Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
32 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
What are the political reasons for the rise of Venice? (7)
|
Capable and Committed Leaders
Fair Election System Exemplary Political System Effective Checks on Power Practical Policies Strong Navy Citizens' Involvement |
|
|
How did capable and committed leaders contribute to the rise of Venice?
Three examples? |
Ensured stable political climate that facilitated trade, and helped to protect Venice's trade interests and sovereignty. This put her one step ahead of her competitors.
Doge Orselo: reconciled feuding cities, negotiated treaties with major powers to protect Venice's independence and other favourable terms Dandolo: directed 4th Crusade at age 90 against Byzantine; sacked Constatinople -> allowed Venice to gain recognition and control important territories in the Byzantine empire Doge Ziani: commercial trading ties w/ ex-Byzantine cities |
|
|
How did a fair election system contribute to the rise of Venice? [5]
|
(Prevented nepotism as powers and positions spread widely)
Nominating Committee to identify male candidates for all elected positions through balloting - ensures no domination of family or individual Nobles not allowed to lobby/campaign for support - less rivalry and no appointment by personal favour No choosing or rejecting of office - ensures all positions filled up, and regular rotation of power ensures the duties are spread around hence less corruption No assurance of more riches when appointed - ensures right motives for appointed Prestige attached to gov. posts - doge most sought after |
|
|
How did an exemplary political system contribute to the rise of Venice? [2]
|
Ensured continued efficiency and competency of Venice's administration and government despite changing environment (people also had more say)
1. Creation of the Great Council to elect capable members to all councils and to settle disputes between members of diff. councils. Passed laws, meted out punishments etc. Members were from most influential families; expanded till 400 once to increase opp. and say in future 2. Specialisation of duties - mor committees created to handle affairs of state - Council of Forty: law, finance, conage - Senate (60 members): foreign relations and trade expansion w Cof40, commerce, Venetian fleet ops |
|
|
How did effective checks on power contribute to the rise of Venice? [1 + 3 links]
|
Council of Ten: Doge, 6 Ducal Councillors, 3 Heads of the Council of 40 - monitored activities of organisations and officials to ensure no corruption, including Doge - they can arrest (and even exile) or limit powers of the corrupt.
Any plot to damage the gov would be crushed before serious damage could be done Contributed to rise of Venice in securing loyalty of the citizens in convincing them that gov works in interests of state rather than selves. Also continued prosperity as prevented over-concentration of power in one person |
|
|
How did practical policies contribute to the rise of Venice?
How was this practice controversial? |
Accommodation and compromise; attitude of leaders -> state came first
Flexible: traded and were friends with Muslims despite opposition from European Christian states Dubious: collaboration with pirates - paid annual gifts, and Venice ships travelled in convoys to be safe Dubious as seen as endorsing pirates to attack others, hence despised and no one to rescue Venice when it needed it |
|
|
How did a strong navy contribute to the rise of Venice? [4]
|
Allowed Venice to dominate trade and serve as middleman btwn east and west - trade monopoly
Protected Venetian ships from attacks by rival pirates Captured and retained important trading ports in the Adriatic Sea etc Attacked non-Venetian ships to destroy trade competitors e.g. Genoa Forced all ships along eastern Med. Sea to stop at ports controlled by Venice |
|
|
How did citizens' involvement contribute to the rise of Venice? [2]
|
Strong sense of belonging and ownership amongst Venetians - work hard and do their best to improve
Divided Venice into 60-70 districts, each headed by District Head to take care of village issues such as security and taxation Gives the Head a sense of responsibility as he is in charge of his own district |
|
|
What are the economic reasons for the rise of Venice? [6]
|
Attitude towards trade
Trade Monopoly Innovations in maritime technology Efficiency in managing voyages Trade Services - Innovative Practices Industrial Development |
|
|
How did the Venetians' attitude towards trade contribute to the rise of Venice? [3]
|
Built up good relations with countries in new areas and expanded trade = edge over competitors
Skilled diplomats could obtain favourable trading terms (e.g. lower tax rates) Adventurous: Brought highly-priced spices from East Enterprising: Explored new trade routes, supplies and markets |
|
|
How did the Venetians' trade monopoly contribute to the rise of Venice?
