Results of no Italian Unification.

So,say Italy is never unified. Garibaldi fails and no other attempts succeed. What is the impact of this in terms of culture, economy, and geopolitics both on a regional nand global scale? What happens to the Italian states themselves?
 

gurgu

Banned
well, Cavour never wanted to unify italy in a rush like garibaldi, he planned to annex slowly to have time to industrialize the gains and avoid tech difference problems, so the italian unificiation might still happen not in 1861 but maybe in 1880? 1890? if prussia still allies the north italy to fight austria venice will be regaines while about pope and two sicilies:
-for the pope just wait for sedan like event( it will happen anyway) the attack the pope and annex him
-two sicilies there are 2 solution: bloody war or tiny federation german like where the south keeps the indipendence and title while the savoy becomes Cesare/emperor of Italy
 
No Italian unification imho necessitates a Franco-Austrian alliance or at least agreement to keep it separated and contained under their respective spheres of influence, maybe with Lombardy-Venetia being spun off as a semi-independent Kingdom under a cadet Habsburg branch (either Max of Mexico or Leopold of Tuscany could be candidates).

This alliance would of course make German unification more difficult and, even if that happens, shift the game of alliance in a rather divergent way from otl.

Divided Italy would be poorer on average and politically insignificant, but the South might eventually become vulnerable to left-agrarian agitation. In general both it and the Papal States nees significant political reform to survive until the present day. Eventually some form of confederation is also likely.

Cultural effects... that's an interesting question, because on one hand, despite what some will argue, Italy did have a common cultural identity at least as far back as Dante, when it fomes to the upper literate classes, while the lower classes had little more in common with people from outside their own province than the shared Catholic faith at least until ww1.

It is possible that divergent Southern ans Northern Italian identities might solidify as separate nationalisms, instead of Italian nationalism developing, but that would not be so straightforward in my opinion and it really depends on how the xx century develops. Look at Austria developing an own identity separated from Germany for example, that was far from an assureassured results in mid xix century.
 
Apparently, Cavour's plan was to create an Italian (Con)Federation with three Kingdoms, roughly corresponding to North, Centre (this was the most delicate part, due to the Pope) and South. The Two Sicilies could be bought easily be bought into this plan if reassured about the Papal States safety, from what I gather. Maybe some event could convince Pius IX to get back to his "liberal" beginnings and accept the ceremonial Presidency of the Confederation, as many wanted in his early reign. I would say that in such a scenario , the whole of the peninsula has a less imbalanced development. If anything, Garibaldi's robbery of the whole gold in the Bank of Sicily and (later) of the Bank of Naples is averted.
I can see this Federal Italy taking a more neutral stance on the International Stage after, say, redeeming the Austrian-controlled lands. This would change dramatically Alt-WW1, or maybe avert it, should F.I. take successfully the role of European Mediator. Not very likely, but with the Pope as President, it may be feasible.
 

gurgu

Banned
Apparently, Cavour's plan was to create an Italian (Con)Federation with three Kingdoms, roughly corresponding to North, Centre (this was the most delicate part, due to the Pope) and South. The Two Sicilies could be bought easily be bought into this plan if reassured about the Papal States safety, from what I gather. Maybe some event could convince Pius IX to get back to his "liberal" beginnings and accept the ceremonial Presidency of the Confederation, as many wanted in his early reign. I would say that in such a scenario , the whole of the peninsula has a less imbalanced development. If anything, Garibaldi's robbery of the whole gold in the Bank of Sicily and (later) of the Bank of Naples is averted.
I can see this Federal Italy taking a more neutral stance on the International Stage after, say, redeeming the Austrian-controlled lands. This would change dramatically Alt-WW1, or maybe avert it, should F.I. take successfully the role of European Mediator. Not very likely, but with the Pope as President, it may be feasible.
That wasn't cavour's plan but the idea suggested to Napoleon 3.0 just to take him as ally against austria , as soon as tuscany/emilian voted to join the north the plan collapsed( villafranca armistice), this was considered a betrayal from the italians and was born the rivarly we can see in any sport.
Cavour's original plan was, as i said, to take italy slowly while making it recover the tech gap.
the federalist idea was proposed from Carlo Cattaneo(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Cattaneo#Revolution)
 
the federalist idea was proposed from Carlo Cattaneo(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Cattaneo#Revolution)
Indeed! I really doubt Garibaldi's expedition was not at least coverly accepted or supported by Cavour, or tge one thousand would have faced much nore difficulties assembling in Teano and departing from there. It was just a gamble at little cost and with plausible deniability.

