Talk:Iconoclasm

message: I think Douglas Rushkoff's definition of Jewish iconoclasm ought to be integrated into this explaination, whereas iconoclasm is an integral part of Jewish theology, the act of which (on forefather Abraham's part) was the defining moment that gave rise to Jewish monotheism. -- Mobius1
: By all means, work it in. Sounds appropriate for the topic. Wesley 16:10, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Jewish iconclasm

message: Just wondering if the following article is relevant to this topic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban#Buddhas_of_Bamiyan
* Added the destruction of the Buddhas (Robindch (talk) 22:07, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Afghanistan 

message: Many of the original artwork destroyed in Europe during the Iconoclasm Period were images of the original depictions of Mary and Christ. The Orthodox had Images of 'semi-Africans' The artists were not fully sure of what african features were, besides dark skin and curly black hair, thus the paintings and coins had european shaped faces with dark skin and curly black hair. Western Europe destroyed these original depictions. In Russia, the images survived destruction. This link shows a range of artwork from the times. 
 http://www.ocf.org/OrthodoxPage/icons/misc_in.html
Or just search for Orthodox artwork.
There are tons of sites, and the artwork is for sale in some places.
: Sorry, those images didn't have "African features". You probably mean resembling Negroid features. Which indeed is strange. That's if you do not know the real history of the mother-child-cult. Hint: It doesn't have anything to do with Jesus Christ, but with Babylonian mysteries, which however were a wronging of prophesies already made. --105.12.5.86 (talk) 16:05, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Actual Artwork Destroyed 

message: Attempted revisions:
Germanos, the iconodule Patriarch of Constantinople, either resigned or was deposed following the ban, expressing concern that it would undermine the doctrine of the Incarnation. In the Western part of the Byzantine empire, Pope Gregory III held two synods at Rome and condemned Leo's actions, with the result that Leo seized some papal lands. During this initial period concern on the side of the emperor seems to have had little to do with theology and more with practical evidence and effects. Icon veneration was forbidden simply because it was seen as a violation of the biblical commandment forbidding making and venerating images. It also gave some the opportunity to enrich themselves through the confiscation of icons, as evidenced by the Council of Hieria's condemnation of the practice in 754.
Problem:
The lack of theological defense was not merely on the side of the emperor at this point.
Problem:  Who are the "some"?  If you want to say it was Leo, simply do so and back it up with a quoted citation, but avoid given the impression that Leo's opposition to icons was primarily for enriching his coffers, for which there is no evidence.  Otherwise that "some" enriched themselves is immaterial.
In a response recalling the later Protestant Reformation, Constantine moved against the monasteries, had relics thrown into the sea, and stopped the invocation of saints. (The "Iconoclastic Council" of 754 anathemetized anyone who "denies the profit of the invocation of Saints" among others.) 
Problem:
You present it without any point.  The real point would be that Constantine apparently held some personal beliefs that went beyond the declaration of the Council of Hieria.  Your problem, then, is how to present that in the context of the present article as somehow relevant.    
It would be very relevant in an article on Constantine, but it seems inserted here merely to "make Constantine look bad."  If you can somehow increase its relevancy to the article and back it up with the appropriate quote and citation, it might well be added to the article.  At present it is more appropriate to Constantine's personal psychology 
and a separate article on him.
You also removed a bit of information on how Patriarch Germanos thought that a change of stance would show "the church had erred."  You completely changed it to give it a different meaning, rather than adding what you felt was an additional bit of information.  It has been returned, and any addition will be considered for future inclusion, but merely replacing it with a quite different statement is something else.
Do not expect me to be so wordy in the future.  I do not have the time.
: Germanos did give a brief theological defense of icons prior to their ban. I added the quote to either this or the Icon article some time ago, and you deleted it, I can only assume because it contradicts your view of history.
: The Council of Hieria did not name the specific princes and officials who enriched their coffers, so neither did I. I did cite that council, which if you read it the quote is easy enough to find. 
: The disconnect between imperial behaviour and what the Church had declared is highly relevant to this subject as well as to an article on Constantine.
: If you believe that Patriarch Germanos thought that a change of stance would show the church had erred, please provide a citation in support of that. I have already provided a quote showing that Germanos's concern was theological, and that the error was in forbidding images. 
: For these reasons, I'm restoring the changes. Wesley 16:22, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes 

