Why The Lack of A Venetian Presence During The Age Of Discovery?

The Venetians were petering out by the 17th century as a naval and mercantile power. I'm wondering, though, why they didn't have any interest in transoceanic colonization. They had lost most of their Mediterranean possessions, why not expand in a different direction?

I know part of that was their merchant and naval fleets, but then again, looking around at Spain, the Dutch, etc., why not start building more modern, ocean-going ships? My theory is they weren't *needed* on the relatively calm Mediterranean, but I don't understand the stagnation in naval design or trade opportunities.

Theories appreciated. :^)
 
I would recommend a book by Larrie D. Ferreiro called Ships and Science: The Birth of Naval Architecture in the Scientific Revolution, 1600-1800. It goes really in depth on how naval architecture evolved during this time period. I am only part of the way through it currently. Another thing to note is the location of Venice. It isn't exactly in the best spot to make colonization easy for them.
 
For Venice to be involved in the Age of Colonization one would need a PoD that would give them a springboard from which to launch colonial expeditions. Quite honestly the easiest way is an alt-Fourth Crusade that conquers Egypt. From there Venice establishes trading posts in the Gulf of Aden and beyond, and establish colonies of Venetian-speakers as far away as India!

...in other words to answer your question it's because they had no access to colonizable places.
 
The Venetians were petering out by the 17th century as a naval and mercantile power. I'm wondering, though, why they didn't have any interest in transoceanic colonization. They had lost most of their Mediterranean possessions, why not expand in a different direction?

Well they DID had a strong present in america, not through direct colonial ownership, but their merchants were everywhere

In Brazil for example, the economical power was shared between the portuguese aristocracy along the venetians and the genovese merchants, and I believe that the same happened on Spanish america. My theory is that Venetia simple didn't had enought population to compete with Portugal, Spain, France and the UK
 
They had the Ottomans to trade with, plus both Venice and Genoa had one big thing that kept them out of America: Gibraltar. Spain could very simply cut off the Venetian and Genoan metropole from the colonies.
 
I would recommend a book by Larrie D. Ferreiro called Ships and Science: The Birth of Naval Architecture in the Scientific Revolution, 1600-1800. It goes really in depth on how naval architecture evolved during this time period. I am only part of the way through it currently. Another thing to note is the location of Venice. It isn't exactly in the best spot to make colonization easy for them.

* Thanks. I'll have to put it on the ever-expanding 'To-Read' pile. ;^)

* I don't feel that location is necessarily a factor here. By 1600, if Venetian ships had copied Western European ships, trek voyage from Venice or Morea wouldn't have been that off-putting.

For Venice to be involved in the Age of Colonization one would need a PoD that would give them a springboard from which to launch colonial expeditions. Quite honestly the easiest way is an alt-Fourth Crusade that conquers Egypt. From there Venice establishes trading posts in the Gulf of Aden and beyond, and establish colonies of Venetian-speakers as far away as India!

...in other words to answer your question it's because they had no access to colonizable places.

* I disagree. I think the real PoD needs to be by around 1600-1650. A successful Fourth Crusade is unnecessary, just the naval technology and gumption to expand past the Med.

They had the Ottomans to trade with, plus both Venice and Genoa had one big thing that kept them out of America: Gibraltar. Spain could very simply cut off the Venetian and Genoan metropole from the colonies.

* I'm not sure of the Venetian relationship with Spain, but the Republic of Genoa was effectively a satellite of Spain. I doubt they would've had much trouble with the Spanish. As for Gibraltar itself, it's hardly a fence keeping people in. Unless I had evidence, I doubt the Spanish would launch a sortie on Venetian ships sailing between the Med and the Atlantic.

* Further, I'm pretty sure the Venetians and the Ottomans weren't on the best of trading terms at this period (unless you're playing Empire: Total War. ;^)).
 
The Ottoman rise in the east caused a permanent threat for centuries to Venetian trading hegemony in the East, and in some cases their very survival.

John Julius Norwich's History of Venice is very good, and covers the Venetian geopolitical goals in this area. They simply don't have the resources or time to head west.
 
The Ottoman rise in the east caused a permanent threat for centuries to Venetian trading hegemony in the East, and in some cases their very survival.

John Julius Norwich's History of Venice is very good, and covers the Venetian geopolitical goals in this area. They simply don't have the resources or time to head west.

Thanks for the suggested read! I've stuck it on my Amazon list. I'm always looking for solid histories of Pre-Risorgimento Italy (Especially Post-Napoleonic Kingdom of the Two Sicilies). I feel like I never have any idea where to even begin looking.
 
