The Venetian Republic (or officially known as the Most Serene Republic of Venice) was a city state in Italy that survived from the year 697-1797. The geographical area that Venice was in was very advantageous. The whole area is a lagoon. At first, Venice was simply a collection of communities that allied with each other against the invading barbarians during the final decades of the Western Roman Empire.

The time in which Venice started its system of democracy is not clear; but some time during the early eighth century the Venetians elected their own leader, Ursus, who was given the rank of dux by Byzantium. In the early history of Venice, there were divisions between the people on whose side to take. Should they remain under the imperial control of Constantinople, to ally themselves with the Franks or to become fully independent? In the end, in the year 803, both the Western and Eastern Emperors recognized Venice, and while it was still a nominally Byzantine territory, it was de facto independent. Venice started building constructions along their coast and started to establish its own armed force. Slowly, Venice built up its military muscle and sea power. It would dominate the seas in the centuries to come. It controlled all of the trading, gained extensive trading rights in the Byzantine Empire and even became its navy power; all of this simply contributed to making Venice fabulously wealthy. Also, Venice slowly acquired more and more oversea territories, creating for itself an empire.

The decline of Venice started during the Ottoman-Venetian wars. Venice lost much of its empire in the Balkans. By the year 1796, Venice had declined so much that its navy, which had once dominated the Mediterranean, only had a few ships left. The final end came in the year 1797 when Napoleon invaded Venetian territory. The last doge, Ludovico Manin abdicated and the territory Venice had left was carved up between the European powers.

]]> http://revolutionsandtheoldrepublic.wordpress.com/2012/10/05/maritime-whiggery/ Fri, 05 Oct 2012 16:17:34 +0000 lmarti60 http://revolutionsandtheoldrepublic.wordpress.com/2012/10/05/maritime-whiggery/

The Roman Republic succeeded in overcoming the seemingly unavoidable degeneration or destruction of small Republics. The Roman Republic ‘conquered’ the entirety of the Italian peninsula, and was able to (for decades) maintain its Republican virtu.  Political theorists adjudicate the success of the Roman Republic to its constitutional structures. Likewise the constitutional structures of the Venetian Republic, Holland, and Britain proved to be very important. However, as mentioned in previous posts, it is necessary to emphasize the characteristics of the material-contextual preconditions that allow for the development of societies and political structures. Thus this post will be about the argument that geographical preconditions are as or more consequential to the development of Republics, as the structures in their constitutions.

Understand that Republics in early modern Europe remained rare, and confined to secluded geographical areas. To contextualize: Spain, Austria, France, Sweden, and Russia where monarchical Leviathans. In Italy there was a brief attempt to establish a Republican systems throughout Florence, Milan, Naples, the Papal States, and Venice. Milan was overthrown by mercenaries. Machiavelli’s Florence fell to the Medici. The Papal States and Naples degenerated and either succumbed to the control of the big transalpine monarchies or became principalities. Only Venice was able to overcome internal and external threats to remain a Republic. Across Europe, feudal territories where swiftly absorbed by larger monarchies. It was only in Britain and Holland that society was able to halt monarchical state building practices.

The material-contextual argument that pertains to these republics is: Maritime insularity. Venice, the Netherlands, and Britain emerged Republics as consequence of their insularity and territorial limitations. Cardinal Contarini, on his accounts on the Venetian constitution, argues that the lack of a standing army and Venice’s reliance on its Navy enabled them to avoid the widespread coups that destroyed the Roman Republic (having its military away from the city itself).

John Millar, a professor of law at Glasgow University and a student of Adam Smith, argued that as the need for a professional army (to repel the constant threat of neighboring powers) became widespread, its purpose easily diverted into supporting and enlarging the monarchs power, thus creating a despotic monarchy. Britain’s insularity (as well as geographical locations of the Venetian Republic and that of the Netherlands) makes it less vulnerable to attacks from foreign powers. In addition, the Navy is ill suited to repress people for their trade is far too specific, and operations at to far distances to be used to extinguish civil uprisings. This of course allows for the predominance of civil liberties and rights. The commons where allowed to halt the absolutist aspirations of the monarchy given its lack of a land army.