message: We recommend that a section be created labeled “Iconoclasm during the French Revolution”. It has come to our attention that a number of important events and anti-theological dispositions during the terror have been fundamentally excluded from the present page. We thus would welcome a chance to offer four points of analysis that we believe will contribute to the already informative page you oversee. These points are 1) A more precise description of the transformation of Notre Dame into a Temple of Reason, 2) The removal of fine art with depictions of the former monarchy as divine, as carried out by Revolutionary activist groups during the Terror, 3) Ritual burnings of religious volumes, and their replacement with enlightenment texts in public thought and discourse, and 4)  The desecration of the royal tombs. Hercules1794 (talk) 15:49, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Iconoclasm during the French Revolution

message: :Wesley, I think that the first point of summary exaggerates, when it saysIconoclasm forbade the making of any image or painting that was intended to represent Jesus or one of the saints. Reading it more closely, the extreme view of the iconoclasts, which holds pictoral representation in such high contempt, is explained by contrast: If anyone shall endeavour to represent the forms of the Saints in lifeless pictures with material colours which are of no value (for this notion is vain and introduced by the devil), and does not rather represent their virtues as living images in himself, let him be anathema!" The point is not quite that image and painting are forbidden.  Rather, "if anyone shall represent ... and does not rather represent".  The contrast is between two ways of representing the likeness of the saints: by paint (which leaves their virtue unrepresented), or by imitation of their virtuous life.  The latter is the tradition received from the apostles, the former is a vain notion introduced by the devil, according to the iconoclasts. 
:I think that the summary could better be written, "Iconoclasm condemned the making of any lifeless image ..." — Mark (Mkmcconn) ** 17:53, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think if you read the council's definition in full, you'll find that a painting is exactly what they meant by "lifeless image", and that in particular, any painting of Jesus presented a false Christology just by being a painting of Jesus. Veneration was only one of the things you could not do with a painting of Jesus. You were also forbidden to make a painting/image (of Jesus or the saints), bring one into a church, bring one into one's home, etc. Wesley 05:50, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Lifeless representation forbidden

message: Mark's summary is incorrect.  Iconoclasm did not condemn the making of any lifeless image.  It condemned the making of images of God, Of Jesus, of the angels and saints for veneration.  Secular images were not forbidden, nor was the cross, which was used to replace forbidden images in churches.  
: What I said was that it condemned the making of any lifeless image of Jesus or of saints (in the attempt to represent their virtues by colors of paint, rather than in a godly life).  Paint as opposed to life, is the central objection.  The image of Jesus can be seen, incarnate - in a life conformed to his image, in the church as it grows toward the full measure of the stature of Christ, the Head of the Church.  It cannot be seen in a painting: a mere docetist shadow.  The full quote of the Iconoclast anathemas makes this clear; and it's too bad that it was removed. — Mark (Mkmcconn) ** 17:38, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Mark's "Summary"

message: I don't know nearly enough to do this, but there really should be a section on (Russian) peasant iconoclasm, as it was such a major part of the history.  Nearly every peasant revolt involved destroying "foreign" symbols, which were usually non-reigious things such as glass windows, or mantleplaces.  Yes there was sometimes religoius aspects as well, but that was still 'out with the new, in with the old' iconoclasm.  Iconoclasm manifested itself even more in the Russian revolution, where lenin had to take drastic measures to protect priceless (bourgeois/european) art, artifacts, symbols from destruction!
::Yes - also the Cultural revolution should be covered  Johnbod 04:31, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-religious Iconoclasm 