- Overcoming trade competition - control of trade (3) |
Venice fully controlled all the trade in the Med. Sea = great advantage over competitors as traders had no choice but to go to her
Overcoming trade competition: Genoa was Venice's biggest competition - eventually defeated by Venice after series of wars in the 14th century = Venice had full control over Med. Sea Control of trade: Venice able to use Arab ports to get variety of luxury goods from East; dominated Med sea; others didn't have that variety so had to buy from Venice at high prices |
|
|
How did Venice's innovations in maritime technology contribute to the rise of Venice? [2]
|
Venetians can trade without hindrance by circumstances = expansion of trade and territorial control
Nautical chart (accurate planning of destination) and mariner's compass (stay on course) - Venetians can travel even in winter and poor visibility Galley: huge innovation - oarsmen reduced dependence on wind - trade and efficiency increases. Merchant + war vessel = deter pirates (In the end, Venice had 45 galleys and 11k seamen) |
|
|
How did Venice's efficiency in managing voyages contribute to its rise? [3]
|
Allowed Venetians to predict when other trades came in and prepared accordingly = increase profits and expansion into many regions
Tech advantage = predict arrival and departure w/ accuracy Senate efficiently organises and monitors schedule Traders travel in convoys = trade in large quantities = profit! |
|
|
How did trade services contribute to the rise of Venice? [3]
|
Attracted traders to Venice due to convenient and efficient services
GIRO banking - no need to carry hard cash of various currencies as can use Venetian banks Double-entry bookkeeping - standardised recording to keep track of purchases and transactions Insurance services |
|
|
How did industrial development contribute to the rise of Venice?
- shipbuilding - Manufacturing - Arts |
More jobs created for the people, Venice prospered by providing new products - attracted traders
Shipbuilding: Rise in industry serving trade industry. Arsenal: Ship-building centralised, efficient, quieter, prevent overcrowding. Became backbone of maritime industry and power Manufacturing in Arts: Jobs created and attracted the skilled in areas like glassmaking, printing, candles, scented soap Also printing industry |
|
|
What was the social reason for the rise of Venice? Elaborate. [4 + 2 link]
|
Attracting Foreign Talent
Expansion of trade and non-trade industries = more jobs hence people came for a better life. Economic migrants: craftsmen, oarsmen Cosmopolitan city so attracted people to come Government gave special privileges and ensured quality standards on work Scholars came as attracted by printing industry HENCE foreigners brought skills and talents = renowned centre for trade and arts that was economically more vibrant. Imparted skills to locals, good labour force |
|
|
How did the geographical location of Venice contribute to the rise of Venice? [2 + 2 link]
|
Strategically located
- lagoon protected from currents of the Adriatic by southern islands - Po river located to west of lagoon Venice could control a trade monopoly in the Med Sea within the lagoon. Safe harbour as protected by Southern Islands |
|
|
What were the internal factors for the fall of Venice? [5]
|
Incompetent leaders (military)
Corruption in the government Overdependence on Mercenaries Complacency of Society Insensitivity towards Neighbouring States |
|
|
How did incompetent (military) leaders lead to the fall of Venice?
[3 + 2 links] |
Fewer leaders: 17th c. plague killed off most nobles, and rotation of office meant no permanent competent leaders
e.g. Nicolo da Canal and Antonino Grimani appointed to lead military = heavy loss against Ottomans Leaders also made decisions based on self-interest rather than in Venice's interest Failed to adapt to changes: larger states had well-informed and knowledgeable leaders, hence Venice became weak and vulnerable and were no longer a strong power Poor decisions = did not help sustain growth and prosperity Poor leaders = Weak defence = unable to protect trade routes |
|
|
How did corruption in the government lead to the fall of Venice? [3 + 1 link]
|
Noble families intermarried for riches = wealth concentrated in few familes = domination
To finance the war, leaders' salaries were suspended and there were high trade taxes, hence civil servants were unhappy and poorer. Some became poorer than others = division in nobility. Poor nobles willing to sell votes, hence leadership = how much nobles could pay to be elected Sale of positions to raise funds = incompetent leaders in gov Served nobility's interests, decisions not made FOR Venice |
|
|
How did the complacency of Venetian society lead to the fall of Venice? [5]
|
Society was indifferent to state matters
Rich: fine living - parades and gambling Citizens not willing to volunteer and serve states e.g. in Navy Easily distracted from daily duties and productive work Commitment level of people reduced drastically -> their own wealth > country's security Saw no need to reinvent themselves, so policies, gov, trade etc. became obsolete Didn't work hard, didn't change themselves = decline |
