Topic: Turks Celebrate the 558th Anniversary of the Theft of Constantinople

[SubdeaconDavid]

558 years ago the Ottomans stole, raped, pillaged and blasphemed against the 2nd Rome - Constantinople. To this day Turkey continues to occupy Constantinople and has eradicated much of the Christian history, heritage and churches from the illegally occupied Byzantine Empire.Today they are celebrating with fireworks, parades, recreations...... but of what?

Breaking down the doors with axes, the Turks entered the Church and dragged the fugitives off to slavery. Two by two, the men were tied together with cords, the women with belts, without consideration for age or station. Scenes of indescribable horror ensued. The icons of Saints were shorn of their jewels and smashed. The gold and silver Church vessels were seized, the altar cloths used for caparisons. Topped with a Janissary's cap, the crucifix was paraded in mockery. The conquerors used the altars as tables; when they themselves had finished eating on them, they turned them over to the horses for feed troughs or used them as beds on which to assault boys and girls."

- The Fall of the Byzantine Empire: A Chronicle by George Sphrantzes

http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2011/05/turks-celebrate-conquest-of.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Mystagogy+%28MYSTAGOGY%29

[Byron]

The sad thing is, that under the post WW1 treaty of Sevres, Greece was given all of Eastern Thrace and Constantinople was going to have "free city" status. Heck even Greek military forces were stationed there.

Greece was very close to taking back the City.

As always our "friends" Great Britain and Italy turned against Greece and made her give up Eastern Thrace to the Turks without even firing a single shot.

[podkarpatska]

Despite the source, a fascinating video on the Fall of Constantinople.

http://www.cbn.com/700club/features/churchhistory/hagiasophia/?cpid=CC1105311

[Alcuin]

Terribly sad. I was looking at photos of the Hagia Sophia online recently, and the desecration of it with Islamic iconography really depressed me.

[bogdan]

Coincidentally, I recently read 1453, an engaging history of the fall of the city (though I don't care for the author's fawning over Mehmet and veiled contempt for Orthodox piety). Truly a sad and horrifying spectacle that can only be celebrated by heartless people.

Emperor-Martyr Constantine XI, and all the martyrs of Constantinople, pray for us!

[Alcuin]

I have always had a special admiration for Constantine XI. He has never been officially canonized, even by the Orthodox, but as a Latin-rate Catholic I feel that he is a saint.

[Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)]

I have always had a special admiration for Constantine XI. He has never been officially canonized, even by the Orthodox, but as a Latin-rate Catholic I feel that he is a saint.

That would be understandable as, desperate to defend Constantinople against overwhelming odds, he tried reaffirm the Council of Florence, which was a precondition for any help from the Catholic West. He did die fighting, I would like to think as much for his faith as for his throne and his people. I consider him a singularly valiant figure in a list of lamentable late emperors.

[Kasatkin fan]

Today they are celebrating with fireworks, parades, recreations...... but of what?

In fairness, it's seen as a Turkish celebration and their victory over Greeks, rather than a Muslim celebration of victory over Christians.

[akimori makoto]

Today they are celebrating with fireworks, parades, recreations...... but of what?

In fairness, it's seen as a Turkish celebration and their victory over Greeks, rather than a Muslim celebration of victory over Christians.

I believe this way of thinking is foreign to both the Greek and Turkish mindsets or, at least, was until very very recently.

I do not buy into the lie that Turkey is a secular state.

[Kasatkin fan]

Today they are celebrating with fireworks, parades, recreations...... but of what?

In fairness, it's seen as a Turkish celebration and their victory over Greeks, rather than a Muslim celebration of victory over Christians.

I believe this way of thinking is foreign to both the Greek and Turkish mindsets or, at least, was until very very recently.

I do not buy into the lie that Turkey is a secular state.

