TSR Wiki > Study Help > Subjects and Revision > Revision Notes > History > Why Iconoclasm?
IMPERIAL
- Leo III and Constantine III successful iconoclasm had not protected Christian communities. Relative success of Leo regime in comparison to ephemeral rulers before him linked to iconoclasm chronic instability only Anastasios of post Justinian emperors able to take coherent measures against the Arab threat mid 8th century period of rebuilding and military success, imperial authority increases imposition and maintenance of iconoclastic ideology itself a sign of imperial authority (incorporation iconoclasm into orthodoxy via Church Council 754 good example). Attempt to placate God
- Leo takes advantage of prevalent disquiet over Christian images to enforce the cult of the cross at their expense -
- Leo IV 813 20 2nd period iconoclasm perceives connection between iconoclasm and long and successful reings
- Imperial Strength and Iconoclasm temporary removal of iconoclasm and permanent removal occurred at times of imperial weakness Theodora and Eirenne reverse iconoclasm showing imperial strength and strength over church areas weak imperial influence, Rome, never fully accept iconoclasm Iconoclasm highlights imperial power
- During middle IconoPhile period every emperor lost to Arbas and Bulgars, support army and clergy led to revival iconoclasm
- Trial strength between imperial power and ecclesiastical power
- Too crude to see iconoclasm as simple opposition between elite and popular beliefs
- An imperial heresy without popular support? 338 Bishops sign 754 cant be unpopular, people support monk bashing, revolts no for iconophile reason
- SUCCESS, IMPERIAL STRENGTH AND CONTINUTIY BECAME DIRECTLY CORRELATED WITH ICONOCLASM
Comments
