WI: Byzantine Venice and Adriatic

The Eastern Roman Empire's influence over Venice, western Istria, and the Dalmatian cities of Zadar/Jadera, Split/Spalathos, and Dubrovnik/Ragusa waxed and waned over the centuries as the cities sought protection from the invading Franks, Lombards, and the Slavs. Eventually, its inability to protect its Adriatic possessions caused most of the cities to turn to the protection of others (Venice, Croatia and later Hungary). What if the Byzantines were better able to maintain their influence in the Adriatic and what would it require? How might this affect the history of Venice and Dalmatia?
 
My first instinct would be that the Byzantines would probably be operating very differently - both a prerequisite and a consequence of your scenario. Venice proved that trade domination can and did bring huge economic power - my first instinct would be to say that the Byzantines need to prioritise control and a garrison of at least Venice, so much so that I'd suggest that Venice, regardless of how it governs itself, is effectively made the Exarchate of Italy & Dalmatia - or something equivalent to that. Keeping Venice on side has one big advantage of fewer feuds between Constantinople and Venice as IOTL - but I can see the two coming to disagreements anyway, as Venice still has all its historic advantages, and so leans towards being the heart of a navy. In this case it is the navy of the Exarchate. If Venice is loyal, then we have a potentially powerful navy that can boost Roman authority, and a city that could be a perfect staging post for any invasion of the Po Valley - whilst at the same time flourishing and enforcing the economic domination of the Romans in the eastern Med.

You'd likely see Venice become the hub of Byzantine Trade into central Europe for sure, with the rest in Constantinople.

But really, the best PoD I can see for this, is the acceptance of powerful naval Exarchates. This would mean going all the way back to Belisarius and Justinian - and it only needs to be a minor PoD - the Balearic Islands are made the capital of the Exarchate of Spain, with its immediate responsibility to take control of the W.Med and establish Roman authority by sea.

Whilst it probably makes little difference (I mean, unless someone can see some powerful butterflies for a navy), other than retaining Roman Naval power in the West, and establishing a precedent for Naval Power over Land Power.
 
I think if Eastern Empire could control Adriatic - Venice could not become the Venice which we know (great trade city)
It certainly won't be as incredibly rich and powerful as OTL, but Venice as a nexus for trade into Germany through Austria and trade up the Po Valley would still make it a valuable port. And since it won't be in direct conflict with the Dalmatian cities, those can prosper as well and thus Venice can devote more power into defending the main city and trade rather than using it to combat local rivals.


My first instinct would be that the Byzantines would probably be operating very differently - both a prerequisite and a consequence of your scenario. Venice proved that trade domination can and did bring huge economic power - my first instinct would be to say that the Byzantines need to prioritise control and a garrison of at least Venice, so much so that I'd suggest that Venice, regardless of how it governs itself, is effectively made the Exarchate of Italy & Dalmatia - or something equivalent to that. Keeping Venice on side has one big advantage of fewer feuds between Constantinople and Venice as IOTL - but I can see the two coming to disagreements anyway, as Venice still has all its historic advantages, and so leans towards being the heart of a navy. In this case it is the navy of the Exarchate. If Venice is loyal, then we have a potentially powerful navy that can boost Roman authority, and a city that could be a perfect staging post for any invasion of the Po Valley - whilst at the same time flourishing and enforcing the economic domination of the Romans in the eastern Med.

You'd likely see Venice become the hub of Byzantine Trade into central Europe for sure, with the rest in Constantinople.

But really, the best PoD I can see for this, is the acceptance of powerful naval Exarchates. This would mean going all the way back to Belisarius and Justinian - and it only needs to be a minor PoD - the Balearic Islands are made the capital of the Exarchate of Spain, with its immediate responsibility to take control of the W.Med and establish Roman authority by sea.

Whilst it probably makes little difference (I mean, unless someone can see some powerful butterflies for a navy), other than retaining Roman Naval power in the West, and establishing a precedent for Naval Power over Land Power.

I was actually thinking of something similar. Perhaps the PoD might be too late, but a naval theme similar to the Theme of the Cibyrrhaeots, Samos, and Aegean Islands but instead based in the Adriatic would be interesting. This theme might be based in Dyrrachium/Durres, Ragusa, Zadar, or Venice, but they would provide ships, sailors, and maintain communications and trade through the Adriatic and anywhere east of Greece proper. Your PoD is interesting for sure: a naval exarch would make for an interesting Mediterranean and make Islamic expansion in Spain, Italy, and even Africa more difficult than OTL.
 
I was actually thinking of something similar. Perhaps the PoD might be too late, but a naval theme similar to the Theme of the Cibyrrhaeots, Samos, and Aegean Islands but instead based in the Adriatic would be interesting. This theme might be based in Dyrrachium/Durres, Ragusa, Zadar, or Venice, but they would provide ships, sailors, and maintain communications and trade through the Adriatic and anywhere east of Greece proper. Your PoD is interesting for sure: a naval exarch would make for an interesting Mediterranean and make Islamic expansion in Spain, Italy, and even Africa more difficult than OTL.

Maybe, maybe not - it depends on its impact. Sure having naval dominance will ensure that supply is a strong possibility (and the ability to redeploy troops from region to region is a boon too) but we have no guarantee that it'd be able to provide a better defense against an alt-Islamic Conquests. After all, we could be changing who is Emperor with this change, with Heraclius perhaps unable to take the throne - or increased affluence ensuring Maurice doesn't need to be so hard on his men - preventing Phocas.

I do somewhat like the idea of it effectively acting as the trade hub, but also protector of many minor states in Western Europe - some coastal lord seeks independence from the Visigoths? Why not seek the protection of Mallorca, and so on. However I doubt it'd be able to project power inland in any serious way, much like Venice IOTL often had issues with doing so.
 
