Visconti Dominated Italy
- Thread starter BBadolato
- Start date
Considering the weakness of the HRE and the Great Western Schism, Gian Galeazzo would have a very good chance. When he suddenly died, Bologna had opened its doors and Florence was negotiating a surrender. It's even more than just Northern Italy: Gian Galeazzo is already lord of Pisa, Spoleto, Assisi, and another spate of towns and cities in central Italy.
The challenge now would be to consolidate his domains, and make the fateful decision not to split his possessions between his two sons: if he goes for it (or maybe one of the sons dies) and pay some care in the grooming of his heir theremight be a Visconti crowned king of Italy before 1450.
IMHO, it is the only true opportunity of unifying Italy before 19th century.
The challenge now would be to consolidate his domains, and make the fateful decision not to split his possessions between his two sons: if he goes for it (or maybe one of the sons dies) and pay some care in the grooming of his heir theremight be a Visconti crowned king of Italy before 1450.
IMHO, it is the only true opportunity of unifying Italy before 19th century.
He can marry his daughter, Valentina to Ladislaus of Durazzo and never remarry which would unite both Naples and the enlarged Milan later on that is if he wants to unite Italy...
There are 2 popes, one in Rome and one in Avignon: the Great Western Schism is still going strong when Gian Galeazzo died, and it gave him a real window of opportunity (ostensibly GG favoured Avignon, also in consideration of the enmity of the Roman pope, Boniface IX). The schism went on until 1420, OTL: if GG does not die in 1402 it might even be longer.
Venice is not really in competition with Milan: the republic still sees the Levant as her natural dominion and the expansion in Italy might never come to be. There was a substantial faction in the city who favored the Visconti (and as a matter of fact Venice and Milan were allies in 1395 in the war against the Carrara of Padova).
What is going to happen if GG (and his successors) manage to consolidate all his possessions into a viable state is hard to say: Venice is a goose who lays golden eggs and is somehow periferic to the Visconti state, so the two might end up as very long term allies; there is however the presence of the Visconti party I mentioned before (which btw was present also in most of the Italian cities, even those like Florence, Mantua and Genoa who were opposed to his expansionist policies and played a significant role whenever the French tried to set up a league against the Visconti), and it is also possible that some kind of coup might be engineered to give the dogate to GG. What I see more difficult is a Venice playing an anti-Visconti role.
I'd rather say that he may be more decisive in his suit for the hand of Maria of Sicily and gain the Sicilian crown (and the duchy of Achaia) in the bargain.
And yet, LordKalvan, a generation later Venice was at war with Milan. Venice abhorred both a vacuum in Lombardy (hence Venice taking over some of GGs holdings upon his death) and was not happy with hegemonies in the North. You're right that at the end of the 14th Cent. Venice was not interested in a terrestrial empire in N. Italy and was not inherently hostile towards GG, although Venice did at one point support the Carrera against Milan. I'm just saying that there were lines that if crossed would make Venice nervous as well as Venice's own increasing interest in playing power politics in the North.
Alex Richards
Donor
Could Milan ease the concerns of Venice by dismantling Genoa, leaving the mainland as a Milanese puppet but giving Venice the med colonies and most of the fleet?
That would never happen. I could see GG encouraging the Genoans to not overtly act against Venetian interests, as a bone.
Here's a map, and the full-sized version, of what was apparently the extent of Gian Galeazzo's territory when he died in 1402 that someone posted the last time this came up.
If he can survive say another ten years then I think he has a pretty good chance of adding Florence to his budding empire as well. If he lives a bit longer and decides to pass the lot along to his eldest son rather than dividing it up then it might be able to survive, there's still more than likely going to be trouble amongst his offspring when he passes but if he's had ten years to plan and implement the idea the sole heir will at least have a fair amount of legitimacy. Plus if the Holy Roman Emperor is backing Rome and Milan Avignon might they be able to talk their Pope into recognising them as and crowning them with the Iron Crown of Lombardy to become King of the Lombards and promote their dukedom into kingdom, or possibly even King of Italy although that might be a bit of a stretch?
