Professional Documents
Culture Documents
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
Brill is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Church History and
Religious Culture
Jan N. Bremmer
Abstract
This article aims to contribute to a better understanding of the genealogy of the te
'iconoclast(ic)' and 'iconoclasm.' After some observations on the beginning of early Christian a
that stress the necessity of abandoning a monolithic view of Jewish, Christian, and Islamic a
regarding their iconic/aniconic aspects, it is noted that 'iconoclast' is mentioned first just be
the start of the iconoclastic struggle and always remained rare in Byzantium. It became know
in the West by Anastasius's Latin translation of Theophanes' Chronographia Tripartita. Fr
there it was probably picked up by Thomas Netter, whose Doctrinale against Wycliffe and
followers proved to be very influential in the early times of the Reformation when images w
focus of intense debate between Catholics and Protestants. Thus the term gradually gained
popularity and also gave rise to 'iconoclasm' and 'iconoclastic.' The present popularity of
term has promoted the grouping together of events that probably should not be conside
together. It has also made scholars focus on Protestant vandalism during the Reformation pe
rather than on the much greater damage to medieval art caused by the Catholic Baro
period.
Keywords
Iconoclasm, iconoclast(ic), iconoclastic period, early Christian art, Reformation and art, Baroque
1 The literature on the subject is immense and I limit myself to the more recent studies:
D. Freedberg, Iconoclasts and their motives (Maarssen, 1985); A. Demandt, Vandalismus: Gewalt
gegen Kultur (Berlin, 1997); D. Gamboni, The Destruction of Art (London, 1997); see also
Gamboni, 'Preservation and destruction, oblivion and memory,' in Negating the Image, ed.
A. McClanan and J. Johnson (Aldershot, 2005), pp. 163-74.
2 N. Schnitzler, Ikonoklasmus—Bildersturm. Theologischer Bilderstreit und ikonoklastisches
Handeln währenddes 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts (Munich, 1996), p. 21.
the aim of this paper to make a small contribution to that answer, even if it is
limited to 'iconoclast,' 'iconoclastic,' and 'iconoclasm'; in addition, I would
also like to make a few observations as to how these terms may have influenced
our views of certain periods and events.
Naturally, one would expect the terms 'iconoclasm' and 'iconoclast' to
appear first at the time of the famous iconoclastic struggle in Byzantium, as is
said for example by Gamboni, who notes that the term 'iconoclast' was "used
first in Greek in connection with the Byzantine 'Quarrel of the Images,' "3 but
this is only partially true. Before we demonstrate this, it might be useful to
start with a few observations on the pre-history of the terms and the Byzantine
events, as more recent studies enable us to paint a more exact and nuanced
picture than was previously possible.4
Let us start with a very simple question, albeit one that I do not find asked
in the recent literature. Why did the Christians call the image an 'icon'? The
term may seem an obvious one for an outsider, but the ancient Greeks had a
very varied vocabulary for images and statues, such as agalma, andrias, bretas,
eidolon, eikôn, hedos, hidruma, kolossos, and xoanon) Of these terms, bretas-was
traditionally used only in poetry, xoanon referred to the wood of which a statue
was made, and andrias, hedos, and kolossos referred to particular kinds of stat
ues. That is probably why only three terms remained current in the vocabulary
of the early Christians: eidolon, agalma, and eikôn. The first one, which has
given us the term 'idolatry' via early Christianity, carried the overtone of
phantom,' 'unreal,' and its use was preferred to indicate the fact that the pagan
gods were nothing more than human imaginations and phantasies.6 Agalma
was mostly used by the Greeks and Romans for the statues of their own gods,
whereas eikôn was mainly employed for statues and images of mortals, from
the living emperor to a local official.7 Eikôn, then, was the least offensive and,
I suggest, therefore preferred by the Christians to indicate paintings, reliefs,
and statues; it also had the advantage that it suggested a greater distance to the
original and thus could be better used to indicate the "image of God," as in the
story of the Creation where God created man "according to our eikôn and like
ness" (Genesis 1,26).8
It is well known that the early Christians were opposed to the cult of images.9
Yet the degree and the location of this opposition are much harder to pinpoint
than is often realised, and a satisfactory synthesis of the archaeological evi
dence and the literary tradition has not yet been achieved.10 Four points merit
particular attention. First, we should avoid the simplistic distinction between
the rational intellectuals on the one side and the credulous statue-venerating
people on the other.11 Second, our early literary evidence derives from Chris
tian apologists who naturally railed against the images and their veneration, as
pagan 'idols' still were important and may have exerted a pull on some Chris
tians, even though contemporary pagan authors carefully distinguish between
6 J.C.M. van Winden, 'Idolum and Idololatria in Tertullian,' Vigiliae Christianae 36 (1982),
108-14; S. Saïd, 'Deux noms de l'image en grec ancien: idole et icône,' Comptes Rendus des
Séances de l'Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 1987, pp. 309-30, there pp. 311-19.
