What is it about the Italian people that makes them suck at war en masse (IE when they are surrounded by other Italians, whether it is the country of Italy or the irrelevant shitty states they were forever), but absolutely shit stomp as commanders and soldiers in the service of other nations and peoples, as well as doing really well in individual combat?
Why does a population of people who are by all accounts rough and alpha as well as smart do so shitty at war when surrounded by each other, but so well when surrounded by others not like them?
1. Raimondo Montecuccoli, Marshal of the Holy Roman Empire considered the greatest general of early modern warfare who had significant defeats over both Le Grande Conde and Turrene
2. Ambrogio Spinola, General and Admiral for Spain who succeeded in crushing the Dutch Revolt for a time. Considered by many to be the greatest master of siege warfare in history owing to to nearly 100 successful sieges and 0 defeats in war.
3. Alexander Farnese, Duke of Parma, also in the service of Spain, considered one of the best ever "Spanish" generals who contributed to the crushing of the dutch revolt as well.
5. Andre Massena, Napoleonic Marshal, considered by many to be Napoleon's best and most capable military commander next to Davout. He was affectionately nicknamed "the darling child of victory".
6. Prince Eugene of Savoy, Marshal of Austria and the Holy Roman Empire, considered by many to be one of the greatest commanders in history, he dealt crushing defeats to the Turks, as well as the French in the War of Spanish Succession.
7. Ottavio Piccolomini, Marshal of the Holy Roman Empire during the 30 years war, considered one of the Empire's best generals in history, dealt crushing defeats to both the French and the Swedes who were at the time seemingly unbeatable on the battlefield
8. Fiore dei Liberi, fencing master who codified most of European swordsmanship in his work "the flower of battle", considered the greatest master of individual combat in Europe in his day.
9. Alessandro Dal Barro, Marshal of the Holy Roman Empire, dealt many crushing defeats to the Ottoman Empire and was so successful that he was nicknamed "the Terror of the Turks"
10. Occhiali, an Admiral of the Ottoman Empire and Barbary pirate born in Calabria who was kidnapped as a slave and through skill and bravery in combat and leadership alone came to be one of, if not the greatest Ottoman Naval commander next to Barbarossa
Camden Ward
why is that?
Gabriel Davis
This. A venetian is not going to fight alongside his "italian" tuscan brother, much less a lombardo, much less a guy from rome, much less a guy from napoli, much less a guy from bari, much less a guy from sicily. "Italy is a fake country, they're not united, they will not fight together as one.
Cooper Miller
i mean they fought like crap even when they were in their city states period to be frank as well... but even then during that period they were producing military leaders who did quite well in the service of other countries.
Jackson Gomez
seriously why fight a war for some fancy rich guy when you enjoy life with your family and friends? Most of the wars italy fought was against other catholic nations and there was no risk for their life style or culture to end
Brayden Jackson
Southerners and northerners didn't really like each other much, don't think they were ever united after the Roman Empire fell. Now, add to that the German tier linguistic autism that created a real language barrier and distrust towards themselves like said, also have Luigi "charge at the Austrians in the mountains" Cadorna as your general and you have Italy's poor performance in WWI. Not sure about WWII as I haven't read much about it
A less known war was the Italo-Turkish war that was quite brief and ended in an Italian victory and territorial gains (greek islands and Lybia), but winning against the ottomans at that point was pretty much beating a dead horse. >. but even then during that period they were producing military leaders who did quite well in the service of other countries.
Because city states can't defend themselves in the modern era, where the country with the highest military budget usually won the war (protip: those were usually the bigger blobs on the map). They were rich and sandwiched between France and Austria, what else could they have done? Venicce did manage to exist well into the 18th century though
Jonathan King
Then why did they fight so well in the service of literally other nations? Italians were considered the most sought after soldiers for the Spanish Army of Flanders. More so than German. More so than Dutch. More so than British. More so than Swiss. etc. Why did they have commanders that did so well with even other countries' army's?
Adrian Sanders
because those were mercenaries/generals that had no families and wanted money
Zachary Russell
*had no ties to the country and wanted money and honor
Jose Russell
Was there more so a culture of being a skilled mercenary in Italy as the highest expression of military virtue, as opposed to serving your own nation and people?
Jose Anderson
You can't think of nationalism like it is today before Napoleon, m8. Flanders, the swiss and some germans also were common mercenaries in european wars. The concept of a standing army wasn't created until later.I'm not sure why these places had so many mercs, I'd have to guess the HRE;'s decentralisation had a role in it
Jonathan Morgan
But how is it that literal nations of people (even if they didnt think of themselves as such) like the french and the spanish domains managed to mobilize massive standing armies and steam role europe time and again?
