An Ausonian Tale: the Kingdom of Naples in the XIX century

[Yanez de Gomera]

Isn't there a bit too few cavalry in the army?

In part this is intentional: cavalry is expensive and in Naples there are no big plains like in northern Italy making it difficult to supply enough quality horses for a bigger force. Still you have a point and maybe another cavalry brigade could be added.
In any case Austria will have a definite advantage when it comes to cavalry.

EDIT I did increase cavalry numbers, now there is a cavalry regiment for each infantry brigade. I also changed the makeup of the cavalry regiments, now there are less squadrons but each squadron is bigger.

 

[TheBerlinguer]

With all this reading about the strength of the Neapolitan military, a question on a slightly different matter arose. What was the final fate of Ferdinand's expedition to the Americas? Did the Kingdom of Spain manage to hold on a few colonial possessions on the mainland? Did Latin America see the birth of a sort of hispanophone Canada, i.e. a Dominion-like institution? Or did everything go pear-shaped and Spain still holds just Cuba & Puerto Rico like IOTL?

 

[Yanez de Gomera]

With all this reading about the strength of the Neapolitan military

The military must not be overestimated: it should be numerically slightly inferior to Sardinia, although recruiting from a bigger population base. Its advantages should lie in a probably better officer class (as Muratian Naples is not afflicted so badly by Jesuitism as Charles Albert's Piedmont)
and a slightly better overall organisation.

a question on a slightly different matter arose. What was the final fate of Ferdinand's expedition to the Americas? Did the Kingdom of Spain manage to hold on a few colonial possessions on the mainland? Did Latin America see the birth of a sort of hispanophone Canada, i.e. a Dominion-like institution? Or did everything go pear-shaped and Spain still holds just Cuba & Puerto Rico like IOTL?

Ehm... Finally somebody called me out on this... I must confess that I am not sure how to handle the situation in S.America:
When I wrote about the Gran Expedition of Ultramar I thought I would go on and write about its consequences in some detail, but to do so I would need some extensive research, and I cannot afford the time for it, so unfortunately I had to put S.America out of the spotlight.

In mainland Spain the situation has been slightly more stable during the twenties, but now they are having the same problems as OTL due to the Carlist faction not accepting Isabel as queen.

My idea for S.America was that Spain would hold onto something more than otl under some dual monarchy/pseudo dominion arrangement (Peru?, Mexico even?). The problem is that I doubt that there would be (on both sides) the necessary political intelligence to make it happen.
Do you have any ideas or suggestions?

 

[Iserlohn]

Ehm... Finally somebody called me out on this... I must confess that I am not sure how to handle the situation in S.America:
When I wrote about the Gran Expedition of Ultramar I thought I would go on and write about its consequences in some detail, but to do so I would need some extensive research, and I cannot afford the time for it, so unfortunately I had to put S.America out of the spotlight.

In mainland Spain the situation has been slightly more stable during the twenties, but now they are having the same problems as OTL due to the Carlist faction not accepting Isabel as queen.

My idea for S.America was that Spain would hold onto something more than otl under some dual monarchy/pseudo dominion arrangement (Peru?, Mexico even?). The problem is that I doubt that there would be (on both sides) the necessary political intelligence to make it happen.
Do you have any ideas or suggestions?

To avoid cliches while still being within the realm of plausibility... I'd say Mexico is the better target for a Bourbon-loyalist state in the Americas. I mean there was the Aranda Plan and everything, so it is definitely possible (maybe not long-term but definitely short-term). Peru meanwhile is just stuck between two ambitious entities which both could "liberate" the region while Madrid isn't looking.

 

[TheBerlinguer]

Ehm... Finally somebody called me out on this... I must confess that I am not sure how to handle the situation in S.America:
When I wrote about the Gran Expedition of Ultramar I thought I would go on and write about its consequences in some detail, but to do so I would need some extensive research, and I cannot afford the time for it, so unfortunately I had to put S.America out of the spotlight.

In mainland Spain the situation has been slightly more stable during the twenties, but now they are having the same problems as OTL due to the Carlist faction not accepting Isabel as queen.