7 The difference between agalma and eikôn, which is not always clear, was established by
L. Robert, Opera Minora Selecta: épigraphie et antiquités grecques, 7 vols. (Amsterdam, 1968-90),
2: 832-40; see also S. Price, Rituals and Power (Cambridge, 1984), pp. 176-9; K. Koonce,
"AyâApa and ebccöv,' The American Journal ofPhilology 109 (1988), 108-10. For eikôn, see Said,
'Deux noms de l'image' (see above, n. 6), 319-30.
8 Still useful on the image of God: G. Ladner, "The concept of the image in the Greek Fathers
and the Byzantine Iconoclastic Controversy,' Dumbarton Oaks Papers 7 (1953), 3-34.
' For an excellent survey of the literature see H. Feld, Der Ikonoklasmus des Westens (Leiden,
1990), pp. 2-6; add J. Kollwitz, 'Zur Frühgeschichte der Bilderverehrung,' in W. Schöne et al.,
Das Gottesbild im Abendland (Witten and Berlin, 1957), pp. 57-76.
10 For the first two centuries, a good start is Ch. Murray, 'Art and the Early Church,' Journal
of Theological Studies, NS 28 (1977), 215-57 and idem, Rebirth and Afterlife. A study of the trans
mutation of some pagan imagery in early Christian funerary art (Oxford, 1981); P.C. Finney, The
Invisible God: the earliest Christians on art (Oxford, 1994), to be read with the reviews by
W. Wischmeyer, International Journal of the Classical Tradition 3 (1997), 339-48; L. Rutgers,
Jahrbuch fur Antike und Christentum 40 (1997), 245-9; and N. Zeegers, Revue d'Histoire Ecclési
astique 93 (1998), 481-6. Without notes but very balanced, L. Rutgers, Subterranean Rome. In
Search of the Roots of Christianity in the Catacombs of the Eternal City (Louvain, 2000), pp. 82-117.
" See now the convincing refutation of this influential thesis ofTh. Klauser (1894-1984), by
Finney, The Invisible God (see above, n. 10), pp. 9-10.
the gods and their images.12 Third, the Christians lived in a world full of
images from which it would have been very hard to extract themselves; and
indeed, figurative art by Christians is already attested around 200, when in
Carthage the glass chalice of the Eucharist was ornamented with a picture of
God/Christ as the Good Shepherd.13 Fourth and finally, Jas Eisner has recently
warned against the use/validity of the expressions "Jewish art" and "Christian
art."14 Rightly so, as the first period of "Christian art" consisted of the selection
of certain pagan themes; Christian art proper only gradually arises after the
conversion of the Roman Empire.15 It is not surprising, then, that both literary
and material evidence indicate that many early Christians did not object to
representational and figurative art: it is only God Himself who was apparently
never represented.
What we have to discard, therefore, is the monolithic picture of an icono
phobic Christianity that gradually became replaced by an iconophilic Church.
There were various ideas and practices in circulation, as we can also note
among the Jews, where we find this combination of dogmatic rejection and
practical acceptance of figurative art too, but with a different limit to the rep
resentation: the Jews not only did not represent Yahweh but they also did not
illuminate theTorah,16 whereas Biblical manuscripts became illuminated from
the beginning of the fifth century onwards.17 The Jews were not unique in this
respect in the ancient world. Among the Nabataeans we can also find both the
aniconic and the iconic tradition;18 in fact, even in Mecca there is clear proof
of representations in the Kaaba before Muhamed.19 It is important to note this
variety of views, as even Hans Belting in his latest book rather simplistically
speaks of the "Glaubenswelt der Juden und Araber mit ihrer an-ikonischen
Kultur."20
Kabul: Afghan and Islamic Studies Presented to Ralph Pinder-Wilson, ed. W. Ball (Melisende,
2002), pp. 144-50. For the Islamic 'Bilderverbot' see R. Paret, Schriften zum Islam (Stuttgart,
1981), pp. 213-69; D. van Reenen, 'The Bilderverbot, a new survey,' Der Islam 67 (1990), 27-77.
