Wednesday, October 29, 2014

Coleridge Poetry

Coleridge Poetry (My Interpretation)
By Madison Nef
To start off, I chose a short yet cryptic poem named “Song”. I went through it line by line and this is what I came up with:
Tho’ veiled in spires of myrtle-wreath,
Love is a sword that cuts its sheath,

Okay. I think that this line speaks for itself- metaphorically using love as a sword, and a sheath is supposed to protect a sword when it is not in use. Maybe Coleridge is talking about how when you truly love someone, you will have ups and downs with them where you will fight verbally with them and it will sting- but it is normal. You WILL on occasion “cut your sheath” and hurt the one you love, even if not intentionally.

And thro’ the clefts, itself has made,
We spy the flashes of the Blade!
But thro’ the clefts, itself has made,
We likewise see Love’s flashing blade,

When a couple fight, sometimes it is easy to see. However, if the sword represents LOVE this could also mean that even while you may fight, the hurt that you deal each other in the end show how much you love your significant other if you hold together through the fights. “And through the clefts, itself has made” = and through the words that have been said (hurtfully to the other person) “We spy the flashes of the blade” = we see how even though they fight, their love for each other still shines through in the end.
By rust consumed or snapt in twain:
And only Hilt and Stump remain.
The end can have one of two meanings: By rust consumed (the good ending) or snapt in twain (the bad ending). By rust consumed signifies that through the fighting, you made it to the end of life together and the rust is symbolic for aging. It becomes brittle and finally snaps (death). As for “snapt in twain”, that is pretty much saying that you fought TOO much and the blade of love snapped before it could even rust. This could symbolize divorce or a break up and POSSIBLY death, but either way it is a bad ending.
The poem is titled Song, but I see no relevance to a song at all. Maybe Coleridge was going through a hard time in his life with the one he loved and wrote this to express himself- who knows. That’s the feeling I got from it. Maybe it’s because I’ve seen similar things happen first-hand between my Mom and Dad. Mom was very sick, but even though her and Dad would argue a lot, they stuck through it to the end, love always showing through. Even though not everyone gets a happy ending, everyone USUALLY gets a happy life. Happiness is a choice- you can wake up and choose to smile or you can wake up and frown. Love and Happiness are what you make them.
I hope you like your choices, I know that I like mine.
Maddie

Sunday, October 26, 2014

Bartolomeu Dias

Bartolomeu Dias
Dias was a famous Portuguese explorer in the late 13th century and in the early 14th century. Not much is known about him prior to 1487 other than he was a superintendent for the royal warehouses and he likely had more sailing experience than the one recorded trip on a freight ship. King John II of Portugal was fascinated with the legend of Prester John, an apocryphal leader of Christians somewhere in Africa. The king sent out a pair of explorers, Afonso de Paiva and Pero da Covilha to search overland for the Christian kingdom in Ethiopia. He also wanted to find a way around the southern African coastline, so only a few months after hiring the first two explorers, he sponsored Dias’ African expedition.
In August of 1487, Dias led 3 ships out of the port of Lisbon, Portugal. They followed the route of Diogo Cao, a 15th century explorer who had traveled as far up the coast as where Cape Cross, Namibia is today. Dias took padroes with him to help mark his way. Padroes are limestone markers that the Portuguese used to claim land on the continent. Often the padroes would be planted on shorelines and have served as guidestones for older Portuguese explorations.
Dias had taken 6 African men with him who had been along the coast before on older voyages. At different towns, Dias left a man and a supply of gold and silver for trading along with warm words from Portugal to tell the townspeople. At Angro de Salto, Dias left the last two Africans along with the supply ship from the voyage. The ship was left with 9 men to guard it. In early January, 1488, Dias and his remaining two ships got blown off of the coastline by strong winds. It is reported that Dias called for a 28 southward turn. This did re-guide the ship, and while it was an extremely risky move that could have compromised the whole voyage, it proved successful. On February 3rd, 1488, the ships saw land and found Sao Bras, or present-day Mossel Bay and the much warmer waters of the Indian Ocean.
It helped that Dias had had previous experience navigating ships, but in was later found that King John and his predecessors had acquired maps from the 1360’s showing links from the Pacific and Indian oceans across Africa. After going closer to the shore, Dias’ ships were ambushed by the Khoikhoi. They threw stones and rocks at the ships until one of Dias’ men shot down one of the tribe members. Dias went further down the shoreline, but his crew was extremely nervous about the depleting food supplies.
The crew members begged Dias to turn back and were slowly turning towards the option of mutiny. Finally after threats from his crew Dias left the decision on turning back or not to his crew. The crew decided to keep sailing for another three days and then turn back. At Kwaaihoek, the crew planted a padroe on March 12th 1488. On the journey back, Dias named the two rockiest capes the Cape of Needles and the Cape of Storms for the heavy storms that rocked the Atlantic.
Upon return to Angra do Salto, Dias was greeted with a sad sight as only 3 men of the 9 he had left to guard the ship had survived the ever-impeding attacks from the locals. A 7th man died on the journey home. Finally, Dias and his considerably-smaller crew returned to Lisbon after more than 15 months at sea traveling over 16000 miles. They were greeted with open arms as heroes, but in a private meeting with the king Dias was forced to explain his failure to meet with the two explorers. Despite his immense achievements nonetheless, he was never put in charge of expeditions again.
Almost as if to add insult to injury, after taking a job in West Africa, King John’s successor put Dias into the place of shipbuilding consultant for Vasco da Gamma’s trip. Dias stuck with da Gamma’s fleet until the halfway point and then turned back for Guinea. After that, Dias was put in charge of 4 boats on a large fleet going to India. Mid-voyage, a horrific storm struck the boats and in the year 1500, 4 of the 13 ships were wrecked, including Dias’. He was lost at sea, but is today remembered for his discovery of the Cape of Good Hope (even if he wasn’t acknowledged for it in his time).

