How does North Italy so more developed than South Italy?

How does North Italy so more developed than South Italy?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom
nature.com/ejhg/journal/v17/n1/full/ejhg2008120a.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_earthquakes_in_Italy
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Once the Romans lost control of the Mediterranean it became "Pirates of the Mediterranean: The Curse of the Black Pearl"

While pirates no doubt existed the Vandals kicked it up a level in the 400s when they captured North Africa.

Piracy was only stopped finally from that region once the French finished them off in the middle of the 1800s.


Pirates also became a problem from Anatolia and the Balkans under the Ottomans.

Naturally southern Italy not only serves as a great center point of the Mediterranean but a perfect target for pirates.

Today its poor situation is probably a mix of corruption, lack of investment in comparison to the more famous areas of Italy (which are only famous because of their success historically). From my understanding the Mafia originated in southern Italy.

>became a problem in the balkans
>A strange republic of Sebvian pirates arose at the mouth of the Narenta. In the 10th century description of Dalmatia by Constantine Porphyrogenitus (De Administrando Imperio, pp. 29-37), this region is called Pagania, from the fact that its inhabitants had only accepted Christianity about 890, or 250 years later than the other Slavs. These Pagani, or Narentani defeated a Venetian fleet in 887, and for more than a century exacted tribute from Venice itself. In 998 they were finally crushed by the doge Pietro Orseolo II., who assumed the title duke of Dalmatia, though without prejudice to Byzantine suzerainty.

Are you really arguing 1000 years of history was all because of Pirates?

You must have just been redpilled by some book about Mediterranean Pirates.

Its ok, when I finish reading a book a recite it like the bible in all my historic arguments too, just not as badly as this.

Take a step back and maybe look at the waring states between the different rulers of the southern regions of Italy and not so much what you just said?

Southern italy had many rulers.

Goths, byzantines, muslims, lombards, byzantines again, normans for a bit, the HRE, even England had claims to southern Italy. For a while it was Spain but while the Renaissance rolled around it became fairly stable, the Italian Peninsula would be a place of many warring borders for over 1200 years until the unification under Sardinia and the first whole kingdom of Italy and eventually the nation itself.

Republic vs Monarchy

stupid reductionistposter

...

Pirates were a huge constant threat to development along the med coast when they were endorsed by the Muslim states to the South who loved that they could go get Christian slaves while on raiding which made it highly lucrative for them. Christians would raid them back, but the muslims couldnt be slaves to the christian or something. The christian response was to sack the major centers of trade and commerce along the med shore of the Muslims, and exert control over the coast since their rulers wouldn't stop the pirates.

This created a vaccuum that the turks moved to fill, expanding into the region proliferating piracy against christians since it benefitted them. The lack of unifed states in Europe at the time compared to the Turks meant they were playing from behind military on the seas. Imagine if the age of vikings had never ended.

The Normans, in their endless wisdom knew that the coast of Africa would be a hotbed for instability for their kingdom and would expand into the area to exert control over it but would fail to last and then southern italy with it would languish under the threats of pirates.

TIL that Thatcherism is worse for the economy than Communism.

Capital flows towards major metropolitan areas, where there are more middlemen and a higher cost of living, and away from the country, which produces primary goods for cheap. Same reason in your own pic London and Paris are richer than the rest of the UK or France. Northern Italy has more metro areas.

It was part of the HRE

>that map
>lumping scotland and northern ireland into england
>but giving the benelux gay little enclaves
fuck u

>>lumping scotland and northern ireland into england
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom
dumb nigger

Sardinia had malaria in all the parts most suited for urbanization (The campidano) until Not very long ago (1945) when The Americans got rid of it

The south was ruled by shit tier hapsburgs past their prime

The north was ruled by more or less independent city states

thanks for educating me on my own country condescending fuckface
for the purposes of that map it's retarded

>why is one country not arbitrarily split up into 3
wow you're smart sweetie :)

Top Kek

Butthurt Scot btfo

Pirates, sandniggers, malaria...

Agrarian economy

spot-on assessment

>lack of investment
Right, I mean a hundred years of continuous cash injections and government involvement is clearly not enough. They still need more money!

lol do you even into corruption? that money doesn't go into state of the art infrastructure, it goes straight into the pockets of corrupt officials.

Then the problem isn't lack of investment, it's corruption. See, you're actually agreeing with me.

because the italy that garibaldi united was realy made up of historicaly, culturaly, linguisticaly and politicaly but especialy economicaly different countries, and one major function of unification was to further ruralise and exploit the south

>major function
Are you implying the south was impoverished on purpose?

yes, systematicaly

it wasnt that rich to begin with mind you, but there was some development, initial investments in industry

what they did was load all the machinery and engines they found as loot and shipp them north

but thats just the obvious part, they also did the same thing washington did after the civil war, they used financial and political means to pauperise and screw over the population, grab land and mines and such

Southern Italy was basically treated as a colony after unification. Industry was dismantled and moved north and Southerners were used as cheap labor.

