Preview

Italian Unification

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
929 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Italian Unification
It took sixty-five years for Italy to be transformed from a series of separate states ruled by restored monarchies after the Napoleonic invasion into a unified Kingdom of
Italy under Piedmont with Rome as its capital. It took so long because there were many obstacles to the political unity of Italy. The influence of the Catholic Church was a very significant obstacle but it was one of many, such as the conservative rulers, the lack of popular support for unity and divisions amongst supporters of unity itself. By far the greatest obstacle, however, was the role of Austria in preventing unity.

The Catholic Church was influential in Italy in many ways. Both rulers and ordinary people were influenced by the conservative beliefs of the Catholic
Church and the attitude of the Papacy towards Italian unity was often reflected in the actions of Italian rulers and mass support for nationalism. In 1815 temporal power was restored to the Papacy in the Papal States and the Pope shared the conservatism of the other
Italian rulers who hoped to maintain their own power in individual states. The dominant power in Italy was
Austria and the Habsburg family and they were staunchly Catholic. When there was revolutionary activity in the Papal States in 1831 Austria came to the defence of the Pope.

The conservatism of the Church was therefore an obstacle to unity but up until the 1840s only one of many. Without the Catholic Church the Italian rulers would still have been opposed to greater unity. In the 1820-21 and 1831 revolutions they did not join together to oppose the threat but called upon
Austrian troops to help them. The revolutionaries themselves were also divided over whether unity was desired at all and those who were nationalists had different ideas. For example, Mazzini wanted a united republic and Balbo thought Piedmont should lead a united Italian kingdom. It was the military might of
Austria that maintained the restoration system

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    In 1855, opposition to the Tsarist Government lacked an effective unifying ideology. This remained the case throughout the 1855-1964 period, even once the communists had taken power. A key contributing factor towards this was the lack of unity opposition possessed. Opposition throughout the period came from several sources, however it was dominated by division in opinion and ideology, only fully uniting in the February revolution of 1917 which brought down Nicholas II and the Romanov dynasty. Even then opposition still differed in opinion, however it was unified by one common cause. Throughout the period, the peasantry were providing opposition to Russian Government. However opposition was repeatedly ineffective. The Polish revolt of 1863 during Alexander II's reign was crushed by the army in much the same way as the 1953 East German revolt and the 1956 Hungarian rebellion were crushed under Khrushchev's tenure. A continuing feature throughout the period is the key role which the army played in limiting opposition from the peasantry, with military force frequently being deployed throughout the period. Lenin used it in the Civil War against the Green armies of the peasantry and Stalin used a similar style of brute force in the assault on the peasantry during the collectivisation process, albeit on a much grander scale. The army was very important to the state and their loyalty to Nicholas II during the 1905 revolution was vital in ensuring he was not deposed then instead of twelve years later. The peasantry also lacked a shared ideology and there were several other factors which meant that a full scale peasant revolt was never likely to occur. The demographic and general backwardness of Russia, whose weakness was repeatedly shown by failures in war throughout the period, meant that the peasantry were never going to unify because poor communications and transport links simply…

    • 1167 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Each state has there own set of laws instead of having the central government make a set of laws that each state will enforce. This made it as if each state had there own government. This made many disagreements between the leaders of that time.…

    • 195 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    IsaacS Period 4 LEQ

    • 313 Words
    • 2 Pages

    A few decades after America won its freedom, unity was much desired amongst populous. Disunity usually occurs with two people or parties with different points of view, value systems, or class opinion clash; that is exactly what took place in the early 19th century America. Political parties hindered the development of national unity in the United States between 1790 and 1840 because of party polarity and sectionalism.…

    • 313 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The question is focused on the challenges mounted to Tsarist rule in the given period, and the extent to which divisions among opposition groups contributed to their failure. Answers may consider the four main strands of opposition, their internal divisions and their intolerance of each other. A tradition of revolutionary activity was established by the Populists and their appeal to the peasants, though they were weakened by the assassination of Alexander II and the repression established by Alexander III. The Social Revolutionaries tried to gain support among both peasants and townspeople, but were divided between anarchists and revolutionaries. The Social Democrats split into Bolsheviks and Mensheviks at the 1903 Congress, while the Liberals did not establish distinctive parties until after the 1905 Revolution. A simple description of some of the revolutionary parties will be marked within Levels 1 and 2, and progression will depend on the range and depth of relevant material.…

    • 555 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The government was set up under the Articles of Confederation, America’s first constitution. The founders were so afraid of a strong central government that they gave all power to the states, rather than set up an over-seeing national government. The Revolution was fought to get away from an overbearing and unfair ruler, so it is understandable why they wouldn’t want another monarchy to take over. The problem was that the Articles of Confederation gave little to no power at all to their national government, causing distress and non-compliance between the states. The Articles of Confederation denied the government the ability to take care of the states and the union. An influential philosopher at the time, Hobbes, believes that it is the sole purpose of the national government to enforce peace and laws; thus making life, liberty, and the pursuit of property possible. Another influential philosopher at the time, Locke, also believes that a central government is necessary to promote public good, to protect property and promote…

