Talk:Geoffrey of Villehardouin

Untitled
I took out the part where someone alleged that G. didn't explain why the crusade was diverted. G. explains clearly that the crusaders had to attack Zara because they were short of the funds they had promised the Doge of Venice in return for his ships and men. They attacked Constantinople because the deposed prince Alexius promised them an enormous sum of money, which never materialized.

Ocanter 22:43, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, you're right. G. supplies reasons in both cases; he deals with the negotiations with Alexios at considerable length. Andrew Dalby 09:17, 12 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I think I might have translated this from the fr: article originally; there is a similar sentence there. (Well that's my excuse anyway!) Er, nevermind, the French article didn't exist then...Adam Bishop 14:14, 12 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, it looks as thought the French article was expanded (in mid 2005) on the basis of the English one, which is why it also makes this statement! Andrew Dalby 15:49, 12 August 2006 (UTC)