I have no doubt it is a very recent thing. Turkish nationalism is a very recent construct, however when I was in Turkey on and around this anniversary my Christian (but non-Orthodox) guide spoke of it quite fondly, and made it quite clear that he was proud of it as a Turk. This may only be one individual, but I saw no signs of Muslim triumphalism in the celebrations (no doubt there was some, but it was not clearly evident, which would indicate it is not the focus).

As for not being a secular state, it has a long way to go, there are certainly sectarian undercurrents that are quite strong, both atheistic and Islamist. Sadly none Christian.

[akimori makoto]

It's easy to be a "secular" state when you've booted out or systematically eliminated everyone who happens to disagree with your religious worldview of choice, isn't it?

(My snideness is directed at the Turkish state, not at you).

[bogdan]

Today they are celebrating with fireworks, parades, recreations...... but of what?

In fairness, it's seen as a Turkish celebration and their victory over Greeks, rather than a Muslim celebration of victory over Christians.

I believe this way of thinking is foreign to both the Greek and Turkish mindsets or, at least, was until very very recently.

I do not buy into the lie that Turkey is a secular state.

Yeah... I don't really buy that either.

Granted, the Turks did let the Greeks live and aren't the worst of the Mohammadans. You don't see suicide bombers in the Phanar. But still, I don't see any of the goodwill returning any of the churches or buildings they stole or destroyed, for example.

It's something, but it's not much to say "at least they aren't killing the Christians." The Church is very much still under the Turkish yoke, even if it's a somewhat happy-looking yoke.

[akimori makoto]

Today they are celebrating with fireworks, parades, recreations...... but of what?

In fairness, it's seen as a Turkish celebration and their victory over Greeks, rather than a Muslim celebration of victory over Christians.

I believe this way of thinking is foreign to both the Greek and Turkish mindsets or, at least, was until very very recently.

I do not buy into the lie that Turkey is a secular state.

Yeah... I don't really buy that either.

Granted, the Turks did let the Greeks live and aren't the worst of the Mohammadans. You don't see suicide bombers in the Phanar. But still, I don't see any of the goodwill returning any of the churches or buildings they stole or destroyed, for example.

It's something, but it's not much to say "at least they aren't killing the Christians." The Church is very much still under the Turkish yoke, even if it's a somewhat happy-looking yoke.

I tend to agree. The Turks are not the worst of oppressors and have a history of being relatively benevolent by occupying power standards.

In some ways, though, the Turkish m/o is more insidious.

If they decided to just kill all the Greeks/Kurds/Armenians or jail all the Christians, they would be bombed into the ground by the Western powers. So, instead, they just make living in Turkey insufferable for anyone not a Turk in the hope that they will eventually just get out. This is the same reason they keep all of the Christian holy sites as "museums" -- the rest of the world would be up in arms if they kept them as functioning mosques, but it would be too much to just hand the things back to the ancestral "owners".

I was glad when my somewhat-relevant letter to the local paper was published just in time for the anniversary of the fall. Here is is, for anyone interested:

I support unequivocally the right of Muslims to believe as they do and to advertise their belief to others ("Jesus billboard loses its prophet margin", May 30).

However, I believe it is disingenuous to say Muslims "believe in Jesus" and to suggest Jesus could be a point of common ground between Christianity and Islam.

Under Ottoman rule, my Christian ancestors were subjected to torture (including being flayed alive) for refusing to confess Jesus is/was only a prophet rather than the son of God. Did these people go to their deaths for a non-issue?

Obscuring the differences between Christianity and Islam will not result in true friendship: only the semblance of it.

[Kasatkin fan]

It's easy to be a "secular" state when you've booted out or systematically eliminated everyone who happens to disagree with your religious worldview of choice, isn't it?

(My snideness is directed at the Turkish state, not at you).

I actually quite agree with you, and hold Turkish nationalism in the greatest contempt, however there is a stark difference between the Islamist and the Secular areas of Turkey.

