Changes

Jump to: navigation, search
no edit summary
However, if the Arabs had captured Constantinople, this would almost certainly not have occurred. Instead, the Caliph's armies would have eventually conquered many European territories, and as in their other conquests, they would have spread their Muslim faith and Arab culture. It seems likely that Russia would also have embraced Islam. If the Arab army had captured Constantinople, much of Eastern Europe and possibly Russia could have become part of the Muslim world.<ref>Meyendorff, p. 134</ref> The victory of Leo III prevented the Muslims from entering the Balkans for many centuries, and when the Ottomans did, they found that Christianity was entrenched, so much so that almost five centuries of Muslim rule did not lead to the region, becoming Islamized. For this reason, the defeat of the Arab siege was as significant as the Battles of Tours and Marathon in the history of Europe.
====Decline of the Umayyad Dynasty====
It has often been stated that the Umayyad dynasty went into decline after the unsuccessful siege of Constantinople. There is no doubt that the Caliphs had been severely weakened on land and sea. The balance of power after the siege shifted towards the Byzantine. The Umayyad dynasty was so concerned about the defeat that they considered abandoning their recent conquests in Iberia. The decline of the Caliphs was underlined at the Battle of Akroinon in 740 when once again, Leo III defeated a large Arab force when he annihilated some 20,000 soldiers. The defeat came at a difficult time for the dynasty as the Empire was also suffering from fiscal challenges.
The blow to Umayyad prestige was significant, and many zealous Muslims claimed that the defeats were because of the impiety of the Caliphs. This culminated in a series of revolts that ultimately led to the Abbasid Revolution when the Umayyads were deposed, and almost the entire family massacred. The defeat of the Umayyads before the walls of Constantinople helped to undermine the dynasty. However, the Caliphs were also weakened by a series of defeats in central Asia and the Caucuses. It cannot be denied that the failure of Umar II to take Constantinople was a factor in the decline and the fall of the second Caliphate.<ref>Hawting, G.R. <i>[https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0415240735/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=0415240735&linkCode=as2&tag=dailyh0c-20&linkId=06d75c26844fff0201735e07b03465a7 The First Dynasty of Islam: The Umayyad Caliphate, AD 661–750]</i> (London, Rutledge, 2000), p. 201</ref>
====Leo III and Iconoclasm====After his victory against the Muslims, the Emperor was viewed as the savior of the Christian world, and his reign began a long and often successful fightback against the Arabs. Leo established a very successful dynasty, the Isaurian (717-802). He used his popularity to reform the bureaucracy, the tax system and reclaimed Sicily from a usurper. Leo was from the eastern part of the Empire, which bordered Arab territories, influenced by Islamic theology, especially concerning its prohibition on representations of the divine image because it was idolatrous.<ref> Haldon, John F. <i>[https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/052131917X/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=052131917X&linkCode=as2&tag=dailyh0c-20&linkId=6842a4ec7c5dd1b5d90fa5f0351fa77b Byzantium in the Seventh Century: The Transformation of a Culture]</i> (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1990),p. 56</ref> Many, including Leo, from the east, came to believe that the worship of religious icons, in particular, was idolatry and it was argued by the iconoclasts that this had led to God almost abandoning the Christian Empire.
The victory over the Arabs in 718 A.D was also a victory for the Iconoclast party. The Isaurian Emperor believed that his victory was a sign that God favored Iconoclasm. In 730 AD, he prohibited the use of icons and their production, claiming they were idolatrous.<ref> Haldon, p. 15</ref> This divided the Empire as Greek speakers favored icons while Christians in the East supported iconoclasm. Those who defied the decree on icons were persecuted, often brutally. It also led to the destruction of many priceless works of art, especially icons and statues, and Byzantine culture was much impoverished by Leo’s religious intolerance. Iconoclasm was to destabilize the Empire until the mid-9th century when iconoclasm was finally defeated.
====Conclusion====
The failure of Umar II to capture the Christian metropolis of Constantinople was of immense historical significance. The siege weakened the Umayyad dynasty in Damascus and contributed to their demise. Because the Christian Emperor was able to withstand the Muslim army, the future of the Byzantine Empire was secure, and it even expanded and was to survive until the 15th century. The defeat of the Umayyads also prevented the expansion of Islam into Eastern Europe when the Slavs and other peoples could have been susceptible to the influence of Islam. Because Leo III had defeated the Muslims, he kept them out of Eastern Europe for several hundred years. This allowed the region to become Orthodox Christian in faith and culture. Finally, Leo III interpreted his victory as divine approval for the doctrine of Iconoclasm, which convulsed the Empire for over a century.

Navigation menu