Neopolitan-Sicilian identity as distinct from Italian

  • Thread starter Deleted member 109224
  • Start date

Deleted member 109224

My understanding is that the basis of Italian identity during unification were the Medieval/Holy Roman Kingdom of Italy and the Napoleonic Kingdom (1807 and 1812 versions). During the unification of Italy, there was a question of whether or not to include the south.

Let's assume northern Italy unites and the south isn't included. What sort of identity does Southern Italy (Naples-Sicily) have compared to the north? Do southerners just identify as Sicilians since the Kingdom is the Two Sicilies? Will the language standard be Neopolitan whereas the north uses Florentine?
 

isabella

Jackson Lennock said:
My understanding is that the basis of Italian identity during unification were the Medieval/Holy Roman Kingdom of Italy and the Napoleonic Kingdom (1807 and 1812 versions). During the unification of Italy, there was a question of whether or not to include the south.

Let's assume northern Italy unites and the south isn't included. What sort of identity does Southern Italy (Naples-Sicily) have compared to the north? Do southerners just identify as Sicilians since the Kingdom is the Two Sicilies? Will the language standard be Neopolitan whereas the north uses Florentine?
Click to expand...
South Italy had a strong identity of his own as they had an unitary story from the Middle Age (either unitary or separates in Sicily and mainland)... They would most likely identify themselves as Neapolitans/Sicilians and their principal language is Neapolitan...
 

FillyofDelphi

Banned
Jackson Lennock said:
Let's assume northern Italy unites and the south isn't included. What sort of identity does Southern Italy (Naples-Sicily) have compared to the north? Do southerners just identify as Sicilians since the Kingdom is the Two Sicilies? Will the language standard be Neopolitan whereas the north uses Florentine?
Click to expand...

At the risk of sounding odd, Sicily in particular resembled the Antibellium American South quite a bit in its general cultural-economic structure at the time of Unification. A personality/social web based system of politics for relatvely isolated communities, with heavy leaning on the local landlords and Church to provide the structure holding them together and system of conflict resolution rather than any greater State authority. Close mostly agrarian economies with both large estates and a poor subset of mostly subsistence farmers who had yet to be hit by the force of the Market Revoltion save for export, with a handful of cities on the coast where virtually all the internal devolopsments were based around and oriented towards export (of a much less valuable good than cash crops, admittedly). A subservient virtually feudal class held in order by partially private publically sponsored armed parties (Mafias and Slave Hunters/Militas) and the supreme authority absentee and generally disinterested so long as the revenues kept coming in. So as a starting point, it might be useful to look at what some people think an independent CSA would develop into as a base.
 
Neoteros

Neoteros

Jackson Lennock said:
My understanding is that the basis of Italian identity during unification were the Medieval/Holy Roman Kingdom of Italy and the Napoleonic Kingdom (1807 and 1812 versions). During the unification of Italy, there was a question of whether or not to include the south.

Let's assume northern Italy unites and the south isn't included. What sort of identity does Southern Italy (Naples-Sicily) have compared to the north? Do southerners just identify as Sicilians since the Kingdom is the Two Sicilies? Will the language standard be Neopolitan whereas the north uses Florentine?
Click to expand...

Florentine/Tuscan/Standard Italian had been used as an official, state language throughout the whole peninsula since the Late Middle Ages: most of the peninsula's states jumped from Latin straight to literary Tuscan in fact, with the respective vernaculars seeing little to no use with only a few exceptions - for example, Savoy and Venice - because Latin and Tuscan, due to their ecclesiastical and literary heritage, were seen as "noble" enough to be used in an official capacity.

Venice's use of the local language owed a lot to the Serenissima's status as a filthy rich merchant republic whose flag was respected throughout the whole Mediterranean; even though there were attempts to use Neapolitan as an official language, by then Tuscan had established itself as the lingua franca of the literate few. You'd have to butterfly away Boccaccio, Dante, Petrarca and the Renaissance to see Neapolitan used as an official language and, even then, Catalan, Castillian or French could've been used down south instead, due to dynastic ties; hell, you'd have to find a way to make Naples as relevant to Europe and the Mediterranean as Venice...

...maybe the brief republican experiment in 13th century Sicily, explicitly modeled after those of Lombardy and Tuscany, could succeed and spread to the mainland?
 
kasumigenx

kasumigenx

Neoteros said:
Florentine/Tuscan/Standard Italian had been used as an official, state language throughout the whole peninsula since the Late Middle Ages: most of the peninsula's states jumped from Latin straight to literary Tuscan in fact, with the respective vernaculars seeing little to no use with only a few exceptions - for example, Savoy and Venice - because Latin and Tuscan, due to their ecclesiastical and literary heritage, were seen as "noble" enough to be used in an official capacity.

