WI: The Pope murdered by an Italian Nationalist

Thomas1195

Banned
IOTL, after the capture of Rome by the Italian army, Pope Pius IX refused to yield his claim to the entirety of the Papal States. The Papacy and the Italian kingdom would remain at odds until Mussolini came to power.

What if things got worse?

Instead of becoming the Prisoner of the Vatican, Pope Pius IX was murdered by an Italian nationalist either shortly after Rome falls or during the capture, declaring something to the effect of ''all who stand in the way of the fatherland will end the same way'' when he's arrested.

Exactly how badly could that mess up Italian-Catholic relations in the future?

Meanwhile, Kulturkampf had just begun in Germany.

Would the Papacy relocate?
 
IOTL, after the capture of Rome by the Italian army, Pope Pius IX refused to yield his claim to the entirety of the Papal States. The Papacy and the Italian kingdom would remain at odds until Mussolini came to power.

What if things got worse?

Instead of becoming the Prisoner of the Vatican, Pope Pius IX was murdered by an Italian nationalist either shortly after Rome falls or during the capture, declaring something to the effect of ''all who stand in the way of the fatherland will end the same way'' when he's arrested.

Exactly how badly could that mess up Italian-Catholic relations in the future?

Meanwhile, Kulturkampf had just begun in Germany.

Would the Papacy relocate?

I think the bigger event here is going to be when the Conclave tries to convene in the Vatican to elect Pius's successor; that's a direct confrontation between the Italian state and basic Catholic protocol, as opposed to assassination by a random romantic nationalist. If the Kingdom allows the Conclave to meet, insures law and order, respects their institutional traditions ect. you're more likely to have a dialogue between the newly elected Pope and the Italian government as to their exact relations: tense, but avoiding the Prisoner in the Vatican uncertainty and the sharpest shots fired by both sides. If they try to force the Church out of Rome entirely though, you really alienate large segments of the Italian population and may very well trigger a civil war in the infant nation: its one thing to separate Church and Secular authority and strip the Church of its Secular governing power. Its quite another to assert the Kingdom's total subjegation of the Catholic Church (effectively)
 

Thomas1195

Banned
If they try to force the Church out of Rome entirely though, you really alienate large segments of the Italian population and may very well trigger a civil war in the infant nation: its one thing to separate Church and Secular authority and strip the Church of its Secular governing power. Its quite another to assert the Kingdom's total subjegation of the Catholic Church (effectively)
Well, a civil war was basically what happened in Switzerland IOTL. But this war could be very nasty, since it might be seen as the latter case. However, foreign intervention is unlikely since France and Austria had just been defeated not long ago and France also had a powerful horde of anti-clerical republicans.

But would such assassination affect the Kulturkampf programme in Germany?
 

Pellaeon

Banned
Like stated above the heavily catholic population of Italy(at least in the south) would not stand for this.

You could have a civil war between the secularist republicans and staunch Catholics or papal loyalists as it were.

Which would greatly damage Italy's economy and social fabric going into the 20th century.
 
Last edited:

Thomas1195

Banned
Like stated above the heavily catholic population of Italy(at least in the south) would not stand for this.

You could have a civil war between the secularist republicans and staunch Catholics or papal loyalists as it were.

Which would greatly damage Italy's economy and social fabric going into the 20th century.
So, it would look like the ACW. But it seems that the liberals would prevail since it controlled the Industrial North which was less Catholic. There ia also a chance that the Catholic South could be crushed quickly like in Switzerland 1848. Economic development in the North might not be weakened significantly if these regions remain intact, but the South would be f*cked, big time.

But do you think such incident would affect Kulturkampf in Germany or the later anti-clerical programme in Republican France? Would these two movements be stopped early or would they become even more extreme than IOTL (I lean towards the latter since the assassination would make their leaders believe that the Pope was just some kind of an empty barrel)?

Maybe South America become a safe haven for the Catholic exiles.
 

Pellaeon

Banned
So, it would look like the ACW. But it seems that the liberals would prevail since it controlled the Industrial North which was less Catholic. There ia also a chance that the Catholic South could be crushed quickly like in Switzerland 1848. Economic development in the North might not be weakened significantly if these regions remain intact, but the South would be f*cked, big time.

But do you think such incident would affect Kulturkampf in Germany or the later anti-clerical programme in Republican France? Would these two movements be stopped early or would they become even more extreme than IOTL (I lean towards the latter since the assassination would make their leaders believe that the Pope was just some kind of an empty barrel)?

Maybe South America become a safe haven for the Catholic exiles.
The Catholic peasantry in the south would still be a continual drain and I think a Catholic insurgency would continue for years in Sicily even if the northern part of the country prevailed conventionally.

