Emergence of the icon
Christian tradition dating from the 8th century identifies
Luke the Evangelist as the first icon painter.
Aside from the legend that Pilate had made an image of Christ, the 4th-century
Eusebius of Caesarea, in his
Church History, provides a more substantial reference to a "first" icon of Jesus. He relates that King
Edessa (died ca 50 CE) sent a letter to Jesus at Jerusalem, asking Jesus to come and heal him of an illness. In this version there is no image. A later account found in the Syriac
Doctrine of Addai (ca. 400 ?) mentions a painted image of Jesus in the story; and even later, in the 6th-century account given by
Evagrius Scholasticus, the painted image transforms into an image that miraculously appeared on a towel when Christ pressed the cloth to his wet face.
 Further legends relate that the cloth remained in Edessa until the 10th century, when it was taken to
Constantinople. It went missing in 1204 when
Crusaders sacked Constantinople, but by then numerous copies had firmly established its iconic type.
The 4th-century Christian
Aelius Lampridius produced the earliest known written records of Christian images treated like icons (in a
Gnostic context) in his Life of Alexander Severus (xxix) that formed part of the
Augustan History. According to Lampridius, the emperor
Alexander Severus (reigned 222–235), himself not a Christian, had kept a domestic chapel for the veneration of images of deified emperors, of portraits of his ancestors, and of Christ,
Irenaeus, (c. 130–202) in his
Against Heresies (1:25;6) says scornfully of the Gnostic
"They also possess images, some of them painted, and others formed from different kinds of material; while they maintain that a likeness of Christ was made by Pilate at that time when Jesus lived among them. They crown these images, and set them up along with the images of the philosophers of the world that is to say, with the images of Pythagoras, and Plato, and Aristotle, and the rest. They have also other modes of honouring these images, after the same manner of the Gentiles [pagans]".
On the other hand, Irenaeus does not speak critically of icons or portraits in a general sense – only of certain gnostic sectarians' use of icons.
Another criticism of image veneration appears in the non-canonical 2nd-century
Acts of John (generally considered a
gnostic work), in which the
Apostle John discovers that one of his followers has had a portrait made of him, and is venerating it: (27)
"...he [John] went into the bedchamber, and saw the portrait of an old man crowned with garlands, and lamps and altars set before it. And he called him and said: Lycomedes, what do you mean by this matter of the portrait? Can it be one of thy gods that is painted here? For I see that you are still living in heathen fashion."
Later in the passage John says, "But this that you have now done is childish and imperfect: you have drawn a dead likeness of the dead."
At least some of the hierarchy of the Christian churches still strictly opposed icons in the early 4th century. At the Spanish non-ecumenical
Synod of Elvira (c. 305) bishops concluded, "Pictures are not to be placed in churches, so that they do not become objects of worship and adoration".
Epiphanius of Salamis, wrote his letter 51 to John, Bishop of Jerusalem (c. 394) in which he recounted how he tore down an image in a church and admonished the other bishop that such images are "opposed . . . to our religion".
Elsewhere in his Church History,
Eusebius reports seeing what he took to be portraits of Jesus,
Paul, and also mentions a bronze statue at
Banias / Paneas under Mount Hermon, of which he wrote, "They say that this statue is an image of Jesus" (H.E. 7:18); further, he relates that locals regarded the image as a memorial of the healing of the woman with an issue of blood by Jesus (Luke 8:43-48), because it depicted a standing man wearing a double cloak and with arm outstretched, and a woman kneeling before him with arms reaching out as if in supplication. John Francis Wilson
 suggests the possibility that this refers to a pagan bronze statue whose true identity had been forgotten; some have thought it to represent
Aesculapius, the Greek god of healing, but the description of the standing figure and the woman kneeling in supplication precisely matches images found on coins depicting the bearded emperor
Hadrian reaching out to a female figure – symbolizing a
province – kneeling before him.
When asked by
Constantia (Emperor Constantine's sister) for an image of Jesus, Eusebius denied the request, replying: "To depict purely the human form of Christ before its transformation, on the other hand, is to break the commandment of God and to fall into pagan error."
After the emperor
Constantine I extended
official toleration of Christianity within the Roman Empire in 313, huge numbers of pagans became converts. This period of
Christianization probably saw the use of Christian images became very widespread among the faithful, though with great differences from pagan habits. Robin Lane Fox states
 "By the early fifth century, we know of the ownership of private icons of saints; by c. 480-500, we can be sure that the inside of a saint's shrine would be adorned with images and votive portraits, a practice which had probably begun earlier."
When Constantine himself (reigned 306-337) apparently converted to Christianity, the majority of his subjects remained pagans. The
Roman Imperial cult of the divinity of the emperor, expressed through the traditional burning of candles and the offering of incense to the emperor’s image, was tolerated for a period because it would have been politically dangerous to attempt to suppress it. Indeed, in the 5th century the courts of justice and municipal buildings of the empire still honoured the portrait of the reigning emperor in this way. In 425
Philostorgius, an allegedly
Arian Christian, charged the Orthodox Christians in Constantinople with
idolatry because they still honored the image of the emperor Constantine the Great, the founder of the city, in this way.
Dix notes that this occurred more than a century before we find the first reference to a similar honouring of the image of Christ or of His apostles or saints, but that it would seem a natural progression for the image of Christ, the King of Heaven and Earth, to be paid similar veneration as that given to the earthly Roman emperor.
 However, the Orthodox, Eastern Catholics, and other groups insist on explicitly distinguishing the veneration of icons from the worship of idols by pagans.
 See further below on this topic.
