The Fall of Constantinople 1453 (Canto)

This is an excellent account of the events that lead to the fall of Constantinople in 1453. Runciman is an excellent historian, who makes you re-live through those dark hours in every detail. It is almost like reading a thriller and worry about the end, even if you know the sad end beforehand. I strongly recommend it to anyone with an interest in history.

A well written account of a key landmark in modern civilisation - the end of the Byzantine empire. In 1453 the Turks finally extinguished the Byzantine empire (barring Trebizond, which followed soon after) created by the emperor Constantine in around 330AD in his new capital of Constantinople (modern day Istanbul). The Byzantines always thought of themselves as Romans, despite being essentially Greek,as their empire was effectively that of the Romans, displaced to the East before the fall of Rome in about 450AD. By the end in 1453, Byzantium was little more than a city state. A fascinating story. Byzantium survived for over a thousand years and perpetuated art and learning through many centuries in which the West was effectively run by warlike tribes.

What a great book! It really immerses you into the 14th and 15th centuries and keeps you absorbed for days. Feels like a novel, although it is non fiction. Quite accurate, beautiful language, nice little book. I never thought I would be so interested by just the fall of Constantinople (as opposed to the history of an entire era spanning a few centuries). Must read!

Ordered this book which by the way is brilliant. Excellent, speedy delivery.Unfortunately I found I had got an earlier1991/1992 reprint tucked away in my library.Asked to return it. No problem. So generous..

A fascinating, complex story which is well told and which still stands up to scrutiny.

A concise, well researched view on the very important topic of the Fall of Constantinople by a recognized expert on the subject.

This and beautifully written little book is the definitive account of the fall of Constantinople. None have matched it since it first appeared in 1965. It remains essential reading for anyone interested in relations between the West and Islam.

Book in good condition by a top Historian

Perhaps this book has been given too much praise for too long. It is still a very good book, but all the same, it is somewhat overrated.The good parts include its readability, solid narrative account and source criticism. The bad parts include its age and a large focus on Byzantium and the west. A number of academic discoveries have taken place since the publishing of this book, and they are not included, probably due to Sir Runciman's passing. The plates in this book are very dark, and the only one to really contribute to the book is the diagram of the land walls.All the same, this is still a standard work on the siege of 1453. Be sure to read it alongside Crowley's book. This book describes the western European context much better, and has more scholarly acclaim, but the Crowley's narrative has more detail and is somewhat more updated. Read them together.

He leído varios libros sobre la caída de Constantinopla, algunos de historiadores recientes, pero sigo pensando que Runciman sigue siendo el mejor. No hay nadie que se le compare en minuciosidad y en imparcialidad. Y es un buen escritor, capaz de transmitir emoción y pasión.Aunque se conoce el final, la caída de Constantinopla tiene todos los ingredientes de un thriller, que acaba siendo un thriller de terror.Cualquiera que esté interesado en el tema debería leer a Runciman. De hecho, todo lo que escribió este gran erudito y experto en historia bizantina es de gran calidad.

Das Buch genaut für Dich, wenn Du wissen will, wie das Chrisliche Türkei heute Islamisch ist? Das Buch ist sehr interessant, aber für Leute gedacht, die Zeit haben. Der Auto wiederholt manche Sätze 2 bis 3 Mal und das macht das Buch langweilig, aber das nun mal sein Schreibstil.

Excellent.

this book gives me more detailed information about the fall of Constantinople and the battle against the them. I like it

