Well, most parts of Italy have one kind or another of "focaccia", and it does not make any sense to say that the "true one" is coming from one place or another. The oldest recorded mention of the word "pizza" is from a lease contract of AD 997, preserved in the archives of Gaeta (a town midway between Rome and Naples, which was a free comune around the start of XI century); it is obviously unclear what the word "pizza" represented, possibly some kind of focaccia made on a festive day.

There was a bakery who sold pizzas in Naples in 1830, most likely a focaccia, seasoned with lard and cheese, and sometimes (but not always) smeared with tomato sauce.
The real breakthrough in terms of widespread recognition of the pizza dates back to the visit of king Umberto and queen Margherita to Naples in 1889: a Neapolitan pizzaiolo presented his creation to the queen, who allegedly liked it very much, saying that he had created this recipe to honor the queen herself and the Italian flag. As I said, similar pizzas were already sold in Naples since the 1830s, but kudos to this guy (Raffaele Esposito) for his commercial initiative: the "pizza Margherita" was born.
IIRC the term "pizza" was born out of the way the very Germanic Lombards pronounced the word "pita". Marinara should already be a thing around 1848, if I am not very much mistaken it was the pizza fishermen had as a meal whenever there was a bad catch (from what I gather, in Naples the most popular variety was with small fishes). As for the Margherita, ITTL it should arise with a different name, and probably be less popular. However, some tricolor recipe may well become popular due to the high patriotic hype of 1848. I guess we could have a "chicken a la Goito", akin to the "Marengo chicken" after the famous battle. One thing that hopefully will never see the sun is the Alfredo sauce, much to my satisfaction XD
 
I guess we could have a "chicken a la Goito", akin to the "Marengo chicken" after the famous battle. One thing that hopefully will never see the sun is the Alfredo sauce, much to my satisfaction XD
You are forgetting the Gradisca goose: melting in the mouth when properly cooked XD XD
 
Narrative Interlude #38: A quiet walk in the park
Villa Pindemonte, 8 April 1848 - Late Afternoon

Ferdinando and Camillo were strolling slowly in the park, talking quietly:
"Tell me about your meeting with the Milanese, Camillo. Was it possible to reach an acceptable compromise between Casati's liberals and Cattaneo's democrats?"

"I would certainly say so, Ferdinando. Given current circumstances, we made a very generous offer: self-government under the Crown of Lombardy in personal union with the Crown of Sardinia, with their own parliament for internal matters, an independent judiciary and their own representatives in the future Confederal Parliament. For the time being, they will adopt the Statute granted by your father to Sardinia and the same electoral laws, but they will be entitled to convene a Constitutional Convention for Lombardy once the war is over. The elections will be called for the first and the second Sundays in May (1), and on the first Sunday there will be also a plebiscite: "Do you want an autonomous kingdom of Lombardy, with the crown being held by the king of Sardinia in personal union?". The republicans didn't even make a big fuss or asked for a republican form as an alternative in the plebiscite. I believe they are smart enough to realize that there is no chance the republic might win a plebiscite: actually, they are correctly fearing that it would poll very badly, in particular in the countryside, and therefore they prefer not to have an actual count. The only serious objection was that the electoral franchise should be widened for the parliamentary elections, but it was mostly a pro-forma. I see Ferrari 's influence here, based on his personal experience in France: the democrats are not yet ready to contest the election in the countryside, therefore widening the franchise would end up loosing seats. I do agree with his analysis, and it is also my preference that the democrats gain a reasonable number of members of Parliament."

"Am I correctly understanding your words? Are you saying that you want a strong left in Parliament? This time you managed to surprise me, Camillo."