I could see Italy developing into a three way split between Savoy, Milan, and Venice in the north, the Papal States coming to dominate central Italy, and Naples happily carrying on doing its own thing down in south.
If he can survive say another ten years then I think he has a pretty good chance of adding Florence to his budding empire as well. If he lives a bit longer and decides to pass the lot along to his eldest son rather than dividing it up then it might be able to survive, there's still more than likely going to be trouble amongst his offspring when he passes but if he's had ten years to plan and implement the idea the sole heir will at least have a fair amount of legitimacy. Plus if the Holy Roman Emperor is backing Rome and Milan Avignon might they be able to talk their Pope into recognising them as and crowning them with the Iron Crown of Lombardy to become King of the Lombards and promote their dukedom into kingdom, or possibly even King of Italy although that might be a bit of a stretch?
I could see Italy developing into a three way split between Savoy, Milan, and Venice in the north, the Papal States coming to dominate central Italy, and Naples happily carrying on doing its own thing down in south.
IMHO after the sudden death of GG Venice was drawn into expansionist wars in Northern Italy by the political vacuum and the weakness of the Visconti heirs. It was a natural enough reaction to a perceived opportunity and things would certainly have been different if Venice oligarchs could have made up their mind from the beginning that Milan could have become a great partner rather than trying to manage them like any other cities they conquered. OTL the 50 years spent trying to become the dominant polity in northern Italy were ultimately unsuccessful (even if the Terrafirma possessions proved loyal and lasted for almost 400 years). The problem was that Venice did not have the strength to play on two tables (mainland wars and Levant, where the Turks were getting more and more aggressive). Even more damagingly the Venetian patriciate begun to invest more and more money in land and properties, perceived as less risky and more appropriate for the ruling class than the tradtional mercantile investments. The shift from mercantile investments to landed properties was obviously quite slow, but by the end of the 16th century most of the goods being cleared in Venice were no more travelling on Venetian ships.
TTL is going to be different: there is no opportunity of cheap expansion nor the collapse of the Visconti faction in Venice will upset the political balance of the city. At the same time GG will be seen as a potential ally vs. the HRE and the kingdom of Hungary, as well as the ruler who controls the main roads to Germany and Flanders. So I guess that Venice will be cautious but friendly. The more so if GG can broker a lasting peace between Genoa and Venice.
From the point of view of the Visconti it is obvious that Venice would make a very nice addition to their possessions. OTOH Venice is also very hard to take by force (as the events of the late war of Chioggia have shown) and is also the greatest clearing house in Europe, and the source of needed materials for Milanese industries, not to mention the tolls charged on goods travelling across Milanese possessions. Quite likely GG will try to stregthen the influence of the Visconti faction in the city, but without pushing too much. At least for the time being. What will happen after he has consolidated his domains and possibly gained a royal crown is another and probably different story.
Florence was alreadynegotiating a surrender when GG died. He was 50sh, so I suppose he can live another 15 years or so. Hopefully he'll avoid dividing his possessions among his sons, and will also have a chance to groom both legitimate sons (although OTL proved that the elder was not a good ruler, it may be different ITTL, growing up under the close supervision of the duke; and in any case the younger son might be ultimately chosen as heir).
The royal title may only be that of Italy (an Italy that did not include anything south of Benevento and Spoleto).Given the parlous state of the HRE in the 15th century he may well be in the position to gain it, provided that he can influence the election of the pope after the death of Boniface IX. Holding most of Tuscany and Umbria (and having his own party among the Roman great families) GG should be able to manage it.
If GG succeeds, I doubt he (or his heirs) will allow a large papal state to be reconstituted in central Italy. There will be some face-saving solution but in the end the pope will control just Rome and the immediate hinterland (and maybe not even that if there are Italian garrisons in Rome and Ostia).
The Naples Angevins will not be happy with this, but I doubt that they can do much to oppose Visconti's control of Rome.
And sometimes later in the 15th century the kingdom of Naples and Italy may be united by a dinastic marriage (or Aragon and Milan may ally to partition Naples, who knows? Unless a weak buffer between Aragonese Sicily and Italian Spoleto becomes attractive for the main players).
