France defeats Prussia: What about Italy?

During the Franco-Prussian War, the French removed their garrison from Rome and Italy conquered Lazio. The succeeding Third French Republic didn't do much about it.

If the Second Empire defeated Prussia and Co, would they just accept the Italian acquisition of Lazio as a fait accompli? I imagine the French would be able to justify taking action, with Papal support, against Italy if they chose to do so.
 
Italy only acted when the Second Empire went down. If the Second Empire does not go down, they will not dare attacking.

In the long-term, what will happen to Lazio if no war breaks out?

Will France negotiate an exit in exchange for gains elsewhere? Something like Lazio for Sardinia.

Could a conflict end up emerging accidentally? Could France over time exert greater control of the Papal State, potentially annexing it down the line?
 
In the long-term, what will happen to Lazio if no war breaks out?

Will France negotiate an exit in exchange for gains elsewhere? Something like Lazio for Sardinia.

Could a conflict end up emerging accidentally? Could France over time exert greater control of the Papal State, potentially annexing it down the line?

In the medium term, if the French Empire remains there, things stay frozen. The Roman question remains a serious running sore for Italy. France is not going to exchange their protection of Rome for anything that Italy could possibly offer in exchange through ordinary diplomacy. A negotiated settlement is a possibility, but it hinges on changes in French domestic policy, and arguably on a more conciliatory stance by the Papacy itself (unlikely in the immediate; quite possible in the longer term). As long as the stability of the Napoleonic regime depends (or is perceived to depend) from Catholic support at home, AND the Papacy remains defiant, there is little that Florence can do, short of risking outright war with France and/or seeking alliances to that effect. Itself not easy, given the importance of Franco-Italian economic (and cultural) ties in this period.
Now, things may be interesting when Tunisia becomes an issue around 1879; but Italy is not going to trade Rome for Tunis, and French Catholics would see the opposite concession as betrayal (maybe, however, their political clout is diminshed enough that an agreement can be made on these terms: the French ditch the Pope, and Italy lets them do whatever they want in North Africa).
Sardinia is a complete nonstarter; I doubt that France was ever interested enough to make it viable anyway.
The longer the situation goes on, of course, the more anti-French Italy is likely to turn, probably aligning much more closely with, well, I suppose Prussia. You may see a context where "Italia irrendenta" means Rome, Nice, Corsica and maybe Savoy (and Tunis perhaps, depending on how that goes), much more than Trento, Trieste and Istria.
 
In the medium term, if the French Empire remains there, things stay frozen. The Roman question remains a serious running sore for Italy. France is not going to exchange their protection of Rome for anything that Italy could possibly offer in exchange through ordinary diplomacy. A negotiated settlement is a possibility, but it hinges on changes in French domestic policy, and arguably on a more conciliatory stance by the Papacy itself (unlikely in the immediate; quite possible in the longer term). As long as the stability of the Napoleonic regime depends (or is perceived to depend) from Catholic support at home, AND the Papacy remains defiant, there is little that Florence can do, short of risking outright war with France and/or seeking alliances to that effect. Itself not easy, given the importance of Franco-Italian economic (and cultural) ties in this period.
Now, things may be interesting when Tunisia becomes an issue around 1879; but Italy is not going to trade Rome for Tunis, and French Catholics would see the opposite concession as betrayal (maybe, however, their political clout is diminshed enough that an agreement can be made on these terms: the French ditch the Pope, and Italy lets them do whatever they want in North Africa).
Sardinia is a complete nonstarter; I doubt that France was ever interested enough to make it viable anyway.
The longer the situation goes on, of course, the more anti-French Italy is likely to turn, probably aligning much more closely with, well, I suppose Prussia. You may see a context where "Italia irrendenta" means Rome, Nice, Corsica and maybe Savoy (and Tunis perhaps, depending on how that goes), much more than Trento, Trieste and Istria.

We should note that France by 1870 is becoming more of a constitutional monarchy, and Napoléon III is getting old. What the government will be like under his son is hard to say. It could go in either direction on the Catholic issue. It seems safe to assume that it would require compensation for leaving Rome though.
 
Wait till the Second Empire collapses in on itself. Napoleon III was becoming more and more sick and he still be dealing with an hostile parliament and unrest over lack of reforms and liberalisation that had stopped. (And failed overseas adventures.)

The thing is French people in general were not very religious under the empire, nor was Napoleon III himself. Napoléon III has protected Rome, sure, but it was just to seek the support of the Catholic lobby. The Roman question poisoned the relation between France and Italy. If the Empire survived, he couldn't have let Italy as an enemy for the support of the Church. (Finally limited in internal policy).
 
We should note that France by 1870 is becoming more of a constitutional monarchy, and Napoléon III is getting old. What the government will be like under his son is hard to say. It could go in either direction on the Catholic issue. It seems safe to assume that it would require compensation for leaving Rome though.

Italy would be willing to make concessions to get Rome peacefully, even more so if somehow the Pope can be brought to an okay-ish stance on it. Now, territorial concessions of substance are probably a no-go. Border correction, that's on the table (I can see something on the scale of the post-WWII Franco-Italian border changes IOTL, roughly) but I doubt would be enough alone.
So what else. Hands-off Tunis? Sure, if that gets Rome, Italy would grant that in a heartbeat. A monetary compensation to the Church? Let's discuss. A larger-than IOTL, independent Vatican? Fine, the Italian government was sort of offering that IOTL, with the additional privilege of paying for keeping being excommunicated.
So, if France proves accomodating, an accomodation will certainly be found; will take time.
 
An interesting point to make is that no 1870 invasion means the Vatican I Council gets to an end, further alienating the Catholic Church from, well, almost everybody.

I think it's just an inevitability, and it actually was a blessing in disguise that it happened as soon as it did.
 
Could France extract territorial concessions for withdrawing from Lazio?

Elba and the eastern slopes of the Alps for example.


Alternatively, could France annex Lazio?
 
Alternatively, could France annex Lazio?

It will mean if not war, having an hostile goverment in Italy for the next forever; Nappy III wanted patch things with Italy and he know that mean disengage from Lazio but he needed the catholic lobby support and so was a big no no. The moment such support is no more necessary an agreement will be found (probably for the Pope something akin to the 'Law of Papal guarantee' and for France some treaty of alliance/leave Tunisi)
 
Could France extract territorial concessions for withdrawing from Lazio?

Elba and the eastern slopes of the Alps for example.


Alternatively, could France annex Lazio?

Those ideas don't really make sense, geopolitically.

The French could obtain compensation for Lazio, but is poltically suicidal for Napoleon III to give up the vestiges of Papal sovereignty.
Elba is a small island, and would only disturb peaceful Franco-Italian relations. Same goes for the slopes of the Alps, plus the fact there isn't too much to be had there.
Annexing Lazio is even worse, as Napoleon gets to keep the need to protect the Pope, direct emnity from the Italians, and the Pope wouldn't be thankful either.
 
An interesting point to make is that no 1870 invasion means the Vatican I Council gets to an end, further alienating the Catholic Church from, well, almost everybody.

I think it's just an inevitability, and it actually was a blessing in disguise that it happened as soon as it did.

It might well mean that the mini-schism that happened over the issue of Papal infallibility gets to be much more important, and it might also end up in a kind of Italian Kulturkampf
The other likely thing is that the Catholic church influence in Italian affairs will be greatly diminished, and this would certainly be a big plus for Italy: in the long run, it will be more beneficial than annexing Rome.
 
Top