May 1946: The Fall of the Monarchy


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
:previous:
Congratulations with the 1000th! :flowers:

Why was the USA so determined to put the end to all Monarchies (of the Axis countries) after the war? They played quite a visible role in the fall of the Italian Monarchy, greatly weakened (rather, made practically ceremonial) the Japanese one. What was the motive?
 
Also that's true...while the British government wanted the Monarchy in order to avoid the possibility of a communist government in Italy.

But, paradoxically the U.S.S.R. openly supported the monarchy. Stalin was the first to recognize the Kingdom of Southern Italy when the King and his retinue repaired to Brindisi, after Mussolini created the REpublic of Salò in the North.
Besides, the leader of the Italian Communist Party, Palmiro Togliatti wasn't completely against the monarchy: he would have accepted to see the little Prince Vittorio Emanuele be educated by a group of great minds, such as philosopher Benedetto Croce, before ascending the throne.
 
Yes, the US really doesn't like monarchies. Look at all the trouble Wilson caused after WW1!
 
President Wilson didn't cause any major problems. He tried to put together a world that would have fewer problems. Wilson had nothing to do with the dissolution of the Italian monarchy after WWII. Yes, the U.S. doesn't think monarchies have much value and they don't. The Italian people have governed themselves very well, sure a nut here and there, but who doesn't have that problem. Mussolini rose to power during a monarchy.
 
President Wilson didn't cause any major problems. He tried to put together a world that would have fewer problems. Wilson had nothing to do with the dissolution of the Italian monarchy after WWII. Yes, the U.S. doesn't think monarchies have much value and they don't. The Italian people have governed themselves very well, sure a nut here and there, but who doesn't have that problem. Mussolini rose to power during a monarchy.

The US doesn´t think Monarchies have much value and they don´t...

A line you pinched from that most incompetent of your secretaries of state,Madeline Allbright.

Oh,really.....I do not give a flying whatshowever what the US thinks,at all.Ever!
We do not think THEY are of much use anyway,incompitent bussybodies.
< ed Warren> Do not even try to comment dear,it is all moot to a fault anyway.
This,and Sixtus,gets me a-going big time,and rightfully so.

Arrogance is a worldrenowned US trademark.
We here,in Monarchies,just shrug our shoulders for you.
Didn´t make a mess of it hey?He was trying to put a world together with fewer problems Hey?
Get real.What a fairytale nonsense line.Try another.
 
Last edited:
Of course it was rigged. Most monarchists were still relocated from the war and were not able to cast their vote.
 
It seems that 3 millions persons have not been able to vote at the referendum, because they were war prisoners or because some land (the Venezia Giulia and the cities of Bolzano and Zara) could not vote.
And 3 millions is a big number, more or less the 10% of all the Italians wth the vote right.
 
Princess Mafalda of Savoy

Not only was manipulated, but I can tell you more: after the referendum, a coup d'etat took place...
But I guess it's better to return at the beginning ot the story.

Between 1922 and 1943 Italy was ruled by the fascist government of Benito Mussolini, and King Vittorio Emanuele III didn't oppose to this totalitarianism.
In 1940 Mussolini led Italy in the Second World War: he was the only person in Italy who wanted that, and the italian army was not able to share in a war: there weren't equipments, and a lot of young soldiers were sent to fight even if they didn't had had any kind of weapon in their hands before.
So, since the beginning of the war everything went wrong for the italian army, and for Italy; Italy fought for the first three years of war only thanks to the helps from the german army.
People was deeply unhappy, and in 1943 also the fascist main body started to understand that; so, on 25 July 1943 the Grand Council of Fascism deposed Mussolini, who was arrested.
In september the armistice between Italy and Allied armed forces was signed, and the Nazis invaded the north Italy, where partisans fought against the occupying german forces. The south of Italy was ruled by the legal government of Badoglio and later of Bonomi.
Between 1943 and 1945 the partisans (who mostly were supported and led by the main antifascist political powers, communists, socialists, christian-democratics and liberals) fought to free the north Italy, and these parties, that joined the National Liberation Committee, started to rule the the north of the Country.
The parties of the NLC were mostly anti-monarchist; and people put the responsability for all happened on the King, who didn't oppose to fascism, and so he was thought responsable for the fact that at the end of the war Italy was a severely damaged country, with a lot of victims, a destroyed economy, and a desperate general condition.