20 H. Belting, Das echte Bild (Munich, 2005), p. 145.
21 On Constantine's conversion see now Bremmer, 'The Vision of Constantine,' in Land of
Dreams. Festschrift Ton Kessels, ed. A. Lardinois and M. van de Poel (Leiden, 2006), pp. 57-79
(with extensive bibliography).
22 For recent surveys see G. Snyder, Ante pacem: archaeological evidence of church life before
Constantine (Macon, 1985); L.M. White, The Social Origins of Christian Architecture, 2 vols.
(Valley Forge, PA, 1997), 2: 121-258.
23 R. Grigg, 'Constantine the Great and the Cult without Images,' Viator 8 (1977), 1-32;
N. Mclynn, 'The Transformation of Imperial Churchgoing in the Fourth Century,' m Approach
ing Late Antiquity, ed. S. Swain and M. Edwards (Oxford, 2004), pp. 253-70.
24 Note that during the Iconoclastic Controversy the Iconophiles assocated the Arians with
the Iconoclasts: D. Gwynn, 'From Iconoclasm to Arianism; The Construction of Christian Tra
dition in the Iconoclast Controversy,' Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 47 (2007), 225-51.
This has been overlooked by M. Wiles, Archetypal Heresy: Arianism through the Centuries (Oxford,
1996), p. 53. Add also to his literature about the Cathars (ibidem): G. Rottenwöhrer, Der
Katharismus, 4 vols. (Bad Honnef, 1982-93), 3: 440-51 and, with a new etymology of'Cathars,'
Bremmer, The Rise and Fall of the Afterlife (New York and London, 2002), p. 68.
25 S. Gero, 'The True Image of Christ: Eusebius' Letter to Constantia Reconsidered,' Journal
of Theological Studies, NS 32 (1981), 460-70; H.G. Thiimmel, 'Eusebios' Brief an Kaiserin
Konstantia,' Klio 86 (1984), 210-22. For the text see now Thiimmel, Frühgeschichte (see above,
n. 4), pp. 282-4; A. von Stockhausen, 'Einige Anmerkungen zur Epistula ad Constantiam des
Euseb von Cäsarea,' in T. Krannich et al., Die ikonoklastische Synode von Hiereia 754 (Tübingen,
2002), pp. 92-112 (with translation).
26 J. Herrin, 'Women and the Faith in Icons in Early Christianity,' in Culture, Ideology and
Politics, ed. R. Samuel and G. Stedman Jones (London, 1982), pp. 56-83; A.-M. Talbot and
A. Kazhdan, 'Women and Iconoclasm,' Byzantinische Zeitschrift 84/85 (1991/1992), 391-408,
reprinted in A.-M. Talbot, Women and Religious Life in Byzantium (Aldershot, 2001), Ch. III;
P. Hatlie, 'Women of Discipline During the Second Iconoclast Age,' Byzantinische Zeitschrift 89
(1996), 37-44; R. Cormack, 'Women and Icons, and Women in Icons,' in Women, Men and
Eunuchs, ed. L. James (London and New York, 1997), pp. 24-51.
27 See his 'Letter to John of Jerusalem' in PG 43.390; cf. the still important study of K. Holl,
Gesammelte Aufiätze zur Kirchengeschichte, 3 vols. (Tübingen, 1928-32), 2: 351-87 (1st ed.
1916); H.G. Thümmel, 'Die bilderfeindlichen Schriften des Ephiphanios von Salamis,' Byzanti
noslavicadl (1986), 169-88; P. Marival, 'Epiphane, "docteur des iconoclastes",' in Nicée II, 787
1987, ed. F. Boespflug and N. Lossky (Paris, 1987), pp. 31-62; R Speck, 'Die Bilderschriften
angeblich des Epiphanios von Salamis,' in Varia II = Poikila Byzantina 6, ed. A. Berger et al.
(Bonn, 1987), pp. 312-5.