message: In The first iconoclastic period section: 730-787 section:
- In the third paragraph, made clarifications on who participated in the Iconoclast Council and its uncanonical nature.  Referring to the Constantine Council as the "Seventh Ecumenical Council" is inaccurate.  The Councils were numbered later on, and this one isn't the Seventh EC.
In the Issues in Byzantine Iconoclasm section:
- Removed sentence: "While the arguments of the iconodules were largely based on biblical commands and written Church tradition, John based his arguments on the Neo-Platonist view of the relation between an image and that which it depicts."
This is factually incorrect.  Not only does it contradict the next few comments, but St. John Damascene used Biblical and Patristic material in his support of the veneration of images.  There's too much material to copy over, but excerpts of his On Holy Images and The Fount of Wisdom can be found here (http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/johndam-icons.html).  The Patristic support is vastly more supportive of the Iconodule position than the Iconoclast one.
Avraamrii 03:13, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for cleaning that up. I recall repeatedly asking an earlier editor for patristic material supporting iconoclasm, and if I recall correctly, all he provided were some writings urging Christians not to worship pagan idols. Wesley 05:27, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New edits 

message: You may want to investigate that among Spanish Catholics there was a rumor that the Durch Reformers smashed the images of the saints but did not break the images of the devils subjugated by those saints. --Error 18:59, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Rumors on the Beeldenstorm

message: See Talk:Aniconism for my reasons against a complete merge. Wesley 05:24, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  proposed merge with [[Aniconism]] 

message: In the current version of Islamic iconoclasm there are two out of a total of three paragraphs dealing with the reconversion of non-islamic religious builings into mosques. I don't think they should be in this article since the destructive action is directed against the builing as a whole and not against the images in it. A good example however is the plastering of the floor of the Aya Sophia. -- And yes, no merging with aniconism, these are two distinct topics. / Abjad 03:43, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Iconoclasm and architecture

message: Not sure where to put this at the moment, but worthy of inclusion IMO: Christian zealots destroy ancient Arctic petroglyphs, Randy Boswell, CanWest News Service, August 26, 2006 http://www.canada.com/reginaleaderpost/news/story.html?id=8abe338f-f3f6-4a2e-a701-082e61411817 Шизомби 07:22, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: modern iconoclasm

message: from the article:
:Such one is the depiction of the Prophet Muhammad. (an allegorical statue of Muhammad on the State Appellate Division courthouse ...
::where would this be then???   Johnbod 04:28, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  what state courthouse ? 

message: Whilst we're on the subject, in this bit (1st outbreak section):
"Surviving letters Germanus wrote at the time say little of theology. According to Patricia Karlin-Hayter, what worried Germanus was that the ban of icons would only prove that the Church had been in error for a long time and so play into the hands of Jews and Muslims"[15]"
- do you know if there are other letters actually dating from "the time", as opposed to the letter(s) to the two Cappadocian bishops from before the outbreak, which I suspect this is referring to? If not, it should be rephrased a bit.  Johnbod 18:34, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There are writings (including a "testament," if I'm remembering correctly) attributed to Germanos, and supposed to have been written after his resignation. Best places to check: Haldon & Brubaker's Sources, or Stein's Der Beginn des byzantinischen Bilderstreites (Munich, 1978). Neither at hand -- will check next week if I have a chance. --Javits2000 18:44, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks - they're beyond my grasp. it sounds to me like the reference is to the early letters. Johnbod 19:15, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Germanus/os letters 

message: At present the last two paragraphs of the "sources" section under Byz. iconoclasm don't really deal with sources -- more with questions of public opinion & the origins of iconoclasm. A suggestion: should we perhaps add another header to set this off, for example "Origins of Iconoclasm"? This could in turn be expanded -- i.e. the question of icon worship before iconoclasm (the Kitzinger model & Brubaker); the Quinisext Council on images; the role of icons in the military defense of Byz. cities. --Javits2000 09:43, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Structure 

