A Congress (Northern) Italy? What if the House of Savoy went extinct in the Napoleonic period?

Status
Not open for further replies.
The main branch of the House of Savoy was quite reduced in numbers during the late xviii and early xix century, eventually leading to the Savoia-Carignano branch taking over in 1830 with Carlo Alberto, who would be the father of Italy's first king, Vittorio Emanuele II.

Now, what if both Vittorio Amedeo and Carlo Felice died before the restoration of the Kings of Sardinia to their continental holdings? Sardinia was proverbially malaria infested or they could have been shipwrecked during their return voyage in may 1814.
In any case, let's assume the main line monarchs are dead by the time the Congress of Vienna opens: I would imagine that Piedmont would be occupied by Austria in the meantime.

Carlo Alberto would be only 16 in 1814 and he had been educated in France, having acquired a reputation aso a rebellious young man, close to liberal ideas and not religiously orthodox... Would he be reinstated or would he be seen as a liability on France's borders?

Austria could be described facto forced to annex Piedmont, but the other powers would probably take umbrage at such an expansion of Austrian power in Italy, so could an agreement be found where a Kingdom of Northern Italy is created, in personal union with the Austrian Emperor but having an at least on paper own constitution army and administration, similar to otl's Poland?

Austria would be the unchallenged overlord of Italy, even more than otl, but at the same time the seeds for a unified state would have been sown far earlier than in otl. Unification could only come at this point by virtue of a popular insurrection supported by France while another possible development is the eventual creation of some sort of Austro-Italo-Hungarian triple monarchy...

Tldr if the main branch of the House of Savoy goes extinct by 1814 would Piedmont be taken by Austria or would the Kingdom still go to Charles Albert, at the time a minor educated in Napoleonic France?
 
Last edited:
Austria getting also Piedmont, it a little too much, expecially because that nation it's a good buffer between France and Austria-Hungary.
IMVHO, they will go for Carlo Alberto because there is nobody else and a Kingdom of Italy it's a little too reminescent of the Napoleonic period...naturally there is also the odd change that a too strong diplomatic squabble over the destiny of Piedmont, can convice the other powers that the OTL plan are not feasible and some kind of strong separation between Paris and Wien it's necessary in a manner that will neither fully outrage or satisfy both.

Adding even something similar to OTL Poland will cause a lot of internal problem at A-H as it will quickly develop in something very similar to Hungary.
 
Austria getting also Piedmont, it a little too much, expecially because that nation it's a good buffer between France and Austria-Hungary.
IMVHO, they will go for Carlo Alberto because there is nobody else and a Kingdom of Italy it's a little too reminescent of the Napoleonic period...naturally there is also the odd change that a too strong diplomatic squabble over the destiny of Piedmont, can convice the other powers that the OTL plan are not feasible and some kind of strong separation between Paris and Wien it's necessary in a manner that will neither fully outrage or satisfy both.

Adding even something similar to OTL Poland will cause a lot of internal problem at A-H as it will quickly develop in something very similar to Hungary.
Yeah, it's probably a bridge too far and Austria itself at the time didn't seem that interested in directly integrating more Italian territories. On the other hand with hindsight we can see that the Kingdom of Sardinia acted as anything but a buffer between al Austria and France, quite on the contrary, but at the time it would have been almost impossible to foresee it.
It must be said though that Italy was recognised as being in the Austrian sphere of influence and there could be compensations in Germany or Poland. The problem would be the Austrian political will to do it, because of the internal reasons you mention (chiefly Hungary).

Probably the best way to have an Austrian Italy lies in the xviii century and in a some lucky marriage between Maria Theresa and maybe Charles Emmanuele III...
 
What if Austria were to "surrender" Piedmont to the Grand Duke of Tuscany - IIRC there was talk of removing Corsica from French possession at the Congress (before Talleyrand slithered in), and handing it off to Tuscany. Or, to simplify it still more, Maria Teresa of Modena, Queen of Sardinia, wanted her husband, Vittorio Emanuele I, to abolish Salic Law and so allow her eldest daughter (who was married to the duke of Modena) to succeed.

In the carousel, Modena gets annexed to Milan/Tuscany/Marie Louise's duchy of Parma, and Modena succeeds as king of Sardinia - he's a Habsburg, he's married to the person who's got the best claim (Carlo Alberto is something like sixth cousin in the male line to Carlo Felice, slightly nearer in the female line), and nobody at the Congress can really object to the idea (except perhaps France (who's sort of on the back foot as the defeated power) or Britain (who wouldn't have the power to enforce her objections)).
 
If the Savoyards aren't around to push for its annexation perhaps the Republic of Genoa could be permanently reestablished. As for the Piedmont, maybe it becomes an independent Habsburg state in exchange for more limited gains elsewhere.
 
Very unlikely at best. The Congress of Vienna was all about restoring, as much as possible, the status quo. If Carlo Alberto is the new King of Sardinia, he's going to be restored to Piedmont. No one is going to give it to Austria and who's to say that Vienna would even WANT it? That's a big chunk of territory to try and rule.
 