My idea for S.America was that Spain would hold onto something more than otl under some dual monarchy/pseudo dominion arrangement (Peru?, Mexico even?). The problem is that I doubt that there would be (on both sides) the necessary political intelligence to make it happen.
Do you have any ideas or suggestions?

I agree with Iserlohn about Mexico being a potential candidate for Bourbon loyalism, especially if the country is as unlucky as OTL in regards to her revolutionary fathers (all of them dead before the end of the liberation process) and I don't see many ways for the butterflies flapping their wings in Naples to change thoroughly that scenario. The innate instability of the United Mexican States (never truly resolved as the modern age can testify) is the best propaganda fodder the Bourbon loyalists can hope for and the reason why it took the revolutionaries so much to eradicate them completely.

About Perù, it's worth mentioning that it's the only part of Spanish America that Bolìvar conquered rather than liberated. A concerted effort between Madrid and Lima could turn the region into such a pain in the behind for the revolutionaries that they'd rather see it go back to the Spanish sphere than bleeding for years in the Andine passes. It didn't happen IOTL, but then neither the Gran Expedicion. I mean, I wouldn't trust either the Peruvian loyalists or Ferdinand VII to devise a winning strategy to fend off both San Martìn and Bolìvar, but who knows? Maybe two half-wits are almost as good at thinking as a whole one.

 

[LordKalvan]

Good insight into the Neapolitan army, Yanez.

I believe that you should go back to your early numbers for cavalry (before the reforms of 1852, the cavalry was fielding 2420 men in peacetime, and double that at war).
I would think that it would be both difficult and unnecessarily expensive for the Neapolitans to field a cavalry force 50% higher in peacetime. There is also the consideration that there is no menacing army on the border, and in any case the lay of the land is not really suitable for smashing charges.
If you accept my suggestion, there are two ways of going at it: either you simply delete a cavalry brigade (2 regiments less) or you still delete a brigade of light cavalry but add add a third regiment to the Ausonia brigade (all three regiments should be line cavalry and probably be named Guardie Carabinieri. I'm aware of the fact that the difference between line cavalry and light cavalry is quite blurred at this time in history, but all European armies are still fielding line cavalry regiments as well as light cavalry ones, and I don't think of any good reasons for Naples to be the oddball). If you like the latter alternative, the three line Regiments might be named Regina, Regno and Duca di Calabria.

The light cavalry regiments should certainly include a squadron of scouts (Guide) each: after all, you pointed out that there were problems during the last troubles in the Legations.

The TOO of the army is fine with me. The only nitpick is that I would like to see a school for noncoms established (good, experienced noncoms are really necessary for a smooth transition from peace to war and facilitate the integration of the reservists). Three years of service are fine, but afterwards the discharged men should be in the reserve up to the age of 30, with 4 weeks of mandatory training each year.

Nice job with the Neapolitan bersaglieri, but if they have to be an elite corps the men should all be long-term volunteers rather than conscripts.

Are you going to do a similar show-and-tell with the navy too? In many ways the navy is even more important for Naples than the army. I would also expect to see a well developed and professional corps of marines (Fucilieri di Marina). Hint, hint

I would also love if you could flesh out a bit Achille's brother, who until now has been totally left in the background. He's the heir to the throne, after all.

My knowledge of central and south American history is minimal, so I cannot help much on the subject. However IIRC the whole of the independence struggle was often decided by relatively small numbers of trained troops and naval assets. My gut feeling is that Spain can almost certainly retain Mexico (the secure base in Cuba is the key) and at least have a fighting chance in Peru.

 

[Avrorrange]

@LordKalvan,about the ground isn't good for cavalry,and that there's no menacing enemy at the border,I think it's pretty obvious that the Neapolitans don't plan to just defend their country,but to go on offensive in the north against the Austrians.To do that,I believe some cavalry is necessary.Even now,there's probably not enough cavalry to do that.Another thing is that trying to train cavalry from scratch is much difficult than trying to train infantry from the scratch,so some level of cavalry is probably needed during peacetime.

