The book is very well researched and practically reads like a novel, with varying descriptions of both sides of the engagement, as well as historical perspectives and analysis of events that led to the battle. My only complaint is that it felt too short, though that may be because it read so well. At only a few hundred pages, I'm sure much more could have been added to the narrative, but the preciseness of the book made it that much better. Very well done.

"In the jihad against Constantinople, one third of Muslims will allow themselves to be defeated, which Allah cannot forgive; one third will be killed in battle, making them wondrous martyrs; and one third will be victorious."

Speaking as a High School student, I was not completely thrilled when I received this book to read and review for my AP World History class. Nor can I say that I started this book but a few days before it was due. I give all of my thanks to Roger Crowley, who created a historical text that wasn't a terrific chore to read in two days.

The book, overall, was very interesting and was structured much like a fictional novel. The story of Islam vs. Christianity and their struggle for "true faith" had the classic elements of suspense, disappointment, and the "I really shouldn't find these so funny" Ottoman tactics of punishing a captive by "sticking a stake through his anus."

All in all, I would recommend this book to any student or adult who is willing to dive into a vast sea of knowledge. Though 1453 contained some descriptions of artillery that rivaled the length and interest levels of those in Greek mythology, it effectively told the tale of Constantinople and added historical allusions and comparisons throughout the story that further added to its appeal.

Furthermore, how can you rival a book that talks about a sea commander named Dolfin Dolfin? This book is definitely the best nonfiction, historical story that I have encountered thus far in my educational experience.

Just an excellent book. The author writing style really helps you imagine in your minds eye the scenes he's describing.

I'll give this book 3 stars out of charity, and because it may succeed as a work of popular history; indeed, most readers will be satisfied with it.

I can't write an exhaustive review, because I quit reading at p.32,when Crowley says that "the Ottomans ruled their subjects with a light hand. . . . No attempts were made to convert Christians . . ." etc. Ask anyone who's lived under Ottoman rule,if you can still find one of these venerable folk, or talk to their descendants. You'll get a different picture of the situation. Crowley himself describes some of the horrors of the siege, inflicted by these "tolerant" Muslims.

It is true that some Ottoman officials developed a liberal laissez-faire attitude toward the Christians--either out of Levantine indolence or practical intelligence: why harass honest and industrious people? Plus, they pay taxes through the nose. And even Sultan Mehmed II was lenient towards the Christians once he had established his rule. Still, the many horrors remain.

If I'd been at home while reading this book, I would have thrown it across the room. As it was, I was in the car and merely commented on the nonsense to my companions.

Gentle reader, if you really want to learn about the Fall of Constaninople, read Runciman, or Sir Edwin Pears, if you can find his book. Also, the translations of the chronicles of the time.

A more technical treatment of the subject than Sir Steven Runciman's The Fall of Constantinople 1453 (Canto), but I have to admit that I prefer the style of Sir Runciman. What Sir Runciman neglected in detail, Mr. Crowley has provided. But, at the same time, there were points where Mr. Crowley seemed overly concerned with parallels to today (implied somewhat in the subtitle). Despite that minor criticism it is likely the very thing other readers will enjoy about the book. Mr. Crowley also recently did a fine article in Military History magazine concerning the fall of Constantinople and I would recommend that as well for thorough technical detail. This is a thorough and enjoyable work and an important contribution to understanding the last days of Constaniople.

The name Constantinople has always conjured up vague images for me - mystery, grandeur, historical wonder. However, 1453 has expanded my understanding of the city as well as the role it played in world history. Crowley covers the siege and attack of Constantinople by the Turks in 1543. The invasion has truly changed the geopolitical landscape of Europe and Asia since that time. This was truly a Holy War - a fight both between Islam and Christianity, as well as a fight within factions of Christianity. It also highlights the great differences between the understandings of the human condition between these world religions. Neither is innocent and neither is patently evil, but they are very different. Crowley speaks about these differences and the background issues in light of the battle, placing them all in an easily accessible light.

After reading 1453, I find myself realizing that the battles of 1453 have similarities to the battles of the 21st century. The cultural battles are still very similar. The geopolitical issues are still in flux. This view helped make the book even more meaningful today.

this book really does a good job of telling the story and focusing both upon the personalities involved and the way that life was for the people in constantinople at the time. it has the right level of depth for someone who's interested in history but is not a specialist.

The historian brings people to life by telling the story of their historical times - illuminating them and their deeds, judiciously treating that which he is not certain of. The novelist brings history to life by telling the stories of the people who lived it - real and imagined, creatively (and judiciously, one hopes) filling in history's voids.

Further, as Napoleon said, "history is the agreed version of events by the victors." Before photographs and sound/picture recording, much of what is taken as historical fact can be disputed. With all that in mind, Roger Crowley has done a commendable job. What gives me the right to say so? Well, I have encountered the very same task!

