The Iconoclastic Edict of the Caliph Yazid II, A. D. 721 Author(s): A. A. Vasiliev Source: Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 9/10 (1956), pp. 23-47 Published by: Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1291091 . Accessed: 09/03/2014 10:59 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Dumbarton Oaks Papers. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 213.175.166.202 on Sun, 9 Mar 2014 10:59:25 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions THE ICONOCLASTIC EDICT OF THE CALIPH YAZID II, A.D. 721 A. A. VASILIEV This content downloaded from 213.175.166.202 on Sun, 9 Mar 2014 10:59:25 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions The Committeeon Publicationswishes to thankProfessor Marius Canard for his kindnessin editingthis article. Except for minorcorrections and the omissionof the last section,which had no directbearing on the subject, it appearsin the formin whichit was writtenby A. A. Vasilievbefore his departurefor Europe in April,1953. This content downloaded from 213.175.166.202 on Sun, 9 Mar 2014 10:59:25 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions HE attitudeof Islamtoward representations ofhuman beings has been the subjectof numerousworks of whicha listmay be foundin K. A. C. Creswell's"The Lawfulnessof Paintingin Early Islam,"Ars Islamica,XI-XII (1946) 159.' It was inspiredby conceptionsanalogous to those of Judaismand doubtlessinfluenced by them. These ideas found theirexpression in thehadiths, the traditions concerning the life and sayings of the prophetMuhammad the dates of whichare not clearlydetermined.' It is a well knownfact that before the appearanceof the hadithas well as afterit therewere many representations of humanbeings in Islam,but they were forbiddenin the mosques,the onlyplace wherethe interdictionwas strictlyapplied. It is curiousto reportthat only during the fifthand sixth centuriesdid theJews forbid images in theirsynagogues; this restriction did not existpreviously, as is evidentfrom the synagogueof Dura-Europos." Amongthe caliphswhose attituderegarding images conformedstrictly to Moslem law, therewas one, the UmayyadYazid II, who extendedthe prohibitionto the Christianchurches of the empire.' Inasmuchas thereis a certainparallelism between the developmentof the iconoclasticideas in Byzantium,which was relativelyslow beforethe promulgationof the edict of Leo III in 726,' and the developmentof the 'Revised version of his firstessay in his Early Muslim Architecture,I (Oxford, 1932) 269-271. See supplement to the bibliographygiven by Creswell in Bishr Fares, "Essai sur de la decoration 1'esprit islamique. Caire, 1952," Confirencesde l'Institutfranpais d'archdologie The orientale,III, 27. authorpoints out in this work that only the most rigid applied the inter- diction and that in the tenth literally, centuryauthorized scholars believed that only the repre- sentationof Allah in bodily formwas strictlyforbidden. 2 Contraryto thereis on this in the Koran. ' formerlyaccepted opinion, nothing subject See B. "La des chez les J. Frey, question images Juifs a la lumiere des r6centes XV d6couvertes,"Biblica, (Rome, 1934) 298-299. The Excavations at Dura-Europos. Pre- of the Sixth liminaryReport Season of Work,October 1932-March 1933, ed. by M. Rostovtzeff, A. Bellinger,C. Hopkins and C. Welles (New Haven, 1936). was not to 'It obviously necessary apply the same measures to the synagogues. Some scholars have thought that the predecessor of Yazid, "Omar II, well known for his strict Muslim and his acts the orthodoxy against Christians,also pursued an iconoclastic policy. A. S. The and their Tritton, Caliphs non-MuslimSubjects (London-Bombay,1930). R. Aigrain, Dictionnaire et de d'histoire gdographiedccldsiastiques, III (Paris, 1924) col. 1323; J. B. cit. 299; R. de "Une Frey, op. Vaux, O.P., mosaique byzantine t Ma'in [Transjordan]," Revue biblique, XLVII (1938) 227-258. On the basis of an inscriptiondated 719-720 (614, the era of Bosra), de Vaux conjecturesthat the mosaics of the church of Ma'in were restored in this the destructioncarried out the year following by Moslem iconoclasts under the reign of 'Omar II (died February 720). He doubts the historicityof the edict of Yazid II, for he thinksthat it has not been mentionedby any Arab author. See below. -But, on ascending the imperial throne in 717, Leo was not an avowed iconoclast. A remarkable of Leo's from molybdobull (seal) reign, this initial period, has been preserved. On one side is a clean-shaven