 

[LordKalvan]

The operative sentence is "in the future". The European arrangement which has come out of the upheavals of the early 1830s is relatively stable. I would say significantly more stable than the equivalent scenario IOTL.
Joaquim Murat stepped back from the brink in 1815 (and again in 1822); his son has done one better on him in the recent crisis, refraining from attacking the Austrian columns and relying on diplomacy.
It looks like that he's not hot-headed, and that he's well capable to reign with his brain rather than with his balls.

Naples does not have the population basis, the development or the deep coffers which would be necessary to confront Austria on his own.
It is reasonable for him to refrain from wasting the limited resources which are available to his kingdom on trying to become the Prussia of Italy.
It would be nice to have a strong cavalry arm, as well as a strong infantry, but who's going to pay for it? And what about artillery (bit on the scarce side) ans the navy which is quite a necessity for a kingdom with a long coastline and the need to use maritime transport from one side to the other of the kingdom? Much better to be expense-conscious, and rely on quality rather than quantity. If the kingdom prospers, there will be more money available in the future, for a time when not only Naples will have secured alliances but also the European equilibrium will be shattered by external factors.
Time works for Naples (and also for Cispadania, Tuscany and the former Legations) and works against Austria.

 

[Avrorrange]

The operative sentence is "in the future". The European arrangement which has come out of the upheavals of the early 1830s is relatively stable. I would say significantly more stable than the equivalent scenario IOTL.
Joaquim Murat stepped back from the brink in 1815 (and again in 1822); his son has done one better on him in the recent crisis, refraining from attacking the Austrian columns and relying on diplomacy.
It looks like that he's not hot-headed, and that he's well capable to reign with his brain rather than with his balls.

Naples does not have the population basis, the development or the deep coffers which would be necessary to confront Austria on his own.
It is reasonable for him to refrain from wasting the limited resources which are available to his kingdom on trying to become the Prussia of Italy.
It would be nice to have a strong cavalry arm, as well as a strong infantry, but who's going to pay for it? And what about artillery (bit on the scarce side) ans the navy which is quite a necessity for a kingdom with a long coastline and the need to use maritime transport from one side to the other of the kingdom? Much better to be expense-conscious, and rely on quality rather than quantity. If the kingdom prospers, there will be more money available in the future, for a time when not only Naples will have secured alliances but also the European equilibrium will be shattered by external factors.
Time works for Naples (and also for Cispadania, Tuscany and the former Legations) and works against Austria.

The Kingdom is prospering.It's precisely because of quality over quantity that you need to train a proper cavalry arm right now.Like I mentioned,cavalry isn't actually something you can recruit ad hoc unlike infantry.Like artillery,it needs more training than infantry.If you actually want to cut something,it's probably the number of infantry.When there's a war and you use levee en masse,the one thing you don't lack is infantry.

 

[LordKalvan]

The Kingdom is prospering.It's precisely because of quality over quantity that you need to train a proper cavalry arm right now.Like I mentioned,cavalry isn't actually something you can recruit ad hoc unlike infantry.Like artillery,it needs more training than infantry.If you actually want to cut something,it's probably the number of infantry.When there's a war and you use levee en masse,the one thing you don't lack is infantry.

Since the TL is already at 1840, I feel that sacrificing infantry in favor of cavalry would not be the best move. Cavalry is no more a decisive battle winner by this time. Everyone loves a dashing cavalry charge, but if you compare the butcher bill with the benefits....

Military technology is changing fast, and doctrine too changes to keep pace.
The role of cavalry in this time and age is to screen and scout, not to win battles.

 

[TheBerlinguer]

Since the TL is already at 1840, I feel that sacrificing infantry in favor of cavalry would not be the best move. Cavalry is no more a decisive battle winner by this time. Everyone loves a dashing cavalry charge, but if you compare the butcher bill with the benefits....

Military technology is changing fast, and doctrine too changes to keep pace.
The role of cavalry in this time and age is to screen and scout, not to win battles.

True, but there's a lot of truth in the saying about generals and their habit of devising strategies for the new wars that could have won the old ones.

