Kassia the Poet

Kassia was born to a wealthy family in Constantinople sometime between 805 and 810 CE. By 843 she had founded a convent and was its first abbess. This convent had a connection to the monastery of Theodore of Stoudios, who supported her work and was, like her, in favor of religious icons.

Her "work" was poetry and hymns. She is distinguished as the only woman whose hymns are part of the Byzantine liturgy, and she shares a distinction with Anna Comnena as the only woman of the early Byzantine Middle Ages who composed works under her own name. Her "Hymn of Kassiani" is chanted each year on Great and Holy Wednesday that commemorates the bargain made by Judas.

There is a tradition around this Hymn that, as she was writing it alone in her cell, the Emperor Theophilos rode to see her. Why would this be? The answer to that goes back to the year 830, when they were both very young.

In that year, the unwed Theophilos was presented with a "bride show" arranged by his mother of suitable woman from whom was supposed to pick a wife. His mother, Euphrosyne, had given him a golden apple to present to his choice. With his eye on the beautiful Kassia, he approached her with the apple but made a tactless remark to which she made a reply. The story is recorded by a few writers of that era, and the exchange went like this:

Theophilos: "Ἐκ γυναικὸς τὰ χείρω." (By a woman came bad things.)

Kassia: "Kαὶ ἐκ γυναικὸς τὰ κρείττω." (But out of a woman came better things.)

Theophilos was referring to Eve's transgression in Eden. Kassia's reply was referring to the Virgin Mary. Theophilos did not like this retort, and passed her by, choosing instead Theodora.

Back to the story: the tradition says that Theophilos never forgot the beauty of Kassia and wanted to see her again. She heard the noise of an imperial retinue arriving, and did not want to face the emperor and risk the temptation of breaking her monastic vows. She hid in a closet, and quietly observed Theophilos enter her cell alone. He cried at not finding her, saw what she was writing, and added one line to the Hymn: "those feet whose sound Eve heard at dusk in Paradise and hid herself for fear."

Kassia was in favor of religious icons at a time when Theophilos (and many others) were iconoclasts. Several contemporary historians wrote that she was exiled to Italy during the iconoclasm conflicts and died some time after 867. She was named a saint in the Orthodox Church with a feast day of 7 September. In 2022, her sainthood was embraced by the Episcopal Church.

Now, about Great and Holy Wednesday and the bargain of Judas, I know your mind went immediately to "30 pieces of silver." There's more to it, however, and tomorrow we'll look at legends of Judas in the Middle Ages.

Theophilos and Theodora

In yesterday's post we saw how Emperor Theophilos got his bride, Theodora the Blessed, in a bride show. Afterward, Theophilos' stepmother, Euphrosyne, who helped arrange the bride show (and maybe pre-picked the winner) retired to the Monastery of Gastria, which had been founded by Theoktiste, the mother of Theodora. The new husband and wife went on to have seven children.

Theophilos was an iconoclast, and Theodora an iconodule, which caused them to clash. The Monastery of Gastria supported the use of icons in religious worship, and Theodora would sometime send their daughters to Gastria to visit their step-grandmother. This secret was revealed when the two-year-old daughter Pulcheria mentioned to her father about the "beautiful dolls" kept in the monastery, and how the people would kiss their faces. Theophilos forbade the girls from seeing Euphrosyne ever again.

The marriage lasted 12 years, until Theophilos died of dysentery on 20 January 842. (The illustration, from the Manasses Chronicle, shows him on his death bed.) As his health was failing, he feared that his chosen successor would be supplanted by Theophobos, a general who had married Theophilos' aunt. Theophobos was invited for a stay in the palace at Constantinople. When Theophilos died, his officers had orders to immediately execute Theophobos, removing the potential rival.

This left his youngest child as the heir, with Theodora (and other advisors) named as regent for the two-year-old Michael III. Theodora turned out to be a capable leader in her own right. Although she had several advisors chosen by her husband before his death, coins minted right after his death show her and no advisors on one side, Michael III and eldest daughter Thekla on the other.

Theodora in March 843 at the Council of Constantinople did away with iconoclasm definitively. One step taken was to release the iconodule Methodios I, imprisoned by Theophilos, and make him patriarch of Constantinople to get rid of the iconoclast patriarch John the Grammarian.

