Alternate Italian Unification WI/idea basket

I've been reading some of the really cool alternate histories on here and naturally they've compelled me to want to write my own.

What if Victor Amadeus, Prince of Piedmont, does NOT die at 15 from smallpox? What could the possible ramifications be? Does this provide a clean slate to change up Italian unification?

I'm thinking this would stick close to OTL events, but with a few tweaks and turns. What if he sides with the French and Spanish rather than the Austrians in the War of Austrian Succession, possibly taking Corsica? Surely a very abled Italian lawyer by the name Bonaparte would make an appearance.

Idea Basket The ultimate goal is to have a stronger Italy by the time of unification and from there on. I'm thinking Savoy becomes more modern and militarily capable earlier on, benefiting further its OTL goals of expansion, territorial aggrandizement and conquest, spreading that drive across the peninsula by the other states desiring its success. I see the south as a problem here to the future goal of a powerful Italy, but my solution would be somehow maybe a more liberal leader rises to power in the south that isn't content with his lands; a problem for OTL leaders of the region at this time. I'm not too sure about how to accomplish that part though, if it's possible at all.

Those are just some things that come to mind, but all new ideas are welcome. I look forward to opinions and feedback on this PoD! Thanks
 
Last edited:
With a POD that early, you might entirely butterfly the French Revolution, and thus removing the nationalist wave throughout Europe that lead to the Italian Unification.
 

Vitruvius

Donor
I suppose if he had lived and managed to marry Elisabeth Farnese it could have an impact. Of course that would require a POD before his death or rather something besides him simply not dying because OTL the marriage fell through before his death. Maybe Philip V marries someone else and Elisabeth settles for Victor Amadeus after all.

But if somehow it did happen then Savoy stands to inherit Parma and Tuscany. Furthermore without Elisabeth interfering in Spain the War of the Quadruple Alliance probably doesn't happen so Savoy retains Sicily. Then during the War of the Polish Succession I could see Savoy siding with France and snatching Naples, probably at the expense of Parma and Tuscany similar to the OTL exchanges. That still gives them a solid base in the north and south so regardless of how the nationalist movements play out there will be a dynastic impetus to unite Italy in order to consolidate their disparate realms. So Savoy then joins France in the War of the Austrian Succession and takes back Parma and possibly Milan. I would imagine in this scenario Sardinia ends up going to Spain after one of the those wars but the rest of Italy seems like fair game for Savoy.

Obviously at some point he French and/or British will become alarmed by Savoyard success and start opposing them, perhaps a Franco-Savoyard or Anglo-Savoyard conflict over Corsica. But if Savoy manages to consolidate its position on the Italian peninsula the only real stumbling block will be the Papal States, which in a pre-revolutionary era is probably a bridge too far. But if the Pope gets anxious and tries to encourage French intervention, possibly something like the Italian Wars occurs. I'd say the old Republics will be pretty quickly trampled. Possibly Savoy looses some peripheral territory to France and Venice goes to Austria in exchange Savoy gains Genoa, Mantua, Bergamo, Brescia and Bologna and forms a core northern kingdom that could be linked to Naples and Sicily via Umbria and Le Marche with a rump Papal State in the Lazio. So it would look a lot like OTL 1860 Italy.

That's a lot of extrapolation, obviously, but I think it could work.
 
Well, here Italian unification would take place by inheritance rather than conquest. If the prince of Piemonte doesn't marry Elisabetta Farnese, another match proposed for him was with Amalia Giuseppina d'Este - second daughter of Rinaldo, duke of Modena.

Ironically, Elisabetta was also betrothed to Francesco III d'Este. IDK why the match never materialized - probably because Modena was in dire financial straits, and Charlotte d'Orléans (another possible bride for Piemonte, proposed by his mother) carried a dowry of something like two million livres, with another million contributed by Louis XV as a wedding gift.

Of course, it's a little ASB, but the Savoy can also inherit Modena if they marry Maria Beatrice Ricciarda d'Este instead of the Hapsburgs. They had a chance to inherit Massa & Carrara through the marriage of one of their cadets, the Comte de Soissons (who had he outlived his mother would've been duke of Troppau, too) married Maria Teresa Cybo-Malaspina.
 

