¹ See, for instance, Bryer, Anthony and Herrin, Judith, eds, Iconoclasm (Birmingham, 1977)Google Scholar; Stein, D., Der Beginn des byzantinisthen Bilderstreites uni seine Entwicklung in die 40 er Jahre des 8 Jahrhunderts (Munich, 1980)Google Scholar; Gero, S., Byzantine Iconoclasm during the Reign of Leo III (Louvain, 1973)Google Scholar and Byzantine Iconoclasm during the Reign of Constantine V (Louvain, 1978); A Grabar, L’Iconoclasmebyzantin (Paris, 1957); Robin Cormack, Writing in Gold (London, 1985).

² See now Haldon, John, Byzantium in the Seventh Century. The Transformation of a Culture (Cambridge, 1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, with his earlier articies ‘Some remarks on the background to the Iconoclast Controversy’, Byzantine Studies, 38 (1977), pp. 161-84, and especially ‘Ideology and social change in the seventh century: military discontent as a barometer’, Klio, 68 (1986), pp. 139-90; Alan Harvey, Economic Expansion in the Byzantine Empire 900–1200 (Cambridge, 1989), pp. 15–34. The contrasting view (emphasizing continuity) put forward by W. E. Kaegi, Jr., ‘Visible Rates of Seventh-century Change’, in F. M. Clover and R. S. Humphreys, eds, Tradition and Innovation in Late Antiquity (Madison, Wise, 1989), pp. 191-208, depends mainly on institutional and military evidence from the reign of Heraclius itself and does not conflict with the perception of profound change over a longer period (see further below).

³ See on this Charles Barber, ‘The Koimesis Church, Nicaea. The limits of representation on the eve of Iconoclasm’, Jahrhuch der isterretchischen Byzantimstik 41 (1991), pp. 43-60.

⁴ For a fascinating range of examples, see Cyril Mango, ‘Antique statuary and the Byzantine beholder’, DOP, 17 (1963), pp. 53-75.

⁵ See the discussion in Mango, Cyril, ed., Patriarch Nikephoros of Constantinople. Short History (Washington, DC, 1990), pp. 12–18 Google Scholar.

⁶ See also Cameron, Averil, Christianity and the Rhetoric of Empire (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1991)Google Scholar, ch. 6, and ‘New Themes and Styles in Greek Literature, 7th-8th Centuries’, in Averil Cameron and Lawrence I. Conrad, eds, The Byzantine and Early Islamic Near East I: Problems in the Literary Source Material = Studies in Late Antiquity and Early Islam, 1 (Princeton, 1991), pp. 81-105.

⁷ See Michael Whitby, ‘Greek Historical Writing after Procopius: Variety and Vitality’, in Cameron and Conrad, Problems in the Literary Source Material, pp. 25–80, with the papers by G. J. Reinink and Han Drijvers in the same volume.

⁸ For this emphasis (against ‘decline’), see Robin Cormack, ‘Byzantine Aphrodisias. Changing the symbolic map of a city’, Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Association, 216, ns 36 (1990), pp. 26-41.

⁹ This is particularly stressed by Haldon: see n. 2 above, and for signs of ideological dislocation, see also G. Dagron, ‘Le Saint, le savant, l’astrologue. Étude de thèmes hagiographiques à travers quelques recueils de “Questions et reponses des Ve-VIIe siècles”’, in Hagiographie, cultures et sociétés (IVe-VIIe s.) (Paris, 1981), pp. 143-55; for administrative change see F. Winkelmann, Byzantinische Rang- und Ämterstruktur im 8. und 9. Jahrhundert - Berliner byzantinische Arbeiten, 54 (Berlin, 1985); the origins of the highly contentious ‘theme-system’ also belong to this period.

¹⁰ See, in particular, E. Kitzinger, ‘The cult of images in the period before Iconoclasm’, DOP, 8 (1950), pp. 85-150; Weitzmann, K., The Icon. Holy Images—Sixth to Fourteenth Century (New York, 1978), pp. 7–23 Google Scholar. Marlia Mundell, ‘Monophysite Church Decoration’, in Bryer and Herrín, Iconoclasm, pp. 59–74, collects examples of iconic and aniconic decoration in contemporary churches.

¹¹ On this question see Mundell, ‘Monophysite Church Decoration’, at p. 70.

