4th Crusade WI

bold mine
After the failure of theThird Crusade (1189–1192), there was little interest in Europe for another crusade against the Muslims. Jerusalem was now controlled by the Ayyubid dynasty, which ruled all of Syria and Egypt, except for the few cities along the coast still controlled by the crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem, now centered on Acre. The Third Crusade had also established a kingdom on Cyprus.

Pope Innocent III succeeded to the papacy in 1198, and the preaching of a new crusade became the goal of his pontificate. His call was largely ignored by the European monarchs: the Germans were struggling against Papal power, and England and France were still engaged in warfare against each other. However, due to the preaching of Fulk of Neuilly, a crusading army was finally organized at a tournament held at Écry by Count Thibaut of Champagne in 1199. Thibaut was elected leader, but he died in 1200 and was replaced by an Italian count, Boniface of Montferrat. Boniface and the other leaders sent envoys to Venice, Genoa, and other city-states to negotiate a contract for transport to Egypt, the object of their crusade; one of the envoys was the future historian Geoffrey of Villehardouin. Genoa was uninterested, but in March 1201 negotiations were opened with Venice, which agreed to transport 33,500 crusaders, a very ambitious number. This agreement required a full year of preparation on the part of the Venetians to build numerous ships and train the sailors who would man them, all the while curtailing the city's commercial activities. The crusading army was expected to comprise 4,500 knights (as well as 4,500 horses), 9,000 squires, and 20,000 foot-soldiers.

The majority of the crusading army that set out from Venice in October 1202 originated from areas within France. It included men from Blois, Champagne, Amiens, Saint-Pol, the Ile-de-France and Burgundy. Several other regions of Europe sent substantial contingents as well, such as Flanders and Montferrat. Other notable groups came from the Holy Roman Empire, including the men under Bishop Martin of Pairis and Bishop Conrad of Halberstadt, together in alliance with the Venetian soldiers and sailors led by the doge Enrico Dandolo. The crusade was to make directly for the centre of the Muslim world, Cairo, ready to sail on June 24, 1202. This agreement was ratified by Pope Innocent, with a solemn ban on attacks on Christian states.[2]
?So WI Genoa expressed a intrest but not for the full lot,?
So half loads at Genoa, and gets taken to Eygpt as agreed, while Venice diverts the other half to Constantinople as OTL.
 
A smaller Crusader army in Constantinople might not be able to seize control of the city and might get sent along its way.

What sort of effects would a Crusader attack on Egypt have, though? Would they be numerous enough to seize control of the county, would they get crushed, or would they content themselves with raiding rather than seriously taking on the Egyptian army?
 
it seems like there was a lot of potential for the Crusaders in Egypt; The Kingdom of Jerusalem made some serious incursions on its own, and some of the later Crusades, I think the 5th, were able to take Alexandria. Catholic Europe could find many opportunities if they could just get a large enough army there, I think.
 
Last edited:
A strong arguement can be made that the 4th Crusade failed spectacularly because they were bankrupt. They spent a large amount of money for transport they didn't really need, because they never got the numbers they were hoping for. Perhaps a more realistic estimate of the numbers of troops would lead to less pointless spending on ships the Crusade didn't need...which means they don't neccesarily need to loot Constantinople, and get sent on their way.
 
The Plan was to take Cairo, then march across the Sinia and take Jerusalem.
IIRC the second Crusade lost doing this. so you would think they would know better.
OTOH Nappy tried this again in 1796, He had a lot more men to try with, so He lost a lot more in the desert.,

So did the eygptian Army several times in the past 50 years.

Evidently it looks simple on the map, not so simple on the ground.

So Whe don't have enuff men and supplies in Cairo, to do the job,
So a lot of dead footmen and squires, and lots of Ranson to be paid for the Kights.

OTL it was the immense piles of loot that allowed Venice to get away, with the breach of contract, so to speak.
ITTL there will not be any loot, nor will there be the Glory of fighting the Heathen.

?What happens to Venice,? I assume most of the French leave thru Genoa, With the HRE continuent going by Venice.
Venice is a Free City, with nominal alliengance to the HRE..

While the French will not be angry with Genoa, [Genoa held up their end of the Contract] They will be upset with venice not delivering the other half of the Army.
There may be knock off effects, as the F
French don't have the Byzanitine Gold to help pay for the war with England.

Any other details I've over looked.
 
Top