This book has a lot of weaknesses. As of this writing, it is over 50 years old, and many of the "modern works" cited date from when the Ottoman Empire still existed. The author makes a number of unusual writing choices - at times he references "the Arab caliphate" - you know, the one-and-only! On page 58 there is a rather long and unusual description of the Sultan's physical features: "He was handsome, of middle height but strongly built. He face was dominated by a pair of piercing eyes, under arched eyebrows, and a thin hooked nose that curved over a mouth with full red lips. In later life his features reminded men of a parrot about to eat ripe cherries." My personal favorite is from page 78, describing a cannon-ball fired from one of the Sultan's guns: "The length of its barrel was 40 spans, that is, 26 ft and 8 in. The reverberation was heard for a hundred stadia, and the ball hurtled itself in the air for a mile, then buried itself 6 ft deep in the earth." Ah, yes, because we all know how long a stadium is!Steven Runciman is writing History with a capital H, and is completly allergic to things like explanations, or citations, or actually quoting primary sources. On pages 128 and 130 he describes the Sultan's and the Emperor's rallying speeches to their men on the day of the last battle - it would have been nice if either of those page-long parphrases had been replaced with the actual speeches, or at least quotes. On page 79 the author writes about the omens surrounding a possible conquest of Constantinople, with quotes taken from "the Tradition" of Islam - you know, hadiths have actual citations too, Sir Runciman. On page 75 the author almost approaches something resembling historical methodology by talking about the different figures given for the size of the Turkish army - but then declares the (unnamed and uncited) Italian accounts more reliable with no explanation whatsoever.The most egregious example is from pages 20 and 21, where the author explains why many Greeks were reluctant to accept Union with Rome. "But there were many thoughtful statesmen who also doubted the benefits of union. Many calculated, with reason, that the West would never be willing or able to send help . . . A few statesmen looked further ahead. Byzantium . . . was doomed. The only chance of reuniting the Greek Church and with the Greek people might well like in accepting Turkish bondage . . . Only thus might it be possible to reconstitute the Orthodox Greek nation and so revive it that in time it might regain enough strength to throw off the infidel yoke and recreate Byzantium. Greek integrity might well be better preserved by a united people under Moslem rule than by a fragment attached to the rim of the Western world."This is an absolutely fascinating argument. But who the hell are these thoughtful statesmen? Sir Runciman never bothers to cite them, never bothers to name his sources, never even bothers to name the apparently numerous people who had the foresight to predict the Greek Independence War and the Megali Idea centuries in the future. I have no idea if what he is saying has any basis in the contemporary reality or if it is just the imposition of a 20th century Byzantine fanboy because a Cambridge historian places no value on actually producing evidence for anything that he says.So if I have so many criticisms, why do I give the book 4 stars? My praise is short and simple - the writing is good. This might be deeply flawed historical method, but it is accurate enough, and is utterly brilliant writing. I will read this book again, because Runciman's History with a capital H is a first-rate story. If you are totally new to Byzantine history, do not start with this book because you will be unable to piece apart all the unexplained bits that Runciman loves. But if you have a passing familiarity with the context and want to read an awesome book about political drama, treason and betrayal, naval battles, desperate sieges, huge walls, Greek fire, and 1000-lb cannon balls, give this book a shot.

There are few historical events that conjure up the adventure, drama and pation of the fall of Constantinople; Barbarian hordes, age old empires, tremendous siege engines, feuding merchant states, conflicted religious leaders, age old prophecies of doom (or victory depending on your view), naval battles and finally a philosopher emperor who having failed to get the outside support his city needs to survive, dies at the hands of the enemy while defending the city's walls, his body never to be found. This book tells the story of the final empire of the Greeks, as if told by a story-teller rocking in a chair by a fire. The story is that good, the characters, their motives and actions are all that good, and they are all true. Some of my favorite parts were the descriptions of the Sultan's Janissaries, and the work of Urban, the canon builder that Constantine turned away, and who Mehmet was only too eager to hire.If you enjoyed any of Norwich's books on the rise and fall of Byzantium, then this book serves as an excellent conclusion. The author, Mr. Runciman, does a fantastic job of detailing the story, placing it in its appropriate historical time frame and setting the record straight on many elements. One of his central tenemants is the arbitrary nature of defining Constantinople's fall as the 'end' of the Dark Ages, and he does a convincing job of making his point that many of the effects often ascribed to the fall had long been in process. First published in 1965, this is by no means the latest re-telling of this event, but its ability to stand the test of time certainly reinforces that it is one of, if not outright, the best. The only disadvantage that may be age related is that it would be nice to have a few more, and perhaps better organized maps and figures that went along with the text.I highly recommend this book, it would be of interest to anyone wanting to learn more about Constantinople, Greek history, Turkish history, Islaamic history, the early Renaissance, and the intricacies of Papal, Venetian and Genoan relations. This is also a great book for anyone who is just looking for a good book.

Sir Steven Runciman had an unique talent for conveying historical information with a flair. He did not convey history as a collection of unrelated facts to dates but instead provided all the color and nuances behind those facts and dates which gave them life. Only a few historians write in a way that transports the reader to the subject time, place, and people the way Sir Runciman has in this little volume.The book is organized by describing the background and focusing on the last Emperor and Sultan Mehmet II as the key individuals in that background. It continues with a description of the weaknesses that prevented the west from providing efficacious help to Constantinople. Attention then turns to the siege and fall followed by an overview of the exodus of learned Byzantines to the west which helped to spark the renaissance.A map of Constantinople and a pictorial depiction of the disposition of troops during the siege provides some detail for context. I would have liked more maps of the other geographical areas mentioned to provide the greater world context and that is my single critical point on this volume.That so much information could be conveyed in so few pages with such brilliant flair is testament to his reputation. This is still the definitive work on the last years of Constantinople and the final fall of the Byzantine empire. It is a must have for ancient history libraries and a must read for historians wishing to communicate historical lessons in writing.

