Ways for an earlier Italian Unification

  • Thread starter Deleted member 67076
  • Start date

Deleted member 67076

So I'm planning a timeline that involves an early Italian unifcation or at least co-operation by the various city states, and was wondering on the various ways this could be accomplished. Now by early I'm talking at the middle ages with the earliest in the 800s. Is there a plausible way for this to occur?

Bonus points if you can get Italy to unite under a republic or as a Second Western Roman Empire
 
Something based around the Holy Roman Empire under Frederick II is the earliest post-roman unification that is actually an Italian nation I could ever see, basically in this scenario he would split the empire between its Italian bits (and Sicily) to one kid and the German part to someone else (possibly a different line of Hohenstaufens or a different son or something) because of the fact the Empire as it was then was completely unmanageable because effectively Italy and Germany where two entirely seperate realms that where only helpful to one another by dividing the Emperors focus enough for both to retain a high level of de-facto independence. Sicily and the territory of the old Kingdom of Italy are much more manageable in the long run.
 
Could the Ostrogoths or Lombards successfully create a unified Italy and hold onto it?

Could they? Yeah probably. Is it plausible? I find it fairly unlikely. Both where racked with constant infighting in their own kingdoms and pissed away a lot of their strenght in places where that is just not an option if you want to hold on long term.
 

Deleted member 67076

Something based around the Holy Roman Empire under Frederick II is the earliest post-roman unification that is actually an Italian nation I could ever see, basically in this scenario he would split the empire between its Italian bits (and Sicily) to one kid and the German part to someone else (possibly a different line of Hohenstaufens or a different son or something) because of the fact the Empire as it was then was completely unmanageable because effectively Italy and Germany where two entirely seperate realms that where only helpful to one another by dividing the Emperors focus enough for both to retain a high level of de-facto independence. Sicily and the territory of the old Kingdom of Italy are much more manageable in the long run.
Any way for a Republic to develop? Like if one city state conquers the rest

Could the Ostrogoths or Lombards successfully create a unified Italy and hold onto it?

I was thinking more to like after the migrations, dealing with the city states themselves as the primary agents of integration, like say Venice and Florence decide to conquer or something.
 
Any way for a Republic to develop? Like if one city state conquers the rest

The city states where too inward focused, they had military forces of mercenaries a lot of the time but where racked with internal political strife which made long term campaigning against one another for a committed conquest difficult. Especially since Genoa, Venice, and Pisa the three Italian states with the most capability to do so had absolutely no interest in unifying Italy since that distracts from the primary goal of the city states governments, making money. (which was another problem, they really where more concerned about the wealth of the Patricians than actively focusing on costly military stuff).
 
I was thinking more to like after the migrations, dealing with the city states themselves as the primary agents of integration, like say Venice and Florence decide to conquer or something.

While it wouldn't be a unification by the city states the Frederickian plan is the closest you'll probably get given how Frederick himself was more attached to the Italian realms than the German ones and spent more time focusing on Italy than Germany.
 

Deleted member 67076

The city states where too inward focused, they had military forces of mercenaries a lot of the time but where racked with internal political strife which made long term campaigning against one another for a committed conquest difficult. Especially since Genoa, Venice, and Pisa the three Italian states with the most capability to do so had absolutely no interest in unifying Italy since that distracts from the primary goal of the city states governments, making money. (which was another problem, they really where more concerned about the wealth of the Patricians than actively focusing on costly military stuff).

Any way you could change that or at least cause a cultural shift that gets the states to think "Were Italian/Roman" and not he's from Pisa, he's from Venice, Naples, etc?
 
Any way you could change that or at least cause a cultural shift that gets the states to think "Were Italian/Roman" and not he's from Pisa, he's from Venice, Naples, etc?

Not when the city-states are the key to the identity of the citizens involved and their rivalries so intense.

People who see the next _____ over as rivals and enemies aren't going to easily transition into seeing them as "the same as our people" in the sense we're looking for.
 

Deleted member 67076

Not when the city-states are the key to the identity of the citizens involved and their rivalries so intense.

People who see the next _____ over as rivals and enemies aren't going to easily transition into seeing them as "the same as our people" in the sense we're looking for.
Again, so what would be needed to change that perception, an enemy mine situation?

Or can we go the other way around and prevent that notion that we aren't Italian, were from city state _____. What POD, after the Fall of Rome would be needed to get that?
 
Again, so what would be needed to change that perception, an enemy mine situation?

Or can we go the other way around and prevent that notion that we aren't Italian, were from city state _____. What POD, after the Fall of Rome would be needed to get that?

Different political situation.

But this is no more divided than say, ancient Greece.

I think if you still have a divided Italy, you're still going to see the cities and important to identity (depending on how divided).
 

Deleted member 67076

Different political situation.

But this is no more divided than say, ancient Greece.

I think if you still have a divided Italy, you're still going to see the cities and important to identity (depending on how divided).
Would it be plausible for the states to join into an Alliance to defend against, say Frankish incursions in the 700s or against Muslim pirates in the 1000s?
 
Would it be plausible for the states to join into an Alliance to defend against, say Frankish incursions in the 700s or against Muslim pirates in the 1000s?

Not really.

In the 700s, we have the Lombard kingdom, which was defeated and absorbed by Charlemagne (but see later problems), and the 1000s - what to make a temporary alliance of convenience lead to lasting unity?

That's the problem. The city-states don't want to unite like you're proposing.

I'm not going to say it's impossible, but when Genoa and Venice (to name the most famous quarrel) are each other's worst enemy/strongest competitor, they're not going to see common good in the prosperity of "both".
 

Deleted member 67076

Not really.

In the 700s, we have the Lombard kingdom, which was defeated and absorbed by Charlemagne (but see later problems), and the 1000s - what to make a temporary alliance of convenience lead to lasting unity?

That's the problem. The city-states don't want to unite like you're proposing.

I'm not going to say it's impossible, but when Genoa and Venice (to name the most famous quarrel) are each other's worst enemy/strongest competitor, they're not going to see common good in the prosperity of "both".

Then can we start with at least greater Co-operation between the two or to have a Third group disrupt the balance of power and cause them and other states to unite, if briefly. Then someone takes over?
 
Then can we start with at least greater Co-operation between the two or to have a Third group disrupt the balance of power and cause them and other states to unite, if briefly. Then someone takes over?
I don't think so.

Because they don't have any interests in uniting.

If, for example, Pisa starts raiding Genoese ships, Venice is going to be pleased as punch.
 

Deleted member 67076

I don't think so.

Because they don't have any interests in uniting.

If, for example, Pisa starts raiding Genoese ships, Venice is going to be pleased as punch.
Yes we have established that.

So how do you change that and get them to think, "We are Italians" or if not have one conquer the rest?
 
Yes we have established that.

So how do you change that and get them to think, "We are Italians" or if not have one conquer the rest?

I'm not sure there is much of a way in the age of the city-states - they're not interested for the most part in conquest, and there aren't really alternate forces in place within the peninsula (as distinct from say, Frederick II giving the kingdom of Italy and kingdom of Sicily to one son).

I don't want to say an earlier unification is impossible, but I'm not seeing what the motive is for anyone to attempt it, which is the first step.
 
Top