Easy access to the sea creates perfect conditions to establish a Republic of Commerce. The sea provides cheap methods of transportations. This foments trade on large scale. Large scale exchanges demands the production of goods to be larger than domestic consumption. In addition, European climate promotes trade. The changing seasons demand exchange of many products. Third and most importantly, access to the sea “provide wealth and productive capability with enough mobility to escape from predatory taxation, thus encouraging capitalism and moderating state behavior” (Bounding Power, D. Deudney).

“Commerce is sometimes destroyed by conquerors, sometimes cramped by monarchs; it traverses the earth, flies from the places where is it oppressed, and stays where it has liberty to breathe: it reigns at present where nothing was formerly to be seen but deserts, seas, and rocks; and where it once reigned now there are only deserts” (Montesquieu).

In conclusion, the Maritime Whig proposes that: 1) insularity determines naval military, which is insufficient to subdue the populations; 2) abundant sea connections are preconditions and facilitates more trade, more wealth, mobility of wealth, and mercantile self-protection. Thus the Maritime Whig presents the material-contextual preconditions to the successes of the rare cases of Britain, Venice, and Holland.

-Castle of Herakion Port

 Venetian fortress

-Castillo del puerto de Heraklion, fuerte veneciano Rocca dil Mare

-Castelo do porto de Heraklion, forte veneciano

Autor: E.V.Pita (Heraklion, Creta, 2007) / Author: E.V.Pita (Heraklion, Creta, 2007)

Fotos / Pictures

Blog: http://evpita.blogspot.com

Twitter: @evpitapictures

Ancient-republics differ to modern-republics in that they had to juggle with security issues, political structures, and ,most importantly, a very different material context. Material context defines security threats, and physiopolitical limitations. Prior to the idea of federalism, self-government was limited to city-states. In order for self-government to be viable citizens gathered in assemblies in order to discuss political affairs. Material-context defined the size of city-states – the assemblies had to be small enough so that every citizen could hear the speaker. According to Deudney, city-state’s intrinsic ‘dwarfdom’  determined several of their features: rarity, fear of diversity, socioeconomic stratification (and the softening effects of wealth), and their militarism.

In order to survive in the international arena, these small city-states were dependent upon geographical advantages and military virtu of their citizens. For example Athens, and the Greek city-states, were separated by mountains, rocky terrain, and often a defensible citadel (acropolis). The small size of these city-states meant constant state of alert/war. The citizens of these city-states had to be military effective. Due to technological restrictions, military virtu went hand in hand with individual strength, endurance, bravery, and unit cohesion. Of course this limited political life, and demanded a homogenous citizenry. Without a homogenous citizenry, willing to make sacrifices for the survival of the republic, the republic would often fall into stasis (violent internal conflict). Thus diversity was seen as a threat – commerce and wealth which created social stratification and class envy posed a threat as well. This explains why ancient-republics were fundamentally anti-liberal in character. Political life was limited to the strenuous requirements of the protection of the collective.

The first Iron Law of Polis Republicanism thus dictates that ‘if a republic be small’ it is military vulnerable and thus dependent on: geography, constant fear of stasis, military virtu and social homogeneity. Given these requirements, republics were limited to: effective but rare, xenophobic, fearful of social stratification and wealth, or highly militaristic/imperialistic./ expansionists. With the exception of the rare cases in which small republics effectively survive (like the Venetian Republic), all possible outcomes lead to the failure through the already explored cycle of political evolution described by Polybius (anacyclosis).

Each of us had read the book “City of Falling Angels”, by John Berendt (if you haven’t read any of his books, they’re like a non-partisan character sketch of events and people – and while they don’t sound interesting, they are surprisingly good reads – he also wrote “Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil”, which has awoken in me a desire to go to New Orleans….but that’s another trip…). One of the people who figures prominently in his book is Archimede Seguso, a man from one of the original family of glass-makers on Murano, and a witness to the fire that took down the famous Venetian theater, The Fenice .