28 T.F. Mathews, "The Emperor and the Icon,' Acta ad Archaeologiam et Artium Historiam
Pertinentia 15 (N.S. 1) (2001), 163-78, to be read with the critique by S. Sande, 'Pagan Pinakes
and Christian Icons. Continuity or Parallelism?,' Acta ad Archaeologiam et Artium Historiam
Pertinentia 18 (N.S. 4) (2004), 81-100; T.F. Matthews, The Clash of Gods, 2nd ed. (Princeton,
1999), pp. 177-90, to be read with the review of J. Deckers, Byzantinische Zeitschrift Id (2001),
736-41, and Matthews's more balanced 'Early Icons of the Holy Monastery of Saint Catharine
at Sinai,' in Holy Image, Hallowed Ground: Icons from Sinai, ed. R. Nelson and K. Collins (Los
Angeles, 2006), pp. 39-55.
29 J.N. Bremmer, "The Apocryphal Acts: Authors, Place, Time and Readership,' in The Apoc
ryphal Acts of Thomas, ed. J.N. Bremmer (Louvain, 2001), pp. 149-70, there p. 153 (date) and
p. 158 (place).
30 Irenaeus, Adversus haereses 1.23.4, 1.25.6, used by Epiphanius, Adv. haer. 27.6; the worship
of Simon's portrait is also mentioned by Eusebius in his letter to Constantia (see above, n. 25);
S. Settis, 'Severo Alessandro e i suoi Lari (S.H.A., S.A., 29, 2-3),' Athenaeum 50 (1972), 237-51;
J.D. Breckenridge, 'Apocrypha of Early Christian Portraiture,' Byzantinische Zeitschrift 67 (1974),
101-9.
31 Augustine, De haer. 7.
32 Cicero, De finihus 5.1.3, cf. B. Frischer, I he Sculpted Word (Berkeley, Los Angeles and
London, 1982), pp. 81-96.
33 Manichaeans: Eusebius's letter to Constantia (see above, n. 25). Mani: H.-J. Klimkeit,
Manichaean Art and Calligraphy (Leiden, 1982), pp. 15-20; S. Lieu, Manichaeism in the Later
Roman Empire and Medieval Cina, 2nd ed. (Tübingen, 1992), pp. 175-7, 276; M. Heuser and
H.-J. Klimkeit, Studies in Manichean Literature and Art (Leiden, 1998), pp. 271-5; C. Mark
schies, 'Gnostische und andere Bilderbücher in der Antike,' Zeitschrift fur Antikes Christentum 9
(2005), 100-21, there 117-20; W. Sundermann, 'Was the Ärdhang Mani's Picture-Book?,' in II
Manicheismo: nuove prospettive della richerca, ed. A. van Tongerloo and L. Cirillo (Turnhout,
2005), pp. 373-84.
34 For evidence of painters in Egypt see now K. Worp, 'Zu den Çorypâipot in Ägypten' and
H. Harrauer and R. Pintaudi, 'Abrechnung für den Maler Julianos,' in Gedenkschrift Ulrike
Horak (P. Horak), ed. H. Harrauer and R. Pintaudi, 2 vols. (Florence, 2004), 1: 43-6 and 109
12, respectively.
35 E. von Dobschütz, Christusbilder (Leipzig, 1899); M. Büchsei, 'Das Christusporträt am
Scheideweg des Ikonoklastenstreits im 8. und 9. Jahrhundert' Marburger Jahrbuch fiir Kunstwis
senschaft 25 (1998), 7-52; Belting, Das echte Bild (see above, n. 20), pp. 52-85.
36 For a list of the earliest icons see L. Langen, 'La peinture d'icônes en Egypt,' Le Monde
Copte 18 (1990), 7-18; add early Western icons, B. Brenk, 'Kultgeschichte versus Stilgeschichte:
von der "raison d'etre" des Bildes im 7. Jahrhundert in Rom,' in Uomo e spazio nell'Alto Medio
evo, 2 vols. (Spoleto, 2003), 2: 972-1053.
37 Av. Cameron, 'The Language of Images: The Rise of Icons and Christian Representation,'
in The Church and the Arts, ed. D. Woods (Oxford, 1992), pp. 1-42, reprinted in her Changing
Cultures in Early Byzantium (Aldershot, 1996), Ch. XII; L. Brubaker, 'Icons before Iconoclasm?,'
in Morjblogie sociali culturali in Europa fra tarda antichità e alto medioevo, ed. G Cavallo et al.
(Spoleto, 1998), pp. 1215-54; M. Meier, Das andere Zeitalter Justinians (Göttingen, 2003),
pp. 528-60.