Vitruvius

Donor
Yes it would be a more traditional 'marriage and conquest' unification not a modern nationalist one. I think the advantage of Elisabetta over Modena is that without her presence in Spain the whole War of the Quadruple Alliance doesn't happen or goes very differently and there's a decent chance that Savoy keeps Sicily. Then it can pick up Parma and Tuscany. This would cut off Milan from Naples and the Austrian hold on Sardinia is already very weak. Theoretically Savoy had a claim, albeit tenuous, to Austrian Italy as the settlement of the War of Spanish Succession dictated that Savoy was heir to the Spanish patrimony if the Habsburg or Spanish Bourbon lines failed. So with a domineering Elisabetta pushing him forward and with control of Parma, Tuscany and Sicily, Victor Amadeus is in a good position come the War of the Austrian Succession. Some concession to Spain and/or France may be necessary but I think he could get away with giving Spain Sardinia.
 
With a POD that early, you might entirely butterfly the French Revolution, and thus removing the nationalist wave throughout Europe that lead to the Italian Unification.

Can't believe I overlooked this. That's pretty detrimental to the plan...

But if somehow it did happen then Savoy stands to inherit Parma and Tuscany. Furthermore without Elisabeth interfering in Spain the War of the Quadruple Alliance probably doesn't happen so Savoy retains Sicily.

Is the retention of Sicily beneficial? I'm curious as to whether it would be harder to maintain than Sardinia. If Napoleon does in fact come to his OTL existence does Sicily take Sardinia's place as in OTL for the royal family? Also, was Philip V really a poor enough of a leader not to assert his claim over France on his own?

Then during the War of the Polish Succession I could see Savoy siding with France and snatching Naples, probably at the expense of Parma and Tuscany similar to the OTL exchanges.
As in Savoy trades Parma and Tuscany to Philip V for the Naples at the end of the war? Or giving up Parma to Austria as in OTL and receiving Naples for it?

That still gives them a solid base in the north and south so regardless of how the nationalist movements play out there will be a dynastic impetus to unite Italy in order to consolidate their disparate realms.

Very cool. Would this dynastic sentiment be enough to overcome feelings of loyalty to one's own state in the absence of the post-Napoleonic nationalism?

So Savoy then joins France in the War of the Austrian Succession and takes back Parma and possibly Milan. I would imagine in this scenario Sardinia ends up going to Spain after one of the those wars but the rest of Italy seems like fair game for Savoy.

Obviously at some point he French and/or British will become alarmed by Savoyard success and start opposing them, perhaps a Franco-Savoyard or Anglo-Savoyard conflict over Corsica. But if Savoy manages to consolidate its position on the Italian peninsula the only real stumbling block will be the Papal States, which in a pre-revolutionary era is probably a bridge too far. But if the Pope gets anxious and tries to encourage French intervention, possibly something like the Italian Wars occurs. I'd say the old Republics will be pretty quickly trampled. Possibly Savoy looses some peripheral territory to France and Venice goes to Austria in exchange Savoy gains Genoa, Mantua, Bergamo, Brescia and Bologna and forms a core northern kingdom that could be linked to Naples and Sicily via Umbria and Le Marche with a rump Papal State in the Lazio. So it would look a lot like OTL 1860 Italy.

That's a lot of extrapolation, obviously, but I think it could work.

Seems quite well and good. A few small changes happen that lead to the rest as natural butterflies (with maybe a hint of Savoy bias).

If the prince of Piemonte doesn't marry Elisabetta Farnese, another match proposed for him was with Amalia Giuseppina d'Este - second daughter of Rinaldo, duke of Modena.

Ironically, Elisabetta was also betrothed to Francesco III d'Este. IDK why the match never materialized - probably because Modena was in dire financial straits, and Charlotte d'Orléans (another possible bride for Piemonte, proposed by his mother) carried a dowry of something like two million livres, with another million contributed by Louis XV as a wedding gift.

This is also a very good proposal. Having lots in the bank is always a good thing, and it seems like Vitruvius' suggestion would be quite expensive. Especially when one considers the eventual goal of getting the South up to speed in terms of modernization. However the first proposal is very thorough at giving Savoy sizeable gains in Italy. Is there another marriage down the line that could provide such a sizeable dowry to an heir of Victor Amadeus?

EDIT: it's evident that this alternate marriage between Victor Amadeus and Farnese would cause great deviations in history alone, leading to a vastly different way things play out. That would be very interesting to see.
 
Last edited:
In addition, what are plausible methods by which the Mezzogiorno (Southern Italy) can modernize into a far more productive region than in OTL? Assuming unification is still in 1860, I figure there'd be a minimum of around 100 years after Savoyard conquest where the south can develop, beginning with major reforms by the living Victor Amadeus, who would share in his father's love of reforms.
 
In addition, what are plausible methods by which the Mezzogiorno (Southern Italy) can modernize into a far more productive region than in OTL? Assuming unification is still in 1860, I figure there'd be a minimum of around 100 years after Savoyard conquest where the south can develop, beginning with major reforms by the living Victor Amadeus, who would share in his father's love of reforms.

It's hard to do worse than OTL in the Mezzogiorno, really. Actually enact land reforms and avoid going for nice things like Bronte, and you get something better.
 
It's hard to do worse than OTL in the Mezzogiorno, really. Actually enact land reforms and avoid going for nice things like Bronte, and you get something better.

Agreed I don't think anyone could pen a worse ending than OTL's southern Italy. I recall reading however that before the industrial revolution the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies was the wealthiest Italian state, so there must be some hope there to at least get things in a better position so that it is more receptive to the industrial revolution, no? In the mid 1700s does it have any hope to achieve a different, more developed future?

Also, what is Bronte, and what kind of land reforms? Clearly ones that support industry, roads, railways, and literacy would be of immense importance. It seems like it would be generally better off without the Bourbons having entered rule there, which would be achieved with Savoyard acquisition after the War of Polish Succession.
 
Last edited:
In this scenario, wouldn’t whom Philip V of Spain married instead of Elizabeth Farnese be important? Philip V was dominated by both his wives in OTL so whomever he marries would likely determine Spain’s attitude toward the ambitions of the house of Savoy in TTL. Philip would have wanted the territories he lost in the war of the Spanish Succession back no matter who he married. If Savoy were to ally with France in TTL, then there is a strong chance they would also be allied to Spain. Perhaps Savoy could obtain Milan from Austria in an alternate war of the Polish Succession. Of course in TTL, Philip may still abdicate his throne in favor of his son Louis and Louis might have a longer reign than in OTL. Louis’s attitude about regaining lost territories in Italy might have differed from his father.
 
Agreed I don't think anyone could pen a worse ending than OTL's southern Italy. I recall reading however that before the industrial revolution the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies was the wealthiest Italian state, so there must be some hope there to at least get things in a better position so that it is more receptive to the industrial revolution, no? In the mid 1700s does it have any hope to achieve a different, more developed future?

Also, what is Bronte, and what kind of land reforms? Clearly ones that support industry, roads, railways, and literacy would be of immense importance. It seems like it would be generally better off without the Bourbons having entered rule there, which would be achieved with Savoyard acquisition after the War of Polish Succession.

The short version is that, even if it was moderately wealthy, the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies was somewhere around Russia, as far as social structure went - almost medieval. Garibaldi arrived and promised paradise to the farmers, then he bit down on those promises, quelling the ensuing revolts with violence. Bronte is probably the most iconic of these: a revolt against the lord of the region was resolved by blood. So no, I am not talking about industry and railways - you have to start from the abolition of de facto serfdom.
 

Vitruvius

Donor
Is the retention of Sicily beneficial? I'm curious as to whether it would be harder to maintain than Sardinia. If Napoleon does in fact come to his OTL existence does Sicily take Sardinia's place as in OTL for the royal family? Also, was Philip V really a poor enough of a leader not to assert his claim over France on his own?

As in Savoy trades Parma and Tuscany to Philip V for the Naples at the end of the war? Or giving up Parma to Austria as in OTL and receiving Naples for it?

To a certain extent I think it is. Sicily is certainly wealthier and more developed that Sardinia at that point in time. When Savoy got Sardinia it was a total backwater that contributed little to the Savoyard state. And they're both islands so I don't think defense is harder for one than the other. But Sicily is more important strategically so the British are more likely to object if someone tries up end the balance of power in the Med by taking it from Savoy. After all Savoy really only got Sicily because the British insisted at Utrecht that they be rewarded for their loyalty with the island.

More importantly the settlement to the War of the Quadruple Alliance saw Savoy essentially loose territory (because Sicily does not equal Sardinia, strategically, economically or simply in terms of prestige) and yet Savoy was on the winning side. I think there's a lot to the argument that it set a precedent that peace in Europe was simply about balancing powers, mainly the great powers like France Spain Austria and Britain and the lesser states were simply chattel to be apportioned between the sides to even the scales. And unfortunately that war bumped Sardinia down to that level arguably setting it back several decades. Thus when the allies needed to control or contain Spain and strengthen Austria they did so at the expense of Savoy without really even consulting or considering the opinions of the Savoyards. I think this also mooted and dejure notion that Savoy stood anywhere in the line of succession for the territories of the old Spanish Empire hence the Italian states simply passed back and forth between a series of Bourbon and Habsburg rulers for the rest of the century.