Settled by the Romans in the 6th century, Murano has a lively history due to its having been a maritime trade epicenter. In nearby Venice, glass making was reaching a crescendo of popularity, but it was an uneasy relationship between the glass-makers and the floating city, as there was a constant fear of fire sweeping unexpectedly. It was this fear that prompted the Venetian Republic, in 1291, to order all glass-makers to move their foundries to Murano. By the 14th Century, glass-makers were counted among the affluent and influential citizens, immune from prosecution by the Venetian Republic, their daughters allowed to marry into the aristocracy even though they were a “trade” family. This affluence however came with a price, as the glass-makers were not allowed to leave the Republic for fear that their glass-making secrets would be found out.

Our goal in going to Murano was to seek out Archimede Segusso’s glass works and perhaps one of his pieces. We didn’t realize until our arrival on Murano, that appointments were necessary and thought we would have to be content with seeing his pieces in one of the glass stores in Venice carrying his work. As we stood outside the factory, contemplating where to go next, a small door opened and a lady poked her head out asking if she could help. When we explained what our intentions had been she told us to wait and disappeared back inside; and this is where my love of the Italian culture comes in – they are so laid back and willing to go with the flow, taking life as it comes and appreciating it. The door opened again and there stood Archimede’s (he himself passed in 1999) grandson who brought us into the factory, gave us a tour and then took us to the showroom where there were hundreds of beautiful limited edition pieces – they were breathtaking. We were shocked and honored by the privilege we were given and promised each other we would return one day to show our gratitude – I very much look forward to doing so.

In the meantime, this shot, while it isn’t a typical shot of Murano, (the ones you see of the island, or of the little houses standing brightly shoulder to shoulder), it is just a photobox that captured me for whatever reason when we stepped off of the vaporetto. I have played with it a little, altered it somewhat, but I like to think I have done so in a manner that compliments the integrity of the place. I love this picture, and hope you like it as well.

Contiki people chilling in St. Mark’s Square

Our first stop in Italy was the sinking city of Venice, a residual shell of its old self, once a great city, known for its commerce and prowess, now just a floating tourist attraction, filled with gypsies and travelers, all keen on draining Venice of its last few residual treasures. Created during the 10th century B.C it was the home capital of the Venetian Republic and a strong maritime powerhouse in Europe from the 13th century till the 17th.Thanks mainly by financial support of the reigning wealthy Contarini family during the 1500′s,

The Beautiful gondola’s of Venice

Venice boosted large profits from water trade, extravagantly made products and held a fine position in the arts, even being the birth place of Vivaldi. Do to the plague hitting in 1348,  1575-1577, and finally devastating in 1630 Venice’s population was decimated, leading to a decline, that was finalized by the 1800′s thanks to Napoleon conquering of the city in 1797. To this day, Venice still produces wonderful masterpieces of art, from its beautiful glassware, to its famous venetian lace, but much of this is through government subsidising, as the demand for such products, no matter how well made, has decreased with the introduction of industrialization. Despite Venice’s decline, the city itself was beautiful to see, and I am sad that we only had just the one day to explore it.

Saint Mark’s Basilica

We began our group tour of Venice in front of St. Mark’s Basilica, in St. Mark’s square, surrounded by buildings on three sides and the ocean on the other. St. Mark’s Basilica was built-in 1071 to house the stolen relics of Saint Mark the Evangelist, taken from Alexandria in 828 by Venetian merchants, and used to show off the prestige of Venice as a European power. One our tour of the Basilica I discovered that the often seen image of a winged lion, is in fact the symbol of St. Mark and the protector of Venice. After seeing the Basilica, we continued our tour, heading to a still working glass factory and watching a glass blower demonstrate his trade. This was followed by an exhibition at a Venetian Lace school, were we saw how lace was still being made in the traditional excruciating manner that had been used for centuries.

