Constantine & Christianity — It was just politics
Henry Davis
2

Hey Henry. There’s tons of mistakes in this piece. There is no historian of the Roman Empire in the world who thinks Constantine converted for political purposes, because there were zero political advantages of conversion. Historians estimate that at the time of Constantine’s conversion, about 90–95% of the population of the empire was pagan, including the entire aristocracy and Senate. In other words, converting to Christianity was an immensely bad political decision to make. Your suggestions about the feudal system having roots in Constantine’s reforms, in the most honest way I can put it, border on historical illiteracy.

You also leave unexplained how Christianity would have served any better a basis for slavery than pre-Christian religion, nor the reason why Constantine thought slavery needed improving so as to adopt Christianity. The suggestion that all our sources from this period is Christian is also wrong, one of the major Roman historians of the 4th century was the pagan Ammianus Marcellinus.

You also suggest in Constantine’s time, pagan elements were embedded into Christianity. You provide two examples of this; Christmas and Easter. The problem is, both of these celebrations have solely Christian origins. Only on the internet do you hear about the imaginary origins into Saturnalia/the winter solstice for Christmas or a deity named Oestre for Easter (in fact, the sheer idea of a pagan deity named Oestre is a myth). Here are some resources that straighten this out.

I welcome any response from you.

Like what you read? Give Jimmy Issa a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.