Plausibility Check: Savoyard conquest of Northern Italy (or at least Milan)

  • Thread starter Deleted member 67076
  • Start date

Deleted member 67076

Now, I'm wondering if there was any way that with the correct set of policies and PODs that the Savoyards could have managed to push forth and conquer North Italy, (I'm thinking the Po Valley, maybe Tuscany and the Romagna at a sort of 'maximum'), or at the very least the Duchy of Milan.

Can it be done? If not, what would be needed to change in order to achieve this result?
 

Cryostorm

Monthly Donor
Isn't that what happened in OTL, along with the rest of Italy? If you want them to just conquer northern Italy then make Garibaldi's uprising never happen.
 

Deleted member 67076

Isn't that what happened in OTL, along with the rest of Italy? If you want them to just conquer northern Italy then make Garibaldi's uprising never happen.

Well yes, but I mean for this to occur during the Middle Ages, not the Modern Era.
 
Milano (and Lombardy) had been a goal of the Savoy since the extinction of the Visconti in 1447. Duke Ludovico of Savoy participated (without much luck) to the free-for-all war in Lombardy, but it is doubtful that he really aimed to take the duchy of Milan (or a portion thereof). His realistic goal was to annex the city of Novara, but the end of the war in 1454 denied him even this consolation prize and left the finances of the duchy in a very bad shape. There is a very slim chance that an early alliance with Venice might be more fruitful, but I doubt it.
The other possibilities are in the 18th centuries (Spanish war of Succession, Polish war of Succession, Austrian war of Succession). In all of them Savoy was on the winning side, but their great goal - Milan - was always denied to them.
They just managed to push the border to the Ticino river, and to gain some possessions in lower Lombardy (and to gain Sardinia and a royal crown in 1713). Their best chance to gain Milan was in the war of Polish Succession: Charles Emmanuel III of Savoy defeated the Austrian troops in a quick campaign in 1733, entered Milan and took the ducal crown for himself. However the peace of Vienna in 1738 forced the Savoyards to relinquish Milan and to be compensated with lands to the west of Ticino river.
 
@ LordKalvan: in 1713 Savoy gained parts of Lombardy and the kingdom of Sicily. Only after the war of the Quadruple alliance (1718-1720) they were forced to trade Sicily for the less important kingdom of Sardinia.

Anyway in 1713, if Savoy gains the duchy of Milan (or most of it), then the kingdom is off the table, then they can only hope to also secure the kingdom of Sardinia right away.

Also this is naturally a very Savoy point of view, France under the house of Valois was also very interested in Milan, as where the Habsburgs; the duchy of Milan is very close to the Austrian Hereditary Lands of the house of Habsburg. Both were in a much stronger position to position. Savoy often had to manoeuvre between France, Spain and Austria, which could backfire, since none completely trusted them.
 
@ LordKalvan: in 1713 Savoy gained parts of Lombardy and the kingdom of Sicily. Only after the war of the Quadruple alliance (1718-1720) they were forced to trade Sicily for the less important kingdom of Sardinia.

Anyway in 1713, if Savoy gains the duchy of Milan (or most of it), then the kingdom is off the table, then they can only hope to also secure the kingdom of Sardinia right away.

Also this is naturally a very Savoy point of view, France under the house of Valois was also very interested in Milan, as where the Habsburgs; the duchy of Milan is very close to the Austrian Hereditary Lands of the house of Habsburg. Both were in a much stronger position to position. Savoy often had to manoeuvre between France, Spain and Austria, which could backfire, since none completely trusted them.

Isn't what I said? Maybe I did condense too much my explanation (see the exchange between Sicily and Sardinia: Sicily was too far away for the Savoy to hold, not to mention its relatively large population. The exchange was forced on them, but I don't think they were too upset by it: the invasion of 1718 had clearly demonstrated the difficulty of defending the island against an invasion force). I simply glitched over this passage, since it had no impact on the OP.

The point is that the Savoy would have been much happier if they had the chance to gain Milan in 1713, even if there would have been no royal title to go with it. However Milan was never on the table: not in 1713, not in 1738 and certainly not in 1748. Lombardy was too rich a prize, even after 150 years of Spanish domination and bad government, and the three powers fighting for it (Spain, France and Austria) would never had relinquished such a plum to a second-tier power like Savoy.

IMHO the Savoy got the best they could reasonably get out of the continuous wars of the first half of the 18th century: a reasonably secure border both in the east and the west, minor but rewarding territories in southern and eastern Piedmont and a royal crown (out of a poor and slightly populated island, but still....). However the most important achievement was that they retained (and strengthened) their independence, which was not a given. If I may turn around your final comment, "Savoy often had to manoeuvre between France, Spain and Austria, which could backfire, since they could never completely trust anyone of these powers."
 
(...) Savoy often had to manoeuvre between France, Spain and Austria, which could backfire, since none completely trusted them.

(...) If I may turn around your final comment, "Savoy often had to manoeuvre between France, Spain and Austria, which could backfire, since they could never completely trust anyone of these powers."

I'd argue both are true and strengthen each other, since they tend to confirm each other.

Having to trade Sicily for Sardinia, is losing the big price, they didn't necessarily want nor realistically could hold, for something less valuable they were able to hold. IMHO a painful loss, but I agree realistically it wasn't that bad; perhaps by this point the ruler of Savoy was content, that he stayed a king.

I also don't dispute, that given the fact, that other stronger powers were also interested in the duchy of Milan, Savoy never had much of a chance to gain the entire duchy.
I also fully agree, that Savoy retaining their independence, arguably is a rather undervalued achievement. Something another less optimal placed medium power, Lorraine couldn't; though dynastically speaking being able to inherit the Austrian Habsburgs and obtaining Tuscany isn't too bad.
Savoy OTOH stayed around, their ruler even rejected to exchange Savoy-Piedmont for Naples-Sicily (it was proposed during negotiations, before the war of the Spanish Succession); though to be fair to Lorraine, that duchy had been occupied by the French on more than one occasion (that drove them straight in the Habsburg camp).
 
Top