I am a novelist and my first book, "The Lion of St. Mark (St. Martin's Press, 2005), was written before I read Roger Crowley's 1453. I only wish I had had it by my side when I was toiling over disputing sources as I wrote my fictional (but historically accurate, I trust) account of the great siege of Constantinople and what happened afterwards.

I appreciate his decision to go with his gut when versions of what happened irreconcilably collide and avoid the use "perhaps", "possibly", and "might have", which can drag historical story-telling to a crawl.

Crowley's style is highly readable and skillfully blends history with many illustrative anecdotes to bring the siege to life. Who could not feel the courage and fears of the Christians and the Ottomans as they fought and bled in the fosse and on the walls in their supreme struggle?

Like the old Mad Magazine's Spy vs. Spy, their contest presaged the modern-day technological battle in the Battle of the North Atlantic that saw the Allies and Germans constantly one-up each other as each strove to gain supremacy.

Traditional histories suffer from the readers' knowledge of how things end. Only first-rate historians are able to "make it read like a novel" to maintain the suspense and show, as Wellington said after Waterloo, that it really was, "a near run thing."

I understand from his website that Crowley's next work will detail the continuing struggle between the Ottomans and the West that culminated in the epic battle of Lepanto in 1571 and a decisive Christian victory.

I'll definitely buy it before beginning my third novel in my Venetians series. Thank you, Roger!

I am currently reading, but am enjoying the various perspectives as well as economic/political situations that led up to the great battle.

I am currently reading, but am enjoying the various perspectives as well as economic/political situations that led up to the great battle.

Fantastic account of an amazing event in world history. Not only does this book cover the pure history of the events that took place, it paints many colorful pictures of the participants on both sides. Prior history of the region, technology of the siege weapons, and biographies of many of the major players are weaved throughout. Considering that the events played out 550 years ago, it is astonishing that there are actual day by day (and sometimes hour by hour) accounts of individual battles, naval attacks, and other fascinating events. Granted there was a lot of material to build from, this book does a great job in tying all of the pieces together in a very entertaining and informative rendition.

The Roman Empire actually fell on May 29, 1453. Roger Crowley's book is decent popular history but Sir Steven Runciman's "Fall of Constantinople" is a much better history and better written. Crowley's book also suffers from a rather pronounced anti-Byzantine/pro-Ottoman slant which does present a slightly skewed picture of reality. Still, if this best-selling history increases knowledge of and interest in the events of 1453, of Ottomans and Byzantines in general, that is not a bad thing.
For an enjoyable fictional version of the siege of Constantinople as seen from inside the walls of the great city, try to find Mika Waltari's 1953 novel "The Dark Angel" (out of print).

The Roman Empire actually fell on May 29, 1453. Roger Crowley's book is decent popular history but Sir Steven Runciman's "Fall of Constantinople" is a much better history and better written. Crowley's book also suffers from a rather pronounced anti-Byzantine/pro-Ottoman slant which does present a slightly skewed picture of reality. Still, if this best-selling history increases knowledge of and interest in the events of 1453, of Ottomans and Byzantines in general, that is not a bad thing.
For an enjoyable fictional version of the siege of Constantinople as seen from inside the walls of the great city, try to find Mika Waltari's 1953 novel "The Dark Angel" (out of print).

This book brings to detailed life the story of the siege and conquest of Byzantine Constantinople in April-May 1453 by the Ottoman army under Mehmet II. It takes the reader from Constantinople's mystical beginnings as the New Rome, through several sieges by Muslim armies in their wave of conquest through the Mediterranean culminating at Tours, to Mehmet's obsession with seizing the "Red Apple" and making it the center of his world empire even though the target of his desire is crumbling and no longer the economic powerhouse it had been before the Fourth Crusade. And then the siege itself is covered extensively, as well as its messy aftermath. Good pacing, good stories and the author's dedication to explaining some of the Medieval concepts and technology (especially the parts concerning the split between the Catholic and Orthodox churches, and the chapter on the Ottomans' massive cannon -- the biggest gun was 27 feet long and 75 cm wide at the mouth and could fire a 1200 pound ball!) to the reader make 1453 a pleasure to read.

I enjoyed this book, and learned from it as well. The description of the siege was excellent: sufficient detail to provide context, not so much detail that the tempo was lost.

Some fascinating facts about fortifications and arms, as well as some of the people involved.

While as the title suggests this was a holy war for Constantinople, and a clash between Islam and the West, it was also a battle for a strategic trading port and a significant cultural jewel.

Alas, much of the latter was lost in pursuit of the former.

Highly recommended to anyone who seeks more knowledge about both the city we now know as Istanbul and 15th century power struggles.

Jennifer Cameron-Smith