Talk:Byzantine Iconoclasm

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Middle Ages (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Visual arts (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
 
WikiProject Greece (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greek art on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Christianity / Theology / Eastern (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by theology work group (marked as Top-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy (marked as Top-importance).
 
WikiProject Turkey (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Religion (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Comments[edit]

"It was also seen as a departure from ancient church tradition, of which there was a written record opposing religious images." This is very POV and unsupported. In fact, there is much evidence to the contrary being that their are images of Christ dating back to 70 AD.

It is neither of these that this was the view of the iconoclasts. Johnbod (talk) 14:23, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

That is rather POV, and there is much evidence to the contrary. Not only is there that church discovered from 70 AD containing images, but their are quotes from St. Basil and others on iconography. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.234.161.40 (talk) 18:44, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that was the POV of the Iconoclasts, which has to be reported here. They were not without evidence on their side. St Basil is not from the early church. Johnbod (talk) 11:56, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
=====[edit]

How is it possible that an article of this nature should not at least mention the Jewish prohibition against religious images of any kind? While not controlling by any stretch of the imagination, one must wonder whether the ancient Byzantines at least had nominal contact with Jewish thought and projected that on to then current iconography. That would also help explain the deep schism between Italians and Greeks, who had a long and distinguished career creating religious iconography and sculpture, and the Jews who ritually forbade it.

Really an issue in an earlier period, see Aniconism in Christianity. The Dura Europos synagogue actually shows Jewish and Christian attitudes to sacred art pretty close in the 3rd century. In so far as "semitic aniconism" is regarded as a factor in Byzantine iconoclasm, it is generally considered to have been the Islamic version that was relevant. Johnbod (talk) 14:04, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Awful introduction[edit]

This article doesn't even state what iconoclasm is, when that should be the first thing the article does. It just jumps straight into specifics. In fact, the entire article could do with restructuring. 92.10.193.29 (talk) 04:10, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

fair point - more of the intro from Iconclasm added. Johnbod (talk) 11:53, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
The intro still reads a bit choppy, with Haldon's challenge upfront, then the 4th paragraph still explaining things. If you trim/streamline it a little may help. I still had a hard time grasping the connections in one reading. History2007 (talk) 19:46, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Yes, the Haldon stuff was all added, too prominently, by a fan, which there was discussion about at the time, & things still need sorting. Johnbod (talk) 02:11, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Right, that was what I thought too. So perhaps the Haldon item should just move to the 4th parag and the rest get trimmed. And actually per WP:LEDE Haldon can not just sit there in the lede if not explained in the body, and not clear how he challenged mainstream ideas anyway. History2007 (talk) 00:27, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Done that anyway. Johnbod (talk) 13:21, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
I've read some reviews of B&H (should have seen the original but the library booking system was permanently temporarily unavailable) & actually a) they get far from universal praise, and b) they seem to actually stress the push from the top in the Imperial Court, & downplay any wider movement, rather contrary to what the fan said. "Basixc assumptions" seem unrocked in fact. Not sure what to do in the absence of better info on them, but I can add from the various sources I do have. Johnbod (talk) 02:35, 11 May 2013 (UTC)