¹² Miracula Artemii [hereafter Mir. Art.] ed. A. Papadopoulos-Kerameus, Varia graeca sacra (St Petersburg, 1909), chs 6, 31. For discussion see V. Déroche, ‘L’Authenticité de l’ “Apologie contre les Juifs” de Léontios de Néapolis’, Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique, 110 (1986), pp. 655-69, at pp. 658-9.

¹³ See Mathews, T. F., The Early Churches of Constantinople: Architecture and Liturgy (University Park, Pennsylvania, 1971), pp. 168ff Google Scholar.

¹⁴ See also Weitzmann, The Icon.

¹⁵ For the ambiguity see Averil Cameron, Judith Herrin, et al., eds, Constantinople in the Eighth Century: the Parastaseis Syntomoi Chronikai (Leiden, 1984), pp. 31 (as applied to statues), 48-52 (often mentioning different materials used, but still in the same general vocabulary).

¹⁶ Cyril Mango, The Art of the Byzantine Empire, AD 312 to 1453 (Englewood Cliffs, 1972), pp. 113ff. 133–41, gives an excellent introduction to the literary evidence.

¹⁷ See Bishop Kallistos of Diokleia, ‘The Meaning of the Divine Liturgy for the Byzantine Worshipper’, in R. Morris, ed., Church and People in Byzantium (Birmingham, 1990), p. 13.

¹⁸ Mansi, 13, 284A-B; cf. 377E; see N. Baynes, ‘The Icons before Iconoclasm’, HThR, 45 (1951), pp. 93-106, repr. in his Byzantine Studies and Other Essays (London, 1955), pp. 226-39, at pp. 232-4. For John of Damascus, veneration of icons, veneration of the Cross, and praying towards the East are main issues. With the increasing awareness of Islam among Christian writers the justification of proskynesis becomes even more of an urgent theme.

¹⁹ Justin II: Michael the Syrian, Chronicle, ed. J. B. Chabot, 4 vols (Paris, 1899–1910), 2, p. 28s for Jerusalem, see further below. Mir. Art., ch. 33, refers to the adoration of the Cross as a regular rite, and the Feast of the Exaltation of the Cross seems to have received a special impetus with its restoration by Heraclius. See, in general, A. Frolow, La Relique de la vraie croix. Recherches sur le développement d’un culte (Paris, 1961), and see Averil Cameron, ‘Byzantium in the Seventh Century. The Search for Redefinition’, in J. Fontaine and J. Hillgarth, eds, The Seventh Century: Change and Continuity (London, forthcoming).

²⁰ See n. 119 below.

²¹ For the former distinction, see H. Belting, Bild und Kunst. Eine Geschichte des Bildes vor dem Zeilalter der Kunsl (Munich, 1900); for the idea of presence, cf. Bishop Kallistos, ‘The Meaning of the Divine Liturgy’, pp. 8-11, citing the Life of S. Stephen the Younger: ‘the icon may be termed a door’ to the heavenly realm (PG 100, col. 1113A).

²² Mansi 13, 288C

²³ Whatever actually happened to the Athenian philosophers who left the Academy of Athens in 529, Byzantium in the seventh century no longer had the great philosophical schools of Late Antiquity where Christians and pagans could learn side by side; for a brief and lively description of the latter see P. Chuvin, A Chronicle of the Last Pagans (Cambridge, Mass., 1990), pp. 91-118, 131-50, and on the Athenian philosophers, especially Simplicius, see Hadot, I., ‘The Life and Work of Simplicius in Greek and Arabic Sources’, in Sorabji, R., ed., Aristotle Transformed. The Ancient Commentators and their Influence (London, 1990), pp. 275–303 Google Scholar.

²⁴ See for the patria and the question and answer literature respectively, G. Dagron, Constantinople imaginaire (Paris, 1984) and ‘Le Saint, le savant, l’astrologue’. Constantine the Great: see n. 115 below.

²⁵ See Patrick Gray, ‘The “Select Fathers”: canonizing the patristic past’, Studia Patristica, 23 (1989), pp. 21-36, and ‘Neochalcedonianism and the tradition: from patristic to Byzantine theology’, Byzantinische Forschungen, 1 (1982), pp. 61-70; Averil Cameron, ‘Models of the Past in the Late Sixth Century: the Life of the Patriarch Eutychius’, in G. Clarke, ed., Reading the Past in Late Antiquity (Canberra: 1990), pp. 205–23.

