Milanese unification of Italy

  • Thread starter Deleted member 67076
  • Start date

Deleted member 67076

Would it have been possible for Milan to unify Italy? If so, how would it be done and what effects would it have?

No real POD limit.
 
We nearly unified northern Italy, and I think Milan could have actually done it. Central and southern Italy, though, it's almost ASB.
 

Deleted member 67076

We nearly unified northern Italy, and I think Milan could have actually done it. Central and southern Italy, though, it's almost ASB.
How come? Would the Papal states be too strong or something?
 
How come? Would the Papal states be too strong or something?

I think the Habsburgs in Naples might also have been a big issue. In the pre-modern era (and even including the 18th century) it was important to have a dynastic claim on anything you wanted to conquer, no matter how flimsy. On the other hand, I know almost nothing about Italian history, so take everything I say with a grain of salt.

Cheers,
Ganesha
 
I think the Habsburgs in Naples might also have been a big issue. In the pre-modern era (and even including the 18th century) it was important to have a dynastic claim on anything you wanted to conquer, no matter how flimsy. On the other hand, I know almost nothing about Italian history, so take everything I say with a grain of salt.

Cheers,
Ganesha

Um not the Habsburgs. Either the Valois-Anjous or the Trastámara dynasties were ruling Naples, depending on when. And I'm sure some ancient claim can be dug up.
 
Shows what I know. Okay, who were the Trastámaras? And would they have been a problem?

Cheers,
Ganesha

They were the ruling dynasty in Castile and Aragon. Alfonso V of Aragon was adopted as heir to Naples by Joanna II but she later switched heirs to Charles of Anjou, then Rene of Anjou. After Joanna died Alfonso invaded and conquered Naples, later leaving it to his illegitimate son Ferdinand (Ferrante). Thus the Trastamaras became the reigning dynasty of Naples. Their claim was pretty flimsy, with Ferrante being a bastard and all. Plus Naples was a technical fief of the Pope, so legally the Pope could deprive the Monarch of Naples of the Kingdom and give it to the Duke of Milan.
 
Gian Galeazzo Visconti actually came reasonably close to it until he died in 1402 and probably would have united Northern Italy if he'd survived.
 
I wonder which language would have been declared the national language of a Milanese Unified Italy? It would be very interesting to see one of the other northern languages as the national language, if you ask me. So many of them are so wildly different sounding from Standard Italian...
 
Gian Galeazzo Visconti not dying in 1402 and unifying northern and Central Italy would be the obvious possibility here. He virtually did it OTL.

Potential Problems:

1. Florence - Gian Galeazzo died while trying to subdue the Bolognese in 1402, but the Florentines would have been his next targets. They would have resisted, but quite likely are not strong enough on their own to defeat Gian Galeazzo.

2. Venice - the Venetians are a tough nut to crack, and probably wealthier than Milan at this point. They aren't going to be particularly happy with Milanese rule in Padua, Vicenza, and other nearby towns, and they're going to be hard to conquer.

3. The Emperor (or King of Germany) - maybe a problem, maybe not. Gian Galeazzo was made Duke of Milan by the German King Wenceslaus, who abided by the later Luxembourg dynasty's general disinterest in Italy. But the German Kings still maintain their claim on the Imperial title and on the Iron Crown, and at some point one of them is going to try to reassert those privileges. This could present complications, and will certainly create difficulties for any Visconti attempt to claim the Iron Crown.

4. The Pope - the Pope, like the Venetians, is not going to be happy with a single powerful ruler in control of all of northern Italy. This is perhaps of minimal importance in 1402, when there's two popes to choose from, but if that situation gets resolved, he's going to run into serious problems.

5. The King of Naples - Naples is not the center of Guelphic power in Italy the way it was for most of the 14th century, but it still remains the largest and most populous state on the peninsula, and, Valois-Durazzo civil wars aside, is going to be much more unified than the Visconti state. Every city under Visconti rule is just waiting for the opportunity to rebel and reassert its independence. Naples has been a single kingdom for a long time. King Ladislas in 1402 had recently expelled his Valois rival from the capital and, at 25, was just coming into his own. He'll be a tough rival. Furthermore, a Visconti upstart has no claim whatever and Naples. Gian Galeazzo could throw support to Louis of Anjou against Ladislaus if it proved necessary, but it'd be virtually impossible for him to claim the throne himself.
 
Any Milanese ruler, who would claim the Iron Crown is asking for trouble with the Empire (not just the Emperor). However like the Valois dukes of Burgundy (Philip the Good and Charles the Bold), they could enter negotiations for a Crown, probably with the Pope and the Emperor.
Unfortunately for Milan in contrast to the duchy of Burgundy, Italy had a much more symbolic relation with the office of Emperor than Burgundy (Arles).
 
Gian Galeazzo Visconti not dying in 1402 and unifying northern and Central Italy would be the obvious possibility here. He virtually did it OTL.

Potential Problems:

1. Florence - Gian Galeazzo died while trying to subdue the Bolognese in 1402, but the Florentines would have been his next targets. They would have resisted, but quite likely are not strong enough on their own to defeat Gian Galeazzo.
You're off by a few months: Gian Galeazzo died on 3 September 1402, but gis troops had already entered Bologna on 30 June, after decisively defeating the Bolognese on 26 June.
Immediately the Milanese under Jacopo dal Verme moved to invest Florence, which was effectively already surrounded by Visconti's possessions. When the news of GG's death reached Florence, the Florentines were already negotiating terms for a surrender. Taking Florence is quite important, since they had been the major obstacle to the Viscontean aspirations, and had been instrumental to put together (and fund) all the various leagues created against GG in the 1390s.

