AHC: Largest Italian Empire

Have Italy expand across Africa (or the globe) spreading Italian culture and language across the planet. The bigger the better.

I made a timeline in which Cesare Borgia created a Neo-Roman/Italian State in Renaissance Italy. Have him become a mercenary commander earlier on instead of a cardinal and boom you have a recipe for some serious Borgia Dynasties.
 
I made a timeline in which Cesare Borgia created a Neo-Roman/Italian State in Renaissance Italy. Have him become a mercenary commander earlier on instead of a cardinal and boom you have a recipe for some serious Borgia Dynasties.
You get around to finishing it? Not trying to be rude but I hate finding a good TL only to find it dropped part way through
 
You get around to finishing it? Not trying to be rude but I hate finding a good TL only to find it dropped part way through

Eurgh I'm really sorry, I tend to focus heavily on each individual year in terms of politics (With the Borgia's politics and affairs in Europe are in turmoil)

But its 48 parts long + extra content so you should be able to get some enjoyment out of it!

https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/cesare-borgia-a-restored-rome-timeline.410232/
 
How do you get a united Italy with the pope still around as political player?
I seriously doubt he'd be happy with a small papal state and furthermore a defenceless pope couldn't be autonomous. They didn't have separation of church and state back then and controlling him would be a significant influence on everyone else.

This requires other major changes to be viable.
I think a continued Avignonese Captivity can be a solution.
 
That would be a theocracy, which is never a good solution.
Caesaropapism is defined as the subordination of the church to a secular ruler.
In its most extreme form, the secular ruler is also the religious head of the church; it does not need to go to such extreme though, not even as far as a formal subordination provided that the secular control is secure enough.

Sorry, misunderstood the term. In any case, would other European states still recognise the authority of the pope if he's subordinate to another secular ruler?
Would we see religious schisms? Decentralisation? The Church retreating in a purely spiritual role?

By the way, another option would be a Latin Symphonia.
 
Sorry, misunderstood the term. In any case, would other European states still recognise the authority of the pope if he's subordinate to another secular ruler?
Would we see religious schisms? Decentralisation? The Church retreating in a purely spiritual role?

By the way, another option would be a Latin Symphonia.
Any or all of the possibilities you enumerate, with the only exception of Symphonia which looks to me a very nice and unachievable castle-in-the-sky.
In my original comment I had mentioned 1400, and it was not a random date I picked out of the hat: between the Avignonese papacy and the Great Western Schism Latin church was in disarray for one hundred years, its grasp on the Patrimonium Petri very weak and even the control of Rome was lost for most of the time.
Gian Galeazzo Visconti died suddenly and untimely in September 1402 when most of northern and central Italy was under his control (even Florence - besieged by the Visconti armies - was negotiating a surrender). Given the parlous state of the HRE, the French troubles (the third installment of the Hundred Years war is going to start soon) and the forthcoming succession crisis in Aragon none of the transalpine powers is in a position to intervene in Italy. When the Great Western Schism will be settled by a Council (IOTL the Council of Pisa failed, and only the Council of Constance managed to patch up things), a Visconti in control of all the former papal lands as well of a large number of other cities will be a major player and will probably get his way: a reform of the church, renouncing the richness and the pomp of earthly power and embracing a spiritual renewal, most likely topped with a diminishing of papal powers and a more counciliaristic approach. This would be beneficial for all the secular rulers (more power in the appointment of bishops, and sooner rather than later the possibility of taxation of Church properties), and possibly would also butterfly away (or at least mitigate the impact of) Reformation.
 
