I don't think Garibaldi is the right guy for this job, as others have said. Is it possible to have Mazzini "kick in the door" of the rotten Sicilian regime? I can see him holding on to the territory in the name of republicanism. The life expentancy of the Republic of the Sicilies is probably not great. The Pope would be terrifyed, and the Sardinians and French would be paying close attention. It's establishment may trigger republicans elsewhere in the peninsular and I can see (save foriegn intervention) a few armies marching south to deal with Mazzini.
A “Mad lad” in Sicily
- Thread starter MittleGittle
- Start date
-
- Tags
- italy unification
So if Garibaldi stays in power the French and English will go to war over influence? Does Austria get involved?
No, no... If Garibaldi stays in power England will have all the influence... Two Sicilies will be a de-facto British protectorate without any doubt...
But will France get involved? Will they offer something to A-H in return for their help if a war breaks out?
Highly unlikely, unless Garibaldi goes full berserk and marches on Rome. But if he stays "put", so to speak, there is no reason to intervene. His whole plan to have Italy divided into three medium-sized French client states has failed spectacularly, even due to his incapacity/lack of will to consult people on his plans (he did not even ask the Pope if it was ok for him to reduce the Papal States to Lazio in favor of the wanna-be Central Italian Kingdom, whose King was, in Napoleon's heart and his own heart alone, the Republican (!) Red Prince, his cousin Plon-Plon. Besides, he incorrectly assumed that the main threat/opponent to France was Austria and not Britain. Southern Italy as a de facto British Protectorate (as @isabella suggested, and I agree with her) would not happen overnight, though. By the time this became apparent, it could be too late to intervene.
There is a part of me that wonders whether this had been the British plan all along...
So there would be an Italian revolution and they gain independence like America, or they remain in the British sphere like Canada.
Give me a break, please!
Both Garibaldi and Mazzini were quite well known to the British, and I could not even envisage Palmerston signing off on such a plan to set up a hard-line egalitarian republic to turn into a protectorate (not even as an unlikely Plan C). Next thing coming up will be it was all a top-secret master plan set up by the Illuminati for their nefarious reasons
The British (and the French too - there were French as well as British warships in the straits of Messina when Garibaldi crossed over to Calabria) were for stability and for closing up in the most expeditious and less messy way the Italian crisis.
Additionally, the French had a vested interest in propping up Pius IX in Rome (but they were not truly willing to defend the Pope beyond the limits of Latium), and (even for someone this may appear to be counter to reason) the British too would have done everything in their power not to appear instrumental in the loss of the Pope's temporal power (certainly not after the Catholic Relief Act of 1829, or the troubles in Ireland).
But all of this is moot, after all: whatever the diplomatic players of Europe might have tried to set up, Garibaldi would not have sold out. He never did in his life, after all, and always refused to use his popularity for personal gains, either of influence or monetary.
Going against an existing Kingdom (even one you despise) to help in totally reshaping the map of Italy hardly qualifies as "to be for stability". That said, I am not saying that they wanted "a hard-line egalitarian republic", far from it. Thing is, we all know why Napoleon helped the Italian cause, and we know why the Brits despised the KoTS and how well they liked Mazzini and Garibaldi. I know that the general consensus is that the British saw a united Italy as a good counter to the French in the Mediterranean. What I am trying to say (and maybe I expressed in an awkward way) is that an independent Sicily would have certainly served the British better, as they already had vested interests in the island and they would have been the only viable option for protection of Sicily. I honestly do not think that anyone thought Garibaldi would topple the whole kingdom, but "liberating" Siciliy would have surely seemed.. thinkable, at least.Give me a break, please!
Both Garibaldi and Mazzini were quite well known to the British, and I could not even envisage Palmerston signing off on such a plan to set up a hard-line egalitarian republic to turn into a protectorate (not even as an unlikely Plan C). Next thing coming up will be it was all a top-secret master plan set up by the Illuminati for their nefarious reasons
The British (and the French too - there were French as well as British warships in the straits of Messina when Garibaldi crossed over to Calabria) were for stability and for closing up in the most expeditious and less messy way the Italian crisis.
Additionally, the French had a vested interest in propping up Pius IX in Rome (but they were not truly willing to defend the Pope beyond the limits of Latium), and (even for someone this may appear to be counter to reason) the British too would have done everything in their power not to appear instrumental in the loss of the Pope's temporal power (certainly not after the Catholic Relief Act of 1829, or the troubles in Ireland).
But all of this is moot, after all: whatever the diplomatic players of Europe might have tried to set up, Garibaldi would not have sold out. He never did in his life, after all, and always refused to use his popularity for personal gains, either of influence or monetary.
The British support to Garibaldi’s landing was a single ship inter posing itself while the Mille were landing, and it was never proven that the captain acted upon orders of the Admiralty. There was not even a rumour of British supplying weapons or funds .
I know, that's why it all started with an "a part of me wonders". It's just something I cannot help but think about.
British dominion of Italy joins the Entente right off the bat in ww1, no triple alliance, and no Italian colonies maybe.