2. Venice - the Venetians are a tough nut to crack, and probably wealthier than Milan at this point. They aren't going to be particularly happy with Milanese rule in Padua, Vicenza, and other nearby towns, and they're going to be hard to conquer.
Venice in the 1390s is not the same city, nor has the same ambitions that will erupt after the death of GG. The Stato di Terra is minimal (just Treviso, which btw was gained through an alliance withh GG against Novello della Scala. Padua (which anyway was regained by Novello della Scala in 1390) does not add anything to the defence of Venice, nor is a significant threat. Venice is protected on the landward side by a vast belt of marshes which are quite hard to negotiate for an army, and no successful siege can succeed if the seaward approaches to Venice are not blockaded. During the war of Chioggia, Genoa was able to blockade Venice and to occupy the Lido and Chioggia (the landward blockade was enforced by Veronese and Paduan troops): still it was not enough. Venice was still able to cut off the Genoese supply route and to gain a decisive victory.
The position of the Serenissima is still somehow parlous: the Black Death (and returning plagues), the war of Chioggia and the long term hostilities in Dalmatia against the Hungarian have certainly weakened Venice, which is just starting to recover.

Looing at the problem from a different perspective, Venice and GG have more common interests than areas of conflict: GG controls the Po river, as well as the Brenner and St. Bernard passes, so can take a cut on all overland traffic to and from Venice; Venice is naturally interested in a secure land route for her traffics, and to avoid the need/risk of negotiating tolls and rights-of-passage with every city or lord on the route (and I would repeat again that the landward-expansion mindset has not yet set in). Why should GG embark in a difficult if not impossible grab when he can anyway enjoy the benefit of the Venetian commerce?

3. The Emperor (or King of Germany) - maybe a problem, maybe not. Gian Galeazzo was made Duke of Milan by the German King Wenceslaus, who abided by the later Luxembourg dynasty's general disinterest in Italy. But the German Kings still maintain their claim on the Imperial title and on the Iron Crown, and at some point one of them is going to try to reassert those privileges. This could present complications, and will certainly create difficulties for any Visconti attempt to claim the Iron Crown.
The HRE is in a very weakened position, and it is one of the big breaks GG cam enjoy: when Ruprecht tried an half-hearted invasion in 1401 (once again paid for by Florence) got mauled near Brescia, and went back immediately.
Plus there is the record of GG's ability in managing the HRE, which eventually gained him a ducal crown: the HRE is not a real worry, provided that some diplomatic niceties are observed,

4. The Pope - the Pope, like the Venetians, is not going to be happy with a single powerful ruler in control of all of northern Italy. This is perhaps of minimal importance in 1402, when there's two popes to choose from, but if that situation gets resolved, he's going to run into serious problems.
Well, 2 popes open many more and more luscious opportunities than just one.
On the record, GG was a (nominal) backer of the pope-in-Rome when he was cozing up to the empire and an equally nominal backer of the pope-in-Avignon when he leaned toward France.
IOTL the final resolution of the Great Western Schism did not come up until 1417. ITTL with another player muddling up the waters it may take even longer.
My take is that GG will try to negotiate a deal and get an investiture from the (final) pope to be invested as papal vassal for the lands which are nominally within the so-called Patrimonium Petri (maybe duke of Romagna? there are other alternatives: the imperial duchy of Spoleto lapsed in the 11th century IIRC, it might be reborn as a papal fief). Obviously he will do his best to delay any reconciliation until he gets his deal.

5. The King of Naples - Naples is not the center of Guelphic power in Italy the way it was for most of the 14th century, but it still remains the largest and most populous state on the peninsula, and, Valois-Durazzo civil wars aside, is going to be much more unified than the Visconti state. Every city under Visconti rule is just waiting for the opportunity to rebel and reassert its independence. Naples has been a single kingdom for a long time. King Ladislas in 1402 had recently expelled his Valois rival from the capital and, at 25, was just coming into his own. He'll be a tough rival. Furthermore, a Visconti upstart has no claim whatever and Naples. Gian Galeazzo could throw support to Louis of Anjou against Ladislaus if it proved necessary, but it'd be virtually impossible for him to claim the throne himself.

Naples is not in a very good condition either, given the civil war between the two branches of the house of Anjou snd the Aragonese ambitions. Anyway IMHO GG is not looking at southern Italy for a further expansion of his domains: he still has to integrate his various possessions into a unitary state (and he started in the late 1390s a major reform of administration and taxation) and to keeps a lot of eggs up in the air (HRE, papacy, France). There is another couple of windfalls coming his way, though: the dinastic crisis in Aragon (which could open interesting perspectives in Sardinia, where the Visconti hold a claim to one of the Judicates) and the renewal of the 100years war, which will reduce France's influence in Italy. Not to mention the need to groom up an heir (hoping that he'll see the light and avoid partitioning his domains upon his death: he did partition them IOTL but I believe another 15 years might help him to change his mind).

My point is that GG will not unify all of Italy, but he may lay down the foundation of a strong state: if he does in due time a Visconti may successfully claim the iron crown.
 
Gian Galeazzo may have been able to create an ephemeral unified state that encompasses most of North and Central Italy. The question is, even if he doesn't die of Plague in 1402 and has another 5, 10, 15 years of life, can he keep the fractious make-up of this region under his control? The history of Medieval and Renaissance Italy is one of Italian polities ganging-up against emergent states that become too strong. To the point where threatened polities will invite outside powers to intervene -- HRE, France, Spain. Even in a best case scenario for G.G., there are going to be internal revolts, probably major ones, by Firenze and in the Romagna. I don't know how long an increasingly stronger Venice would maintain either neutrality or an alliance of convenience under the circumstances. Furthermore, even if G.G. leaves a more consolidated state to his heirs, both of his heirs, Gian Maria and Filippo Maria, were far less gifted than their father, to say the least.
 
Top