S
shlomo3amrooh
Guest
I was always told that the melkites were the Syriacs who gave into byzantinisations.Well, partially. The city of Antioch itself was bi-lingual (and bi-ethnic), albeit that the “upper crust” was Greek-speaking (much the same syndrome as one can find in Brussels – which is what I’ve heard called “a Flemmish city with a French complex” – where for many years, it was “fashionable” for the local Flamands to be Francophone), irrespective of ethnicity. While I am far less familiar with Egypt, I think the same can be said for Alexandria. In any case, this had absolutely nothing to do with Chalcedon.
I wouldn’t say it quite that way. In the early stages, there were two groups called Melkites: the “Melkite Maximites” (who ultimately adopted the Byzantine Imperial liturgical usage) and the “Melkite Maronites” (who maintained their Syriac liturgical usage). While the moniker arose because of Chalcedon (and therefore, of course, the Emperor), it was proudly worn. After all, Syria was still part of the Empire.