Because there could be infinite possibilities to imagine an Italian "Empire" from 476 to 1525 (because I am oriented to believe after Pavia the chances for an unified Italy, presupposition for the AHC fulfillment, would shrink until 1796 (first Napoleonic campaign in Italy), I would too try to exploit the 1861 route. So my ideas:

  • Cavour not dying... Okay is paramount. So if I would be Cavour, what would be my agenda? 1) Striking a deal with Garibaldi. Not about offering him the command of the entire Italian Army of course, but negotiating with him the terms of integration of the Redshirts with the Piedmontese army. Favouring more meritocracy so more Redshirts officers, included commoners... Enough to allow Cavour and Garibaldi to stay in good terms. Maybe can even mollify Garibaldi enough to go in America to fight in the Union through Cavour's mediation (because Garibaldi asked quite much to the Nordists to go fight with them)... So no Aspromonte and lesser issues with France. 2) Avoid or at least take better the "Piedmontization" of Italy... I am not sure if Cavour would go fully with it, but I confide he would have enough political acumen to reduce the integration shock. 3) find ways to recalibrate the national debt without making pay the South for it. This is the major issue I guess. The only solution I think is a more fair as possible redistribution of the incomes so that investments would fall equally or not so different between North and South.
  • Obviously strike a better deal with Bismarck, without irking too much Nappy III. And winning and winning well the third war of Italian independence, so victory at Custoza, victory at Lissa, Garibaldi returned in time from America taking Trent, and the Italian would take the final push on Triest. Taking Trentin (not Alto Adige), Veneto and Friuli and a bit of Istria (without Fiume). Enough to end the Risorgimento already and not having further issues with Austria.
  • Going in 1865 for Aceh, under the invitation of an Italian adventurer which I mentioned time ago in an old post and had interests where... If Vittorio Emanuele II who was interested would pull enough leverage over Cavour... Maybe he could agree to distract the European countries from other targets (Rome, Veneto). Paradoxally the initial protectorate on Aceh would be a greater boost for controlling the Suez route... the Italian government wrestling shares of the Suez Canal, and therefore wrestling influence in Egypt from Britain (maybe propped by France initially).
  • Staying allied with Prussia even after 1866, and wait for the French-Russian war and march to the Rhone... Seizing back Savoy and Nice claiming "France with the peace of Villafranca violated the agreements of Plomberies and forced us to cede those regions, and we will reclaim them back". And naturally, Corsica as true war prize. And on the top, seizing every French share of the Suez Canal, ousting France out of Egypt. Last, when the Commune happens, take the chance to invade Rome.
  • Further snubbing France by putting for first the protectorate over Tunisia. But this would likely irk definitely Paris and also London would start to be wary. Still the Bismarck diplomacy should help to assuage issues for many years.
  • With growing interests in Egypt and Aceh, Italy would be more active in Eastern Africa. From Massaua, going as OTL with Eritrea then Somalia, but may eventually wrestle even Dijibuti and Somaliland at the African conference of Berlin. Eventually even start to penetrate into Sudan (at cost to later face the Mahdi). If after 1871 Italy is the majority shareholder of Suez, Egypt should be pratically at her feet. No British Cairo to Cape dream... Maybe this may butterfly the Boer wars. Naturally, victory at Adua to force Ethiopia into capitulation, get rid of Menelik, and on the path of the British Raj declare Umberto I "Emperor of Ethiopia". Italian East Africa pointed to be the Italian India.
  • A stronger Italy with a presence in Aceh could seize some Pacific island, and being in good terms with the US, seize Sun May Bay and exercise a first commercial penetration in China. During the Boxer rebellion the Italian role in the defence of the Legations (aside with a larger intervention) will be acknowledged, and obtain all of Tientsin as concession. So Italy would have her Hong Kong.
  • Italy would be in dire tension with the OE since 1877. The Russians, impressed by the Italian rise, would search an agreement to gobble the Turks. Italy could likely invade Albania and puppet it, free Montenegro (and puppet it), invade Libya already from Tunisia (and declare her colony) then seize Crete and arrive to Rhodes. Italian-Russian expansion would stop before the first would plan to seize Cyprus and dare to land in Palestine and the second to march on Constantinople, because the Concert would meddle, but they would more or less keep what they gained. Greece would however have an uneasy relation with Italy since then.
Stopping here at the eve of 1900, but more or less Italy built a respectable, hopefully not ABS, overseas empire in 40 years.
 
