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
Cantacuzenus in his reply expressed his thanks to the pontiff for his
promised aid against the infidels and in reference to the Union of
the Churches declared that he would willingly die if by his death he
could secure the object for which both ardently longed. He pointed out,
however, that the differences between the Churches related to doctrine,
and that Catholic teaching recognised that these could only be settled
by a Council of the whole Church. He himself could accept no new
dogmas nor force others to accept them before they had been definitely
accepted by a Council. He therefore suggested that one should be
called, being confident that its deliberations and its decisions would
receive divine guidance. As the pope could not come to Constantinople
and Cantacuzenus could not go to Rome, the emperor proposed that the
Council should be summoned to meet in some maritime city, midway
between the two capitals.
The nuncios found, or professed to find, the proposal of the emperor
reasonable, and returned to Rome. The pope expressed his satisfaction,
but declared that he could not suggest a place of meeting till he had
communicated with the princes of the West. After some time he sent word
that though he regarded the Union of the Churches as the most important
question with which Christendom had to deal, he was obliged to defer
fixing the time and the place for the Council until he had secured
peace among the Italian princes. The death of Clement, in 1352, delayed
the execution of this project.
[Sidenote: Character of Cantacuzenus.]
It is difficult to form an impartial judgment of the characters of
Cantacuzenus and John, whose reigns cover the period during which, if
it had been possible, the empire might have recovered its strength. The
history of the reign written by the former, as well as the narrative of
Ducas, places the conduct of the elder emperor in a favourable light.
The charge most commonly brought against him, of having introduced the
Turks into Europe, can only be accepted with considerable reserve.
As we have already seen, he was not the first to introduce them. The
Spaniards must bear the responsibility of this charge. Once it became
necessary to fight, whether against Serbians, Bulgarians, or internal
enemies, an emperor can hardly be blamed for obtaining auxiliaries.
The mercenaries most easily obtainable were the Turks. All contending
parties in the Balkan peninsula were ready to accept their aid. The
excuses of Cantacuzenus are evidence which proves that he realised
the danger of their obtaining a permanent foothold in Europe. A more
valid justification is furnished by the fact that, with the object
of preventing them crossing into Thrace without his permission, he
endeavoured to close the two passages which they had been accustomed
before his time to employ--namely, from Lampsacus and between Sestos
and Abydos.
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