AHC: Maintain Byzantine rule over Italy

Is there any way to ensure that Byzantine rule over all or some of Italy remains strong enough so that it can become an integral part of the Byzantine Empire, in practice as well as in name, and, perhaps, remain a part of the Empire for as long as Greece proper itself. Bonus points if the Byzantine Empire remains considered the leading Christian power in an undivided church, in addition to being considered the heirs to Rome by most of Western Europe as well as east.
 
I wouldn't say its outright impossible, but given the situation the Empire faced, its very difficult.

Even if the Byzantine-Gothic wars are less of an issue, Italy is a burden to defend, not an asset. And for the Empire, that's a cost it will have trouble supporting.
 
Do you mean all of Italy, or just the south?

I think, if anything, the best possible idea is to have Belisarius not march on Ravenna in defiance of Justinian's orders in 540. The Ostrogoths form a powerful buffer state based on the Po Valley shielding Italy from attack, while the Romans keep the rest- most poorer bits, to be sure, but without centuries of Saracen and Lombard invasion, they'll certainly be richer than in the OTL middle ages. Rome never experiences the misery of the OTL 540s, and generally, Italy is a happier place.
 
If Justinian properly supported Belisarius at the very beginning, instead of giving him a shoestring, then he could very well take the entire penninsula. No Belisarius-Narses rivalry, and the Goths never recover.

Instead of an economic loss to posses, Italy either pays for itself, or perhaps even gives a slight bonus to the treasury. Before the devastation of the Gothic War, Italy was very economically productive. It doesn't need to be a drain on resources provided the war is over quickly. I don't see it being a burden to defend - the Alps make a nice frontier.
 

MAlexMatt

Banned
So nice that they kept out none of the northern invaders such as the Lombards.

Possession of great wealth does not necessarily mean the capacity to mobilize that wealth in a way that accomplishes the goal of """national""" defense.

Look at early modern Northern and Central Italy. Undoubtedly one of the wealthiest regions on the planet, but totally unable to repel the French or the Spanish.
 
Possession of great wealth does not necessarily mean the capacity to mobilize that wealth in a way that accomplishes the goal of """national""" defense.

Look at early modern Northern and Central Italy. Undoubtedly one of the wealthiest regions on the planet, but totally unable to repel the French or the Spanish.

I was looking at the mountains. The Alps as a barrier to Italian conquest (either conquests in Italy, or in Rome's day, BY Italy) are overrated.

Not able to really repel the Germans either, looking at the wealth =/= power part.
 
I don't think that early modern Italy is a good comparison, even if the alps are a little overrated. Early modern Italy was way behind France and Austria in virtually all aspects, and suffered because of that, not because they had a particularly poor economy or indefensible frontier.
 
I don't think that early modern Italy is a good comparison, even if the alps are a little overrated. Early modern Italy was way behind France and Austria in virtually all aspects, and suffered because of that, not because they had a particularly poor economy or indefensible frontier.

I disagree, medieval Italy had far outstretched its neighbors in the vital industry of silly hats!
 

MAlexMatt

Banned
I don't think that early modern Italy is a good comparison, even if the alps are a little overrated. Early modern Italy was way behind France and Austria in virtually all aspects, and suffered because of that, not because they had a particularly poor economy or indefensible frontier.

In terms of total industrial output, early modern Italy would make swathes of France or Austria similar in population or area look like the backwater hick regions they were. The problem was that early modern Italy directed its capital in a way that France or Austria didn't, in proportions and in form that ended up not being what early modern Italy needed to protect itself from the French or the Hapsburgs.

A Byzantine ruled Italy would have been different. The internal rules of warfare the OTL Italy developed would never have come to be, and so the extreme wealth of contemporary Italy (probably somewhat less, under the centralized rule of the Romans, but extreme nevertheless) would have been more adequately directed towards international competition.
 

Esopo

Banned
I don't think that early modern Italy is a good comparison, even if the alps are a little overrated. Early modern Italy was way behind France and Austria in virtually all aspects, and suffered because of that, not because they had a particularly poor economy or indefensible frontier.

early modern italy was far ahead of the rest of europe in everything but centralized government.
 
If Belisarus is able to regain Italy without destroing it, there will be another problem: The only remaining rich province of the Western Empire was northern Africa. Italy was controlled by local nobles who didn't pay taxes at all. If you regain it you will get nothing out of it.

Everything leads to a not wealthy Italy in medieval age.
 
I don't think that early modern Italy is a good comparison, even if the alps are a little overrated. Early modern Italy was way behind France and Austria in virtually all aspects, and suffered because of that, not because they had a particularly poor economy or indefensible frontier.

Since I'm the one who mentioned the frontier: Its not that its exceptionally indefensible, just not especially defensible.

And I'm not sure even if it is productive (for the state) that the costs of defending it outweigh the profits - especially given how precious trained manpower is for a state with long frontiers.
 
If Belisarus is able to regain Italy without destroing it, there will be another problem: The only remaining rich province of the Western Empire was northern Africa. Italy was controlled by local nobles who didn't pay taxes at all. If you regain it you will get nothing out of it.

Everything leads to a not wealthy Italy in medieval age.

The ability of the Western Senatorial nobility to resist Justinian's taxmen is probably very limited. Part of the reason Justinian still gets such a bad press today is because of his determination to screw cash out of the wealthy.
 
If Southern Italy : Butterfly the settlement of Normans in OTL Normandy.

It would greatly slow the use of norman mercenaries in the western Byzantine Empire, if not butterflying them.

Of course the Catepanate of Italy would likely suffer from other issues, Lombards, Siculo-Arabs, or even the possibility to turn like the exarchate of Ravenna aka more and more autonomous.

Still, it would prevent to have the worm within the fruit.
 
Top