Visconti unites Italy - what happens next?

After the Florentine surrender, there will be a podesta' appointed by GG as highest office holder in Florence, and a Milanese garrison. That should be enough to keep the Florentines to their side of the bargain. Not to mention the positive hate of the other Tuscan cities (with Pisa and Siena in the frontline) for Florence.
On a more positive side, the central administration and the rationalization of taxes and duties which had been started by GG OTL (and should be completed by him ITTL) should be a big incentive for the merchant and banker class to play ball.
This would work also for the other cities too, obviously. AFAIK, the cities and towns grabbed by GG were never wrung dry, nor were excessive political reprisals allowed.
I always got the impression that the Florentine civic pride might interfere with attempts to dominate the city state, but your arguments are sound. Wouldn't trust them in a pinch though.

Asfar as the Marches of Ancona are concerned, I'm becoming more and more convinced that GG would use his old allies, the Malatestas, as viceroys, maybe even resurrecting the old Carolingian title of Wardens of the Marches of Ancona (but Ancona itself - as along standing free republic and the chief harbor on the Adriatic - would probably be ruleddirectly by him through a podesta;
Interesting idea, certainly. Would probably be easier than ruling the area directly from Milan.

Which pope? at the moment there are two incumbents, one in Rome and one in Avignon, and if things do go on for a few years as per OTL there is a good chance a third one will be appointed too. Plenty of elbow room and opportunity for the wily GG.
The Pope in Rome, after the end of the schism in this case. That said, I believe we already established that the schism might be prolonged in this scenario, so whether my argument is valid or not depends on whether or not it ends as it did OTL.

OTOH the emperor is in a penurious state and always in need of money. Which is another nice thing for the newly created (and very solvent) duke of Milan. My idea is that GG will negotiate/buy/extort whichever title will be available from both sides (and will play a major and well rewarded role in the composition of the schism).
I could certainly see GG buying himself some more ducal titles and the like, but the Iron Crown itself seems a bit much. There's an Imperial title called "Arch-chancellor of Italy" that sounds like a decent compromise, but as it belonged to the Archbishop of Cologne it seems unlikely that GG could get his hands on it.


I am not saying they will be allied forever. I'm just pointing out that there are sound commercial reasons to cooperate and no real-life reason to be on opposite camps. In a couple of generations this may change, or maybe not. What I know is that both the Visconti and the Serenissima would benefit in a major way by cooperating with each other, and that GG is well above the average run-of-the-mill petty prince.
I suppose it's not too hard to believe that they could stay on friendly terms as long as their respective leaders remain more concerned about long-term profit than conquest then.


Probably yes. Actually I should say most certainly.
GG still remembers when the Aragonese crown vetoed his marriage proposal to Maria of Sicily (and sent a fleet to harass the Pisan ship he had despatched to bring the queen to North Italy). Then there is the troubled times the kingdom of Naples is going to live in the next couple of decades, as well as the above mentioned Aragonese dynastic crisis.
A lot will depend on the settlement of the schism (the pope is still the formal overlord of the crowns of Naples and Sicily), and what GG can get out of the settlement.
It should be also mentioned that the Genoese mercantile interests would be very opposed to an Aragonese expansion in southern Italy (and IOTL Filippo Maria Visconti supported the intervention of Renee d'Anjou for this very reason).

Obviously ITTL GG would be in a much stronger position than his son was IOTL, and his strategy would be different. He might even push for his younger son (said Filippo Maria) to marry Joan of Naples (the bride would be quite older than the groom, but it has never been a major obstacle in dynastic marriages) which would unite the kingdom of Naples with the Viscontean holdings. Alternatively he might look for a fight against the Aragonese in the kingdom of Naples (mainly by subversion) and in Sardinia (leveraging on the old Visconti claim on the Judicate of Gallura, which came from the Pisan branch of the Visconti, as well as on the Genoese strongholds in Corsica and Northern Sardinia and supporting the still independent Judicate of Arborea). There could even be a royal crown in this, possibly even two. Note that Venice would certainly be happy to support naval operation against Puglia.
Some interesting opportunities for expansion here. Would certainly be interesting to see an almost entirely united Italian peninsula in the 15th century, even if the unity of such a country would be tenuous at best. (Even with GG's bureaucracy)

I do wonder what would happen if, in a scenario where we have a Visconti Naples, the French still decide they want to go on an Italian expedition once the HYW is wrapped up. IIRC Valois Burgundy and Milan were on mostly very good terms OTL, but I am not sure if such an alliance would help much in this case. (This is assuming France will even be in a position to gain or exercise the claims in question though.)

Sardinia was a mess and I won't even pretend to understand what went on there back then. I do know Genoa had some holdings there, but that's about it.
 
The age of the free communes is an end, and the oligarchic family who control Florence are fighting against the tide of change. IOTL Cosimo the Elder became in fact (if not in name) lord of Florence using the support of the lower classes against the same oligarchy. Looking at the matter from another point of view, the vaunted Florentine libertas was just applicable to the oligarchs of Florence: neither the rest of Tuscany nor the middle and low classes of Florence proper could get a taste of it. In many ways the Visconti overlordship was much less demanding (and less extortive)than the Florentine one. I really doubt there will be a lot of problems for GG in Tuscany.

