Download Rome Versus Constantinople Page 1 of 8 Rome

Rome Versus Constantinople
Page 1 of 8
Rome Versus Constantinople
This exposé is under construction
Click on images to enlarge
Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in
pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made known to the king what
shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure. (Daniel 2:45).
In one of the greatest of the great prophecies of the Bible, JEHOVAH gives the entire history of the human race in advance from about
500 B.C., to the end of time.
JEHOVAH presented this history in advance in the form of a terrifying statue or image that appeared to King Nebuchadnezzar of
Babylon in a nightmare . . . which the king promptly forgot when he awoke.
None of his astrologers or "wise men" could be of any help to him in interpreting the dream because they were all charlatans and fakes.
Daniel the Jewish prophet, who was a captive in Babylon, came to the rescue and told the king his forgotten dream . . . and its
interpretation:
Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and
glory. And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he
given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all. Thou art this head of gold.
And after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee, and another third kingdom of brass, which shall
bear rule over all the earth.
And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron: forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things:
and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise. (Daniel 2:37-40).
Notice that the 4 empires follow one another in SUCCESSION and there is no gap or break between them.
The king of Babylon had a dream in which he saw
all of world history from his day to the end of time.
Daniel the prophet interpreted the dream as a
colossal statue composed of 4 different metals,
representing 4 successive world empires.
The legs of iron represented the divided Roman
Empire.
The stone that destroys the image represents
Christ at His Second Coming.
4 world empires of Daniel Chapter 2.
4 metals statue of Daniel
Chapter 2.
The 4 metals correspond to the 4 empires which the king saw in his dream. The stone or Rock symbolizes Christ, who will destroy all
earthly empires at His Second Coming:
"And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to
powder." (Matthew 21:44).
The Roman Empire began to divide with Emperor Constantine
Even before the time of Constantine, there were several Roman Emperors who lived in several cities besides Rome. The division
started in earnest with Constantine.
http://www.reformation.org/rome-vs-constantinople-pdf.html
4/29/2010
Rome Versus Constantinople
Page 2 of 8
Constantine was a GIANT or COLOSSUS who
conquered the entire Roman Empire.
His iron legions trod down the entire Empire
from Britain to Persia.
In 324, he decided to build a new capital in the
East at Byzantium, and leave Old Rome to the
Papal dynasty.
Colossal head of Constantine
in Rome.
Statue of Constantine in York,
England.
After he became sole master of the Roman Empire, Constantine began building a new capital at a Greek city called Byzantium.
Constantine had a monumental ego....Only one conqueror in history named a city after himself and that was Alexander the Great.
Constantinople—the New
Rome—soon became a
rival to Old Rome in
splendor and riches.
Eastern Emperors often
ruled Rome from this new
upstart city.
Today the city is called Istanbul.
Constantinople became the new capital of the Roman
Empire.
Naturally, Old Rome was not about to give pride of place to this new upstart so the rivalry and competition began almost immediately.
Islam was founded to overthrow Constantinople!!
Only 50 years after the founding of Islam by Mohammad, a huge Arab army . . . and NAVY . . . attacked Constantinople....Conquering
Constantinople required a huge number of ships which you would not normally associate with desert dwellers.
Constantine had a fantastic eye for terrain.
Anybody attacking Constantinople would
need a powerful land army and a well
equipped NAVY.
The first besiegers were DESERT dwelling
ARABS!!
Constantinople was surrounded
on 3 sides by water.
A virtually impregnable city.
A knowledge of combined operations by land and sea was necessary for the conquest of Constantinople. Also a knowledge of
siegecraft and the use of battering rams and powerful catapults.
It so happens that the first besiegers of Constantinople were DESERT DWELLING Arabs. The first siege began in 674 and lasted for 5
years. The Arab besiegers were almost completely annihilated by the Eastern Romans.
http://www.reformation.org/rome-vs-constantinople-pdf.html
4/29/2010
Rome Versus Constantinople
Page 3 of 8
Caliph Muawiyah I surrounded Constantinople with a
huge Arab army and navy.
