Strategic importance of Trentino & Venetia

[koa_dan]

Well, I'm thinking about how important Trentino was to Italy and Venetia was to Austria-Hungary during the pre-WW1 period. So suppose A-H gave Italy only Trentino (but not South Tyrol and Trieste) to Italy, would it be enough to keep the Italians neutral (not including French colonies given to them later)? How would this affect the prestige of the Hapsburgs?

On the other hand, what if Italy joined a defeated Entente and was forced to cede Venetia to A-H? How severe would this loss be to Italy as a whole? Also, how would this benefit A-H? I believe A-H would not want to take anymore territory though.

 

[Michele]

My feeling is that no, that wouldn't be enough. Italy could very probably make do without South Tyrol, but Trieste and other largely Italian coastal cities farther East wouldn't be left in foreign hands.

As to the rest, you'd need to define what you mean by "Venetia".

 

[koa_dan]

Then how important Trentino was to A-H then? Would giving it away acceptable to the Hapsburgs?

And by "Venetia" I meant this region (excluding the Dalmatian coast of course).

 

[Michele]

Then that's all of Veneto plus that part of Friuli (most of it) that in 1914 was within the Italian borders. Losing that would be unacceptable to Italy. If the whole of the Entente is defeated and Austria-Hungary insists on wanting that, naturally, it will be lost - but the upshot will be the same attitude the French had about Alsace-Lorraine after 1871. Prepare for the next war. Many outside Italy don't remember that that was the main Italian outlook for the whole 1800s. It will continue, and more bitterly.

One might also wonder what happens in the winning empire. OK; it has won, but certainly at a high cost - and it was creaky to start with in 1914. Now one has to suppose that besides that slice of Italy, it will have taken over those headstrong Serbians, and probably a slice of Czarist Russia. Wonder whether they can manage to control those additional millions of unhappy subjects.

 

[koa_dan]

Then that's all of Veneto plus that part of Friuli (most of it) that in 1914 was within the Italian borders. Losing that would be unacceptable to Italy. If the whole of the Entente is defeated and Austria-Hungary insists on wanting that, naturally, it will be lost - but the upshot will be the same attitude the French had about Alsace-Lorraine after 1871. Prepare for the next war. Many outside Italy don't remember that that was the main Italian outlook for the whole 1800s. It will continue, and more bitterly.

One might also wonder what happens in the winning empire. OK; it has won, but certainly at a high cost - and it was creaky to start with in 1914. Now one has to suppose that besides that slice of Italy, it will have taken over those headstrong Serbians, and probably a slice of Czarist Russia. Wonder whether they can manage to control those additional millions of unhappy subjects.

I have seen several TLs in which a victorious A-H took Venetia from Italy, so I'm not sure if that piece of land is really worth all the future troubles. I think stripping Italy of her colonial empire is a much better option for A-H then.

 

[WeissRaben]

Then that's all of Veneto plus that part of Friuli (most of it) that in 1914 was within the Italian borders. Losing that would be unacceptable to Italy. If the whole of the Entente is defeated and Austria-Hungary insists on wanting that, naturally, it will be lost - but the upshot will be the same attitude the French had about Alsace-Lorraine after 1871. Prepare for the next war. Many outside Italy don't remember that that was the main Italian outlook for the whole 1800s. It will continue, and more bitterly.

It would be worse that A-L, likely as not. Alsace-Lorraine always was a borderland between France and Germany, and had become part of the French sphere relatively recently (Alsace in particular). Moreover, A-L counted one and half million inhabitants, in 1871, out of a total French population of 37.5 million inhabitants; Veneto in 1914 counted more than three million inhabitants, out of a total Italian population of 35 millions.

 

[Arkenfolm]

Why all of Venetia and not just the southern passes and valleys of the Alps like the Cadore, Carnia, and Val Canale/Canal del Ferro regions? That seems much more strategic in the long run and less difficult to absorb since combined it only had something like 125,000 people in 1911 (and the Val Canale already was Austrian until the end of WWI). That was the peak of the region's population since there was already heavy emigration, so it shouldn't be too difficult for Austria to absorb compared to all of Venice.

 

[Clandango]

Then how important Trentino was to A-H then? Would giving it away acceptable to the Hapsburgs?

And by "Venetia" I meant this region (excluding the Dalmatian coast of course).

It was a package deal. That area you show was never owned by Austria just in that form. They unifed their possesion of Milan with it, which was later unifed with the western third of Venetia on that map, creating the Kingdom of Venetia-Lombardy. Yah, nitpicking but are you refering to before or after they split this? And I think that getting Dalmatia and Istria was a bit more important to them. While Venice was once a rich area, by the time the Austrians got it it had faded due to trade with Asia no longer being funneled through the Ottoman Empire, who the Venetians were in good with.

 

[koa_dan]

Yah, nitpicking but are you refering to before or after they split this?

Well, I meant after they got split. As I mentioned above, I simply questioned this because I have seen several TLs on this forum showing such a scenario. I attach some of them below. I don't remember whose they are though.