I agree with you. Von Westmeath's plan is good, but a risky one. He cannot afford too many losses, let alone annihilation. Even though the Army of Italy will hardly march on Wien, this panic could easily arise should he be severely defeated. At that point, the Italians will want at least all of Veneto, so goodbye secret negotiations in London. Besides, rebel forces all over the Empire will be emboldened even further.
Italico Valore - A more successful 1848 revolution in Italy - a TL
Deleted member 147289
Von Westmeath took control of the Austrian forces in Italy after the surrender of Radetzky and brought along with him some reinforcements. Along with Radetzky some 15.000 men were taken prisoner. Based on what data I have the Austrians had around 50.000 men in Italy so it's safe to assume that after a month of retreat the imperials are reorganizing along with their general waiting for reinforcements which have been diverted to quell the rebellion in Pola. What can Von Westmeath do? Run? Definitely not a viable strategy since he'll have to fight at the end and he would be cornered. He still has quite a few supplies and heavy equipment and his men are mainly tired of retreating with few significant actions, even if knowing that the situation at home is worsening is not helping. A quick and easy victory would be the best way to use some supplies, galvanize the men and stopping the enemy advance. If the Austrians push hard enought they could rout the Piedemontese turning a crossing in a bloodbath
In the author's defense, this is probably Nugent's best chance to either defeat the Italians or secure an orderly retreat out of Veneto. If he can just keep them from crossing that bridge, their numerical advantage should be nullified.
If Nugent (why everyone calls him "von Westmeath"? Nugent was a professional soldier born in Ireland and added "von Westmeath" to his name when he was ennobled, from the name of the county where he was born) is routed, Austria looses the last field army they have in Italy, and not only Veneto (which is effectively already gone) but also Friuli (where in any case both Udine and the fortress of Palmanova are in insurgent hands) and his retreat across hostile territory would be a nightmare. This is only the beginning, though: Bohemia and Wien are already out of imperial control, and another defeat would certainly push the Hungarians in full revolt. Is this a reasonable bet for Nugent to take? OTOH, if he takes a more cautious approach and retreats behind the Piave river (which is a much better defensive line), he keeps his army "in being", not just as an useful counter for the negotiations but also to be used to reverse the situation in Austria proper and Bohemia, if needed, or to join the Croatians and invade Hungary if they go into full revolt.
But the point, as I said before, is that he doesn't necessarily has to fight, or maybe he'll be needed to fight elsewhere. I think your numbers may be a little optimistic: Nugent took with him 12,000 men, and even accepting that he found 35,000 men in Veneto (desertions in the Austrian army would have been certainly higher ITTL, in particular in the Hungarian regiments) his supply train cannot be very full, and his supply convoys will be harassed by insurgents, forcing him to escort them with whatever cavalry he has left.
The Brenta is not a big river, although in April the snow melt will increase the flow. However, there would be nothing more stupid for the Piedmontese to do to try to force the river at the bridge of Fontaniva, where the main east-west road crosses the Brenta. What is CA trying to do? Snatch defeat from the jaws of victory? The Brenta can be crossed at other points too, probably the best choice is at Bassano del Grappa, some 20 km north of Fontaniva. CA should keep some pressure and build up field fortifications at Fontaniva and send the bulk of the troops to cross at Bassano. There is an obvious advantage in having a numerical superiority on the enemy.
This assuming that CA needs a decisive victory, which effectively he doesn't at this point in time. Spending the summer organizing Lombardy and training additional troops, and at the same time carrying on negotiations via UK and France.
The only aggressive move he should do, it is to send the Sardinian fleet to the Adriatic. It would be the right move to give confidence to Venice, and also to carry out commerce raiding and such. The Austrian fleet (which was not much to start with) has been weakened by the mutiny in Pola, both by the loss of ships and trained sailors and will be in trouble to cover the Dalmatian coast.
Deleted member 147289
Von Westmeath is called like this since, you might guess, Nugent ( the other one) is leading the reinforcements so having two Nugent would be a bit strange...keeping the army is one thing but you have to consider that, without opposition, Piedmont would take all the Venetian plain which is a big no no in the Austrian's mind and the only ways to stop a larger army is to be on the defensive (and Von Westmeath would likely consume all his supplies in such a way) or strike hard at the right moment which is when the Piedmontese cross the Brenta.
Mind you Fontaniva is not the only place where they cross, the army is quite large by now and De Sonnaz is leading the 2nd Corps further south. CA's army is crossing at Fontaniva but as I said before it's one of the crossing points. CA is seeking his validation as a leader from a great victory, no matter the casualties, because crossing the Brenta with 30.000 Austrians on the other side is not going to be a walk in the park but a bloodbath. CA doesn't know where the Austrians are and think that they're on the run, as he (along with the officer corps) believes that the final battle will be between the Piave and Tagliamento. He doesn't know that Von Westmeath is concentrating his forces there.
British diplomacy is already at work in Piedmont and Austria, I have no clue about the French since I assume they would only be interested in a republican Italy at the moment, not a monarchical one no matter how liberal. The shooting war will likely end by the end of spring as this was a lightning campaign capitalising on the "collapse" of Austria, then we'll have the diplomatic one but the Piedemontese will hold all the cards. Britain doesn't want to radically change the balance of power but make the most from the situation, and now the situation dictates that Austria has no power in Italy.
