AH Challenge:Have a United Italy with an colonial empire

Well, now; on TTL, Christopher Columbus did actually approach the Sforza family in search of some financial backing for his trip westward. Suppose we say that the Sforza family did back him; Then the Sforzas et. al. would have been going over to the New World to stake out territorial claims from 1492 onward.
 
Well, now; on TTL, Christopher Columbus did actually approach the Sforza family in search of some financial backing for his trip westward. Suppose we say that the Sforza family did back him; Then the Sforzas et. al. would have been going over to the New World to stake out territorial claims from 1492 onward.

Is New World wealth going to be enough to fund a war of conquest in Italy? Remember that at this time, the Pope is still a force to be reckoned with, Naples belongs to a foreign crown, and Venice is a Power.
 

Germaniac

Donor
I don't think the Duchy of Milan was powerful enough to colonize the new world, non the less conquer France... Spain was a large and powerful nation when it began its conquest of the new world.
 
Perhaps an earlier POD would work. Maybe someone takes Leonardo's eraly tank idea and uses it along with a strong army and reunites that penisula. Then listens to Columbus and starts to set up a colonial empire
 
This won't work before the era of nationalism. Prior to that, the Italians were fervent in their belief in the ideal of preventing any one state controlling Italy and if one state threatened to become too powerful, they would all gang up to bring down the threat - and would use external nations to help them if they needed, hence the Holy League wars of the 16th century. It is somewhat possible for a non-Italian state (read: France, maybe Spain but better France) to impose themselves if they crucially have luck on their side, but no Italian state was ever going to win a pan-Italian war of conquest before the era of nationalism because the Italians simply did not want to be part of an Italian nation-state.
 
This won't work before the era of nationalism. Prior to that, the Italians were fervent in their belief in the ideal of preventing any one state controlling Italy and if one state threatened to become too powerful, they would all gang up to bring down the threat - and would use external nations to help them if they needed, hence the Holy League wars of the 16th century. It is somewhat possible for a non-Italian state (read: France, maybe Spain but better France) to impose themselves if they crucially have luck on their side, but no Italian state was ever going to win a pan-Italian war of conquest before the era of nationalism because the Italians simply did not want to be part of an Italian nation-state.


This is exactly right. Milan in particular would also have needed to rely on mercenari and condottieri in order to have any sort of offensive force. The problem is that a unified Italy is BAD for the mercenaries' business. In short: the POD needs to be after 1500 AT LEAST.
 
Does Rome count? Unified Italy, used military and settler colonies to pacify a large empire across three continents. Or are we talking New World colonies?
 
This sort of depends on your definition of "decent sized." By my definition, Italy had a "decent sized" colonial empire in Africa in OTL, holding Libya, Eritrea, Italian Somaliland, and (for a short time) Ethiopia. Granted, that was in the late 1800s and early 1900s, which is probably later than you wanted in your challenge, but you never actually specified a date. The only problem here is getting them some land in the Americas.

In the 1890s, Italy was looking to expand (as evidenced by the First Italo-Ethiopian War). Maybe Spain is smarter and realizes that they are going to lose their last few American colonies (Cuba and Puerto Rico) soon whether they like it or not, so they try to find a buyer and Italy steps in. I know it isn't a terribly likely scenario, since the US would probably snatch up anything Spain wanted to sell. The US didn't want any more colonialism in the Western Hemisphere than there already was, but maybe if they don't see Italy as a threat (which few nations did after the previously mentioned disaster in Ethiopia) then they'd let the deal go through. So does an OTL Italian Empire + Cuba and Puerto Rico qualify as "decent sized"?
 
The best POD would be Gian Galeazzo Visconti not dieing of the plague in 1402: he's still in early middle age (could survive another 15 years or so) and is at the top of his power: lord of most of northern and central Italy, his war with Bologna and Florence is very close to a successful end and the year before (1401) he did dfeat emperor Rupert's attept to regain control of Italy.

Give him another 15 years and he might consolidate his possessions and possibly even gain (or buy from the empire) the crown of Italy. There would also be no succession crisis, since both his sons would achieve major age.

If he's followed by a able successor (and Filippo Maria Visconti was not bad) the kingdom of Italy could be consolidated by mid 1400s.

There is the problem of Venice, but TTL the Venetian mainland party (partido de terrafirma) would be stillborn, and Venice would not be too likely to be involved in adventures in Northern Italy: it's rather likely that the new kings would employ diplomacy, subversion and military threats to gain control of the Serenissima, possibly as hereditary Doges. I'm quite convinced that it would be to the ultimately benefit of Venice too, since would obviate to their traditional problem of insufficient manpower.

As far as the kingdom of Naples is concerned, I believe the best outcome wold be a merging with the kingdom of Italy on occasion of some succession crisis.

By the end of th 15th century you have a united Italy, and the Renaissance would be in full bloom; and this would be an Italy not devastated by the wars of OTL, with the navies of Genoa and Venice working together rather than fighting. There's also the added bonus of the Great Schism, and this means that also Rome could be achievable.

