CENT. images in Greece, and was carried from thence
VIII. into both the eastern and western provinces, was
PART II the most unhappy and pernicious in its conse-

quences. The first sparks of this terrible flame,
that had like to have proved fatal both to the
interests of religion and government, had already
appeared under the reign of Philippicus Bardanes,
who was created emperor of the Greeks a little
after the commencement of this century. This
prince, with the consent of John, patriarch of
Constantinople, ordered a picture, which repre-
sented the sixth general council, to be pulled down
from its place in the church of St. Sophia, A. D.
712; because this council had condemned the
Monothelites, whose cause the emperor espoused
with the greatest ardour and vehemence. Nor did
Bardanes stop here; but sent immediately an or-
der to Rome to remove all images of that nature
from the churches and other places of worship.
His orders, however, were far from being re-
ceived with submission, or producing their de-
signed effect; on the contrary, Constantine, the
Roman pontiff, not only rejected, by a formal pro-
test, the imperial edict, but resolved to express
his
contempt of it by his actions as well as his words :
He ordered six pictures, representing the six
general councils, to be placed in the porch of
St. Peter's church; and, that no act of rebellion
or arrogance might be left unemployed, he assem-
bled a council at Rome, in which he caused the
emperor himself to be condemned as an apostate
from the true religion. These first tumults were
quelled by a revolution, which, the year fol-
lowing, deprived Bardanes of the imperial throne
[g].
X. The

[q] See Fred. Spanhemii Historia imaginum restituta, which is published in the second volume of his works, and also printed apart. Maimbourg's History of this controversy, which is full of the most absurd and malignant fictions. Muratori Annali d'Italia, tom. iv. p. 221.

PART II.

the Isau

X. The dispute, however, broke out with re- CENT. doubled fury under Leo the Isaurian, a prince of VIII. the greatest resolution and intrepidity, and the new tumults it excited were both violent and Its progress durable. Leo, unable to bear any longer the under Leo excessive height to which the Greeks carried their rian. superstitious attachment to the worship of images, and the sharp railleries and serious reproaches which this idolatrous service drew upon the Christians from the Jews and Saracens, determined, by the most vigorous proceedings, to root out at once this growing evil. For this purpose he issued out an edict, A. D. 726, by which it was ordered, not only that the worship of images should be abrogated and relinquished, but also that all the images, except that of Christ's crucifixion, should be removed out of the churches [r]. In this proceeding the emperor acted more from the impulse of his natural character, which was warm and vehement, than from the dictates of prudence, which avoids precipitancy where prejudices are to be combated, and destroys and mines inveterate superstitions rather by slow and imperceptible attacks, than by open and violent assaults. The imperial edict produced such effects as might have been expected from the frantic enthusiasm of a supersti

S 3

tious

[r] In this account of the imperial edict, Dr. Mosheim follows the opinions of Baronius, Fleury, and Le Suer. Others affirm, with more probability, that this famous edict did not enjoin the pulling down images every where, and casting them out of the churches, but only prohibited the paying to them any kind of adoration or worship. It would seem as if Leo was not, at first, averse to the use of images, as ornaments, or even as helps to devotion and memory: for at the same time that he forbid them to be worshipped, he ordered them to be placed higher in the churches, say some, to avoid this adoration; but afterwards finding that they were the occasion of idolatry, he had them removed from the churches and broken.

CENT. tious people. A civil war broke out in the islands VIII of the Archipelago, ravaged a part of Asia, and PART II afterwards reached Italy. The people, partly

The contests be

tween the

of images

who were called

Iconoduli,

and their

opposers

called Ico

from their own ignorance, but principally in consequence of the perfidious suggestions of the priests and monks, who had artfully rendered the worship of images a source of opulence to their churches and cloisters, were led to regard the emperor as an apostate, and hence they considered themselves as freed from their oath of allegiance, and from all the obligations that attach subjects to their lawful sovereign.