Theodosius to Justinian
After adoption of Christianity as the only permissible Roman state religion under
Theodosius I, Christian art began to change not only in quality and sophistication, but also in nature. This was in no small part due to Christians being free for the first time to express their faith openly without persecution from the state, in addition to the faith spreading to the non-poor segments of society. Paintings of martyrs and their feats began to appear, and early writers commented on their lifelike effect, one of the elements a few Christian writers criticized in pagan art — the ability to imitate life. The writers mostly criticized pagan works of art for pointing to false gods, thus encouraging idolatry. Statues in the round were avoided as being too close to the principal artistic focus of pagan cult practices, as they have continued to be (with some small-scale exceptions) throughout the history of
Nilus of Sinai (d. c.430), in his Letter to Heliodorus Silentiarius, records a miracle in which St. Plato of Ankyra appeared to a Christian in a dream. The Saint was recognized because the young man had often seen his portrait. This recognition of a religious apparition from likeness to an image was also a characteristic of pagan pious accounts of appearances of gods to humans, and was a regular topos in hagiography. One critical recipient of a vision from
Saint Demetrius of Thessaloniki apparently specified that the saint resembled the "more ancient" images of him – presumably the 7th century mosaics still in
Hagios Demetrios. Another, an African bishop, had been rescued from Arab slavery by a young soldier called Demetrios, who told him to go to his house in Thessaloniki. Having discovered that most young soldiers in the city seemed to be called Demetrios, he gave up and went to the largest church in the city, to find his rescuer on the wall.
During this period the church began to discourage all non-religious human images – the Emperor and donor figures counting as religious. This became largely effective, so that most of the population would only ever see religious images and those of the ruling class. The word icon referred to any and all images, not just religious ones, but there was barely a need for a separate word for these.
Luke's portrait of Mary
It is in a context attributed to the 5th century that the first mention of an image of Mary painted from life appears, though earlier paintings on
catacomb walls bear resemblance to modern icons of Mary.
Theodorus Lector, in his 6th-century History of the Church 1:1
 stated that
Eudokia (wife of emperor
Theodosius II, died 460) sent an image of the "
Mother of God" named
Icon of the Hodegetria from Jerusalem to
Pulcheria, daughter of
Arcadius, the former emperor and father of Theodosius II. The image was specified to have been "painted by the Apostle Luke."
Margherita Guarducci relates a tradition that the original icon of Mary attributed to Luke, sent by Eudokia to Pulcheria from Palestine, was a large circular icon only of her head. When the icon arrived in Constantinople it was fitted in as the head into a very large rectangular icon of her holding the Christ child and it is this composite icon that became the one historically known as the Hodegetria. She further states another tradition that when the last Latin Emperor of Constantinople,
Baldwin II, fled Constantinople in 1261 he took this original circular portion of the icon with him. This remained in the possession of the
Angevin dynasty who had it likewise inserted into a much larger image of Mary and the Christ child, which is presently enshrined above the high altar of the Benedictine Abbey church of
 Unfortunately this icon has been over the subsequent centuries subjected to repeated repainting, so that it is difficult to determine what the original image of Mary’s face would have looked like. However, Guarducci also states that in 1950 an ancient image of Mary
 at the Church of
Santa Francesca Romana was determined to be a very exact, but reverse mirror image of the original circular icon that was made in the 5th century and brought to Rome, where it has remained until the present.
In later tradition the number of icons of Mary attributed to Luke would greatly multiply;
Salus Populi Romani, the
Theotokos of Vladimir, the
Theotokos Iverskaya of
Mount Athos, the
Theotokos of Tikhvin, the
Theotokos of Smolensk and the
Black Madonna of Częstochowa are examples, and another is in the cathedral on
St Thomas Mount, which is believed to be one of the seven painted by
St. Luke the Evangelist and brought to India by
Ethiopia has at least seven more.
In the period before and during the
Iconoclastic Controversy, stories attributing the creation of icons to the New Testament period greatly increased, with
several apostles and even the Virgin herself believed to have acted as the artist or commissioner of images (also embroidered in the case of the Virgin).
There was a continuing
opposition to images and their misuse within Christianity from very early times. "Whenever images threatened to gain undue influence within the church, theologians have sought to strip them of their power".
 Further,"there is no century between the fourth and the eighth in which there is not some evidence of opposition to images even within the Church".
 Nonetheless, popular favor for icons guaranteed their continued existence, while no systematic apologia for or against icons, or doctrinal authorization or condemnation of icons yet existed.
The use of icons was seriously challenged by Byzantine Imperial authority in the 8th century. Though by this time opposition to images was strongly entrenched in Judaism and Islam, attribution of the impetus toward an iconoclastic movement in Eastern Orthodoxy to Muslims or Jews "seems to have been highly exaggerated, both by contemporaries and by modern scholars".
Though significant in the history of religious doctrine, the Byzantine controversy over images is not seen as of primary importance in Byzantine history. "Few historians still hold it to have been the greatest issue of the period..."
The Iconoclastic Period began when images were banned by Emperor
Leo III the Isaurian sometime between 726 and 730. Under his son
Constantine V, a council forbidding image veneration was held at Hieria
 near Constantinople in 754. Image veneration was later reinstated by the
Empress Regent Irene, under whom another council was held reversing the decisions of the previous iconoclast council and taking its title as
Seventh Ecumenical Council. The council anathemized all who hold to iconoclasm, i.e. those who held that veneration of images constitutes idolatry. Then the ban was enforced again by
Leo V in 815. And finally icon veneration was decisively restored by
Empress Regent Theodora in 843.
From then on all Byzantine coins had a religious image or symbol on the
reverse, usually an image of Christ for larger denominations, with the head of the Emperor on the obverse, reinforcing the bond of the state and the divine order.