 

[Noblesse Oblige]

True, but there's a lot of truth in the saying about generals and their habit of devising strategies for the new wars that could have won the old ones.

This. Despite the advancement of technology, and thus new ways to wage war, a lot of strategies used by generals tend to ignore these advancements, thinking it would change little. Even up to World War II with the Fall of France, a lot of the French old guard used strategies that won World War I for them rather than newer stratagems.

 

[Yanez de Gomera]

That's a nice discussion on the respective advantages and disadvantages of having more or less cavalry in yhis time period.

I would prefer to keep the four brigades, in order to have a nice ratio of a cavalry regiment per infantry brigade, but I think a good compromise could be a reduction in the number of men for each squadron to 105 in peacetime and 140 at full mobilization. This would give 3360 troopers at normal strenght, rising to 4480 at full mobilization.

For comparison Piedmont had 10 infantry brigades and 9 cavalry regiments, despite drawing from a smaller population base. Obviously they had more stringent defense committments, bordering with both France and Austria, and their navy was inferior, but still I don't think my numers are exaggerated or crippling for Naples.

Light cavalry, besides its role as screen, explorer and harrasser, is also rather useful for internal security, eg keeping the roads clear from briganti. I downgraded all the various hussars, curassiers, lancers etc to cavalleggeri as a money saving measure, as they would have a lower pay grade and need lesser horses. This might be comparable with what the UK did in the XVIII century transforming all its cavalry into dragoons (mostly in name only) in order to pay them less. I think it could be in character for Achille, who is a bit of a penny pincher monarch...

If some blazing charge is needed, one squadron in each regiment is made of lancers, so they are not completely toothless.

Some other clarifications on service time etc... Conscription starts at 20 years of age, and after the three years of full time service there are 5 years when the soldier has to devote just one month to training, like LordKalvan wrote, then they are released for service, but still liable to be recalled into the militia (Guardia Provinciale) in case of invasion for other ten years (this would however only be an extreme measure, some kind of Landsturm, not a proper Landwehr).

The other two militias (Guardia Civica for the cities and Guardia Mobile, at least partly mounted, in the country) are volunteer bodies, formed from middle class people like it was usual at the time, and are therefore rather politicized in a liberal sense (in the Risorgimento the establishment of such a militia was a common demand from the liberals).

Cavalry and Artillery soldiers have to serve for 6 years before going to the reserve (as those specialities are better suited to more professional soldiers). Finally the Bersaglieri are a volunteer corps, sorry for not pointing it out more clearly before.

The idea for a NCO school is obviously good, but I am afraid it is too much ahead of its time for the moment. The NCOs are selected from the mass of the conscripts, but normally prolong their service becoming professional soldiers and the experienced nucleus for the army.

@LordKalvan: You are right, in the next updates I should shine some light on Luciano Carlo Murat (in OTL Achille died in 1847...), for now I can say that he is not so austere as his brother and can be seen much more often at the S.Carlo theatre and doesn't look very much interested in politics. (In OTL was apparently a bit of a gambler and drunkard, now he knows he has big responsibility, and has had a more regular youth, but still...).

AS for the navy, in one of the last updates I had some snippets about it, including the first steam warships (actually little more than armed packets). In any case I am working on a more comprehensive review of the Navy, it is certainly the jewel of the Kingdom's armed forces.
However I think it should be abit smaller than OTL's Duosicilian Navy, having less resources and less committments due to not controlling Sicily.

Finally the ideas of having formal Fucilieri di Marina is intriguing, but that's something for the future [edit: ERRATA CORRIGE there was iotl a fucilieri di marina regiment so I will include it in the naval overview. What Imeant is that sonething like the USMC simply won't happen] and, I have some ideas concerning Venice... Fanti da Mar has a nice sound, hasn't it?


South America would need some research, there have certainly been butterflies by now, because of an at least partially successful expedition in 1821, and certainly Peru has remained tied to Spain for longer, and the mainland's influence on Mexico is greater, but I have not yet decided what to do about it. Garibaldi will probably feature: maybe he could end up in Mexico, instead of Rio Grande do Sur and Rio de la Plata.

