Is it true that Byzantine iconoclasm actually predates the ban

No, the first iconoclast period came shortly after Islam and small-scale proto-iconoclasm came around the same time.

No iconoclasm gained momentum exactly because of the Muslims, as the Byzantines saw their losses as divine retribution and scrambled for something that they were doing wrong.

So yes, in theory the theological idea that idols were wrong existed but the Byzantines acted on it/saw it relevant only after the Muslims.

>>1940854
>>1940841

I believe you might be wrong. There's surviving Islamic iconography from the Umayyad era, including coins depicting Muhammad himself. It seems that Islamic iconoclasm could have been enforced only since the Abbasid era.

>>1940830
Its hard to tell since they destroyed the texts and arguments of the iconoclasts

>>1940872
Maybe, yeah. Islam is a tough one. It's history is extremely muddy, some go as far as to claim that it wasn't really a religion until 800-900 ish

the jewish ban on images significantly predates both

>>1940830
I'd say iconoclasm is something particular to Syria at the time, and when the Arabs invaded the number of Syrian refugees (lel) started to influence Byzantine religious debate. The reason it may have taken some time to affect the Arabs is probably because they kept to themselves and slowly adopted local culture over two or three generations.

>>1940830
Christian iconoclasm has nothing to do with islam only uncultured swines belive such thing.

>>1941431
Syrian Christians venerate icons. Cental Anatolia was actually the stronghold of iconoclasm.

>>1940830
Byzantine iconoclasm took inspiration from Islamic iconoclasm.
It's worth mentioning though, that Islamic iconoclasm at the time wasn't absolute, depictions of Muhammad exist long after the Abbasid period.

>>1940830
the iconoclasm controversy seems to be one of the reasons Catholic and Orthodox art have gone in such different directions.