message: On May 23rd, I edited, factually, the section to end in this manner:
Protestant Christianity, however, was not uniformly hostile to the use of religious images. Martin Luther argued that Christians should be free to use religious images as long as they did not worship them in the place of God. Zwingli and others for the sake of saving the Word rejected all plastic art; Luther, with an equal concern for the Word, but far more conservative, would have all the arts to be the servants of the Gospel.
“I am not of the opinion” said Luther, “that through the Gospel all the arts should be banished and driven away, as some zealots want to make us believe; but I wish to see them all, especially music, in the service of Him Who gave and created them.” Again he says: “I have myself heard those who oppose pictures, read from my German Bible. … But this contains many pictures of God, of the angels, of men, and of animals, especially in the Revelation of St. John, in the books of Moses, and in the book of Joshua. We therefore kindly beg these fanatics to permit us also to paint these pictures on the wall that they may be remembered and better understood, inasmuch as they can harm as little on the walls as in books. Would to God that I could persuade those who can afford it to paint the whole Bible on their houses, inside and outside, so that all might see; this would indeed be a Christian work. For I am convinced that it is God’s will that we should hear and learn what He has done, especially what Christ suffered. But when I hear these things and meditate upon them, I find it impossible not to picture them in my heart. Whether I want to or not, when I hear, of Christ, a human form hanging upon a cross rises up in my heart: just as I see my natural face reflected when I look into water. Now if it is not sinful for me to have Christ’s picture in my heart, why should it be sinful to have it before my eyes?”
I would like to know why my revision was reverted?
-Paul Kiler, Pastor to Artists and Creatives, Missionary with Artists in Christian Testimony International
paul.kiler (at) gmail.com
Pkiler 21:06, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not by me, but I might well have done. Much too long, given the very brief coverage of the subject we have.  The first bit has been left. You might try The Reformation and Art.Johnbod 22:02, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Reformation Iconoclasm Changes

message: As explained  here the following was deleted in the article by  but no reason was put on the talkpage. Why was it deleted, and how could it be improved..
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Iconoclasm&diff=prev&oldid=154852950 There is also evidence for destruction of icons by medieval Muslim rulers of South Asia. The most famous concerns a stone lingam, an aniconic representation of the Hindu god Shiva, which was housed in the temple complex at Somnath in Gujarat. According to a tradition preserved by the 16th century historian Mahommed Kasim Ferishta, the Ghaznavid emperor Mahmud of Ghazni raided Somnath in 1025, looting the temple. The temple Brahmins offered to buy the lingam back, but Mahmud refused, and his army carried it back to Ghazni. There the lingam was broken, and a portion of it was re-used as the threshold of the congregational mosque.F.B. Flood, "Between cult and culture: Bamiyan, Islamic iconoclasm, and the museum," The Art Bulletin 84 (2002), 650.
What is wrong with Dr Flood? Or is the problem that the victims are polytheists?
Librorum Prohibitorum (talk) 03:37, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no question that the Muslim conquest of India was accompanied by enormous destruction of Buddhist and Hindu buildings and images, though there are far better known examples than the one you say is the "most famous" - the site of the Qutub Minar is already mentioned in the article, and the site of the Babri Mosque in Ayodhya is all too well known.  There are many more examples - some in Decline of Buddhism in India for example, most famously Nalanda.  The question is to what extent these meet the definition at the head of the article:"Iconoclasm is the deliberate destruction within a culture of the culture's own religious icons and other symbols or monuments, usually for religious or political motives ..." since the commanders at least of the Muslim armies were mostly to some extent non-Indian in origin, and whether Muslim and Hindu or Buddhist culture were the same is a complicated question. The same issue arises with Muslim conquests elsewhere.  Your edit is incorrect in at least one respect, and ignores the text on the question already in the article. Johnbod (talk) 10:48, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletions 

message: I have in mind the occasional public destruction of recorded music, as is seen in the US since the 1950's, as outlined here:
http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/14759.htm
Often books, videos and CDs are destroyed together:
http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/bannedbooksweek/bookburning/21stcentury/21stcentury.htm
There is already a Wiki article for book-burning:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_burning but I can't seem to find one for recorded music. Is a broader merge indicated here?
131.81.37.22 (talk) 16:26, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think this would be called iconoclasm; obviously the objections to images are of a particular kind. I think this would be classed with book-burning. Johnbod (talk) 16:48, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does 'iconoclasm' extend to non-visual icons? 

message: The image :Image:Destruction of Buddhas March 21 2001.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --23:45, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:Destruction of Buddhas March 21 2001.jpg

message: this "Iconoclasm is the practice of destroying/ridiculing cultural icons or institutions or not being allowed to depict an icon within a culture of the culture's own religious icons and other symbols or monuments, usually for religious or political motives" is akward, at best74.192.12.135 (talk) 01:02, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it is! Now changed back to the old version - I don't know when that happened. Thanks. Johnbod (talk) 01:33, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: akward

message: This page claims that 'Iconoclasm' is a French word. Yet Iconoclasm_(Byzantine) says that it is a Greek word. Is it both? NelC (talk) 20:14, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: French or Greek?

