Christian communities sometimes preferred Muslim rule to Latin Christian dominion.

Evidence

Historically, Christians sometimes lived under Muslim domains and protection. For example, after the conquest of Constantinople, since the Orthodox no longer had access to the instruments of running a state, they had to accept the autonomy under the millet system of the Ottomans. The dynamics of this relationship were defined by a tax paid by the Orthodox and in return they had protection and freedom to practice their religion. Later Christian authorities would sometimes even praise this system. In the eighteenth century, the patriarch of Jerusalem believed the hosting by the Ottomans was a special grace from God, for the Orthodox were protected from the heresies and political meddling of the Latin west. — Ali Qureshi, The Fall of Constantinople, 54

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to broader patterns of minority religious autonomy under imperial millet systems and to the theme of religious minorities preferring one imperial protector over another. — connects to: The schism within Christianity was perceived as a greater threat than that of a foreign invasion; the Orthodox were relatively receptive towards having the Ottomans as material rulers in contrast to the Latins.; The fall marked the end of the Eastern Roman Empire and highlighted the deep-rooted theological tensions within Christianity, tensions that were so profound that many Orthodox Christians preferred Ottoman rule over submission to the Latin Church. This preference stemmed from a desire to maintain theological autonomy and avoid the doctrinal compromises required by the Latin Church.; The Latin doctrine differed from the Orthodox in regard to papal supremacy, the filioque clause, and unleavened bread. With these tensions unresolved between the churches, the Ottomans may have been seen as a means to avoid a forced compromise which Latin rule might bring about. The Ottomans on the other hand would only impose a tax upon the Christian population. This financial subservience was the only toll they had to pay to the Ottomans, and perhaps this option was more economical than changing their creed under a Latin reign. (+12 more)

Broader Connections

• Orthodox clergy preferred Ottoman rule over Latin rule during the fall of Constantinople. #corroborates (0.90) — Ali Qureshi, The Fall of Constantinople, 60
• The essay critically assesses the contemporary scholarship on Christian Islamophobia, arguing that it often overlooks the internal Christian divisions and portrays Christianity as a monolithic… #expands (0.80)
• Medieval Christian infighting outweighed the shared threat of Islam #expands (0.60) — Ali Qureshi, The Fall of Constantinople, 45
• Islamophobia scholarship often treats medieval Christianity as a united whole against Muslims #expands (0.60) — Ali Qureshi, The Fall of Constantinople, 25
• Christians preferred Ottoman tolerance over Catholic persecution #expands (0.55) — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 75
• Muslim Spain exemplified relative interfaith coexistence through convivencia. #corroborates (0.45) — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 55