Can someone come up with a time line in which Venice remains independent with a strong navy and several Mediterramean possessions and a few possible overseas colonies.
Make Venice last.
- Thread starter MadMaper 13
- Start date
Venice was bound to decline with the discovery of a route around Africa and the rise of the Ottomans.
You can have them last until unification if Napoleon doesn't go on a conquering spree and eventually have to cede the Republic's lands to Austria, after all.
You can have them last until unification if Napoleon doesn't go on a conquering spree and eventually have to cede the Republic's lands to Austria, after all.
Seconded. Once Vasco de Gama discovered that the Indies could be reached by sailing around the Cape of Good Hope, the fortunes of Venice were bound to decline. Their prosperity was based upon their dominance of the Eastern Med. trade routes, which since time immemorial had been the easiest way to transport Eastern luxury goods and spices to the West. The Ottoman dominance of the East was nettlesome, but the Venetians eventually reached a modus vivendi with the Turks, and probably could have continued to prosper without the discovery of the sea route to the Indian Ocean.
Of course, the Italian Wars sped up Venice's decline markedly. If Pope Julius II had not had the stupidity to invite the French to intervene in Northern Italy in the early 16th century, things might have gone much better for Venice over the next few centuries. If they had not had their land armies destroyed and much of their Italian territories under threat they could have confronted the Ottomans more forcefully in the Med., and possibly forced a more favorable peace with the Turks, while maintaining their power over Crete, Cyprus and the Ionian Islands. Not a stretch when you consider that the Venetian Arsenal could produce more galleys that they entire Ottoman Empire, and qualitatively superior ones at that!
Of course, the Italian Wars sped up Venice's decline markedly. If Pope Julius II had not had the stupidity to invite the French to intervene in Northern Italy in the early 16th century, things might have gone much better for Venice over the next few centuries. If they had not had their land armies destroyed and much of their Italian territories under threat they could have confronted the Ottomans more forcefully in the Med., and possibly forced a more favorable peace with the Turks, while maintaining their power over Crete, Cyprus and the Ionian Islands. Not a stretch when you consider that the Venetian Arsenal could produce more galleys that they entire Ottoman Empire, and qualitatively superior ones at that!
Might there be a way for Venice to create an early Suez? They used the Silk Road overland did they not?
In this way, could they then control trade between the Med and the Red Sea, and as such gain maybe some East African and Asian colonies, while maintaining superiority over trade with the East, and as such, their wealth?
In this way, could they then control trade between the Med and the Red Sea, and as such gain maybe some East African and Asian colonies, while maintaining superiority over trade with the East, and as such, their wealth?
We need Venice to take control over the Saini, but Suez will probably not happen, but they can always build up a large red sea navy and use it as a chain to the eastern med and India. Killing off the Ottomans early will help, and keeping the French from running around Italy will help immensely.
Perhaps if Venice could get Byzantium (During the Crusades maybe), they could have a monopoly on the Early Russians, and rely on that. If they can control Gibraltar during any point in time they could have a monopoly of Mediterranean trade even after the Cape of Good Hope.
Another option would be for Venice to gain more land in Italy, and maybe in the Balkans. When their position in the Mediterranean begins to be less valuable, they could fall back on other things.
Another option would be for Venice to gain more land in Italy, and maybe in the Balkans. When their position in the Mediterranean begins to be less valuable, they could fall back on other things.
I don't really see how a Venetian Suez is that implausible. They certainly had the wealth to build it at one time, and they could have used manpower from conquered areas around the Sinai peninsula. Set up a few bases down the Red Sea, annex Socotra Island and then off to Bombay, Malacca and Shanghai they go!
Though a conquered Sinai could also mean, perhaps preferentially, a land based route over the Sinai to a naval base on the Red Sea and have a merchant fleet waiting, like Axeman said. I'm quite liking that idea.
Though a conquered Sinai could also mean, perhaps preferentially, a land based route over the Sinai to a naval base on the Red Sea and have a merchant fleet waiting, like Axeman said. I'm quite liking that idea.
Plus if Venice has the Sinai, they will have an easier time attacking Egypt, and even Cyrene and much of North Africa, but that just depends on how much is profitable.
So I am thinking a Venice with Egypt, Dalmatia, Constantinople *from the 4th Crusade* Crete, Dalmatia, and Itallian buffers such as Verona and Ferrera.
