Plausibility: Parliamentary Kingdom of Sicily

  • Thread starter Deleted member 67076
  • Start date

Deleted member 67076

Since 1097, the Norman Kingdom of Sicily had a Parliament, one of the earliest in Europe. Made up of 3 parts (Feudal Representatives, Ecclesiastical Representatives and "State Property"; i.e, Burghers), the Parliament regularly met as an advisory council to the King.

Though it continued until the 1840s, Parliament was never able to grow in strength as that of its British counterpart. (Or even its Spanish ones)

Is there a way that the kingdom can develop into a Parliamentary Democracy over time?
 
Good possibilities are the Sicilian branch of the House of Barcellona not getting extinct and therefore the island keeping his independence for a longer time, which would lead to even greater power for the local aristocracy (but that would be problematic for the development of a burgher and/or squire class which seem very important for British style parliamentarism) or the 1812 constitution actually being enforced and maybe extended to the continental part when the Bourbons are restored there.
The later is much more "democratic" but how to make the King realise it would be in his long term interests too? A xix century solution is also problematic because of the great likelihood of an eventual Italian unification. Maybe... in a scenario where Murat is allowed to keep Naples, Sicily could remain a sort of British protectorate (sulphur, winemakers, fisheries are all interesting resources for Britain, but making it an outright colony seems excessive) and the king would at that point be influenced to a parliamentarian persuasion.

Since 1097, the Norman Kingdom of Sicily had a Parliament, one of the earliest in Europe. Made up of 3 parts (Feudal Representatives, Ecclesiastical Representatives and "State Property"; i.e, Burghers), the Parliament regularly met as an advisory council to the King.

Though it continued until the 1840s, Parliament was never able to grow in strength as that of its British counterpart. (Or even its Spanish ones)

Is there a way that the kingdom can develop into a Parliamentary Democracy over time?
 

Deleted member 67076

Good possibilities are the Sicilian branch of the House of Barcellona not getting extinct and therefore the island keeping his independence for a longer time, which would lead to even greater power for the local aristocracy (but that would be problematic for the development of a burgher and/or squire class which seem very important for British style parliamentarism)
However, would keeping independence allow for the Kingdom to avoid its economic stagnation and thus aid its Burgher class? Or would that require going back to preventing foreign interventions all the way back to Frederick II? (Which would be interesting to see)
 
However, would keeping independence allow for the Kingdom to avoid its economic stagnation and thus aid its Burgher class? Or would that require going back to preventing foreign interventions all the way back to Frederick II? (Which would be interesting to see)

The problem is that strong barons will likely mean weak demanial ("free") cities and a focus on extensive agriculture.

Fred was extremely centralising and tried something similar to "state capitalism". Whether that was beneficial or a disaster is up to debate. Honestly I think that avoiding the split between Naples/Apulia and Sicily and the almost 90 years of on/off warfare that followed the vesper insurrection of 1282 would be a great boon for the kingdom and maybe having strong kings at that point, able to reduce the political power of the great feudalism might sow the seeds for a future parliamentarian regime.

About the Sicilian Vespers... it seems that initially, before inviting Peter of Aragon, the Sicilian cities tried to find recognition from the Pope as free communes. The Sicilian Parliament might ahve become a sort of council for the league of Sicilian cities, wouldn't that be cool?
 

Deleted member 67076

The problem is that strong barons will likely mean weak demanial ("free") cities and a focus on extensive agriculture.
That's a very good point.

Fred was extremely centralising and tried something similar to "state capitalism". Whether that was beneficial or a disaster is up to debate. Honestly I think that avoiding the split between Naples/Apulia and Sicily and the almost 90 years of on/off warfare that followed the vesper insurrection of 1282 would be a great boon for the kingdom and maybe having strong kings at that point, able to reduce the political power of the great feudalism might sow the seeds for a future parliamentarian regime.

About the Sicilian Vespers... it seems that initially, before inviting Peter of Aragon, the Sicilian cities tried to find recognition from the Pope as free communes. The Sicilian Parliament might ahve become a sort of council for the league of Sicilian cities, wouldn't that be cool?
Hmm, ok so suppose the Aragonese managed to win with both sides of Sicily intact, kicking out Charles of Anjou definitively. However, in response to Aragonese rule (and in reaction to Charles' centralization) local nobles and the cities strikes a bargain to king Peter, offering to elect him in exchange for granting them partial autonomy and a say in government affairs via Parliament. This means like in Britain, Parliament now has a cemented say in the government. Yet at the same time, the Barons aren't overwhelmingly in charge.

Could this be a path forward to Parliamentary democracy?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That's a very good point.


Hmm, ok so suppose the Aragonese managed to win with both sides of Sicily intact, kicking out Charles of Anjou definitively. However, in response to Aragonese rule (and in reaction to Charles' centralization) local nobles and the cities strikes a bargain to king Peter, offering to elect him in exchange for granting them partial autonomy and a say in government affairs via Parliament. This means like in Britain, Parliament now has a cemented say in the government. Yet at the same time, the Barons aren't overwhelmingly in charge.

Could this be a path forward to Parliamentary democracy?
It could very well be. Obviously it rests on many things going in the desired direction over the years, but it seems possible to me (with the caveat that ousting the Anjous from Naples at that stage would be quite difficult).
 
Top