406'09

Saturday, August 22, 2009

Ok here's the next part : Viewpoint question.

1) The discovery of a new sea route to the East in the late 15th century was a setback for Venice. Do you agree? EYA.

I agree that the discovery of a new sea route to the East in the late 15th century was a setback for Venice. The discovery of a new sea route by the Portuguese was a setback as it destroyed Venice's trade monopoly. When Vasco da Gama sailed round the Cape of Good Hope, it led to a short-cut to India. The new trade route meant that the Portuguese and other Europeans could bypass completely the Venetian traders as they could buy their spices directly from India. So, this destroyed her monopoly and reduced her profits which Venice had been earning for centuries. This loss in trade monopoly meant that new trade rivals emerged through the English and Dutch. Venice was unable to compete with them as they had better ships and more financial resources. Losing trade meant that prosperity in Venice decreased tremendously. In this way, the discovery of a new sea route proved to be disastrous for Venice.

However, the discovery of a new sea route was not a total setback for Venice as this did not mean the end-all for trading activities in Venice. It was not a total disaster as Venice had alternatives to conduct trade. The Venetians had access to the overland trade route as the Portuguese did not want the overland trade route used by the Venetians to end completely. Despite the rise of Portuguese power, Venice was still able to play a major role in the East-West trade as the Portuguese officials were willing to allow Venetian traders access to Portuguese-controlled ports in return for money. Furthermore, the discovery of a new sea route was not a total disaster for Venice as she was plauged by even greater problems such as corruption, complacency and loss of territory.

Finally, I disagree that the discovery of a new sea route was a setback as even without the discovery of a new sea route, Venice would have fallen as she had too many internal problems such as corrupt and incapable leaders and a complacent society. As Venice had incapable leaders, they were not able to find other ways to prosper even if they had lose their trade monopoly to the other Europeans. Venice also lacked the ability to adapt to change when she faced external threats like wars and loss of territory. Again, the government was not able to provide solutions to their loss of trade problem - such as cutting a canal through the Suez to link the Mediterranean Sea to the Red Sea; then the discovery of the new sea route would not have been a setback at all. The greatest setback for Venice was not the discovery of a new sea route but it was her inability to adapt to change, to innovate in order to keep up with progress.

2) Did Venice's unique political system help or hinder Venice? EYA.

Venice's unique political system was a help to Venice because Venice had a very strong government. Venice had an exemplary political system - while European states practised feudalism, Venice was a republic as the leaders were elected and this was closest to modern day democracy. Election was based on nomination, balloting and voting to ensure that there was neither nepotism nor incompetent leaders. In the beginning, the leaders were forward looking and capable. Talented people were elected to serve in the government. Practical policies were implemented to respond to the demands of a changing environment eg paying pirates to stop harrassing its trading ships until they built up a strong navy. The Venetian government also accommodated the stronger powers to obtain trading privileges and asserted its power against the weaker ones. The Signoria was formed to check on power such that dictatorship was not allowed so as to secure the loyalty of the people.

Venice's unique political system was a hindrance to Venice because the government was corrupt and incompetent. By the 17th century, Venice lacked the ability to face her external threats and so crumbled very quickly internally due to corruption. To finance wars, the government obtained revenue from the salaries of the civil servants and imposed higher taxes. Poverty caused the poor nobles to vote for the rich who could pay them well. Corruption led to a small group of nobles who held office for fame and wealth rather than contribute to the well-being of Venice. Since political power was concentrated in about 100 men from 30 families, this led to abuse of power as they were only interested in perpetuating their power, prestige and wealth. There were no permanent competent navy and army leaders as no family was allowed to control the government. Incompetent military leaders were punished but Venice failed to realise that it needed to change its system of selected leaders. Venice also did not conscript its citizens into the army and so, relied to heavily on mercenaries for its defence. When Venice faced decline, she could not afford large mercenary armies.

Finally, Venice's political system was more a help than hindrance as it had the greatest impact on the rise of Venice as any society would need capable leaders if it were to rise and grow. It was the exemplary political system that made Venice grow to become a city of trade, wealth and power from the 9th to 15th centuries. The political system led to economic success and social stability. The fall of Venice was not only brought about by the political system but rather by external events sycg as wars with the Ottoman Empire. The complecent people were not able to adapt to new challenges and thus, lost Venice' supremacy.

____________________________________________________________________

Ok that should be all, anyway I really can't predict what will come out for viewpoint, but this is just the 2 essays I found. Good luck!

Melvin

Class 406'09
Jaywalkers
A class who played ~~and worked~~ hard
6:41 PM