Post by raharris1973 on Jul 14, 2024 10:06:42 GMT
Interesting discussion found elsewhere:
The idea of Italy breaking away from Germany early is interesting, and these discussants point out that if successful, the the Italians won't really be breaking away from the Holy Roman Empire, they will be taking the Holy Roman Empire, title and style and all, with them, away from Germany.
The idea of a more centralized monarchical Italy in the Medieval era is fascinating and one wonders about the balance between increased flourishing from order and economy of scale that could happen versus what might be lost by having city-states not truly being their own sovereign masters.
Furthermore, I wonder about the implications for all the centuries afterward, of Italy "getting away". A stock, 19th century romantic era of nationalism answer would be the separation of Italy would be good for German development, self-focus, and centralization north of the Alps. But would the medieval historical record really support this idea?
Would the ideas of a Kingdom of Germany, King of the Germans or King of Germany, elected or otherwise, continue to exist if that person was not *also* the Papally recognized Holy Roman Emperor. If not, does Germany have even less coherence in the high Middle Ages than in OTL, with the stem duchies perhaps, or even lesser states, becoming completely disconnected from each other?
Gauchobadger-
The medieval Holy Roman Empire was noteworthy for its disputes and feudal strife. Of particular notice was the position of Italy in the empire, which was always tenuous to say the least. In the early decades of the 11th century, the HRE was ridden with succession crises after the childless death of Otto III and, twenty years later, Henry II. In the first debacle, a number of Italian notables decided to invite the House of Ivrea back to Italy through Arduin, grand-nephew of the last independent Italian king, Berengar II. Later on, with the extinction of the Ottonian dynasty and the ascension of the Salians under Conrad II, there was similar unrest in northern Italy, in which discontented elites offered the Iron Crown of Lombardy to the Capetians in West Francia and then, following a refusal, to the Duke of Aquitaine, who seemed interested in the offer but ultimately also declined, leaving the rebel movement headless. Italy was successfully reabsorbed into the HRE, but political tensions would continue.
So, what if Italy had successfully broken off from the HRE under Arduin of Ivrea or another usurper at the beginning of the 11th century? What would be the effects of a free Italy on the rest of Europe and the Mediterranean world?
The medieval Holy Roman Empire was noteworthy for its disputes and feudal strife. Of particular notice was the position of Italy in the empire, which was always tenuous to say the least. In the early decades of the 11th century, the HRE was ridden with succession crises after the childless death of Otto III and, twenty years later, Henry II. In the first debacle, a number of Italian notables decided to invite the House of Ivrea back to Italy through Arduin, grand-nephew of the last independent Italian king, Berengar II. Later on, with the extinction of the Ottonian dynasty and the ascension of the Salians under Conrad II, there was similar unrest in northern Italy, in which discontented elites offered the Iron Crown of Lombardy to the Capetians in West Francia and then, following a refusal, to the Duke of Aquitaine, who seemed interested in the offer but ultimately also declined, leaving the rebel movement headless. Italy was successfully reabsorbed into the HRE, but political tensions would continue.
So, what if Italy had successfully broken off from the HRE under Arduin of Ivrea or another usurper at the beginning of the 11th century? What would be the effects of a free Italy on the rest of Europe and the Mediterranean world?
Socrates-
The problem with this is that the Roman Emperor needed to control Rome, at least nominally to be seen as legitimate in that title. If Italy breaks off, it means that he is no longer seen as preeminent within Europe and loses the divinity element to justify his rule.
The problem with this is that the Roman Emperor needed to control Rome, at least nominally to be seen as legitimate in that title. If Italy breaks off, it means that he is no longer seen as preeminent within Europe and loses the divinity element to justify his rule.
Catherine the Average-
As someone with a decent level of knowledge on the ties between Italy and the Empire, I think I could make a meaningful addition to this: the most likely outcome of this is Arduin, or whoever manages to separate Italy from Germany, then marching on Rome to be proclaimed emperor. The imperial crown was very strictly connected with the peninsula and Rome up until, arguably, the Peace of Westphalia in 1648 (though signs of the cracks between them started showing under Heinrich VII in the 14th century). Especially after the tenth century, any Italian sovereign strong enough to wrestle the iron crown away from the Germans is necessarily also powerful and influential enough to claim the imperial title from the Papacy.
As someone with a decent level of knowledge on the ties between Italy and the Empire, I think I could make a meaningful addition to this: the most likely outcome of this is Arduin, or whoever manages to separate Italy from Germany, then marching on Rome to be proclaimed emperor. The imperial crown was very strictly connected with the peninsula and Rome up until, arguably, the Peace of Westphalia in 1648 (though signs of the cracks between them started showing under Heinrich VII in the 14th century). Especially after the tenth century, any Italian sovereign strong enough to wrestle the iron crown away from the Germans is necessarily also powerful and influential enough to claim the imperial title from the Papacy.
The idea of Italy breaking away from Germany early is interesting, and these discussants point out that if successful, the the Italians won't really be breaking away from the Holy Roman Empire, they will be taking the Holy Roman Empire, title and style and all, with them, away from Germany.
The idea of a more centralized monarchical Italy in the Medieval era is fascinating and one wonders about the balance between increased flourishing from order and economy of scale that could happen versus what might be lost by having city-states not truly being their own sovereign masters.
Furthermore, I wonder about the implications for all the centuries afterward, of Italy "getting away". A stock, 19th century romantic era of nationalism answer would be the separation of Italy would be good for German development, self-focus, and centralization north of the Alps. But would the medieval historical record really support this idea?
Would the ideas of a Kingdom of Germany, King of the Germans or King of Germany, elected or otherwise, continue to exist if that person was not *also* the Papally recognized Holy Roman Emperor. If not, does Germany have even less coherence in the high Middle Ages than in OTL, with the stem duchies perhaps, or even lesser states, becoming completely disconnected from each other?
