Why did the Crusaders sack Constantinople in 1204?

Why did the Crusaders sack Constantinople in 1204?

the destruction of the Byzantine Empire and its dramatic collapse under the weight of Mehmed the Conquerer’s spectacular invasion is not necessarily the first or only catastrophe staining the history of Constantinople today. In fact, possibly even more devastating, was not the siege of the Byzantine capital by the Ottomans in the 15th century, but instead, the sacking of Constantinople in 1204 by the Crusaders.

♦Consider supporting the Channel:

♦Please consider to SUBSCRIBE:

♦Music by Epidemic Sound

#History #Documentary #Crusade

(Visited 1 times, 1 visits today)

Related Videos

Comment (34)

  1. Long story short Money, by then the Crusaders are basically Rouge and Practically Mercenaries originally they wanted to just pay a debt to the Venitians but spiralled into the conquest of Constantinople.

  2. The main reason because Constantinople refused to fund and help the the third crusade led by the German king Frederick Barbarossa , which ended in disaster and the annihilation of 300,000 to 600,000 crusaders [Muslim sources] due to famine, cold, disease and harassment of the Seljuks in Anatolia, which is the graveyard of the Crusaders..

    No crusader army dared cross Anatolia after Barbarossa's crusade

  3. Byzantines. Greeks with Roman citizenship that gradually took under their control the Roman state after the western part was permanently lost. Both Greeks (ethnically) and Romans (politically). And once again the comment section is full of the same troll accounts that are trying to take advantage of the fact that medieval Byzantine Greeks were Roman citizens in order to wrongly present them as the same people as the ancient romans.

  4. Many investors/traders advice – that at the start of the bear market, you should sell and buy later on. My question – How do they know at the beginning of the correction – whether stocks would fall by 5%, 10%, 20%, 30% or more?

  5. It is impressive that the Romans could recover from the magnitudes of such a siege, even if only partially.

  6. IT IS..ORTHODOX IS PURE RELIGION.. and Bulgari and Hungarian was not so bog at time.. THIS ARE WAS COVERED FROM NEMANJIĆI KING FAMILY WHICH WAS COVERED ENTIER BALKAN..LEARN SOMETHING MORE NOT WHAT YOUR WISH IS..

  7. Rome has been burned & looted by Western European savage hands once again since the cities fell in CE 410. The sack of Constantinople in 1204 CE is an ungrateful reward itself that was received in return from the Western Europeans civilized by Medieval Rome. They raped Rome has been called the 'cradle & mother of European civilization.

  8. 10:15 As an enthusiast of crusader history I did not know Speros Vryonis before this video but it appears he is not an expert in history of the crusades and has bias towards Byzantium and Greece. This statement is simply untrue. Firstly because as far as the crusades to Holy Land countinued throught 12th and 13th centuries it did stop islamic world from advancing forward, second because there were many different theaters and times in which crusades were called. Crusades in Iberia and the Mediterrean succeded to repell islam from Western Europe, ultimetly with Grenada War (1492) and Lepanto (1571). Crusader efforts in the Balkans like Belgrade (1456) or Vienna (1683) also stopped muslim invasions even with many failures along the way and ultimetly led to decline od the Ottomans. Also each crusade should be recognized as it's own thing. Regarding crusader movement in general as a failure is simply false. Overall as far as it countinued and there was motivation for them the movement was succesful in the end.

    Better read Johnatan Riley-Smith, Thomas Madden, Bernard Hamilton or Thomas Asbridge – historians who really care about crusader history.

  9. Crusader: “Hey guys, i have an idea: lets sack, plunder and ruin this fellow christian state on the edge of our greatest enemy borders!”
    Other Crusaders: "makes sense, lets do it!”

  10. Untill this year , Crusaders doesnt get how Muslims can arrange an army just by an Imam telling them about a holly war, they are just defending their home land,their religion without the need for money or gold or any crown. Europeen did the crusades not to defend their religion , it was only for expedition and Gold <3

  11. After the fall of Constantinople byzantium was gone . It was at this point where 2 greek city states re-united and recreated the Byzantine empire . Thats why modern Greeks believe they are decendents of the Byzantine Empire and are called romans by their most hated enemy turks (Ρωμαίοι- γιαούριδες)

  12. You should have included what happened to the crusaders in April 1205 – The battle of Adrianopol. Karma sucks for sure.

  13. The western europiens killed and enslaved tens of millions of people the sack of Constantinople is nothing compared to their bloody history and present

  14. European people are jealous, they destroy the beauty of their same kind in name of jealousy. The same happened with germany in second ww. Now russia is a big threat as islam was at those times

  15. you should check out Nicolae Milescu's, a moldavian explorer who has reached Beijing and was the teacher of peter the great

  16. I mean the crusades were always about money to begin with. I think the Sacking of Constaintinople just really highlighted that fact. Christendom wanted the wealth provided by the middle east and used religion as an excuse to get it.

  17. I think the fourth crusade are the only time we can say that Constantinople was preached because in 1453 it was a small city state rather than a capital of empire

LEAVE YOUR COMMENT

Your email address will not be published.