Views of Constantinople

Ibn Battuta -
I think that Ibn's view of Constantinople is neutral because he talks about both positive and negative aspects of the city. Ibn mentions good parts of Constantinople such as its enormous size, its strong wall, and its great Hagia Sophia church. However, he also talks about negative aspects of the city. He says there is a river that is dirty and that the marketplaces and the churches are filthy. I think I can trust this source because it seems for the most part to be listing facts and it doesn't seem bias as he is emphasizing positive and negative aspects.

Benjamin of Tudela -
Benjamin's view is completely positive and only focuses on the good aspects of Constantinople. He mentions that it is a prosperous city, with lots of trade going on that occurs nowhere else in the world. Benjamin repeatedly emphasizes the wealth and beauty of the city. He states that the wealth of Constantinople is unmatched and the inhabitants are well-fed and well-read. I would have doubts about fully trusting this source because he seems to be overly positive about Constantinople. He mentions no negative things about the city.

Liudprand of Cremona -
Liudprand seems to abhor Constantinople. He states that he was rudely and disrespectfully greeted by the emperor's brother. Liudprand then goes on to say that the royalty figure he was taken to was hideous, making him love and venerate his own emperors even more. He also states that the citizens are scandalous and dishonest. This view cannot be trusted because he is writing to his own emperor who might be offended if he flaunts the positive aspects of the city.