The presence of Sead Eddin in Venice

But there is no evidence to prove that even any of the leaders had any certain knowledge that a treaty had been signed, by which the services of the Venetians in carrying the army to Egypt had become impossible. The presence of Sead Eddin in Venice, in July, 1202, possibly gave rise to doubts as to the good faith of the republic, though the presence of an envoy from the sultan may have been concealed or may have been disregarded amid the multitude of visitors to the great centre of Eastern trade in Western Europe. If such doubts arose, the conduct of the Venetians to the Crusaders while at Lido increased them, while the attack upon Zara brought conviction into the minds of a large body of the army that they were not being fairly dealt with by the Venetians.

It is probable that the belief that Venice was not acting fairly was one of the causes of the ill-feeling which showed itself in the riot between the Venetians and the Crusaders within a week after the occupation of the city. But the secret of the treaty was well kept. The interest of Dandolo was, on the one hand, not to allow its provisions to transpire, and, on the other, to take advantage of every circumstance in order to divert the attention of the Crusaders from Egypt. Henceforward, and without any explanation being suggested, we find that the Crusaders speak rather of going to Syria than to Egypt.

The arrival of a smaller number of Crusaders in Venice than had been contracted for gave a plausible excuse to Dandolo, first, to delay the departure of the expedition, then to divert it towards Zara, and afterwards to keep it there during the winter. We have seen that he entirely succeeded. From the ratification of the treaty with the Sultan of Egypt, in July, 1202, the intention was to divert the expedition from its intended attack upon Egypt, the weakest and at the same time the most important point under Moslem sway.