|
|
How did overdependence on mercenaries lead to the fall of Venice? [4]
|
Absence of loyal army: Venice had barely any citizen army (no conscription for navy as more interest in mainland)
Increase in cost of maintaining army Other states had stronger citizen armies and could pay mercenaries better so mercenaries left to fight for other states E.g. French mercenaries in 1615 once plotted to kill the Senate but stopped by Cof10 Mercenaries cannot be trusted to defend the country; resulted in weakness in military -> decline |
|
|
How did insensitivity towards neighbouring states lead to the fall of Venice? [4 subpts[
|
Venice conquered and dominated weaker states, obstructed trade of other states, and accommodated pirates so that they would attack other states
Hence they were hated, and European states would not help Venice in times of need e.g. against Ottomans despite Ottomans' threat to whole of Europe |
|
|
What were the external factors that led to the fall of Venice? [4]
|
Wars with the Ottoman Empire
Rise of Large States Discovery of New Sea Route Competition of New Trade Rivals |
|
|
How did foreign threats/ the wars with the Ottoman Empire lead to the fall of Venice? (brief) [3+1]
|
1. Involvement in the mainland
WARS WITH OTTOMAN EMPIRE 2. Loss of coastal territories 3. Disruption of trade in the East Also League of Cambrai |
|
|
How did Venice's involvement in the mainland contribute to the fall of Venice? [3]
|
Mainland essential in supplying resources to Venetian traders
Venice tried to switch alliances, play powers off each other to balance power (offered to help one fight against another interchangeably) Led to distrust: Venice built up mercenary army to guard against possible hostility, rivalry among overland states made overland unsafe |
|
|
How did the war with the Ottoman Empire lead to loss of coastal territories and hence the fall of Venice? [2]
|
Ottoman was a great threat; Venice knew she was no match and gave up territories
Venice tried to play European powers against Ottomans = hostility, so when European states launched mili campaign against Ottos, they left Venice to fight alone. Hence she lost Negroponte (an important point) due to fighting on her own |
|
|
How did the war with the Ottoman Empire lead to disruption of trade in the East and hence the fall of Venice? [2]
|
Ottomans acquired territories in the Adriatic Sea, so galleys used to defend against attacks = trade decreased
Ottoman's sea campaigns drained Venice's resources and manpower during seven-year long war -> disrupt trade as well |
|
|
How did the League of Cambrai lead to the fall of Venice? [2]
|
Since the European states came to hate Venice and its power,
a military alliance against Venice was formed (Spain, Hungary, France etc) to reduce power of Venice and divide territories among larger states Cost of wars: drained and weakened Venice's resources, and Venice had to raise taxes to finance mercenaries and replenish weapons |
|
|
How did the rise of large states lead to the fall of Venice? [2]
|
Loss of coastal territories:
Venice sandwiched between France, Spain and England which had more resources and manpower, and Venice had no overlords to help defend it. Hence they lost dominance as the Ottomans controlled the sea ports and large states dominated the land Double threat: France in mainland, Ottomans in coastal Leaders cared more for wealth in mainland; self rather than state Hence defended mainland and lost coastal territories to Ottomans - exposed self to dominance by Otto-controlled coastal territories |
|
|
How did the discovery of new sea routes lead to the fall of Venice? [2]
|
Loss of huge profits:
Portuguese found route around Cape of Good Hope to India and East; the irony is that V considered a canal through Suez but decided too costly. Hence countries could now bypass Venice-controlled territories V survived by bribing Port to let Venice trade in ports; overland trade route went past Portuguese ports so Ports could benefit Loss of trade monopoly Ports captured key areas in the East - as they could get spices directly from India, destroyed Venice's spice monopoly and trade monopoly Obstruction by Portuguese = no longer main sea power in Europe |
|
|
How did competition from new trade rivals lead to the fall of Venice?
New method of trading vs old method? [3] Thirty-Year War [2] |
English EIC and Dutch EIC (VOC)
New method of trading: more resources as traders were backed by state, vs Venice where traders were only given gov permits and left on their own Venice and Port's old method was no match = lost competitive edge Also, Venetian sailors lacked skill to operate ships; large states more successful in negotiating for favourable trading rights in new port Venetians also imposed a protectionist policy; traders repulsed by high foreign duties(costs) so Venice lost trading partners Further disruption of trade through Thirty-Year War: - trading centres destroyed by war, Venice's overland trade passed war areas in Europe hence affected - states preferred to trade with Netherlands, so Netherlands replaced Venice as dominant trading state |
