The Destruction of the Greek Empire and the Story of the Capture of Constantinople by the TurksPears, Edwin
History
The Destruction of the Greek Empire and the Story of the Capture of Constantinople by the Turks
Pears, Edwin
Byzantine Empire -- History -- 1081-1453; Istanbul (Turkey) -- History -- Siege, 1453
Against the version of Phrantzes is to be placed the fact that his tomb
is unknown and that no contemporary--or, indeed, subsequent--writer
mentions where it was. Had it existed, it is not likely to have been
forgotten by the Greeks. Had the body been purposely buried in a secret
place, there would probably have grown up a legend about it which would
have kept its memory green.[456]
[Sidenote: Character of Constantine.]
Constantine Palaeologus Dragases in the fiftieth year of his age
disappears amid the final charge of the Turkish Janissaries. Although
there were rumours of his escape, his death within the Inner Enclosure
of the Lycus valley cannot reasonably be doubted. His conduct during
the whole of the siege had earned respect. He had done his best to
encourage his subjects to fight bravely, had stimulated them by his
speech and by his example. He had spared no exertion day and night to
organise the defence, had tried to reconcile hostile parties and to
unite all for the common safety. When the long-standing jealousies
and rivalries between his own subjects and the citizens of the two
republics threatened to weaken the force available for the defence of
the city, it was he who by his personal influence and the respect
and even affection which he had acquired and inspired persuaded them
to postpone their quarrels. Fanatical Greeks and equally fanatical
Catholics had almost forgotten for the time their animosities and
had joined forces for the honour of God and for the defence of
Christianity. At his instigation, Roman cardinal and Orthodox bishops
had thrown themselves energetically into the common labour of resisting
the Moslem hordes. At his entreaty the task of completing the Union of
the Churches was by common accord allowed to stand over. The example
of the religious chiefs was followed by their flocks. Whenever we are
able to get a glimpse of the emperor’s personality we see him as a
man without conspicuous ability but whose devotion to his country was
complete, whose sympathy made friends of all who were brought into
contact with him, and won for him the admiration of his own troops and
of the brave Italians who fought under him. His refusal to leave the
city when urged to do so by the patriarch and other leaders both of
the Church and people was the more praiseworthy when it is remembered
that the arguments in favour of departure were at least plausible, and
that he had apparently come to the conclusion that, in spite of all his
exertions, Mahomet would succeed in capturing it.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account