It would lead to Italy in the long run having far greater and stronger secessionist tendencies and prejudices. The Catholic south hating the secular north and the secular north looking down on the religious south.

I think the situation in Germany and France would proceed similarly though perhaps the attitudes of the anti-clerics would be hardened perhaps leading to a sort of elitist disdain for the religious peasantry and rural poor.
 

Thomas1195

Banned
The Catholic peasantry in the south would still be a continual drain and I think a Catholic insurgency would continue for years in Sicily even if the northern part of the country prevailed conventionally.

It would lead to Italy in the long run having far greater and stronger secessionist tendencies and prejudices. The Catholic south hating the secular north and the secular north looking down on the religious south.
Agree on Sicily, but I think the national government would effectively impose control over all of mainland Italy as soon as the war ends. Imposing secular education would eventually make the younger generations less Catholic. There would be no "School War" like in Belgium since the Catholics wouldn't be in a position to oppose such move.

Or the situation could be like in Switzerland, where the Catholic Conservatives were struck down quickly.

I think the situation in Germany and France would proceed similarly though perhaps the attitudes of the anti-clerics would be hardened perhaps leading to a sort of elitist disdain for the religious peasantry and rural poor.
Well, a Northern Italian victory might further encourage Kulturkampf in Germany. French anti-clerical programme would be the same since it was successful IOTL.
 
First, remember that until 1877 France was ruled by conservative-monarchists, not the anti-clerical republicans that came to be associated with the Third Republic. At this time France came pretty close to restoring the House of Bourbon to the throne. This brings me to the Bourbon Pretender Henri V, Comte de Chambord. Chambord was pretty inactive in terms of his own restoration, being a combination of waiting for a "God wills it" scenario like the English restoration or the restoration of his uncle Louis XVIII and a completely stubborn man in regards to a symbolic flag, despite the advise of nearly every royalist, conservative and cleric involved. The only thing that really roused him into "awakening" was the attacks on the Church in the last years of his life, 1877-1883.Second, despite the defeats Austria suffered from France and Prussia they were still in a pretty good position and it's worth remembering that the Austrians were actually winning during the Third Italian war of Independence and was only forced to cede Venetia after the defeat at the Battle of Königgrätz and French mediation.

So here's an idea for a possible scenario. Lets say Pius IX is assassinated, throwing Catholic Europe into chaos. The conclave meets (there's no reason for the Italian government to challenge it; they never did so during the 49 years of the Prisoner in the Vatican) and likely elects an ultra-conservative (no one responds to an assassination by electing the political opposite of the victim, at least as far as I can tell). The war in France isn't changed, except perhaps a larger victory for the Royalists in the January 1871 polls (they can easily play up the Church being under attack by godless anarchists and the need for France to defend her or something like that). I think this attack on the Church could be enough to push Chambord to see the need for himself to take the throne, in 1871/1873. So we could likely see a restored Kingdom of France.

Next is what happens in Italy itself. Remember that Italy was barely 9 years old in 1870 and could probably be easily undone if the Savoys didn't have a powerful protector in France and later Germany. The murder of the Holy Pontiff by a godless nationalist in the heart of Rome is easily a spark for a revolt in the Two Sicilies, where the Italian unification was highly unpopular. Hell at this point many European states refused to recognize Italy and maintained diplomatic relations with the exiled Sicilian Court. Depending on how the revolt goes in the South and when it breaks out (ie still during the Franco-Prussian war or not) we could potentially see Italy invaded by Austria in the North, in support of both the Church and the Two Sicilies (remember that Franz Josef's sister-in-law was the deposed Queen of the Two Sicilies) and for a chance to grab back Venetia.

A lot will depend on how Italy handles the situation but I think the scenario above is a possibility or at the least the pieces are there to have a revived France and Two Sicilies allied with Austria-Hungary as a Conservative counterweight to Germany and Russia. We could even see the revival of the Papal states depending on the Italian situation (Henri V would love to invade and place the Pope back in his proper place)! Could be a very interesting TL.
 

Thomas1195

Banned
First, remember that until 1877 France was ruled by conservative-monarchists, not the anti-clerical republicans that came to be associated with the Third Republic.
The primary reason for this was Republicans' opposition of surrender.

Henri V would love to invade and place the Pope back in his proper place
Well, remember that the French Army had just been crushed not long ago. France would not be in a position to project power against another European power until the end of the decade.

Depending on how the revolt goes in the South and when it breaks out (ie still during the Franco-Prussian war or not) we could potentially see Italy invaded by Austria in the North, in support of both the Church and the Two Sicilies (remember that Franz Josef's sister-in-law was the deposed Queen of the Two Sicilies) a
Depending on the situation, Austria could be rolled over by the German Army. This time Germany would partition A-H and give Gallicia to Russia.