Everybody associated the Arabs with the DESERT.
Mecca is in the DESERT of Saudi Arabia.
Old Rome was quickly turning these sand dwellers into
sailors.
Muawiyah I (602-680) led
the first Arab siege of
Constantinople.
Roman Emperor Constantine IV led the heroic defense
of the city.
Emperor Constantine IV (652685).
The Eastern Romans had a secret weapon called Greek Fire. It was somewhat like napalm and actually burned on the water. It was the
ancient world's equivalent of the atomic bomb.
Greek Fire
scorched the
Arab Papal
mercenaries.
Greek Fire was hotter than the desert sun and
scorched the Arab besiegers.
Greek Fire was a potent secret weapon of the
defenders of Constantinople.
The besiegers were barbecued with this Greek Fire: and the siege was a total failure, with thousands of Arab casualties:
The Saracen ships carried heavy siege engines and huge catapults; but the fortifications along the Marmara
and the Golden Horn were proof against their assaults. The Byzantines, moreover, possessed a secret
weapon. To this day we are uncertain of the composition of 'Greek fire'. Whether it was sprayed over an
enemy vessel or poured into long, narrow cartridges and catapulted against its objective, the results were
almost invariably catastrophic: the flaming, oil-based liquid floated upon the surface of the sea, frequently
igniting the wooden hulls of the ships and causing an additional hazard to those who tried to jump overboard.
For long the Muslims refused to admit defeat; only after the fifth year did the battered remnants of the
Saracen fleet turn about and head for home. In 679 Muawiya sulkily accepted Constantine's offer of peace,
which demanded the evacuation of the newly-conquered Aegean islands and an annual tribute. A year later
he was dead. Constantine, on the other hand, was at the height of his popularity. He had inspired his subjects
with the morale to withstand five years of siege by a power hitherto considered irresistible, and in doing so he
had saved Western civilization. Had the Saracens captured Constantinople in the seventh century rather than
the fifteenth, all Europe—and America—might be Muslim today. (Norwich, A Short History of Byzantium, p. 101.)
The siege turned out to be a total failure, with thousands of Arab casualties.
The 2nd Arab siege of Constantinople occurred in 717
The proud Arabs were very bitter about their failure to take Constantinople. The tried again in 717 with a new Caliph.
http://www.reformation.org/rome-vs-constantinople-pdf.html
4/29/2010
Rome Versus Constantinople
Page 4 of 8
Caliph Umar II tried to revenge the disastrous defeat
of the 1st siege of Constantinople.
Emperor Leo III led the heroic defense of the city.
This siege also turned into a disaster and the Arabs
entered into a reluctant detente with the Roman
Emperors.
Emperor Leo III (685-741).
Caliph Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz
(682-720).
Roman Emperor Leo III led the heroic defense of the city:
For forty years the setback at Constantinople rankled with the Umayyad caliphs in Damascus. It remained
inconceivable within Islamic theology that the whole of humankind would not, in time, either accept Islam or
submit to Muslim rule. In 717 a second and even more determined attempt was made to overcome the
obstacle that hindered the spread of the Faith into Europe. The Arab attack came at a time of turmoil within
the empire. A new emperor, Leo III, had been crowned on March 25, 717; five months later he found an army
of 80,000 men dug in the length of the land walls and a fleet of 1,800 ships controlling the straits. The Arabs
had advanced their strategy from the previous siege. It was quickly realized by the Muslim general Maslama
that the walls of the city were invulnerable to siege machines; this time there was to be a total blockade. The
seriousness of his intentions was underlined by the fact that his army brought wheat seed with them. In the
autumn of 717 they plowed the ground and planted a food supply outside the walls for harvesting the
following spring. Then they settled down to wait. A foray by the Greek fire ships had some success but failed
to break the stranglehold. Everything had been carefully planned to crush the infidels. (Crowley, 1453: The Holy
War for Constantinople and the Clash of Islam and the West. p. 13).