message: In the defining section in the top of the page "It is thus generally distinguished from the destruction by one culture of the images of another, for example by the Spanish in their American conquests. The term does not generally encompass the specific destruction of images of a ruler after his death or overthrow"
yet in the very bottom an example from Baghdad is mentioned in which American soldiers tears down a statue of Saddam Hussein. --93.160.252.18 (talk) 10:37, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I've removed that & post-WW2 actions.  This whole section is relatively recent & I'm not sure it really belongs here. I've added a bit to the lead. Johnbod (talk) 11:50, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Contradiction on definition vs. examples

message: How about mentioning the toppling of the Saddam Hussein statue in the last section on "Political and revolutionary iconoclasm"?
Dagme (talk) 20:15, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Not iconoclasm as such - see the definition. Johnbod (talk) 20:36, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Saddam Hussein 

message: In the section Reformation iconoclasm there are a little too many images. They should ideally be all at right, since any image at the left confuses the indentation structure, making it hard to perceive the quotes. I moved one image from floating to the left to float to the right. If anyone thinks that removing one or two superfluous images in that section is a good idea, then I will support the thinker in question. Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 15:07, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't especially agree; a one-line gallery would be one solution. Johnbod (talk) 16:35, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Too many images

message: The recent Hindu section updates seem (to me) mostly a catalog of persecution of Hindus, as opposed to instances of iconoclasm.  These updates seem well-sourced and well-written, but I think they have been plunked into the wrong article. M.boli (talk) 12:45, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I know what you mean, but the destruction of temples with images at the least includes iconoclasm, though the word usually means destroying the images but leaving the building largely intact. I'm not sure the more thorough approach of some Indian Muslims can be excluded. Johnbod (talk) 12:52, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The article itself mentions several instances where artworks on several religious places are hit. It is similar. ..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. Humour Thisthat2011   13:48, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

text: Prosecution of Hindus is hardly mentioned. The substance mentioned strictly belongs to iconoclasm. ..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. Humour Thisthat2011   13:46, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: And the section labeled Contemporary persecution is about what, if it isn't about contemporary Persecution of Hindus? M.boli (talk) 14:34, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That is about contemporary Iconoclasm. ..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. Humour Thisthat2011   14:51, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

text: All that is irrelevant can be edited out. ..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. Humour Thisthat2011   14:50, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

text: I agree we should essentially stick to physical destruction, but it seems to me the present text largely does so - I'm not seeing that "much of the included material ...is mostly about riots, torture, edicts against language, and slaughter". Perhaps you could quote passages here? Johnbod (talk) 14:51, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

text: Edited as suggested. ..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. Humour Thisthat2011   15:45, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

text: The same is true of medieval Catholicism, Tibetan Buddhism, probably Roman pagan religion and so on. Johnbod (talk) 16:36, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

text: Aye, aye, Cap'n. I'll stop running off at the mouth now. M.boli (talk) 16:41, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:    — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kunalrks (talk • contribs) 15:27, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hindu section: largely a catalog of persecution? 

message: Here I intend iconoclasm in opposition of iconodules  (Do not worshipers of images), No explicitly in destructive sense
The iconoclasm was not characteristic of the first Islam indeed I remember the mosaics of the Dome of the Rock, the mosque of Damascus and the ruins of the Umayyad palaces in the Syrian desert. There are lot of animals figures. Only with the Abbasid Caliphate iconosclas became common in all Islam. I remember that iconoclasm was present in the late Roman Empire in various Christian heresies and in Manicheism, moreover it has always been present in Judaism that obviously influenced Christianism and Islam.
Many Christians of Syria and Egypt that were converted to Islam often in opposition to Byzantium, were iconoclasts. There were many anti-Trinitarians in Syria. They never accepted Nicaea. The Islam of Four Rightly Guided Caliphs was exit from Arabia with almost no theology but with simple dogmas.
So it is not the iconoclasm of Islam that has influenced the Byzantine iconoclasm. But it is late Roman Empire iconoclasm that influenced Islam iconoclasm.
Finally I remember that during the short period of iconoclasm power in Byzantium the Exarchate of Ravenna definitively broke away from Byzantium. Hovewer also in western side the iconoclasm remain latent. I remember the Cathar, Albigenses heresies and some currents into Cattolic church for example the Franciscan spirituals. All well before Protestantism. All these movements are heavily influenced by the idea of the early Christians comunities in which iconoclasm often was in opposition pagan “iconodulia”. It is no coincidence that there are many beautiful classical statues without heads ..... and sculpture and painting are so decayed.
--Andriolo (talk) 18:04, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Christian and Manichean iconoclasm older than Islamic iconoclasm. 