Last edited:
Because there could be infinite possibilities to imagine an Italian "Empire" from 476 to 1525 (because I am oriented to believe after Pavia the chances for an unified Italy, presupposition for the AHC fulfillment, would shrink until 1796 (first Napoleonic campaign in Italy), I would too try to exploit the 1861 route. So my ideas:

  • Cavour not dying... Okay is paramount. So if I would be Cavour, what would be my agenda? 1) Striking a deal with Garibaldi. Not about offering him the command of the entire Italian Army of course, but negotiating with him the terms of integration of the Redshirts with the Piedmontese army. Favouring more meritocracy so more Redshirts officers, included commoners... Enough to allow Cavour and Garibaldi to stay in good terms. Maybe can even mollify Garibaldi enough to go in America to fight in the Union through Cavour's mediation (because Garibaldi asked quite much to the Nordists to go in Italy)... So no Aspromonte and lesser issues with France. 2) Avoid or at least take better the "Piedmontization" of Italy... I am not sure if Cavour would go fully with it, but I confide he would have enough political acumen to reduce the integration shock. 3) find ways to recalibrate the national debt without making pay the South for it. This is the major issue I guess. The only solution I think is a more fair as possible redistribution of the incomes so that investments would fall equally or not so different between North and South.
  • Obviously strike a better deal with Bismarck, without irking too much Nappy III. And winning and winning well the third war of Italian independence, so victory at Custoza, victory at Lissa, Garibaldi returned in time from America taking Trent, and the Italian would take the final push on Triest. Taking Trentin (not Alto Adige), Veneto and Friuli and a bit of Istria (without Fiume). Enough to end the Risorgimento already and not having further issues with Austria.
  • Going in 1865 for Aceh, under the invitation of an Italian adventurer which I mentioned time ago in an old post and had interests where... If Vittorio Emanuele II who was interested would pull enough leverage over Cavour... Maybe he could agree to distract the European countries from other targets (Rome, Veneto). Paradoxally the initial protectorate on Aceh would be a greater boost for controlling the Suez route... the Italian government wrestling shares of the Suez Canal, and therefore wrestling influence in Egypt from Britain (maybe propped by France initially).
  • Staying allied with Prussia even after 1866, and wait for the French-Russian war and march to the Rhone... Seizing back Savoy and Nice claiming "France with the peace of Villafranca violated the agreements of Plomberies and forced us to cede those regions, and we will reclaim them back". And naturally, Corsica as true war prize. And on the top, seizing every French share of the Suez Canal, ousting France out of Egypt. Last, when the Commune happens, take the chance to invade Rome.
  • Further snubbing France by putting for first the protectorate over Tunisia. But this would likely irk definitely Paris and also London would start to be wary. Still the Bismarck diplomacy should help to assuage issues for many years.
  • With growing interests in Egypt and Aceh, Italy would be more active in Eastern Africa. From Massaua, going as OTL with Eritrea then Somalia, but may eventually wrestle even Dijibuti and Somaliland at the African conference of Berlin. Eventually even start to penetrate into Sudan (at cost to later face the Mahdi). If after 1871 Italy is the majority shareholder of Suez, Egypt should be pratically at her feet. No British Cairo to Cape dream... Maybe this may butterfly the Boer wars. Naturally, victory at Adua to force Ethiopia into capitulation, get rid of Menelik, and on the path of the British Raj declare Umberto I "Emperor of Ethiopia". Italian East Africa pointed to be the Italian India.
  • A stronger Italy with a presence in Aceh could seize some Pacific island, and being in good terms with the US, seize Sun May Bay and exercise a first commercial penetration in China. During the Boxer rebellion the Italian role in the defence of the Legations (aside with a larger intervention) will be acknowledged, and obtain all of Tientsin as concession. So Italy would have her Hong Kong.
  • Italy would be in dire tension with the OE since 1877. The Russians, impressed by the Italian rise, would search an agreement to gobble the Turks. Italy could likely invade Albania and puppet it, free Montenegro (and puppet it), invade Libya already from Tunisia (and declare her colony) then seize Crete and arrive to Rhodes. Italian-Russian expansion would stop before the first would plan to seize Cyprus and dare to land in Palestine and the second to march on Constantinople, because the Concert would meddle, but they would more or less keep what they gained. Greece would however have an uneasy relation with Italy since then.
Stopping here at the eve of 1900, but more or less Italy built a respectable, hopefully not ABS, overseas empire in 40 years.