When Michael III turned 15 (in 855), he took a mistress. His interests seemed to be in youthful pursuits rather than governance. Theodora arranged a bride show to find him a suitable wife, hoping this would help him settle down. The mistress, Eudokia Ingerina, was allowed to be present, but Theodora disqualified her because she was not a virgin. Michael was forced to marry a wife he did not want, so he decided to overthrow his mother and the regents. He had one advisor killed and proclaimed himself sole ruler on 15 March 856. Theodora did not fight back, retiring from power but living in the palace until Michael sent her and his sisters to Gastria. Our last recorded mention of Theodora was at Michael's funeral; she was buried at Gastria when she died.

Speaking of bride shows, it seems that Theodora might not have been Theophilos' first choice. Tomorrow I'll tell you about "the one that got away."

Second Council of Nicaea, Part 2

The first part of the Second Council of Nicaea—in which I discuss the agenda of the first three sessions—is here.

The fourth session was to get to the heart of the debate, with Biblical support for icons. Exodus 25:19 discussed the making of the Ark of the Covenant, decorated with cherubs. Genesis 31:34 was about Laban searching for the important stolen idols taken from his house. Some Church Fathers wrote about images positively.

During the fifth session, a selection of writings was shared to prove that iconoclasm originated from pagans, Jews, and Muslims, and therefore was antithetical to Christianity.

The sixth session had to be held to reverse the decisions of a prior council. Constantine V had been against icons, and held the Council of Hieria (Hieria was a suburb of Constantinople) to eliminate icons for good. Held from February to March 754, 338 bishops gathered to decide that it was impossible to portray God the Father, and that a portrayal of Jesus would only show the image of the man and could not also show that he was divine; it was therefore inadequate, erroneous, and disrespectful. If icons were to be restored, then the Council of Hieria needed to be repudiated.

Finally, the seventh session (13 October 787) created their official stance:

As the sacred and life-giving cross is everywhere set up as a symbol, so also should the images of Jesus Christ, the Virgin Mary, the holy angels, as well as those of the saints and other pious and holy men be embodied in the manufacture of sacred vessels, tapestries, vestments, etc., and exhibited on the walls of churches, in the homes, and in all conspicuous places, by the roadside and everywhere, to be revered by all who might see them. For the more they are contemplated, the more they move to fervent memory of their prototypes. Therefore, it is proper to accord to them a fervent and reverent veneration, not, however, the veritable adoration which, according to our faith, belongs to the Divine Being alone—for the honor accorded to the image passes over to its prototype, and whoever venerate the image venerate in it the reality of what is there represented.

These images should be venerated for what they represent, but not adored in and of themselves.

The proceeds were written up by Patriarch Tarasios to be carried by the papal legates back to Pope Adrian I. The document acknowledged the unity between the pope and the Byzantine emperor regarding icons. Unfortunately, the document left someone out, someone significant to Western Europe. It could have become a problem for the pope. I'll explain that next time.

Second Council of Nicaea, Part 1

The Second Council of Nicaea (24 September - 13 October 787) was the last of seven ecumenical councils that took place with participation from both the Western Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches. It took place on the site of the first council, Nicaea (now called İznik, Bursa, in Turkey). Its purpose was to debate the use of idols and images, but covered some other topics.

The religious use of icons had been suppressed in the Eastern Orthodox Church during the reign of Leo III (717 - 741). I talked about it in 2013. His son, Constantine V, also enforced the ban on images at the Council of Hieria, which Constantine referred to as the seventh ecumenical council. That designation was overturned, however, at the currently discussed council.

Patriarch Tarasios of Constantinople was appointed by the Empress Irene—he had been a senator, and secretary to Irene—and wished to restore the use of icons. He and Irene requested the council with the support of Pope Adrian I, who agreed to participate. They tried meeting initially in 786 at a church in Constantinople, but bishops who were opposed to icons sent soldiers to break up the gathering.

Irene then sent the guards on a mission against Arabs attacking in Asia Minor to get them out of the way. The Council was assembled again, this time in Nicaea. Tarasios disguised two monks as emissaries of the patriarchs of Antioch and Jerusalem to give more legitimacy to the Council. For those bishops opposing, he warned them that they could keep their positions if they did not make any public statements against the decisions of the Council. Once these conditions were established, the Council assembled with over 300 bishops or their proxies, with Tarasios presiding.

