What if the Italian unification failed?
- Thread starter James1996
- Start date
Well, the 1859 war of unification failing is probably the most likely and interesting one, let's go with that. How do we achieve it? Austrians decide to follow the ideas of their best feild commander and modernize the army (breach-loaders, better formations, a 2 year conscription and so on), and also let the actual good commanders lead the war. French and Sardinians get beaten to a bloody pulp at Solferino, perhaps Victor II. gets captured, Napoleon III. decides to retreat home and leave his dreams in Italy. Also Garibaldi dies due to a few dozen bullets and Cavour flees to exile. So, what now?
Well, Italy has basically once more become an Austrian playground. While I would expect some form of reorganization, the OP is asking for a full disunity, so let's go with that. One very important thing we should remember is, that the idea of an unified Italy, while held by few in the past centuries, has only aquired mass support in the last five decades. Now, it has once more received a crushing defeat, and I would expect the local Italian monarchs to try and reinforce the old regional identities. Perhaps a German style confederation, with a Habsburg at its head, is estabilished for Northern Italy (exluding Lombardy and Venetia). It is of course question whether this would work, but I would say it is quite possible. I would expect the regional identities to slowly and surely once more replace the idea of an Italian ( a rather fresh idea itself, remember), though some connections will remain. It is also possible that the Italian nationalism might survive, but with the stranglehold that the Austrians now posses in Italy, it would never be allowed to rise, aside from quickly quashed rebellions. But what changes in foreign affairs, one might ask? A lot.
The lack of an united Italian state has many diplomatic consequences. For one, the German reunification. We have already estabilished that a more modernizing form of Austria is present, one which might quite well be capable of defeating the Prussians at Sadova. With their southern flank secured by their Italian puppets, their army strong and united at one front, and their population elated by previous victory, the dream of an united Germany might well be defeated, just as the Italian one was. Now, you have a massive Austrian sphere of influence, including the entireity of Italy, Germany and the previous Austrian hodings. A Franco-Russian alliance to counter this, with the possible inclusion of Britain is in my opinion quite likely.
So yeah, a disunited Italy basically means a giant Austria wank. That might be going a bit too far, but without the defeats in Italy, and with the region under their control, the Austrians might well become a dominant European power once more, though one has to ask for how long, how will they deal with their own separatists, now drunk on victories, and whether the new alliance against them could fully contain them.
Depends on the POD. A POD that butterflies away Napoleon's Italian Campaign is a lot different than the one @LordMartinax ably described above. But both can get you to the same goal if you want a Balkanized Italy.
The biggest problem with medieval/early modern Italy is a combination of the Ottomans replacing the Byzantines, the Mamlukes kicking the Crusaders out of the Levant, the New World/Age of Exploration rendering the old trading routes obsolete, and the Italian Wars devastating the countryside means that by 1575-1600 at the latest the center of gravity in Europe shifted from the Mediterranean to Northern Europe. There's a reason that by 1700 even Venice, the most dynamic nation-state in Italy, was an ossified shell of its past glory. Ditto for Milan and Florence. However, butterflying away the Ottomans, the Mamlukes, or the Italian War (can't exactly butterfly away the New World without a geologic POD) means that Europe specifically and the world in general is vastly different so it is tough to say what the aftershocks are.
However, there's a way to keep Italy disunited - have it be a long-tern playground for France and the Hapsburgs post say 1700 or so. If France props up one state (Milan? Savoy? Genoa?) and the Hapsburgs another (Venice? Milan? Some combo of the smaller states - Mantua/Modena/Parma?) it is entirely possible that a sort of proto-Cold War could occur that freezes things in place for a while. So Savoy/Milan/Venice/Whomever stay "independent" but are basically puppets of greater powers.
Not super likely because why would France puppetize Savoy when they could just outright annex them? Same for Austria and Venice/Milan. But there's a route there.
OR, and I'm just sorta thinking out-loud here before I grab lunch - butterfly away nationalism. Then there's no overarching "Italian-ness" rather people primarily identify as Venetian/Milanese/Neapolitan/etc first and foremost. I think no Napoleonic Wars is the easiest way to do that. Looks like all roads don't lead to Rome in this case, but back to Nappy.