The revolt in mainland Italy would be crushed swiftly by the combined action of Italian Army and the Redshirts. Sicily, however, would be a different thing.
 
So we could likely see a restored Kingdom of France.

Such a restoration would be hotly contested by the French people, who IOTL consistently voted for republican governments in the 1880s and onwards despite most politicians supporting a restoration. You may very well see yet another revolution down the road.
 
Such a restoration would be hotly contested by the French people, who IOTL consistently voted for republican governments in the 1880s and onwards despite most politicians supporting a restoration. You may very well see yet another revolution down the road.

Maybe but that's without mobilizing the conservative Catholic vote. It's the same block that forced Napoléon III to keep the garrison in Rome during the 1860s. A Monarch would be able to mobilize them better than any political party and the murder of the Holy Pontiff is likely to make them come out in support of the new regime.
 
Maybe but that's without mobilizing the conservative Catholic vote.

On the contrary, conservative Catholicism was a very major part of every conservative regime after the Concordat of 1801, from the Bourbon Restoration to the July Monarchy to the Second French Empire, and even Vichy France had a conservative Catholic element to it. So, no, this point is largely irrelevant, as the conservative Catholic vote was mobilized IOTL.

A Monarch would be able to mobilize them better than any political party

A monarch would be more controversial than anything, considering how Henri of Chambord seems to have been reactionary, refusing to become monarch because of his hatred of the tricolour. I suspect he would quickly divide opinion and would go all pear-shaped after stirring up controversy.
 
So here's an idea for a possible scenario. Lets say Pius IX is assassinated, throwing Catholic Europe into chaos.
I don't see how A turns to B.

If Pius IX is assassinated, a Conclave meets and elects a new Pope. There is no chaos.

You yourself say Italy will let the Conclave proceed, so again, no chaos there.

The only way for any chaos to occur is for the Italian government to openly and deliberately block the Conclave from undoing the damage from the assassin, thereby effectively condoning the assasination. This is pretty ridiculous (after all Italy is still a monarchy, and a proper state. Not a rogue state). But if they did it, they'd alienate a lot of European courts (Russia and Germany don't like assassins much either), and a lot of north-Italians too (just because you're not a conservative catholic doesn't mean you're not a catholic). Most likely is rioting in a few Italian cities and the Italian government being hastily replaced by a sane one, which lets the conclave proceed.
 
Could some Southern dissenters attempt to revolt before the Italian Government react officially?

Why would they? The Papal Assassination isen't connected to the government, at this point, and the most likely organ to mobalize any large scale revolt (The Church hierarchy itself who are likely to instead call for patience while they wait for the Italian government to make the first move in the event of uncertainty in order to place the blame for any escalation firmly on their shoulders) wouldn't be putting the revolt together.
 
There is a very low probability that the pope is assassinated (a madman can never be excluded, obviously, but the Italian government would have nothing to gain out of this, and even Mazzini was conscious that it would have not benefited the republican cause): to have it happen during the Italian occupation of Latium and Rome would stretch credibility beyond anything believable.

Gen. Cadorna, who was in command of the Italian troops which took Rome was under very strict orders to avoid any bloodletting as much as possible and the occupation of the city was delayed by a few days to avoid pushing too much. The pope himself had to recognize that any resistance would be futile, and his orders were to put up just a formal resistance but to surrender once the fist breach in the walls had been made (which is what happened in reality: as soon as a sufficient breech was made near Porta Pia the white flag went up). Even the fortress of Civitavecchia surrendered without resistance.

Initially the Italian troops did not enter the Leonine city (the most inner part of the city just around the Vatican) and Castel Sant'Angelo: these portions were occupied later upon request of the papal government, in order to avoid disorders. The Vatican however was never entered.

A slightly more credible case might be made for an assassination of Pius IX after the fall of Rome in particular if his notorious mood swings get worse. It would affect only the Church itself, though, and possibly bring to the throne a more conservative pope than Leo XIII. Since however Leo XIII himself never changed the existing policies vis-a-vis the Italian state (and even made things worse by issuing an ill-thought encyclical forbidding Catholics to stand for election or even vote in Italian elections). It might however lead to a more conservative Church and the most negative effects would be in the Americas.
 
May I mention that there already was, in OTL, a low-intensity war, or guerrilla war, called the "brigandage" in Southern Italy? Insofar as this had an ideology, it was in favor of the temporal power of the Pope and all of that. It lasted, as a seriously dangerous guerrilla, about a decade, 1861 to 1869-70. By that time, with the eventual fall of Rome, it lost importance and brigands reverted to be what they had always been, armed outlaws who were common criminals.
But in this scenario, brigands will definitely see a comeback in the South and in the central, former-Papal State regions.
The measures the new Kingdom implemented, historically, were quite harsh, and they will remain in force in this situation.
 
Top