²⁶ See Herrin, Judith, The Formation of Christendom (Oxford, 1987), p. 278 Google Scholar; examples: Mansi, 11, 225B-9A; 332D; 336D; 381-449; see also G. Bardy, ‘Faux et fraudes littéraires dans l’antiquité chrétienne’, RHE, 32 (1936), pp. 290-2, and esp. P. Van den Ven, ‘La patristique et l’hagiographie au concile de Nicée en 787’, Byzantion, 25-7 (1955-7), pp. 325-62.

²⁷ Hodegos, X.2.7, ed. Uthemann, K.-H., Anastasii Opera. Viae Dux, CChr.SG, 8 (1981)Google Scholar; PC 89, cols 184-5.

²⁸ Had., XII.3, PG 89, col. 198; see the very interesting discussion by A Kartsonis, Anastasis (Princeton, 1986), pp. 40-63.

²⁹ See Déroche, ‘L’Authenticité de l’ “Apologie contre les Juifs”’, pp. 667-8.

³⁰ See Mango, Cyril, ‘The Availability of Books in the Byzantine Empire, A.D. 750–850’, in Byzantine Books and Bookmen (Washington, DC, 1975), pp. 29–46 Google Scholar, esp. 30-1.

³¹ Baynes, N., ‘Idolatry and the Early Church’, in his Byzantine Studies and Other Essays (London, 1955), pp. 116–43 Google Scholar, esp. p. 141; J. McGuckin, ‘The Theology of Images and the Legitimation of Power in Eighth-Century Byzantium’, forthcoming. The iconophile argument in Germanos’s De haeresibus elsynodis (PG 98, cols 40-88) and elsewhere rests on the idea that images belong to the tradition of the Ecumenical Councils, whereas Iconoclasm is a flagrant example of heresy. See also Leslie Brubaker, ‘Byzantine art in the ninth century: theory, practice and culture’, Byzantine and Modem Greek Studies, 13 (1989), pp. 23-93, at pp. 42-56, emphasizing the role of the florilegia, of which the Sacra Parallela attributed to John of Damascus is the most conspicuous example, and which was duly illustrated with approved miniatures: see K. Weitzmann, The Miniatures in the Sacra Parallela (Princeton, 1979).

³² See also the stimulating article by Dagron, G., ‘Le Culte des images dans le monde byzantin’, in his collection La Romanité chrétienne en Orient (London, 1984), no. XI Google Scholar.

³³ See Cormack, Writing in Gold, pp. 106–18, for an excellent analysis of the range of explanations listed above. Muslim iconoclasm: see G. R. D. King, ‘Islam, Iconoclasm and the declaration of doctrine’, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 48 (1985), pp. 267-77.

³⁴ Discussion of the coins of Justinian 11 and their possible relation to contemporary Islamic coinage (Cormack, Writing in Gold, pp. 06-106) is part of the story. See also J. Moorhead, ‘Byzantine Iconoclasm as a problem in art history’, Parergon, ns4 (1986), pp. 1-18. The style and development of icons themselves in the sixth and seventh centuries is still a controversial matter, being hampered by the paucity of surviving material and the lack of external dating criteria; see especially the works of E. Kitzinger, ‘On Some Icons of the Seventh Century’, in K. Weitzmann et al, eds., Late Classical and Medieval Studies in Honor of A. M. Friend (Princeton, 1955). pp. 132-50; ‘Byzantine art in the period between Justinian and Iconoclasm’, Berichte zum XI. internationalen Byzantinisten Kongress (Munich, 1958), pp. 1-50; Byzantine Art in the Making (Cambridge, Mass., 1977), and for some discussion of the issues, J. Trilling, ‘Sinai Icons: another look’, Byzantion, 53 (1983), pp. 300-11. After writing this paper I found many parallelisms of approach with the valuable discussion of the later phase of Byzantine Iconoclasm by Brubaker, ‘Byzantine art in the ninth century’ (see esp. pp. 23-4).

³⁵ See Byzantium, Cyril Mango. The Empire of New Rome (London, 1980), p. 98 Google Scholar (‘popularpiety’) and especially Kitzinger, ‘The Cult of Images’; Herrin, The Formation of Christendom, p. 307.

