What Was the Role of Venice in the Fourth Crusade?
The Republic of Venice played a central role in the Fourth Crusade, from financing the expedition to directing its course to participating in the Sack of Constantinople in 1204. The eye-witness account by Geoffrey of Villehardouin, the Marshal of Champagne who marched with the Fourth Crusade and was one of its leaders, remains the indispensable source. Without Venice, the Fourth Crusade would not have happened in the form it did. The Republic’s role is one of the most important and most controversial aspects of the entire Crusade, and the standard modern treatments (Madden 2003, Phillips 2004, Queller 1977) disagree about how cynical Venice’s intentions actually were.
For the broader story, see the main article on the Fourth Crusade, the Sack of Constantinople (1204), and Why the Fourth Crusade sacked Constantinople.
Venice as a Naval Power
By the end of the 12th century, the Republic of Venice was the dominant naval power in the Eastern Mediterranean. The Republic had been founded on the trade between Western Europe and the Eastern Mediterranean, and it had grown rich on the exchange of goods between the Latin West, the Byzantine Empire, and the Islamic world. The city’s great Arsenal, founded in the 12th century, was the most advanced shipbuilding facility in Europe, and it could produce ships in unprecedented numbers.
Venice’s commercial interests in the Eastern Mediterranean were extensive. The Republic had commercial treaties with the Byzantine Empire, the Crusader States, and the major Muslim powers. Venetian merchants had important communities in Constantinople, Alexandria, Acre, and many other cities. The Republic’s commercial interests were protected by treaties and by the presence of Venetian fleets in the Eastern Mediterranean.
Venice’s role in the Crusades was therefore central from the start. The Republic had been involved in the First Crusade, and it had provided ships, money, and naval support for later expeditions. The Republic’s participation in the Crusades was a way of extending its commercial influence, and the Crusader States were important markets for Venetian goods.
The Contract of 1201
The Fourth Crusade was called by Pope Innocent III in 1198, and the response to the call was good. The principal leaders of the expedition, including Boniface of Montferrat, Hugh of Saint-Pol, and Louis of Blois, decided to contract with Venice for transport to the Holy Land. The agreement, signed in early 1201, called for Venice to provide ships for 4,500 knights, 9,000 squires, and 20,000 foot soldiers, with provisions for nine months.
The cost of the agreement was enormous: 85,000 silver marks, more than the entire annual revenue of the French crown. The Republic’s leadership, including Doge Enrico Dandolo, agreed to the terms because they expected the Crusade to advance Venetian commercial interests. The Crusader States were important markets for Venetian goods, and the recapture of Jerusalem would open new opportunities for trade.
The financial terms of the agreement were generous to Venice, and the Republic stood to gain substantially if the Crusade succeeded. The agreement also gave Venice a powerful leverage over the Crusaders, because the Republic controlled the ships that the army needed to reach the Holy Land. This leverage would be crucial when the Crusaders were unable to pay the full amount of the contract.
The Diversion to Zara
The Crusaders were unable to raise the full sum of the contract. By the time the army gathered in Venice in 1202, the Crusaders had paid only about half of the amount owed. The financial situation was serious, and the Republic’s leadership, led by Enrico Dandolo, offered a solution: the Crusaders could pay off their debt by helping Venice to capture the Adriatic port of Zara, which had recently rebelled against Venetian rule.
The attack on Zara in November 1202 was a violation of the papal ban on Crusaders attacking fellow Christians, and Pope Innocent III excommunicated the entire army. The Republic’s leadership was willing to accept the excommunication because the capture of Zara was a significant commercial and strategic gain. Zara was an important port on the Adriatic, and its capture gave Venice a major foothold on the eastern shore of the Adriatic Sea.
The attack on Zara was the first major diversion of the Fourth Crusade, and it set the stage for the diversion to Constantinople. The Republic’s leadership showed that it was willing to put commercial interests above religious considerations, and the Crusaders learned that Venice was a formidable negotiating partner.
The Diversion to Constantinople
The second major diversion of the Fourth Crusade was the attack on Constantinople. The opportunity came with the arrival in the Crusader camp of Alexios, the son of the deposed Byzantine Emperor Isaac II Angelos. Alexios offered the Crusaders substantial sums of money, military support, and the union of the Greek and Latin churches, in return for their help in restoring his father to the throne.
The decision to accept Alexios’s offer was supported by the Republic’s leadership, with Enrico Dandolo playing a central role. The arguments were several. The financial situation of the Crusaders was serious, and the offer would help to pay off the debt to Venice. The commercial interests of Venice in the Eastern Mediterranean would be advanced by a friendly regime in Constantinople. The union of the Greek and Latin churches had been a long-standing goal of the papacy, and the Republic’s leadership was willing to support it.
The decision to attack Constantinople in April 1204, after the failure of the regime of Alexios IV, was also supported by the Republic’s leadership. The sack of Constantinople was a major commercial gain for Venice. The Republic received 3/8 of the city and the Greek Empire, and the famous bronze horses of the Hippodrome were taken to Venice, where they still stand above the entrance to St. Mark’s Basilica.
The Legacy of Venice’s Role
The role of Venice in the Fourth Crusade has been the subject of intense historical debate. Older historians portrayed the Republic as a cynical commercial power that deliberately diverted the Crusade to advance its own interests. More recent scholarship, especially that of Thomas Madden and Jonathan Phillips, has emphasized the complex political and commercial context in which the Republic acted.
The truth is probably a mixture. Venice was a commercial republic, and its leadership was willing to act in the commercial interests of the city. But the Republic was also a Christian state, and its leadership was not indifferent to the religious goals of the Crusade. The diversion of the Crusade to Zara and to Constantinople was a major moral failure, but it was also the result of a complex set of factors that included the financial situation of the Crusaders, the political crisis in the Byzantine Empire, and the personal ambitions of the leaders.
The legacy of Venice’s role in the Fourth Crusade is complex. The Republic gained substantial commercial and territorial advantages, but the moral cost was high. The sack of Constantinople was a major blow to the prestige of the Latin Church, and it deepened the split between the Greek and Latin churches. The Republic’s leadership was, in the end, willing to pay this price for the commercial and political advantages of 1204.