When the age of explorations starts, Italy miht play a role: possibly Colombo (or his TTL alter-ego) would be sponsored by the king of Italy; the alternative might be an expansion along the Red sea (either through a commercial penetration/political control of Egypt or through an entente, if not an outright alliance, with the Ottomans): the Italian navy would clash with the Portuguese in the Indian Ocean for the control of the spices trade, and maybe ultimately the Italians get to America from the Pacific side :): Italian California anyone?
 
The alternative to the above is a kind of mirror image: Gian Galeazzo dies on schedule, and Venice gets involved on terrafirma. Only this time they are more successful and the mainland party becomes dominant. It takes some vision (recognising that the Ottomansare the rising power in the Balkans and siding with them in order to concentrate on the mainland expansion) and obviously some luck: in this ATL Venice would dominate all of Italy by the end of the 15th century, but the bonus would be an earlier penetration in the Red sea (Egypt falls two generations earlier to a joint Ottoman/Venetian attempt) and Venice would be well established in the Indian Ocean before the Portuguese arrive.
 
I still think that any such TL would simply see the Pope eventually step in, commissioning the French and the Holy Roman Emperor, with others, to march in and destroy the aggressor...as happened IOTL.
 
I still think that any such TL would simply see the Pope eventually step in, commissioning the French and the Holy Roman Emperor, with others, to march in and destroy the aggressor...as happened IOTL.

You forget that the starting point I suggested is just in the middle of the Great Schism: the papacy is not at itsbest right now (or should I say 'the papacies"? :))

The HRE is also at a low point, and I mentioned Rupert being sent back to Germany with ringing ears in 1401.

There are not really unsurmontable external problems: the real issue is stabilizing the Visconti's lordships and forging them into a single kingdom. And having at least one strong heir.
 
Still, just because the Pope can't be ringleader doesn't mean that the other Italian states will roll over and let themselves be taken anywhichway Milan wants it. I just think that Italy was too volatile and contrary an area to allow one of their own to conquer it - eventually that state will be brought down in a hail of fire.
 
Still, just because the Pope can't be ringleader doesn't mean that the other Italian states will roll over and let themselves be taken anywhichway Milan wants it. I just think that Italy was too volatile and contrary an area to allow one of their own to conquer it - eventually that state will be brought down in a hail of fire.

Make up your mind: first it was an external intervention, stirred up by the pope; now it the "volatility and contrariety" of Italy.

In truth, Gian Galeazzo would be facing the classic problems of any lord who has conquered by force of arms and has to pacify and integrate the new possessions in his dominions. He may succeed or not: however the fact that IOTL no one managed to attain the crown of Italy does not mean that it is impossible. The kings of France overcame certainy much greater difficulties before forging France into a centralised state. To a minor extent, the HRE emperors were significantly less successful, but still managed to keep the imperial structure together.

Gian Galeazzo is a proficient enough leader, well above the ones who were opposing him. To his luck, the international scene is very favorable. He's plenty of money (a rarity on the European scene) and once Florence is conquered (when he died the surrender was already being negotiated) his treasury will be even more full. Give him an extra lease on life, and he may succeed in forging something more than a personal dominion; if he's succeeded by an able ruler (and Giovanni Maria was that) a kingdom can be born.
 
Gian Galeazzo is a proficient enough leader, well above the ones who were opposing him. To his luck, the international scene is very favorable. He's plenty of money (a rarity on the European scene) and once Florence is conquered (when he died the surrender was already being negotiated) his treasury will be even more full. Give him an extra lease on life, and he may succeed in forging something more than a personal dominion; if he's succeeded by an able ruler (and Giovanni Maria was that) a kingdom can be born.

My understanding, however, is that his will divided up his domains among his heirs. This doesn't sound like a man with thoughts of forging anything like a united Italy, does it?
 
My understanding, however, is that his will divided up his domains among his heirs. This doesn't sound like a man with thoughts of forging anything like a united Italy, does it?

You're quite right in that: in 1401 he's still the classic Signore, the personal lord of a (large) number of cities. I'd like to give him another 10-15 years, in a paramount position in Italy as no lord has enjoyed since the previous millennium; and also a chance to see his sons grow up. You should not forget that he was also the guy who bought from the emperor the title of duke of Milan: it shows that he had plans.

Mind, it's a long shot: but as I said before he's also the right man in the right time. Might happen.
Note that even if he does not manage to consolidate his domains, and in the end he still splits them among his sons (who will be known to him as adult men, btw, and not just children) a "normal" succession(s) would at least change the history of Venice (for good, IMHO): the lure of expanding into the Italian mainland will not be there, and the Serenissima will concentrate on the East and its traffics

PS: anyay I thoughtthat we were on an AH forum here. Where's the fun if anything goes deterministically as per OTL?
 
It seems possible to me. In my old French TL I was going to have Florence set up trading posts in the Carribean. I think a "kingdom of Northern Italy" could have been a player in the New World, at least for awhile.
 
Top