message: I nominated the section "Chinese iconoclasm" for neutrality review, particularly for the following statement: 
"Muslims do not believe in superstition (see Shirk (Islam)) and his religion may have influenced Bai to take action against the idols in the temples and the superstitious practices in China."
Claiming particular Islamic proscriptions are irreconcilable with rituals of the faith(s) practiced in the temples destroyed by Bai Chongxi, that such irreconcilability was significant to Bai, and that his actions were facilitated by his "inherently anti-superstitious Islamic perspective" is not neutral.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.175.5.220 (talk) 04:57, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The section is neutral.  It merely says that Bai's religion may have influenced his zeal in the Kuomintang [Guomindang] campaign in 1926 to suppress temples and practices denounced as superstitious.  The source cited, the work of historian Diana Lary, is consistent with the statement made in this article.  And Lary is a reputable and respected scholar of China in this period and region. --Pechmerle (talk) 04:58, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Chinese iconoclasm

message: I realise this has already addressed above, but I feel this subject is important and should be treated more explicitly. However, the treatment of this question in the article Byzantine iconoclasm is unsatisfying and insufficient, in my opinion. Note that Aniconism in Christianity#Byzantine iconoclasm says:
:The political aspects of the conflicts are complex, involving with the relationship between the Byzantine Emperors, the Orthodox Church councils, and the Pope. There has been much scholarly discussion over the possible influence on the Iconoclasts of the aniconism in Islam, the century-old religion which had inflicted devastating defeats on Byzantium in the decades preceding. Most scholars reject direct religious influence, though many feel the feeling of crisis produced by defeats at the hands of Islam contributed to the Iconoclast movement.
If the issue has been so intensely discussed in the literature, there should be plenty of sources to cite, and a fuller treatment of the subject should be possible; enough to merit a separate section in Byzantine iconoclasm.
Also, Iconoclasm#Byzantine iconoclasm says:
:In the Byzantine Empire, iconoclasm began with Emperor Leo III. Apart from the purely religious conflict, it created political and economic divisions in Byzantine society; it was generally supported by the Eastern, poorer, non-Greek peoples of the Empire [...] who had to constantly deal with Arabic raids. On the other hand, the wealthier Greeks of Constantinople, and also the peoples of the Balkan and Italian provinces, strongly opposed iconoclasm. [...]
:The use of images had probably been increasing in the years leading up to the outbreak of iconoclasm. One notable change came in 695, when Justinian II put a full-face image of Christ on the obverse of his gold coins. The effect on iconoclast opinion is unknown, but the change caused Caliph Abd al-Malik to stop his earlier adoption of Byzantine coin types. He started a purely Islamic coinage with lettering only. [...]
This is a pretty suggestive correlation, to say the least. The idea that the successes of Islam had something to do with the movement is hardly unreasonable, and the second paragraph is evidence enough that Islam was in fact adverse to (especially religious) images in the period in question. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 18:29, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think anyone doubted the last point, did they? Johnbod (talk) 19:51, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Islamic influence on Byzantine iconoclasm 