XI. The Roman pontiffs, Gregory I. and II. were the authors and ringleaders of these civil partisans commotions and insurrections in Italy. The former, upon the emperor's refusing to revoke his edict against images, declared him, without hesitation, unworthy of the name and privileges of a Christian, and thus excluded him from the comwho were munion of the church; and no sooner was this noclast formidable sentence made public, than the Romans, and other Italian provinces, that were subject to the Grecian empire, violated their allegiance, and rising in arms, either massacred or banished all the emperor's deputies and officers. Leo, exasperated by these insolent proceedings, resolved to chastise the Italian rebels, and to make the haughty pontiff feel in a particular manner, the effects of his resentment; but he failed in the attempt. Doubly irritated by this disappointment, he vented his fury against images, and their worshippers, in the year 730, in a much more terrible manner than he had hitherto done; for, in a council assembled at Constantinople, he degraded from his office Germanus, the bishop of that imperial city, who was a patron of images, put Anastasius in his place, ordered all the images to be publicly burnt, and inflicted a variety of severe punishments upon such as were at

tached

tached to that idolatrous worship. These rigo- CENT. rous measures divided the Christian church into VIII. two violent factions, whose contests were carried PART II. on with an ungoverned rage, and produced nothing but mutual invectives, crimes, and assassinations. Of these factions, the one adopted the adoration and worship of images, and were on that account called Iconoduli or Iconolatræ; while the other maintained that such worship was unlawful, and that nothing was more worthy of the zeal of Christians, than to demolish and destroy those statues and pictures that were the occasions and objects of this gross idolatry, and hence they were distinguished by the titles of Iconomachi and Iconoclasta. The furious zeal which Gregory II. had shewn in defending the odious superstition of image worship, was not only imitated, but even surpassed by his successor, who was the third pontiff of that name; and though, at this distance of time, we are not acquainted with all the criminal circumstances that attended the intemperate zeal of these insolent prelates, yet we know with the utmost certainty, that it was owing to their extravagant attachment to image-worship that the Italian provinces were torn from the Grecian empire [s].

XII.

[$] The Greek writers tell us, that both the Gregories carried their insolence so far as to excommunicate Leo and his son Constantine, to dissolve the obligation of the oath of allegiance, which the people of Italy had taken to these princes, and to prohibit their paying tribute to them, or shewing them any marks of submission and obedience. These facts are also acknowledged by many of the partisans of the Roman pontiffs, such as Baronius, Sigonius De Regno Italia, and their numerous followers. On the other hand, some learned writers, particularly among the French, alleviate considerably the crime of the Gregories, and positively deny that they either excommunicated the emperors above mentioned, or called off the people from their duty and allegiance. See Launoius, Epistolar. lib. vii. Ep. vii. p. 456. tom. v. opp.

CENT.

PART II.

XII. Constantine, to whom the furious tribe VIII of the image worshippers had given by way of derision the name of Copronymus [t], succeeded his father Leo in the empire, A. D. 741, and, anigress under mated with an equal zeal and ardour against Constan- the new idolatry, employed all his influence in tine Copro- extirpating and abolishing the worship of images,

Their pro

nymus.

in opposition to the vigorous efforts of the Roman pontiffs, and the superstitious monks. His manner of proceeding was attended with greater marks of equity and moderation, than had appeared in the measures pursued by Leo; for, knowing the respect which the Greeks had for the decisions of general councils, whose authority they considered as supreme and unlimited, in religious matters, he assembled at Constantinople, A. D.754, a council composed of the eastern bishops, in order to have this important question examined with the utmost care, and decided with wisdom, seconded by a just and lawful authority. This assembly

All

par. II. Nat. Alexander. Select. Histor. Ecclesiast. Capit.
Sæc. viii. Dissert. i. p. 456. Petr. de Marca, Concordia Sacer-
dotii et Imperii, lib. iii. cap. xi. Bossuet, Defens. Declarationis
Cleric Gallic. de potestate Eccles. par. I. lib. vi. cap. xii. p. 197.
Giannone, Histoire Civile de Naples, tom. i. p. 400.
these found their opinions, concerning the conduct of the Gre-
gories, chiefly upon the authority of the Latin writers, such as
Anastasius, Paul Deacon, and others, who seem to have known
nothing of that audacious insolence, with which these pontiffs
are said to have opposed the emperors, and even represent them
as having given several marks of their submission and obedi-
ence to the imperial authority. Such are the contrary accounts
of the Greek and Latin writers; and the most prudent use we
can make of them is, to suspend our judgment with respect to
a matter, which the obscurity that covers the history of this
period renders it impossible to clear up. All that we can
know with certainty is, that the zeal of the two pontiffs above
mentioned for the worship of images, furnished to the people
of Italy the occasion of falling from their allegiance to the
Grecian emperors.

[] This nick-name was given to Constantine, from his having defiled the sacred font at his baptism.