Secrecy, Politics, Monasteries, and Byzantine Iconoclasm

The Byzantine iconoclastic controversy (726–843) has sparked a debate among Byzantine scholars. The literature on iconoclasm and Byzantine history links the onset of the Iconoclasm period to various indirect factors, including the dual nature of Christ, the ban on idols in the Old Testament, the expansion of the Muslim empire, natural disasters, schisms, Leo III’s political motives, and many others. Debates in the Iconoclasm age between iconodules and iconoclasts created confusion in the literature, and researchers concluded that iconodules altered records of the first phase of iconoclasm by introducing theological concepts. However, theological debates over the nature of Christ obscured the iconoclastic emperors’ political intentions, as theology was generally exploited as a political tool in the Byzantine Empire. The complex interaction between Orthodox and Muslim religions, the wealth of monasteries, and the political ambitions of both Byzantine and Umayyad emperors were some of the leading causes of the process that led to the development of iconoclasm. This study proposes that theological arguments were used to conceal the emperors’ political motives by blaming others for violating the pillars of Christianity. Secrecy in foreign policy and covert operations contributed to the lack of direct evidence, hiding political motives behind theological arguments.