AFAIK, there is only one general Laval Nugent von Westmeath, who lead reinforcements from Slovenia, and took Udine, Belluno and Vicenza before joining Radetzki
(November 3, 1777 – August 21, 1862) was a soldier of Irish birth, who fought in the armies of Austria and the Two Sicilies.
Laval Nugent von Westmeath - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
We'll have to agree to disagree, then.
Forcing a potentially decisive but anyhow risky field battle is not in the interest of either combatant.
The idea that CA doesn't know where the Austrians are doesn't stand up. The plains between the Brenta and the Piave are riddled with potential insurgents, who would certainly know where a few ten thousands of Austrian soldiers were camped.
France (both the Provisional government and the Republic proclaimed on 5 May 1848) were always very cautious on the diplomatic front: France never openly supported either the insurrections in Italy or the ones in Poland, even if there were plenty of Italian and Polish exiles in Paris lobbying for that.
In particular, Lamartine (who was at the head of the Provisional Government during these critical weeks) always acted to show a friendly face to the UK, to avoid the risk that the government born out of the revolution of 1848 would be considered a rogue state with expansionist appetites.
Thomas1195
Banned
It would be more interesting if Thouret actually gets his bill to ban pretenders from running for Presidency passed ITTL, so Napoleon III and his brothers would be banned from running.
Deleted member 147289
About Nugen I'll check it because I am quite sure that there's another one. If not I already have another name on the list. Sometimes things have to go in a certain way, be it author's wishes or circumstance.
About French diplomacy let's just say that the lobbying groups and the need to be UK friendly will likely get them to help Sardina
Unfortunately for Thouret, I really like Napoleon III...
It is not really possible, a majority of the MPs returned to parliament after the elections were conservatives, who voted to establish the republic because of the fear of another insurrection, but would have been more comfortable under a monarchy.
Thomas1195
Banned
The same Assembly that thoroughly mocked Louis Napoleon and essentially laughed the future Emperor out of it (this is OTL) when he argued against the Amendment that aimed to ban him and his relatives. Thouret could have easily passed his Amendment at that moment. For the candidate, Cavaignac would have most likely become the President.
But the amendment was not approved, was it?
When Cavaignac run against Louis Napoleon in December, he lost by a mile, even if he was the Cavaignc of three “days of june“.
Even if the amendment had passed (very unlikely), it would have been rescinded before the presidential election.
For the record, I don’t have any sympathy for LN.
What was the result of that vote? How many deputies voted in favor or against the proposal?
Thomas1195
Banned
Thouret contemptuously withdrew it IOTL, after Bonaparte's attempt to challenge the motion failed flat.
Thomas1195
Banned
But apparently that was OTL. I mean, Napoleon was literally laughed off the Assembly.
I went and checked for the Thouret amendment. The key to put it in the proper perspective, is that it was proposed by Thouret on 7 October 1848, during the discussion on the method for the presidential election (the assembly had been discussing it for more than a couple of months, the contention being the choice between the election of the president by popolar vote or by the Assembly). In the end, it was a comedy of errors: LN made a very ineffectual rebuttal, Thouret withdrew the amendment in contempt (!) and Cavaignac (who had openly stated his support for the popular election in August) suddely changed his position, and threw his support behind the election by the Assembly. The cherry on the cake is that the same deputies who had laughed off LN's rebuttal now voted for the popular election by a large majority (did they fail to realize that a scion of a former dynasty - aka LN, who was the only one who could have competed in the immediate - would never be elected by the Assembly but had a more than reasonable chance in a popular vote? Was it a Machiavellian strategy of Lamartine, given that an amendment was introduced giving back to the Assembly the election if no contender would gain an absolute majority of the vote?). The other question is why the Assembly rescinded the decree of exile for LN just after the vote on the method for presidential election.
Anyway, it is a very interesting point of divergence (a bunch of them really), but it is still 6 months in the future, since this TL has just reached April.
If anyone is interested
The French Republic under Cavaignac, 1848
General Louis Eugene Cavaignac has been a symbol of reactionary violence ever since he crushed the insurgent workers of Paris in the "bloody June Days" of 1848. Professor de Luna presents a fresh interpretation of the General, as well as a detailed examination of the turbulent year of European...
books.google.it
Edit: I checked on Amazon, but unfortunately there is no kindle version available, and a paperback costs 93$
It's a pity because I would have liked reading it.
At a first glance, it looks like that the best and easiest way to keep LN out of the run would have been Cavaignac giving his support to the election by the Assembly in August.
Last edited:
Deleted member 147289
While my TL is only in April (soon May), things are gonna speed up after the conclusion of the hostilities with chapters that have a much larger scope but also a more flexible timeframe (Semesters likely) with focuses on important events. I personally find LN a very interesting figure and the Second Empire is very intriguing, both in it's conservative version and L' Empire Liberal which never happened but still...
Cavignac came up a few times in my head while thinking about France's future but who's to tell that the general will not try to transform the republic in a militarist dictatorship? Afterall the main contenders in the elections are a "reactionary" general and the nephew of Napoleon and I wouldn't trust either of them with a newborn republic.
Cavignac came up a few times in my head while thinking about France's future but who's to tell that the general will not try to transform the republic in a militarist dictatorship? Afterall the main contenders in the elections are a "reactionary" general and the nephew of Napoleon and I wouldn't trust either of them with a newborn republic.
To his merit, he didn't abuse his temporary dictatorship. He might have steered the Assembly to approve an indirect election of the president, and in such a case the presidency of the republic would have been his without any doubt.