Editing Constantine V (section)

== Assessment and legacy ==
[[File:SoldiersGuardIgnatios.jpg|thumb|right|Soldiers at the tomb of Constantine V, Skylitzes Chronicle]]
Constantine V was a highly capable ruler, continuing the reforms{{snd}}fiscal, administrative and military{{snd}}of his father. He was also a successful general, not only consolidating the empire's borders, but actively campaigning beyond those borders, both east and west. At the end of his reign the empire had strong finances, a capable army that was proud of its successes and a church that appeared to be subservient to the political establishment.<ref>Brubaker and Haldon, p. 248</ref>

In concentrating on the security of the empire's core territories he tacitly abandoned some peripheral regions, notably in Italy, which were lost. However, the hostile reaction of the Roman Church and the Italian people to iconoclasm had probably doomed imperial influence in central Italy, regardless of any possible military intervention. Due to his espousal of iconoclasm Constantine was damned in the eyes of contemporary iconodule writers and subsequent generations of Orthodox historians. Typical of this demonisation are the descriptions of Constantine in the writings of [[Theophanes the Confessor]]: "a monster athirst for blood", "a ferocious beast", "unclean and bloodstained magician taking pleasure in evoking demons", "a precursor of [[Antichrist]]". However, to his army and people he was "the victorious and prophetic Emperor". Following a disastrous defeat of the Byzantines by the Bulgarian Khan [[Krum]] in 811 at the [[Battle of Pliska]], troops of the ''tagmata'' broke into Constantine's tomb and implored the dead emperor to lead them once more.<ref>Garland, p. 95</ref> The life and actions of Constantine, if freed from the distortion caused by the adulation of his soldiers and the demonisation of iconodule writers, show that he was an effective administrator and gifted general, but he was also autocratic, uncompromising and sometimes needlessly harsh.<ref>Bury, pp. 9–10 (including quotations from contemporary sources)</ref><ref>Ostrogorsky, p. 167, 175</ref><ref>Fine, p. 78</ref>

All surviving contemporary and later Byzantine histories covering the reign of Constantine were written by iconodules. As a result of this, they are open to suspicion of bias and inaccuracy, particularly when attributing motives to the Emperor, his supporters and opponents. This makes any claims of absolute certainty regarding Constantine's policies and the extent of his repression of iconodules unreliable.<ref>Treadgold (2012), entire chapter</ref><ref>Brubaker and Haldon, p. 157</ref> In particular, a manuscript written in north-eastern Anatolia concerning miracles attributed to [[Theodore of Amasea|St. Theodore]] is one of few probably written during or just after the reign of Constantine to survive in its original form; it contains little of the extreme invective common to later iconodule writings. In contrast, the author indicates that iconodules had to make accommodations with imperial iconoclastic policies, and even bestows on Constantine V the conventional religious acclamations: 'Guarded by God' ({{lang|grc|θεοφύλακτος}}) and 'Christ-loving emperor' ({{lang|grc|φιλόχριστος βασιλεὺς}}).<ref>Zuckerman pp. 193–194</ref>