 

[Draeger]

-snip-

I can appreciate demoting the cavalry, but isn't this going to have a number of consequences?

Short-term: the cavalry loses morale and stature, officers begin clamoring for restoration of their pay, join radical anti-crown parties, etc.

Long-term: the cavalry is reduced to a mostly ceremonial role, at least until mechanization begins. Naples does not have the long-standing lancer tradition of France or the Hussar/Dragoon tradition of England. What will happen to Naples' existing cavalry tradition in the long run if it is not treated as a priority? Or is this on purpose---you are purposefully strengthening the infantry, particularly the specialists, as the backbone of the army, and thus the primary decisive unit?

It seems you are definitely playing to Naples' (and, really, OTL Italy's) strengths and weaknesses: specialist professional infantry and a well-managed conscripted line, with cavalry and artillery serving combined-arms roles to screen/scout/provide support for the infantry. It's a revolutionary concept, given the state of things in 1830s Europe, especially in the south. The question is, what will you -do- with this impressive force?

Will it be a glass cannon---once spent, it cannot recover easily, even given the revamped conscription/reserve-training system? Or will it be a paper tiger---mostly for show?

If Naples keeps up its policy of prioritizing diplomacy, I fear the army will fall into the role of the latter, regardless of reforms and drills. If an army never sees action, it decays. You have done something great in introducing the Bersaglieri this early to the Neapolitan arsenal. They will be a great tool, but for what? A few actions in North Africa? Perhaps against the much-weakened Ottomans? Fun to read, but meaningless---unless your Naples, under Achille or his successor, faces down a modern European army (winning decisively, and able to prosecute a campaign of seizure and siege after such a battle) soon, it cannot stay relevant for very long.

If you hope to unite Italy under Naples, then Naples -must- become the clear master of the Peninsula. OTL it was Sardinia because it had French support against Austria----but OTL Italy was very polarized politically between those two great powers. TTL it's not so clear---the UK has a voice, and has made it heard; Russia, too. It will be -very- interesting to see how you manage to bring Italy to heel under Naples' rule, and with the GPs' blessing.

[edit]Hint: I think Sicily is a GREAT first target for all that pent-up military enthusiasm!

 

[Avrorrange]

[edit]Hint: I think Sicily is a GREAT first target for all that pent-up military enthusiasm!

I guess this is why British support is so vital?Question is,why would Britain support Naples' bid to unify the peninsula?

 

[Draeger]

I guess this is why British support is so vital?Question is,why would Britain support Naples' bid to unify the peninsula?

I don't think they would. It would require French support, which doesn't seem likely, even though the Bourbons are out of power there. I think if the English power play goes horribly wrong and they're buried in revolts for a while, then Naples can snatch Sicily and then act like nothing happened when the English get their collective you-know-what together.

I think Yanez has a good thing going with the Legations gaining autonomy. We have something similar to the city-state system under the Roman Republic in Central Italy as it stands. Achille (or his successor) could assert himself over Central Italy a la Ladislao il Magnanimo, or attempt to 'liberate' Habsburg Italy during TTL's incarnation of the Hungarian revolts, neither of which I think would go over very well, though.

Like I said, though, there are a lot more voices at the Italian table ITTL than OTL, and it will require equal parts force and diplomatic finesse, and appropriate applications thereof, in order for Naples to end up on top of a united Italy.

 

[Yanez de Gomera]

