The Venetian Reconquest of Monemvasia — Resettlement and Revival (1690 — 1715)
In 1685 the Venetian doge, Francesco Morosini, began a campaign to reconquer the Morea. This signaled a general revival of the fortunes of the "most serene city". By 1690, except for Monemvasia, Venice controlled the entire peninsula. Eventually the old tactic of bombarding the fortress while starving out the populace succeeded.
After a siege of fourteen months, the city surrendered, and the Venetians once again occupied Monemvasia. Remains of the artillery used for this siege can still be found in the hills of the mainland opposite the cliffs, as well as further south near the village of Hagia Paraskevi, and below the church of Hagia Thekla near Nomia.
After the Venetian reconquered the Morea, Monemvasia became the seat for the government of the territory of Malvasia; following an adminstrative reform, it became the seat of the Venetian provincial government of Laconia. Numerous officials resided there, including a "provveditore" for administration and war, a "rettore" for justice, and a "camerlengo" for finance. These men all answered to the "general provveditore" of the Morea, who governed from Mistra. In the city
itself, the old magisterial city council came back into power.
The greatly reduced Greek population took part neither in government nor in defense. Foreign mercenaries had to continue in the country to maintain the Venetian power. One of the most important military units for this purpose was quartered in Monemvasia.
The Venetians had recaptured a country devastated and depopulated by a long war. The Morea could not even manage a sufficent surplus to defray the costs of government and defense. To free itself from this financial burden, Venice determined to increase the size of the population. This would in turn provide the manpower to farm the land, produce a surplus, and make the Morea profitable. To this end, the Venetians brought in colonists from other parts of the Mediterranean. For example, Albanians settled as shepherds in the immediate vicinity of Monemvasia. Settlers in the city itself came particularly from Crete. Also, descendants of former residents of the city, who had fled in 1540 at the time of the surrender to the Turks, now returned from various Venetian dependencies. Included in this group was the family of the physician, Andreas Likinios, known especially for having the church of Hagios Nicholaos built in 1703.
By 1701 the Venetians had so repopulated the area, that the territory of Malvasia, that is, the city of Monemvasia together with sixteen surrounding villages, contained 2067 families, with a total population of 9003. The population of the territory of Malvasia thus made up about five percent of the total population of the Morea. By contrast, in 1570 the city of Monemvasia alone had 8000 families with about 32.000 to 40.000 inhabitants. This clearly shows the population decline of the previous century. However, another thirteen localities in the vicinity remained completely depopulated. Thus even with the successful repopulation effort, Monemvasia by no means completely regained its former importance. Venice was the legal successor to Turkish interests in the Morea, and received the land that had formerly belonged to the Turks. Churches and private individuals were allowed to retain the property they had held under Turkish rule. Through investiture, the Venetians planned to expand cultivation, and thus develop more tax revenue. The fact that the income from tithes increased is evidence of the success of this policy. The Venetians collected not only tithes, but also excise taxes on wine, spirits, olive oil, tobacco, and salt. In 1691 the territory of Malvasia contributed 17 percent of the total Venetian revenue from the Morea. During the later years of Venetian control, the profits that the Morea managed to produce were paid into the account of the Venetian fleet, which protected the dependencies of the Republic, and which had earlier helped subsidize the governing and defense of the Morea.
In relation to their population size, Monemvasia and its hinterland contributed more than their share to Venice's income. This is an indication that the city's renewed importance in business and commerce had increased the residents' prosperity, and had brought about a certain level of wealth.
During the first period of Turkish rule, Monemvasia's significant commercial interchange was with Alexandria in Egypt. Now, however, Monemvasia could export the country's products through its harbor to the West. Direct commercial contact was allowed only during a period of transition. Thereafter, Venice stipulated that all goods had to be exported to her alone. The first product that had to be sold through Venetian agency was olive oil, and further commercial restrictions followed. English and French merchants, therefore, turned to Turkish regions, where these restrictions did not apply, and where, consequently, the same goods could be had for less money. The merchants of Monemvasia, with their commerce totally directed toward Venice, were placed at a further disadvantage by the fact that their money, the sequin, was exchanged at an unfavorable rate in Venice. This meant that, for the same amount of money, they purchased fewer goods in Venice than they could have done in the Levant.
Venetian Map by Coronelli from 1689
But despite these obstacles and detriments to commerce, the merchants of Monemvasia made sufficient profit, so that these twenty five years of the second Venetian rule saw considerable construction within the city. Both the churches and private individuals paid for this building boom, which has left an imprint on the city to this day. This Venetian period saw the construction of two large churches and the rebuilding of the largest church of the lower city, all in the Italo Byzantine style. The new wave of construction also produced beautiful Renaissance palaces, which are still conspicuous within the city, as well as magnificent patrician residences, like the one known today as the "Stellakis" house (see the Description of the City below).
It was easier for the city dwellers to undertake construction projects than it was for the rural peasantry to do so, for the latter had to provision the garrison quartered in the city. Every eighteen peasant households had to provide food for one soldier. The urban citizenry, on the other hand, no longer had to pay for maintaining the city's fortifications, for these costs now came out of general tax revenues.