That said, the Confederal Italy idea and in particular having the Pope as the cerimonial head of state was supported not by Cattaneo, rather by the Neoguelphs, cgief among them Cesare Balbo. It basically died after 1849. Maybe a situation in which Pellegrino Rossi is not murdered and manages to steer the Papal States towards moderate constitutional rule?

Cattaneo's federalism was republican, more modern and iirc Swiss-inspired. I also doubt that Cattaneo wanted unification that strongly: in some periods of his life he would have also been satisfied with autonomy under the Habsburg Crown.
 
Last edited:
People from the Italian peninsula would probably still be referred to as Italians in the same way people from various Arab countries are still called Arabs.

What happens though to nations that would have been Italian colonies in otl?
 
Absolutely no unification is not 100% possible.
For example if Cavour dies as a child there wouldn't be a SIWoI. Without such war I'm not sure about Garibaldi siding completely with Savoy and about Southern Italians siding with him, so I wouldn't bet on an Expedition of the Thousand analogue (And on it getting the big support of OTL both from North and South.).
If the Austro-Prussian War still happens Savoy may decide to side with Prussia and so may get Lombardy (Which would trigger rebellions in Emilia and Tuscany at least and probably result in the formation of a Kingdom of Northern Italy.).
If Savoy manages to get both Lombardy and Tuscany Two Sicilies is basically done.
The only problem is the Papacy, but I don't see it standing too strongly against an almost united Italy.
I think the most important thing of this possible delay is that Veneto would remain in Hapsburg hands. This prevents any possible alliance between Rome and Vienna and makes the Italian-Austrian front way less defensible in case of a major European conflict.
 
Absolutely no unification is not 100% possible.
For example if Cavour dies as a child there wouldn't be a SIWoI. Without such war I'm not sure about Garibaldi siding completely with Savoy and about Southern Italians siding with him, so I wouldn't bet on an Expedition of the Thousand analogue (And on it getting the big support of OTL both from North and South.).
If the Austro-Prussian War still happens Savoy may decide to side with Prussia and so may get Lombardy (Which would trigger rebellions in Emilia and Tuscany at least and probably result in the formation of a Kingdom of Northern Italy.).
If Savoy manages to get both Lombardy and Tuscany Two Sicilies is basically done.
The only problem is the Papacy, but I don't see it standing too strongly against an almost united Italy.
I think the most important thing of this possible delay is that Veneto would remain in Hapsburg hands. This prevents any possible alliance between Rome and Vienna and makes the Italian-Austrian front way less defensible in case of a major European conflict.
Why not just have it so that any events that lead to the majority of the Italian peninsula uniting fail?
 
That wasn't cavour's plan but the idea suggested to Napoleon 3.0 just to take him as ally against austria , as soon as tuscany/emilian voted to join the north the plan collapsed( villafranca armistice), this was considered a betrayal from the italians and was born the rivarly we can see in any sport.
Cavour's original plan was, as i said, to take italy slowly while making it recover the tech gap.
the federalist idea was proposed from Carlo Cattaneo(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Cattaneo#Revolution)
I took the information from the description of the book "Il regno del Nord. 1859: il sogno di Cavour infranto da Garibaldi" by Arrigo Petacco. TBH, I have not read it, so I can't say how reliable it is. The "plan" is depicted as follows: Kingdom of Northern Italy (Sardinia-Piedmont+Lombardy-Venetia+Tuscany+Emilia], Rome as Federal Capital, Papal States reduced to Lazio, with the Two Sicilies swallowing up Umbria and Marche. According to the same source, it was the very Francesco II of Naples who vetoed the deal, as taking lands from the Papal States was as good as sacrilege to him. Then the was the English and gold- backed "impresa dei mille", one of the greatest farces in human history if you ask me, and the rest is more or less history.
 
Indeed! I really doubt Garibaldi's expedition was not at least coverly accepted or supported by Cavour, or tge one thousand would have faced much nore difficulties assembling in Teano and departing from there. It was just a gamble at little cost and with plausible deniability.

It's not really so easy or clear cut.
Cavour certainly knew about Garibaldi's expedition (how could he not?). However, the diplomatic situation in Europe was not supportive of further annexations in southern Italy (even France was not really friendly at this time) and at the same time Cavour's popularity had plunged after the cession to France of Savoy and Nice had become public domain (the cession had been a secret clause of the treaty of Plombieres). To further complicate the already messy situation, the king of Sardinia was in "secret" communication with Garibaldi and supported his expedition, and the same - from a very different political position - was true of Mazzini.
The truth is that Cavour could neither openly support nor oppose the expedition.