³⁶ ‘A Dark-Age crisis: aspects of the Iconoclastic Controversy’, EHR, 88 (1973), pp. 1-34, repr. in his Society and the Holy in Late Antiquity (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1982), pp. 251-301, esp. p. 274; earlier, he had written of the ‘democratization’ of culture in Late Antiquity: see The World of Late Antiquity (London, 1971), pp. 74–180ff., on which see Averil Cameron, ‘Images of authority: elites and icons in late sixth-century Byzantium’, PaP, 84 (1979), pp. 3-35, esp. 24-5.

³⁷ See Herrin, The Formation of Christendom, pp. 309f. and other works cited there; Christianity and the Rhetoric of Empire, pp. 201-3.

³⁸ Ps. Zacharias Rhetor, Historia ecclesiastica, XII.4, rr. in Mango, Art of the Byzantine Empire, pp. 114-15.

³⁹ See further Cameron, ‘Images of authority’.

⁴⁰ Cf. also the analysis of the Miracles of S. Demetrios and the mosaics of the church of St Demetrios at Thessaloniki: Cormack, Writing in Gold, pp. 50–94.

⁴¹ Writing in Gold, p. 46; analysis of the Life of Theodore of Sykeon, pp. 39-47.

⁴² See N. Baynes, “The supernatural defenders of Constantinople’, AnBoll, 67 (1949), pp. 165-77 and ‘The icons before Iconoclasm’, HThR, 44 (1951), pp. 116-43 (both in his Byzantine

⁴³ Chmnicon Paschale, 284-628 AD, ed. and tr. Michael and Mary Whitby (Liverpool, 1989), s.a. 626,628.

⁴⁴ Ibid., s.a. 624, and cf. also s.a. 615; for all this account see the valuable translation and notes by Michael and Mary Whitby, esp. pp. 166ff., referring to further bibliography; the 626 siege marked an important moment in the formation of the idea of Constantinople as specially protected by God and especially the Virgin, although the famous icon of the Virgin at Blachernae (no longer surviving) is not securely attested at this date (see Averil Cameron, “The Virgin’s robe; an episode in the history of early seventh-century Constantinople’, Byzantion, 49 (1979), pp. 47-8). The editors comment that the liturgical changes of 615 and 624 were ‘intended to emphasise that God was present with the congregation, a reliable source of protection in troubled times’ (p. 168, n. 454).

⁴⁵ See, e.g., Schulz, H.-J., The Byzantine Liturgy, Eng. tr. (New York, 1986), pp. 38–40, 164–72 Google Scholar.

⁴⁶ Theophanes, Chronographia, ed. C. de Boor (Leipzig, 1883), 1, anno mundi 6119, pp. 327-8; cf. Nicephorus, Breviamm, 19, and see Michael McCormick, Eternal Victory (Cambridge, 1986), pp. 70–2. On the chronological problems and the question of whether or not these two accounts refer to the same occasion, see Mango, Patriarch Nikephoros, pp. 185-6.

⁴⁷ See now Marlia Mundell Mango, ‘The Uses of Liturgical Silver, 4th-7th Centuries’, in Morris,éd., Church an d People in Byzantium, pp. 245-62; cf. also M. Kaplan, ‘L’Eglise byzantin des VIe-XIe siècles: terres et paysans’, in ibid., pp. 109–23; according to Procopius, De aedijìciis, ed. J. Haury, rev. G. Wirth (Leipzig, 1913), I. 1. 6s, the original sanctuary furnishings of St Sophia in Constantinople amounted to 40,000 lbs of silver; the altar was of gold, with gold columns and a ciborium of silver (Paul the Silenriary, Ekphrasis on Hagia Sophia, ed. P. Friedlá’nder, Johannes von Gaza una Paulas Silentiarius (Leipzig and Berlin, 1912), lines 720-54). The same period saw changes in the monetary and fiscal structure as basic as any of the military and administrative developments: see the contributions by C. Morrisson, J. Durliat, and R. Delmaire in Hommes et richesses dans l’empire byzantin, IVe-VIIe siale (Paris, 1989).