38 For the texts see C.J.F. Dowsett, The History of the Caucasian Albanians by Mouses Dasxur
anci (Oxford, 1961), pp. 171-3; Thümmel, Frühgeschichte (see above, n. 4), pp. 154-71.
seem that the term was very popular in Byzantium, as it is mentioned only
very intermittently, except for the Acts of the Council of Nicaea II, which
decided in favour of the restoration and veneration of images. After the end of
the iconoclastic struggle, which was won by the iconodules, the term is found
mainly in connection with heretics, such as the Manicheans and Paulicians.49
In fact, the term is so rare that it is not to be found in the great Greek and
Byzantine dictionaries from before the twentieth century, those of Stephanus,
Ducange, and Sophokles.50
How, then, did the term become accepted in the West? What we now call
the "iconoclastic struggle" certainly did not go unobserved in Italy and
France.51 Several seventh-century synods had the question of the veneration of
images on the agenda, and the Acts of the Second Council of Nicaea (AD 787)
were translated into Latin several times.52 The Parisian Council of 825 even
discussed the matter in detail, as it had become urgent again because of the
prohibition of images by Claudius, the bishop of Turin.53 Yet, although the
Acts of Nicaea II often use the term eikonôklastês, it does not occur in these
early Latin texts, because Anastasius Bibliothecarius, the translator of the Acts
of Nicaea, always uses iconas frangentes or confringentes. However, we do find
the term iconoclasta in Anastasiuss Latin translation of Theophanes in his
Chronographia tripartita. (335, 9 de Boor), from where it was taken over by the
Historia Miscella (Patrologia Latina 95, 1139A).
54 W.R. Jones, 'Lollards and Images: The Defense of Religious Art in Later Medieval
England,' Journal of the History of Ideas 34 (1973), 27-50; Feld, Ikonoklasmus des Westens (see
above, n. 9), pp. 85-90; Schnitzler, Ikonoklasmus-Bildersturm (see above, n. 2), pp. 85-8;
S. Stanbury, "The Vivacity of Images: St Katherine, Knighton's Lollards, and the Breaking of
Idols,' in Images, Idolatry, and Iconoclasm in Late Medieval England, ed. J. Dimmick et al. (Oxford,
2002), pp. 131-50.
55 Thomas Waldensis, Doctrinale antiquitatum fidei Catholicae Ecclesiae adversus Wiclefitas et
Hussitas ad vetera exemplaria recognitum & notis illustratum, ed. B. Blanciotti, 3 vols. (Venice,
1757-59; reprinted in one volume: Farnborough, 1967), 3: 902-72, there 906.
56 The exception seems to be J.W. Fuchs, Lexicon Latinitatis Nederlandicae medii aevi, 8 vols.
(Leiden, 1970-2005), 4: 2287, referring to Cronica et cartularium monasterii de Dunis (Brugge,
1864), p. 97 as a text of ca. 1488, which is quoted by Schnitzler, Ikonoklasmus-Bildersturm (see
above, n. 2), p. 22 note 51. However, this is a mistake and the text is clearly much later, as the
quoted sentence begins with: Anno Domini 1566.
57 For Karlstadt see R. Sider, Andreas Bodenstein von Karbtadt: the development of his thought
1517-1525 (Leiden, 1974), pp. 148-73; A. Zorzin, Karbtadt ab Flugschriftenautor (Göttingen,
1990); E. Ulimann, 'Die Wittenberger Unruhen, Andreas Bodenstein von Karlstadt und die
Bilderstürme in Deutschland,' in LArt et les révolutions, 8 vols. (Strassbourg, 1992), 4: 117-26.
so successful that it was reprinted in the same year. In that same spring, the
Catholic theologian Johannes Eck published a pamphlet with a defense of the
images (On not removing images of Christ and the saints) without, however, yet
knowing Karlstadt's work, but on April 2 the Dresdner court chaplain Hiero
nymus Emser (1478-1527) already issued a pamphlet against Karlstadt (That
one should not remove images of the saints from the churches nor dishonour them,
and that they are not forbidden in Scripture).58 For his arguments he drew on
Netter without mentioning him, but there can be little doubt about his debt,
as two years later he explicitly mentions our Carmelite in a treatise on the
Eucharist against Luther.59 Netter will remain an important source for the
Catholic theologians in the fierce debates about images of that century,60 and,
directly or indirectly, he seems to be responsible for the occurrence of the term
iconoclasta in the texts of Catholic theologians,61 which starts with Emser and
Eck, but gradually also reaches the lay people.62
58 For all three pamphlets see now B. Mangrum and G. Scavizzi, A Reformation debate: Karl
stadt, Emser, and Eck on sacred images: three treatises in translation (Ottawa, 1991).