It seems that all of JEHOVAH's creation was at war with the Muslims because on their way home an undersea volcano erupted and a
storm destroyed most of the fleet.
Charlemagne—the phony "holy" Roman Emperor
Not a singe year went by but Old Rome sought to destroy her rival....The list of attackers included Persians, Arabs, Slavs, Bulgars,
Magyars, Khazars, etc. etc; but all without success.
In the year 800 A.D., a golden opportunity presented itself to annex the Eastern Empire to Rome, and achieve by diplomacy what arms
had failed to accomplish.
Irene was a real femme fatale who got rid of her
husband and son and become sole Empress in
797.
Pope Leo III quickly crowned Charlemagne "holy"
Roman Emperor and proposed a marriage to Irene.
Through this alliance, he hoped to annex the
Eastern Empire to Rome.
Empress Irene (752 - 803).
Reigned from 797 to 802.
Charlemagne (742-814).
Reigned as king of the Franks
from 768 to 814.
Charles the Great reigned as king of the Franks until December 25, 800 A.D. With the unmarried Empress Irene on the throne at
Constantinople, the Pope quickly had Charles crowned "holy" Roman Emperor.
The next step was to propose a marriage between the two, thus annexing the Eastern Empire to Rome. The scheme failed miserably,
and Irene was deposed and died in exile.
This unholy Roman "empire" was also called the First Reich. It was abolished by Napoleon Bonaparte in 1806.
The 4 crusades to conquer Constantinople
http://www.reformation.org/rome-vs-constantinople-pdf.html
4/29/2010
Rome Versus Constantinople
Page 5 of 8
By the year 1000 A.D., Old Rome was getting desperate. All the attempts to conquer Constantinople by her mercenaries had ended in
failure....Even the attempt to capture the Empire through marriage had failed.
Beginning in 1069, Old Rome launched 4 massive Crusades to conquer Constantinople. All were failures except the last or Fourth
Crusade.
1.
2.
3.
4.
First Crusade from 1095-1099.
Second Crusade from 1147-1149.
Third Crusade from 1187-1192.
Fourth Crusade from 1202-1204.
The first three Crusades ended in failure, but the fourth and last established a short lived Latin Empire in Constantinople.
Emperor Alexius appealed to Pope Urban III
for military help against the Seljuk Turks.
The Pope was more than glad to oblige as this
would give him an excuse to conquer
Constantinople.
Emperor Alexius (1048 -1118).
A rabble rousing monk named Peter the
Hermit persuaded thousands of Europeans to
join in a Crusade to "liberate" the Holy Land
from the Arabs.
Pope Urban III preaching the First
Crusade.
In August 1095, a huge undisciplined mob appeared outside the gates of Constantinople. Emperor Alexius was appalled. He kept a
watchful eye on them and refused to allow them into the city . . . except in small groups. He quickly put them on ships and ferried them
across the Bosporus:
Peter's rabble army was in no way typical of the armies of the First Crusade. Over the next nine months
Alexius was to find himself the unwilling host to perhaps another 70,000 men, and a fair number of women,
led by some of the most powerful feudal princes of the West. The economic, logistic, military and diplomatic
challenges presented by this horde were unparalleled in Byzantine history, the basic problem being one of
trust. Alexius was understandably skeptical about the high Christian motives so glibly professed. The
Normans at least, as he well knew, were out for what they could get—if not the Empire itself, then their own
independent principalities in the East. This latter objective did not worry him: a few Christian buffer states
between himself and the Saracen might be no bad thing. But such principalities must not be founded on
imperial territory and their princes must acknowledge him as their suzerain. Feudalism in Western Europe, he
understood was based on solemn oaths of fealty; very well, he would demand just such an oath from all the
Leaders in respect of any future conquests. (Norwich, A Short History of Byzantium, p. 257).