message: Please stop deleting this paragraph. It is a summary of an article from a peer-review academic journal (with noted scholar Norman Geisler being one of the editors). The author has a Ph.D. in church history and the editors have relevant degrees. Just because you don't like what it says doesn't mean you can delete it and then accuse those who restore it of "edit warring." The paragraph could probably use some copy-editing, maybe even condensing, but to delete a reference to one of the few articles on iconoclasm in a wiki page on iconoclasm is unwarranted.
::==Iconoclasm in early Christianity==
John B. Carpenter argues that the early church inherited the opposition to icons in second temple, Talmudic Judaism, and opposed icons through the fourth century.John B. Carpenter, "Icons and the Eastern Orthodox Claim to Continuity with the Early Church," Journal of the International Society of Christian Apologetics, Vol. 6, No. 1, 2013, pp. 107-122. Hence, early Christians were accused of being "atheists" by Romans who assumed the absence of images meant the absence of belief in gods.For example, Martyrdom of Polycarp, chapter 9; cited by John B. Carpenter, "Icons and the Eastern Orthodox Claim to Continuity with the Early Church," Journal of the International Society of Christian Apologetics, Vol. 6, No. 1, 2013, p. 111. Origen (184-254) responded to the charge of "atheism" by admitting that Christians did not use images in worship, following the Second Commandment.Origin, Contra Celsus, Book VII, Chapter 64; according to John B. Carpenter, "Icons and the Eastern Orthodox Claim to Continuity with the Early Church," Journal of the International Society of Christian Apologetics, Vol. 6, No. 1, 2013, p. 112. Canon 36 of the Council of Elvira (c. 305) states, “Pictures are not to be placed in churches, so that they do not become objects of worship and adoration.” About the year 327 the early church historian Eusebius (c. AD 263 – 339) wrote, "To depict purely the human form of Christ before its transformation, on the other hand, is to break the commandment of God and to fall into pagan error."David M. Gwynn, From Iconoclasm to Arianism: The Construction of Christian Tradition in the Iconoclast Controversy [Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 47 (2007) 225–251], p. 227.  Epiphanius (inter 310–320 – 403), bishop of Salamis, in Cyprus wrote, in Letter 51 (c. 394), to John, Bishop of Jerusalem about an incident of finding an image in a church in his jurisdiction: "I went in to pray, and found there a curtain hanging on the doors of the said church, dyed and embroidered. It bore an image either of Christ or of one of the saints; I do not rightly remember whose the image was. Seeing this, and being loath that an image of a man should be hung up in Christ's church contrary to the teaching of the Scriptures, I tore it asunder and advised the custodians of the place to use it as a winding sheet for some poor person." He goes on to tell John that such images are “contrary to our religion” and to instruct the presbyter of the church that such images are “an occasion of offense.”John B. Carpenter, "Icons and the Eastern Orthodox Claim to Continuity with the Early Church," Journal of the International Society of Christian Apologetics, Vol. 6, No. 1, 2013, p. 118. The issue of icons in eastern Christianity was only settled at the second "Seventh Ecumenical Council," in 787, leading Carpenter to conclude that that council marks the true beginning of Eastern Orthodoxy with it's prominent use of icons.Carpenter, ibid., p. 121.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.53.88.54 (talk) 15:00, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: No, we won't! The proper article for this is Aniconism in Christianity where the matter is already dealt with in greater detail using specialist sources, which you/Carpenter can't claim to be. The conclusion that "that council marks the true beginning of Eastern Orthodoxy with it's prominent use of icons" is all but WP:FRINGE and belongs to religious polemic rather than an article on a historical subject. The manifesto of the "International Society of Christian Apologetics" is clear from its website, which comes complete with a doctrinal statement. People may want to see Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Multiple_religious_articles_related_to_Eastern_Orthodoxy and Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Yeoberry (where this ISP says he is Yeoberry). Johnbod (talk) 16:29, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Information Suppression

message: Would this  deserve to be mentioned? Recent event, but old stuff. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:51, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Syria 

message: I have reordered this article to encompass the two themes of iconoclasm identified in the lede: religious and political forms of iconoclasm. As discussed numerous times on this talk page, the article must be clear about which is which, and that political iconoclasm should not be excluded from the discussion. I also feel there is too much emphases given to some subjects - the French Revolution and the destruction of Hindu temples in particular - and I suspect this is probably because there are no specific main articles to refer the reader to. These main articles should be done developed from the material I have temporarily commented out. (I am prepared to do the articles, I just want to know what the community has to say about it.) Then the article will work better as an overview of the "vast and exciting world of iconoclasm" and the reader can then surf to more detailed articles at his or her pleasure. Comments? Better ideas? Verne Equinox (talk) 01:43, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Major reworking is warranted

message: Does someone can add about ISIS?
*http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/26/isis-fighters-destroy-ancient-artefacts-mosul-museum-iraq
*http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/06/isis-destroys-ancient-assyrian-site-of-nimrud
--Setareh1990 (talk) 17:01, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: ISIS

