tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31671374.post78439416730312160..comments2023-10-30T07:10:34.610-07:00Comments on Underbelly: VeniceBucehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16452321114185736762noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31671374.post-78079239239179308122010-05-24T12:31:09.367-07:002010-05-24T12:31:09.367-07:00Not so that Venice lost everything after 1453
Con...Not so that Venice lost everything after 1453<br /><br />Constantinople was virtually nothing since the Venetians ravaged it in 1204 - look at those horses on San Marco (or the real ones) - stolen in 1204 - and the porphyry of the Four Tetrarchs still outside - same "dealer" - etc.<br /><br />While Venice may have lost some immediate advantage to Genoa (who avoided offending the winning side in 1453), Venetian trade with the Turks and the city recovered with a new treaty, Venice remained immensely wealthy, and it conquered quite a bit of Northern Italy as some sort of lachrymose compense - Yes, there were wars and battles and eventually decay later, but not for more than a century<br /><br />Florence, on the other hand, lost out almost immediately - by the end of the century, after the Pazzi conspiracy and later Medici collapse, Florence was well on the way from nearly richest city and most important art center, to somewhere in the lower league tables in both arenas - art central moved to Venice and Rome, and trade/banking importance never returned to pre-1453 levelsBuzzPnoreply@blogger.com