I would say that all the solutions proposed here are a quite outliers, even leaving aside the POD of having both VE I and Carlo Felice conveniently die.
I freely admit that looking closely at the quality of Italian rulers post-Vienna, the idea of sending all of them in exile and sowing a new crop of kings and dukes would be very attractive but (unfortunately) unworkable; what has been proposed is even worse than OTL: Francis of Habsburg-Este was a deplorable individual and even under close Austrian tutelage did very badly in Modena, promoting him to be king of a much larger state and in a much more sensitive spot as Piedmont-Sardinia would be courting disaster (I know that he's probably the one who would have a decent dynastic chance if VE I and CF die suddenly, but that is why Charles Albert would not be put aside: he would be under strict tutelage (as a matter of fact he was IOTL too) but would still become king. There is still the chance that he gets into a worse mess than OTL around 1820, and in such a case he might abdicate or even take his own life, but even then I think that there is still the line of Savoy-Soissons which might be tapped).
The survival of the republic of Genoa is impossible: not only the pre-revolutionary republic was a basket case, but worse leaving a weak Genoa on the French border would risk opening the door of Italy for France. Not to mention that Sardinia-Piedmont needs Liguria (and in particular Genoa harbor) if it is to be built up as a credible bulwark against French ambitions.
An Austrian Piedmont (plus Genoa for what I said above) would be too much of a plum for Austria when added to Lombardy and Venetia (Sardinia could be given to Tuscany with the royal crown), and at the same time it would create a couple of major headaches: it would be the resurrection of a kingdom of Italy, which could not be milked too easily and would become the lodestar of Italian nationalism, and would give Austria a long common border with France which is certainly not the best thing Austria would want or need.
 
And of course the Savoyards remained in control of the Island of Sardinia.

Did the French ever try to invade it? Had they family been totally dispossessed, would that affect their chances of restoration?
 
The Savoy succession problem would be hard to resolve ITTL : after Carlo Alberto, the next Savoy was Giuseppe (or rather Joseph, as he lived in France) the son of a morganatic marriage of Eugène of Villafranca and Élisabeth-Anne Magon de Boisgarein, a low noblewoman. They struggled some years to have their marriage confirmed, but in the end, King Vittorio Amedeo recognized the marriage, but kept Joseph out of the Savoy succession. In the eyes of the Holy Alliance, Carlo Alberto is the only heir.
 

gurgu

Banned
How a bout a reverse annexation between genoa and savoy? Genoa is restored but as a kingdom ruled by a local genoese noble( maybe the last doge?) and gain all piedmont-savoy-sardinia.
Austria doens't gain more influence on Italy, and Genoa would have the ability to be a buffer zone
 

gurgu

Banned
I don't see why Carlo Alberto can't be king also ITTL.
he was considered to be " rebellious and libertarian" and also had some relations with bonaparte, so if the other 2 king die before they designate him as official heir the wien congress may decide to destroy the kingdom or choose another dynasty more conservative
 
How a bout a reverse annexation between genoa and savoy? Genoa is restored but as a kingdom ruled by a local genoese noble( maybe the last doge?) and gain all piedmont-savoy-sardinia.
Austria doens't gain more influence on Italy, and Genoa would have the ability to be a buffer zone

I feel there was a distinct lack of prestigious enough Genoese nobles at the time, but even if that was the case, the state would probably still be named Kingdom of Sardinia to avoid having to create a new royal titoe out of nothing.
Economical, social and demographical reasons would also quickly shift the balance of the kingdom towards Turin. Genoa had long been a spent force, politically speaking.
 

gurgu

Banned
I feel there was a distinct lack of prestigious enough Genoese nobles at the time, but even if that was the case, the state would probably still be named Kingdom of Sardinia to avoid having to create a new royal titoe out of nothing.
Economical, social and demographical reasons would also quickly shift the balance of the kingdom towards Turin. Genoa had long been a spent force, politically speaking.
my teacher once told me in private that the genoese doges( yes the dogs) were always very prestigious, also the last doge basically humiliated in richness the other members in the wien congress by presenting himsef with a dress full of tiny emmeralds all over....
another example of genoese best moments: in the versailles treaty(1768) when the doge was forced to go to the palace, king louis XIV asked him about the versailles palace : "what is the thing that impressed you the most"
and the doge answered in genoese " mi chi" which means "me here"

so if the republic was decaying, it wasn't the same for it's doges and goverment, rember that the bank of saint george was one of the most rich in europe and offical bank of spain...

also if they want to keep the name the genoese would rebel again so in might change to something less specific as kingdom of West Italy( italy was still considere only the north partof the peninsula) or kingdom of sardinia-liguria
 
In regards to Liguria, is there a possibility for the Grimaldi family of Monaco to sell off their original holdings to France and be promptly selected as rulers of the new Genoese state?
 
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top