16-12-2003 06:42									#1
	Iconoclastic Wars Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

I know nothing about them except they happened.
Enlighten me. I'm going to bed. I expect a wiiiiiide array of credible information to wait for me tomorrow as is the grand tradition of 'poly/

	16-12-2003 06:47									#2
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

religious types for once welcomed

Make yourselves useful for once

	16-12-2003 06:52									#3
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

don't know what you are talking about, but I like your avatar

	16-12-2003 07:00									#4
	Got spare money?

is where people starting worshping idols of jesus?

	16-12-2003 07:01									#5
	Suffering from ads?

when did they start worshipping idols of Mary? Amongst all the other saints those crazy catholics tend to worship in leiu of ignoring their comandments...

	16-12-2003 08:06									#6
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Excactly, I don't know why we don't equate our faith to late night TV gospel shows like the rest of the Christians. I guess we are behind the times.

-Pat

	16-12-2003 08:40									#7
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

I have some very basic knowledge I can try to share.

Basically, some Catholics disagreed with the idea that Jesus could be represented in a material form (this might extend to other religious figures such as the Virgin Mary).
In fact, iconoclast means "image breaker".

Others thought painting religious scenes was the best way to spread Christianism, since the masses were illiterate.

I think the conflict arose around the 5th or 6th century AD between the Roman Catholics (most barbaric tribes that had settled in Rome's former territory had been converted) and the Byzantines. The latter formed what we now know as the "Orthodox Church".

A quick wikipedia check would probably give you the basics.

	16-12-2003 08:47									#8
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

It was more of a civil war between factions within the Byzantine Empire itself.

-Pat

	16-12-2003 11:37									#9
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

It was a good excuse for first Arabs and then Turks (in cahoots with restive subject populations) to beat on the Romans/Byzantine Greeks/misc Orthodox.

The idea is that the Orthodox are worshipping 'idols' by making and venerating religious icons, and the Islamics are 'icono-clasts' icon smashers.

	16-12-2003 14:17									#10
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

I'll explain it later, have no time right now.

	16-12-2003 14:28									#11
	Get a bigger avatar today!

The iconoclastic wars were a series of civil wars in the mid-period Byzantine Empire. Iconoclasts were against the use of images in church, and destroyed much ancient art. They were supported by the army (at the time) and the imperial family.

HOWEVER, as typical for byzantoine history, it wasn't just about pictures. The wars between iconoclasts and iconodules (the ones that liked pictures) were really fights for control of the empire, the church and the army.

Luckily for us, many of the pictures intended to be destroyed wer simply painted over, and restored later (then painted over again... then restored again...) as the tendencies of the ruling emperor and his supporters dictated.

That's it in BRIEF.

Basically the Iconoclasts came from the Asian part of the Empire, and the Iconodules from mainland Greece. But it was extremely complicated.

I can tell you more on request, its somethng of a hobby.

-Jam

	16-12-2003 15:07									#12
	Remove this text

Sounds like a typicaly stupid religious war.

	16-12-2003 18:20									#13
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Thanks

What did the Iconoclasts wanted then? (on religious terms). Since Icons AFAIK aren't worshipped they are merely a "transport" of worship to what they iconise.
Did the Iconoclasts wanted not to have any tangible representation of the saints and trinity?

	16-12-2003 18:22									#14
	Put an end to popups!

And if the Iconoclasts had the support of the army and the imperial family how come they didn't win? (since apparently they didn't)

	16-12-2003 18:45									#15
	Full PM-box? Change here!

IIRC, the Iconoclasts were responding in part to the incredible military success of that new religion on the block, Islam. The astonishing, rapid, violent success of Islamic warriors caused some Byzantines to reason that God must be mad at them for something; since one of the most notable differences between Islam and Christianity at that point was that Islam forbade religious imagery, the Iconoclasts got it into their heads that they could square things with God if they, too, rejected images. The resulting damage to religious art was often far worse that the damage wrought by Muslims later; in the Hagia Sofia, for example, the Ottomans merely plastered over the mosaics, while the Iconoclasts actually tore them out.

	16-12-2003 18:52									#16
	Increase Your PM Length

As I found out these wars were
730-787
and 813-843

AFAIK The Ottomans were nowhere near Byzantium at that time?