[Cognomen]

Sad indeed, but perhaps not for the same reason we are thinking.  One opinion voicing this:

"Because of the sins of men, God permitted a bitter calamity to fall upon the capital of Christianity."
St. Nikolai of Zicha

His Hymn of Praise from the 29 May entry in the Prologue

THE FALL OF THE CITY CONSTANTINOPLE [MAY 29, 1453]
EMPEROR CONSTANTINE XI

Constantine the Emperor, Constantinople bravely defends,
And to God quietly prays, within himself:
O Most-high God Who, from the heavens is looking
And injustice, you do not allow to defeat justice
Christians, against You, greatly sinned
And Your laws, have trampled greatly
Without Your permission, this battle is not
Because of men's sins, this blood sheds.
That this city falls, is it Your will
That they do not surrender, encourage my people,
That the Cross do not trample and to Islam go
But to endure bondage, until a freedom new
Let them servants be, let them even be slaves
Upon them, let hatred and ridicule befall,
But, with hope and repentance, let them endure
And, with bitter sighing, for former sins,
Until their sins, they wash away and every sin, they repay,
And until to You, they completely return.
If they have You, they will be rich,
All plundered treasures, You will replace.
Constantinople on earth, be or not be -
Constantintople in heaven, You established,
Where, with Your servants, you gloriously reign.
Before this Constantinople, behold, even I stand.
O Blessed One, on our sinful soul, have mercy,
When it is built anew, let the old one be razed!

http://www.westsrbdio.org/prolog/my.html?month=May&day=29&Go.x=14&Go.y=9

[Basil 320]

I can't begrudge the Turks celebrating the essential birth of their nation, but after all these years, after their decimation of the Christian (an probably Jewish, I don't know for sure) populous during the later 67 years of the 20th century, including their failure to comply with their own court's order to compensate the Greek populous and the Greek Orthodox Churches for their Pogrom of 1956, they remain an oppressive, medieval, barbaric nation in their continued suppression of the legitimate rights, for purely religious purposes, of the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the Greek Orthodox Churches of Istanbul, a people and religious institution which predates their conquest by 1,415 years; that's what I find unbelievable and why I consider Turkey an uncivilized state, not-with-standing pretenses to the contrary in their constitution.

[Theophilos78]

In fairness, it's seen as a Turkish celebration and their victory over Greeks, rather than a Muslim celebration of victory over Christians.

This is not true. Constantinople fell into the hands of the Ottomans, who did not call themselves Turkish and who were not nationalist. The Ottoman Empire was based on the Islamic idea of "ummah", which categorized people on the basis of their faith instead of their nationality or ethnicity.

Besides, even today Turks bind the conquest to a supposed prediction of their (false) prophet Muhammad. He is reported to have said "Constantinople is going to be conquered for sure. How blessed is the army that is going to conquer it!" However, this hadith seems to be a fabrication.    According to some traditional Islamic sources, Muhammad actually predicted that Constantinople would be conquered by Muslims just at the time of the Dajjal's (anti-Christ in Islamic terminology) advent.

[deusveritasest]

and blasphemed against the 2nd Rome - Constantinople

That's impossible. Blasphemy is only about God.

[primuspilus]

A point of note if you dont mind. The Ottoman Empire had more in common genetically-speaking with the peoples of the former Persian Empire than with the Turks. The Turks in Turkey today are decended of a mish-mash of Greek, Hittite, Sarmatian, and a few others. Although alot of Ottomans claim Anatolian decent, the majority of them were closer to old Persian decent thanks to the rise of the Caliphates and the free travel throughout the vast expanses that they provided.

Basically, I'd have some pause to state that the Turks of today could really claim much in reality.

primuspilus

[CRCulver]

Uh, primuspilus, the Turks who besieged Constantinople were mostly those Hittite and Greek-descended peoples autochthonous to Anatolia. You're right that the ruling class had much in common with peoples to the east, but the armies doing the work were descended from people who, a few centuries before, were Byzantine. They had simply accepted an Ottoman superstrate and became Ottoman themselves, losing their old identity.