The biggest problem with medieval/early modern Italy is a combination of the Ottomans replacing the Byzantines, the Mamlukes kicking the Crusaders out of the Levant, the New World/Age of Exploration rendering the old trading routes obsolete, and the Italian Wars devastating the countryside means that by 1575-1600 at the latest the center of gravity in Europe shifted from the Mediterranean to Northern Europe. There's a reason that by 1700 even Venice, the most dynamic nation-state in Italy, was an ossified shell of its past glory. Ditto for Milan and Florence. However, butterflying away the Ottomans, the Mamlukes, or the Italian War (can't exactly butterfly away the New World without a geologic POD) means that Europe specifically and the world in general is vastly different so it is tough to say what the aftershocks are.
However, there's a way to keep Italy disunited - have it be a long-tern playground for France and the Hapsburgs post say 1700 or so. If France props up one state (Milan? Savoy? Genoa?) and the Hapsburgs another (Venice? Milan? Some combo of the smaller states - Mantua/Modena/Parma?) it is entirely possible that a sort of proto-Cold War could occur that freezes things in place for a while. So Savoy/Milan/Venice/Whomever stay "independent" but are basically puppets of greater powers.
Not super likely because why would France puppetize Savoy when they could just outright annex them? Same for Austria and Venice/Milan. But there's a route there.
OR, and I'm just sorta thinking out-loud here before I grab lunch - butterfly away nationalism. Then there's no overarching "Italian-ness" rather people primarily identify as Venetian/Milanese/Neapolitan/etc first and foremost. I think no Napoleonic Wars is the easiest way to do that. Looks like all roads don't lead to Rome in this case, but back to Nappy.
The reigns of Louis XIV and his successors saw a series of pan-European coalitions designed to stop France getting too big, so maybe the French monarch decides that surrounding his country with subordinate "allies" is a better way of ensuring national security than trying to expand the French realm directly.
Point of pedantry: there had been a sense of overarching Italian-ness long before the 19th century, just as there had been a sense of overarching German-ness. The age of nationalism changed things not (generally) by creating new national identities de novo, but by making people think that national identity was the best basis for political organisation.
raharris1973
Gone Fishin'
So preventing Italian unification is paired upped with preventing German unification? There's no way to defeat to Piedmont-Sardinian unification project while the Prussian unification project wins? What about vice versa?
No, as Austria losing Italian lands to Sardinia was the first step also for the Prussian victory and in any case was a big loss of prestige/reputation for Austria. Unless you have a Sardinia who would unite only the proper Kingdom of Italy (aka lands at north of the Papal States), leaving the Italian peninsula divided in three states (still keep in mind who the project of Piedmont was related ONLY to the North and evolved for other things)
Italy uniting and Germany remaining separated is possible
I think it is possible, but certainly Prussia's odds are reduced by a more powerful Austria. The entire thing likely hinges on what happens to Lombardy. You do not strictly need Austria controlling the place to have a divided Italy, but it surely helps a lot.
I can envision, in the case of Austrian victory in 1859 war, that they can arrange the destruction of the Kingdom of Sardinia: Nice and Savoy go to France (Nap III has obtained something for the pound of flesh he asked from the nation), Piedmont is split, east of Sesia river is annexed to Lombardy-Venetia (reversing Succession Wars Savoyard's grabbing), former Genoa Republic becomes a Duchy/Viceroyalty for second-born Habsburg, Piedmont proper may become a Principality again (under a second-born Habsburg or open for some German Catholic prince...) or directly join Lombardy-Venetia.
Customs union in Northern Italy (Lombardy-Venetia + Piedmont + Genoa + Emilian Duchies + Tuscany) in the 1870s, loose confederation under a new Kingdom of Italy in personal and perpetual union under Franz Joseph & his own heirs. Likely that an ATL Augsleich will be attained also for the Italian part of the Empire (I think that population-wise, counting also Piedmont, Liguria, Tuscany & Emilia, the Italian element would have been the second ethnicity in the Empire...)
Papal States survives the tide, modernizes a little. Likely that someone may call for the separation of Romagna Legations aimed to the inclusion into the Habsburg-led Kingdom of Italy leading to interesting frictions between His Holiness and the Catholic Emperor...
Two Sicilies survive, maybe better off in the short term. I can imagine a stronger British support for that... Two Sicilies inherits OTL Italian colonialist stance looking to Horn of Africa, Tunisia and Lybia.
The treacherous Savoy House is relegated to Sardinia only.
Butterflies into Germany: It may well have led to a big Austrian wank, but IMHO Northern Germany & Prussia go anyway on its way. Possible survival of a southern German states confederation strictly knit to Wien...