Venice's use of the local language owed a lot to the Serenissima's status as a filthy rich merchant republic whose flag was respected throughout the whole Mediterranean; even though there were attempts to use Neapolitan as an official language, by then Tuscan had established itself as the lingua franca of the literate few. You'd have to butterfly away Boccaccio, Dante, Petrarca and the Renaissance to see Neapolitan used as an official language and, even then, Catalan, Castillian or French could've been used down south instead, due to dynastic ties; hell, you'd have to find a way to make Naples as relevant to Europe and the Mediterranean as Venice...

...maybe the brief republican experiment in 13th century Sicily, explicitly modeled after those of Lombardy and Tuscany, could succeed and spread to the mainland?
Click to expand...

Before the sack of Rome in 16th century, Rome was Neapolitan speaking.
 
Neoteros

Neoteros

kasumigenx said:
Before the sack of Rome in 16th century, Rome was Neapolitan speaking.
Click to expand...

Well, kind of. The dialects spoken just outside Rome (and in a strip of territory covering Lazio, Umbria and Marche) belong to their own dialect continuum, distinct from both Neapolitan and Tuscan; even though it shares some phonological features with Neapolitan, it is closer to (and mutually intelligible with) Tuscan otherwise.
 
kasumigenx

kasumigenx

Neoteros said:
Well, kind of. The dialects spoken just outside Rome (and in a strip of territory covering Lazio, Umbria and Marche) belong to their own dialect continuum, distinct from both Neapolitan and Tuscan; even though it shares some phonological features with Neapolitan, it is closer to (and mutually intelligible with) Tuscan otherwise.
Click to expand...
But that was due to the sack of Rome and the migration of Tuscans to Lazio.
 

Nitid

Well could a larger number of Albanian refugees influence southern italy in the 15th century onwards ?
 
Last edited:

Nitid

Well they could leave a significant cultural and linguistic influence provided they are more numerous,but it is unlikely mostly because of the huge prestige of romance languages but it could have happened
 
Demothenes

Demothenes

Venetian wasn’t even a dialect but an entirely seperate language. Morphologically speaking I’ve read it actully has more in common with Istrian and Dalmatian dialects. Really, the Veneto would probably be regarded as an entirely seperate nation from the rest of Italy if it hadn’t been for their steep decline and conquest.
 
Neoteros

Neoteros

Demothenes said:
Venetian wasn’t even a dialect but an entirely seperate language. Morphologically speaking I’ve read it actully has more in common with Istrian and Dalmatian dialects. Really, the Veneto would probably be regarded as an entirely seperate nation from the rest of Italy if it hadn’t been for their steep decline and conquest.
Click to expand...

Indeed; the fact that it sounds similar to (and is to a certain extent mutually understandable with) standard Italian has more to do with the legacy of trade than with it being a dialect.
 
Demothenes

Demothenes

Neoteros said:
Indeed; the fact that it sounds similar to (and is to a certain extent mutually understandable with) standard Italian has more to do with the legacy of trade than with it being a dialect.
Click to expand...

I've often thought that an interesting TL would be a surviving Venetian state in North Italy, as it probably would not have been as susceptible to Italian Nationalism as the rest of Italy.

Moving back to the prompt however, I'd think that an interesting way to do this would be through the de Hautevilles and the Normans who established the first kingdom of Sicily in the 11th Century. Now, a major reason for Southern Italy to be tied in with the rest of Italy is because of the Hohenzollern inheritance and the fact that Sicily became part of the Holy Roman Empire that dominated the rest of Italy. If however, Sicily survived as a highly centralized state, and eventually a successful kingdom, as it was under the de Hautevilles, you might have a state that instead of being oriented Northwards into the rest of Italy, would have had it's eyes cast south towards Tunisia, North Africa and probably Greece as well. The de Hautevilles managed to fight the Byzantines on rather even terms and actually win. If they had stayed an independent, stable kingdom for several centuries, especially if their Norman identity, somewhat like in England, managed to seep down into the South Italian population, it's not hard to imagine that you'd see a very distinct seperation between North and South- even moreso than in OTL. You'd have major cultural centers to compete with Florence and Milan, major economic centers, and probably a more distinct language depending on where the Normans managed to conquer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top