I am not so sure that Savoy can manage to keep its independence, with three strong states (France, Italy and Burgundy) on its borders. Another possibility might be an Italian participation in the next bout of the Anglo-French wars (with or against France? My choice would be to ally with Burgundy, since both Burgundy and Italy are interested in a weak France and a weak HRE; it might be argued the other way around, though).There are a lot of possibilities here.
I doubt a lasting peace between Genoa & Venice was really achievable---bad blood and the commercial rivalry were just too intense.
I think that the pro Visconti faction in Venice would not countenance the destruction of the Venetian state, if GG or heir should be so inclined to work to conquer the Republic.
I would be curious as to what diplomatic correspondence between Venice and other powers at the time was going on to ascertain if Venice was indeed concerned by the rising Visconti power. Particularly with France. I could see a potential alliance there. You know, just in case...
Venice was certainly both dynamic and calculating enough to take at least some initial measures. Even at the same time working with GG so long as they had common interests.
I think that the pro Visconti faction in Venice would not countenance the destruction of the Venetian state, if GG or heir should be so inclined to work to conquer the Republic.
I would be curious as to what diplomatic correspondence between Venice and other powers at the time was going on to ascertain if Venice was indeed concerned by the rising Visconti power. Particularly with France. I could see a potential alliance there. You know, just in case...
Venice was certainly both dynamic and calculating enough to take at least some initial measures. Even at the same time working with GG so long as they had common interests.
The bad blood was there: the war of Chioggia was a war to the knife, and Genoa went quite close towin it (although it might have proven a Pyrrhic victory). However in the end Genoa lost, and badly: the really damaging outcome was not loss of land, but rather the loss of the skilled manpower which was the backbone of any fleet in the Medieval and Renaissance period: captains, coxwains, soldiers trained to fight at sea and so on. It takes at least a generation (if not more) to replace them when they are killed in a single battle or in a short war, and it is also the reason for which annihilation seabattles are relatively rare. It is an extension of the concept of fleet in being: galley (and even galeons) can be replaced fast enough, assuming there's money and naval supplies available; skilled manpower is a much more difficult thing to replace. This constraint applied even to much larger states: see the Spanish after Djerba or the Ottomans after Lepanto.
Anyway the point is that Genoa was ascendant prior to the war of Chioggia(also in consideration of the Hungarian pressure on Venetian possessions in Dalmatia and Friuli/Istria) but after the war of Chioggia they were never able to really compete with Venice on their own. I would also believe that the internal troubles of Genoa (which after the war of Chioggia was for more than a century either under the French thumb or under the Milanese one) stem out of the consequences of defeat.
Venice is somehow in better conditions, but also for the Serenissima the last 50 years have been a little bumpy and the victory at Chioggia came to a high price. Not to mention that the Turks are more and more aggressive in the Balkans and in the eastern Mediterranean, and the Hungarians are a problem to be dealt with.
IMHO there is an opportunity of arbitration and composition since both cities are somehow exhausted. Obviously it works better if the umpire has a big stick to wave (and Milan controls the inland commercial routes of both cities).
As far as the belief that the Visconti faction would not countenance the destruction of the republic, I think you give them morecredit than they are worth of. These guys would get to the top of the pyramid if Venice becomes a Visconti possession, and that would be justification enough, even discounting the pious drivel with which they are dressing up their ambitions.
While Venetian state was solid, and lasted for 1000 years to prove it, there were enough examples of naked ambition and conspiracies to believe that a new one could not be fuelled up by Visconti gold and promises.
Re Venetian diplomatic efforts, I'd point out that twice the French set upan anti-Visconti league: Mantua, Genoa and Florence were always in the game (even if their dedication was not always of the best); Venice never participated in these ventures.
Which is why I wondered about Venetian diplomatic correspondence of which a copious record through a good part of Venetian history apparently remains. Action not required. Just evidence that Venice explored options.
As to how effective and prevalent the Visconti influence in Venice was at the time, I'd like some documentation, por favore.
The Venetians were historically rather rough on their traitors...
As to how effective and prevalent the Visconti influence in Venice was at the time, I'd like some documentation, por favore.
The Venetians were historically rather rough on their traitors...