Friday, October 17, 2014

Vasco da Gama

Vasco da Gama
Vasco da Gama was a well known Portuguese explorer in the late 15th century. He was born and raised in the town of Sines, Portugal to Isabel Sadre and Estavao da Gama. In the 1400’s, spices from India were very popular in Europe. However, the only trading route to transport the spices from India to Europe was by land, and the trips were long, expensive, and in the end not worth the effort.
The King of Portugal figured that if he could found a trade route to India over the ocean, he would become rich from the trading. Previously, an explorer named Bartolemeu Dias the Cape of Good Hope at the tip of Africa. There was a chance that a good route could be developed if you rounded the tip of the Cape, but no one thought that the Indian and Atlantic oceans met and no one wanted to make the journey.
No one, besides Vasco da Gama. Vasco’s father was a knight and an explorer, and had originally volunteered to make the long voyage. However, the trip had been put off for so long that it finally got handed over to Vasco. On July 8th, 1497, Vasco left Lisbon, Portugal in hopes of finding the shore of India. He took 4 ships: the Sao Gabriel, Sao Rafael, the Berrio, and a fourth ship unnamed and used for storage- and 170 men with him.
The ships reached the southern tip of Africa at the Cape of Good Hope on November 22nd. The expedition then headed north, up along the coast of Africa, stopping at various trading posts along the way. They did business in Mombasa and Malindi, and while at Malindi gained an extra crew member- a local navigator who knew the direction to India. With the help of the strong winds, the expedition was able to cross the Indian Ocean and arrive in the port of Calicut, India in less than a month.
However, things did not go smoothly at Calicut. Vasco ran into many issues trying to trade with merchants, as he had brought little of value in goods on his ships. Local traders became suspicious, and he soon left. The voyage back to Portugal was a rough one- more than half of his crew got scurvy and died, and the trip took MUCH longer than the one before. However, when Vasco returned home, he was a hero- he had found the much needed trade route to India.
Vasco’s expeditions didn’t stop there- he sailed twice more to India before his death. His second voyage was a military expedition as he was in charge of the 4th India Armada. The expedition set out on February 4th, 1502 and had 15 ships and over 800 men. However, the trip sealed his notoriety in India as he ambushed many competing traders, looting and ransacking their ships. He also overthrew and looted a ship of Muslim pilgrims that were traveling from Calicut to Mecca. He locked in all the 400 passengers, INCLUDING 50 women, the owner of the boat, and an ambassador from Egypt and then lit the boat on fire, burning them to death.
Vasco’s final voyage consisted of 14 different ships. He sailed to India with the new title of Viceroy, along with 2 of his 6 sons. He arrived after a very long and troubled voyage (about 5 ships were lost along the way) in September and began inflicting his power upon Portuguese India. He contracted malaria not long after his arrival and died shortly thereafter. He is still remembered today as one of the greatest explorers of his time.
Maddie