So I am thinking a Venice with Egypt, Dalmatia, Constantinople *from the 4th Crusade* Crete, Dalmatia, and Itallian buffers such as Verona and Ferrera.
Would Venice be able to hold all of Egypt so immediately? At this point, did Egypt not extend far south into the Nile and Sudan?
The Sinai, perhaps an early Eritrea, Socotra, bases in the Maldives as a start, and Venice can conquer a maritime and island empire (similar to Japan's after WWI) extending from East Africa to the East Indies.
What say you? With all this wealth coming from the Far East, would Mediterranean powers be more inclined to go the Sinai way rather than the Cape of Good Hope? Could this bring Portugal and Venice into conflict?
The Sinai, perhaps an early Eritrea, Socotra, bases in the Maldives as a start, and Venice can conquer a maritime and island empire (similar to Japan's after WWI) extending from East Africa to the East Indies.
What say you? With all this wealth coming from the Far East, would Mediterranean powers be more inclined to go the Sinai way rather than the Cape of Good Hope? Could this bring Portugal and Venice into conflict?
It did, it did; it's all dependent on Venice exploiting the Mamluk weakness which in OTL the Ottomans monopolized (so any 16th-century onward POD will be excruciatingly difficult for the survival of the Serene Republic).
The biggest problem with the Sinai route is that even in OTL the Venetian Mediterranean Empire wasn't easy to manage.
That's only if Venice insists on holding the Adriatic coast. The city itself is untouchable, and in this TL they've got continued naval dominance even more extreme than OTL.
Holding the coast is practically a must lest they want to be constantly plagued by pirates. The eastern coast is crucial for sea movement in pre-steam world.
Have Venice take Constantinople permanently and prevents the Ottomans to reach in the Adriatic Sea. Another is to have Portugal never explores the entire Africa or longer Moorish rule in Iberian Peninsula.
If we have an early enough POD we need several things done :
1 ) Ottomans must be weakened enough so they cannot threaten Egypt and the Eastern Med, but Hungary at the same time must not be underpowered. The most likely candidate for both seems to be a survival of the Byzantine Empire, or maybe even better Venice could keep the Latin Kingdom of Constantinople in its pocket.
2) Egypt and Sinai must be secured. The Sudan can be guarded by a simple frontier from the sea to the sea of fire. Perhaps a longer living Timurid *who for some reason does not sack Delhi lets say* but rather plunders the Nile and ravages Anatolia *which is ITTL not partially united by the Ottomans yet*
3) Portugal and Spain need to have "accidents", anything from bad leaders to bad trade winds making their progress around Africa take longer.
4) Italian wars need to be butterflied away *hopefully by having a surviving Latin Kingdom of Constantinople.
1 ) Ottomans must be weakened enough so they cannot threaten Egypt and the Eastern Med, but Hungary at the same time must not be underpowered. The most likely candidate for both seems to be a survival of the Byzantine Empire, or maybe even better Venice could keep the Latin Kingdom of Constantinople in its pocket.
2) Egypt and Sinai must be secured. The Sudan can be guarded by a simple frontier from the sea to the sea of fire. Perhaps a longer living Timurid *who for some reason does not sack Delhi lets say* but rather plunders the Nile and ravages Anatolia *which is ITTL not partially united by the Ottomans yet*
3) Portugal and Spain need to have "accidents", anything from bad leaders to bad trade winds making their progress around Africa take longer.
4) Italian wars need to be butterflied away *hopefully by having a surviving Latin Kingdom of Constantinople.
Unconsensual
Banned
The rise of the Ottomans did actually help Venice somewhat, after all it became the mediator between East and West, it still traded with the Ottomans , and the most important part was that it distracted catholic powers from Venice itself (ex: the League of Cambrai). They traded a more imminent threat for the distant Ottoman threat and it brought them time, though they were still in decline.
Venice by the virtue of population and resources simply cannot compete against nation-states on prolonged wars of attrition especially on far-away lands. Maybe it isn't the Ottomans but Venice can't hold out indefinitely in the Sinai against local nation-states, diplomacy and espionage can delay the inevitable but short of depopulating the local region and filling it with Venetians it is not possible.
But it is inevitable that, marine shipping will improve overtime and surpass galleys in the Mediterranean. The cape cannot remain undiscovered forever. The lifeline of Venice will become obsolete, you need Venice to find a new source.
