If Sardinia never get Lombardia Veneta most likely there would be no Italy in the first place.
If Sardinia never get Lombardia Veneta most likely there would be no Italy in the first place.You just need a well played crisis and losing a war after or before, like Austria Beating Italy and they never getting lombardia-venetia, they try again and Austria beat them again so badly they just break up
Agree. After Unification, you really need a WWII-level event to break Italy apart, and in absence of that, I really do no see any clear option. I have seen here and there a "have a WWI happen earlier and Italy be on the loosing side", but we would need to twist OTL so much to get there that I really cannot say how plausible that would be.If Sardinia never get Lombardia Veneta most likely there would be no Italy in the first place.
Agree. After Unification, you really need a WWII-level event to break Italy apart, and in absence of that, I really do no see any clear option. I have seen here and there a "have a WWI happen earlier and Italy be on the loosing side", but we would need to twist OTL so much to get there that I really cannot say how plausible that would be.
IOTL, the disastrous Italian management of the Third War of Independence is due even to the fact that Austria was willing to negotiate and cede Venetia through negotiations (France was trying to be the "dealer", which explains why in the post-war negotiations Veneto was ceded to France in the first place and then by France to Italy). From what I know, it was a war where neither of the sides were really willing to go to battle. If you take the Italian indecisiveness due to the possibility to get what they wanted without a fight, chances are the Italians fight better (not wasting the numerical advantage they had by splitting their Army in tow would have helped). So you need Austria to decisively win the two-front war against Prussia and Italy, push deep into Lombardy, but then... The population will never accept to get back under Austrian control. Central Italy will stay loyal to the Kingdom, so will the Northwest. I do not know wether the Austrians could try and send Francis II back to Naples (he was in Vienna IIRC) to incite a pro-Borbonic revolt, but given Francis' personality, I do not see this being a success.Hmm this is true, so, if say Austria manages to come out trumps during the Austro-Prussian war, including victories in Venetia, would that be enough?
IOTL, the disastrous Italian management of the Third War of Independence is due even to the fact that Austria was willing to negotiate and cede Venetia through negotiations (France was trying to be the "dealer", which explains why in the post-war negotiations Veneto was ceded to France in the first place and then by France to Italy). From what I know, it was a war where neither of the sides were really willing to go to battle. If you take the Italian indecisiveness due to the possibility to get what they wanted without a fight, chances are the Italians fight better (not wasting the numerical advantage they had by splitting their Army in tow would have helped). So you need Austria to decisively win the two-front war against Prussia and Italy, push deep into Lombardy, but then... The population will never accept to get back under Austrian control. Central Italy will stay loyal to the Kingdom, so will the Northwest. I do not know wether the Austrians could try and send Francis II back to Naples (he was in Vienna IIRC) to incite a pro-Borbonic revolt, but given Francis' personality, I do not see this being a success.
I believe that if you alter the first two wars, you would end up having no Italy at all... I mean the first was lost and the second led to the proclamation of the kingdom of Italy. I am trying to imagine an early break-up, but question is: what then? Most of the elites of the pre-unitary states were quick to jump on the Sardinian chariot in 1859/1860, actively supporting the plebiscites for annexation. This was true even in those states were the previous rulers were well-loved, like Tuscany (where the people of Florence showed their affection for Leopoldo even as he was leaving the city): Ricasoli, Capponi and the likes all supported annexation, sending reports on the numbers of voters and confident that their mezzadri and the like would vote for the Kingdom of Italy.Ah, so, in this sense then, Italy is pretty much solidified at that point. Likely needing an earlier difference, in the first or second wars?
This is trueI believe that if you alter the first two wars, you would end up having no Italy at all... I mean the first was lost and the second died to the proclamation of the kingdom of Italy. I am trying to imagine an early break-up, but question is: what then? Most of the elites of the pre-unitary states were quick to jump on the Sardinian chariot in 1859/1860, actively supporting the plebiscites for annexation. This was true even in those states were the previous rulers were well-loved, like Tuscany (where the people of Florence showed their affection for Leopoldo even as he was leaving the city): Ricasoli, Capponi and the likes all supported annexation, sending reports on the numbers of voters and confident that their mezzadri and the like would vote for the Kingdom of Italy.