Early on, the Adriatic was a relative backwater to the wider Mediterranean - as were the Balearic and Thrrenian Islands.
The Byzantines did have a good presence (or they wouldn't have estabilished OTL control), so they kept control with the relatively moderate investiment they had while slowly shifting focus towards a land-based strategy and essentially shrugging off the loss of overseas holdings as minor inconveniences. In my opinion, you need a better incentive.

I would say that a good POD would be the establishment of a strong, united polity in Italy, which then tries to project power eastwards towards the other shore of the Adriatic - a stronger menace than OTL that forces Venice and Byzantium to work more closely as the ERE scrambles to fortify its presence in Dalmatia and prevent any attacks on Greece. From there, it isn't unfathomable a new, strong maritime Exarchate emerges; the biggest difference is in the longer survival of Illyrian-Roman culture and in a stronger focus on the military for Venice.
 
Last edited:
I'm relatively curious about the possible Hellenization or re-Hellenization of western lands with such a focus on a western navy. For example, having greater Griko populations in Sicily, Calabria, and Apulia due to maintained trade (as long as they fend off Muslim invaders, the Lombards, the Normans...) or maybe instead of Venetian becoming the language of Adriatic trade instead have it be Greek, stretching from Durres to Venice as Latin is supplanted by Greek?
 
I'm relatively curious about the possible Hellenization or re-Hellenization of western lands with such a focus on a western navy. For example, having greater Griko populations in Sicily, Calabria, and Apulia due to maintained trade (as long as they fend off Muslim invaders, the Lombards, the Normans...) or maybe instead of Venetian becoming the language of Adriatic trade instead have it be Greek, stretching from Durres to Venice as Latin is supplanted by Greek?

It is a possibility, but it depends on how important Greek-Speakers are to these groups. Sure armies/navies will speak Greek as will merchants - it is useful, which suggests that yes, it would likely happen. But that isn't the same thing as Hellenisation IMO. It also depends on which scenario. If Italy is ruled, then slowly, sure - you'll likely get some exchange but you've got quite a lot of people there. If it is just a few trading cities, chances are they'll all be uniquely bilingual. Venice being Lombard-Greek, Zara Croat-Greek, Ragusa Serb-Greek, and surely some Dalmatian-Greek in there too. This is because whilst Greek is useful in the trading cities, it ISN'T with the local peasantry, who supply most of the raw goods. As a result, each would have a weird hybrid, and that isn't accounting for the distance from the Empire Proper.
 
I'm relatively curious about the possible Hellenization or re-Hellenization of western lands with such a focus on a western navy. For example, having greater Griko populations in Sicily, Calabria, and Apulia due to maintained trade (as long as they fend off Muslim invaders, the Lombards, the Normans...) or maybe instead of Venetian becoming the language of Adriatic trade instead have it be Greek, stretching from Durres to Venice as Latin is supplanted by Greek?

This is not the modern era; a navy is more useful as a way to ferry troops for major land-based operations, as was the case for Byzantium (the attempted recapture of Alexandria and Carthage, the reconquest of Crete). A stronger local navy will have a focus on the necessities of defense. Any scenario where Byzantium wants to invest in the Adriatic is one where Greek presence is actually under menace.
 
I'm relatively curious about the possible Hellenization or re-Hellenization of western lands with such a focus on a western navy. For example, having greater Griko populations in Sicily, Calabria, and Apulia due to maintained trade (as long as they fend off Muslim invaders, the Lombards, the Normans...) or maybe instead of Venetian becoming the language of Adriatic trade instead have it be Greek, stretching from Durres to Venice as Latin is supplanted by Greek?

Venice is pretty Hellenic influenced OTL (Just look at the palazzo ducale), they viewed themselves as the true heirs to the classical Greek polis (as well as being more "Roman" than the Lombard on the mainland).

This is arguably historical in that Venice in its early days was a Byzantine outpost and client state. What you really need is a stronger focus on the adriatic- say the Macedonians last long enough to consolidate over Sicily, or a medieval Lombard kingdom threatens Byzantine and Venetian holdings.
 
Venice is pretty Hellenic influenced OTL (Just look at the palazzo ducale), they viewed themselves as the true heirs to the classical Greek polis (as well as being more "Roman" than the Lombard on the mainland).

This is arguably historical in that Venice in its early days was a Byzantine outpost and client state. What you really need is a stronger focus on the adriatic- say the Macedonians last long enough to consolidate over Sicily, or a medieval Lombard kingdom threatens Byzantine and Venetian holdings.

Perhaps we take a look at the Pax Nicephori then? If we go by the earliest version Post-War, we could have the Byzantines make a significant effort to ensure a strong presence in all of their Italian cities, perhaps redirecting some of the settlement that IOTL went to Anatolia, boosting the populations of these cities with Greeks, and investing in fortifications. I think that with that situation you have a region that is different from the Catepanate enough to deserve its own titles (and Nikephoros was into reorganisation) so we could see a Catepanate of the Adriatic, which I expect would (in the wake of a primarily naval war in the region) be notably focused on its navy.

This could very much marry a more Pro-Byzantine Adriatic (primarily because of the Greek settlers) with more people. The key would be how effective it would be at trade, and whilst I don't think we'd see Venice rise to its dizzying heights, collectively with the Dalmatian cities it IOTL conquered it could well lead them and be comparable. Potentially they could be wealthier, but there are questions of how strong the merchant culture would be. My understanding is that whilst the Byzantines were slowly adopting aspects of the Italian model in the 1400s, at this point they didn't really boast a merchant class in the same way Venice would. Would/Could this Catepanate be able to with its overwhelmingly urban population?
 
Top