I am loving this roadmap... where does it go from there I wonder?
 
I am loving this roadmap... where does it go from there I wonder?

Let's see... Italy+Germany Vs France+Britain+OE so far. Probably AH will still ally with Germany in the end. Being in better relations with Italy after 1878 because Rome vouched for Bosnia going to Austria. Russia... Don't know. But with an Italy entangled in China, I wonder if in case of a Russian-Japanese war would fling... Maybe still towards Russia. But the Balkans would be a mess still especially if Italy got entangled already in Albania, useful just to confirm the Italian mastery over Adriatic especially after a Lissa victory. But if would be used as commercial base towards the Balkans, well things may get heated soon as there would be three competitors rather than two. Or even more. Greece may fling towards Britain, France or Russia, unless Italy would take some bargain by ceding Crete (for what? Ionian islands? Economical monopoly?). Serbia may fling towards Italy or Russia. Bulgaria can likely fling towards Italy. Romania... Probably Russia but why not Italy as well?

Naturally... In case of collapse of the Balkans and eventual Great War, Italy can carve a system of allies and puppets as long to destroy Serbia's panslavic ambitions. Annexing just Dalmatia, can become the arbiter of the region.

Meanwhile I forgot this bullet point to add in my list:

  • Make everything to keep Amedeo of Savoia-Aosta as King of Spain, so to build a profitable Ital-Spanish cooperation. And well a bit more of prestige for the house of Savoia won't hurt in front to the other four major houses of Europe, for Italian benefit. This however may bring headaches about the Cuban war and Morocco later in Rome...
 
Let's see... Italy+Germany Vs France+Britain+OE so far. Probably AH will still ally with Germany in the end. Being in better relations with Italy after 1878 because Rome vouched for Bosnia going to Austria. Russia... Don't know. But with an Italy entangled in China, I wonder if in case of a Russian-Japanese war would fling... Maybe still towards Russia. But the Balkans would be a mess still especially if Italy got entangled already in Albania, useful just to confirm the Italian mastery over Adriatic especially after a Lissa victory. But if would be used as commercial base towards the Balkans, well things may get heated soon as there would be three competitors rather than two. Or even more. Greece may fling towards Britain, France or Russia, unless Italy would take some bargain by ceding Crete (for what? Ionian islands? Economical monopoly?). Serbia may fling towards Italy or Russia. Bulgaria can likely fling towards Italy. Romania... Probably Russia but why not Italy as well?

Naturally... In case of collapse of the Balkans and eventual Great War, Italy can carve a system of allies and puppets as long to destroy Serbia's panslavic ambitions. Annexing just Dalmatia, can become the arbiter of the region.

Meanwhile I forgot this bullet point to add in my list:

  • Make everything to keep Amedeo of Savoia-Aosta as King of Spain, so to build a profitable Ital-Spanish cooperation. And well a bit more of prestige for the house of Savoia won't hurt in front to the other four major houses of Europe, for Italian benefit. This however may bring headaches about the Cuban war and Morocco later in Rome...

I wonder if ties to Austria might be tense, given Italy would absolutely want to turn the Adriatic into an Italian lake.

That said, they would have ambitions against the Ottomans - something that would come in handy trying to get the Greeks on their side, and far more importantly, the Russians.
 
I wonder if ties to Austria might be tense, given Italy would absolutely want to turn the Adriatic into an Italian lake.

That said, they would have ambitions against the Ottomans - something that would come in handy trying to get the Greeks on their side, and far more importantly, the Russians.