Palazzo Contarini del Bovolo

After this stop we headed over to Palazzo Contarini del Bovolo, the ancient palace of the once powerful Contarini family. Entering a tiny street, it opened upon a lush courtyard in front of one of the most beautiful spiral staircases I have ever seen. Built in 1499 by the Contarini family this staircase named Scala Contarini del Bovolo (of the snail) was one of the greatest architectual masterpieces in Venice, though as it is in a less traveled part of Venice, many tourists never see it. Though the staircase itself was closed due to construction, the outside of the building was beautiful enough that we were not too disappointed in not being able to climb to the top. Once we left the Palazzo it was time for our gondola ride, a much over rated experience, imagine a scenic New York taxi cab on the water. The sights from the water were breath-taking, but the ride was far too short, and as our cabbie, sorry gondolier was on the phone the whole time, we got no singing. But even with the lackluster performance, the ride was worth it and gave us all a very different look at Venice. Following the gondola ride, we all split up, heading to Venice’s and the world’s oldest still operating coffee-house, the Caffe Florian in continuous operation since 1720. Sampling some of Venice’s famous filtered coffee we enjoyed the rest of our day in Venice, casually enjoying the music from outside and the beautiful paintings and architecture inside, until it was time to call it a day, get back on our boat and head to the contiki hostel.

London is one of the great ‘world cities’, of that there is no doubt. Her wealth of architectural gems, great art collections and much more ensure that London is thronged with tourists from Spring through Autumn. The attraction of London is often based on the amazingly rich history of the city, and one of the great buildings of Europe (and a UNESCO World Heritage Site, #488, 1988 listing), the Tower of London. Technically, its correct title is ‘Her Majesty’s Palace and Fortress, the Tower of London’, and this gives you some idea of its initial use. Started in around 1070, the White Tower (the central keep of the fortress) was intended by William the Conqueror - Guillaume le Conquérant - to be the principal fortress and armoury for his conquest of the remainder of England.

It is singularly appropriate, therefore, that as well as the marvellous treasures of the Crown Jewels, the Tower would house some items from the Royal Armouries Collections (there are many more held in Leeds in Yorkshire). Outside the Tower, close to the River Thames, you can find two very large mortars. They are both cast iron, but have differing histories, despite looking fairly similar.

The mortar on the left is of Spanish design, and dates from the 18th century. Unusually, both the base and the barrel have been cast as one unit. The calibre of the mortar is 13 inches, which seems to be a common heavy mortar calibre, as preserved British mortars at Crownhill Fort, Plymouth, are similar. The range of this weapon would be around 3,000 yards, and it is likely to have been used as a fixed installation in a fortification, or at sea in a bomb ketch. These were unwieldy vessels but could produce deadly plunging fire against land targets, such as that provided by bomb ketches of the Royal Navy at both the First Battle of Copenhagen (1801), the Second Battle of Copenhagen (1807) and in many other engagements during the Napoleonic Wars. When installed in a fortification, because the angle of elevation was fixed, the mortars would be carefully sighted (and sited) so that when a target reached a certain point (at a predetermined distance), the battery would open fire with telling effect, hurling their large, 200 lb, explosive shells at the enemy.

The other mortar is also a cast iron weapon (some older mortars and cannon were cast in bronze). This time the mortar has trunnions, which allow the weapon to be elevated, in its carriage, to the required angle to engage attackers. It is of 16″ calibre and bears a maker’s mark ‘TW’; it is an earlier piece, and is dated ’1684′. Interestingly, it resembles Italian weapons of the period and is described as this. The barrel, however, reveals a cast design of the ‘Lion of St. Mark’, the symbol for Venice and the Venetian Republic. This maritime power and trading giant dominated the eastern half of the Mediterranean Sea (and more) during the 17th century. The mortar came from Corfu, as a gift, and since the Venetian Republic ruled that island from 1401 to 1787, the markings on the weapon make perfect sense.

This mortar was presented to the British Government in 1842, during the Victorian era, at a time when Great Britain still ruled Corfu as a British Protectorate (it did so from 1815-1864). The Lord High Commissioner of the Ionian Islands at this time was James Alexander Stewart-Mackenzie, a noted Scottish diplomat, so it is quite possible that he was behind the gift of the mortar! All in all, these two weapons are fine examples of an ancient form of artillery.

This is 1/4 of a map that was prepared for Napoleon’s campaigns in Germany, Egypt and northern Italy. You can consult the complete map in the  Perry-Castañeda Map collection of the lbrary of the University of Texas at Austin.

The Franchinis have been connected with  all the duchies in this map (i.e. Duchies of Parma, Milan, Modena and Tuscany) as well as the Venetian and Genovese republic,s Switzerland and the principality of Tyrol.