作者简介

Leslie Brubaker is Professor of Byzantine Art and Director of the Centre for Byzantine, Ottoman and Modern Greek Studies at the University of Birmingham, UK. She is the author of Vision and Meaning in Ninth-century Byzantium (1999), co-editor of Gender and the Transformation of the Roman World, 300-900 (2003) and Byzantium in the Iconoclast Era c. 680-850: a history (2011).

内容简介

Byzantine 'iconoclasm' is famous and has influenced iconoclast movements from the English Reformation and French Revolution to Taliban, but it has also been woefully misunderstood: this book shows how and why the debate about images was more complicated, and more interesting, than it has been presented in the past. It explores how icons came to be so important, who opposed them, and how the debate about images played itself out over the years between c. 680 and 850. Many widely accepted assumptions about 'iconoclasm' - that it was an imperial initiative that resulted in widespread destruction of images, that the major promoters of icon veneration were monks, and that the era was one of cultural stagnation - are shown to be incorrect. Instead, the years of the image debates saw technological advances and intellectual shifts that, coupled with a growing economy, concluded with the emergence of medieval Byzantium as a strong and stable empire.


Leslie Brubaker is Professor of Byzantine Art and Director of the Centre for Byzantine, Ottoman and Modern Greek Studies at the University of Birmingham, UK. She is the author of Vision and Meaning in Ninth-century Byzantium (1999), co-editor of Gender and the Transformation of the Roman World, 300-900 (2003) and Byzantium in the Iconoclast Era c. 680-850: a history (2011).

下载地址

豆瓣评论

  • Vinterfrost.
    写Apologia的参考资料,作者试图挖掘出Iconoclasm和Iconoclasts对于拜占庭帝国稳定和城市建设的贡献,以及探索second iconoclasm出现的政治学原因。重点读有关Theophilos的部分。11-22
  • Kdn
    学术喷子写作典范,只遗憾神学理论部分略少,而我又是历史白痴罢了。主要的进展或许有二:一是改变(某部分)读者对圣象破坏深刻而“负面”的印象,二是解释神学为什么并非圣象破坏的动机。作者似乎更看重前者,可惜我只对后者感兴趣。了解第一次尼西亚公会议的争论细节,就很难不觉得神学只是偶然历史的伴随现象。第二次尼西亚公会议当然也同样,却打开了另一条出路:如果神学是既有宗教实践的理论辩护,那么尽管它因为滞后而不可能是实践的动机,对神学标本的考古却能像Pictet所谓的语言学古生物学一样还原出古代人的生活习性、提供宗教心理学解释。关于圣像及其破坏的经验有一部分延续至今,但关于同本质论的经验却已经基本丢失。如果能把阿里乌斯主义当作同类文物(不同时代的面包?)来回溯考察,或许能离已经失去的经验更进一步8。12-14
  • Frankus
    相当不错的关于圣像破坏运动的著作,或许能在相当程度上改变我们对圣像破坏运动的印象。作者试图证明圣像破坏运动的重要性和“影响”多为后世圣像崇拜派重构以及夸大的,而真正的Isurian Dynasty时代的资料则并不支持Theophanes等人的记载。对照利奥三世本人主持编纂的Ἐκλογή来看,在很大程度上确实可以得到这个结论。02-05

猜你喜欢

大家都喜欢