⁴⁸ See Bishop Kallistos, ‘The Meaning of the Divine Liturgy’, and further below. Symbolic interpretations of church buildings: Corippus, In laudem lustini, IV. 288-3 11, ed. with tr. and comm. Averil Cameron (London, 1976), with pp. 206-7; Paul the Silenriary, Ekphrasis on H. Sophia, on which see R. Macrides and P. Magdalino, ‘The architecture of Ekphrasis: construction and context of Paul the Silentiary’s Ekphrasis of Hagia Sophia’, Byzantine and Modem Greek Studies, 12 (1988), pp. 47-82; Andrew Palmer, with Lyn Rodley, ‘The inauguration anthem of Hagia Sophia in Edessa: a new edition and translation with historical and architectural notes and a comparison with a contemporary Constantinopolitan konrakion’, ibid., pp. 117-67; Mathews, The Early Churches of Constantinople, and on the symbolism of church architecture in the ninth century and later, cf. also ‘The Transformation Symbolism in Byzantine Architecture and the Meaning of the Pantokrator in the Dome’, in Morris, ed., Church and People in Byzantium, pp. 191-214.

⁴⁹ Eutychius, Sermo de paschate et eucharistia, PG 86, 2.2400–1.

⁵⁰ For discussion of earlier patristic views see Charles Murray, ‘Art in the Early Church’, JTkS, ns 28 (1977), pp. 303-45; ‘Le Problème d’iconophobie et les premiers siècles chrétiens’, in F. Boespflug and N. Lossky, eds, Nicée II787-1987 (Paris, 1987), pp. 39-49.

⁵¹ See P. Henry, ‘What was the Iconoclastic Controversy all about?’ Church History, 45 (1976), pp. 21-5.

⁵² Mystical Theology, 1001A, tr. C. Luibheid and P. Rorem, Pseudo Dionysius: the Complete Works (London, 1987), p. 137; cf. V. Lossky, The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church, tr. Members of the Fellowship of St Alban and St Sergius (Cambridge, 1957), p. 35.

⁵³ Letter 9, 1105C pp. 282-3.

⁵⁴ Celestial Hierarchies, 2, 137B, p. 148.

⁵⁵ Ibid., 140D, p. 149.

⁵⁶ Letter 9, 2, 1108B, p. 284.

⁵⁷ Letter 10, 1117B, p. 289.

⁵⁸ Letter 9, 1105D, p. 283.

⁵⁹ E.g. Joh. Dam., Oratio III.22, De imaginibus; Theodore Abu Qurrah, De cultu imaginum, ed. I. Dick, Théodore Abuaurra, Traité du culte des icones (Jounieh and Rome, 1986, eh. 15); see Sidney H. Griffith, ‘Theodore Abu Qurrah’s Arabic Tract on the Christian practice of venerating images’, Journal of the American Oriental Society, 10$ (1985), pp. 53-73. I am grateful to Sidney Griffith for his generosity in sharing his translation with me in advance of publication, and for continued help in other ways.

⁶⁰ Kitzinger, ‘Cult of images’, pp. 137Í., with Charles Murray, ‘Artistic Idiom and Doctrinal Development’, in Rowan Williams, ed., The Making of Orthodoxy. Essays in Honour of Henry Chadurick (Cambridge, 1989), pp. 288-308, at p. 298, and Baynes, ‘The icons before Iconoclasm’, pp. 226–8.

⁶¹ As, for instance, J. Meyendorff, Christ in Eastern Christian Thought (Washington, 1969), p. 79; see, however, P. Rorem, Biblical and Liturgical Symboh within the Pseudo-Dionysian Synthesis = Studiesand Texts, 71 (Toronto, 1984); A. Louth, ‘Pagan theurgy and Christian sacramentalism in Denys the Areopagite’, JThS, ns 37 (1986), pp. 432-8, and see his Denys the Areopagite (London, 1989).

⁶² Mansi, 13, 212A, tr. D. Sahas, Icon and Logos: Sources in Eighth-Century Iconoclasm (Toronto, 1986), p. 54.

⁶³ Ignatius Monachus, Narratio de imagine Christi in monasterio Latoni, 6, tr. in Mango, Art of the Byzantine Empire, p. 155.

⁶⁴ See Bishop Kallistos, ‘The Meaning of the Divine Liturgy’, p. 17.

⁶⁵ Cf. Mortley, R., From Word to Silence, 1 vols, Theophaneia, 34–35 (Bonn, 1986)Google Scholar, esp. 2, pp. 221–41; Maximus: see H. U. von Balthasar, Kosmische Liturgie. Dos Weltbill Maximus des Bekenners, 2nd edn (Einsiedcln, 1061).