To his merit, Cavour managed to keep all the balls in the air: the Lee Enfields bought through a subscription in Milan were sequestered but at the same time Cavour managed to get to Garibaldi more than a thousand rifles which had been used by the Sardinian army in 1859, using La Farina as conduit; the expedition was allowed to depart without any hindering from Quarto, near Genoa; the Sardinian navy was ordered to sail from Tuscany to Sardinia, with orders not to intercept Garibaldi's steamers in open sea but to arrest him if they made port in Sardinia (but Garibaldi intended to sail along the Tuscan coast and make port near Orbetello: Cavour knew this plan for sure, since at the same time a regiment of Bersaglieri quartered in Orbetello was ordered to leave the city - Cavour's fear was not of an incident between the Bersaglieri and the volunteers, but rather his worry that the Bersaglieri would join the expeditionary force).

Something similar he had to do to avoid diplomatic backlashes: his efforts were made easier because of the state of unrest in Hungary which tied up Austria's hands for the most critical period, and by the fact that Prussia was not exactly eager to support Austria, or even to give a guarantee for Venetia; Russia was the most vocal opponent, and the czar tried to set up a conference of powers in Warsaw, but nothing came out of it. The two real problems were France (due to Louis Napoleon attempt to gain something more in compensation for the additional annexations in Southern Italy) and Great Britain, who was against French expansion, and in general was more interested in avoiding further chaos in Italy (Lord Russell in particular feared that Garibaldi, after conquering southern Italy would move to invade Venetia). The critical moment came when Garibaldi crossed Messina strait to land in Calabria: neither the French nor the British opposed the crossing, even if this possibility had been discussed between them.

In the end, none of the Powers acted and Cavour managed to convince Louis Napoleon to agree to the Sardinian invasion of Marche and Umbria, under the convenient but very transparent fig leaf of avoiding the risk that Garibaldi from Naples would march on Rome.

It was a very impressive tour de force, which quite possibly played a major role in weakening Cavour's health.

EDIT: most of this can be found in Cavour's biography written by Rosario Romeo
 

gurgu

Banned
I took the information from the description of the book "Il regno del Nord. 1859: il sogno di Cavour infranto da Garibaldi" by Arrigo Petacco. TBH, I have not read it, so I can't say how reliable it is. The "plan" is depicted as follows: Kingdom of Northern Italy (Sardinia-Piedmont+Lombardy-Venetia+Tuscany+Emilia], Rome as Federal Capital, Papal States reduced to Lazio, with the Two Sicilies swallowing up Umbria and Marche. According to the same source, it was the very Francesco II of Naples who vetoed the deal, as taking lands from the Papal States was as good as sacrilege to him. Then the was the English and gold- backed "impresa dei mille", one of the greatest farces in human history if you ask me, and the rest is more or less history.
Not possible because two sicilies wanted to protect the pope so it could be a natural wall from the north to prevent invasions( especially from someone that might want to unify the peninsula). Mazzini always hated Cavour for not supporting the cause of a united Italy because he always thought that the great powers won't stay and look while someone tries to unite a peninsula with a main position in the Mediterranean sea
 

gurgu

Banned
Indeed! I really doubt Garibaldi's expedition was not at least coverly accepted or supported by Cavour, or tge one thousand would have faced much nore difficulties assembling in Teano and departing from there. It was just a gamble at little cost and with plausible deniability.

That said, the Confederal Italy idea and in particular having the Pope as the cerimonial head of state was supported not by Cattaneo, rather by the Neoguelphs, cgief among them Cesare Balbo. It basically died after 1849. Maybe a situation in which Pellegrino Rossi is not murdered and manages to steer the Papal States towards moderate constitutional rule?

Cattaneo's federalism was republican, more modern and iirc Swiss-inspired. I also doubt that Cattaneo wanted unification that strongly: in some periods of his life he would have also been satisfied with autonomy under the Habsburg Crown.
garibaldi's expedition was going to fail if the english did not lend them money and protected them on the arrive at marsala( covered from cannons by staying in the middle). The tea drinkers tought they would take control of sicily and make it a protectorate( free grain and main control of the mediterranean)
Cavour discovered about the thousand expedition in the last moment but did nothing because was a win-win for him anyway( garibaldi dies? one less opponent- garibaldi wins? thank you for your service)
 
...
...In the end, none of the Powers acted and Cavour managed to convince Louis Napoleon to agree to the Sardinian invasion of Marche and Umbria, under the convenient but very transparent fig leaf of avoiding the risk that Garibaldi from Naples would march on Rome.