In this ATL, I'm writing this from Mailand in German and not in English since die sprache von Goethe is the main studied foreign (not so foreign) language in the Kingdom of Italy and my national anthem is the following
SERBI DIO L'IMPERATORE.
Customs union in Northern Italy (Lombardy-Venetia + Piedmont + Genoa + Emilian Duchies + Tuscany) in the 1870s, loose confederation under a new Kingdom of Italy in personal and perpetual union under Franz Joseph & his own heirs. Likely that an ATL Augsleich will be attained also for the Italian part of the Empire (I think that population-wise, counting also Piedmont, Liguria, Tuscany & Emilia, the Italian element would have been the second ethnicity in the Empire...)
Papal States survives the tide, modernizes a little. Likely that someone may call for the separation of Romagna Legations aimed to the inclusion into the Habsburg-led Kingdom of Italy leading to interesting frictions between His Holiness and the Catholic Emperor...
Two Sicilies survive, maybe better off in the short term. I can imagine a stronger British support for that... Two Sicilies inherits OTL Italian colonialist stance looking to Horn of Africa, Tunisia and Lybia.
The treacherous Savoy House is relegated to Sardinia only.
Butterflies into Germany: It may well have led to a big Austrian wank, but IMHO Northern Germany & Prussia go anyway on its way. Possible survival of a southern German states confederation strictly knit to Wien...
In this ATL, I'm writing this from Mailand in German and not in English since die sprache von Goethe is the main studied foreign (not so foreign) language in the Kingdom of Italy and my national anthem is the following
SERBI DIO L'IMPERATORE.
Have the Burbon dynasty survive in France after the napolionic war and have them be more intrested in preserving the Burbon dynasty in the Kingdom of the Two Sicalys and Parma then supporting the Piedmont Sardinian upstarts. The only other strong sponsor they could reach out to for unification might be prussia but doing this without the otl wars of italian unification leading up to the otl austro prussian war this means a stronger Austria and a France with intrests in intervining to prevent italian unification from removing the italian Burbons which likly sees France Intervention in favor of Austria in this combined alt Austro Prussian War/ War of Italian Unification and making a alliance to maintain thier sphears in Italy and Germany which should be strong enough together to keep central Europe from unifying.
en.m.wikipedia.org
en.m.wikipedia.org
en.m.wikipedia.org
en.m.wikipedia.org
en.m.wikipedia.org
House of Bourbon - Wikipedia
House of Bourbon-Two Sicilies - Wikipedia
House of Bourbon-Parma - Wikipedia
Austro-Prussian War - Wikipedia
Unification of Italy - Wikipedia
Last edited:
raharris1973
Gone Fishin'
I'd like to continue this line of discussion:
The next foreign policy crisis Austria will have to attend to is watching the Polish revolt in Russia, where it is mostly a spectator. The next one where it has difficulty avoiding involvement is Schleswig-Holstein, where there will be popular outrage against Danish policies. Bismarck might recalculate his moves on this one. Perhaps Austria may get drawn in the same way as OTL, as part of a duo with Prussia, or perhaps it oppose Denmark through the multilateral vehicle of the German Confederation and install the Duke of Augustenberg on Duchies. In any case, witnessing Austrian and Prussian comparative military performance, Bismarck may be wary of provoking a showdown with Vienna, at least too soon.
Wildcard: Would the French be ready enough by '64 to try for revenge on Austria to intervene in a Denmark war?
I imagine France (the 2nd Empire) and Russia will align against it. At the same time, Vienna is not particularly ambitious to expand further within Europe, so Franco-Russian containment is sort of guarding against aggression that never comes.
The next text of continental stability comes with the Balkan revolts of the middle-late 1870s. Would Russia try to make diplomatic arrangements to prepare for a war leading to independent Bulgaria, and try to buy off Austrian support?
Would Austria be interested in a deal? Or, if Austria is already sensitive to Franco-Russian, and possibly British, encirclement, will it see the Ottoman Empire as its only and indispensable European ally, that it needs to champion?
If Europe can navigate through the Turkish crisis without a general war, would Austria participate in the colonial race and where? Would second fiddle Prussia eventually develop a fleet of any size in the Baltic or North Seas or claim any colonies, or will the Austro-German-Italian naval outlet be all Adriatic-Mediterranean?