"There is a method to my apparent madness. First of all, we do not want the left marginalized in Parliament: if such were the case, they would go back to the streets, led by the worst fire-breathers (2). In second place, the "liberals" are not, or at least not yet, a party with enough experience in governing. Worse than that, given free reins they might almost certainly turn into a myopic bunch, with a vested interest to promote only those reforms which immediately benefit themselves. They already got a constitution, they will soon get autonomy, they get representation in Parliament. At this point, they will start to become an oligarchy and will refuse to consider the needs of the poorest classes (3). There are many other reforms which need to be implemented: we discussed some of them yesterday night, but if I remember correctly we never spoke about what needs to be done to change our relations with the Church, to bring them in tune with modern times. Ferdinando, the French revolution of 1830 was in many ways similar to what we are doing now, leaving only aside the presence of the Austrian interlopers in Italy, which works in our favor, and the presence of a Pope in Rome who is also a temporal ruler, which is not a minor problem. Unfortunately, Guizot did not understand what needed to be done, and created an oligarchy during the eighteen years of his premiership, slowly moving from liberal into conservative and in the end verging on reactionary (4). I was a Guizot partisan in the early 1830s, I was in favor of his juste milieu, and it took me some time to open my eyes to his many faults. I say this to my chagrin, but at least now I know better than to repeat the same mistakes. By comparison, the British Parliament has done better, in particular since Lord Grey became prime minister, and didn't even need a revolution to kickstart a reforming process. The electoral reform has been done, and the Corn Laws have been repealed, but it was not done at a stroke of a pen: it was carried out gradually, grinding down the opposition of many of the members of his party, finding new allies, overcoming the opposition of the House of Lords. The electoral reform re-arranged the electoral map of England, reducing the influence of the great land owners and giving representation to the industrial interests of the manufacturing cities, which in turn supported the abolition of the Corn Laws (5). It was to their own benefit, obviously, but it was also to the benefit of the general public and the poorest classes. I am not saying that Great Britain is paradise on earth, and for sure there are other reforms which are needed, but it is easy to see that the revolution which has spread very quickly over most of Europe has not affected much the British. I'm not advocating a repetition of the same path which worked in Great Britain, the social and political landscapes are very different: I believe it would be prudent to consider how other countries dealt with their own problems: otherwise we will be stuck between the rock of the reaction and the hard place of revolution. My apologies for this long and dreary speech (6), but I felt it was needed. We will need to carry out many reforms, but we also want to control the pace: this means that we need to expand the base which supports our political strategy, and the democrats, at least the moderates among them, are necessary. It will not be an alliance, much less a marriage: I like calling it a "connubio" ( 7), it's such a nice and useful word." Camillo looked Ferdinando in the eyes, with an impish smile on his lips: "If you want to call me a socialist, you are welcome: I don't really care.(8)"

"I will never do that, Camillo. What you say makes certainly sense, even if the reasoning behind it makes our political strategy vis-a-vis the Confederation a very straightforward proposition.
I will need to think about all the implications, but I admit that I cannot match your slippery ways in the murky waters of politics.
Now let me give you a recount of the parley I had earlier with Archduke Ranieri. I am surprised you didn't ask me at once."

"The parley was affecting the military sphere, where I am less than conversant. I am also sure that it went well, am I right?"

"I think so, although we will have to wait to know for sure. Ranieri was accompanied by Prince Schwarzenberg (9) and by General von Haynau (10). Their nose was certainly put a bit out of joint by seeing whom I brought to the parley and by the flags we were showing, but overall the encounter was civil enough. Ranieri was a bit morose, and left Schwarzenberg to speak on his behalf. He proposed a cease fire, which was denied. My request were quite straightforward, and not negotiable: the Austrian garrison had 48 hours to stack their muskets, and leave the city; no gun would be spiked and no damage would be done to the fortifications or to the civilians. All Austrians troops would be taken to a prisoner camp, to be released upon the signature of a peace treaty. All officers above the rank of captain would be released on parole, together with their dependents and any Austrian civilian, and escorted to Salorno to cross into Austrian territory. I made pretty clear that the investment was complete, and there was no possibility of a relieving army reaching Verona. I gave them a quick brief of the military situation, which did not improve their mood. Upon the expiration of the ultimatum our siege guns would open fire against the walls of Verona. In such a case, the offer of paroling the top officers was off. Any and all atrocities or mistreatment of the civilian population would be investigated, and the commanders of the garrison would be held responsible for them. My bluntness enraged von Haynau, a very unpleasant man, but von Schwarzenberg managed to keep him under check. It was a short meeting, since there was nothing to negotiate. I think that Schwarzenberg will cast the deciding vote. Ranieri has never been a man for big decisions, and von Haynau does not have the seniority or the political skills. It looks like we have to wait until day after tomorrow, but I am confident enough."