⁶⁶ Eccl. Hier. 2,428C, p. 212.

⁶⁷ I Cor. I. 18f.; 13. 12.

⁶⁸ De doctrina Christiana, 1.11.11, 12.11; see Cameron, Christianity and the Rhetoric of Empire, pp. 66-7.

⁶⁹ Cf. De rudibus catechizandis, 913.

⁷⁰ Mark 4.9; Matt 13.43; Luke 14.15; Matt. 13. 11.

⁷¹ See on this Cameron, Christianity and the Rhetoric of Empire, ch. 2, esp. pp. 47-8, 56-7. For revelation by ‘signs’ and the view of creation as containing ‘signs’ of God’s purpose in the Early Christian period see R. M. Grant, The Letter and the Spirit (London, 1957).

⁷² See Cameron, Christianity and the Rhetoric of Empire, p. 150.

⁷³ See Brubaker, ‘Byzantine art in the ninth century’, pp. 70-5 for examples. In later versions of the iconophile argument the point is made that pictures are universal, whereas writing is circumscribed by having to use a specific language.

⁷⁴ Oratio lde imaginibus, 16, ed. B. Kotter, 3 (Berlin, 1975), pp. 89-90; PC 94, col. 1245.

⁷⁵ Lossky, Mystical Theology, p. 189; this judgement draws on contemporary statements, but cf. also Sperber, D., Rethinking Symbolism, Eng. tr. (Cambridge, 1975), p. 85 Google Scholar: ‘symbols are not signs’.

⁷⁶ See, e.g., Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Homilies, 10.19.

⁷⁷ E.g. John Dam., Oratio I.12 de imaginibus 22, Kotter, 3, p. 129, cf. Or. I.12 (the Burning Bush, the dew upon the fleece (Judges 6.40), Aaron’s Rod, manna, the brazen serpent (Num. 21.9), the sea, water, and clouds).

⁷⁸ The same idea transferred into Arabic: Abu Qurrah, Decultu imaginum, 15: ‘the greatest, the most famous icon, the tablets of the Law’.

⁷⁹ See Déroche, ‘L’Authenticité de l’ “Apologie contre les Juifs”’, p. 661; see further below.

⁸⁰ I Cor. 2.7; 3. 19, cited by Abu Qurrah, Decultu imaginum, 3.

⁸¹ Cf. Brubaker, ‘Byzantine art in the ninth century’, pp. 75-81.

⁸² See Cameron, Christianity and the Rhetoric of Empire, pp. 208–13. For some examples, see Mango, Art of the Byzantine Empire, pp. 133–9.

⁸³ See Benedicta Ward, Miracles and the Medieval Mind. Theory, Record and Event 1000–1215 (London, 1987), pp. 132ft”.; Cameron, Christianity and the Rhetoric of Empire, pp. 212ff. (also associated with miracle stones focused on the Eucharist).

⁸⁴ Cameron, ‘Images of authority’, pp. 18-24.

⁸⁵ Cameron, Christianity and the Rhetoric of Empire, pp. 218-19. In John Damascene the defence of images went together with the exposition of the faith (cf. his De fide orthodoxa, ed. B. Kotter, Die Schriften des Johannes von Damaskos, 2 (Berlin, 1973). For John of Damascus and the idea of a hierarchy of images and approved ways to God, see also John Eisner, ‘Image and Iconoclasm in Byzantium’, Art History, 11 (1988), pp. 471–91, esp. pp. 477-91.

⁸⁶ Thus the iconophiles condemned iconophile ‘innovation’ and claimed their own obedience to apostolic, patristic, and ecclesiastical tradition: Mansi, 13, 208C, cr. Sahas, Icon and Logos, p. 52; see Brubaker, ‘Byzantine art in the ninth century’, pp. 48-9.

⁸⁷ On these issues see L. Brubaker, ‘Perception and conception: art, theory and culture in ninth-century Byzantium’, Word and Image, 5 (1989), forthcoming, with’Byzantine art in the ninth century’, pp. 24-6.

⁸⁸ Auerbach, E., Mimesis. The Representation of Reality in Western Literature, Eng. tr. (Princeton, 1953). pp. 40ff Google Scholar., 53f., 63, 74ff.; cf. The Literary Language and its Public in Late Latin Antiquity and in the Middle Ages, Eng. tr. (London, 1965), pp. 22, 60f.