It was a very impressive tour de force, which quite possibly played a major role in weakening Cavour's health.

Indeed I agree with you and thank you for the detailed reconstruction of those convulse weeks. I admit I went for a fairly hefty simplification when saying that was "Cavour's gamble" and I should have at least noted the role of the King.

However I still note how many of the steps by Cavour are exactly what one would do to preserve plausible deniability in case of insuccess while still allowing the expedition to go on, sonit can't be said that Sardinia was surprised or would have preferred not to conquer the South of Italy.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Could it be possible for Italian unification to be a total fail, but Bismarck’s Prussian led unification basically happens with outcomes basically the same as 1871?

Could the continued existence of Italy as a playground for the Austrians or Austro-Hungarians make them more relaxed about the Balkans and tolerant of Russian influence there? Perhaps this could allow the thre emperors league to survive long term.
 
Last edited:
I took the information from the description of the book "Il regno del Nord. 1859: il sogno di Cavour infranto da Garibaldi" by Arrigo Petacco. TBH, I have not read it, so I can't say how reliable it is. The "plan" is depicted as follows: Kingdom of Northern Italy (Sardinia-Piedmont+Lombardy-Venetia+Tuscany+Emilia], Rome as Federal Capital, Papal States reduced to Lazio, with the Two Sicilies swallowing up Umbria and Marche. According to the same source, it was the very Francesco II of Naples who vetoed the deal, as taking lands from the Papal States was as good as sacrilege to him. Then the was the English and gold- backed "impresa dei mille", one of the greatest farces in human history if you ask me, and the rest is more or less history.
The King of Two Sicilies who vetoed that plan was Ferdinand II not his son who had become King just before the start of the expedition of Garibaldi
 
The King of Two Sicilies who vetoed that plan was Ferdinand II not his son who had become King just before the start of the expedition of Garibaldi
Oh, I see. I missed that part of information, thank you very much. So is there any chance that Francis II upon his accession to the throne tries to make this deal? As I could not find the original book, there are many things in this potential federation I cannot fully understand (for instance, who agreed to this plan on Ferdinand's behalf? And why did he agree in the first place, knowing that his king was a staunch Catholic?), so any further details would be much appreciated. The more I learn about the subject, the more I feel that a Federal Italy would have fared a lot better than OTL enlarged Kingdom of Sardinia.
 
Oh, I see. I missed that part of information, thank you very much. So is there any chance that Francis II upon his accession to the throne tries to make this deal? As I could not find the original book, there are many things in this potential federation I cannot fully understand (for instance, who agreed to this plan on Ferdinand's behalf? And why did he agree in the first place, knowing that his king was a staunch Catholic?), so any further details would be much appreciated. The more I learn about the subject, the more I feel that a Federal Italy would have fared a lot better than OTL enlarged Kingdom of Sardinia.
Pretty unlikely who Francis II will accept to take away lands from the Pope... And an Italian Federation over all the peninsula will require to left the Papal States untouched for being accepted by the Kings of Two Sicilies...
So either you have an Italian Federation who exclude Papal States and Two Sicilies (but maybe take some of the northern part of the Papal States) or you have an Italian Federation led by either the King of Two Sicilies or the Pope who left the borders untouched
 
Maybe in this alternate timeline Napoleon III just decides to just conquer Italy and restore the old Napoleonic puppet states where Italy is divided between the Bonaparte kingdom of Rome in the North, the Papal States, and the Murat Kingdom of Naples. This confederation would be headed by the Pope. Perhaps a more successful and tactful Napoleon III would try to emulate his uncle with this. Perhaps Napoleon III fights the Austrians in this war.
 
Maybe in this alternate timeline Napoleon III just decides to just conquer Italy and restore the old Napoleonic puppet states where Italy is divided between the Bonaparte kingdom of Rome in the North, the Papal States, and the Murat Kingdom of Naples. This confederation would be headed by the Pope. Perhaps a more successful and tactful Napoleon III would try to emulate his uncle with this. Perhaps Napoleon III fights the Austrians in this war.
I’m pretty sure that all the European Powers would applaud Louis Napoleon’s attempt to conquer Italy and turn back the clock to his uncle’s golden age:rolleyes:
 
Top