Thursday, October 16, 2014

Shakespeare Sonnets

SHAKESPEARE SONNETS
THOUGHTS FROM MADISON NEF
What is your substance, whereof are you made,
That millions of strange shadows on you tend?
Since every one hath, every one, one shade,
And you but one, can every shadow lend.
Describe Adonis, and the counterfeit
Is poorly imitated after you;
On Helen's cheek all art of beauty set,
And you in Grecian tires are painted new:
Speak of the spring, and foison of the year,
The one doth shadow of your beauty show,
The other as your bounty doth appear;
And you in every blessed shape we know.
   In all external grace you have some part,
   But you like none, none you, for constant heart.

My first thought upon reading this sonnet was that Shakespeare was mocking someone who felt they were perfect- “What is your substance, whereof are you made”. I translated into modern text, and that gave me a much clearer view of what I think he was trying to say. I’m not sure how religious Shakespeare was, but it sounded (at least in a modern version) like he was describing Jesus and questioning how he was so sinless and perfect. Here is the modern version:

What is your true essence, what are you made of, that there should be millions of reflections of you? Every person has only one image, but you, though you’re only one person, lend something to everyone else’s image. If an artist tries to depict Adonis, he’ll wind up creating an inferior imitation of you. If he were to paint
Helen as beautifully as possible, he would again wind up with a picture of you, decked out in Greek costume. Praise the spring and the abundant harvest season—but the spring is only a faint shadow of your beauty, and the fall a faint imitation of your abundance. We recognize you in every blessed sight that we see. You are part of every beautiful thing, but you’re not like any of them—you’re incomparable—in the constancy of your heart.

Line 1-5) Millions of reflections- Jesus/God can truly be seen in everything in the world, from the gorgeous landscaping to humans themselves. The seasons were created by him, but as depicted in the bible heaven is greater, therefore making the seasons just a mere shadow in his presence.

Line 5-7) God is in everything and everyone. He truly is part of every beautiful thing, but, as Shakespeare says, is incomparable to them in the constancy of his heart. The love and mercy of God and Jesus is incomparable to any beautiful thing or person here on Earth. I like that Shakespeare realized what so many of us overlook in our everyday lives… God could erase our existence at any minute. He created our world, and at any point could take it away.

You really have to read the modern version to understand the sonnet, which is why I am so thankful for the internet. I thought that Shakespeare was mocking someone who thought they were better than everyone else at first glance at the original. Maybe he was, and I just didn’t see it- or maybe the translation was biased. Either way, that is what I took it as AFTER reading the translation.

This was Sonnet 53, one of Shakespeare’s more serious sonnets.


When most I wink, then do mine eyes best see,
For all the day they view things unrespected;
But when I sleep, in dreams they look on thee,
And, darkly bright, are bright in dark directed.
Then thou, whose shadow shadows doth make bright—
How would thy shadow’s form form happy show
To the clear day with thy much clearer light,
When to unseeing eyes thy shade shines so?
How would, I say, mine eyes be blessèd made
By looking on thee in the living day,
When in dead night thy fair imperfect shade
Through heavy sleep on sightless eyes doth stay?
All days are nights to see till I see thee,
And nights bright days when dreams do show thee me.

I think that this is another religious sonnet. I think Shakespeare is trying to say that he doesn’t like the world around him and watching it as it deteriorates as he is happy with his own thoughts and way of thinking. He speaks of closing his eyes and being able to envision one whose shadow can make light out of darkness. I think of this religiously as perhaps Jesus. He could be talking about a girl, but from other sonnets I have read I think he is talking about religion. He says that “days are nights” and “nights are days” in comparison- saying that he prefers night to day because Jesus can illuminate the dark and is much clearer in the dark, alone.

I really think that translations help for the sonnets. Looking at the words in old-fashioned writing can be a bit confusing- and you find yourself second-guessing a lot. Clearly Shakespeare was saying the same message- Jesus shines above all. I think he was trying to express his love and awe for God in this sonnet by saying that if he shines so brightly in the dark and through the sins of the world, then he must truly be glorious and amazing in heaven, in holy light with no sins and darkness clouding around him OR clouding Shakespeare’s vision, for that matter.

