Austrian Victory at Sadowa?

Garibaldi was not a political leader in Italy in 1866, and he was busy leading his volunteers in Trentino. Probably, next thing he'd do in this scenario would be an another attempt on Rome. That would ROYALLY piss France off, but, hey, Italy is at war with Austria.
Not political but he sure as hell is a popular figure and a military leader.
 
Not political but he sure as hell is a popular figure and a military leader.

He was a good military leader, especially in boosting his troops morale. I'm doing biographic research about one his officers in Sicily right now, the way he was regarded is quite impressive.
OTOH, he was at odds with the italian govt. most of the time. He had many followers, but his troops were essentially irregulars and volunteers, something the Government did not like much in the first place. He was very popular among some sectors of the people, but it seems to me that he was an highly polarizing figure in life, hated and feared by many in the elite. After his death, of course, myth took over.
 
OTL was not a curbstomp. Austria did not lose any land to Prussia, nor its great power status.

Only because Bismarck so decided. Had Austria collapsed, Prussia would have to choose between absorbing large amounts of non-German territory, or else having a cluster of small states on its flank, many of them Slav and leaning to Russia. It suited him to keep Austria in being as a European power, just not as a German one.

OTOH, Austria has nothing to gain by being lenient to Prussia. Indeed, if she does so she has fought the war for nothing, since Prussia will soon recover and seek revenge. The only way to avert that would be to cripple Prussia by a huge indemnity which stops her from recovering for many years; but if Austria is in a position to imopose that, she is in a position to impose the territorial changes as well.

Nor has Nappy III any reason to object to the changes. His big obsession is Italy, and his main concern will be to ensure that Austria does not renege on her promise to give up Venetia. The simplest way to ensure that will be to occupy the Rhineland and Westphalia, and make his withdrawal conditional on Austria's from Venice. And for France, the creation of a new "Bavaria" or two new "Wurttemburgs" on the Rhine - even if they are ruled by junior Habsburgs - will be a great improvement on having Prussia there. The pill can be sugared for Austria by a promise (which he will almost certainly never be called upon to fulfil) to support her against any Russian intervention.
 
Only because Bismarck so decided. Had Austria collapsed, Prussia would have to choose between absorbing large amounts of non-German territory, or else having a cluster of small states on its flank, many of them Slav and leaning to Russia. It suited him to keep Austria in being as a European power, just not as a German one.

TBH, the Hungarians likely would have absorbed most of the smaller successor states into their own multiethnic but oligarchical Magyar imperium, though the Prussians wouldn't want that situation either so the point still stands.
 
If this happens then together with the victories on land and sea against the Italians Austria's in the enviable position of having had a war with almost no serious defeats, which dramatically enhances the power and prestige of Franz Josef and the House of Habsburg. Austria-Hungary either does not happen or happens in a very different fashion, and this is for the Habsburgs what a victory in 1877 would be for the Ottoman Empire.
 
Only because Bismarck so decided. Had Austria collapsed, Prussia would have to choose between absorbing large amounts of non-German territory, or else having a cluster of small states on its flank, many of them Slav and leaning to Russia. It suited him to keep Austria in being as a European power, just not as a German one.

OTOH, Austria has nothing to gain by being lenient to Prussia. Indeed, if she does so she has fought the war for nothing, since Prussia will soon recover and seek revenge. The only way to avert that would be to cripple Prussia by a huge indemnity which stops her from recovering for many years; but if Austria is in a position to imopose that, she is in a position to impose the territorial changes as well.

Nor has Nappy III any reason to object to the changes. His big obsession is Italy, and his main concern will be to ensure that Austria does not renege on her promise to give up Venetia. The simplest way to ensure that will be to occupy the Rhineland and Westphalia, and make his withdrawal conditional on Austria's from Venice. And for France, the creation of a new "Bavaria" or two new "Wurttemburgs" on the Rhine - even if they are ruled by junior Habsburgs - will be a great improvement on having Prussia there. The pill can be sugared for Austria by a promise (which he will almost certainly never be called upon to fulfil) to support her against any Russian intervention.

Most of what you say makes sense, but it would take more than a single defeat to force Prussia accept such a great reduction, when both Britain and Russia strongly disagree. Russia can be theoretically bought with concessions about that straits, but that would make Britain even more furious. I concur that both Austria and France would have great convenience in a Carthaginian peace, but I am not sure they would consider it worth the necessary war effort, that won't be only a reverse Sadova. If Italy is still at war, it would be even more costly, and in your proposal would put Napoleon in very weird position, advocating the gift of his ally's territory to someone he himself is at war with. And Garibaldi may actually decide do some weird stuff in Nizza (his hometown) or more likely in Rome, if France acts against Prussia.
 