After the complete liberation of Italy, and the end of the war, the north Italy was mostly against the Monarchy, while the south was faithful to the King.
Something had to change, and maybe if the King would have abdicated in 1944 or 1945 would have been better.
Because of this strong internal opposition to the Monarchy, the King signed a decree prescribing the referendum to choose the form for the state, that took place on 2 June 1946.

The political campaign was framed by incidents, mostly in the north Italy, where monarchists were fought by both republicans and fascists; some politicians uses also personal attacks against the old King and the new King Umberto II, who became King after the (tardy) abdication of his Father, on 9 may 1946, less that a month before the referendum; King Umberto, for example, was accused to be homosexual, and in a deeply catholic country this was a heavy accuse (even if false).

The referendum took place, and was won by the republicans: 12 millions votes vs 10 millions for the Monarchy.
The Supreme Court of Cassation had to proclaim the Republic on 12 June, but on this date only the results of the referendum were read; no proclamation, that was postponed to the 18 June.
We have to remember that the Court of Cassation was the only body with the power of proclaim the winner of the referendum.
On that night, the Prime Minister De Gasperi proclaimed the republic, illegally.

The following day te King decided to leave: if he had opponed to the proclamation of the government, a new civil war would have begun. And he didn't want this: that's the reason of his leaving.

About the manipulation of the referendum, we have to notice some things:
1-Many prisoners of war were in prison and not able to vote;
2-Some provinces (Trieste, Bolzano) had not yet been reintegrated into Italy, and so had not been included in the vote;
3-The number of voters recorded was higher than the number of the electors (at least it seems to be so);
4-De Gasperi had no powers to proclaim the Republic.


Where I noted above in bold italics, is the time when Princess Mafalda was taken, along with another very young European Princess, out of Italy by the Nazi's for questioning in Berlin. She and the younger child were then taken to Buchanwald. Princess Mafalda worked as a prisoner in the ammunitions factory, intentionally adjacent to the concentration camp. The Allies began bombing thee plants, not actually knowing Buchanwald was next to it.
On one of the bombing raids, Princess Mafalda was seriously injured while working in the plant. An attempt to give her blood, which was the wrong type, killed her.

Shortly after, the young European Princess, was taken out, and placed with an adopted family by Princess Ileana of Romania and Archduchess of Austria.
 
I have read a lot about Princess Mafalda but I have never heard this story with a young european princess in camp with her.Where have you read that??
 
was leaving after getting orders for military service common during wwII? i have my fathers orders somewhere. He moved here and joined the navy.
 
If in 1946 more than a half of the population was more or less in the favour of the Monarchy in this moment the royalists are quite few and the Royal Family not enough known. I suppose 90% of the Italians does not knoe who is Crown Prince Aimone of Savoy.
 
That was a wonderful summary, MAfan. :flowers:
The King's decision to leave was a courageous and thoughtful one; only a Monarch, who truly cares for his people would prefer an exile to a possible civil war.


I may not think very highly of Vittorio Emanuele, Prince of Naples, but Emanuele Filiberto is a charming man and would make a delightful King. Somehow, I am sure that some time in future, the Monarchy in Italy will be reinstated.

Italy would be much stronger and more unified with a Monarchy taking care of business!!
 
Tomorrow will hold a referendum in Italy. Will then be able to hold a new referendum as of 1946 to the Italians can choose between monarchy and Republic?
 
Is there a genuine wish among wide segments of the Italian population of restoring the monarchy?

It's not my impression from the albeit few Italians I've met and talked with about the situation in Italy.
However, all of them express a loathing for the political class!

Do you think a monarch could be a balance against the nationalists who are on the rise in Italy?
 
Is there a genuine wish among wide segments of the Italian population of restoring the monarchy?

It's not my impression from the albeit few Italians I've met and talked with about the situation in Italy.
However, all of them express a loathing for the political class!

Do you think a monarch could be a balance against the nationalists who are on the rise in Italy?

I doubt it considering that Vittorio Emanuele III actively supported Mussolini's fascist regime.
 
All the Italians I know, without exception, would be strongly opposed to any restoration, though most seem to have sympathy or respect for Umberto II.

The current Italian Constitution, designed largely to prevent the rise of another extremist to power, spreads power very widely, giving very little to the President of the Republic. In many ways, replacing the President with a constitutional Monarch, and perhaps an officer of state to arbitrate and chair negotiations on the Monarch's behalf, would not be such a big change. Even if there were ever a serious upsurge i support for the restoration of a monarchy, the major problem would be that there are too many rivals, within the Savoy family and among the old reigning families in the regions and provinces.
 
Back
Top Bottom