My eyes work best when I’m asleep, because all day they look at things I don’t care about. When I sleep, my dreaming eyes alight on you and glitter brightly in the dark, having found your bright image there. Given that your shadowy dream-image brightens even the dark, how bright might you appear in daylight, when your own light is so much clearer? How bright, when your shadow shines so brightly to my eyes blinded by darkness? What good would it do my eyes to see you in the daytime when they already look at your beautiful image in the dead of night, as I sleep? Every day is as dark as night until I get to see you again, and every night is as bright as day when I see you in my dreams.

Above is the translated version. “Every day is as dark as night until I get to see you”. A clear plea for God. Can you imagine how empty and cold a life without God must be? Maybe Shakespeare had a friend who was going through a religious struggle and wrote the sonnet for them to open their eyes. Maybe he himself was struggling and wrote this to remind himself that God is before worldly things. “Every night is as bright as day when I see you in my dreams.” Maybe Shakespeare’s beliefs were not accepted around him- maybe he felt that he had to shelter himself.

Being he was a famous playwright, he had to appeal to many audiences. Maybe he disguised his sonnets to look like love poems, when they were indeed about his deep relationship with God that he didn’t want to show off. That is why he had to go through his days with a mask on, in the dark until at night he was alone and could pray freely without being judged by the public.

What do you think? Do you agree, or do you have your own opinion? Let me know.

Maddie

Thursday, October 9, 2014

Interpretations: Sonnets 35 and 52 of Shakespeare

“No more be griev'd at that which thou hast done:
Roses have thorns, and silver fountains mud,
Clouds and eclipses stain both moon and sun,
And loathsome canker lives in sweetest bud.
All men make faults, and even I in this,
Authorizing thy trespass with compare,
Myself corrupting, salving thy amiss,
Excusing thy sins more than thy sins are;
For to thy sensual fault I bring in sense,
(Thy adverse party is thy advocate)
And 'gainst myself a lawful plea commence:
Such civil war is in my love and hate
That I an accessary needs must be
To that sweet thief which sourly robs from me.”
Line 1: Don’t be ashamed at what you have done in the past. Let it go and forgive you.

Lines 2-4: Even those who seem perfect and flawless sin and make mistakes. Some are better at masking it than others but the flaws are still there.
Lines 5-7: Everyone makes mistakes, and there is no reason to hold contempt for someone just because they seem to have a better life than you. Jealousy is a sin in itself; don’t fall into a trap of your own making. As I stressed before, EVERYONE has flaws, some not as visible as others.
Lines 8-11: Don’t avoid your sins or try to cover them up because that only makes things worse. As I said in line one: forgive yourself of your mistakes. Don’t dwell on such small things and leave them in the past. If you let them stay in the back of your mind, it will only grow more contempt for those who you think are “better” than you in a sense. Others can be better at a certain ACTIVITY, but NO ONE can be BETTER than you.
Lines 12-14: Be kind to those who seem to be doing better than you as they too are going through their own struggles. Understand their pain, even if they refuse to understand yours and are not forgiving of you. In a religious sense, know that God repents all sins in the end and that you just need to put your trust in Him.
Perhaps Shakespeare was going through a time of spiritual darkness/doubt at the time he wrote this sonnet and felt that everyone had it better than him, despite his acclaim as a wonderful playwright. I certainly have had times in life where I feel that EVERYONE has it better than me- not even just the stars and celebs. On the opposite side of things, maybe he was trying to offer comfort to those who felt that way and remind them that even famous people like himself have issues too, and that in the end we are all human beings who are flawed and make mistakes.
I don’t know how spiritual and religious Shakespeare was, but this sonnet to me almost sounded like a plea to God. If not comforting, crying out: asking God to take away his sins and the sins of those around him, to give him the graces he needed to forgive them for all the hurt they had caused him and ALSO give them the strength to forgive him of any wrongs he himself had committed.
This is sonnet 35. It is one of the few sonnets Shakespeare wrote that was not about love.