Most of what you say makes sense, but it would take more than a single defeat to force Prussia accept such a great reduction, when both Britain and Russia strongly disagree. Russia can be theoretically bought with concessions about that straits, but that would make Britain even more furious. I concur that both Austria and France would have great convenience in a Carthaginian peace, but I am not sure they would consider it worth the necessary war effort, that won't be only a reverse Sadova. If Italy is still at war, it would be even more costly, and in your proposal would put Napoleon in very weird position, advocating the gift of his ally's territory to someone he himself is at war with. And Garibaldi may actually decide do some weird stuff in Nizza (his hometown) or more likely in Rome, if France acts against Prussia.


France doesn't have to declare war on Italy. Indeed, it could even occupy the Rhineland without declaring war, though it would be unusual behaviour.

Even if Prussia did try to fight on what would she use? Her best troops are in Bohemia and can extricate themselves only through narrow passes, which will take time if it's possible at all. More likely they are pinned against the Bohemian mountains and forced to surrender.

Iirc the troops in Western Germany are mostly Landwehr, which performed indifferently even against Hanover and Bavaria. So the French army can probably reach the Elbe before running into real opposition. Bismarck himself, in his memoirs, stated that French intervention (even after victory at Sadova) would have compelled withdrawal from Bohemia in order to cover Berlin.

Afaics, if Prussia loses Sadova, she is toast. That is probably what Von Moltke meant when he told his king (who was getting jittery and talking about retreat) that "We are fighting here for the very existence of Prussia".

As to foreign powers, the crucial thing is that they all had other fish to fry, and that German affairs were way down their priority list. Nappy III's attention, as noted, was focused on Italy. The Tsar was mostly concerned with shaking off the Peace of Paris, and would also have neen terrified of a French army on his Polish border, so soon after the revolt there. As for Britain, given her troubles with the Union in the recent ACW, and the current Fenian raids into Canada, she is far more worried about possible war with the US than with anything happening in Europe, esp Central Europe where she has little or nothing at stake. Italy, of course, has been stomped at Custozza, and with her Prussian ally also beaten can only beg Nappy III to intercede for her. In short, the only country Franz Josef has to worry about is France, whose acquiescence can be bought by yielding Venice.

Could I recommend AJP Taylor's The Struggle For Mastery In Europe, the relevant chapters of which cover the diplomatic ins and outs pretty well? Geoffrey Wawro's The Austro-Prussian War is the best account of the war itself.
 
France doesn't have to declare war on Italy. Indeed, it could even occupy the Rhineland without declaring war, though it would be unusual behaviour.

Even if Prussia did try to fight on what would she use? Her best troops are in Bohemia and can extricate themselves only through narrow passes, which will take time if it's possible at all. More likely they are pinned against the Bohemian mountains and forced to surrender.

Iirc the troops in Western Germany are mostly Landwehr, which performed indifferently even against Hanover and Bavaria. So the French army can probably reach the Elbe before running into real opposition. Bismarck himself, in his memoirs, stated that French intervention (even after victory at Sadova) would have compelled withdrawal from Bohemia in order to cover Berlin.

Afaics, if Prussia loses Sadova, she is toast. That is probably what Von Moltke meant when he told his king (who was getting jittery and talking about retreat) that "We are fighting here for the very existence of Prussia".

As to foreign powers, the crucial thing is that they all had other fish to fry, and that German affairs were way down their priority list. Nappy III's attention, as noted, was focused on Italy. The Tsar was mostly concerned with shaking off the Peace of Paris, and would also have neen terrified of a French army on his Polish border, so soon after the revolt there. As for Britain, given her troubles with the Union in the recent ACW, and the current Fenian raids into Canada, she is far more worried about possible war with the US than with anything happening in Europe, esp Central Europe where she has little or nothing at stake. Italy, of course, has been stomped at Custozza, and with her Prussian ally also beaten can only beg Nappy III to intercede for her. In short, the only country Franz Josef has to worry about is France, whose acquiescence can be bought by yielding Venice.

Could I recommend AJP Taylor's The Struggle For Mastery In Europe, the relevant chapters of which cover the diplomatic ins and outs pretty well? Geoffrey Wawro's The Austro-Prussian War is the best account of the war itself.

I've been looking for Taylor's book for a while, and it is on my wishlist indeed. However, Italy, though already defeated, had an army able to combat even after Custoza. Of course picking a fight with Austria and France at the same time WOULD be suicidal, no matter how many grudges with both Italy can have. To my mind, public opinion in Italy would gladly postpone Venice if they think they can get Rome. Not that they really can do much there if Sadowa goes the other way.
 
Top