Hmm, you know we could just make Venice into some rich playhouse of Europe (which it was for some time), add some minimal banking restrictions and neutrality. (somewhat close to a Tl I'm drafting)
I'm actually doing research and drafting a TL for the most Serene republic. From some books I read to keep Venice as a territorial power you essentially need to permanently prevent the rise of nation-states (quite impossible, short of very good luck and the prevention of the spread of skill and knowledge) or make Venice a nation-state by allowing it to essentially unify parts of Italy (which ruins the theme of the city-state).
You'd have to have a radically different 1204. The fall of the Roman Empire did nothing for Europe's defences and played directly into the hands of the Turks because it almost destroyed their oldest enemy. I'd say either have the Romans survive, but heavily influenced by the Italian states, or either have Venice annex Greece and Rumelia. That way there's enough power there to keep the Ottmoans in check, and from then on it's just keeping control of the Eastern Mediterranean.
As for the Indies, well remember that it took decades if not a century for the East Indian tradel anes to come under European control, and even then Portugal was still very weak. If the Venetians could take control of Egypt and the Red Sea then they'd have a much shorter, and thus more competitive route, as well as shorter lines of communication. What will ultimately be Venice's downfall is the fall in prices of spices and other oriental pruducts. It'll have to transfer into manufacturing or other fields of commerce that are more robust-maybe forts in India to control some of the textile industry, or concessions in China. Unless it industrialises thoroughly and quickly (very unlikely) it'll just do what the Netherlands did and fall into being a third rate power with what used to be very valuable colonies which have since become more trouble than they're worth.
As for the Indies, well remember that it took decades if not a century for the East Indian tradel anes to come under European control, and even then Portugal was still very weak. If the Venetians could take control of Egypt and the Red Sea then they'd have a much shorter, and thus more competitive route, as well as shorter lines of communication. What will ultimately be Venice's downfall is the fall in prices of spices and other oriental pruducts. It'll have to transfer into manufacturing or other fields of commerce that are more robust-maybe forts in India to control some of the textile industry, or concessions in China. Unless it industrialises thoroughly and quickly (very unlikely) it'll just do what the Netherlands did and fall into being a third rate power with what used to be very valuable colonies which have since become more trouble than they're worth.
WI Venice casts an eye Westward?
Wait a minute. In all the timelines proposed in all the years of the AH site, doesn't anyone wonder WI the Venetians cover their bets of holding trade to the East--by going West too?
Specifically--get control of Gibraltar and whatever point of land on the south side of the Strait is best for a seapower to hold--would that be Tangier?
This is in aid of Venetian traders seeking trade links to Northwest Europe--England, France, the Low Countries.
In the course of doing this--this is a side venture from their point of view after all, their efforts are still mainly as OTL on securing the Eastern trade--they eventually do a little exploring down the African coast, find one or more of the sets of obscure Atlantic islands--Canaries, Madeira, Azores--perhaps pick up on rumors of lands to the West from Northern Europeans....
The point being, either they preempt Portugal, Spain, or both, or at any rate are in a position to cut themselves in on the America trade when some European rediscovers America and makes it stick.
"Venezuela" might be literally a "New Venice" then?
What I'm suggesting has a whole range of possibilities, from ASB VeniceWank (they just don't have the population base to replace Spain after all) to a mere marginal survival where Venice is just barely hanging on there in the modern day.
In fact if Venice is not remarkably strong and the whole map of the Mediterranean is completely redrawn by 1800, I can only see Napoleon abolishing the place. Then it might get restored in the post-Napoleonic settlements, and then eaten up again during Italian Unification, by the HRE, post-WWI, Hitler would surely either eat it or feed it to Mussolini, etc. At some point Venice surely gets absorbed into some larger entity, unless it is such a large entity even as the 18th century ends that its national ID cannot be ignored.
Another way to go is to have the home republic eventually perish completely as an independent power, but have a former colony, cut loose by that event, continue an independent career.
Aside from American territory, what about Venetian South Iberia/North Morocco--basically Greater Gibraltar? They start with securing control of the straits for narrowly commercial purposes, but holding on to the basic claim doggedly, naturally the territory they control tends to grow, to give more depth to their holdings and to give it enough of an economic base to be self-supporting. By the 18th Century, Britain might ally with this cadet branch of Venice (with or without allying with the mother city, depending on how that relationship has evolved by then) rather than seek to hold Gibraltar herself.