IMHO for a few years (say up to 1406 or so) GG should be free to concentrate in the consolidation of his domains, and in completing his fiscal and bureaucratic reforms. It is quite possible that he may give leave to the Malatesta in bringing to an end their long-standing feud with the Montefeltro, but it will be not his main focus. On the other hand Padua is a bit of a personal affront, and I think will be dealt with expeditiously.

There are however 3 major events which will draw most of GG's attention: one is obviously the schism, and its solution (or lack thereof). The second one concerns France: there is a major dynastic crisis coming up at the end of the decade, and there is no reason to believe that the 100 years war will not flare up again in 1415 (which will open good possibilities of retaking Genoa, and possibly meddling with the lords of lower Piedmont and the Savoy). The third is the Aragonese dynastic crisis, coming up at the same time (and again opportunities for meddling in the kingdom of Naples and in Sardinia).
 
If you want to get a united Kingdom of (northern) Italy, the best bet would probably to have the Viscontis expanding throughout the north but keeping the title of Duke. After a few generations their rule becomes less precarious as their subjects get used to the new political situation. Later some kind of spat breaks out between the Pope and the Emperor, and the Pope makes the Duke of Milan into the King of Italy to annoy the HRE.
 
The age of the free communes is an end, and the oligarchic family who control Florence are fighting against the tide of change. IOTL Cosimo the Elder became in fact (if not in name) lord of Florence using the support of the lower classes against the same oligarchy. Looking at the matter from another point of view, the vaunted Florentine libertas was just applicable to the oligarchs of Florence: neither the rest of Tuscany nor the middle and low classes of Florence proper could get a taste of it. In many ways the Visconti overlordship was much less demanding (and less extortive)than the Florentine one. I really doubt there will be a lot of problems for GG in Tuscany.

IMHO for a few years (say up to 1406 or so) GG should be free to concentrate in the consolidation of his domains, and in completing his fiscal and bureaucratic reforms. It is quite possible that he may give leave to the Malatesta in bringing to an end their long-standing feud with the Montefeltro, but it will be not his main focus. On the other hand Padua is a bit of a personal affront, and I think will be dealt with expeditiously.

There are however 3 major events which will draw most of GG's attention: one is obviously the schism, and its solution (or lack thereof). The second one concerns France: there is a major dynastic crisis coming up at the end of the decade, and there is no reason to believe that the 100 years war will not flare up again in 1415 (which will open good possibilities of retaking Genoa, and possibly meddling with the lords of lower Piedmont and the Savoy). The third is the Aragonese dynastic crisis, coming up at the same time (and again opportunities for meddling in the kingdom of Naples and in Sardinia).

Even then, it won't be realistic for Visconti's heirs to rule the whole peninsula; there are too many powers with a vested interest in preventing that.
 
Even then, it won't be realistic for Visconti's heirs to rule the whole peninsula; there are too many powers with a vested interest in preventing that.

The same might be said of France, Spain, Great Britain: you mention it.
There are always powers with a vested interest in preventing unification and centralization, until they are dealt with and then everyone applauds the new king/overlord/tyrant/insert title here.

The window of opportunity for GG was caused by the parlous conditions of papacy and HRE, as well as by the fact that both France and Aragon were fast heading into troubles. A plurality of the Italian city states and lordships had already been annexed by 1400, and the others did not have the strength, the will and the money to resist.
I'm not saying that it was a done thing, but GG was a gifted man as well as a ruthless one: by the adroit use of gold, soldiers, diplomats and assassins he might have done it.
 
The same might be said of France, Spain, Great Britain: you mention it.
There are always powers with a vested interest in preventing unification and centralization, until they are dealt with and then everyone applauds the new king/overlord/tyrant/insert title here.

The window of opportunity for GG was caused by the parlous conditions of papacy and HRE, as well as by the fact that both France and Aragon were fast heading into troubles. A plurality of the Italian city states and lordships had already been annexed by 1400, and the others did not have the strength, the will and the money to resist.
I'm not saying that it was a done thing, but GG was a gifted man as well as a ruthless one: by the adroit use of gold, soldiers, diplomats and assassins he might have done it.

Except that these powers and the Church actively sought to prevent Italian unification at every opportunity until roughly 1859.
 
The window of opportunity for GG was caused by the parlous conditions of papacy and HRE, as well as by the fact that both France and Aragon were fast heading into troubles. A plurality of the Italian city states and lordships had already been annexed by 1400, and the others did not have the strength, the will and the money to resist.
I'm not saying that it was a done thing, but GG was a gifted man as well as a ruthless one: by the adroit use of gold, soldiers, diplomats and assassins he might have done it.