Footnotes
  1. The electoral law in Sardinia was over two turns​
  2. This happened in France IOTL: the Left vacated the assembly, and organized a major demonstration in the streets for mid-May.​
  3. This happened in France IOTL: by the end of May the "Party of Order" was dominating the Assembly​
  4. From 1846, Guizot became very closely aligned to Metternich, and was against constitutions being granted by the Italian states.​
  5. Historical. The new industrialists wanted cheap bread for their workers, and after the electoral reform had the clout to support the repeal of the Corn Laws​
  6. The apology is pro-forma only. Cavour wrote down verbatim all he said in his diary entry for the day​
  7. There is no perfect correspondence in English: it's basically an informal union or better a parliamentary alliance. OTL Cavour framed this alliance with the moderate left of Rattazzi to push through parliament the abolition of the privileges of the clergy and the dissolution of many religious orders opposed by the conservatives​
  8. IOTL, Bismarck spoke these words in the Reichstag in 1883, during the discussion on insurance for the workers​
  9. Prince Schwarzenberg was a protégé of Metternich and a career diplomat. IOTL he arrived in Verona from Naples, where he was ambassador, and later on fought at Goito. After the end of the Italian campaign, he went to Vienna as Radetzki's liaison with the Austrian government, and in October 1848 was made prime minister. TTL, he barely manages to reach Verona, but cannot leave: he is going to argue in favor of surrendering Verona, feeling the need to reach Vienna as soon as possible.​
  10. General von Haynau had quite a bad record IOTL: in 1849 he became known as the "butcher of Brescia" for the atrocities committed in repressing the insurrection of the city, and later on he doubled down in Hungary, where he ordered the hanging of 13 Hungarian generals who had surrendered to his troops in the last days of Hungarian insurrection. IOTL, he was posted in Hungary in 1848, but it would have been a pity to deny him a very minor part in the cast for the Italian campaign.​
Made in @LordKalvan
 
Good work guys, I love how you two reconstruct, dissect and expose so clearly the politics, the nuances... I hope to read more soon.

p.s. If I were a Lombard republican/democrat (like i am in OTL) in 1848, I would ask for republic in the plebiscite... rabidly
 
Good work guys, I love how you two reconstruct, dissect and expose so clearly the politics, the nuances... I hope to read more soon.

p.s. If I were a Lombard republican/democrat (like i am in OTL) in 1848, I would ask for republic in the plebiscite... rabidly

I'd take a Nordic dem-soc monarchy over a conservative, corrupt republic any day but, since Scandinavia was a backwater back then, I would've been among those voting for a republic, too. :p
 
Good work guys, I love how you two reconstruct, dissect and expose so clearly the politics, the nuances... I hope to read more soon
Thank you. @Tarabas and I believe in world building, and in the exploration of alternative ways to shape the future of Italy: which requires politics more than anything else.
Next interlude should deal with the surrender of Verona (I think that for once I can give you a lil peek in the future :)) and some information about the situation in Friuli.
Then Rome, where things are coming to a boiling point, and I assume that some readers would like to know what has happened to the three young guys who were spied upon by the informant. Finally Naples, which has been on the backburner for now, but where the political landscape is murkier than ever.
We'll try to avoid keeping you hanging for long, but unfortunately RL might have a different opinion 😏.
 