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Iconoclasm. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121023135634/http://www.islamicamagazine.com/content/view/161/59/ to http://www.islamicamagazine.com/content/view/161/59/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:24, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Iconoclasm. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6AS7rgB7f?url=http://faculty.cua.edu/pennington/canon%20Law/ElviraCanons.htm to http://faculty.cua.edu/pennington/canon%20Law/ElviraCanons.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:36, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I don't have a lot of time, but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idolatry_in_Sikhism . I think it would be an informational addition to the article. --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 03:41, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add a section on Sikhism 

message: What in the world are "bengal fires"? Also written in the same way (copyvio) at Statue of Zlatan Elizium23 (talk) 17:12, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Bengal fires are obsolete, but probably flares are intended. --Error (talk) 11:43, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Curious 

message: There was an attempted blanking of two paragraphs wholly cited to two books by Richard Eaton. For the benefit of the IP that have reverted, as their claims seemed unfounded and made no sense with regards to the subsequent paragraphs also detailing further acts of a similar vein, Richard Eaton is a professor of the University of Arizona that has published several books on Indian history. If there is criticism of his claims from a professor or professional historian then I suggest you bring that forwards before you again blank those paragraphs without a legitimate reason. Koncorde (talk) 15:08, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Richard M Eaton 

message: I recently made substantial edits to the citations on this page. This included several actions:
# I split ; ;  into 
# I converted a number of template-less references to use 
# I added information to citations, such as  or 
# I corrected incorrect information, such as the title of http://www.frontline.in/static/html/fl1725/17250620.htm
# I merged duplicate references
# I removed superfluous URL parameters
# I split  into 
# I changed the case of titles to sentence case
# I expanded references with additional information, such as the French original from which the Foucault reference was translated.
# I changed some  to 
# I changed URLs from aggregators like MSN.com to original publication sources like The Guardian
My changes were reverted by  based on WP:CITEVAR. I think I may have erred in #1 above. Many references on this page already use , so I didn't think #2 would be an issue for WP:CITEVAR, and using templates greatly improves machine parseability. Many of the references appear very similar with and without templates; I'm not seeing a clear citation style change. All of the other changes seem to me to be clear improvements.  Can you be more specific in which changes you object to? What do others think? Daask (talk) 11:17, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Introducing sfn is a major change, and doing so without discussion, not to mention edit-warring to preserve your changes, is most certainly a change of citation style in terms of  WP:CITEVAR.  Merging duplicate references is arguably so. Like many articles, this has developed somewhat mixed styles. This does not mean any drive-by editor can come along and convert the the whole article to their personal preference, including different templates, without discussion. Or, of course, they can try that, but should not get shirty when reverted; they are the ones in the wrong. I am not objecting to all the changes made, but there are too many to expect people to pick through them. Johnbod (talk) 13:09, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

text: I see three instances of harvnb converted to sfn, plus one more bare-text short cite converted to sfn. These could be harvnb to respect the custom of the people who have been editing this page. Regarding the reading list at the bottom: I don't understand the problem with putting the readings in cite templates. Everything else seems like cite completion and cite maintenance. I get that it was a big pile of edits to pick through, but that's because it looks like a lot of work was done. Maybe now the picking has been done? Most are improvements, I'm glad it's now on the talk page. --- M.boli (talk) 15:08, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Respecting the clear policy, you mean. I don't myself see any benefit in putting the "readings" (sources) in cite templates, if sfn is not being used. I said I didn't oppose all the changes, although only a few introduce any actual improvement. Johnbod (talk) 14:59, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation improvements 

message: — Assignment last updated by Sdolphin02 (talk) 16:43, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Islamic Art

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:55, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion