Austria keeps Sicily-Naples

Susano

Banned
IOTL, Sicily-Naples was the great price Austra ganed out of the War of the Spanish Succession (beesides the Southern Netherlands, or what at that point had remained of them), which, with a Bourbon on the Spanish throne, it overall lost. However, even that compensation price was not to last, and got lost again already 17 years later in the War of the Polish Succession.

So is there a way for Austria to hold on to its WotSS prices, at best while also holding on to the Southern Netherlands as IOTL? And what would the effects of an Austran South Italy be?
 

Vitruvius

Donor
So is there a way for Austria to hold on to its WotSS prices, at best while also holding on to the Southern Netherlands as IOTL? And what would the effects of an Austran South Italy be?

I think the easiest way would be to eliminate or at least neutralize Elisabeth Farnese. It would be best if she never married Philip V but I suppose it could work if she was barren and had no children. She was one of the main proponents of Spanish intervention in Italy as she saw it as the birth right of her children both to secure the Farnese inheritance in Parma and Tuscany and to restore Spanish hegemony in Naples, Sicily, Milan etc.

If you get rid of her that takes a lot of pressure off. If she were to remain Queen but a childless one it could still work since no one really wanted to see Spain restored to power in Italy. One of the conditions for the retrocession of Naples-Sicily was that it would not be personally united with Spain. Without additional heirs there is no Spanish infante to assume the throne in Italy.

I'm not sure how Naples and Sicily would make out under continued Viceregal government. The Austrian tenure was so short its hard to judge its effectiveness. Furthermore one has to consider how they would fair through the War of Austrian Succession which will probably still happen. An Austrian Naples might also affect the settlement vis a vis Tuscany and Lorraine. Its hard to imagine France and Spain allowing Austria to directly control so much of the Italian peninsula.
 

Thande

Donor
I actually think it would be more interesting if Austria kept Naples-Sicily but lost Flanders (or whatever you want to call it). It removes a focus of Vienna's attention you see...then, assuming something roughly analogous to OTL's Revolutionary/Napoleonic Wars come about and Austria ends up with Venice, as well as Hapsburg possession of Tuscany...you could end up with all of Italy becoming part of the Hapsburg Dominions.
 
But if Austria keeps Naples and Sicily, as well as already owning Milan... I somehow doubt the Great Powers would see it in their interest to allow Parma (which was briefly ruled by Maria Theresa) or Tuscany fall into the Habsburg sphere. There was also a generation later that saw one of Maria's sons marry the heiress of Modena. Although seeing basically the whole of Italy under Habsburg domination is interesting, I wonder how acceptable it would be... if Franz Stefan still marries Maria Theresa as OTL, certainly France will still take Lorraine, so I guess it's possible he could still take Tuscany, but Charles VI might choose to compensate him with Naples and Sicily rather than Tuscany. Tuscany may go to someone else, or the Great Powers may accept the last Medici (Gian Gastone's sister, IIRC) as Grand Duchess there.

Is a union of Modena, Parma, and Tuscany plausible? Or perhaps Parma and Tuscany? I know there was some talk of Parma and Tuscany being united under a Bourbon Grand Duke, but I believe it fell through... plus the Bourbons in Italy were of the Spanish branch.

Quite an interesting scenario indeed.
 

Thande

Donor
But if Austria keeps Naples and Sicily, as well as already owning Milan... I somehow doubt the Great Powers would see it in their interest to allow Parma (which was briefly ruled by Maria Theresa) or Tuscany fall into the Habsburg sphere. There was also a generation later that saw one of Maria's sons marry the heiress of Modena. Although seeing basically the whole of Italy under Habsburg domination is interesting, I wonder how acceptable it would be... if Franz Stefan still marries Maria Theresa as OTL, certainly France will still take Lorraine, so I guess it's possible he could still take Tuscany, but Charles VI might choose to compensate him with Naples and Sicily rather than Tuscany. Tuscany may go to someone else, or the Great Powers may accept the last Medici (Gian Gastone's sister, IIRC) as Grand Duchess there.

Is a union of Modena, Parma, and Tuscany plausible? Or perhaps Parma and Tuscany? I know there was some talk of Parma and Tuscany being united under a Bourbon Grand Duke, but I believe it fell through... plus the Bourbons in Italy were of the Spanish branch.

Quite an interesting scenario indeed.

"Let others make war; you, fortunate Austria, marry", etc. It could easily be the trigger for yet another 18th century war of succession, but that's not to say Austria would necessarily lose. We could also help the situation along by having France get big bits of Piedmont in the progress and time acculturating them as happened later on to Nice and Savoy in OTL - that would put pretty much the whole of "cultural" Italy under the Hapsburgs.
 
"Let others make war; you, fortunate Austria, marry", etc. It could easily be the trigger for yet another 18th century war of succession, but that's not to say Austria would necessarily lose. We could also help the situation along by having France get big bits of Piedmont in the progress and time acculturating them as happened later on to Nice and Savoy in OTL - that would put pretty much the whole of "cultural" Italy under the Hapsburgs.

Oh, certainly. I could see many of these lands in Italy becoming appanages for the younger sons, especially seeing how many children Maria Theresa had with her husband. Her son Leopold II had just as many too, so after a generation or so, it's likely many of these areas are under Habsburg monarchs with close ties to Vienna, rather than being directly ruled by the Emperor himself.
 

Susano

Banned
Well, Modena and Tsucany were Habsburg cadet lines. Related and allied to Austrias ruling family, but not an unitary force, so I dont think its that large a problem. I see the problem rather geopolitically: Sicily-Naples is, as a pretty large exlave, rather exposed to expamisonist aspirations by other powers. Practically any war Austria went through in that period has the threat of losing Sicily-Naples - Polish Succession, Austrian Succession, 7 Years...

Youre probably right Drake that limiting the number of Bourbons (always a good thing anyways :D ) might help. The French line went through a bottleneck at that time, too, after all, and indeed nobody wants Sicily-Naples to fully fall to Spain or, worse yet, France. Of course, as at that time the Franco-Austrian enemyship still persissted, the Bourbon Powers might find it sufficient to simply take away the Kingdoms from Austria and give them to anybody, really.

So it seems to me the best things to do would be to avoid war risks for Austria, and to end the Franco.-Austrian enemyship. Have Maria Theresia born male for the former, for example. As for the latter, there is the idea of Nekromans' Prussian succession in the UK. That could certainly brking France and Austria together, but would of coruse have rather more far reachiong cosnequences then just Sicily-Naples, heh.
 

Thande

Donor
I have this crazy idea that eventually all of Italy becomes part of a (more or less) unitary Hapsburg-ruled state, with some self-rule privileges like happened to Hungary in OTL (and TTL as well)...and then a more successful German unification movement ends up conquering German-Austria, but the Hapsburgs hang on elsewhere and we get this weird "Italo-Hungary" empire...
 
Well, Modena and Tsucany were Habsburg cadet lines. Related and allied to Austrias ruling family, but not an unitary force, so I dont think its that large a problem. I see the problem rather geopolitically: Sicily-Naples is, as a pretty large exlave, rather exposed to expamisonist aspirations by other powers. Practically any war Austria went through in that period has the threat of losing Sicily-Naples - Polish Succession, Austrian Succession, 7 Years...

Youre probably right Drake that limiting the number of Bourbons (always a good thing anyways :D ) might help. The French line went through a bottleneck at that time, too, after all, and indeed nobody wants Sicily-Naples to fully fall to Spain or, worse yet, France. Of course, as at that time the Franco-Austrian enemyship still persissted, the Bourbon Powers might find it sufficient to simply take away the Kingdoms from Austria and give them to anybody, really.

So it seems to me the best things to do would be to avoid war risks for Austria, and to end the Franco.-Austrian enemyship. Have Maria Theresia born male for the former, for example. As for the latter, there is the idea of Nekromans' Prussian succession in the UK. That could certainly brking France and Austria together, but would of coruse have rather more far reachiong cosnequences then just Sicily-Naples, heh.

Right, I agree. After the Succession War, France really has no reason to continue being 'enemies' with Austria. The cries of encirclement are a century old. By 1648 they were growing stale, considering how many times Louis XIV warred against the Spanish and slowly nibbled away at Franche Comte and the Spanish Netherlands.

Sicily and Naples aren't as bad as exclaves as say, the Austrian Netherlands. At least Austria could make some feeble attempts to hold Naples and Sicily by way of the Adriatic... Trieste was part of the Habsburg monarchy at this point, no? Holding Naples might force them to develop a navy, even if only in the Adriatic. I don't think it's too hard to force Austria and France into an alliance; they allied to constrain Spain OTL in the 1720s. If Maria Theresa is born a male, and Elizabeth Farnese is barren as Vitruvius suggested, Austrian Naples and Sicily is good as secure. :D

Perhaps if Elizabeth is still as ambitious as OTL, she might still pressure Philip to intervene in Spain, perhaps angling to see herself upon the throne of Parma, and perhaps even Tuscany... even though she's a woman, she is still a Farnese and has Medicean blood in her to claim Tuscany. She was certainly ambitious enough that she might brow-beat Philip into intervening in Italy to claim her 'birthright' on her behalf, instead of for her sons (which wouldn't exist in this atl). Austria, Great Britain, and France join together to constrain Spain... and the matter is easily resolved without Naples and Sicily being lost. We could even have Spain 'attempt' conquer Sicily but fail awfully due to general incompetence and being driven out by the Sicilians themselves who prefer the lax rule of the Habsburgs to the tyranny that the Spanish oft imposed?

If the Anglo-Prussian personal union occurs in the later 1720s as you want, France and Austria will draw together out of convenience. The OTL alliance of 1755 was much the same. France was very against Spain, especially during d'Orléans regency... the rift didn't really heal until the 1740s. So France spurning Spain for Austria is fine at this point.
 

Vitruvius

Donor
If Maria Theresa is born a male, and Elizabeth Farnese is barren as Vitruvius suggested, Austrian Naples and Sicily is good as secure. :D

Perhaps if Elizabeth is still as ambitious as OTL, she might still pressure Philip to intervene in Spain, perhaps angling to see herself upon the throne of Parma, and perhaps even Tuscany... even though she's a woman, she is still a Farnese and has Medicean blood in her to claim Tuscany. She was certainly ambitious enough that she might brow-beat Philip into intervening in Italy to claim her 'birthright' on her behalf, instead of for her sons (which wouldn't exist in this atl). Austria, Great Britain, and France join together to constrain Spain... and the matter is easily resolved without Naples and Sicily being lost. We could even have Spain 'attempt' conquer Sicily but fail awfully due to general incompetence and being driven out by the Sicilians themselves who prefer the lax rule of the Habsburgs to the tyranny that the Spanish oft imposed?

I'm not so sure that Marie Theresa's gender has much to do with it really. IOTL Austria lost Naples and Sicily under Charles VI's watch long before the War of Austrian Succession. A Franco-Austrian alliance would help but after the end of the Regency in France its hard to figure out how it would work. Obviously the War of Polish Succession would be very different. Perhaps it ends up being the War of Tuscan Succession instead.

I like the idea of a childless Elisabeth Farnese for several reasons. One is that there will be no Infantes making war in Italy. Another is that assuming everyone else dies more or less on schedule the Spanish throne will fall vacant around 1759. Theoretically it would pass back to French Bourbons but of course Austria could contest that. Certainly it gives Austria more leverage.

So one scenario I could see is that Spain fails in its OTL invasion of Sicily in 1718. Elisabeth has no children but since Philip V still has an heir its not a big deal. She still pushes for Spanish intervention in Italy but all this amounts to is recognition of her rights as heiress of Parma and Tuscany. Austria keeps Naples-Sicily. Francis Stephen is compensated with the Austrian Netherlands instead. The OTL War of Austrian Succession plays out more or less as expected but Austria still holds Naples and Sicily. Philip V dies and is succeeded by his son Ferdinand VI. Elisabeth Farnese takes up direct rule in Parma-Tuscany. Both Elisabeth and Ferdinand have no heirs. IOTL they died in 1759 and 1766 respectively. So the 7 Years war analogue could be another War of Spanish Succession. Or perhaps France and Austria agree to a partition. Spain gets a cadet Bourbon and Parma-Tuscany goes to a cadet Habsburg who marries the heiress of Modena. The result is not only Naples and Sicily still under Austrian control but a Habsburg hegemony in Italy.

Of course there are lots of other possibilities. For example there was almost a marriage alliance between the Spanish Bourbons and the Habsburgs that would have seen Maria Theresa marry the future Charles III. That presents all sorts of interesting possibilities. One thing to consider in any of them is that the Neapolitans almost always preferred which ever side was likely to give them a resident King. That was the main appeal of Charles III, he would reside in the Kingdom rather than appointing a viceroy as the Austrians had been doing.
 
I like the idea of a childless Elisabeth Farnese for several reasons. One is that there will be no Infantes making war in Italy. Another is that assuming everyone else dies more or less on schedule the Spanish throne will fall vacant around 1759. Theoretically it would pass back to French Bourbons but of course Austria could contest that. Certainly it gives Austria more leverage.

So one scenario I could see is that Spain fails in its OTL invasion of Sicily in 1718. Elisabeth has no children but since Philip V still has an heir its not a big deal. She still pushes for Spanish intervention in Italy but all this amounts to is recognition of her rights as heiress of Parma and Tuscany. Austria keeps Naples-Sicily. Francis Stephen is compensated with the Austrian Netherlands instead. The OTL War of Austrian Succession plays out more or less as expected but Austria still holds Naples and Sicily. Philip V dies and is succeeded by his son Ferdinand VI. Elisabeth Farnese takes up direct rule in Parma-Tuscany. Both Elisabeth and Ferdinand have no heirs. IOTL they died in 1759 and 1766 respectively. So the 7 Years war analogue could be another War of Spanish Succession. Or perhaps France and Austria agree to a partition. Spain gets a cadet Bourbon and Parma-Tuscany goes to a cadet Habsburg who marries the heiress of Modena. The result is not only Naples and Sicily still under Austrian control but a Habsburg hegemony in Italy.

Just as a curiosity, if Elisabeth Farnese has no children, then the most senior heir of Parma following primogeniture would be James Francis Edward Stuart, the son of James II and Mary of Modena. After him and his issue the next in line would be the Dukes of Modena (in 1766 the duke was Francis III). So we could have the possibility of a Stuart as an Italian duke of a union of Parma and Modena.

For Tuscany, if we follow the right of blood, then the heirs of the Medici would be the same as above. The only surviving line would be the one of Virginia de Medici, who married Cesare D'Este of Modena, who began the same line of the family that ended in Mary of Modena and the later dukes. So James Stuart or Francis III would have too a claim through their blood to Tuscany.
 

Vitruvius

Donor
Just as a curiosity, if Elisabeth Farnese has no children, then the most senior heir of Parma following primogeniture would be James Francis Edward Stuart, the son of James II and Mary of Modena. After him and his issue the next in line would be the Dukes of Modena (in 1766 the duke was Francis III). So we could have the possibility of a Stuart as an Italian duke of a union of Parma and Modena.

For Tuscany, if we follow the right of blood, then the heirs of the Medici would be the same as above. The only surviving line would be the one of Virginia de Medici, who married Cesare D'Este of Modena, who began the same line of the family that ended in Mary of Modena and the later dukes. So James Stuart or Francis III would have too a claim through their blood to Tuscany.

I have this odd feeling of Deja Vu. Anyways to digress a bit from the main topic. The Tuscan succession was complicated by the complex legal nature of the Grand Duchy. Florence was theoretically an Imperial fief giving the Emperor prerogative in determining its succession. Charles VI was rather upset when Gian Gastone made the Infante Charles a Hereditary Prince of Tuscany. Siena however was a Spanish fief at least legally, having been bestowed by Philip II to Cosimo I and his heirs. The title that united these territories, Grand Duke of Tuscany, had been bestowed by the Pope giving him some say, again at least in theory. Parma itself was theoretically a Papal fief as it was briefly part of the Papal States before it was elevated to a Duchy for the Farnese by Paul III. So if you want to go strictly by the law there is no clear successor just a lot of people who will claim the right to pick one. None of which mattered because all of these claims were sacrificed IOTL to the political exigency of compensating the Duke of Lorraine.

And not for nothing but the Modenese claim to Parma comes by way of Maria Caterina who died in 1646 and Virginia died in 1615 so they're both a bit removed for a such a minor state as Modena to use to stake a claim on anything. Charles III was really only recognized because his mother threw the weight of Spain behind his claim. Having said all that I think a Stuart Duke of Parma is a fantastic idea if only because I've never even considered it before. All of this is a bit off topic but I suppose its worth considering how the rest of Italy would be apportioned if Austria were to keep Naples and Sicily.
 
IOTL, Sicily-Naples was the great price Austra ganed out of the War of the Spanish Succession (beesides the Southern Netherlands, or what at that point had remained of them), which, with a Bourbon on the Spanish throne, it overall lost. However, even that compensation price was not to last, and got lost again already 17 years later in the War of the Polish Succession.

So is there a way for Austria to hold on to its WotSS prices, at best while also holding on to the Southern Netherlands as IOTL? And what would the effects of an Austran South Italy be?

If Austria manages to keep Sicily-Naples (a POD after 1720, because before the treaty of The Hague, Austria controlled Naples-Sardinia), does this prevent a War of the Austrian Succession? If it doesn't prevent this war, Sicily-Naples might have ended up in the hands of the Bavarian Wittelsbachs as a part of the peace negotiations. OTL the Bavarian elector and later emperor Charles VII did put forward his own claims to be the successor of the last male Habsburg Charles VI. Basically I suggest that the house of Habsburg-Lorraine keeps all possessions they ended up with in OTL, however the Bavarian Wittelsbachs are compensated with Sicily-Naples. This solution will also make the Bavarian elector equal to other electors of that period, which managed to acquire a crown (the elector of Brandenburg was king in Prussia, the elector of Hanover was king of Great Britain and some the electors of Saxony were elected king of Poland and Grand Duke of Lithuania).
 
Last edited:
Top