Post by atlantis on Apr 24, 2008 10:59:09 GMT -5
Clifton R. Fox
Professor of History
Tomball College
presented to the
Raleigh Tavern Philosophical Society
Tomball, Texas, USA
The Modern Orthodox World
The Orthodox world in the modern age has been a world dominated by Russia. In 1480, Ivan III of Moscow [ruled 1462-1505] declared his independence from the Golden Horde. He and his successors aspired to make their independence stick, to attain control over all of old Rus, and to gain aceptance as leaders of the Orthodox world, successors of the Romaioi. To this end, Ivan married Sophia Palaeologina, the niece of Constantine XI, the last Emperor in Constantinople. Ivan and his successors began to employ the title "Tsar" [i.e. Caesar or Emperor], although Ivan III’s grandson Ivan IV [Ivan the Terrible, 1533-1584] was the first to actual undergo a formal coronation as Tsar.
By the 16th century, Russian Orthodox theologians were propounding the theory of the "Three Romes." God had ordained, so the theory went, that humanity should have one faith, one emperor, one capital city. For abstruse mystical reasons, there must in succession three capital cities corresponding to the three persons of the trinity: Rome in Italy had been first, Constantinople had been second, Moscow was third -- there could be no other. Russian officialdom, both religious and secular, seemed to have accepted this view, which placed the Tsar in a special position within the Orthodox World, indeed within the cosmic plan.
In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, Russia took the offensive against the Ottoman Empire. A constant theme in Russian policy was the goal of liberating Orthodox peoples from Muslim rule. Catherine the Great commanded her son Paul to give his sons Greek names, expecting that one of them would rule as Emperor in Constantinople: neither Alexander nor Constantine nor Nicholas ruled there, but Catherine the Great had not been bereft of vision. Within the lifetime of her grandsons, Greece did attain independence as a kingdom after a revolution against the Ottomans exploded in the 1820’s. The British and French intervened in favor of the rebels out of sympathy towards the Greeks as heirs of Plato and Pericles, but they were suspicious of Russian machinations. To forestall Russian influence, the Greeks were denied Constantinople, and had to settle for Athens as a capital. The Greeks were forbidden to have a Russian as their king: they were forced to stomach a Bavarian king, and later a Danish royal family.
The Greek revolutionaries who created the modern Greek state made a deliberate choice to call themselves "Hellenes," like the ancient Greeks, and eschew the name "Romaioi." The switch from Romaios back to Hellene flowed from the politics of modern nationalism. Greeks needed Western European help to liberate themselves from the Ottomans, and they were not likely to attract assistance if the Western peoples thought of Greeks as "Byzantines." However, if the Greeks were imagined as the children of Plato and Pericles, then the sympathies of educated Westerners, steeped in the Classical tradition, would be with Greece. In the Greek Revolution, the "Philhellenic" [Greek loving] sympathies of Britain and other European governments were deeply engaged, and their proved decisive. The name of "Hellene" was revived in order to presented a national image which rejected the "Byzantine" past. Nonetheless, many people in rural areas of Greece still use the two terms interchangeably, When they wish to praise a man, they say that he is "true Romaioi."
No one one should underestimate the power of the past to shape the present. Peoples steeped in tradition -- unlike Americans -- remember the triumphs and trials even of remote times as though they were yesterday. In particular, peoples mired in poverty and tested by oppression take refuge with their hearts and minds among the deeds of past "golden ages," deeds which their despair in the present and their hope in the future have selected, embellished and enshrined.
If the two halves of Europe are ever to be made whole, much must be overcome. This achievement may or may not, in the long run, prove possible, but the peoples of Orthodox Europe can never be incorporated on a basis which will better the condition of themselves, Europe in total and the world, if the peoples of Western Europe think of them only as bedraggled victims of time awaiting salvation, and not as the lost half of their own souls to be welcomed home.
Professor of History
Tomball College
presented to the
Raleigh Tavern Philosophical Society
Tomball, Texas, USA
The Modern Orthodox World
The Orthodox world in the modern age has been a world dominated by Russia. In 1480, Ivan III of Moscow [ruled 1462-1505] declared his independence from the Golden Horde. He and his successors aspired to make their independence stick, to attain control over all of old Rus, and to gain aceptance as leaders of the Orthodox world, successors of the Romaioi. To this end, Ivan married Sophia Palaeologina, the niece of Constantine XI, the last Emperor in Constantinople. Ivan and his successors began to employ the title "Tsar" [i.e. Caesar or Emperor], although Ivan III’s grandson Ivan IV [Ivan the Terrible, 1533-1584] was the first to actual undergo a formal coronation as Tsar.
By the 16th century, Russian Orthodox theologians were propounding the theory of the "Three Romes." God had ordained, so the theory went, that humanity should have one faith, one emperor, one capital city. For abstruse mystical reasons, there must in succession three capital cities corresponding to the three persons of the trinity: Rome in Italy had been first, Constantinople had been second, Moscow was third -- there could be no other. Russian officialdom, both religious and secular, seemed to have accepted this view, which placed the Tsar in a special position within the Orthodox World, indeed within the cosmic plan.
In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, Russia took the offensive against the Ottoman Empire. A constant theme in Russian policy was the goal of liberating Orthodox peoples from Muslim rule. Catherine the Great commanded her son Paul to give his sons Greek names, expecting that one of them would rule as Emperor in Constantinople: neither Alexander nor Constantine nor Nicholas ruled there, but Catherine the Great had not been bereft of vision. Within the lifetime of her grandsons, Greece did attain independence as a kingdom after a revolution against the Ottomans exploded in the 1820’s. The British and French intervened in favor of the rebels out of sympathy towards the Greeks as heirs of Plato and Pericles, but they were suspicious of Russian machinations. To forestall Russian influence, the Greeks were denied Constantinople, and had to settle for Athens as a capital. The Greeks were forbidden to have a Russian as their king: they were forced to stomach a Bavarian king, and later a Danish royal family.
The Greek revolutionaries who created the modern Greek state made a deliberate choice to call themselves "Hellenes," like the ancient Greeks, and eschew the name "Romaioi." The switch from Romaios back to Hellene flowed from the politics of modern nationalism. Greeks needed Western European help to liberate themselves from the Ottomans, and they were not likely to attract assistance if the Western peoples thought of Greeks as "Byzantines." However, if the Greeks were imagined as the children of Plato and Pericles, then the sympathies of educated Westerners, steeped in the Classical tradition, would be with Greece. In the Greek Revolution, the "Philhellenic" [Greek loving] sympathies of Britain and other European governments were deeply engaged, and their proved decisive. The name of "Hellene" was revived in order to presented a national image which rejected the "Byzantine" past. Nonetheless, many people in rural areas of Greece still use the two terms interchangeably, When they wish to praise a man, they say that he is "true Romaioi."
No one one should underestimate the power of the past to shape the present. Peoples steeped in tradition -- unlike Americans -- remember the triumphs and trials even of remote times as though they were yesterday. In particular, peoples mired in poverty and tested by oppression take refuge with their hearts and minds among the deeds of past "golden ages," deeds which their despair in the present and their hope in the future have selected, embellished and enshrined.
If the two halves of Europe are ever to be made whole, much must be overcome. This achievement may or may not, in the long run, prove possible, but the peoples of Orthodox Europe can never be incorporated on a basis which will better the condition of themselves, Europe in total and the world, if the peoples of Western Europe think of them only as bedraggled victims of time awaiting salvation, and not as the lost half of their own souls to be welcomed home.