“So am I as the rich whose blessèd key
Can bring him to his sweet up-lockèd treasure,
The which he will not every hour survey,
For blunting the fine point of seldom pleasure.
Therefore are feasts so solemn and so rare,
Since seldom coming in the long year set,
Like stones of worth they thinly placèd are,
Or captain jewels in the carcanet.
So is the time that keeps you as my chest,
Or as the wardrobe which the robe doth hide,
To make some special instant special blest
By new unfolding his imprisoned pride.
  Blessèd are you whose worthiness gives scope,
  Being had, to triumph; being lacked, to hope.”

I don’t even need to arrange this sonnet into different lines to get the point of it across- I think it is pretty clear that Shakespeare is trying to say that even though you may have something great, too much emphasis on it can truly make it not that great. That is why (so Shakespeare says) holidays are so far spaced apart- so that when they do come around, they are that much more special. Who would want Christmas every day? Think about it. At first, it would be GREAT. A feast, gifts, and a merry time EVERY DAY. But after about a week, you’d get sick of it and want a normal life again.
It’s like the richest person in the world. Have you ever thought what THAT would be like in the hands of the wrong person? I’m sure that at first instinct we would all say “Yeah, I’d love that!”  But would we really? How long would it be before we let our wallets get the best of us? Humans have impulses that tell them to always have goals, wants and needs and to strive to fulfill those wants and needs. If we were the richest people in the world (and imagine for a moment that you are), how long would it take for us to satisfy ALL of our needs and wants?
With all that money, we would be satisfied- correct? No. We would still want SOMETHING, even if we had no idea WHAT it was. That is why it is better to have a moderate amount of everything and have goals and wants to work towards- that way it feels so much nicer when you achieve them. Say, for instance, that you have been saving up for an expensive car or TV. It feels MUCH better buying it after you have worked your tail end off for it than just buying it with money you had anyway.
Be the one who has a treasure, but savors it for the right moment- Have the money to get what you want, but don’t exploit it. Have limits and boundaries to you compulsiveness. Don’t take life for granted, for within an instant it could be gone. Take your life for what it is and nothing more. If you are a little more fortunate than others, good. If not, fine- your life is yours to live and no one else’s. I think that I have made good decisions in mine and savored the wonderful and joyous parts- have you?
Maddie



Monday, October 6, 2014

Great Ancient Civilizations of Anatolia (Part 3, Final)

Great Ancient Civilizations of Asia Minor
Part 3 – By Madison Nef

In this part I’d like to talk about Constantinople, or as it is known today, Istanbul. Constantinople was originally Byzantium before Emperor Constantine I re-founded it in the year 324 AD. Constantinople quickly became known as the religious, political and cultural capital for Asia Minor with a population of 600,000 – 1,000,000 during the time of the Crusades. Constantinople became known as “a new Rome” because of the conflict between the cities in Asia Minor and Egypt. Both wanted to be looked upon as capitals for the Roman Emperor and Constantine saw that Rome was no longer a suitable place for him to live. He founded Byzantium and renamed in Constantinople. With the development of Constantinople, the Roman Empire slowly reunited.

The Byzantine Empire reigned from about 330-1453 AD and Constantinople took the place of Miletus as a capital Asia Minor city. In this age, Constantinople didn’t have as much influence as it does today, but it slowly grew to be one of the greatest city states of Asia Minor. Today, Ankara is the capital of Turkey, but most people still look to Istanbul as the capital as it has not only 3 times the population of Ankara at 12 million residents but also because of its political influence.

A section of Byzantium called “the First Hill” was thought to be a great public area, hosting a lot of temples and monuments at the time. There is not a lot of evidence of this as the area was heavily rebuilt by Constantine and the only artifacts that prove the existence of the area at all are the inscriptions on the coins. The hill is now home to Topkapi Palace. Topkapi is an extremely large palace located in Istanbul which served as a home for the Ottoman Turks for 400 years out of their 642 year reign. It is currently open as a museum.