So from a diplomatic or strategic point of view Savoy could be stronger going into the Wars of Polish or Austrian succession. OTL Savoy's participation in the former was half hearted because they felt, rightfully I think, that the French and Spanish were planning on keeping everything for themselves. But if Savoy still had Sicily and also had claims to Parma and Tuscany it could be different. It could go a number of different directions but I see Savoy in a better position. And if it doesn't have Naples by the time Charles VI dies they could put in a claim for it as heir of Spanish Italy when the Habsburg (male) line failed.

Come to think of it perhaps the best POD would be if Philip V's first wife Maria Luisa doesn't die. They were quite in love, she had produced the requiste heir and could possibly pop out another kid or two. But more importantly as a Savoyard Princess she could influence Philip into favoring Savoy. A true Franco-Spanish-Savoyard alliance against Austria. Spain gets a token territory like Sardinia and Savoy makes big gains on the peninsula. Its straying a bit from the OP but does set up Savoy nicely in Italy by mid-century.
 
In this scenario, wouldn’t whom Philip V of Spain married instead of Elizabeth Farnese be important? Philip V was dominated by both his wives in OTL so whomever he marries would likely determine Spain’s attitude toward the ambitions of the house of Savoy in TTL. Philip would have wanted the territories he lost in the war of the Spanish Succession back no matter who he married.

Yes, I agree. Even if he remarried to a bride less head-strong than Farnese, any man would still want something he believes is rightfully his.

Of course in TTL, Philip may still abdicate his throne in favor of his son Louis and Louis might have a longer reign than in OTL. Louis’s attitude about regaining lost territories in Italy might have differed from his father.

This is also a very cool angle. I always like having real characters developing and shaping history differently than they did.

The short version is that, even if it was moderately wealthy, the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies was somewhere around Russia, as far as social structure went - almost medieval. Garibaldi arrived and promised paradise to the farmers, then he bit down on those promises, quelling the ensuing revolts with violence. Bronte is probably the most iconic of these: a revolt against the lord of the region was resolved by blood. So no, I am not talking about industry and railways - you have to start from the abolition of de facto serfdom.

Ah, crucial point. Well put.

Come to think of it perhaps the best POD would be if Philip V's first wife Maria Luisa doesn't die. They were quite in love, she had produced the requiste heir and could possibly pop out another kid or two. But more importantly as a Savoyard Princess she could influence Philip into favoring Savoy. A true Franco-Spanish-Savoyard alliance against Austria. Spain gets a token territory like Sardinia and Savoy makes big gains on the peninsula. Its straying a bit from the OP but does set up Savoy nicely in Italy by mid-century.

Precisely. I was researching last night for possible other brides for Philip when I thought the same thing. What with her brother living longer, it seems a pity not to share the fortunes of life to old age. Very insightful stuff Vitruvius, I admire your knowledge on the period.

It seems I have no other queries of my own for now. I'm still curious to hear if anyone has anything to add, particularly going forward/effects on eventual unification.
 
To a certain extent I think it is. Sicily is certainly wealthier and more developed that Sardinia at that point in time. When Savoy got Sardinia it was a total backwater that contributed little to the Savoyard state. And they're both islands so I don't think defense is harder for one than the other. But Sicily is more important strategically so the British are more likely to object if someone tries up end the balance of power in the Med by taking it from Savoy. After all Savoy really only got Sicily because the British insisted at Utrecht that they be rewarded for their loyalty with the island.

AFAIK there was something about the peace treaties at the end of the WoSS that created the Kingdom of Sicily with the intention of handing it off to the Wittelsbachs in exchange for Bavaria - which then would go to the HRE. But something altered the status quo and the Wittelsbachs got propped back onto the throne in Munich, and the kingdom of Sicily was left as a loose end, so someone suggested that the duke of Savoy be rewarded for his loyalty with the crown of Sicily rather than the Austrians ceding the duchy of Milan (to which the house of Savoy had the best claim on the Visconti inheritance) to VAII.
 
Sicily is certainly more populous and potentially richer than Sardinia. It however requires serious reforms (which I doubt the Savoys would be able to see the need of in first place and implement afterwards: they did not do anything of the kind in Sardinia) and was much farther away than Sardinia itself (the dukes of Savoy have just one decent port on the Mediterranean: Nice). I would guess that the main attraction for the Savoy would be the royal crown. Anyway the would have certainly preferred Milan to either island.
From the point of view of Sicilians, probably the best thing for them would have been the crown being given to the Wittelsbach: while there is no guarantee they would succeed in implementing the necessary reforms, the presence of a king in Palermo would be a huge improvement over being governed as a Spanish colony (or even being governed from Naples, as it happened IOTL)
 

Dorozhand

Banned
The French Revolution is unlikely to be butterflied, as the social and economic forces which drove the bourgeoisie to overthrow the aristocracy had been inevitably building since Louis XV's reign.
 