>what they did was load all the machinery and engines they found as loot and shipp them north
Might wanna post some verification of your claim.

>Christians would raid them back, but the muslims couldnt be slaves to the christian or something.
This is wrong, and there were plenty of Muslim (and Jewish) slaves in the Northern Mediterranean. The slave trade was uneven because it was far more lucrative for the Muslims who had smaller population density and not enough labor.

The 9th and 10th century were also major periods of Mediterranean piracy as Moorish, Slavic, and even some Norse and Greek raiders were on the prowl, yet rather than reduce the region's prosperity there was substantial growth on all fronts.

The real answer is the rise of North Italian merchants and speculators who dominated the Spanish economy and turned the South into a breadbasket to support the growing industry and population of the North.

northern Italy just has more resources and the merchant republics made it a center of trade and culture. there was just no reason for the south to ascend, it has shit soil and next to no resources.

Considering that region didn't become free of pirates until the 1800s its fairly accurate.

The entire area probably didn't have many wealthy individuals willing to invest in building factories. Much of the south probably didn't have the population to support large factories too so if wealthy individuals did want to invest they would do so in the safer more densely populated north.

Even something small like this can effect the future.

>Implying most muslims didn't use their European slaves for sex slavery (male and females)
I am laffin.

Fucking learn the language then, retard.
You mean "lump in with" not "lump into", otherwise you look like a dumb yank that can't figure out the union rather than just a dumb brit that can't figure out English.

The North is Celtic with some Germanic blood. The South isn't. Their cultures are and were vastly different.

>The North is Celtic
The North is North Italic. The South is largely Greek colonist from thousands of years ago.

The North is (mostly) Celtic. It was called cisalpine gaul for a reason. Greek colonists had a limited genetic influence. The main substrate of the South is indigenous.

this thread again?

South Italians and Greeks (and Ashkenazi Jews) cluster very closely in all maps of genetic distance.
It wasnt limited at all, unlike Magyars in Hungary, turkic tribes in Anatolia, or even Moors in Spain.


"The genetic contribution of Greek chromosomes to the Sicilian gene pool is estimated to be about 37% whereas the contribution of North African populations is estimated to be around 6%.", Di Gaetano, C; Cerutti, N; Crobu, F; et al. (2009). "

nature.com/ejhg/journal/v17/n1/full/ejhg2008120a.html

What happened in South Italy with regards to Greeks (the scale of the colonization), is only coparable to what happened in the British Island with the Anglosaxons and Jutes. Although it seems this process was far more peaceful and gradual, and more male dominated (Greek men taking local women instead of whole families traveling)

>>what they did was load all the machinery and engines they found as loot and shipp them north

Das Rite, we wuz kangz before evil northerners took our machines

Spain and France didnt fight for South Italy in the 1400s and 1500s because it was a shithole.

South Italy as a terrible shithole is a 1800s thing, even if the North was more developed.
Sicily was a quite prosperous place until American wheat begun to be exported to the USA, thats how they financed their great Barroque arquitecture, and Naples was an important European capital.

I don't think muslims were enslaved in heavy amounts by Christians. At most, they were forced to man galleys which was a dangerous job at the time.

Sicily, as far as I am aware is a massive and profitable grain producer since the roman times. Napoli had one of the largest populations in Europe throughout the period for this reason. Southerns kept fucking, and make more of each other off Sicilian grain.

What happened was the inability of the city to develop advanced economics, such as advanced artisans to enhance commerce of the city. Perhaps the issue then is a lack of diverse resources?

Most of the african popluation along the med shore was urbanized though, you are correct. From the 900's on the African coast was getting ravaged internally by Muslims and nomadic tribes.

South Italy had a feudal economy before the unification, while the North already started the industrialization process. But the unification didn't help the economy of the South much, because the Kingdom focused on the productive part of the country, and intervention in the South was minimal. Southerners had to pay even more taxes than before at that time, because the Kingdom had to repay its war debt. This neglect towards the South eventually caused a distrust towards the government, thus the expansion of mafia. When the government started paying more attention to the southern part of the country, it was already too late, because everything was already controlled by mafia. Interference with public contracts is a good example of how mafia hinders the development of the economy, because it causes both a waste of public money and poor infrastructure.

>Rome
>North Italy
og look this retarded shit again

Stay mad Vinny

Everyone in the thread has brought up some good points. Pirates, political instability, urban capital flow, farming economy, corruption, mismanagement by the north post unification, etc. So I'll just add a few more.

The main point with regard to political instability is that it destroyed the legacy infrastructure of the Roman Empire.

Other factors involve deforestation over the long period of human settlement. Similar patterns can be seen in southern Spain.

Another factor is the seismic and volcanic activity in the region.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_earthquakes_in_Italy
Among the worst disasters was the 1908 Messina earthquake and tidal wave. The north of Italy just doesn't experience disasters of that magnitude.

...

The North purposely fucked over the South with policies that harmed it