A maritime Venetian Republic that was larger might have more of a chance. A Venetian unification of north Italy, say?
 
A maritime Venetian Republic that was larger might have more of a chance. A Venetian unification of north Italy, say?
On the other hand, Venetian dominance of northern Italy, that would see Venice butting heads with the Papacy, France, and the Habsburgs (not to mention all of the Italian duchies and republics alogn the way) and more resources committed to fighting one side or the other, no? Even if Venice had more luck in the Italian Wars, they'd have threats on all sides, plus the Ottomans on the seas, so I'm not sure how much they'd be able to focus on a landmass halfway across the world.

Aside from that, sailing on the Mediterranean doesn't translate well to sailing on the Atlantic, so there'd have to be naval reforms to produce ships more suited to sailing the open-ocean in order to get across the Atlantic to get and protect New World colonies. For a nation without a window to the Atlantic and so specialized in Mediterranean shipbuilding, I'm not sure how eager the Most Serene Republic would be to make such a massive change. If, however, a doge was interested enough (and survived long enough to boot) to actually do that, I suppose the Venetians would be able to make an at least respectable oceanic fleet (an Arsenal for carracks and the like?).

Of course, that also relies on them being able to compete with the Portuguese, French, English, Spanish (and later Dutch) and fight off all the pirates that came along with them. And also the Barbary pirates, just to add to the fun. Assuming Aragon still gets Naples under its crown, Venice is most likely going to butt heads with at least one Iberian power just from the power dynamics in the peninsula. Based on how Spain kept neglecting Gibraltar (they had trouble preventing the Dutch from getting ships through the Strait of Gibraltar and resisting Barbary raids in the region), however, I wouldn't say that that would make Venetian Atlantic ventures impossible. Sure, it's a bit more inconvenient compared to the rest of the colonial powers who had direct access to the Atlantic, but Venice isn't immediately sunk just because of Gibraltar.

The main issue, aside from logistics, would be interest then. It relies on Venice being interested enough in trans-Atlantic affair to dedicate a huge amount of resources and manpower and redirect their focus westward which, while plausible, is a bit unlikely in the grand scheme of things (in hindsight after the Mediterranean is overshadowed by the Atlantic, sure. But by then it's a bit late and there's a fair amount of competition. And before, well, Mediterranean trade is much more profitable so not much incentive to try something new and uncertain).
 
Which could be brought on by Crusader Egypt ;-)

...or possibly a mega-Jerusalem by itself, but that seems like wank territory. For an even earlier PoD, a Macedonian dynasty even more successful than OTL could see the ERE take Palestine and Aqaba, and from there Venetian traders could launch Red Sea expeditions.

But I think you want a PoD a bit later? It just seems really tough at any point after the Ottomans become an existential threat
 
* I'm not sure of the Venetian relationship with Spain, but the Republic of Genoa was effectively a satellite of Spain. I doubt they would've had much trouble with the Spanish. As for Gibraltar itself, it's hardly a fence keeping people in. Unless I had evidence, I doubt the Spanish would launch a sortie on Venetian ships sailing between the Med and the Atlantic.

Hum? Why would the Spanish want the Genoese to explore the rest of their Empire? Catalans were barred from settling in the Americas into the 18th century.
 
Most of the structural answers have been made, but there is one important one.

Why would Venice want to? Its a merchant state. It trades, it doesn't own and tax vast territories. That isn't how they made their fortunes. Its governed by merchant interests. Other than dominating some good trade resources, they'd have no interest - and they don't need to own territory to dominate trade in the colonies. They just need to go and set up shop there.

Venice, just didn't want nor need to culturally. They had already realised what Britain realised towards the end of Empire. They want control over trade and trade routes - NOT territory.

But if you want a major Venetian trade presence above and beyond OTL - possibly with a smattering of sugar colonies - then get them Ceuta and Malta. Ceuta helps to ensure secure passage to the Atlantic, and operates as a major port - and Malta gives them a fortress in the Central Med. That helps deal with the structural problem of isolation.

After that, the incentive exists for trade families to expand beyond Ceuta. Don't get me wrong, I think there is a high chance that the establishment of sugar colonies isn't unlikely - they'd just have to get there fast, but it would lead to the creation of a new society within Venice, the Plantation Classes. They would certainly be territorial - but I don't know where they'd get the manpower for a fight - as there certainly aren't enough mercs in the Western Hemisphere.
 