Sicily is certainly more populous and potentially richer than Sardinia. It however requires serious reforms (which I doubt the Savoys would be able to see the need of in first place and implement afterwards: they did not do anything of the kind in Sardinia) and was much farther away than Sardinia itself (the dukes of Savoy have just one decent port on the Mediterranean: Nice). I would guess that the main attraction for the Savoy would be the royal crown. Anyway the would have certainly preferred Milan to either island.
From the point of view of Sicilians, probably the best thing for them would have been the crown being given to the Wittelsbach: while there is no guarantee they would succeed in implementing the necessary reforms, the presence of a king in Palermo would be a huge improvement over being governed as a Spanish colony (or even being governed from Naples, as it happened IOTL)

That would be interesting - a Wittelsbach controlled Sicily, and maybe Max III can have a daughter who becomes queen of Sicily and marries either the duke of Chablais or Carlo Emanuele IV (and gives him children. something both their OTL wives failed to do).
 
This is my favourite 19th Century POD for Italy, though I’ve never seen it competently done.

During the Napoleonic and Revolutionary wars King Ferdinand of the Kingdom of the Two Scillies and his heir Francis are captured and die in some way. The King appointed by Napoleon, Joachim Murat, defects to the allies as OTL and England decides to allow him to keep the throne and hand over the occupied island of Sicily in exchange for certain promises and conditions.

Through pressure of the Carbonari-led rebellion in 1821 he reforms the Kingdom into a Constitutional Parliamentary Democratic Monarchy. The Holy League rejects this and demand changes where upon Murat stands strong and rejects the pressure. In doing so a rift develops between the Kingdom and the Catholic Church. This leads to further reforms to break the dominance of the Church in the Kingdom. It also redeems Murat in the eyes of many Nationalists.

His son takes over an proves to be an intelligent business manager and directs royal resources to modernisation efforts including railroads and city improvements including a Secular Education initiative, strongly popular in the Northern Italian cities which looked on shocked at the Southern Kingdom’s actions, but steps up the anger of the Catholic Church.

In 1832 after the French move into Algeria, the King acts and invades Tripoli in the middle of a Civil War to back one side. The winner however is deposed and Neapolitan annexation follows. The hinterland is harder to control and takes several decades. But land grants for peasants encourage settlements in the newly controlled territories. It is widely recognised across Italy and Europe as the first Italian colony.

This King dies the year before the 1848 revolutions and is succeeded by his brother. The Constitution is still in place but many areas of the Papal States request and gain annexation into the Kingdom, against protestations from the Pope (though there is no military response). These are the only territorial changes of the 1848 revolutions.

Advocates of Italian unification are divided over whether to support Sardinia-Piedmont or the Two Scillies as the chief state to base unification on. This problem solves itself when the heir to Two Scillies, a tall handsome and respectable prince, marries the Second in line to the Sardinia-Piedmont throne, a charming glamorous Princess. Then the heir to Sardinia-Piedmont dies and agreement is reached to unite the two Kingdoms and to impose Scilly’s liberal Constitution North. This freaks out France and Austria.

The resulting war is a revolution in terms to European politics as Prussia and their Northern German allied states join in support of Italy. The ultimate outcome is a Unified Italy which includes all the Territory of Sardinia-Piedmont, including Nice, Monaco and Savoy, the island of Corsica from France, recognition of Italian influence in Tunisia, and from Austria: Lombardy, Venice, Trento, the Italian speaking city of Trieste and Dalmatia. The newly established Germany annexes Alsace-Lorraine from France and leaves the Hapsburgs with the crown of St Steven, minus Pressberg and Ödenburg which Germany takes.

This sets up a divide of Italy-Germany and France-Hungary going forward.
 

Vitruvius

Donor
The French did indeed want to give Sicily to the Elector of Bavaria. He had loyally fought for them a essentially handed them the Spanish Netherlands at the beginning of the war (he was the Governor at the time). But the allies occupied Bavaria and the upper Palatinate was given to the Elector Palatine and Mundelein to Marlborough while the French found themselves up able to deliver on their promises of territory in the Spanish Netherlands as the allies refused to see an inch of it fall into the French sphere. So the French wanted him to have Sicily. But the British had previously committed to giving the island to Savoy. So instead Bavaria was to get Sardinia which otherwise would likely have gone to Spain. Sardinia was considered to be inconsequential so it's status was almost an after thought. But Austria and the HRE didn't sign onto the Peace of Utrecht and fought on against France by themselves eventually agreeing to the Peace of Rast at where by they agreed to restore all Bavarian territories in Germany in exchange the Emperor gained Sardinia.
 
Top