The Siege of Belgrade Through the Primary Sources of Latin, Middle English, and Turkish

While some historians regard Constantinople as a stronghold of Christendom and a successor to New Rome (Nova Roma), its conquest is often considered the most significant political and religious event for both the Latin West and the Orthodox East. In contrast, the siege of Belgrade has received only limited attention in primary sources written in Latin and Ottoman Turkish, despite being seen as a symbol of Christian resilience, an assertion of Christian superiority, and a strategic setback for the Ottomans. This episode also illustrates how the crusading spirit of the Latin West appeared to revive in response to the fall of Constantinople, which had plunged Christendom into a state of despair and crisis. Western sources often portray the Ottomans as brutal invaders driven by expansionist ambitions, whereas Eastern narratives emphasize a unified Christian resistance. This paper explores how depictions of both brutality and virtue coexist in historical and literary accounts of the siege of Belgrade from Western and Eastern perspectives. In doing so, it draws attention to the failed campaign of Mehmed II—who styled himself as “the lord of the two lands and the two seas”—and reconsiders its significance for Turkish historiography. By challenging the notion of uninterrupted Ottoman expansion in the Balkans, the study also suggests a counter-narrative that underscores Ottoman adaptability and resilience. Employing the methodology of New Historicism, this paper argues that historical narratives are shaped by ideological positions and cannot remain neutral.