WI/AHC Carolingian Italy became a major power?

We all know the Carolingian Kingdom of italy that existed around 843-961, and how it got annexed into the holy roman empire after Otto I took rome and got crowned there

But what if the kingdom of italy prospered? What if the italian house of Kaarling had "italianized" themselves and united the peninsula+sicily+corsega and Sardegna?

according to this 870 the Carolingian Kingdom of italy even held part of southern france, all the way to Marselle:

843-870_Europe.jpg


And the moors have already invaded southern italy in the 870s, with a PoD having the moors also taking the byzantine provinces in southern italy and the italians pushing the moors before the byzantines got the chance of capturing it we can have a pretty probable PoD
 
If a Karling survived,he will likely have a good claim on the rest of the empire if the male lines of his relatives in West Francia and East Francia died out as in OTL.
 
Firstly, the kings of Italy were not properly "Carolingian" after 896 or so (in the sense of being male-line descendants of Charlemagne), when Arnulf of Carinthia went back to Germany. Arnulf did have a bastard son who was crowned king of Italy, Ratold, but we know almost nothing about him and his "reign" was never more than momentary and nominal. It's possible he was a child, but we don't even know his age. The latest possible POD for a Carolingian Italy probably involves Arnulf not suffering a stroke (or whatever happened to him) and Ratold actually surviving and ruling, but you'd need a truly hypercompetent Ratold to make that work. The end of the 9th century is not a great time to be King of Italy.

Secondly, while Burgundy (that "part of Southern France" you mention) was indeed part of the Lotharingian territory created after Verdun that included Italy, it didn't remain that way very long, and was more frequently under East/West Francian or independent rule. The last person (before the Salian emperors) to rule both in any real sense was Hugh of Arles, who was a Carolingian only through his mother, and he couldn't even manage to control much beyond his home country in Provence.

It's not unbelievable that a Carolingian king could hang on in Italy, and it would make for an interesting TL to have a heir of Charlemagne still ruling in Rome (particularly if the ruling Carolingians still die out in France and Germany). Certainly the story of Germany would be radically altered. I don't see the immediate retention of Burgundy being very likely, however, and "Carolingian Italy" is still going to face many of the same considerable difficulties that the non-Carolingians did in the tumultuous late 9th/early 10th centuries.
 
I mostly agree with Carp, here, except with the definition of kings of Italy as not that "Carolingians". You didn't have that much distinction between senior and junior line at this point, and western Europe dynastical system should be seen as some sort of family system on which various lineages were absorbated (including, at some points, House of Wessex).

Anyway, the main problem of Italy was double : first, it served as target practice for virtually any wannabe raider of conqueror in the IXth/Xth centuries. Saracens, Vikings, Hungarians, Byzzies, Germans, you name it. Meaning that you'd have Italy to first stand off before prospering.

Then, you had a strong identification of italian kingship (partially inherited from Lombard kingship concepts) with imperial kingship : Carolingian emperors were so because of their relation with the "roman people" (aka, very litteraly the people of the city of Rome and their natural representant, the pope). It implies that either an Italian king is able to stand with an imperial title on its own (and that alone would be hard), or that any other contenter may be really tempted to take the burden.

The Italian situation was mentioned a bit there.
 
Top