Pearson Edexcel · A-Level · History
Course version: 9HI0 · Version from Sept 2015
The significance of the size and leadership of the crusading forces.
Full specification wording
What explains the failure of the Fourth Crusade?: The significance of the size and leadership of the crusading forces.
The size and leadership of the crusading forces were critical to the failure of the Fourth Crusade.
Checked against the Pearson Edexcel 9HI0 specification (opens in a new tab) on .
- Point 2 of 4
Study notes
From the checked teaching notes for this specification point.
The idea
The size and leadership of the crusading forces were critical to the failure of the Fourth Crusade. The original plan anticipated 33,500 men, but only around 12,000 arrived in Venice in 1202. This massive shortfall in size meant the crusaders could not pay the 85,000 silver marks owed for the Venetian fleet. Leadership also played a pivotal role. The early death of Thibaut of Champagne led to the appointment of Boniface of Montferrat, who had ties to Philip of Swabia and Prince Alexios. Furthermore, the strong leadership of Doge Enrico Dandolo of Venice steered the indebted and undersized crusader army towards Zara and ultimately Constantinople, diverting them from Outremer.
What earns the marks
- Explains how the smaller-than-expected size of the crusading force (around 12,000 instead of 33,500) led to crippling debt to the Venetians.
- Analyses the impact of the change in leadership from Thibaut of Champagne to Boniface of Montferrat on the crusade's direction.
- Evaluates the role of Doge Enrico Dandolo's leadership in exploiting the crusaders' lack of numbers and funds to attack Zara and Constantinople.
- Assesses how the combination of inadequate size and compromised leadership ultimately caused the failure of the Fourth Crusade to reach Outremer.
Common mistakes and how to put them right
Discussing the leadership of earlier crusades (like Richard I or Saladin) instead of focusing on the Fourth Crusade.
Put it right: Ensure all examples relate to the 1202-1204 expedition.
Ignoring the numerical shortfall.
Put it right: Explicitly mention the expected size (33,500) versus the actual turnout (~12,000) to explain the financial crisis.
Underestimating the influence of Venetian leadership.
Put it right: Highlight Doge Enrico Dandolo's crucial role in redirecting the crusade.
Exam tips
- Use specific figures, such as the 85,000 marks owed and the 12,000 men who arrived, to demonstrate the impact of the force's size.
- Connect the leadership decisions of Boniface of Montferrat and Enrico Dandolo directly to the diversion to Constantinople.
Try the lesson
The start of the What explains the failure of the Fourth Crusade?: The significance of the size and leadership of the crusading forces. lesson, made from checked teaching notes for this specification point.
Have a go first
How did the size of the crusading forces contribute to the diversion and ultimate failure of the Fourth Crusade?
Listen
The size and leadership of the crusading forces were critical to the failure of the Fourth Crusade. The original plan anticipated 33,500 men, but only around 12,000 arrived in Venice in 1202. This massive shortfall in size meant the crusaders could not pay the 85,000 silver marks owed for the Venetian fleet. Leadership also played a pivotal role. The early death of Thibaut of Champagne led to the appointment of Boniface of Montferrat, who had ties to Philip of Swabia and Prince Alexios. Furthermore, the strong leadership of Doge Enrico Dandolo of Venice steered the indebted and undersized crusader army towards Zara and ultimately Constantinople, diverting them from Outremer. A strong answer earns marks for these points. Explains how the smaller-than-expected size of the crusading force (around 12,000 instead of 33,500) led to crippling debt to the Venetians. Analyses the impact of the change in leadership from Thibaut of Champagne to Boniface of Montferrat on the crusade's direction. Evaluates the role of Doge Enrico Dandolo's leadership in exploiting the crusaders' lack of numbers and funds to attack Zara and Constantinople. Assesses how the combination of inadequate size and compromised leadership ultimately caused the failure of the Fourth Crusade to reach Outremer. A common slip: Discussing the leadership of earlier crusades (like Richard I or Saladin) instead of focusing on the Fourth Crusade. Instead, Ensure all examples relate to the 1202-1204 expedition. Exam tip: Use specific figures, such as the 85,000 marks owed and the 12,000 men who arrived, to demonstrate the impact of the force's size.
There is more to this lesson
The full lesson goes on to check your understanding and help you earn the marks. Create a free account to carry on, with your progress saved.
A week of Premium from your first lesson · Then the free plan continues · No card, no charge
Test your understanding of What explains the failure of the Fourth Crusade?: The significance of the size and leadership of the crusading forces.
Active recall beats re-reading. Take an instant quiz now to test what you’ve learned and lock it into long-term memory.
A week of Premium from your first lesson · Then the free plan continues · No card, no charge