Traces of the existence of idolatry are found in the oldest books which we possess, e.g., the Pentateuch and Job. It has been supposed that idolatry was conveyed from Egypt to India in the seventeenth century B.C., and in a modified form from India to the northern parts of Europe in the sixth century B.C. Idolatrous worship extended to all beings in heaven and earth, animate or inanimate, visible or invisible, and also the representations or images of these made by men themselves. One of the earliest forms of idolatrous worship was probably that of the sun, moon, and stars—the heavenly host. It rapidly extended however to other objects, and assumed more degrading aspects, as in Egypt, where beetles, bulls, &c., were worshipped; hence the sneer of Juvenal that Egypt was quite overrun with gods. For the correspondingly low species of modern idolatry called Fetishism see CONGO. The heathen gods and goddesses of antiquity, together with the attendant circumstances of their worship, will be referred to under the names of JUPITER, BACCHUS, &c. It is generally considered that idolatry originated in a delification of the unseen powers of nature, in consequence of which the more splendid objects of nature were worshipped, as the abodes or manifestations of these unseen powers. Perhaps, however, nearly coeval with this was the development of the notion which conceives of the Deity in human form and with human attributes. In the Roman empire idolatry was abolished by Honorius in A.D. 404. Constantine had ordered the demolition of idolatrous temples in 330.

In the first ages of Christianity images were neither worshipped nor used in the churches. The attempts of Roman writers to prove the contrary are by no means satisfactory. Baronius (ad Ann. 102) refers to a decree said to have been passed at Antioch by the apostles themselves, commanding believers to make images of Christ. But the first actual notice of such a decree is not to be found till seven centuries later. Tertullian (De Pudicitia, c. 10), as quoted by Bellarmine, speaks of chalices or cups on which was represented the parable of the good shepherd. But Tertullian and others of the Fathers held even painting and engraving to be forbidden by the second commandment. The Idomeneus passage quoted only proves the use of emblematical figures.

As to the two brass statues referred to by Eusebius (Eccl. Hist., book vii. 18), representing our Saviour performing a miracle, it is to be remembered that Eusebius considers the woman who erected the statues a pagan. Towards the close of the fourth century pictures of saints and martyrs were admitted into churches. Images followed in the next century, and out of pictures and images a species of Christian symbolism was built up, which represented visibly the leading facts and features of Christianity. Whatever may be said of the utility of images and pictures as thus the books of the poor, Biblia Pauperum, a means of instruction, the following centuries exhibit images of the Virgin, saints, martyrs, &c., honoured with observances substantially the same as those of the pagans to their false gods. Lights were burned before them, incense and prayers were offered, and hymns were sung to them, as well as miracles ascribed to them. The worship of images, which had thus gradually crept in, was interrupted by the great controversy which began to rage in the eighth century. (See Iconoclasts.)

At the period of the Reformation, the Protestant churches condemned and abolished the use of images. The Mohammedians all along have done the same. The Council of Trent gave its deliverance in its twenty-fifth session on the subject of images, and declared that the images of Christ, the Virgin, saints, &c., were to be kept in the churches, and to receive due honour and veneration, not as though anything divine resided in them, but that by means of them the prototypes might be adored. This differs but slightly from the sentiments of the ancient pagans, for while many of them believed that the statues were inhabited by the gods whom the statues represented, others again, such as Plato, Seneca, &c., considered the statues as no more than blocks of wood or marble, by means of which the prototypes might be adored.