PC: King Garibaldi I of Italy?

Giuseppe_Garibaldi_(1866).jpg

Sooo I'm currently reading about the opera that was the process of Italian Unification in the 19th century and had a pretty simple plausibility question regarding the possible destiny of Garibaldi if he decided to attack Victor Emmanual's Piedmontese Army after capturing Naples at the Battle of Volturno?

In a nutshell the PoD is that he decides to attack (instead of meeting with Emmanuel), betraying his conviction that Victor is the king-to-be of a unified Italia for a chance at marching on Rome, capturing it and annihilating the Papacy. (His most desired goal)

If he is then successful, is it plausible that with exponentially more massive popular appeal most likely gained from these ATL successes(and of course with Victor disenfranchised), could we see him (or his supporters) declare himself King of Italy?
 
Giuseppe_Garibaldi_(1866).jpg

Sooo I'm currently reading about the opera that was the process of Italian Unification in the 19th century and had a pretty simple plausibility question regarding the possible destiny of Garibaldi if he decided to attack Victor Emmanual's Piedmontese Army after capturing Naples at the Battle of Volturno?

In a nutshell the PoD is that he decides to attack (instead of meeting with Emmanuel), betraying his conviction that Victor is the king-to-be of a unified Italia for a chance at marching on Rome, capturing it and annihilating the Papacy. (His most desired goal)

If he is then successful, is it plausible that with exponentially more massive popular appeal most likely gained from these ATL successes(and of course with Victor disenfranchised), could we see him (or his supporters) declare himself King of Italy?
He's actually republican and supported the House of Savoy only because his desire for the unification of Italy overcomes his dislike of monarchies.
 
Leaving aside the not so little details of how Garibaldi's volunteers would have been able to defeat the rather capable Piedmontese army and the inevitable French intervention to defend Rome (there is imo less 1 chance in 10000 of this happening), I would think that Garibaldi would more likely style himself Duce, Dittatore, maybe even Imperatore, but never Re.
 
In an ASB TL, he could become the President-for-Life of Rome or even southern Italy, after a falling out with Victor Emmanuel II, but he'd never wear a crown.
 
While Garibaldi was at heart a Republican; he perfectely understand that only the Savoy had the mean to unite Italy and for this reason he pledged his loyalty to Victor Emannuel II who he thinked was destinated by God will to unify the italian penisula and he never ever faltered by this pledge. To make it change his mind there is the need of an entire different scenario...like a total diverse 1848 with maybe a surviving Roman Republic or even (if very difficult) revolution that dethrone the Savoy and enstablish a republic in Piedmont; otherwise while Giuseppe Garibaldi King of Italy it's ubercool it also impossible to obtain
 
Garibaldi was always a Republican, even if during the 1850s he realized that the unification of Italy would have been possible only through the Savoy. After landing in Sicily in 1860, he proclaimed himself "dictator" (the proclamation of Salemi on the eve of the victorious battle of Calatafimi), but only in the name of king Victor Emmanuel II. Later on, after taking Naples, he refused the entreaties of many of his followers who were trying to convince him to proclamate a republic in the south: the intervention of the Sardinian army became necessary not because his political loyalties were in doubt, but rather to avoid a march on Rome to end the temporal power of the pope (Cavour played very smartly in this narrative convincing Louis Napoleon that the only way to keep Garibaldi away from Rome was to acquiesce to a quick march of the Sardinian army to the south).

Garibaldi's ideal state was a republican one, but he was quite skeptic on the effectiveness of a parliamentarian democracy, at least before the masses had been educated and prepared to play a constructive role: his solution was always the same, a time-limited dictatorship patterned on ancient Rome. In his testament he wrote:

“… l’Italia deve proclamarsi Repubblica, ma non affidare la sua sorte a cinquecento dottori [i parlamentari], che dopo d’averla assordata con ciarle, la condurranno a rovina. Invece, scegliere il più onesto degli italiani e nominarlo dittatore temporaneo, con lo stesso potere che avevano i Fabi ed i Cincinnati. Il sistema dittatoriale durerà sinché la Nazione italiana sia più educata a libertà, e che la sua esistenza non si trovi più minacciata da potenti vicini. Allora la dittatura cederà il posto a regolare governo repubblicano”

"Italy must become a republic, but cannot put her fortunes in the hands of 500 doctors who will deafen her with words without sense and lead he to ruin. It is better to choose the most honest Italian, and appoint him as a temporary dictator, with the same powers that were granted to the Fabii and the Cincinnati. The dictatorship will have to continue until the Italian Nation has learnt to live in freedom, and her existence is no more threatened by powerful neighbors. Only then the dictatorship will be replaced by a traditional republican government."
[translation is mine].

Garibaldi proved to be ready to renounce to his dictatorial powers when the emergency was over, but I would not bet on other prospective dictators (even if chosen among the most honest ones) to be so willing to do the same. It is also a (sad) truth that Garibaldi was scarcely interested in social reforms and during all his life was more at ease with the educated upper class than with the peons: maybe it is a good thing that Garibaldi was also not interested in parliamentarian politics
 
Top