Thursday, 16 May 2024

Make Constantinople Great Again

 



It is easy for westerners, and western Christians even, to forget just how much the Eastern Romans protected Christendom from pagan and Islamic threats. Charles Oman notes,

“To Leo, far more than to his contemporary the Frank Charles Martel, is the delivery of Christendom from the Moslem danger to be attributed. Charles turned back a plundering horde sent out from an outlying province of the Caliphate. Leo repulsed the grand-army of the Saracens, raised from the whole of their eastern realms, and commanded by the brother of their monarch. Such a defeat was well calculated to impress on their fatalistic minds the idea that Constantinople was not destined by providence to fall into their hands. They were by this time far removed from the frantic fanaticism which had inspired their grandfathers, and the crushing disaster they had now sustained deterred them from any repetition of the attempt. Life and power had grown so pleasant to them that martyrdom was no longer an “end in itself”; they preferred, if checked, to live and fight another day.”[1]

Byzantium, or the Eastern Roman Empire, truly stood as a bulwark of Christianity against the threats of the east for centuries, indeed a millennia. From the moment that Constantine built the city as the capital of Rome in the early 4th century until its fall it took the majority of the onslaughts directed towards the Christian world from Persians and then Muslims, and other threats. 

But its efforts have been so forgotten to the West, that the comparatively minor efforts of Charles Martel are often given the credit that Emperors like Leo the Isaurian actually deserve. Not that Martel’s efforts were of no consequence, they were. But apart from the works of men like Leo the Isaurian and others, they surely would have been of very little consequence.

This also demonstrates how often the narratives we believe about history are so different to the realities of history. A similar example can be found in World War 2. Future generations will be far less emotionally opposed to acknowledging that it was Russia that won World War 2, far more than Britian, or even the U.S.. But currently many people bristle at the suggestion because of the West’s emotionalization of the reasons and achievements of World War 2. Such is the way history is handled. Often what is remembered is based in fact, but spun in such a way that it obscures the greater truth.

The Franks may have been responsible for checking the Saracens in western Europe, but they are also in large part responsible for the destruction and pillaging of Byzantium, an attack that very much led to its eventual fall and capture by the Turks.

One can hope and pray that through the work of the gospel Byzantium is again returned to Christendom and stands again as a bulwark against the incursions of antichristian forces. But until that day we should remember its efforts more accurately. Byzantium was lost, eventually, but it stood strong for so long it gave the West the chance it needed to flourish.  

List of References


[1] Oman, Charles. The History of the Byzantine Empire: From Its Glory to Its Downfall (p. 96). e-artnow. Kindle Edition.

No comments:

Post a Comment