The next foreign policy crisis Austria will have to attend to is watching the Polish revolt in Russia, where it is mostly a spectator. The next one where it has difficulty avoiding involvement is Schleswig-Holstein, where there will be popular outrage against Danish policies. Bismarck might recalculate his moves on this one. Perhaps Austria may get drawn in the same way as OTL, as part of a duo with Prussia, or perhaps it oppose Denmark through the multilateral vehicle of the German Confederation and install the Duke of Augustenberg on Duchies. In any case, witnessing Austrian and Prussian comparative military performance, Bismarck may be wary of provoking a showdown with Vienna, at least too soon.
Wildcard: Would the French be ready enough by '64 to try for revenge on Austria to intervene in a Denmark war?
Supposing Austria remains dominant not just in Italy, but also Germany, because either Austria defeats Prussia, or Prussia resigns itself to playing Austria's second fiddle, Austria is a big power bloc with a strong army, but with messy and loose internal politics.
I imagine France (the 2nd Empire) and Russia will align against it. At the same time, Vienna is not particularly ambitious to expand further within Europe, so Franco-Russian containment is sort of guarding against aggression that never comes.
The next text of continental stability comes with the Balkan revolts of the middle-late 1870s. Would Russia try to make diplomatic arrangements to prepare for a war leading to independent Bulgaria, and try to buy off Austrian support?
Would Austria be interested in a deal? Or, if Austria is already sensitive to Franco-Russian, and possibly British, encirclement, will it see the Ottoman Empire as its only and indispensable European ally, that it needs to champion?
If Europe can navigate through the Turkish crisis without a general war, would Austria participate in the colonial race and where? Would second fiddle Prussia eventually develop a fleet of any size in the Baltic or North Seas or claim any colonies, or will the Austro-German-Italian naval outlet be all Adriatic-Mediterranean?
Alternatively, Bismarck could end up not becoming Minister-President of Prussia. It isn't exactly off the table to have someone else get the position. But with Bismarck, Prussia may be disinclined to act in a manner that is hostile to a more powerful Austria.
As for France, probably...
It depends on what other wacky adventures that Nappy III gets involved in between 1859 and 1864. Tempted to wonder what the story of Mexico would be, since Napoleon would not pick Maximilian to take the Mexican throne in this scenario.
I... i'm amazed, but concerned. Please tell me you're joking and not actually serious.
Eh, he says "in this ATL"... if he's from Milan/Mailand and is a loyal subject of Regno Lombardo-Veneto, that's fine... I've seen stranger things on here
Eh, he says "in this ATL"... if he's from Milan/Mailand and is a loyal subject of Regno Lombardo-Veneto, that's fine... I've seen stranger things on here
I said in that ATL, unfortunately I am not proficient in German though
In my proposal of missed Italian unification I could be a Habsburgs' subject like my great great grandpas (on my mother side) and great grandpa (on my father side) of the Austro-Italian Empire
I don't like the Savoia House but I'm still an Italian... My wet dream is pretty much the one described by @Tarabas and @LordKalvan in their masterpiece ATL Primavera d'Italia - Love and Revolution...
Last edited:
I said in that ATL, unfortunately I am not proficient in German though
In my proposal of missed Italian unification I could be a Habsburgs' subject like my great great grandpas (on my mother side) and great grandpa (on my father side) of the Austro-Italian Empire
I don't like the Savoia House but I'm still an Italian... My wet dream is pretty much the one described by @Tarabas and @LordKalvan in their masterpiece ATL Primavera d'Italia - Love and Revolution...
Honestly, I'd probably look at the Italian Federation from Kaiserreich if you ask me. Maybe I like the Habsburgs more...I dunno. I'm not a fan of the House of Savoy tbh.
Well, I don't want to engage in too much Savoy-bashing, as Vittorio Emanuele is still revered as a national hero, but I do find it interesting how the historiography, at least in the US and western Europe, treats VE II far differently from Otto von Bismarck. Bismarck is (or was, in the moldy collection of old history books I have) portrayed as a blustering neighbourhood bully, who cajoled and strong-armed the weaker German states into joining Prussia in the Kleindeutschland scheme, and fought wars of aggression against Prussia's neighbors to consolidate the new nation and to foster a new nationalistic sense of unity (which of course they eventually blame for WWI, but that's another matter
) .Vittorio Emanuele OTOH is treated as a great liberator, hero of Italian unification - despite the fact that he, too, bullied and cajoled the smaller Italian states into joining Sardinia (and to his credit at least used popular referenda to force the rulers into abdication), and if they refused, simply invaded them, as in the case of Two Sicilies and the Papal rump state, and fought a war of aggression against a neighbor to consolidate the national spirit and increase his holdings...