59 H. Smolinsky, 'Reformation und Bildersturm. Hieronymus Emsers Schrift gegen Karlstadt
über die Bilderverehrung,' in Reformatio ecclesiae, ed. R. Bäumer (Paderborn, 1980), pp. 427-40,
there pp. 437-8.
60 M. Harvey, 'The Diffusion of the Doctrinale of Thomas Netter in the Fifteenth and Six
teenth Centuries,' in Intellectual Life in the Middle Ages: Essays presented to Margaret Gibson, ed.
L. Smith and B. Ward (1992), pp. 281-94; note also J. Molanus, De historia SS. imaginum et
picturarumpro vero earum usu contra abusus, libri quatuor, 2nd ed. (Louvain, 1594 [1st ed. 1570]),
p. 4.
61 Perhaps understandably, I have not been able to find the term in sixteenth-century Protes
tant theologians.
62 Theologians; H. Emser, Missae Christianorum contra Luteranam missandi formulam assertio
(Dresden, 1524) no page number = H. Emser, Schriften zur Verteidigung der Messe, ed. Th. Freu
denberger (Münster, 1959), p. 24; Constantium Augustum Iconoclasten; J. Eck, Enchiridion loco
rum communium adversus Lutherum, & alios hostes ecclesiae (Lyon, 1572 [Landshut, 1525]),
p. 159 = Enchiridion etc., ed. P. Fraenkel (Münster, 1979), p. 193: Graeci appellarunt haereticos
illos Iconoclastas, id est, fractores imaginum and Homiliarum Tomus Secundus (Paris, 1597 [1533]),
p. 206: Catabaptistarum, sacramentariorum, Iconoclastrarum (sie), & quid denique non?-,
A. Catharinus,0/>«jfa/b (Lyon, 1542), pp. 61, 23; Disput. 141, 3 (non vidi-, 1 owe this reference
to Marc van de Poel, who refers to R. Hoven, Lexique de la prose latine de la Renaissance, 2nd ed.
(Leiden, 2006), s.v., but also notes the absence of the term in all other relevant dictionaries);
J. Cochlaeus, De sanctorum invocatione & intercessione, deque imaginibus & reliquiis eorum pie
riteque colendis (Ingolstadt, 1544), no page numbers but often in the text; S. Hosius, Verae,
Christianae, Catholicaequedoctrinaesolidapropugnatio (Cologne, 1558), p. 181 Sententia Synodi
Nicaenae contra Iconoclastas. Lay people: V. Despodt, Gentse grafmonumenten en grafichrifien
tot het einde van de Calvinistische republiek (1584) (Gent, 2001) = http://www.ethesis.net/gent_
grafmonumenten/repertorium.pdf, no's 1.6/084-5 (AD 1601).
Given the fierce Huguenot attack on images,63 it may not be surprising that
in French the term 'iconoclaste' already appears in 1557.64 However, the Latin
spelling was still adopted in the Scottish translation of John Leslie's (1526-96)
Historie of Scotland, which appeared in 1596, but was originally published in
Latin in Rome in 1578. Here the term is clearly a direct reference to the
Iconoclastic Struggle: "... a counsel of thrie hunder and fiftie Bischopis haldne
at Nice (i.e. Nicaea II in AD 787)65 against the secte of Jmagebrekem, thair
name Jconoclastte, from Jcon, quhilke in greke is namet ane Jmage in Sco
ur."66 It is clear that here the term is still in Latin, and it was not until the
iconoclasm during the era of Cromwell that the first occurrences of both
'iconoclast' and 'iconoclastic' appear,67 despite the fact that, strangely enough,
the Greek term made a comeback in the seventeenth century in the titles of
works by Milton and the Quaker George Fox.68 In the title of books I note its
first appearance in 1671, perhaps still a fruit of the Cromwell years,69 whereas
only from the 1870s onwards it occurs in the titles of articles, just like 'icono
clastic,'70 which starts to appear in titles of books only in 1930.7' In its mean
ing of somebody who assails or attacks accepted and cherished opinions and
11 B. Blood, The Bride of the Iconoclast (Boston, 1854); B. Grant, A full report of the discussion,
between the Rev. Brewin Grant and "Iconoclast" [i.e. C. Bradlaugh] in the Mechanics' hall, Sheffield,
on the 7th, 8th, 14th, & 15th June, 1858 (London, 1858).
