When most
folks look at a map, they will see only a single Rome, the one in Italy. But there are actually two more, neither of
them in Italy: one is identified with Washington,
D.C., in the United States and the other with Moscow in Russia, each quite
different from the other as they represent two different stages of Roman
history. In the American Rome one will
see a continuation of pagan, pre-Christian Rome, while in the Russian Rome one
will see a continuation of Orthodox Constantinople/New Rome.
Let us look
first at American Rome. From her
earliest days, the leaders of the US identified closely with the pre-Christian
Roman Republic:
‘Throughout
the course of history, the ancient civilization of Rome has been widely
discussed, praised, and emulated by writers, statesmen, and philosophers alike.
Rome has no shortage of admirers, and arguably some of its most enthusiastic
supporters were the American Founding Fathers who were enamoured of the Roman
past largely because of Rome’s unique form of government, which had supposedly
preserved liberty for hundreds of years. The Founders lavished praise upon the
Roman republican heroes who defended their government from tyranny in the
turbulent final days of the Republic.
‘ . . . The
American Revolution further intensified interest in the Roman world. By
anchoring those arguments for freedom to ancient precedent, Revolutionary
American authors aimed to demonstrate that their arguments were timeless and
firmly embedded in history. Historians such as Plutarch, Livy, and Tacitus
successfully encapsulated in writing the eternal and unavoidable struggle
between liberty and power.[4] Parallels
between Rome and America were made frequently by Revolutionary writers and
orators. Josiah Quincy compared the tyrant Caesar to King George, asking “is
not Britain to America what Caesar was to Rome?”[5] One
of the most dramatic and obvious examples of reference to Rome was Joseph
Warren’s oration on the Boston Massacre in 1775, during which he wore a Roman
toga.[6] It would be difficult to find
any public figure of the Revolutionary period who did not quote a classical
author in their pamphlets, orations or letters.[7]
‘ . . . The
founding generation admired Cicero as a steadfast defender of liberty and a
deeply philosophical thinker on the ways in which government can best preserve
our naturally endowed rights and freedoms. He was referred to as a constant
source of wisdom on the topic of political philosophy as well as a guide to
civic virtue and was described by Josiah Quincy as “the best of men and the
first of patriots.”[15] Cicero’s
oratorical prowess was emulated by many early American lawyers and statesmen
who wished to be as eloquent and impassioned as the man who defied tyrants.[16]
‘ . . .
Historical figures such as Cicero and Cato were considered fitting role models
not only due to their character, but because of the similarity between their
predicament and that of the Founders. Cicero and Cato, faced a power far
greater than themselves, but were steeled by the cause of liberty. Regardless
of how history played out, the Founders viewed Cicero and Cato as heroes of
freedom and enemies of tyranny.’
The
preoccupation in US thinking vis-à-vis Rome, as with nearly everything else, is
the idea of a religiously agnostic individual liberty. This will contrast with Russia, as we shall
see. But to begin with, we must see what
it is that Russia, the Third Rome, inherited from the second Rome, Constantinople:
‘As
the historical, lawful descendants of ancient Rome, which was destroyed by
barbarians in the fifth century, the inhabitants of Byzantium called themselves
Romans. In a vast empire divided into many nationalities there was one
faith—Orthodox Christianity. The Byzantines literally fulfilled the Christian teaching
of a new humanity living in a Divine spirit, where “there is neither Greek, nor
Jew, nor Scythe,” as the Apostle Paul wrote. This
hope preserved the country from the destructive storm of ethnic conflict. It
was enough for any pagan or foreigner to accept the Orthodox Faith, and confirm
it in deed, in order to become a full member of society. On the Byzantine
throne, for example, were almost as many Armenians as there were Greeks; there
were also citizens of Syrian, Arabian, Slavic, and Germanic origin. Amongst the
higher ranks of government were representatives of all peoples in the
Empire—the main requirements were their competence and dedication to the
Orthodox Faith. This provided Byzantine civilization with incomparable cultural
wealth.
. . .
The rest may
be read here:
https://www.geopolitika.ru/en/article/pagan-american-rome-and-christian-russian-rome
Or here:
https://katehon.com/en/article/pagan-american-rome-and-christian-russian-rome
--
Holy Ælfred the Great, King of England, South Patron, pray for us
sinners at the Souð, unworthy though we are!
Anathema to the Union!
No comments:
Post a Comment