Well, there were reasons if AH was a continental but never a true naval power... Would be wiser for Wien accept a compromise over commercial reassurances in the Adriatic, especially if Triest would be
lost. This may bring eventually over large AH investments in Croatia and Dalmatia (rails, harbours, arsenals, forts), to be consolidated after the snatch of Bosnia. This however may mark an AH resurgence or being a major cause of her fall. Especially if during the Ausgleith, the issue of Fiume would bring tensions.

Effectively, a post 1878 Balkans may bring issues between Italy, Austria, Russia and the OE. Depending also how much Bismarck would mediate for the region, knowing that he wouldn't never put Germany to the condition to fight a war in the Balkans. I guess he would be friendly with an Italy who helped the Prussians twice and weren't a dead weight, also for keeping at bay France; but he needed to keep good Austria as well and probably limit Italian adventurism in the Balkans, even if Rome would be satisfied with colonial and Mediterranean gains. Who knows, maybe Italy doesn't need even to keep troops in Albania and Montenegro, those countries would arrive to eat from her hand in a way or another hence defusing tensions for a while. Unlikely that AH, Greece, Serbia or Bulgaria will attempt to lay an hand over Montenegro and Albania without forcing a reply from Italy.

Cyprus may be a very delicate issue by the way. I don't see Italy snatch it in time for 1878, maybe during the new Greek-Turk war... Maybe Italy can agree to help Greece for a price.
 
Because there could be infinite possibilities to imagine an Italian "Empire" from 476 to 1525 (because I am oriented to believe after Pavia the chances for an unified Italy, presupposition for the AHC fulfillment, would shrink until 1796 (first Napoleonic campaign in Italy), I would too try to exploit the 1861 route. So my ideas:

  • Cavour not dying... Okay is paramount. So if I would be Cavour, what would be my agenda? 1) Striking a deal with Garibaldi. Not about offering him the command of the entire Italian Army of course, but negotiating with him the terms of integration of the Redshirts with the Piedmontese army. Favouring more meritocracy so more Redshirts officers, included commoners... Enough to allow Cavour and Garibaldi to stay in good terms. Maybe can even mollify Garibaldi enough to go in America to fight in the Union through Cavour's mediation (because Garibaldi asked quite much to the Nordists to go fight with them)... So no Aspromonte and lesser issues with France. 2) Avoid or at least take better the "Piedmontization" of Italy... I am not sure if Cavour would go fully with it, but I confide he would have enough political acumen to reduce the integration shock. 3) find ways to recalibrate the national debt without making pay the South for it. This is the major issue I guess. The only solution I think is a more fair as possible redistribution of the incomes so that investments would fall equally or not so different between North and South.
  • Obviously strike a better deal with Bismarck, without irking too much Nappy III. And winning and winning well the third war of Italian independence, so victory at Custoza, victory at Lissa, Garibaldi returned in time from America taking Trent, and the Italian would take the final push on Triest. Taking Trentin (not Alto Adige), Veneto and Friuli and a bit of Istria (without Fiume). Enough to end the Risorgimento already and not having further issues with Austria.
  • Going in 1865 for Aceh, under the invitation of an Italian adventurer which I mentioned time ago in an old post and had interests where... If Vittorio Emanuele II who was interested would pull enough leverage over Cavour... Maybe he could agree to distract the European countries from other targets (Rome, Veneto). Paradoxally the initial protectorate on Aceh would be a greater boost for controlling the Suez route... the Italian government wrestling shares of the Suez Canal, and therefore wrestling influence in Egypt from Britain (maybe propped by France initially).
  • Staying allied with Prussia even after 1866, and wait for the French-Russian war and march to the Rhone... Seizing back Savoy and Nice claiming "France with the peace of Villafranca violated the agreements of Plomberies and forced us to cede those regions, and we will reclaim them back". And naturally, Corsica as true war prize. And on the top, seizing every French share of the Suez Canal, ousting France out of Egypt. Last, when the Commune happens, take the chance to invade Rome.
  • Further snubbing France by putting for first the protectorate over Tunisia. But this would likely irk definitely Paris and also London would start to be wary. Still the Bismarck diplomacy should help to assuage issues for many years.
  • With growing interests in Egypt and Aceh, Italy would be more active in Eastern Africa. From Massaua, going as OTL with Eritrea then Somalia, but may eventually wrestle even Dijibuti and Somaliland at the African conference of Berlin. Eventually even start to penetrate into Sudan (at cost to later face the Mahdi). If after 1871 Italy is the majority shareholder of Suez, Egypt should be pratically at her feet. No British Cairo to Cape dream... Maybe this may butterfly the Boer wars. Naturally, victory at Adua to force Ethiopia into capitulation, get rid of Menelik, and on the path of the British Raj declare Umberto I "Emperor of Ethiopia". Italian East Africa pointed to be the Italian India.
  • A stronger Italy with a presence in Aceh could seize some Pacific island, and being in good terms with the US, seize Sun May Bay and exercise a first commercial penetration in China. During the Boxer rebellion the Italian role in the defence of the Legations (aside with a larger intervention) will be acknowledged, and obtain all of Tientsin as concession. So Italy would have her Hong Kong.
  • Italy would be in dire tension with the OE since 1877. The Russians, impressed by the Italian rise, would search an agreement to gobble the Turks. Italy could likely invade Albania and puppet it, free Montenegro (and puppet it), invade Libya already from Tunisia (and declare her colony) then seize Crete and arrive to Rhodes. Italian-Russian expansion would stop before the first would plan to seize Cyprus and dare to land in Palestine and the second to march on Constantinople, because the Concert would meddle, but they would more or less keep what they gained. Greece would however have an uneasy relation with Italy since then.
Stopping here at the eve of 1900, but more or less Italy built a respectable, hopefully not ABS, overseas empire in 40 years.
Love everything except the Aceh and Suez parts. One- Aceh is in Indonesia and would have no effect on Italian interests in Suez... too far and isolated, need something more, Nicobar and Andaman Islands, Maldives, maybe influence over Oman and purchasing Gwador and Portuguese Indian cities. Second- you'd have to have more than just a marginally stronger Italy to oust Britain from outright not caring who had shares in the canal company when it comes time to influence and "take" Egypt from the Ottomans. You'd need a weaker and distracted Britain. That won't happen as long as India is the jewel in the crown.
 