73 P. Busaeus, Avthoritatvm Sacrae Scriptvrae et sanctorvm patrvm, qvae in catechismo doctoris
Petri Canisii theologi Societatis Iesv citantur, 4 vols. (Venice, 1571), 1: index s.v. Claudius Tauri
nensi episcopus qui per quem de iconoclasmo oppugnatus and Xenaiae euiusdam Persae hypocrisis ér
Iconoclasmus; L. Froidmont, Causae Desperatae Gisb. Voetii etc. (Antwerp, 1636), p. 14: in Belgio
post Iconoclasmum anni 1566; D. van Papenbrock, in Acta Sanctorum, Iun. 1 (Antwerp, 1695):
946: Licet enim Vetera omnia dejecerit iconoclasmus.
74 S. Idzerda, 'Iconoclasm during the French Revolution,' American Historical Review 60
(1954), 13-26; Feld, Ikonoklasmus des Westens (see above, n. 9), pp. 253-76; R. Wrigley, 'Breaking
the Code: Interpreting Iconoclasm in the French Revolution,' in Reflections of Revolution: Images
of Romanticism, ed. A. Yarrington and K. Everest (Routledge, 1993), pp. 182-95; Réau, Histoire
du vandalisme (see above, n. 63), pp. 233-551; R. Clay, "Theft and iconoclasm: the treatment of
Catholic objects in eighteenth-century France,' Oxford Art Journal 26 (2003), 1-22.
75 W. Taylor, 'Foreign literature,' The Monthly Review, New Series 24 (1799), 506-13, there 512.
76 Trésor de la langue française, vol. IX, 1062. Note that iconoclasmo is still absent from the
Vocabulario universale italiano, 3 (Naples, 1834): 599.
77 J. Ingram, 'Iconography and iconoclasm,' Archaeological Journal 1 (1846), 131-4.
78 I. Browne, Iconoclasm and whitewash, and other papers (New York, 1885); S. Gero, Byzan
tine iconoclasm during the reign of Leo III (Louvain, 1973).
79 J. Irmscher, 'Der byzantinische Bilderstreit in der Geschichtsschreibung der Aufklärung,' in
Der byzantinische Bilderstreit, ed. ]. Irmscher (Leipzig, 1980), pp. 170-92.
did not study the eighth and ninth centuries of Byzantine history from an
iconoclastic perspective.80 That we do so today is a fairly recent development,
which seems to have started in the Anglophone world only in the 1950s with
the well-known papers of Francis Dvornik and Ernst Kitzinger.81 After this
hesitant beginning the use of the term has exploded in recent decades and
become a very "sexy" subject, as the many studies in this field eloquently attest,
witness the following rough count of the terms 'iconoclast(ic)' and 'icono
clasm' in the titles of books and articles:82
1850-1875 1 1
1876-1900 2 9
1901-1925 2 14
1926-1950 6 14
1951-1975 21 32
1976-2000 46 114
2001-2007 20 80
80 J.D. Howard-Johnston, 'Gibbon and the middle period of the Byzantine Empire,' in Edward
Gibbon and Empire, ed. R. McKitterick and R. Quinault (Cambridge, 1997), pp. 53-77.
81 E Dvornik, Photian and Byzantine Ecclesiastical Studies (London, 1974), Ch. V ("The Patri
arch Photius and Iconoclasm,' 1st ed. 1953); E. Kitzinger, The Art of Byzantium and the Medieval
West (Bloomington and London, 1976), pp. 90-150, 390-1 ('The Cult of Images in the Age
before Iconoclasm,' 1st ed. 1954, which heavily drew on Von Dobschütz, Christusbilder [see
above, n. 35]).
82 I have counted the books via HOLLIS (Harvard) and the articles via PiCarta. Admittedly,
this is a rough estimation, as it is regularly hard to decide what counts as an article, but the trend
seems clear.