represented young, emperor crowned with a diadem bearing a on the other the cross; side, Virginholding on her left arm the InfantJesus. Since the seal bears the legend "Leo and Constantine,the Faithful Emperors of the Romans," it is to be This content downloaded from 213.175.166.202 on Sun, 9 Mar 2014 10:59:25 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 26 A. A. VASILIEV same ideas in the Islamic world,which proceeded more rapidlybecause Islam was a more recentreligion, and, inasmuchas, accordingto some scholars,the edict of Leo III mayhave been inspiredby the edict of Yazid of 721, it is importantto reviewthe sourcesrelative to Yazid's iconoclasm, and to studycertain questions which bringout the politicalsimilarity be- tweenthe Emperorand the Caliph. GREEK SOURCES I begin thisstudy with a discussionof sourcesreferring to the edict of Yazid II, and considerfirst the Greek texts. The oldest,and contemporary,source that mentionsthe Saracen reli- gious superstitionssimilar to idolatryfails to give any informationon Islamic iconoclasm.This sourceis the letterof the PatriarchGermanus of Constantinople(715-730) to Thomas of Claudiopolis,one of the icono- clasticbishops of Asia Minor,written about 724, shortlybefore the opening ofthe iconoclastic policy of Leo III, and preservedin the acts of the Second Council of Nicaea of 787.6 In his letter,after accusing the Jews,who "not onlyjust now,but oftenreproached us forsuch things"(i.e. foridolatry in the formof venerationof images), and callingthem "true worshippers of idols"(ot i7j3 6'vroTEL8ckoXarpEau 6paTrEvcral), Germanussays that the Saracens also seem to hit upon somethingsimilar, since "they,up to our own days, veneratein the desertan inanimatestone [XiOcdn ~c] which is calledKhobar [Xofadp]." 7 attributedto a year after720, when ConstantineV was associatedto the throne.See N. Liha'ev, "Sceaux de l'empereurLeon III l'Isaurien,"Byzantion, XI (1936) 473-474. Addi- tionalevidence of theearly attitude of Leo III towardsthe imagesis to be foundin his reply to a letterof the Caliph 'Omar II (hence before720), as givenby the Armenianhistorian Ghevond(see below,p. 43). This letterhas been translatedand explainedwith care by A. Jeffery,who considersit authentic:"Ghevond's Text of the Correspondencebetween 'Omar II and Leo III," HarvardTheological Review, XXXVII (1944) 269-332. Leo III, answering the the Caliph's question, "Why do you adore . .pictures and the cross?" explains why Christianshonor the cross, and adds: "As forpictures, . findingin theOld Testamentthat divinecommand which authorized Moses to have executedin the tabernaclethe figuresof the Cherubim,and animatedby a sincereattachment for the disciplesof the Lord, who burnedwith love forthe Saviour Himself, we havealways felt a desireto conservetheir images, whichhave come downto us fromtheir times as theirliving representations. Their presence charmsus, and we glorifyGod who has saved us throughthe intermediaryof His only- begottenSon, who appearedin the worldin a similarfigure, and we glorifythe saints.But as forthe wood and thecolors, we do notgive them any reverence." (p. 322) 'Mansi, XIII, 109 B-E. D-E: Z~E KaL TO TOLOVTOV Ibid.,109 appaK-lVOi Edft f7r~LTKrTfT7LV 8OKOvULV, apKETOV E"1 arVTOL ft>, atU7VV'qV Kcu E vTpo7rp7vTpoayayEWV TqVi /EXPL TOV VVi EV T' Tp/j TLXOV/LVVircL p a-vTcA T E rq ToV XEYO/AVOVXo/ap Kal TAoL7TCLh -3MaTarLa' saVTrW ,E r[XJTULV, alOAX&)"rpo"rEv77OV~v,a KLUErva(YTpo41qs (W'sv ErLo~16L Zop7-j Orp? yvL()s77 pUTpLa. rarTporapa8o'C Ia'LL This content downloaded from 213.175.166.202 on Sun, 9 Mar 2014 10:59:25 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions ICONOCLASTIC EDICT OF CALIPH YAZID 27 Here is the earliestmention of the word Khobar in the sense of the Kaaba in Mekka. Later,but stillin the eighthcentury, John of Damascus, in his De haeresibusLiber, refersto the Kaaba as Xafia0lcor Khaber. As did the PatriarchGermanus, he reproachesthe Saracenswith adoring and kissingthe stone,which is said to representthe head of Aphrodite.8 The Xi0o la'fvxoqin the letterof PatriarchGermanus brings to minda saying ascribed by a Moslem writerto the second Caliph 'Omar, who, referringto the black stone,supposedly declared: "I know thatthou art a stone,without power to harmor to help,and had I not seen the Messenger of God kissthee, I would notkiss thee." 9 The letterof the PatriarchGermanus, though failing to supplyany in- formationon the iconoclasticedict of Yazid II, shows that,from his own pointof view,the real