A plurality of Northern Italian city-states and lordships, you mean. Some of those who "acknowledged" in some form, the overlordship of GG, like Siena, viewed it as a strategic convenience while pursuing very independent agendas. I think you badly underestimate the other portions of the peninsula who would have resisted and may have very well done so collectively. Granted, there were windows of opportunity where the Kingdom of Naples was having succession issues, and the Papacy and Venice had her issues. But whether or not GG could have taken advantage of this at the right time while also being absorbed in his previous acquisitions is an arguable point. Such a dire threat can have a wonderfully concentrating effect on squabbling states.

Besides, although GG was known to entertain uniting N. Italy, I haven't heard that his ambitions extended to the entire peninsula. There is also the issue that even if GG had lived long enough to consolidate his rule, his heirs were not remotely of the same caliber. Gian's unified N. Italy, let alone an united Italy may not have survived him.
 
Last edited:
A plurality of Northern Italian city-states and lordships, you mean. Some of those who "acknowledged" in some form, the overlordship of GG, like Siena, viewed it as a strategic convenience while pursuing very independent agendas. I think you badly underestimate the other portions of the peninsula who would have resisted and may have very well done so collectively. Granted, there were windows of opportunity where the Kingdom of Naples was having succession issues, and the Papacy and Venice had her issues. But whether or not GG could have taken advantage of this at the right time while also being absorbed in his previous acquisitions is an arguable point. Such a dire threat can have a wonderfully concentrating effect on squabbling states.

Besides, although GG was known to entertain uniting N. Italy, I haven't heard that his ambitions extended to the entire peninsula. There is also the issue that even if GG had lived long enough to consolidate his rule, his heirs were not remotely of the same caliber. Gian's unified N. Italy, let alone an united Italy may not have survived him.

I would say a plurality of Northern and Central city states and seignuries: after all GG enjoyed the lordship over most of Umbria (including Perugia, Gubbio, Norcia and Spoleto), all of Tuscany (the assumption is that GG survives and when he died the Florentines were negotiating a surrender) and portions of the Marche (and he was known to be stirring the soup among the lords of Inner Latium).

When I was discussing the issue in a similar TL, my feeling was that GG would stop his expansion for a few years and consolidate his domains: he was not Atilla the Conqueror and the fact that by 1398 he started in earnest a complete reform of the bureaucracy and the tax system makes me think that he was aware of the need to centralize and streamline the government.
From an immediate security POV the traditional and proven way to control a city was a garrison esconced in the fortress: anyway cities were not monolithic blocks, the number of factions and the feuds between the noble families of any given city or town were usually so heated that quite aways the supreme magistrate was a foreigner, enthoned as podesta' in the hope he would not be embroilered with current factions. By the way I never read anywhere that GG governed by fear and the sword nor that he was inclined to blood baths: which makes sense since the Black Death went through Italy just a couple of generations above, and the main issue in GG time was to find willing workers not to kill them.

The only exception to the consolidation hiatus might be Padua, since there is a personal feud with Novello da Carrara; he might also give a free hand to his faithfull allies, the Malatesta, to sort out their grievances and ancient feuds with the Montefeltro family. Both are side shows, though. There is also the schism game afoot, but that's a diplomatic game not a war: my guess is that it's not really in GG's best interest to broach a solution, much better to stir the pot and use the time to consolidate Romagna and central Italy. Which means that it's likely there will be no council of Pisa (not that it made a big splash OTL either) although the emperor might try to call a council in Switzerland or Southern Germany.

The Visconti strategy may become again more aggressive by 1410, when the Aragonese are embroilered in their succession crisis and France and England are going to have another bout in the 100 years war. The best move he might do is reassert his seignoury over Genoa and maybe Mantua (the latter if the Gonzaga have not seen the writing on the wall and are still being difficult).
Ferrara is another possibility, but in alliance with Venice. Sardinia is a bit of a stretch (even if the Visconti had a claim over one judicate and Sardinia bring a regal crown).

GG never wrote a political testament detailing which were his aims. Maybe he was just an opportunist taking advantage of unsettled times and most likely he had not fixed a particular objective: certainly he wanted to be the biggest cheese in Italy and by a mix of force, diplomacy, cunning and bribery almost got there. He was also one of the first Italian lords to feel the first wind of renaissance and his court in Pavia was stacked with humanists and savants (first among them Petrarca). This, together with the major hidraulic works he commissioned to regulate the irrigation in Lombardy and the building of the magnificent Certosa of Pavia are the best legacy to his name.
 
Except that these powers and the Church actively sought to prevent Italian unification at every opportunity until roughly 1859.

True, even if there was just a single instance before 1848: the war against Venice in i512.
And the papacy was against any single ruler over Italy: no big news, they did it to the Goths, then the Lombards, then the HRE during the Investitures quarrell.

But who can come and mess up things in the first decade of 1400? the best bet would be France but they are allies (of a sort) with GG and the troubles with the English would not allow the to mount any serious foray into Italy.
And there is not a pope, but two: one in Avignon and one in Rome. This changes things a bit, doesn't it?
 
Top