Recruitment (Edexcel A-Level History): Revision Notes
Recruitment
Who was recruited to lead the Fourth Crusade?
The Fourth Crusade was not led by kings but by a group of powerful barons (nobles) from northern France and the Flanders region. The most influential leaders, recruited by the pope's official preachers, were:
- Thibault III of Champagne
- Louis of Blois
- Simon of Montfort
- Reynald of Montmirail
- Baldwin of Flanders
- Hugh of Saint Pol
These leaders took their crusading vows at a tournament at Écry on 28 November 1199. The first four were recruited together at this event, while Baldwin of Flanders took his vow shortly afterwards. This marked the beginning of the Fourth Crusade's recruitment, but also revealed early problems that would contribute to its ultimate failure.
The absence of royal leadership was unusual and significant. Previous major crusades (the Second and Third) had been led by kings such as Louis VII, Richard I, and Philip II. The Fourth Crusade's reliance on baronial leadership meant it would lack the financial resources, authority, and military strength that royal leadership provided.
Connections between the crusade leaders
The leaders of the Fourth Crusade formed a closely connected group, linked by several important ties:
Family connections:
- Baldwin of Flanders was Thibault's brother-in-law
- Close family relationships encouraged them to crusade together
- Thibault's grandparents were King Louis VII and Eleanor of Aquitaine, who had participated in the Second Crusade
Links to previous crusades:
- Four of the leaders had connections to King Richard I, a Third Crusader
- Richard I was the uncle of both Louis of Blois and Thibault of Champagne
- Richard I had been an ally of Hugh of Saint Pol and Baldwin of Flanders
Geographic and political bonds:
- All came from the same region (northern France and Flanders)
- They shared a common political situation and threats
- These connections meant they brought not only their personal wealth but also their loyal vassals (followers) to the crusade
These interconnections created a tightly-knit leadership group with shared interests and mutual trust. However, this also meant that if one leader made a controversial decision, others were more likely to support it out of loyalty—a dynamic that would become significant later in the crusade.
Why did these leaders join the crusade?
Several factors motivated the barons to take up the cross:
Family crusading heritage: The connection to Richard I likely encouraged them to follow in his crusading footsteps. Having crusading ancestors and relatives created a family tradition and expectation of participation.
Political pressures: More importantly, the Fourth Crusade offered an escape from the threat to their lands posed by King Philip II of France. This threat intensified after Richard I's death in April 1199, because Richard had previously acted as their protector. The crusade provided both a religious duty and a political opportunity to leave these troubles behind.
The political motivation was arguably stronger than the religious one. By taking crusading vows, these nobles gained temporary protection from their enemies and could legitimately leave their lands without appearing to flee from conflict. This political dimension would later influence their decision-making during the crusade itself.
Wealth and power: Although they were not kings, these barons were a powerful group who could bring substantial resources to the crusading cause. Their combined wealth and the loyalty of their vassals made them formidable leaders, even without royal authority.
Case study: Baldwin of Flanders (1171–1206)
Case Study: Baldwin of Flanders as a Typical Fourth Crusade Leader
Baldwin provides an excellent example of a typical Fourth Crusade leader and demonstrates both the strengths and weaknesses of baronial leadership.
Background and commitment:
- Baldwin had been an ally of Richard I against Philip II
- He had successfully regained much of the county of Flanders from Philip in battle
- After committing to the crusade, he sent a representative to Venice, playing a key role in planning
- He was an enthusiastic crusader whose forces were among the first to reach Venice in July 1201
Participation in key decisions: Baldwin supported many of the controversial decisions that led to the crusade's diversion from Outremer (the Crusader states in the Holy Land). For instance, he backed the proposal to travel to Constantinople with Prince Alexius.
Later career and fate:
- Baldwin was eventually elected to the imperial throne in Constantinople
- In March 1205, he faced a rebellion in Thrace supported by the ruler of Bulgaria
- He was captured in April 1205 at Adrianople while attempting to tackle the rebellion
- By 1206, he was presumed dead and replaced by Henry of Flanders as emperor
This case study shows how a capable military leader could become caught up in the political complexities and diversions that ultimately defined the Fourth Crusade.
Early warning signs: recruitment problems
Even at this early stage in late 1199, there were clear signs of problems that would eventually cause the crusade to fail.
The inability to recruit kings
The death of Richard I in April 1199 and the controversy surrounding Philip II's marriage meant the crusade would not be led by a monarch. This had serious consequences:
- No royal coffers (treasury) to fund the expedition
- No countrywide taxes that a king could raise
- No royal naval fleets to transport the crusaders
- Less authority and unity of command
The need for baronial support
Recruitment depended entirely on the personal decisions of individual leading nobles. If a baron decided not to take the crusading vow, it was unlikely his lords (vassals) would join either.
This system had clear weaknesses:
- Some leading barons, such as Duke Eudes III of Burgundy, felt able to ignore the call to crusade
- This restricted the number of lords who chose to join from particular regions
- Recruitment was patchy and unpredictable
The need for mercenaries
By the 12th century, it had become increasingly common to hire mercenaries (professional soldiers) to supplement a crusading force. Without a king in charge, hired troops would be essential to increase the size of the army.
The Financial Problem of Mercenaries
Mercenaries created a serious problem: they required payment. Thibault III of Champagne believed it would cost him 25,000 livres to fund his own troops, but he also knew he would need to pay roughly the same amount again for mercenaries. Without sufficient cash to pay them, the crusading forces would quickly fall apart.
This gives us a concrete sense of the financial burden: a single baron estimated needing 50,000 livres (units of currency) in total—a massive sum that would strain even a wealthy noble's resources.
Impact of recruitment problems on the crusade
While these issues were not enough on their own to prevent the crusade from setting out, they had a significant impact on its eventual course:
Financial constraints: The lack of royal funding meant that the leaders' actions would need to reflect their limited financial position. They could not afford to lose the money they had already committed or to abandon expensive arrangements they had made.
Limited numbers: Without royal leadership and with patchy baronial recruitment, the crusading army would be smaller than hoped. This made them vulnerable to financial pressure and more willing to accept diversions that promised payment.
The combination of limited funds and limited numbers created a dangerous situation. The crusade leaders had made expensive commitments (especially to Venice for transport) but had fewer troops and less money than anticipated. This left them with little room to maneuver when circumstances changed.
Dependence on deals and agreements: The leaders needed to make binding arrangements to secure transport and supplies, but their limited resources meant they had little flexibility if circumstances changed. This would prove crucial when the crusaders could not pay Venice for the transport they had contracted.
These recruitment problems set the stage for the later diversions to Zara and Constantinople, as the leaders struggled to fulfil their financial obligations and maintain their army.
Key Points to Remember:
-
The Fourth Crusade was led by barons, not kings – six nobles from northern France and Flanders who took the vow at Écry in November 1199
-
The leaders were closely connected by family, geography and political threats, particularly from King Philip II of France
-
Three major recruitment problems emerged: inability to recruit kings, dependence on individual barons' decisions, and the need for expensive mercenaries
-
Lack of royal leadership meant no royal treasury, taxes or naval fleets – forcing leaders to make binding financial agreements they struggled to honour
-
These early recruitment problems created the financial pressures that would later lead the crusade away from Outremer towards Zara and Constantinople