Results of no Italian Unification.

[Basileus_Komnenos]

I’m pretty sure that all the European Powers would applaud Louis Napoleon’s attempt to conquer Italy and turn back the clock to his uncle’s golden age

To make this more plausible then perhaps Napoleon II survives his tuberculosis after a miracle recovery. His grandfather taking pity on him allows him to serve in the Austrian Army. This gives Napoleon II experience and allows him to form connections in the Austrian army. His name if Bonaparte also allows him to have some prestige. Napoleon II was described by his contemporaries as very intelligent and charming (unlike Nappy III who people perceived as a clumsy fool). Napoleon then rises up the ranks and he’s shown himself to be a proven battle commander.

1830’s:
France is in a full Civil War because let’s say Charles X refuses to give up power and flees to the countryside to rally support against the revolutionaries in Paris. Some support Louis-Philippe as the next King of France. Let’s say instead of the 1840’s a crop failiure occurs ten years early in Central Europe which causes revolutionary movement to break out across Prussia and Austria. Maybe the Italians and Hungarians both revolt since Europe is in flames and the Austrian Government is in chaos.

Napoleon II has a contingent of army officers loyal to him and he goes to Italy where he presents himself to the Italian Nationalists. He never abdicated as King of Rome: the title Napoleon I crowned him with as an infant. He then re-assumes his title and conquered the other Italian states through his military genius. He then meets with the Pope. One of the popular and more Conservative Italian unification ideas was a confederacy led by the pope as its nominal head. Napoleon II would agree to this and would then his invite his Murat cousin to become King of Naples. The Pope would then crown Napoleon II as King of Rome and then acknowledge him as French Emperor.

While the rest of Europe is in chaos, Napoleon basically uses the power vacuum to take as much as he can before the divided revoutionary movements are put down by the reactionaries and conservatives. News of Napoleon II stunning success in Italy spreads to France. The Orleanists and Legitimists are now nervous. Napoleon II then invades with his army where the French surrender to him. Even after Waterloo, Bonapartism was a potent force in France. Napoleon II then takes Paris as much of the French army defects to him. The Bourbons and Orleanists then flee and Napoleon II coronates himself as the French Emperor and re-assumes his title. He then makes a speech about wanting peace and focus on internal development in France. Napoleon II then does Napoleon’s II style reforms of France.


Perhaps as a butterfly of this Germany unified around the Frankfurt convention or something similar. Perhaps Napoleon freaks out by this powerful enemy at his doorstep. Maybe he makes a deal with the Austrians and Bavarians. Perhaps he later crushes them with the Bavarian and Saxon army defecting to Napoleon which plows him victory. Napoleon then marches on Berlin and restores the Confederation of the Rhine. Prussia would be stripped of land while his allies would be strengthened.

 

[FranzAncheNo]

Napoleon II has a contingent of army officers loyal to him and he goes to Italy where he presents himself to the Italian Nationalists. He never abdicated as King of Rome: the title Napoleon I crowned him with as an infant. He then re-assumes his title and conquered the other Italian states through his military genius. He then meets with the Pope. One of the popular and more Conservative Italian unification ideas was a confederacy led by the pope as its nominal head. Napoleon II would agree to this and would then his invite his Murat cousin to become King of Naples. The Pope would then crown Napoleon II as King of Rome and then acknowledge him as French Emperor.

The thread is called "Results of no Italian Unification.".

 

[Basileus_Komnenos]

The thread is called "Results of no Italian Unification.".

Whoops. Technically it still counts right? Since Italy would be a Confederation split between 2 Kingdoms in the North and South, and Central Italy which includes the Papal States. Each state would have separate administrations as well.

 

[LordKalvan]

make this more plausible then perhaps Napoleon II survives his tuberculosis after a miracle recovery. His grandfather taking pity on him allows him to serve in the Austrian Army. This gives Napoleon II experience and allows him to form connections in the Austrian army. His name if Bonaparte also allows him to have some prestige. Napoleon II was described by his contemporaries as very intelligent and charming (unlike Nappy III who people perceived as a clumsy fool). Napoleon then rises up the ranks and he’s shown himself to be a proven battle commander.