There were seven sessions in all. The first dealt with the subject of whether dissenting bishops would be allowed to remain in office. I've already mentioned how Tarasios dealt with this. The second session read a letter from Pope Adrian, translated into Greek, explaining his approval of images. The letter was a little condemnatory on Byzantine attitudes toward papal authority, but the residing clergy finally agreed to submit to the pope.

In the third session, the bona fides of the eastern representatives (Antioch and Jerusalem, etc.) were examined. It was decided that they were, in fact, not authentic. This did not cause the disbandment or illegitimacy of the Council, however.

The remaining three sessions started to tackle (finally) the question of icons, with pros and cons presented. We will finish up with those tomorrow.

The East-West Schism

Pope Leo IX's actions in 1054 (through his delegate Cardinal Humbert, actually) were the catalyst for the great East-West Schism between the Western and Eastern churches, but only because differences had been building for a long time.

Some of the difficulties between the two rose from cultural differences. The West was influenced by Roman law, while the East had Greek philosophy at its base, leading to much more vigorous intellectual debate about dogma and doctrine and misunderstandings between them and the West.

Also, the West considered itself superior from the start as the seat of Peter, and so did not discuss things with its Eastern counterpart before making changes like adding the phrase "and from the Son" to the Nicene Creed, established at the First Council of Constantinople in 381. This phrase, Filioque in Latin, created a huge controversy over whether the Son of God was co-equal with the Father as a source of the Holy Spirit. The 879–880 Council of Constantinople (Eastern Orthodox, as opposed to the Fourth Council of Constantinople Roman that took place a decade earlier) rejected the phrase Filioque.

The Eastern Church also believed in what is now called eucharistic ecclesiology (or more recently holographic ecclesiology), the idea that each bishop is the successor of St. Peter, equal to all other bishops, and the head of his own diocese, and that all these churches constituted the whole Church. The Roman West followed universal ecclesiology, a more "feudal" system in which all bishops were beholden to the hierarchy above them, leading up to the pope. The Orthodox Church does not accept the idea of papal authority being supreme, believing in a more collaborative or collegial relationship between all dioceses.

Although the Fourth Council mentioned above affirmed the value of images of god and saints for veneration, the Eastern policy earlier had promoted iconoclasm, based on Moses' 3rd Commandment against "graven images." The West had never been opposed to such things, but there was a strong current against it in the East, which drew a line between veneration ("respect"), and worship of an image.

With these in the background, we come to Patriarch Michael I Cerularius, who adds to the differences his objection to the use of unleavened bread in the West for the Eucharist. The Eastern argument is that yeast causes bread to rise and that is a better symbol for the Resurrection. The West uses unleavened bread because that is what Jesus would have used at the Last Supper, being a Seder.

These were already points of contention in 1054, so when Pope Leo IX tried to tell Patriarch Michael to fall in line because the Donation of Constantine said he should, the East had had enough.

Of course, differences continued to be created, as both sides did their best to understand the world. One of them that started to appear a century after the East-West Schism started was the idea of Purgatory. I'll talk about that next time.

Fourth Council of Constantinople

Technically, there were two of these synods, both held in Constantinople. One of them was called by Emperor Basil I, with the cooperation of Pope Adrian II, whose support Basil wanted after his recent coup (he had assassinated the previous emperor, Michael III).  So although it was held in Constantinople, it is considered a council of the Roman Catholic Church, not of the Eastern Orthodox Church. The catalyst for calling this council (October 869 - February 870) was to depose Patriarch Photios I, who was appointed inappropriately by Michael III, and to reinstate his predecessor, Ignatios. Clergy who were supporters of Photios were defrocked. Photios himself was incarcerated in a monastery.

There were over two dozen other decisions laid down as canons from this council that carried great weight doctrinally, even thought it was poorly attended; the first meeting had only 12 bishops, and the total in the few months it was held barely exceeded 100 clerics. The council was held in the Hagia Sophia (the illustration is a 16th century depiction by Cesare Nebbia). 