Either that, or "Britannia Rules the Waves" gets butterflied away completely--as they'd fail to get anywhere in the Med unless the Straits Venetians let them.
Ah well, for Gibraltar to be a possession worth having, one either needs a larger empire it is a vital point for, or to somehow profit from the trade of other powers passing through.
I'm just throwing out concepts that lie westward, rather than throwing in the towel and saying "Poor Venice is doomed once someone looks West..."
Mind, I'd agree that these are less probable timelines, because the Venetians enjoyed great success for a time in reaching Eastward, it probably would not occur to them to cover bets to the west, especially as that would divide their efforts; unless the Western colonies could pay their own way they'd look like a pointless diversion, and even if they were rather profitable it would still represent a drain of total manpower. Unless somehow this diversion gives them a new pool of loyal talent to draw from, either in Western territories themselves or by reconfiguring their efforts in the East so as to make recruitment of allies there more probable. Suppose the Venetians could make themselves less hated among Greeks for instance, and wind up with the loyal help of at least certain Greek peoples--then they'd have more manpower to reinforce both their Eastern operations and Western ventures.
At the end of the day I'd agree with this much:
Either Venice grows to be a much greater power, conquering her own region as a distinct national realm on a modern nation-state scale, and/or having a colonial empire of some territorial significance to draw from that is more or less defensible in the context of the 17th, 18th, 19th, and 20th century snakepits;
Or at some point Venice's time has past, she can't hold on to the sorts of mercantile trading post colonies and systems of extorted concessions that worked ok in the early part of the second millennium but not so well as the scale of things picked up. Once eclipsed, Venice does not last, not as a power other powers seriously reckon with though it might be convenient for some major power to keep it in play as a nominally independent state. Eventually absorption into larger Italy (or some other state that pre-empts greater Italy, such as a stronger HRE) seems inevitable.
This sad fate could easily overtake her even if there were a whole string of Venetian trading posts down the African coast and major concessions in the ports of NW Europe too; at some point Venice needs to develop a possession that gives her a major population center somewhere--either by acquiring a lot of territory in the neighborhood of the home city, or founding a loyal overseas colony that the mother city can rely on to hold its own and also rally to her aid, or at any rate carry on the torch of specifically Venetian identity when the tie is at last severed.
Wait a minute. In all the timelines proposed in all the years of the AH site, doesn't anyone wonder WI the Venetians cover their bets of holding trade to the East--by going West too?
Specifically--get control of Gibraltar and whatever point of land on the south side of the Strait is best for a seapower to hold--would that be Tangier?
This is in aid of Venetian traders seeking trade links to Northwest Europe--England, France, the Low Countries.
In the course of doing this--this is a side venture from their point of view after all, their efforts are still mainly as OTL on securing the Eastern trade--they eventually do a little exploring down the African coast, find one or more of the sets of obscure Atlantic islands--Canaries, Madeira, Azores--perhaps pick up on rumors of lands to the West from Northern Europeans....
The point being, either they preempt Portugal, Spain, or both, or at any rate are in a position to cut themselves in on the America trade when some European rediscovers America and makes it stick.
"Venezuela" might be literally a "New Venice" then?
What I'm suggesting has a whole range of possibilities, from ASB VeniceWank (they just don't have the population base to replace Spain after all) to a mere marginal survival where Venice is just barely hanging on there in the modern day.
In fact if Venice is not remarkably strong and the whole map of the Mediterranean is completely redrawn by 1800, I can only see Napoleon abolishing the place. Then it might get restored in the post-Napoleonic settlements, and then eaten up again during Italian Unification, by the HRE, post-WWI, Hitler would surely either eat it or feed it to Mussolini, etc. At some point Venice surely gets absorbed into some larger entity, unless it is such a large entity even as the 18th century ends that its national ID cannot be ignored.
Another way to go is to have the home republic eventually perish completely as an independent power, but have a former colony, cut loose by that event, continue an independent career.
Aside from American territory, what about Venetian South Iberia/North Morocco--basically Greater Gibraltar? They start with securing control of the straits for narrowly commercial purposes, but holding on to the basic claim doggedly, naturally the territory they control tends to grow, to give more depth to their holdings and to give it enough of an economic base to be self-supporting. By the 18th Century, Britain might ally with this cadet branch of Venice (with or without allying with the mother city, depending on how that relationship has evolved by then) rather than seek to hold Gibraltar herself.