Everything here is completely ASB. It’d be easier to have Napoleon I not invading Spain and/or Russia or whatever which wouldn’t end up with the little Corsican deposed and exiled

 

[Tarabas]

The thread is called "Results of no Italian Unification.".

So, back to business then. For the sake of the discussion, assume that the pre-unification map is unchanged. The first thing that comes to my mind is that, with Lombardy-Venetia still firmly in Hapsburg hands, we would have no Ausgleich, or a very different one. A triple Monarchy seems fairly likely, IMHO. An Austria that keeps the relatively rich and developed L-V would be less inclined to venture in the Balkans, and the absence of a southern front (provided by the Kingdom of Italy in 1866) could make Prussia more wary of going to war against Austria, leading to a completely different German Unification (if any). Sardinia-Piedmont would inevitably tie up its destiny to that of France, maybe swapping Nice and Savoy for some token colonial possession. The kingdom of Two Sicilies would probably continue as it was, with possibly some colonial venture in Tunisia (maybe Libya, but that would be a bit of a stretch).

 

[raharris1973]

So, back to business then. For the sake of the discussion, assume that the pre-unification map is unchanged. The first thing that comes to my mind is that, with Lombardy-Venetia still firmly in Hapsburg hands, we would have no Ausgleich, or a very different one. A triple Monarchy seems fairly likely, IMHO. An Austria that keeps the relatively rich and developed L-V would be less inclined to venture in the Balkans, and the absence of a southern front (provided by the Kingdom of Italy in 1866) could make Prussia more wary of going to war against Austria, leading to a completely different German Unification (if any). Sardinia-Piedmont would inevitably tie up its destiny to that of France, maybe swapping Nice and Savoy for some token colonial possession. The kingdom of Two Sicilies would probably continue as it was, with possibly some colonial venture in Tunisia (maybe Libya, but that would be a bit of a stretch).

Could it be possible for Italian unification to be a total fail, but Bismarck’s Prussian led unification basically happens with outcomes basically the same as 1871?
Could the continued existence of Italy as a playground for the Austrians or Austro-Hungarians make them more relaxed about the Balkans and tolerant of Russian influence there? Perhaps this could allow the thre emperors league to survive long term?

 

[Tarabas]

Could it be possible for Italian unification to be a total fail, but Bismarck’s Prussian led unification basically happens with outcomes basically the same as 1871?
Could the continued existence of Italy as a playground for the Austrians or Austro-Hungarians make them more relaxed about the Balkans and tolerant of Russian influence there? Perhaps this could allow the thre emperors league to survive long term?

I think we should answer before to the question: would Austria be stronger or weaker in this scenario? A possible paradox here is that, even if the former holds, Austria having a larger, catholic, non-german population could be a stronger argument for the KleinDeutschland solution, thus possibly accelerating a Prussian-led german unification. On the other side of the coin, a richer Austria wasting less or no energy on the Balkans could align both with the Russians and the French, and be a more attractive solution to the Southern German states, so I could see the creation of a Southern and a Northern German Federation along the classical catholic/protestant divide. But I have to admit I am no expert on the era, so please take my opinion "cum grano salis".

 

[raharris1973]

I think we should answer before to the question: would Austria be stronger or weaker in this scenario? A possible paradox here is that, even if the former holds, Austria having a larger, catholic, non-german population could be a stronger argument for the KleinDeutschland solution, thus possibly accelerating a Prussian-led german unification. On the other side of the coin, a richer Austria wasting less or no energy on the Balkans could align both with the Russians and the French, and be a more attractive solution to the Southern German states, so I could see the creation of a Southern and a Northern German Federation along the classical catholic/protestant divide. But I have to admit I am no expert on the era, so please take my opinion "cum grano salis".

Good point - that is a plausible way for things to go.