Greetings all,
It seems that today was the day Constantinople was renamed "Istanbul" on March 28th in 1930:
The Greek Reporter article reminds that both names are Greek words. While that's nice I personally feel it misses the point.
I
personally believe that "Istanbul" is the name of the modern layer that
sits on top of historical Constantinople. The two aren't blended and
changed together, they're forever separated by design, intent and
civilization. Ancient Constantinople can't change Istanbul - and
Istanbul can't reach into the past and somehow change Constantinople,
the city of the Emperor Constantine.
I
myself am not angry about this. MOST of the ancient world has been
forcibly ended and built over, everywhere. I dislike that but it's how
the world works. It is simply an inspiration to build anew rather than a
cause for resentment or anger.
The
Emperor Constantine would be the last person to decry Istanbul, or
dream that it could somehow be removed or go away. Constantine was a
complete pragmatist. I believe he'd say "Well bugger this, I'll go make a
better one!" If Constantine could abandon Rome, he could abandon
Istanbul and make another Constantinople somewhere else. A patch of
ground, no matter how historical, is not the Ideal.
Sure,
ancient history getting covered over is very sad. But that doesn't mean
it's dead - and you don't have to fight over it in order for it to
live again.
That's why Byzantium Novum is here after all... :)
-Marcus Cassius Julianus
www.byzantiumnovum.org
No comments:
Post a Comment