Research Paper on:
Constantinople Siege

Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
be said to have begun at that point. Its significance to the West and Christendom is that it marks the final end that was the glory of Rome and the  assurance of Christian/European superiority. For Muslims, and for Turks in particular, it was a victory still celebrated, for though the citys population had dwindled significantly from its heyday and its  wealth was largely drained away, it remained a symbol of Christian/Western dominance, and its symbolic value was not lost either on Sultan Mohammed II or on the Muslim world in  general. The conquest was also the springboard toward respect for the Turks, and for an empire that would last well into the 20th century. Ottoman Sultan Mohammed II (or Mohamed,  or Mehmet, or Mehmed, or Memet; it really does not matter because he did not spell his name any of those ways; in this paper we will use the original  anglicized spelling rather than any of the newer attempts at more allegedly "authentic" versions) was 21 years old, had been on the throne for two years, and was looking for  respect for himself and his small consortium of neighboring Turkish states (Davis, 1999). He was, more than anything, ambitious. He had twice assumed the throne when his father Murad abdicated,  but he was so obnoxious and unpopular that his father had come back (Vickers, 2001). Now that he was well and truly in charge, he was ready for action. The  emperor Constantine, who was to be the last of the Byzantine emperors, was hoping to hold together an empire that had been crumbling for several hundred years. His city, which  had once been said to boast at least 400,000 inhabitants with a sizable army to defend it, had less than 100,000 at the start of the siege. The defenders consisted