Sack of Constantinople in 1204

So, how did the TS get from Constantinople to Lirey, France?Geoffrey de Charny had owned it in Lirey, but he never disclosed how he got it.

Even Geoffroy de Charny, owner of the Lirey-
Chambery-Turin Shroud about 1349-54, never gave any sign that he ever
heard of it. Long after his death his descendents say, vaguely, that he acquired
the Shroud as a “reward freely given.”

https://biblearchaeology.org/images/articles/p41.pdf

In the Fourth Crusade, the crusaders had stripped many relics from Constantinople.

The Fourth Crusade (1202-1204 CE) was called by Pope Innocent III (r. 1198-1216 CE) to retake Jerusalem from its current Muslim overlords. However, in a bizarre combination of cock-ups, financial constraints, and Venetian trading ambitions, the target ended up being Constantinople, capital of the Byzantine Empire and the greatest Christian city in the world. Sacked on 12 April 1204 CE, Constantinople was stripped of its riches, relics, and artworks, and the Byzantine Empire was divided up between Venice and its allies. The Fourth Crusade thus gained its infamous reputation as the most cynical and profit-seeking of all the crusades.

https://www.worldhistory.org/Fourth_Crusade/

Three days of looting climaxed the assault. A Byzantine chronicler described the theft of holy images, destruction of relics, the ripping of jewels from chalices and use of the cups for drunken revelries.

The victors divvied up the massive loot. Among the best known souvenirs harvested by the Venetians were four bronze horses that still stand atop the door of St. Mark’s Basilica in Venice. The Crusaders did not bother going on to Jerusalem. Innocent III was horrified and criticized papal representatives who abandoned the Holy Land to join in the establishment of the new “Latin” order in Constantinople. Nonetheless, Innocent accepted the outcome.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/ … 38e8c3e6a/

Pope Innocent III wrote:

We were not a little astonished and disturbed to bear that you and our beloved son the Cardinal Priest of the Title of St. Praxida and Legate of the Apostolic See, in fear of the looming perils of the Holy Land, have left the province of Jerusalem (which, at this point is in such great need) and that you have gone by ship to Constantinople. And now we see that what we dreaded has occurred and what we feared has come to pass…. For you, who ought to have looked for help for the Holy Land, you who should have stirred up others, both by word and by example, to assist the Holy Land ­ on your own initiative you sailed to Greece, bringing in your footsteps riot only the pilgrims, but even the natives of the Holy Land who came to Constantinople, following our venerable brother, the Archbishop of Tyre. When you had deserted it, the Holy Land remained destitute of men, void of strength. Because of you, its last state was worse than the first, for all its friends deserted with you; nor was there any admirer to console it…. We ourselves were not a little agitated and, with reason, we acted against you, since you had fallen in with this counsel and because you had deserted the Land which the Lord consecrated by his presence, the land in which our King marvelously performed the mystery of our redemption….

It was your duty to attend to the business of your legation and to give careful consideration, not to the capture of the Empire of Constantinople, but rather to the defense of what is left of the Holy Land and, with the Lord’s leave, the restoration of what has been lost. We made you our representative and we sent you to gain, not temporal, but rather eternal riches. And for this purpose, our brethren provided adequately for your needs.

We have just beard and discovered from your letters that you have absolved from their pilgrimage vows and their crusading obligations all the Crusaders who have remained to defend Constantinople from last March to the present. It is impossible not to be moved against you, for you neither should nor could give any such absolution.

Whoever suggested such a thing to you and how did they ever lead your mind astray?. . .

How, indeed, is the Greek church to be brought back into ecclesiastical union and to a devotion for the Apostolic See when she has been beset with so many afflictions and persecutions that she sees in the Latins only an example of perdition and the works of darkness, so that she now, and with reason, detests the Latins more than dogs? As for those who were supposed to be seeking the ends of Jesus Christ, not their own ends, whose swords, which they were supposed to use against the pagans, are now dripping with Christian blood ­ they have spared neither age nor sex. They have committed incest, adultery, and fornication before the eyes of men. They have exposed both matrons and virgins, even those dedicated to God, to the sordid lusts of boys. Not satisfied with breaking open the imperial treasury and plundering the goods of princes and lesser men, they also laid their hands on the treasures of the churches and, what is more serious, on their very possessions. They have even ripped silver plates from the altars and have hacked them to pieces among themselves. They violated the holy places and have carried off crosses and relics. .

Furthermore, under what guise can we call upon the other Western peoples for aid to the Holy Land and assistance to the Empire of Constantinople? When the Crusaders, having given up the proposed pilgrimage, return absolved to their homes; when those who plundered the aforesaid Empire turn back and come home with their spoils, free of guilt; will not people then suspect that these things have happened, not because of the crime involved, but because of your deed? Let the Lord’s word not be stifled in your mouth. Be not like a dumb dog, unable to bark. Rather, let them speak these things publicly, let them protest before everyone, so that the more they rebuke you before God and on God’s account, the more they will find you simply negligent. As for the absolution of the Venetian people being falsely accepted, against ecclesiastical rules, we will not at present argue with you….

https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/source/1204innocent.asp

Pope Innocent III excommunicated the crusaders for their actions, but did not do anything to force the relics to be returned and also didn’t stop himself from being the leader of the Eastern region.

Innocent III was heavily opposed to the attack on Constantinople and sent many letters warning the crusaders to not sack the city. Innocent III excommunicated the crusaders who attacked Byzantine cities, but was unable to physically halt or overturn their actions. The attack on Constantinople led to the start of the Latin Empire’s rule of Constantinople, which lasted for the next sixty years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Innocent_III

Many of the crusaders were from France.

The majority of the crusading army that set out from Venice in early October 1202 originated from areas within France.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Crusade

So, possibly the crusaders were responsible for taking the TS from Constantinople into France.