One of its statements was a re-affirmation of the Second Council of Nicaea's support of the use of icons and holy images. It even declared that an image of Jesus was to be venerated equally as the Gospel itself:

We decree that the sacred image of our Lord Jesus Christ, the liberator and Savior of all people, must be venerated with the same honor as is given the book of the holy Gospels. For as through the language of the words contained in this book all can reach salvation, so, due to the action which these images exercise by their colors, all wise and simple alike, can derive profit from them. For what speech conveys in words, pictures announce and bring out in colors.

It went further to declare that holy images of subjects other than Jesus were also considered worthy of veneration:

The image of his all-pure Mother and the images of the holy angels as well as the images of all the saints are equally the object of our homage and veneration.

The Roman Catholic popes were pleased to have the Eastern Orthodox Church looking to it for guidance, and Pope Adrian II got the credit, though he was not a particularly powerful pope, serving exactly five years. I'll tell you more about him tomorrow and his good luck with family connections and his bad luck with temporal authority.

Charles' Books

The Opus Caroli regis contra synodum ("The work of King Charles against the Synod"), also known as Libri Carolini ("Charles' Books"), was a series commissioned by Charlemagne to counter the work of the Second Council of Nicaea. It was specifically written to argue against the Council's decrees about icons.

Held in 787, this Council reversed Emperor Leo III's decree decades earlier that religious images were forbidden. The Council decided that religious images were not only allowed, but the reverence and prayers aimed at them actually transferred to the saint or member of the Trinity which they represented. In fact, every altar should have in it a saint's relic.

Charlemagne, a devout Christian, had a different approach to the subject of religious icons, and decided it should be made known. In the 790s (prior to him being named Holy Roman Emperor in 800), he ordered an elaborate statement on the subject. 

The opening statement is rather strong:

In the name of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ beginneth the work of the most illustrious and glorious man Charles, by the will of God, king of the Franks, Gauls, Germany, Italy, neighboring provinces, with the assistance of the king, against the Synod which in Greek parts firmly and proudly decreed in favour of adoring images recklessly and arrogantly, ...

The argument was a compromise between Leo III's strict iconoclasm and the Council's "reckless and arrogant" acceptance of honoring images. Charlemagne believed in religious images, but not treating them as anything more than images: do not burn incense before them, or votive candles. Do not pray to them, but to the figure they represent.

Was this document necessary? What was Charles' reason for arguing against the Council? The iconoclasm debate was considered a Byzantine issue; Nicaea was deep into the "Greek parts," as far from Gaul as one could get. It is possible that Charlemagne was partially motivated by the desire to oppose what he considered decisions coming out of the Eastern Empire, since it had offended him over the rejection of his daughter's marriage to its emperor and its decision to support his rival in Lombardy.

Charles did not have this statement sent to the pope after all; it is assumed that he decided not to antagonize the Church by arguing that Nicaea was wrong in its conclusions. The document did not disappear, however, and was found and published centuries later, in 1549. Calvin and the Protestant reformation found in it support for their beliefs. Christian churches these days almost all contain some images.

So who was the author? To whom did Charlemagne turn for this important work? Some assume Alcuin had a hand in it, but there is a better candidate. Some of the Latin language matches the style of Bishop Theodulf of Orleans, one of Charlemagne's "puzzle masters." Clearly, he was good at more than acrostics, and we'll talk about him next time.

Liutprand of the Lombards

In order to preserve Western Europe for Christendom and repel the Muslim invasions, Charles Martel enlisted the aid of Liutprand, King of the Lombards (c.680 - 744). His reign from 712 until his death in 744 was one of the longer and more productive reigns in Lombardy.

He almost didn't make it. Due to political intrigue, his family was destroyed by rivals: the usurper Aripert II exiled his father King Ansprand to Bavaria, blinded his brother, and cut off the ears and noses of his mother and sister. Liutprand was young enough to be considered harmless, and so was spared and sent to Bavaria with his father.

King Ansprand returned with an army of Bavarians and Austrians. Aripert fled towards Gaul, but drowned crossing a river. On Ansprand's deathbed, the Lombard nobles called Liutprand and declared him his father's co-ruler. This practice—declaring a co-ruler—made succession clear and ensured there would always be a functioning ruler. Liutprand did the same with his own son in later years when Liutprand was ill. Ansprand died the next day.