The next two Crusades were also total failures as far as conquering Constantinople was concerned, so we must concentrate on the
fourth and last Crusade.
Pope Innocent III was one of the most
fanatical Popes to ever wear the purple.
At his urging, the Fourth Crusade was
launched in 1202, which saw the conquest
and occupation of Constantinople by the
Latins.
The Latin empire that was established by
the Crusaders fell apart in 1261.
Pope Innocent III (1160 1216).
Reigned from 1198 to 1216.
Sack of Constantinople by the Crusaders.
The Eastern Empire pulled further away from Old Rome after this brutal conquest and occupation by the Latins.
The Council of Florence in 1439
http://www.reformation.org/rome-vs-constantinople-pdf.html
4/29/2010
Rome Versus Constantinople
Page 6 of 8
The Council of Florence, which ended on July 5, 1439, was the last great desperate effort by Old Rome to end the Great Schism before
the conquest of Constantinople by the Turks.
The Council began in 1431 in Basel, Switzerland, and became known as the Council of Ferrara after its transfer to Ferrara was decreed
by Pope Eugene IV. The Council transferred to Florence in 1439 because of the danger of plague at Ferrara, and because the city of
Florence had agreed, against future payment, to finance the Council.
The Council was the last great event before the
Fall of Constantinople.
Desperate efforts were made by Old Rome to end
the so-called Great Schism but one man foiled
them all.
This army of one was Saint Mark of Ephesus who
refused to sign the decrees of union.
Pope Eugene IV (1383-1447).
Pope from 1431 to 1447.
Saint Mark of Ephesus (13921444).
The Council was also the last great event before the Discovery of the New World by John Cabot and the Reformation. Old Rome used
every weapon in her arsenal to get the Orthodox to sign the decrees reuniting the 2 churches.
All the Greeks present at the Council—even the Emperor—signed the decrees of union—except for one man: Saint Mark of Ephesus.
For his uncompromising stand, Saint Mark died an untimely death at the young age of 52.
The voluntary union sought by Old Rome never materialized—so she unleashed her Muslim Turks against the city only 14 years later.
Constantinople finally fell to the Turks in 1453
Old Rome was finally able to eliminate her Eastern rival in 1453. After fighting heroically for 1000 years, the Empire finally came to an
end.
The Latin Church fought ferocious battles to
overthrow the Eastern Roman Emperors.
Finally in 1453, they used the Ottoman
Empire to conquer Constantinople.
After that defeat, the Orthodox church moved
to Moscow and that became the 3rd Rome.
Constantine XI (1449- 1453).
Considered the last Roman
Emperor.
Sultan Mehmed II (1449-1481).
Conqueror of Constantinople.
The Orthodox church preserved the manuscripts of the Greek New Testament....The conquest of Constantinople by the Turks caused
many of the Greek scholars to flee to Italy, bringing their manuscripts with them.
The Orthodox church preserved the Greek New Testament manuscripts
The Orthodox church preserved the Greek New Testament manuscripts that survived from the last great pagan persecution under
Emperor Diocletian.
When Constantinople fell, many of the Greek scholars fled to Italy, bringing their priceless manuscripts with them. This was later to lead
to the Renaissance and Reformation.
Venice—the adopted homeland of John Cabot—always had a very special relationship with the Eastern Roman Empire:
Northern Europe had taken an interest now, too, and its scholars had begun journeying to Italy, where many
of them studied with the same Byzantine teachers as the Italians. The Dutch scholar who was the greatest of
the northern humanists, Desiderius Erasmus, learned Greek in Venice with Marcus Musurus. Erasmus'
http://www.reformation.org/rome-vs-constantinople-pdf.html
4/29/2010
Rome Versus Constantinople
Page 7 of 8
English friend Thomas Linacre, a doctor and classicist who founded London's Royal College of Physicians,
spent more than a decade in Italy studying Greek with Demetrius Chalcondyles and Politian, and winning his
degree in medicine from the university of Padua. Linacre was Erasmus' and Sir Thomas More's doctor, and
the close friend of another English humanist, John Colet, who had also studied in Italy. The German humanist
Johannes Reuchlin had come to Italy in the 1480s, where he studied Greek with John Argyropoulos in Rome.