⁸⁹ Mimesis, p. 555.

⁹⁰ See the letter of Germanos I to Thomas of Klaudiopolis, PG 98, cols 156C-D, 176D, on which see Herrin, The Formation of Christendom, pp. 331-2; Brubaker, ‘Byzantine art in the ninth century’, p. 34; see also Dagron, ‘Le Culte des images’, pp. 141–2.

⁹¹ Rebuttal of supposed Jewish arguments is still a strong theme in Abu Qurrah’s tract, which goes through the whole repertoire of created objects which receive veneration in the Old Testament; see Griffith, ‘Theodore Abu Qurrah’s Arabic Tract’, pp. 59-62; also Sidney H. Griffith, ‘Anastasios of Sinai, the Hodegos and the Muslims’, Creek Orthodox Theological Review, 32 (1987), pp. 341–58, at pp. 345ff. For the importance of the theme in the seventh century see also Dagron.’Le culte des images’, p. 143 (‘cette nouvelle appréciation de l’héritage judaïque’). The hardening of Christian attitudes to judaism is not so much a cause of Iconoclasm as a parallel development.

⁹² See recently G. G. Stroumsa, ‘Religious contacts in Byzantine Palestine’, Numen, 36 (1989), pp. 16–42.

⁹³ See, e.g., A. Sharf, Byzantine Jewry from Justinian to the Fourth Crusade (London, 1971), pp. 48–57. Leo III: Theoph., Chron., anno mundi 6214, p. 401, de Boor; according to Theophanes the iconoclastic edict of Caliph Yazid II which belongs to 722 was also inspired by ‘a Jewish wizard’.

⁹⁴ On this genre and its main themes see Déroche, ‘L’Authenticité de l’“Apologie contre les Juifs”’, discussing its purpose at pp. 668-9.

⁹⁵ See N. Gendle, ‘Leontius of Neapolis: a seventh century defender of holy images’, Studia Patristica, 18 (1985), pp. 135-9.

⁹⁶ See Cameron, Averil, ‘Byzantium in the Seventh Century. The Search for Redefinition’, in Fontaine, J. and Hillgarth, J., eds. The Seventh Century: Change and Continuity (London, forthcoming)Google Scholar.

⁹⁷ See, e.g., Trophies of Damascus, ed. G. Bardy, Patrologia Orientalis, 15 (1927), pp. 169-292, at p. 221.

⁹⁸ Leontius of Neapolis, PC 93, col. 1604B.

⁹⁹ Scorn for matter is represented as a Manichaean error: Orario II.13, Kotter, 3, p. 104; PG 94, col. 1300B, cf. 1245B (other material signs; see n. 77 above).

¹⁰⁰ As argued in the Peuseis of the Emperor Constantine V: see S. Gero, ‘Notes on Byzantine Iconoclasm in the eighth century’, Byzanlion, 44 (1974), pp. 23-42;’The eucharistie doctrine of the Byzantine Iconoclasts and its sources’, Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 65 (1975), pp. 4-22.

¹⁰¹ See, e.g., Nicephorus, Antirrhetici, II.2: PC 100, col. 333B—D, usefully tr. with notes M.-J. Mondzain-Baudinet, Nicéphore, Discours contre les iconoclastes (Paris, 1990).

¹⁰² See the discussion by Anna Kartsonis, Anastasis. The Making of an Image (Princeton, 1986), pp. 3 3-60; Brubaker, ‘Byzantine art in the ninth century’, p. 39. Interestingly, a miniature in the Chludov Psalter (ninth century) shows the figure of Pseudo-Dionysius as a witness to the Crucifixion, illustrating the text of Ps. 45.7, ‘Nations may be in turmoil and thrones totter’; see Cormack, Writing in Gold, p. 134.

¹⁰³ Theopaschism, condemned by the Fifth Ecumenical Council of 553, was also condemned in 691-2 (canon 81, see below), and at the Second Council of Nicaea, 787.