The illustration shows a large part of the Italian Peninsula under Lombard rule, and Liutprand can take credit for that by taking advantage of local hostilities. Byzantine Emperor Leo III made edicts against icons in 726. Pope Gregory II, however, rejected iconoclasm. Some parts of the peninsula (remember that at this time "Italy" is not a country but a large number of independent states) accepted Leo's edicts; some did not. The clash was serious: for example, the Byzantine Duke of Naples was killed by a mob while trying to destroy religious icons.

Liutprand took advantage of the civil discord to take his armies south and conquer much of the peninsula. On approach to Rome, he was met by Pope Gregory at the ancient city of Sutri, where the two negotiated a deal by which the papacy would get control of Sutri and some other towns as a donation to the pope (the start of establishing the Papal States), and Liutprand was allowed to take as much other territory as he was able.

As the longest-reigning Lombard king, it would be inappropriate to try to summarize his rule in one brief post. His later relationships with popes and the Carolingians and his legal reforms deserve their own attention. Stay tuned.

The Umayyad Caliphate

After the Rashidun Caliphate came the Umayyad Caliphate in 661 CE, with a dynastic rule starting with Muawiya ibn Abi Sufyan, the governor of Syria. The Umayyad Caliphate used Damascus as their capital, rather than Medina.

The Umayyad Caliphate saw a period not only of expansion, but also of unification and reform. One example was when an earlier policy of paying stipends to retired military and their descendants was deemed an untenable drain on financial resources and was eliminated in favor of only paying active military.

The Byzantine gold solidus—a standard in the eastern Mediterranean and beyond—was replaced in 693 by the dinar (see an example here). The dinar originally had the head of the caliph on it, but this use of images lasted only a few years before religious objections replaced it with quotations from the Koran. Other coinage used in Muslim-ruled lands also had imagery replaced in the next few years.

Arabic became the official language of all territories of the caliphate, and government officials who spoke Persian and Greek needed to learn Arabic to keep their posts.

The Dome of the Rock was completed in Jerusalem in 691/692. Although Mecca retained importance for Muslims, it is thought that the Umayyad creation of the Dome of the Rock was intended to take some of the importance away from Mecca, since the Umayyads were originally condemned in Mecca by those faithful to the previous Rashidun Caliphate.

The Umayyad expansion consolidated all of Northern Africa and moved into the Iberian Peninsula. It is their presence in Spain that led to the first big clash with Western Europe, when in 721 Odo the Great fought them at the Battle of Toulouse. I'll tell you about Toulouse tomorrow.

John of Damascus

John of Damascus was born into a well-to-do Arab-Christian family in Damascus around 675 CE. His father was an official serving the Umayyad Caliphate. He was a priest, a composer of hymns (some of which are still used in Eastern Orthodox liturgy), and a defender of Christianity. He was interested in law, theology, music, and philosophy.

He lived near the end of patristic development of church dogma, and is considered the last of the Eastern Orthodox Doctors of the Church, being referred sometimes specifically as the Doctor of the Assumption because of his writing on the Assumption of Mary.

He spoke out in contrast to the Eastern tradition of iconoclasm. He wrote three (that we know of) works defending icons:

You see that He forbids image-making on account of idolatry, and that it is impossible to make an image of the immeasurable, uncircumscribed, invisible God. You have not seen the likeness of Him, the Scripture says, and this was St Paul’s testimony as he stood in the midst of the Areopagus: ‘Being, therefore, the offspring of God, we must not suppose the divinity to be like unto gold, or silver, or stone, the graving of art, and device of man.’

These injunctions were given to the Jews on account of their proneness to idolatry. Now we, on the contrary, are no longer in leading strings. Speaking theologically, it is given to us to avoid superstitious error, to be with God in the knowledge of the truth, to worship God alone, to enjoy the fulness of His knowledge. We have passed the stage of infancy, and reached the perfection of manhood. We receive our habit of mind from God, and know what may be imaged and what may not. [link]

The anti-Semitism is not unique. Other works of his show strong hostility to other groups: Against the Jacobites; Against the Nestorians; Dialogue against the Manichees; On the Faith, Against the Nestorians; On the Two Wills of Christ (Against the Monothelites); as well as the straightforward On Right Thinking.

He was also, unsurprisingly, opposed to Islam; one of the first known Christian writers to attack it. In Concerning Heresy he claims Muslims first worshipped Aphrodite, and that Mohammad learned Christianity from an Arian monk instead of true Christianity. Also, he criticizes the claim that Mohammad received the Koran from God in his sleep, because there were no witnesses. Moses received the Torah in front of the Israelites, Jesus was foretold by the Old Testament, but no witnesses exist to support Mohammad's claims, and no prophecies in the Bible foretold Mohammad.

John was also a promoter of perichoresis, the idea that the members of the Trinity are constantly "going around" each other, endlessly interacting and being intertwined. This sounds obvious (maybe) to anyone raised in a Christian environment, but pre-Nicene Councils, focus on the Trinity was often on distinguishing between the three to explain why three were needed. Perichoresis ties their being/existence closer together.

John of Damascus died 4 December 749. He is considered a saint in the Catholic Church, as well as Eastern and Ethiopian Orthodox Churches, the Anglican Communion, and Lutheranism. His feast day is 4 December and 27 March. He is there patron of pharmacists, theology students, and icon painters!

As mentioned above, John's writings helped define the dogma of the early Church. Next I want to go a little deeper into his unofficial title "Doctor of the Assumption."

The Second Council of Nicaea

We have talked about the Council of Nicaea before, but always the First Council in 325. There were several ecumenical councils. The seventh was the second to be held in Nicaea, and was called to deal with the subject of iconoclasm.

I addressed iconoclasm before: the idea that images of religious figures should be forbidden came from Moses' third commandment about not making "graven images."  In 787, the Second Council met to deal with the subject (they hoped) once and for all.

Arguments for included invoking various lines from the Old Testament:

• Genesis 31:34 : "Now Rachel had taken the images, and put them in the camel's furniture, and sat upon them. And Laban searched all the tent, but found them not."
• Exodus 25:19, regarding the fashioning of the Ark of the Covenant: "And make one cherub on the one end, and the other cherub on the other end."
• Ezekiel 41:18: And it was made with cherubims and palm trees, so that a palm tree was between a cherub and a cherub; and every cherub had two faces

...and others.

Over the course of three weeks (24 September to 13 October), presentations were made followed by debate. At the end, the use of religious images was allowed, reversing the edict against them made by Byzantine Emperor Leo III decades earlier. The official statement made declared that veneration offered to the image was actually passed to the subject of the image, and was therefore a good thing.

This Council also declared that every altar should contain a saint's relic. Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches still adhere to this practice.

Not Made By Hand

17th century painted icon (ironically) representing
the "Not Made by Human Hands" tradition;
the Greek letters in the halo indicate that it
is an acheiropoieton.

Speaking of iconoclasm (as we just were in the post on the halo in art), did the Middle Ages or the Church have a position on images not made by hand? If images of the divine were blasphemous, how would one deal with Veronica's Veil, the cloth used by Veronica to wipe the face of Jesus while on his way to Golgotha? His likeness mysteriously appeared on the cloth. Was this not an icon, and proof that icons were acceptable to God?

To be honest, the early Middle Ages should not have had to deal with this dilemma, since the story of Veronica is not found in the Gospels and is not readily known until almost the 13th century. In fact, it is our old friend Gerald of Wales who first records anything in the West about the veil, which he says he saw on a pilgrimage to Rome in 1199. (Gerald is the first to point out that the name "Veronica" is Latin "vera+icon"; that is, "true+image.")*

Authentic or not, it was the start of a trend of cloths that showed the face of Jesus without having been made by human agency. Icons such as this had a name, Acheiropoieta, "not made by hands" (Greek ἀχειροποίητα).

Despite the "not made by hands" label, many items that fell into this category were made by human hands, so long as those hands were holy, or the subject was an acheiropoieton. Saint Luke was said to have painted a portrait of Mary when he visited her. If this image survived, it would be an acceptable icon. Also, human reproductions of Acheiropoieta were considered by some to be as sacred as the originals, and as acceptable in the face of the iconoclasm controversy.

An eastern Church Council of 836 declares certain items to be legitimate Acheiropoieta: the Image of Edessa, a square of cloth containing the face of Jesus; an image in Lydda (now Israel) of the Virgin that appeared miraculously on a pillar in a church; another image of Mary in Lydda that appeared in another church. Unfortunately, there was no Church Council of 836, and the document is considered fraudulent.

Acheiropoieta are usually considered to have miraculous properties. On the Island of Cyprus there is an Acheiropoietos Monastery, named so because of an Acheiropoieton that miraculously moved from Asia Minor in the 11th century to save itself from a Turkish invasion.

*To the Middle Ages, this was proof that the world is composed of patterns and symbolism. To later historians, this suggests that "Veronica" was an ideal name made-up expressly for this anecdote.

Haloes

(photo credit Conor Hogan, 2014)

The picture here is medieval, although not from the Middle Ages. It's of the dome of Our Lady of Victory Church in Lackawanna, NY. It was taken and sent to me by someone who asked "Why is the halo triangular?" It turns out that there have been many ways over the centuries to express saintliness or godliness through the use of different styles of halo.

"Halo" comes from the Greek ἅλως, which means the "shining disk" of the sun or moon.* There have been many representations of haloes in art throughout the whole of art history. Sometimes they are represented as rays shining out from the head of a special person. Often they are circular. The circle may be portrayed as a disk behind the saint's head, looking like a large dinner plate floating so that his or her head is perfectly centered in the circle. In the Renaissance (see the top image here), when realistic perspective became a goal in art, the halo was often shown as if it were a perfectly round and flat disc that was attached to the back of the head, so that at an angle you would see it as an elliptical hat (check out the fancy hats here). Later, it was fashionable to portray it as a simple lighted "hoop," as we see in this 15th-century painting.

There were some special haloes, used in only certain circumstances. Members of the Holy Trinity could be seen with a halo that had three rays (or sets of three lines) extending from the head to the circumference. We see that in the diagram to the right. A halo made of stars was used only for the Blessed Virgin Mary (here is a sample, connecting her to the EU flag), because of the woman whose head was surrounded by 12 stars mentioned in the Book of Revelation who gives birth to the child who was to rule all nations.

Which leaves the triangle. The triangle also represented the Trinity, but was used solely for depicting God the Father. This was perhaps because the triangle is the obvious symbol for the Trinity. It could be because God the Father rules in Heaven, and "heaven" or the area above the earth was sometimes represented symbolically as a triangle. Earth's symbol was a square, due to the four cardinal directions and the "four corners of the earth," and if you look from one horizon to straight up and then down to the far horizon, you have drawn a triangle with your eyes.

So, the church in Lackawanna, NY, drew from some old symbolism for the depiction of God on the dome; clearly, it was not built by iconoclasts.

*You can see examples of the meteorological phenomena that inspired the word here.

Iconoclasm

The word "iconoclast" today usually denotes someone who challenges tradition, but the origin of the word was in the religiously and politically charged world of Constantinople in the Early Middle Ages.

To be honest, "iconoclast" (a destroyer of religious images belonging to his own culture) and its opposite, "iconodule" or "iconophile," were terms created much later by historians to describe the iconomachia (war of icons) of the late 8th and early 9th centuries in the Byzantine Empire.

Each side had its arguments, of course. The iconoclasts invoked the third of Moses 10 Commandments against "making graven images." They argued that any proper image had to be made from the same substance as the original, and therefore wood and stone were not appropriate to portray flesh. The only substance available to represent Christ was the Eucharist, which had been decreed to be Christ's flesh. Also, images were incapable of representing Christ's divinity as well as his humanity. Images had been condemned in churches by the Synod of Elvira in 305, because they might distract people from the true reason for being in church.

The iconodules had their own reasons. Once God incarnated as Jesus, representations of the divine on Earth became justified. God did tell Moses to add cherubim to the Ark. Although idols might be false, icons represented important real people and things. Also, there were miracles associated with icons, attesting to divine approval.

There were two periods, called the First Iconoclasm—from 726-787, begun by Emperor Leo III when he replaced an image of Christ with a cross at the entrance to the palace—and the Second Iconoclasm—in 814-842, when Emperor Leo V thought his military failures were the result of displeasing God. Leo III's major opponent was the venerable St. John of Damascus. Leo V had to contend with the prolific pen of St. Theodore of Stoudios.

Iconoclasm was largely an Eastern Christian conflict. Western Christianity never became seriously concerned with it, to the delight of art historians.