[FONT=&quot][Hello everyone! I am back! THis TL was almost dead, because I was terribly occupied until the 10th with a difficult exam, and then had a bit of a writers' block, but now I finally got around to write the italian Zollverein analogue. Unfortunately I have limited sparetime and therefore very small time to resnearch for this, especially for happenings outside Europe. I would like to get to the Italian unification, but writing an ATL 1848 that is somewhat credible is not easy... In any case good reading and feedback is much welcome!]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The birth of the Lega Doganale Italiana[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Since 1831 both the Grand Duchy of Tuscany and the Duchy of Modena and Lucca had been experiencing significant economic growth, due to the introduction of some liberal reforms and to the influx of French capitals (that was especially noticeable in Modena-Lucca). The effects were even more visible in the Legazioni of Bologna and Romagna, that were prospering under the capable leadership of their High Commissioners. The Legazioni already formed a free market, according to the provisions of the London Convention, but customs and tolls still existed between them and their “protecting States”. The Legazione delle Marche kept closer relationships with Rome and the rest of the lands still directly controlled by the Pope, with Ancona enjoying its role as the main Adriatic port in Central Italy, and as a safe haven for liberals unwelcome in Rome.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The complex system of tariffs created by the new political asset appeared however untenable, because it hampered commerce between territories that were now becoming politically socially and economically very close. This was especially evident between Modena and Bologna: the two cities were close, there were advanced projects for a railway connecting the two, and Pellegrino Rossi, the High Commissioner for the Legazione di Bologna, was also foreign minister for Duke Carlo Ludovico of Modena and Lucca, yet the two entities were still separated by tariffs and different regulations. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]It was in fact Pellegrino Rossi, whose influence in the Modenese court was now rivaling that of Ascanio Mansi, the Prime Minister, the one who proposed the creation of a customs union between the Legazioni and the protecting states. In this he was influenced by the writings of the German economist Friederich List and by the experience of the Zollverein, that had recently been created among most of the German states and that already was giving signs of having a great success in rationalizing and bringing together their economies. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]A customs union would imply the creation of a free market among the contracting parties, and the adoption of a common tariff towards third parties (necessitating also an uniformation of measurement systems). With time the contracting parties could get even closer, by adopting common commercial law codes and a common value. All this would surely bring closer political relationship, and if it could be expanded to the other Italian states, it would lead to a confederation among them, that in Rossi’s thought was the best way to peacefully solve the Italian question, possibly including Lombardy-Venetia, to which Austria would have to give, in future, a degree of autonomy, and being headed by the Pope, who would guarantee a balance between the Italian states, and reassure the catholic powers of the peacefulness of such a confederation.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Clearly this ideas clashed with the reality on the ground, with a papacy drifting towards more and more reactionary position and an Austria that gave no signs of wanting to ever relax its grip on Milan and Venice.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Still, the proposal made much economic sense, and in 1836 Carlo Ludovico authorized Rossi to start negotiations with Tuscany and Naples. The Grand Duke Leopoldo was quick to be convinced, as the relationships between the two states had been very good since 1831, and a customs union would surely facilitate his project of building a railway line connecting Leghorn, Florence and Bologna.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]In Naples the proposal was met more coldly, and King Achille initially took refuge behind parliamentary prerogatives to avoid giving a direct answer.
The Kingdom of Naples had, since 1832, a free trade agreement with the Kingdom of Sicily, and thanks to the moderation of King Ferdinand IV, and to the good personal relationship between the two Kings, relationship between the former rivals were now pretty warm. Opening to the northern markets could have benefits, but entailed great risks for the still fragile Neapolitan economy. On the other hand, it could be a great occasion to advance the cause of Italian unity, and Naples would certainly have a leadership role in the union, being by far the more populated and militarily stronger State. If they didn’t join though, Tuscany, Modena and the Legations could become a sizable counterweight to the Kingdom.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]In the end the question would have to be decided by Parliament, as it would entail a significant variation to tax laws, who were a parliamentary prerogative according to the Neapolitan constitution, but for the moment Achille gave a tentative assent to the agreement, conditioned to Sicilian participation (as otherwise the successful trade between the two States would have to be curtailed).[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The Kingdom of Sicily consented too to the proposal, it was clear to Ferdinand that, if Sicily remained out of the customs union, it would be quickly outcompeted by Naples in trading with the rest of the Peninsula.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The Papal States instead refused to accede to the union, even when the Pope was offered its presidency, as the resentment for the humiliation suffered in 1831 was still strong enough to trump financial considerations. Austrian concerns and pressure had proved insufficient to stop Tuscany from embracing Rossi’s plan, instead creating a rift between the independently minded Grand Duke and his relatives in Vienna. In Parma instead Maria Luisa was much more dependant on Austrian support and advisors, and refused to enter negotiations, as did Carlo Alberto of Sardinia when he was tentatively contacted.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The negotiations were very difficult, and made longer by numerous disagreements on technical points on the functioning and even the naming of the union. It was 1838 when the treaty was signed, and only one year after came the ratification of the Neapolitan parliament and the Lega Doganale Italiana became a reality.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Its members were the Kingdom of Naples, the Kingdom of Sicily, the Grand Duchy of Tuscany, and the Duchy of Modena and Lucca. The Legazioni di Bologna, Romagna and Marche, whose ability to sign international treaties without the Pope’s assent was controversial, received the status of Associated Members.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The Presidency of the Lega would pass from one monarch to the other each year, while important decisions and regulations would be adopted by a council of delegates from the member States (the associated members “delegated” their vote to the respective member State). The decisions would have to be unanimous, but didn’t need any ratification. The administration of the League’s activities and the implementation of its regulations would be the responsibility of a Secretariat based in Naples and presided by a Chancellor elected by the Council. The first Chancellor would be Pellegrino Rossi.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The treaty provided for numerous exceptions and a fairly complex compensatory system, so the fiscal uniformation was not quick, nor complete, but significant steps were made, as the adoption of common standards of coinage and measurement between the states and the adoption of a uniform commercial code in 1845. Most importantly, all commercial treaties with third countries were to be conducted jointly, giving a seed of political unity to the League members.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The Lega Doganale facilitated the construction of new infrastructures between member states, and its most significant success was the creation of the Società Anonima Strade Ferrate dell’Italia Centrale, that was responsible for the construction of a railway line linking Modena, Bologna, Prato and Firenze (and from there Leghorn through the Leopolda railway finished in 1842) that was completed in 1847. An even more ambitious project to link Ferrara and Brindisi, along the Adriatic coast was started, but failed to attract enough capitals to become viable.[/FONT]

