Austria, for real historical and material reasons was unlikely in 1870, to fight Prussia, Russia, Italy and possibly Romania and Serbia, whilst at the same time struggling with Nationality questions. Beust and Franz Josef weren't stupid.
And Italy regardless of how it performs in 1866 just did not want an alliance with Prussia.
Hindsight can simplify the past, hindsight can make past descisions, that were logical, sensible, or maybe unavoidable at the time, look like mistakes. Nobody can forsee the future, and great surprises do happen in history. Such as the Prussian defeat of France.
The scenario that Austria attacks Prussia has some feasability to it, sections of the Austrian ruling elite wanted it. Andrássy could have exited history earlier through an accident. Yes Beust may have gone for broke, and it's quite feasable that Franz Josef concurs with him.
But Italy does not make any attempt to keep the Prussian alliance going, nobody in power want's it. So this is pure invention. Granted you say Italy does better in 1866, but you dont explain how. And you just assume that makes it more likely that Italy attacks Austria later on.
But you simply ignore the effect this would have on Austria. As stated previously, this may make it less likely that Austria will attack Prussia in 1870. Granted leaders make colossal mistakes, but these are intelligent men, living the reality of events, at the time, and you simply ignore this.
An Italian Victory in 1866 would have a number of knock on effects, on France, on Britain, on the Ottoman's, on the nationalities of Austria Hungary, on Russia, and on the Balkan states.
It might encourage a series of events that leave Napoleon III more willing to cede Rome. Leaving Italy free to have it's alliance with France and Austria.
Granted on the other hand an Italian victory, may make it impossible for Austria to consider an alliance with Italy, and it may leave an alliance with Austria less appealing to Napoleon III.
On the other hand revenge against Italy, rather than against Prussia may dominate Austrian thoughts,
possibly - and you completely neglect this - encouraging Austria to look for an alliance with Prussia. It partly depends on, where the danger is percieved to come from.
An italian victory at the Battle of Custoza may have sparked uprisings in Hungary, Slav lands etc, maybe balkan attacks on Austria. Maybe Austria collapses altogether as a result.
Remember that the leaders of the major European powers have as one prime concern to keep certain balances of power, that ultimately benefit themselves. If Austria looks in mortal danger the aims of other European powers are then influenced by that.
You can't alter the outcome of a major historical event, such as the Third War of Italian Independence, and then presume that you end up with, the world as it would have been, had events happened as they did.
Maybe what's needed for the General European war - hingeing on Austria attacking Prussia in 1870 - is that
Austria absolutely crushes Italy in 1866. Know Austria feels even more unlucky to have been beaten by Prussia,
and the crushing of Italy serves to secure Austria's flanks at home and abroad. The Austrian armys prestige and confidence is higher.
If Venetia is still ceded to Italy, then the Austrian desire for revenge against Prussia simmers even more.
If Italy gains nothing in 1866, then it is much more likely to want to continue the Prussian alliance, and attack Austria later.
Whichever way it unfolds, a stronger more confident Austria is much more likely to attack Prussia.
Italy's disaster then lays a realistic historical ground for wide ranging Italian army reforms. Now Italy really does want a rematch with Austria. Austria confident of it's ability to deal with Italy marches against Prussia with greater expectations.
And what of Napoleon III, confidence in the Austrian Army's abilities as an ally is higher, maybe Napoleon III, through his own over confidence, or maybe manouvered by Bismarck, has increased designs on Belgium. Britain concerned for the safety of the channel ports .......
Who knows ?
And Italy regardless of how it performs in 1866 just did not want an alliance with Prussia.
Hindsight can simplify the past, hindsight can make past descisions, that were logical, sensible, or maybe unavoidable at the time, look like mistakes. Nobody can forsee the future, and great surprises do happen in history. Such as the Prussian defeat of France.
The scenario that Austria attacks Prussia has some feasability to it, sections of the Austrian ruling elite wanted it. Andrássy could have exited history earlier through an accident. Yes Beust may have gone for broke, and it's quite feasable that Franz Josef concurs with him.
But Italy does not make any attempt to keep the Prussian alliance going, nobody in power want's it. So this is pure invention. Granted you say Italy does better in 1866, but you dont explain how. And you just assume that makes it more likely that Italy attacks Austria later on.
But you simply ignore the effect this would have on Austria. As stated previously, this may make it less likely that Austria will attack Prussia in 1870. Granted leaders make colossal mistakes, but these are intelligent men, living the reality of events, at the time, and you simply ignore this.
An Italian Victory in 1866 would have a number of knock on effects, on France, on Britain, on the Ottoman's, on the nationalities of Austria Hungary, on Russia, and on the Balkan states.
It might encourage a series of events that leave Napoleon III more willing to cede Rome. Leaving Italy free to have it's alliance with France and Austria.
Granted on the other hand an Italian victory, may make it impossible for Austria to consider an alliance with Italy, and it may leave an alliance with Austria less appealing to Napoleon III.
On the other hand revenge against Italy, rather than against Prussia may dominate Austrian thoughts,
possibly - and you completely neglect this - encouraging Austria to look for an alliance with Prussia. It partly depends on, where the danger is percieved to come from.
An italian victory at the Battle of Custoza may have sparked uprisings in Hungary, Slav lands etc, maybe balkan attacks on Austria. Maybe Austria collapses altogether as a result.
Remember that the leaders of the major European powers have as one prime concern to keep certain balances of power, that ultimately benefit themselves. If Austria looks in mortal danger the aims of other European powers are then influenced by that.
You can't alter the outcome of a major historical event, such as the Third War of Italian Independence, and then presume that you end up with, the world as it would have been, had events happened as they did.
Maybe what's needed for the General European war - hingeing on Austria attacking Prussia in 1870 - is that
Austria absolutely crushes Italy in 1866. Know Austria feels even more unlucky to have been beaten by Prussia,
and the crushing of Italy serves to secure Austria's flanks at home and abroad. The Austrian armys prestige and confidence is higher.
If Venetia is still ceded to Italy, then the Austrian desire for revenge against Prussia simmers even more.
If Italy gains nothing in 1866, then it is much more likely to want to continue the Prussian alliance, and attack Austria later.
Whichever way it unfolds, a stronger more confident Austria is much more likely to attack Prussia.
Italy's disaster then lays a realistic historical ground for wide ranging Italian army reforms. Now Italy really does want a rematch with Austria. Austria confident of it's ability to deal with Italy marches against Prussia with greater expectations.
And what of Napoleon III, confidence in the Austrian Army's abilities as an ally is higher, maybe Napoleon III, through his own over confidence, or maybe manouvered by Bismarck, has increased designs on Belgium. Britain concerned for the safety of the channel ports .......
Who knows ?
Last edited: