In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

O N E The Biblical Prohibition of Images The student attempting to outline the intellectual backgroun d an d sources of iconoclastic traditions in the West has a clearly defined starting point: it is the biblical prohibition of images. In the Middle Ages or during the Reformation, i n the period between, say, Tertullian and Luther or Ignatius of Loyola, whoever dealt with images had to come to terms with the Second Commandment , t o interpre t it , an d t o asses s it s plac e i n a comprehensive syste m o f beliefs . Moder n scholar s ar e of cours e awar e of th e source s fro m whic h th e biblica l prohibitio n o f image s derived ; they know that this prohibition had forerunners in prebiblical cultures.1 But whe n w e loo k a t ou r proble m fro m th e poin t o f vie w o f a lat e antique or early medieval believer , whether highly educated or illiterate, these prebiblica l source s an d earl y culture s vanis h int o nothingness , disappear altogether . T o th e period s betwee n earl y Christianit y an d High Baroque the biblical prohibition o f image s was an absolute beginning , the unprecedented formation o f a persisting attitude . Ha d a n iso13 14 Reflections in Classical Antiquity lated fragment of an early aniconic culture ever been noted by a medieval or humanisti c schola r (a s i n som e isolate d case s ma y actuall y hav e happened), th e schola r woul d hav e ha d t o mak e i t dependen t i n som e way o n wha t th e Bibl e says . Fo r fifteen centuries i t was a n establishe d truth that the ban on depicting God began with the Bible. The biblical text itself i s beyond the domain in which a n historian of aesthetic idea s usually feel s a t home. I t is only i n order to outline som e of th e source s o f lat e antiqu e an d medieva l though t o n th e statu s o f sacred images that I shall make some comments on the biblical prohibition of images. I wish I could enter the mind of a careful an d pious student living in one o f th e centurie s wit h whic h thi s stud y deals . Disturbe d b y ever renewed an d violen t conflict s ove r th e statu s o f sacre d images , he ma y have turned naively—so we imagine—to the Bible for help and instruction . Wha t coul d h e have foun d there ? We know , o f course , tha t suc h direct questioning of the Bible was rare in the periods we shall discuss in the followin g chapters . Bu t regardles s o f ho w i t wa s approached , th e Bible was, as everybody knows , the ultimate authority . Eve n though a s a rule the text was known only through a thick filter of interpretations , biblical attitude s determine d th e directio n o f thought . Ou r first task is , therefore, t o understand wha t our student ma y have found, or believed to be said, in the Scriptures. What th e Ol d Testamen t say s abou t image s i s no t fre e o f a certai n ambiguity.2 A modern student, trying to bring the concise biblical statements int o a system , canno t escap e th e feelin g tha t h e o r sh e i s face d with contradictin g attitudes . The simpl e questio n o f wha t precisel y th e Scripture says about images is not easily answered. I n the Middle Ages, every educate d person , on e assumes , mus t hav e bee n awar e tha t rejec tion , or at least suspicion, of images was an attitude characteristic of the Old Testament. Nevertheless, there must have been additional questions. What precisel y doe s Scriptur e prohibit ? Coul d I indeed ente r the piou s student's mind , I woul d probabl y realiz e ho w muc h...

Share