It's back. :D

Here's hoping Cavour's strategy will work.
We will have to see how things play out, but Cavour's political strategy is not wildly different from what he managed IOTL (although ITTL he has been dealt a much stronger hand of cards, and this might certainly enhance his clarity of political vision). Another thing which is going to play in his favor is the full immersion that Isola della Scala is providing, as well as the opportunity to get to know better and more personally most of the players.
In the end, I am quietly optimistic 😉😉
 
p.s. If I were a Lombard republican/democrat (like i am in OTL) in 1848, I would ask for republic in the plebiscite... rabidly

I'd take a Nordic dem-soc monarchy over a conservative, corrupt republic any day but, since Scandinavia was a backwater back then, I would've been among those voting for a republic, too.
It is practically impossible to imagine a plebiscite in 1848 where the republican option would prevail over a monarchist one, the more so in TTL Lombardy, where the package offered to the Lombards features both autonomy and a say in the constitutional arrangement. Which is why the republican option is not included in the plebiscite, and the republicans themselves are accepting it without too much fuss.
Both you guys would be Ferdinando's partisans if an ASB transported you to TTL's 1848: don't you dare deny it XD XD
 
Both you guys would be Ferdinando's partisans if an ASB transported you to TTL's 1848: don't you dare deny it XD XD
Since Lombardy will be in a personal union so nominal it will eventually get its own constitution (a far more democratic one than Piedmont's at that) and representation (potentially even a greater amount of it than Piedmont's, due to Lombardy's greater population) it'd be like voting for a republic in all but name, anyway. :p
 
Since Lombardy will be in a personal union so nominal it will eventually get its own constitution (a far more democratic one than Piedmont's at that) and representation (potentially even a greater amount of it than Piedmont's, due to Lombardy's greater population) it'd be like voting for a republic in all but name, anyway. :p
A "far more democratic" constitution might be a bridge too far: baby steps and all that. Ideally, the constitution of Lombardy will be the footprint for the revision of the Albertine Statute and also for the Confederal Constitution.
As I see things, it is more important to build on solid foundations than to fight over the internal décor.
Given a viable parliament, the difference between a republic or a monarchy is not really important (as demonstrated by the outcome of the constitutional crisis over the Siccardi laws IOTL).
 
Absolutely amazing, I don't know how I managed to miss this masterpiece!!! This it is the timeline I dreamed of !!! Keep it up!!
 

Arrix85

Donor
I do wonder what the consequence of a confederation will be on the regional languages of Italy. (I always tell my students that Piedmontese, Lombard, .... are NOT Italian dialects, they are Latin dialects like Tuscan), from what I gather they are way more spoken in the South, maybe they'll do better also here up North?
 
Contrary to what would be natural to think, I don't believe that even the Confederal approach will do much to keep regional dialects alive and kicking.
The big game changers are mass education and urbanization (which cannot be avoided), and are ultimately byproducts of the industrial revolution.
Lack of literacy, poor or no knowledge of the national language and poor or no knowledge of what happens in the world outside can be survived when the world of an individual is limited to his little town or village, but when someone has to move to a big city to find a job in a factory (or even has to migrate to a different region if not a different continent) these become huge handicaps.
Incidentally, the better times which are on the horizon for Italy (both in political and economic terms) do not mean that Italian migration to the Americas or to Australia will be substantially reduced. If anything, it is quite possible that Italian migrants will start to go earlier (Italian migrations numbers became really significant only after 1880): between 1846 and 1873 (when the big economic downturn happened) almost 10 million Western and Northern Europeans migrated to the USA and Canada, but there were only a few Italians among them. Migrating in the 1860s means that not everyone stops to work in the industrial mills and factories of the N-E USA, a significant portion of these migrants became farmers in the mid-West, or even went to the Western Coast, following the discovery of the gold fields in California.
There is always the handicap of the language and the catholic religion, but it can be overturned, in particular if the migration is financially supported by backers in the Old Country (like it happened for a significant percentages of German migrants).
 
Top