Nathan Moore
for most of european histiory everyone fought for every country and regularily switched sides, most of the troops were international mercenaries too. in the german lands this was common until the 19th centutry, for example when schleswig-holstein was conquered by prussia from denmark in 1864 the commander was moltke who himself had been in the danish army before.
Jack Ramirez
Those were the two biggest '''superpowers''' of their times. Seriously, people underestimate how much land the Spanish directly or indirectly controlled when Carlos became the King. pic related, but let's not forget about the overseas realm
Ryder Martin
2 world wars 4 world cups
Elijah Young
So would the Spanish peoples of whatever variety think of themselves as lords over other races or groups of people more or less? Or did they view the Italians and the Germans and the Dutch and all else that were part of the Empire as equal subjects of the crown?
Jace Hughes
France had the largest population in Europe by far for most of modern history
Landon Sanchez
Easy there. Your performance in WW1 and WW2 as a whole was crap. Though you guys did have some pretty amazing "moments"
Brandon Clark
>"the Terror of the Turks"
did he just sit on them until they suffocated?
Daniel Long
Probably latter, but I can't answer it properly. Don't think it'd matter too much to your average peasant though
Joseph Carter
hehehe he was a little tubby... but so was Subutai, Genghis Khan's chief military commander.
Plus, he died fighting the Turks with the Venetians. He died actually fighting like a true warrior
Julian Clark
Spain gained a shitload of gold from the Americas which they used to finance their wars in Europe
Lincoln Williams
Uluc Ali is the rightful heir of Hayeddin, if not even greater than him. His fleet was the only one who "won" their engagement at lepanto and managed to get out alive, even though he was pit against Giancarlo Doria.
Joshua Williams
please delete this whole thread
Oliver Bailey
they are not about shooting guns and shouting and order and whatnot they are about shooting their loads into chicks then riding on a scooter in the sunshine yelling ciao!! to everyone
Kevin Gonzalez
>muh performance
We still won though
Nicholas Rogers
Germans also had a unification, that's not an excuse.
Carson Thompson
I believe the great Italian defeat at Kobarid in 1917 was due to a protracted standoff with the Austrians in a cold mountainous region which had the effect of demoralising the soldiery that was used to warmer climes, whereas the other side was full of soldiers from the Alpine, Dinaric and Carpathian regions.
Isaiah Rogers
It's mostly about historical causes. Italy never really had a strict feudal hierarchy, for a bunch of reasons that would be too long to dead, and the city states didn't really develope as nations. Creating a national army was nearly impossible (The first to really try was Machiavelli in the early XVI in Florence, and failed badly). There were no professional soldiers aside from mercenaries, but mercenaries are not loyal and won't fight against the odds for anyone. Also Italy was fragmentized and the numbers really low. If you think about it, the only exceptions were the rare times that Italians united against a common foe (e.g. battle of Legnano) and sea warfare (at least until coloniale navies became a thing), where battles were won by expert sailors and not soldiers. After the unification, it was mostly a matter of difficult comunications between officers and people with different accents and cultures that saw each other as strangers. WWII was shit for us mostly because tech disadvantage, and because Mussolini was shit at foreign politics, even if a lot can be blamed upon the soldiers.
Colton Edwards
They took poor inexperienced people and send them to die in war, soldiers can't be blamed for that
Ian Phillips
and they lost two world wars
Andrew Martinez
>They took poor inexperienced people and send them to die in war The story of litterally every war. Our defeat is mostly placed upon the fact that people were send in a war described as a merry trip to fuck black qts. Instead the fascists decided to fight even with worse equipment and smaller numbers because, again, Mussolini was REALLY shitty at foreign politics (I don't mean the "allying with Hitler was his only mistake" meme, he really was terrible, look it up)
Jaxson Lee
The defeat at Caporetto was caused by a series of factors, chief among them the fact that Italian officers, while being well aware of the fact that a massive offensive was on the way, did jack shit to prepare a suitable defense, because they tough the war to be already won and were in general terribly unprofessional and retarded nobles that hated their own troops
Matthew Ross
The funniest part is when he actually believed Hitler when he told him that they would not go to war over Poland, and then Ribbentrop casually told Galeazzo Ciano that they were going in fact to go to war with France and England during a party in Berlin and had to tell his staff while closed in his hotel's room bathroom for fear of being spied on by the Germans
Ayden Jones
the italian unification was much, much different than the german one.
Connor Martin
Italy never lost a war > USA couldn't win one since WW II