The writer takes you back to the late decades of an empire that carried forth the banner and legacy of Imperial Rome. Far from the vast and immensely wealthy empire of Justinian or Constantine; it has weathered centuries of stagnation, infighting, and attacks from every front, and is now little more than a rump of a state no more than a few dozen miles in length, with an archipelago of small Greek tributary realms. A new Islamic power will soon subsume it, and bring an end to a nearly millennium long epoch.

Even after his death, Steven Runciman's works on the medieval Greeks and the Orthodox Church remain the standard for student seeking general information and for non-scholars seeking knowledge.As with all his works, The Fall of Constantinople is both well researched, but more importantly, well written. He provides enough background on the decline of the Eastern Empire and the rise of the Ottoman Turks to place the fall in proper perspective. The Eastern Empire in 1453 was a mere shadow of its once glorious self. The conspiracies and plots between Emperors, Patriarchs, Popes and Kings, ultimately, between Eastern and Western Christendom doomed the heir to the Caesars.Runciman's wonderful writing makes this come alive. He does not, like many historians, feel that a dry recitation of the facts alone is enough. Rather, his history reads almost like a novel. The characters have depth and emotion. The last Emperor is shown as a shrewd many trying desperately to save his people, even to the point of entering into an unpopular union with the Roman Church. The Sultan is no mere cartoon villain as often portrayed in medieval Europe or a politically correct Third World leader (as might be portrayed today) but rather a ruthless, though driven young man, determined to fulfill the goal of 8 centuries of Moslem leaders - the capture of "The City."And as the story winds toward its inevitable conclusion, you root for the heroes and mourn their deaths.Constantinople fell not because the Ottomans were the strongest empire in the world. Rather, it fell because the petty jealousies of the Western leaders made the defense of Constantinople impossible. Today, as the West finds itself again under attack, we should keep heed of our history, and avoid allowing our jealousies to cause another Fall of Constantinople.

Runciman delivers a fair and detailed account of the fall of Constantinople. Many say that his writing and work is very anti-west. I didn't see that in this book. He was fair to both sides of the story, but didn't fail to criticize characters in history that he found flawed. I'm ok with an author throwing in his opinion it is not always a bad thing. Overall I would say it was very well written and worth the read.

Post-modernist historians will tell you that there are no such things as historical turning points but (as in so many other things) they are mistaken, and one of history's great watersheds is the the conquest of Constantinople by the Ottoman Turks. This was the final chapter of classical European civilization and the beginning of the greatness of the Ottoman Empire. Certainly those who witnessed or were contemporaries thought this event an earth-shattering occurrence, for good or ill. And who better than to tell this epic story than Steven Runciman, an old-school historian and writer of the first rank. Even though you know the outcome, you are swept up in his flawless narrative. Runciman was a classicist and a philhellene, so the Byzantines are definitely the good guys in this book, but no matter, for their fate was cruel. The historical background and the fates of the survivors are also covered. A very very good history book indeed.

This was the first book I read by Runciman and I was immediately enamored with his style. He conveys both the strategic and human elements well with sprinklings of the concurrently developing subplots throughout. While the title itself leaves no doubt as to the outcome of this tragic tale, the reading is an engrossing story and you are left spellbound as history unfolds through the pages. I have used this book to introduce friends to medieval history(although it takes place towards the end of that period) and have then had them come back to me to suggest other books in this field of study with intrigued interest. An epic tale of the final winking out of the glory that was the Byzantine Empire presented by a master storyteller.

The author shows how the decaying Christian Byzantine empire was practically reduced to Constantinople befor being conquered . Mehmet II revived the empire and was considered heir to the Caesars. Runciman gives a detailed account of the events, Europe incapable of uniting forces against the Turks and then being surprised that Mehmet II took advantage of all the internal disputes.This is also the story of a lost paradise that nobody seems to regret today. Just as Islam lost its own paradise in Andalousia a few decades later under Isabella the Catholic.It is a book to read today while Islam is again putting pressure on the Western world. What if it happened again? Runciman shows how trading and economic interests outbid religious fervor. And that however dramatic the events may be, life reorganizes around any faith.

Bought it as a gift for a friend. He loves history and says the facts are true and reliable.