83 This is rightly noted by H. Bredekamp, Kunst als Medium sozialer Konflikte. Bilderkämpfe
von der Spätantike bis zur Hussitenrevolution (Stuttgart, 1975), pp. 114-6.
and the vandalism of images during the Reformation, under one umbrella
term. Moreover, the availability of the term has also promoted the tendency to
see causal correlations between rather different phenomena. Thus Armenian
opposition to images becomes combined with Yazid's edict and the Byzantine
opposition to representing Christ without any proof that there was a real con
nection between these movements.
Last and certainly not least, the anti-image writings of Calvin, Zwingli, and
Luther, as well as the iconoclastic vandalism of the early Protestants, have been
well studied and their effects on the development of Western theology and art
often analysed.84 Yet the concentration on the "events" of iconoclasm have
often obscured the fact that, in general, the churches of the Reformation have
preserved medieval art much better than the Catholic churches. This insight is
only gradually winning ground, even though already in 1916 the German art
historian Georg Dehio had noted that medieval altars had been much better
preserved in Lutheran countries than anywhere else.85 More recently, we have
had a series of studies on those Lutheran countries,86 but a full survey was
hardly possible. I may perhaps be forgiven to say that the efforts of my Gron
ingen colleagues Justin Kroesen and Regnerus Steensma enable us now to
sketch a much more precise picture.87 Their study of the village church in
Western Europe confirms the judgment of Dehio, but it also demonstrates
that even Anglican and Calvinist churches often have preserved interesting
pieces of medieval art, be it in the form of the retables, baptismal fonts, pul
pits, screens or sacred vessels.
The reasons for this development naturally first depend on the theological
views of the leading lights of the Reformation. Although Luther declined the
84 See especially W. Hofmann, ed., Luther und die Folgen fur die Kunst (Munich and Hamburg,
1983); C. Eire, War against the idols: the reformation of worship from Erasmus to Calvin (Cam
bridge, 1986); R.W. Scribner and M. Warnke, eds., Bilder und Bildersturm im Spätmittelalter und
in der frühen Neuzeit (Wiesbaden, 1990); S. Michalski, The Reformation and the visual arts: the
Protestant image question in Western and Eastern Europe (London, 1993); wonderfully illustrated,
C. Dupeux et al., eds., Bildersturm. Wahnsin oder Gottes Wille? (Munich, 2000); P. Blickle, ed.,
Macht und Ohnmacht der Bilder: reformatorischer Bildersturm im Kontext der europäischen
Geschichte (Munich, 2002); J.L. Koerner, The Reformation of the Image (London, 2003); Belting,
Das echte Bild (see above, n. 20), pp. 173-216; W. van Asselt, "The Prohibition of Images and
Protestant Identity,' in idem et al., eds., Iconoclasm andIconoclash (Leiden, 2007), pp. 299-311.
85 G. Dehio, 'Die Krisis der deutschen Kunst im sechzehnten Jahrhundert,' Archiv für Kultur
geschichte 12 (1916), 1-16, there 8-9. For Dehio see Erich Hubala, 'Georg Dehio 1850-1932:
Seine Kunstgeschichte der Architektur,' Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte 46 (1983), 1-14; B. Herrbach,
'Georg Dehio: Verzeichnis seiner Schriften,' Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte AI (1984), 392-9.
86 J.M. Fritz, ed., Die bewahrende Kraft des Luthertums: Mittelalterliche Kunstwerke in evange
lischen Kirchen (Regensburg, 1997).
87 J.E.A. Kroesen and R. Steensma, Het middeleeuwse dorpskerkinterieur / The Interior of the
Medieval Village Church (Louvain, 2004).
88 The classic study is E. Duffy, The Stripping of the Altars, 2nd ed. (London and New Haven,
2005).
85 For this brief survey see J.E.A. Kroesen, 'Tussen Bugenhagen en Borromaeus: de paradox
van de conserverende Reformatie,' Nederlands Theologisch Tijdschrift 59 (2005), 89-105.
90 See, for example, J. Bourke, Baroque churches of Central Europe, 2nd ed. (London, 1962);
P. and C. Cannon-Brookes, Baroque churches (New York, 1969).
Although this process eventually was much more destructive of medieval art
than the iconoclasm of the Reformation, it has received far less attention from
art historians.91 Iconoclastic events evidently appeal much more to the con
temporary imagination with its postmodernist fascination for fragmentation.
Yet outbursts of destruction may in the end be far less damaging than a process
of creeping destruction. There is a lesson here to be learned.92