Constantine wanted to turn Byzantium into the equivalent if not a BETTER Rome, and the first thing he did was expand Byzantium into a larger capital. He then added more monuments to set the tone so that more people would move there. In Justinian’s reign, he finished off Constantinople by building the beautiful Hagia Sophia basilica. It started as a Greek orthodox church, then became an imperial mosque, and is now a museum much like the Topkapi Palace.   Prof. Kenneth Harl says that he finds the best thing to describe the relationship between Justinian and Constantine is the mosaic art that many visitors see as they enter the Hagia Sophia- the one depicting Holy Mary holding Jesus with Constantine on one side offering her a model of the city and Justinian on the other side offering her a model of the church. Needless to say, I agree- Constantine developed and built up the original city, starting with completely redesigning the downtown area of it (adding the first basilica churches, started the imperial palace, and built one of the first stadiums, the Hippodrome) while Justinian completed it by building Hagia Sophia and finishing off the imperial palace.

Constantinople continued to grow after his death with the building of the new triple wall which completely blocked out any invaders from Constantinople and discouraged many of the barbarians living outside of the city. The fortress consisted of a moat, an inner wall and then ANOTHER wall. It was built on a solid foundation that was almost impossible to dig through- and the first wall was 40 feet high. Even if you DID make it over the first wall, you were greeted with arrows and a SECOND wall with a height of 60 feet.

Today, Istanbul has a population of over 12,000,000, has housed 3 empires in its time (Roman, Byzantine and Ottoman) and while it is not an empire today, it might as well be as it has the same population size as Belgium.

John Chrysostom
While Constantine had done a great job in making Constantinople into a political capital, it was Chrysostom who left a great impact in the religious laws and ways of the Eastern Roman Empire. He fought for patriarch equality, and in the Second Ecumenical Council of 381 AD, he got his law passed: Constantinople was on par with the old Rome, meaning that the patriarch had the same rights as the Pope. Not only did Chrysostom get this law passed, but he was also involved in religious hijacking.

Mary was always the patron saint of Ephesus. John managed to take her shrine from Ephesus and move it to Constantinople with no complaints from Ephesus’ bishop, and soon Mary and her icons were protecting Constantinople instead of Ephesus when Constantinople was not even a religious city. In fact, it was strictly an imperial city!  John was well known for his literary work and his speeches and is sometimes called “The Golden Mouth” in history. He was also the reason for the passing of the Chalcedonian creed at the Ecumenical Council of 451 AD. The creed stated that Christ was both human and divine. This would be the creed that Constantinople would follow for years to come. At the same time, the “single nature” or the Monophysite creed that had been written by Alexander I was condemned.

Justinian I (ruled 327-365 AD)
 Justinian came to the throne in 327 AD and spent most of his time before his death in 365 AD trying to recapture the Western Provinces. His tries were not very successful and not only bankrupted him, but also put his entire empire at risk for more raids and attacks. This led to a military crisis in the next generation.

However, Justinian DID have some triumphant moments and there are a lot of good things to be said about him as well. He was responsible for earning Constantinople the title “Queen of Cities” and also was responsible for many of the domed churches that were scattered throughout the city. Perhaps his greatest achievement, however, was the completion of the Hagia Sophia, a large domed church that was and still is considered an architectural masterpiece for the time period it was built in. Although parts of it have been rebuilt a few times, most of the original building still stands strong, including the dome.

 The Hagia Sophia is a beautiful church- it is about 15-20 stories high in modern standards and actually caused Queen Olga of Russia to convert immediately when she saw it: she said that “God must surely dwell in such a magnificent building”. The dome rests on another smaller rectangular dome which has the top cut off of it, allowing for more stability at such a height. The dome has 40 windows cut out at its base, so a lot of light gets in making it look like a dome on top of an orb of light from afar.
It is a great example of the advanced Roman architecture of the time, much like the triple wall.




The Byzantine Dark Age

After the death of Justinian, Constantinople began to fall. It was left bankrupt from Justinian’s war efforts to take over the West, and a plague swept through the land from 542-544 AD that cost Constantinople ½ of its population. It was Heraclius I who really salvaged Constantinople and pulled it out of its hole by borrowing money from the church and forming a new imperial army. He ruled from 610-641 and by 621 had a fully formed army.

Prior to this, Constantinople had almost been lost to the Persians and their military situation was very bad. In 621, Heraclius sent his entire army across the Black Sea and attacked Persia from behind, reversing the military situation for a short period of time. Unfortunately, the Arabs picked that exact time to attack Persia, over running it along with Syria, Egypt, and eventually North Africa. From there on out, Constantinople was constantly under siege from the Arabs. The Arabs were very religious people, calling themselves Khalif or “descendants of Muhammad”. They saw Constantinople as a principal and religious city from which the word of God should be preached. Both the Umayyad and the Abbasid Caliphate tried to re-take the city over the years but were not successful.

