The occupation of Ragusa by the Normans is evidently an episode in the wars which they waged against the Eastern Empire, and the town was probably seized merely as a basis for further operations. Gervase, who ruled the whole time, does not seem to have been an absolute despot, as the consent of the Assembly was required for all the acts of the Government. Norman rule in Dalmatia did not survive the death of Tancred and the consequent collapse of the Sicilian kingdom in 1190. In documents of a date posterior to this, such as the treaty with Fano in 1199,[79] with Ancona[80] of the same year, with Bari of 1201,[81] and with Termoli of 1203,[82] no mention either of Venetian or Norman counts is made, so that we may conclude that for the time being Ragusa enjoyed freedom from foreign rulers. But Venice was preparing to re-occupy the whole of Dalmatia, and the Fourth Crusade of 1202 provided her with the desired opportunity. The Crusaders began their expedition to the Holy Land by storming and sacking Zara, where they wintered. In 1204 they captured Constantinople, subverted the Greek Empire, and set up the ephemeral Latin Empire of the East in its place, with Baldwin of Flanders as Emperor. The Doge of Venice, Enrico Dandolo, the prime mover and leader of the expedition, became “lord of a quarter and a half of Romania.” In 1205 the Venetians, at the height of their power, demanded the submission of Ragusa, which was at once tendered. Dandolo (the historian) thus describes this fourth surrender:— “Tommaso Morosini, who had been nominated Patriarch (of Constantinople) by Innocent III., returned to Venice, carrying the Pope’s letters; he set sail with a fleet of four triremes and made war against the city of Ragusa, who, at the suggestion of the Greeks, had rebelled against Venice. The citizens, no longer trusting in the strength of the Greeks, surrendered their city to the Venetians.” Two other chronicles[83] give similar accounts of the event. The indefatigable “Esadastes” of course tries to prove that Ragusa did not surrender, because the people who had held out so bravely and successfully against the Saracens 340 years previously would not have tamely submitted to a squadron of four ships commanded by a priest. The Ragusan apologist, however, forgets the enormous prestige acquired by the Venetians as a consequence of their exploits in subverting the Eastern Empire, after which event Ragusa could not hope to oppose the greatest Power in the Adriatic with any chance of success.[84]