[primuspilus]

I see your point. I was more referring to the ruling class, yeah, but I do see what you're saying.

[Kasatkin fan]

This is not true. Constantinople fell into the hands of the Ottomans, who did not call themselves Turkish and who were not nationalist. The Ottoman Empire was based on the Islamic idea of "ummah", which categorized people on the basis of their faith instead of their nationality or ethnicity.

I was speaking of the modern celebration, not the original fall. That certainly was, at the time seen as a Muslim victory over Christianity.

[Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)]

A point of note if you dont mind. The Ottoman Empire had more in common genetically-speaking with the peoples of the former Persian Empire than with the Turks. The Turks in Turkey today are descended of a mish-mash of Greek, Hittite, Sarmatian, and a few others. Although alot of Ottomans claim Anatolian decent, the majority of them were closer to old Persian decent thanks to the rise of the Caliphates and the free travel throughout the vast expanses that they provided.

Basically, I'd have some pause to state that the Turks of today could really claim much in reality.

primuspilus

Speaking of genetics, a Turkish officer brought his family to a family day event at the NATO base. He and his family looked like Western Turks, who look like most other Mediterranean folks, except for the youngest, a five year old girls with red hair and green eyes. It turns out the family came from Galatia, a province that had been depopulated in the 6th century due to war and famine. The Emperor had recruited a Celtic tribe, which was raiding into the Empire from beyond the Danube, to settle in Galatia. Small world, no? The kid had Celtic and Greek genes, in addition to Turkish, Sarmatian, Persian, Hittite (lets not forget, also possibly Armenian and Arab) ones.

[username!]

In fairness, it's seen as a Turkish celebration and their victory over Greeks, rather than a Muslim celebration of victory over Christians.

This is not true. Constantinople fell into the hands of the Ottomans, who did not call themselves Turkish and who were not nationalist. The Ottoman Empire was based on the Islamic idea of "ummah", which categorized people on the basis of their faith instead of their nationality or ethnicity.

Besides, even today Turks bind the conquest to a supposed prediction of their (false) prophet Muhammad. He is reported to have said "Constantinople is going to be conquered for sure. How blessed is the army that is going to conquer it!" However, this hadith seems to be a fabrication.    According to some traditional Islamic sources, Muhammad actually predicted that Constantinople would be conquered by Muslims just at the time of the Dajjal's (anti-Christ in Islamic terminology) advent.

Good point, it wasn't the Turks that took Constantinople but the Ottomans, but do the Turks feel a certain connexion to the Ottomans?

[Kasatkin fan]

In fairness, it's seen as a Turkish celebration and their victory over Greeks, rather than a Muslim celebration of victory over Christians.

This is not true. Constantinople fell into the hands of the Ottomans, who did not call themselves Turkish and who were not nationalist. The Ottoman Empire was based on the Islamic idea of "ummah", which categorized people on the basis of their faith instead of their nationality or ethnicity.

Besides, even today Turks bind the conquest to a supposed prediction of their (false) prophet Muhammad. He is reported to have said "Constantinople is going to be conquered for sure. How blessed is the army that is going to conquer it!" However, this hadith seems to be a fabrication.    According to some traditional Islamic sources, Muhammad actually predicted that Constantinople would be conquered by Muslims just at the time of the Dajjal's (anti-Christ in Islamic terminology) advent.

Good point, it wasn't the Turks that took Constantinople but the Ottomans, but do the Turks feel a certain connexion to the Ottomans?

"Ottoman" refers to the ruling dynasty, established by Osman I, formally a bey of the Seljuk Empire. The Turkish Republic certainly feels itself to be a continuation of the Ottoman State. They were often called "Turks" as that was the dominant ethnic group at the top when it was founded (Turks being a Central Asian nomadic people). As has been pointed out, however, true Turks of the central Asian stock haven't had much of an influence in a while. Mostly it is native anatoleans who converted to Islam and dropped their previous national identity.