1204 Scenario

[qvcatullus]

Once to the Crusader (mostly french, weren't they?), once to the Byzanties themselves and once to the Turks. Then what about Istanbul? Didn't the Russians get very close during one of those wars in the 19th century?

Well, there were also the civil troubles in the empire -- you might say that it "fell" to other Byzantines to displace the old rulers.

 

[Demetrios]

It did fall to the crusaders, who set up their own Empire centered there, controlling parts of Thrace, Anatolia, and Macedonia for about 60 years (though the lands they controlled outside of Constantinople were slowly and steadily reconquered by the Byzantines almost from the beginning). Constantinople was then reconquered by a general in the command of Michael Palaeologus, though that was more by luck than anything else. When the Byzantines happened upon Constantinople there were practically no crusaders there defending it - most of them were out on a raid. So I guess you could say that Constantinople fell three times in its history.

Four times. Don't forget about 1918, when the British occupied it.

And the Latin Empire long survived the fall of Constantinople. The Duchy of Athens and the Principality of Achaia, both parts of the Latin Empire, survived well into the 15th century, paying homage to the Latin Emperor almost right up until the end.

 

[unmerged(24379)]

A 1240 scenario would be better, with the Mongol hordes arriving...

 

[unmerged(11206)]

Well, it's unlikely that there would be a 1204 scenario after an 1187 one was annouced. They are only 17 years apart, after all...

On top of that, the first 2 times the idea was seriously adopted to make a Crusade out of seizing Constantinople were:

1. When Emperor Frederick I was passing through on the 3rd Crusade (1189), the Byzantine Emperor threw his ambassadors into prison and broke the agreements they had concerning supply, transport, etc.. So Frederick scattered the Byzantine army escorting him and seized Adrianople and Philippopolis. Wintering in Adrianople, he wrote to his son Henry VI to meet him in Spring with a combined Pisan-Genoese-Venetian fleet before the walls of Constantinople. With his huge German army attacking from landward, and the "imperial fleet" from the sea, he planned to capture Constantinople and 1) remove it as a traditional obstacle for Western armies passing through; 2) use it as a forward base to recapture Outremer; and probably also 3) to reunite the 2 Empires under himself. The Byzantine Emperor then realized he'd overplayed his hand, released the Germans, and agreed to supply their army and ferry it across to Asia.

2. When Alexius III deposed his brother Isaac II (1195), Emperor Henry VI, already gathering a German army and Italian fleet, prepared to conquer Constantinople and install his brother Philip I as Emperor in right of his wife, Irene (Isaac II's daughter). The Lords of Cyprus & Cilicia-Armenia agreed to hold their lands as imperial fiefs, and in return were each crowned King by the German Chancellor despite the protests of the Byzantine Emperor. Before the army sailed, Alexius III bought his way out with a large sum of money and an agreement to pay annual tribute. Henry's army then bypassed Byzantium and sailed for Acre on the "German Crusade" (1197).

So the idea was floating around in Germany & Italy starting with the 3rd Crusade, and even before if we count the Normans' attempt to capitalize on the 2nd Crusade by invading Greece (1147). It can even be argued that #2 above set the ball rolling for the 4th Crusade, as it was Isaac II's son, supported by his brother-in-law, King Philip I of Germany, that diverted the 4th Crusade to Constantinople.

 

[Earl Uhtred]

I think the most anti-climactic entry into Constantinople was probably Alexius Comnenus' - defended by a regiment of old men, mutinous Varangians and assorted goats, skinks and gerbils which surrendered to AC's only slightly less sorry army at the first whiff of grapeshot.