	16-12-2003 18:57									#17
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

No, but 1st the Arbars were, and then came then Seljuks.

	16-12-2003 19:00									#18
	Inflate your Upload Space

Besides much later Byzantium was as ripe as a rotten apple to fall to the hordes of the Ottomans. They had conquered all of the Balkans and left Constantinople for last. There were millions of Ottomans armed with French cannons against some thousands of Byzantines. How could this be interpreted as "God" instead of simple mathematics?

AFAIK the despise was for the Latins for their duplicity (having all of their hatred and jealousy against the Byzantines fulfilled by the Ottomans) not for the Ottomans.

Even the Emperors of that time said they prefered to be submitted to the Ottomans than to the Latins, because the prophecies said we would survive the Ottomans but not the latins and because the despise was bigger for the latter.

	16-12-2003 19:04									#19
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara No, but 1st the Arbars were, and then came then Seljuks.

Yes but those were repelled. Following that argument, the Icons should have been seen as favorable?

	16-12-2003 19:06									#20
	Inflate your Upload Space

Religion:
War:

Religious wars:

	16-12-2003 19:08									#21
	Get a bigger avatar today!

paiktis, I simply meant that if you look at the heartbreaking damage that was done to the Hagia Sofia, the worst of it was done not by Muslims (who often get blamed for it by ignorant tourists) but by Christians themselves. The same goes for the damage to the churches of Cappadocia. Sorry if I wasn't being clear.

But the initial military victories that spooked the Iconoclasts were those of the Arab Ghazis, as Che said.

	16-12-2003 19:10									#22
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

From Wikipedia
1st wars
The first Iconoclastic period came to an end at the Second Council of Nicaea in 787, when the veneration of icons was affirmed, although the worship of icons was expressly forbidden. Among the reasons were the doctrine of the Incarnation: because God the Son (Jesus Christ) took on flesh, having a physical appearance, it is now possible to use physical matter to depict God the Son, and to depict the saints. Icon veneration lasted through the reign of Empress Irene's successor, Nicephorus I (reigned 802-811), and the two brief reigns after his.

2nd wars
Emperor Leo V (reigned 813-820) instituted a second period of Iconoclasm in 813, which seems to have been less rigorously enforced, since there were fewer martyrdoms and public destructions of icons. Leo was succeeded by Michael II, who was succeeded by his son, Theophilus II. Theophilus died leaving his wife Theodora regent for his minor heir, Michael III. Like Irene 50 years before her, Theodora mobilized the iconodules and proclaimed the restoration of icons in 843. Since that time the first Sunday of Lent is celebrated in the churches of the Orthodox tradition as the feast of the "Triumph of Orthodoxy".

The only referance I could find about muslim faith was that some Christians living outside of Byzantium to some Arab Chalifates rejected the Emperor's rule on the worship of Icons.

	16-12-2003 19:11									#23
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Oh, and neither the Arabs nor the Seljuks were "repelled." They didn't take Constantinople (in fact, they didn't try), but they both took control of substantial chunks of the empire.

	16-12-2003 19:12									#24
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly paiktis, I simply meant that if you look at the heartbreaking damage that was done to the Hagia Sofia, the worst of it was done not by Muslims (who often get blamed for it by ignorant tourists) but by Christians themselves. The same goes for the damage to the churches of Cappadocia. Sorry if I wasn't being clear.

come on... The muslims completely destroyed Hagia Sophia after the death of Muhamed which had declared a degree of protection because he was afraid of the wrath of the byzantines god falling upon him.
There are written tales about how Hagia Sophia looked back then and it looked splendid.

quote: But the initial military victories that spooked the Iconoclasts were those of the Arab Ghazis, as Che said.

Those were repelled though.

	16-12-2003 19:14									#25
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly Oh, and neither the Arabs nor the Seljuks were "repelled." They didn't take Constantinople (in fact, they didn't try), but they both took control of substantial chunks of the empire.

The Arabs did seige Constantinople but were repelled.

Leo was able to promulgate his policy because of his personal popularity and military success - he was credited with saving Constantinople from an Arab siege in 717-718 and then sustaining the Empire through annual warfare

By the time the Seljuks came there was no Iconoclastic wars.