¹⁰⁴ Germanos ‘s exposition of the meaning of the Eucharist also follows in the tradition of the Pseudo-Dionysius, and draws on Maximus. The Migne text of his Historia ecclesiastica or Historia mystagogica (PG 98, cols 384-453) is late and interpolated, but the original can be reconstructed from other versions, including the Latin translation of Anastasius Bibliothecarius: see R. Taft, ‘The Liturgy of the Great Church: an initial synthesis of structure and interpretation on the eve of Iconoclasm’, DOP, 34-5 (1980-1), pp. 45-76, and on the Urtext, R. Bornert, Les Commentaires byzantins Je la divine liturgie du Vile au XVe siècle (Paris, 1966), pp. 125-42; for the extant versions see CPG, 3, 8023, and see J. Meyendorff, On the Divine Liturgy (Historia ecclesiastica), ed. and tr. (Crestwood, NY, 1984); for Maximus’s Mysta gogia, see J. Stead, ed. and tr.. The Church, the Liturgy and the Soul of Man: the Mystagogia of St. Maximus the Confessor (Still River, Mass., 1982).

¹⁰⁵ On the development from Pseudo-Dionysius to Germanos see Taft, ‘The Liturgy’, p. 58, and cf. pp. 67ff., with p. 71 on Maximus; see also Barber, ‘The Koimesis Church, Nicaea’. Cf. also the similar emphasis in the Acts of II Nicaea, Mansi, 13,288C-E: the coming of Christ in the flesh justified the place of the material in the divine economy against the Iconoclast view that matter was evil (280D).

¹⁰⁶ For a brilliant short exposition of the implications of Antiochene literalism versus Alexandrian allegory see Chadwick, H., ‘Philoponus the Christian Theologian’, in Sorabji, R., ed., Philoponus (London, 1987), pp. 42–6 Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁷ Sixth Council: see Barber, ‘The Koimesis Church’; Anastasius: above, n. 28.

¹⁰⁸ PG 98, cols 80A, 81B.

¹⁰⁹ Taft, ‘The Liturgy’, p. 58.

¹¹⁰ Theoph., Chron., anno mundi, 6203, pp. 381–2, de Boor; Liber Pontificalis, ed. L. Duchesne, 2 vols (Paris, 1886-92), s.v. Constantine I (708-15); Herrin, Formation of Christendom, p. 312.

¹¹¹ See Bishop Kallistos, ‘The Meaning of the Divine Liturgy’, pp. 12-15; Brubaker, ‘Byzantine art in the ninth century’, pp. 65-7.

¹¹² See Mango, ‘Antique Statuary’; Cameron and Herrin, Constantinople in the Eighth Century, intro., pp. 31–4.

¹¹³ Cameron and Herrin, Constantinople in the Eighth Century, intro., p. 33.

¹¹⁴ Parastaseis Syntomoi Chronikai, chs 53, 57, 47, ed. Th. Preger, Scriptores Originum Conslanlinopolitanarum, 1 (Leipzig, 1901, repr. New York, 1975); cf. Cameron and Herrin, eds, Constantinople in the Eighth Century, p. 33.

¹¹⁵ See ibid., pp. 34ff. But not only as the discoverer of the True Cross but also as the founder of Constantinople as a Christian city, contrasted with another imperial builder, the pagan Emperor Seprimius Severus, Constantine also acquired a new prominence; see also Cameron, ‘Byzantium in the Seventh Century’.

¹¹⁶ Eustratius, Vita Eutychii, 53, PC 86.2.2333, tr. Mango, Art of the Byzantine Empire, pp. 133–4.

¹¹⁷ Cf. Dagron, ‘Le culte des images’, p. 143: ‘un long processus d’acculturation, au cours duquel la Byzance chrétienne apprend ce qu’elle eut revendiquer de son passé romano-hellénique et ce à quoi il lui faut renoncer.’

¹¹⁸ For a similar process at work in the late sixth century see Cameron, ‘Models of the Past”.

¹¹⁹ Canons 73 (Cross not to be used to decorate floors), 82 (Christ not to be represented as a lamb, but in human form, so as to remember the physical suffering of Christ in the flesh); 23, 28, 29, 31, 32, 58, 70 (women must be silent during the liturgy), 83, 101 (Eucharist); 57, 61, 62, 65 (pagan practices; many other canons regulate custom, dress, and entertainment); 81 (Trisagion). On canon 81, condemning Theopaschism, see Kartsonis, Anastasis, p. 37.

¹²⁰ Above, n. 28; Anastasius’s argument also appears in the context of an attack on Theopaschism.

¹²¹ Brubaker, ‘Byzantine art in the ninth century’, deals mainly with the art of the ninth century in this light.

¹²² Abu Qurrah, Decultu imaginum, 13.