine Iconoclasm in the Mediterranean from the seventh to ninth centuries, when images were systematically destroyed after official imperial policy in two phases. Students will study the motivations, attitudes, and documentation of this period, as well as the effects upon art itself-particularly changes in iconography, style, and reception. The final third of the course will consider the ways that the Byzantine phenomenon intersects with other historical instances of image destruction, including Medieval Islamic attitudes to images; Buddhist ritual dissolution ceremonies of art and architecture; Protestant image destruction in Early Modern Europe; political image destruction of the French Revolution; and artistic interventions of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. Ultimately, this course will help students define the power that art has had, and continues to have, on varying individuals and groups. Writing assignments will encourage students to consider historically specific instances of image destruction or modification and develop their writing skills as arts professionals.