Enrico Dandolo: The Doge Who Diverted the Fourth Crusade
Enrico Dandolo (c. 1107-1205) was the Doge of Venice from 1192 until his death in 1205. An elderly, nearly blind statesman — he was in his late eighties by the time of the Fourth Crusade, and his exact age and the cause of his blindness are both matters of medieval dispute — he became the principal architect of the Fourth Crusade and the architect of the Sack of Constantinople in 1204. His role in the diversion of the Crusade from its original purpose of recapturing Jerusalem, and his leadership of the sack of Constantinople, make him one of the most controversial figures in medieval history. The standard treatment in English is now Thomas Madden’s Enrico Dandolo and the Rise of Venice (2003), which is in conscious debate with the older view of the Doge as a cynical Venetian merchant. Madden’s Dandolo is more statesman than villain, and the difference matters.
For the broader story, see the main article on the Fourth Crusade, the Sack of Constantinople (1204), and Why the Fourth Crusade sacked Constantinople.
The Early Career of Enrico Dandolo
Enrico Dandolo was born into one of the leading patrician families of Venice around 1107. He had a long career in Venetian politics before becoming doge. He served as ambassador to Constantinople, where he was reportedly blinded by the Byzantines, although modern historians doubt this story. He was a member of the Great Council, and he held a number of important administrative positions.
The blinding story is significant because it is one of the most famous anecdotes in the history of the Crusades. According to the version preserved by the chronicler Geoffrey of Villehardouin and others, Dandolo was sent to Constantinople as a Venetian ambassador in 1171, and he was blinded by the Byzantine Emperor Manuel I Komnenos, who had him thrown from a height and blinded with a mirror held in front of his eyes. The story is probably false, but it became a powerful explanation for Dandolo’s hostility to the Byzantine Empire.
Dandolo was elected doge in 1192, at the age of about 85. The election was contested, and Dandolo had to be carried into the church of St. Mark for the ceremony. He was, by all accounts, in poor health, and his election was a surprise. He would, however, serve as doge for 13 years, leading Venice through one of the most challenging periods in its history.
Dandolo and the Fourth Crusade
The Fourth Crusade was called by Pope Innocent III in 1198. The response to the call was good, but the logistics of the expedition were formidable. The Crusaders needed ships to transport them to the Holy Land, and they turned to Venice, the dominant naval power in the Eastern Mediterranean. The agreement, signed in 1201, called for Venice to provide ships and provisions for the entire army.
Dandolo was at the heart of the negotiations. The agreement was generous to Venice, requiring the Crusaders to pay 85,000 silver marks, more than the entire annual revenue of the French crown. The Crusaders were able to raise only about half of the sum before they arrived in Venice. The shortfall would be crucial.
The diversion of the Fourth Crusade to Constantinople is usually attributed to Dandolo. The argument is that he saw an opportunity to advance Venetian commercial interests by establishing Venice as the dominant power in the Eastern Mediterranean. The diversion of the Crusade to Zara, and then to Constantinople, was the result of this Venetian strategy. Modern historians, however, have emphasized that the diversion was the result of a complex interplay of factors, including Venetian commercial interests, the personal ambitions of the Crusader leaders, and the political crisis in the Byzantine Empire.
The Attack on Zara
The first major diversion of the Fourth Crusade was the attack on the Adriatic port of Zara, which took place in November 1202. Zara was a Christian city that had recently rebelled against Venetian rule, and Dandolo offered the Crusaders the opportunity to pay off their debt to Venice by capturing it. The attack was a violation of the papal ban on Crusaders attacking fellow Christians, and Pope Innocent III excommunicated the entire army.
Dandolo’s role in the attack on Zara is significant. The decision to attack was made by the leadership of the expedition, with Dandolo playing a central role. The excommunication was a major blow, but it did not prevent the attack. The capture of Zara, in November 1202, was the first major military action of the Fourth Crusade, and it set the stage for the diversion to Constantinople.
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 made by the leadership of the expedition, with Dandolo playing a central role. The argument was that the offer was too good to refuse, and that the union of the churches had long been a goal of the papacy. The decision, however, was also a recognition of the financial straits of the Crusaders, who were deeply in debt to Venice.
The army of the Fourth Crusade arrived before Constantinople in June 1203. The first siege, in July 1203, was a success. The Crusaders and Venetians, with their formidable fleet and disciplined army, broke through the city’s defenses. The emperor Alexios III fled, and Isaac II was restored to the throne. Alexios IV, who had been the cause of the diversion, was now co-emperor.
The Sack of Constantinople
The relationship between the Latin and Greek populations of Constantinople deteriorated rapidly in the months that followed. The new regime was unable to pay the sums promised, and the Greek population was deeply hostile to the idea of union with Rome. In January 1204, a palace coup overthrew the regime of Isaac and Alexios IV. The new emperor, Alexios V, refused to honor the agreement with the Crusaders.
The decision to attack Constantinople was made by the leadership of the expedition, with Dandolo playing a central role. The Crusaders and Venetians, with Dandolo leading the assault, stormed the city on 12 April 1204. The Sack of Constantinople in 1204 is examined in detail in a dedicated article.
Dandolo’s role in the sack of Constantinople is one of the most discussed episodes in his career. The chronicler Geoffrey of Villehardouin, who knew Dandolo personally, defended his actions. Modern historians, however, have been more critical. The sack was a major moral catastrophe, and Dandolo’s role in the diversion of the Crusade is widely seen as a major failure of leadership.
The Death of Dandolo
Dandolo died in Constantinople in June 1205, just a few months after the sack. He was buried in the Church of the Holy Apostles in Constantinople, an honor that was usually reserved for Byzantine emperors. His death was a major blow to the Latin Empire, which was already struggling to establish itself. The Latin Empire of Constantinople would survive for another 56 years, but it was always fragile.
Dandolo’s legacy has been the subject of intense historical debate. Older historians, especially those writing from a Greek or Western perspective, have tended to portray him as a cynical opportunist. More recent scholarship, especially that of Thomas Madden and Jonathan Phillips, has emphasized the complex political and commercial context in which Dandolo acted. Whatever the verdict, Dandolo remains one of the most important and most controversial figures in the history of the Crusades.
The Reputation of Enrico Dandolo
In Venice, Dandolo is remembered as one of the great doges, alongside such figures as Pietro II Orseolo and Francesco Morosini. The famous bronze horses of St. Mark’s, looted from Constantinople in 1204, are still displayed in the basilica, although they are now replicas. The originals are preserved in the basilica’s museum. The horses are a reminder of the close relationship between Venice and the Fourth Crusade, and of the moral ambiguity of Dandolo’s legacy.
In the Greek and Byzantine tradition, Dandolo is remembered as one of the great enemies of the empire. The blinding story, in particular, has shaped the Byzantine view of the doge. The Greeks never forgave the sack of Constantinople, and the memory of 1204 has shaped the relationship between the Greek and Latin churches ever since.
In modern scholarship, Dandolo has been the subject of major studies, including those by Thomas Madden in Enrico Dandolo and the Rise of Venice (2003) and Jonathan Phillips in The Fourth Crusade and the Sack of Constantinople (2004). These works have helped to clarify Dandolo’s role in the Fourth Crusade and to place his actions in the context of Venetian and Mediterranean politics. The verdict of modern scholarship is that Dandolo was a brilliant statesman acting in the legitimate interests of his republic, but that the diversion of the Crusade to Constantinople was a moral catastrophe that would have consequences for centuries.