(Wells, Sailing from Byzantium, p. 113).
Erasmus scoured Italy for copies of Greek
manuscripts.
He used these ancient and correct
manuscripts to prepare Latin and Greek
editions of the New Testament.
It was a Greek edition of Erasmus that Saint
Martin Luther used to produce his superb
German translation.
Desiderius Erasmus (1466 1536).
Saint Martin Luther (14831546).
Erasmus of Rotterdam was the intellectual giant of the Renaissance in Europe. He was the most learned man of his age. Every
university in Europe vied for the honor of having him as a member of their faculty. He was also the editor of the Greek New Testament
that Saint Martin Luther used to launch the blessed Reformation. It was said that "Erasmus laid the egg that Luther hatched." Erasmus
had nothing but contempt for the corrupt clergy. His father and mother, Gerard and Margaret Brandt, are the subjects of The Cloister
and the Hearth.
William Tyndale used the same Byzantine text as Saint Martin Luther in his superb English translation of the New Testament.
Moscow is the successor of Constantinople!!
The Triune God, who sees all things in advance, had a new home for the Orthodox church in Russia.
Zoe Palaiologina was the niece of Emperor
Constantine XI.
In 1472, she married the Grand Duke of
Moscow, Ivan III.
Due to her influence, Moscow became the 3rd
Rome, and depository of the Orthodox faith.
Zoe Palaiologina (1455-1503).
Wife of Ivan from 1472 to 1503.
Ivan the Great. (1440-1505).
Reigned from 1462 to 1505.
Due to her family traditions, she encouraged imperial ideas in the mind of her husband, Ivan. It was through her influence that the
ceremonious etiquette of Constantinople (along with the imperial double-headed eagle and all that it implied) was adopted by the court
of Moscow.
The double-headed eagle was adopted by
Ivan III after his marriage with the Byzantine
princess Zoe Palaiologina, whose uncle
Constantine XI, was the last Byzantine
Emperor.
Double headed imperial eagle.
Russian coat of arms.
We shouldn't fail to mention that the Julian calendar was imported to Moscow from Constantinople, as well as the Greek based Cyrillic
http://www.reformation.org/rome-vs-constantinople-pdf.html
4/29/2010
Rome Versus Constantinople
Page 8 of 8
alphabet.
Vital Links
The Jesuits in Russia
Meet the First Pope!!
Constantine's 6 Major Changes to Christianity.
The Vatican Against the Orthodox Church by Avro Manhattan
Crowley, Roger. 1453: The Holy War for Constantinople and the Clash of Islam and the West. Hyperion, New York, 2005.
Gibbon, Edward. The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (in 6 volumes). Methuen & Co., London, 1909.
Gill, Rev. Joseph, S.J. The Council of Florence. Cambridge University Press. London, 1959.
Herrin Judith. Byzantium. The Surprising Life of a Medieval Empire. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2008.
Meyendorff, John. Byzantium and the Rise of Russia. St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, Crestwood, New York, 1989.
Norwich, John Julius. A Short History of Byzantium. Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 1997.
Papadakis, Aristeides. The Christian East and the Rise of the Papacy. St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, Crestwood, New York, 1994.
Riley-Smith, Jonathan (Editor). The Oxford Illustrated History of the Crusades. Oxford University Press, New York, 1997.
Wells, Colin, Sailing From Byzantium. How a Lost Empire Shaped the World. Delacorte Press, New York, 2006.
Copyright © 2008 by Niall Kilkenny
Back to Main Menu
http://www.reformation.org/rome-vs-constantinople-pdf.html
4/29/2010