 

[Gian]

So the progress towards Unification continues.

I'm starting to think that given the progress of Naples (compared to Piedmont-Sardinia from what I can see), it would seem that come 2015, it would be the South around the city of Naples, rather than the Po Valley, that could be the center of Italian industry, right?

Or am I just conflating what I'm seeing with the trend of industrialization in Italy?

 

[guinazacity]

Great Update, Great to see it's back!

 

[LordKalvan]

Welcome back!
Good to hear you're out of the woods with your exams.

Your update on the creation of the Lega Doganale Italiana is quite sensible: it's obvious that such an endeavor would take time and require a lot of time-consuming negotiations. Good point with the associated status given to the Legations: the practical effect is the same, and it avoids another diplomatic row with the Papal States (and possibly Austria too). I agree that the Pope would not want to touch it even with a pole, and that Austria would also refuse to join, dragging along Parma (incidentally, Marie Louise's death was on 17 December 1847, and I don't see any special reason to grant her a lease on life. After her death, Parma should be united with Modena IIRC, and therefore would automatically become part of the customs union). It's a pity that Carlo Alberto refuses to join (I'd assume that there should be pressures from the economic sector of his kingdom to enter the union), but I suppose is part and parcel of his stronger links with Austria).

Very good news about the completion of the railway linking Florence and Bologna. It will give a great boost to the economy and would be very beneficial for Leghorn. The railway from Ferrara to Ravenna is probably a bit premature at this stage (incidentally, what's the status of railway development in the kingdom of Naples?) but I believe that a railway from Ancona to Rimini and Bologna should be in the cards. IMHO the trans-Appenninic railway should accelerate also the works on the railway link between Venice and Milan (if for no other reason, there should be military considerations to push it forward).

I'd draw also your attention to the development of the electric telegraph (have a look at http://downloads.quadratodellaradio...telecomunicazioni per l'unità d'italia(2).pdf).

The first telegraphic line IOTL was built along the Leopoldina line in 1847-48.
ITTL it would be feasible to have it operative 2 or 3 years earlier, so that when the railway between Florence and Bologna is built a telegraphic line will be installed too. Connections to Modena and Ancona should also follow pretty quickly.

Keep up the good work!