"So, so you think you can tell heaven from hell?" - Pink Floyd

The first document featured in the reading pertains to discussing random aspects of the city of Constantinople. Its content may be perceived as a review of the city. For this reason, I believe that the document was written by a traveler, directed towards outside people who have never traveled to Constantinople. The information included talks about the city in general, so one would assume that perhaps the document was written in order to educate others, in this case outsiders who have never traveled to the city, of people and places outside of their realm. The second document talks about the city in an almost awe inspired way, discussing pilgrims and their reactions to the city. For this reason, I believe that the document was perhaps written by a pilgrim to the city, for its discussion of religious elements and its reverence of the city. It is arguable for this reason that the document was written towards others of a similar religious faith as the writer, in order to serve as a story to tell. The third document discusses an attack of barbarians, who "did not appreciate beauty," upon the city. Its disapproving nature of this attack and clear anger in reference to it makes me infer that this document was written by an inhabitant of the city, who witnessed the attacks. Because of this, if this inference is somewhat true I believe that the document was written for later citizens of the city, in order to educate them on their past and history. Document four is a painting of a map of Constantinople. I believe that it was probably created by an artist of the city, for its detail and the fact that it seems like a decent map, so it must have been created by someone familiar with the place. It must have been created for merchants or other travelers, to aid their movement. It also probably served as an efficient history preserver. Document five is a picture of the interior of the church Saint Sophia. I believe the picture was probably taken by a recent modern age photographer. Because of this, it was probably meant for people outside of the area of Constantinople, in order to educate others on culture in the city. Document six revolves around the emperor of Constantinople. Because it is so centered on this man, I believe the document to be written by a servant or worker for the emperor, intended to portray him in a very positive light. It was probably directed at the citizens of the city, in order to make them happy with the emperor and to encourage approval of him. Document seven talks about privileges granted to the citizens of Venice. It seems very biased, leading me to believe that the writer of the document was an inhabitant of Constantinople, who felt their exemptions to be unfair. It was probably directed to the other inhabitants of the city, who felt similar ways, intended to bring attention to the matter. Of all these documents, I feel that the first is the most reliable, due to the fact that it simply provides an overview of the city and lacks an opinion. It merely summarizes what a traveler witnessed, and had no reason to be biased.