Venice didn't need to be a part of the Age of Exploration. It already had all the spices it could need. Plus it would be expensive to get out of the Medditeranean, and other Italian states might try to sabotage their efforts.
 
Not the same thing, but related - it's always puzzled me why more internally backward nations like Spain, Portugal, and France were able to build colonies and global maritime empires. This happened while the northern Italian states, which had had thriving middle classes and naval experience for centuries, left a much smaller footprint during that era. They then fell far behind what northern Europe and Britain would become during the development of capitalism in the early modern period.

All of the successful nations I mentioned here had easy access to the Atlantic. It looks like position really was that important.
 
Not the same thing, but related - it's always puzzled me why more internally backward nations like Spain, Portugal, and France were able to build colonies and global maritime empires. This happened while the northern Italian states, which had had thriving middle classes and naval experience for centuries, left a much smaller footprint during that era. They then fell far behind what northern Europe and Britain would become during the development of capitalism in the early modern period.

All of the successful nations I mentioned here had easy access to the Atlantic. It looks like position really was that important.

1) Italy was invaded repeatedly by these powers during the period. I swear, sometimes watching a timelapse map of Italy during the period could cause strobe-induced seizures.

2) Italian naval experience was for the Med - not the Atlantic.

3) The others have (relatively) stable borders, a large population, and their threats are comparable powers rather than insurmountable sods.

- A friend @Joshuapooleanox has written a TL that flips this all on its head by unifying Italy - which is what you'd need for a larger Italian footprint at this point. Uniting Italy does create a wealthy state, with defensible borders, at the heart of the Med. It is a game-changer.
 
Not the same thing, but related - it's always puzzled me why more internally backward nations like Spain, Portugal, and France were able to build colonies and global maritime empires. This happened while the northern Italian states, which had had thriving middle classes and naval experience for centuries, left a much smaller footprint during that era. They then fell far behind what northern Europe and Britain would become during the development of capitalism in the early modern period.

All of the successful nations I mentioned here had easy access to the Atlantic. It looks like position really was that important.
1) Italy was invaded repeatedly by these powers during the period. I swear, sometimes watching a timelapse map of Italy during the period could cause strobe-induced seizures.

2) Italian naval experience was for the Med - not the Atlantic.

3) The others have (relatively) stable borders, a large population, and their threats are comparable powers rather than insurmountable sods.

- A friend @Joshuapooleanox has written a TL that flips this all on its head by unifying Italy - which is what you'd need for a larger Italian footprint at this point. Uniting Italy does create a wealthy state, with defensible borders, at the heart of the Med. It is a game-changer.
HELLO! I EXIST!

Ok, no but seriously, https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/posts/14876499/

If you wanna have a read, go nuts. I've put a lot of effort into it. No spoilers though ;)
 
Hum? Why would the Spanish want the Genoese to explore the rest of their Empire? Catalans were barred from settling in the Americas into the 18th century.

I didn't say they'd /want/ them to. I'm just saying I doubt the Spanish would sortie out of Gibraltar every time a Genovesi ship crossed the pillars of Heracles.


Most of the structural answers have been made, but there is one important one.

Why would Venice want to? Its a merchant state. It trades, it doesn't own and tax vast territories. That isn't how they made their fortunes. Its governed by merchant interests. Other than dominating some good trade resources, they'd have no interest - and they don't need to own territory to dominate trade in the colonies. They just need to go and set up shop there.

Venice, just didn't want nor need to culturally. They had already realised what Britain realised towards the end of Empire. They want control over trade and trade routes - NOT territory.

What do you mean they didn't want colonies? What about Cyprus, Crete, Dalmatia, Morea, and the Black Sea colonies?


1) Italy was invaded repeatedly by these powers during the period. I swear, sometimes watching a timelapse map of Italy during the period could cause strobe-induced seizures.

2) Italian naval experience was for the Med - not the Atlantic.

1.) Northern Italy not so much by other European powers IIRC. Venice's major problem was with the Ottomans gobbling up their Easter Med territories and colonies. The major issues Northern Italy has with Western Europe don't start to pop up till the end of the 18th Century (aside from France's beef with Genoa).

2.) What do you mean no Atlantic experience. Many Italian sailors captained early trans-Atlantic voyages. Columbus (Genoa), Cabot (Venice), Verrazano (Florence), etc. They had the skills, they just needed the naval architecture and gumption to set up some small colonies in the West and East Indies.
 
Top