Islam, Iconoclasm, And the Declaration of Doctrine by g. r. d. King

Embed Doc
Copy Link
Readcast
Collections

CommentGo Back

Download

Islam, Iconoclasm, and the Declaration of DoctrineAuthor(s): G. R. D. KingSource:

Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London,

Vol. 48,No. 2 (1985), pp. 267-277Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of School of Oriental and African StudiesStable URL:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/617544

Accessed: 22/06/2009 06:03

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unlessyou have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup.Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with thescholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform thatpromotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

School of Oriental and African Studies

and

Cambridge University Press

are collaborating with JSTOR todigitize, preserve and extend access to

Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London.

http://www.jstor.org

ISLAM,ICONOCLASM,ANDTHEDECLARATIONOFDOCTRINE

By

G. R.D.

KING

Theattitude of theearlyIslamic statetowardsfigurativerepresentationsisoftencited as a sourcecontributingto the establishmentofofficially-supportediconoclasmwithin theByzantine Empirein A.D.726.1Islamhasgenerallyadoptedapositionopposedto therepresentationalin secularart,andtheexclusion of allfigurativemotifs fromIslamicreligiousartis clear fromthefirst,yetthisattitudeisnotnecessarilytoberegardedasintrinsicallyicono-clastic in the truesense of theword; indeed,outside Arabiaitself,theonlyevidence oficonoclasm until thefallof theUmayyad Caliphatein132/750isconfined to the well-knownattackonimagesand statuescarried out ontheordersof Yazid II.b.'Abdal-Malik(101-105/720-724).Thismuchdiscussedoutbreak oficonoclasmiswell documentedbyIslamic and Christiansources,2buttheveryfact thatitissospecificallyassociatedwithYazid'sCaliphatesuggeststhatitwasconsideredunusual at the time.AlthoughChristiansourcescarefullyrecordthe difficulties of their communitiesunder theUmayyads,theabsenceofreferences toimage-breakingunderCaliphsbefore Yazidimpliesthathisaction wasararityworthyof comment: under normalcircumstances,itwouldseemthe Muslims left the Christians to use iconsandrepresentationsornot,astheywished.Theconnexion betweenIslamandByzantineiconoclasm,andspecificallybetweenYazid and LeoIII,theinstigatorofimperialiconoclasm,wasallegedveryearlyon in theByzantinesources.Duringthe Second Council of NicaeainA.D.787,assembledtocondemniconoclasmand tosupportthenewlyre-estab-lished iconodule rule in theEmpire,itwas stated that Leo IIIhad introducediconoclast doctrine intoByzantineterritoryinimitationof Yazid II'sactionsinside theCaliphate.3Thechargewasrepeatedby Theophanesin theearlyninthcentury4andbythe Patriarch ofConstantinople, Nicephorus

1In anextensivebibliographyonIconoclasmthefollowingtouchparticularlyon theIslamicattitudetoimages:H.Lammens,'L'attitude del'Islamprimitifen face desartsfigures',JournalAsiatique,IImeserie, vI,1915,239-79.T.W.Arnold,Paintingin Islam(NewYork,1965),1-40. G.Ostrogorsky,'Lesdebutsdelaquerelledesimages',MelangesCharlesDiehl(Paris,1930)I,235-55. G.Mar9ais,'Laquestiondesimagesdansl'art musulman',Byzantion,vii,1932,161-83. K. A.C.Creswell,'The lawfulness ofpaintinginearlyIslam',ArsIslamica,xi-xII, 1946,159-66.Idem,EarlyMuslimarchitecture,2nded.Oxford,1969),I/i,409-14. BishrFares,'PhilosophieetjurisprudenceillustreesparlesArabes. LaquerelledesimagesenIslam',Me'langesLouisMassignon (Damascus, 1957),

II,

77-109. A. A.Vasiliev,'TheIconoclastic edictoftheCaliphYazidII,A.D. 721',Dumbarton OaksPapers (hereafterDOP),9, 10,1956,25-47.A.Grabar,L'iconoclasmebyzantine(Paris,1957).R.Paret,'Textbelegezumislamischen Bilder-verbot',DasWerkdesKinstlers.StudienzurIkonographieundFormgeschichteHubert Schradezum60.GeburtstagStuttgart,1960,36-48.G.E. vonGrunebaum,'Byzantineiconoclasm andtheinfluenceofthe Islamicenvironment',Historyofreligions[Chicago]

II,

1,1962,1-10(reprintedforprivatecirculation,UniversityofChicago).O.Grabar,'Islamic art andByzantium', DOP,18,1964,69-88.Idem,TheformationofIslamicart,New Haven andLondon,1973),75-103.Idem,'Islam andIconoclasm',Iconoclasm :Papersgivenat the ninthSpringSymposiumofByzantineStudies,UniversityofBirmingham,March1975,ed.A.BryerandJ.Herrin(Birming-ham,1977),45-52(hereafterIconoclasm).S.Gero,'Notes onByzantineIconoclasm in theeighthcentury', Byzantion,

XLIV,

1974,23-42. L.W.Barnard,TheGraeco-Romanand OrientalbackgroundftheIconoclasticcontroversyLeiden,1974)10-33. P.Crone,'Islam,Judeo-Christian-ityandByzantineIconoclasm'JerusalemStudiesinArabicandIslam,1980,

II,

59-95.