Love everything except the Aceh and Suez parts. One- Aceh is in Indonesia and would have no effect on Italian interests in Suez... too far and isolated, need something more

Ehhh... Aceh during the 1860's was getting increasingly desperate over its independence. Besides becoming a British protectorate while also appealing to the Ottomans, the Acehnese sultan even married off one of his daughters to an Italian trader (Celso Cesare Moreno) in order to gain Rome's attention. As for isolation, its strategic position at the mouth of the Malacca Straits was well known as far back as the Age of Discovery, and it's pepper exports actually made it moderately wealthy as a regional sultanate. In fact, it was partly all the above factors that made the Dutch want the place to begin with!

Italy snagging Aceh isn't really that far-fetched. The key is actually holding it. The Dutch East Indies would go to war with anyone that protects Aceh and its spice exports, so Rome needs a navy that could back off Batavia ASAP.
 
Seriously, Argentina had a relatively large population of Italian descendants, and I thought of the country when I first noticed this thread, although I was hesitant despite the assurance of "no limit of PoD".

The point is, with Italy snatching Tunisia, won't many Italians prefer to move there in the next decades? It would be the only region truly worthy to colonize during an empire building quest.
 
The point is, with Italy snatching Tunisia, won't many Italians prefer to move there in the next decades? It would be the only region truly worthy to colonize during an empire building quest.
But settler immigration implies displacing the locals from the best agricultural lands, which will naturally lead to a very nasty insurgency. Argentina, despite it's remoteness and relative wilderness might look like a safer option.
 
But settler immigration implies displacing the locals from the best agricultural lands, which will naturally lead to a very nasty insurgency. Argentina, despite it's remoteness and relative wilderness might look like a safer option.

Never said everything will go for the best. But Italy could play along the lines of 19th century Imperial colonization without arriving to the nasty strategies of 20th century.
 
Top