The reason for their failure was due to the extremely strong and fortified walls and also a new form of weapon that the Byzantines had discovered. It was Greek petroleum of sorts and it could be siphoned out at incoming fleets and armies and it would burn it up. It was described as “fire mixed with thunder and lightning” and it was these two main prospects that allowed Constantinople to stand so strong to the invasions.

After awhile the Arabs would hand over attack plans to other commanders on the spot- there was no longer any profit in conquering Asia Minor, or Constantinople for that matter. There was too much planning involved- you needed a year to set up your plans and get supplies for your trip and then ANOTHER year to trek through Asia Minor from Baghdad. You needed a fleet for your army and you needed food. And even if you DID conquer Asia Minor, there wasn’t much to be gained from it- the Arabs was more interested in Egypt and Syria.

The most that the Arabs ever did was set up military bases and camps on the outskirts of the mountains, and every once in a while they would raid Byzantine Asia Minor- but none of these raids ever amounted to much and never turned into a real conquest. These raids were more to throw the Byzantine emperors off balance and to get treaties from them, not to actually take over Constantinople.

However, the emperors in Asia Minor didn’t realize this and started stretching out their troops, sending them out to different parts of Asia Minor. The Heraclian and Isaurian Dynasties actually tried to rearrange Asia Minor all together to prepare for future attacks from the Arabs. The government in Constantinople also tried to colonize Asia Minor more, sending out small settlements of people. They were still struggling to make up their numbers from the plague, so much so that they would even bring in peasants from Europe to help colonize Asia Minor. They would also bring in Slavs, Greeks, Armenians AND Georgians to help make settlements larger.

Most of the newcomers were put into the armies and the continent was militarized in a way that it had not been in 700 years. A lot of the colonies were put on the outskirts as a defense system and it was all of these new settlements that really prevented some of the heavier Arab raids from collapsing Asia Minor like Persia, Syria and Egypt collapsed.



A lot of the seaside cities fell in the late 7th century- Ephesus was majorly sacked by the Arabs and had to be rebuilt but it was rebuilt on a smaller scale. The plague had also swept through here too and most of the population was already depleted. These smaller cities were VITAL to the protection of Asia Minor and it was a great loss. Starting in the archaic age, what was left of the cities either disappeared all together or declined so much that they may as well have disappeared.

The inner cities were also changing, and it is thought that the Romans returned to the ways of the Iron Age- there was no longer any need for walls as the emperors had secured peace for the time being and cities turned back to living in citadels. This was the case with Madensehir, a small city that rested in the valley of the Anatolian Plateau. The people living there packed up and completely abandoned the city, moving to the top of Karadag just above the plateau. Karadag means “Black Mountain”, which was a fitting name for it as it was an extinct volcano. It is thought that Madensehir was just too exposed for the people and they left.

Another good example is Canli Kalisi, another small city on the plain that was moved to a nearby but more defendable mountain range.  Many of the churches and housing developments in this area are carved out of the standing stone, giving a great look of freestanding architecture of the time. Upon inspecting the dwellings, they seem fit for lords with a main dining area, a small private chapel and also many kitchens and sleeping chambers. However, these mountain cities were a lot more crowded than the plains OR the cities in general- there was not enough space, houses were crowded together, there was not a lot of room for agriculture and the greatest building was a church.

While the churches IMITATED the ones in Constantinople, they were a lot smaller and more humble, lacking the artistic style of the classical period (the 4th and 5th centuries).

In Cappadocia, there was often underground living quarters near large cities. The people would go underground and let the Arabs run over their farms as they often headed west, and then come up when they left. When they came back, they would go back underground and roll great millstones across the doorways to keep them safe.

The Dark Age was a horrible time for Asia Minor, but it truly held together. We saw wonderful architecture and weaponry, crafty planning and attacks, devastating plagues that wiped entire cities off the map, and war all the way through. Has our world today changed much from what it was back then? War is always prominent, illness kills more and more every day, and while we have more technology today, if we don’t use it correctly then we are only setting ourselves back further. Thank you for reading.

Maddie