2

Vasiliev,loc.cit.A.Grabar,op.cit.,93-112.

3

J. D.Mansi,SacrorumConciliorumNova,etAmplissimaCollectio(Florence,1757),xii,cols.197,200[Greek];198-99[Latin].4Theophanes, Chronographia,ed.C.deBoor(Leipzig, 1883)

I,

401-2.

(d.

A.D.

828).5Vasilievevensuggests

6

that theindividualwhopersuadedYazid toadopticonoclasm was the samepersonwhoappearedshortlyafter-wards in theEmpireadvisingLeoto move inthe samedirection. Itispossiblethat theIconoclastpartywithinByzantine territorywasencouragedtoimitateYazid'sactivities,but intermsofdoctrineandiconography,iconoclasm haddeeperroots withinChristianityitself.It did not need Islam to invent Christianoppositiontoimages;theextensive useoficons in the Christianworld wassufficienttostimulate aprofoundobjectionto themamongthose Christianswho feltthatalien,pagan-likepracticeshad intruded into theirreligion.As tochargesmade within theChristianworld that iconoclasm wasthe creation of theMuslimsor thatLeoIIIand hissupporterswere'Saracen-minded,these weremoreinthe nature ofinsults thanprecisereferencesto atheological position.Epithetscastat oneanotherbydisputingChristians donotnecessarilysignifyadeepunderstandingofIslamic attitudesinaperiodwhenByzantine knowledgeofIslamwaslimited.TheMuslims themselvesgaveonlyoccasional indicationsof serious concernwiththeprincipleofChristianworshipthroughicons in theUmayyad period;apartfrom Yazid'scurious and short-livedattack,the Muslims seemsimplynottohavecaredgreatlyabout the matter.Theytook an interestinthecontentofChristianrepresentationsfromtime totime,when thesubject-matteroffendedorcontradictedIslamicbeliefs. But itwasthe issue ofdoctrine,itsstatementandcounter-statement,that was of fargreaterinteresttothe Islamicworld,whether indisputingChristianpracticesorexpoundingthebeliefs of theMuslims. The matter ofrepresentationsof God hadalreadybeen settledinIslam inthe lifetimeoftheProphet:the inconceivablewasbeyond encompas-singbyanyartisticrepertoire;andmeanwhileidolatrywassuppressedandthepre-Islamicreligious imageswere overthrown insideArabia itself. Thepaganidols ofMekkaweredestroyed bytheMuslims in8/630,andalthoughtheProphet mayhavesparedapictureofMaryand Jesusin theKa'ba,henever-thelessdestroyedthe restofthe numerousimageswhich it hadhoused beforehisentryto Mekka. Thegreatnumberof idolsinthehousesoftheQurayshwere likewiseremoved,while missions weresenttodestroyotherpaganidolselsewhere inArabia.Somesitesassociated withtheJahiliyyaseem to havebeenavoidedever after.7However,withpaganismandidolatry suppressed,theMuslimsdo notappeartohave extended theirdestructionofimagesthereaftertotheChristian communitiestheyencountered;theymaywellhavedisap-provedofthewidespreaduseoficons inworshipbymanyin the NearEast,buttheyseem to have leftthese Christians topursuetheirowncustoms.Thesilenceofthe Christian andIslamicsourcessuggeststhatnolong-sustainedandtotalrepressionof Christianimagesevertookplacein theearlyIslamicperiodto matchin effectivenessthesuppressionofpaganidols inArabia carriedoutby

5Nicephorus,'Antirrheticus tertius Adv. ConstantinumCopr.', PatrologiaeGraecae,c,cols.528,529,532,533[Greek];cols.527,530, 531,534[Latin].

6

Vasiliev,loc.cit.,p.28,n.12;p.30.

7

F. V.Winnettand W.L.Reed,AncientrecordsromNorthArabia,(Toronto,1970),34.Forstudiesofpre-Islamic idolatryand thereligiousenvironment at thetime of theProphet,see H.Lammens,'Les sanctuairespreislamitesdansl'Arabieoccidentale',Melangesde laFaculteOrientale,UniversiteSaint-Joseph(1926)xi,fasc.2, 39-173; idem,L'Arabieoccidentaleavantl'Hegire(Beirut,1928);TouficFahd,Le Pantheondel'Arabie centraledlaveilledel'Hegire(Paris1968).Fahd(249 ff.) suggeststhatArabianpre-Islamic religionhadbeenheavilyinfluencedbytheHellenistic traditionofrepresentingdeitiesofvarioustypesinpaintingandsculpture,atendencywhich hadgreatlyincreasedpriorto Islam.Thevarious statuettesandwall-paintingsexcavated at al-Faw in south-west SaudiArabiasubstantiatethispoint,at leastas farasstressingthedegreeofHellenisticinfluenceonpre-IslamicArabian art(seeA.R.al-Ansary,Qaryatal-Fau(Riyad,1981)).

268

G. R.D.KING

of 00

Leave a Comment