Either that, or "Britannia Rules the Waves" gets butterflied away completely--as they'd fail to get anywhere in the Med unless the Straits Venetians let them.
Ah well, for Gibraltar to be a possession worth having, one either needs a larger empire it is a vital point for, or to somehow profit from the trade of other powers passing through.
I'm just throwing out concepts that lie westward, rather than throwing in the towel and saying "Poor Venice is doomed once someone looks West..."
Mind, I'd agree that these are less probable timelines, because the Venetians enjoyed great success for a time in reaching Eastward, it probably would not occur to them to cover bets to the west, especially as that would divide their efforts; unless the Western colonies could pay their own way they'd look like a pointless diversion, and even if they were rather profitable it would still represent a drain of total manpower. Unless somehow this diversion gives them a new pool of loyal talent to draw from, either in Western territories themselves or by reconfiguring their efforts in the East so as to make recruitment of allies there more probable. Suppose the Venetians could make themselves less hated among Greeks for instance, and wind up with the loyal help of at least certain Greek peoples--then they'd have more manpower to reinforce both their Eastern operations and Western ventures.
At the end of the day I'd agree with this much:
Either Venice grows to be a much greater power, conquering her own region as a distinct national realm on a modern nation-state scale, and/or having a colonial empire of some territorial significance to draw from that is more or less defensible in the context of the 17th, 18th, 19th, and 20th century snakepits;
Or at some point Venice's time has past, she can't hold on to the sorts of mercantile trading post colonies and systems of extorted concessions that worked ok in the early part of the second millennium but not so well as the scale of things picked up. Once eclipsed, Venice does not last, not as a power other powers seriously reckon with though it might be convenient for some major power to keep it in play as a nominally independent state. Eventually absorption into larger Italy (or some other state that pre-empts greater Italy, such as a stronger HRE) seems inevitable.
This sad fate could easily overtake her even if there were a whole string of Venetian trading posts down the African coast and major concessions in the ports of NW Europe too; at some point Venice needs to develop a possession that gives her a major population center somewhere--either by acquiring a lot of territory in the neighborhood of the home city, or founding a loyal overseas colony that the mother city can rely on to hold its own and also rally to her aid, or at any rate carry on the torch of specifically Venetian identity when the tie is at last severed.
While as a feat of engineering, a Suez Canal is quite possible with even Medieval technology. However, it would require truly massive amounts of conscript labor, as the lack of high explosives means you need thousands of additional laborers with pickaxes. Something more akin to the older Pharaoh's Canal would be more realistic.
For this to be even remotely possible, I think you would need a completely sucessful crusade for starters, with Europeans controlling the both the Levant and Egypt. The Crusader states would probably be economically dependent on Venice, and could probably be convinced to to cede the land, and have the muscle to bring in the labor.
However, even if the Venetians get their canal connecting the Eastern Md. to the Red Sea, it does not guarantee them an Indian Ocean Colonial Empire by any means. Venice never really conquered any important possessions on its own, rather it purchased them from Crusaders and others in exchange for cash. While they always had a respectable navy, the Venetian military was never really much to brag about. They would need to bring in either some other Europeans or Crusaders to conquer for them, and there is no guarantee that the Serene Republic would have the leverage to get them.
Plus, Venetian galleys aren't really going to get further than the Persian gulf, unless can gain access to thousands of friendly ports from Persia to Vietnam. Venice would need to build themselves Galleons to really exploit the East Indies, and once they have them they might as well sail around Africa themselves.
I get what you're saying, but in all honesty it doesn't really add up for me. The Venetian military, as you said, being not much to brag about, could very possibly change with regards to, well, conquest. But as for the above comments about the galleons, the entire purpose of building a canal through Sinai would be to prevent the Portuguese from monopolising trade to the East around Africa. To even access the Med the Venetians would have to somehow conquer territory in Spain or right next to Spain in Morocco, which, IMO, won't be smiled upon by anyone really, whereas to get the Sinai it would be a war against a "heretical heathen empire bent on corrupting the good Christian states" in Europe.
Spitballing here, but when you look at it the way I'm doing it, a Red Sea route to the east seems a lot more feasbile than an Africa route for a power like Venice. Might they even gain support against the Mameluks? Or Turks? When was Egypt taken by the Ottomans anyway?