    • 871 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Both factions had good arguments, and both had solid historical reasons to support their views. An advocate of a strong, national government, such as James Madison, could point to the mob riots of economically distressed farmers and the frightening military uprising lead by Daniel Shay, known as Shay’s Rebellion. Shay and his militant sympathizers threatened the authority of State of Massachusetts, which could have led to civil chaos. This uprising underscored the need for a comprehensive, national constitution. Later, the French Revolution’s mobs that executed the king and queen further emphasized the dangers of popular uprisings and the need for a central government. A supporter of a weak central government in which power resides within the individual state, such as Thomas Jefferson, could point to the tyranny of King George, and Great Britain’s refusal to provide the colonies with representation. Both views had valid reasons for structuring a government to protect against men who become corrupted by power either as a despot or as a leader of factional interests.…

    • 992 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    To some extent, Mussolini’s ability to secure and increase his power in 1919-1928 was due to the weaknesses of his political opponents. However, Mussolini’s strengths were also an important part in doing this. Mussolini was able to increase his power from 1922-1928 through his strategy, his ability to obtain Rule by Decree, the establishment of the Grand Council of Fascism and the fact that he had the support of powerful groups. He also used various violent tactics, which meant the Fascists had the power of the state behind them. However, Mussolini’s opponents were very weak. This is demonstrated in the failure of the Aventine succession and the weaknesses of the Liberals and the Socialists.…

    • 2107 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    At first, the rulers or the statue who was in absolute power, refused to sign or agree to the constitution. This lead to more riots and conflicts. Some revolutions, such as the Mexican revolution, created bloody wars and fights in order to gain the approval of their constitution. In other cases, such as the Brazilian Revolution, they cause no destruction on people’s lives and they did not carry out bloody wars- they decided to solve problems “peacefully.” After revolting a little more, the head of the conservatives decides to sign and be part of the contract, which leads towards the end of the revolution and this is the stage in which the radicals’ desires are fulfilled. In yet another example, the Mexican Revolution created the Inquala plan: which contained the three conditions: “One, Mexico would become an independent monarchy governed by transplanted king Ferdinand. Two, Creolles and Pennensulars would have equal human rights and civil liberties. Three, the Roman Catholic Churches could keep their privileges.” More precisely, the Brazilian Revolution created a petition that eight-thousand Brazilians signed, that asked King John to let his son, Dom Pedro, to rule this country. Eventually, Pedro gave the independence to the Brazilian, and he led the constitutional monarchy in…

    • 794 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    One reason why opposition to the state between 1855 and 1964 was mostly unsuccessful is the divided nature of oppositional forces. One example of this is the Civil War of 1918 where Richard Pipes argued it was a ‘foregone conclusion’ that the Reds would win. The Whites were made up of many different oppositional groups such as the SRs, Liberals looking for a tsarist revival and foreign forces concerned with stopping the spread of communism, which meant they lacked a common purpose or motive to defeat the Bolsheviks and was one of the fundamental reasons why they were unsuccessful in winning the Civil War. As well as this, they had a geographical disadvantage as the Red’s held the centre cities of Petrograd and Moscow, meaning they could never unite in one place to plan a strategic attack. This also allowed the Reds to have unlimited supplies of clothing, food and weaponry, as well as the use of the railway to attack the Whites. Similarly, in 1905 the attempted uprising of opposition to Tsar Nicholas II was unsuccessful due to the separate groups of opposition. The revolutionary forces were made up of different social classes of Russia, such as the industrial workers, the peasantry and political groups such as the Social Democrats and the Kadets, each with separate reasons for revolting – for example the Kadets’ wish of developing a constitutional monarchy. The October Manifesto, a concession by Nicholas II weakened the by settling the problems of the Liberals in the creation of the Duma, meaning they no longer supported the revolution. This is also seen in the November Manifesto after the peasants were appeased by abolishing the redemption taxes that had troubled them for so many years. The divided opposition is key to Nicholas II staying in power as after this attempted revolution he remained unchallenged for the next 12 years. The…

    • 501 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    After the American Revolution, the Federalists and Anti-Federalists argued over the the ratification of the Constitution. During both before and after the American Revolution, there existed conflicting political ideologies. The nature of American politics stayed the same as there was always people who had different ideas on what the government should do and how it should effectively serve its people. There was justification for each ideology, Loyalists believed that the British government was too powerful and revolt would mean destruction for the colonies while the Patriots argued that to continue living under British rule would be to live as oppressed subjects to the crown. The Federalists saw the flaws of a weak central government. For example, Shay’s Rebellion was caused by the federal government’s inability to establish a stable economy, causing discontentment among farmers with large debts. Anti-Federalists wanted to prevent a strong federal government in order to avoid the abuse of power similar to British rule. People will always have different and conflicting ideas and the American Revolution did not change that aspect of American…

    • 685 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Sedition Act of 1798

    • 2387 Words
    • 10 Pages

    For the first few years of Constitutional government, under the leadership of George Washington, there was a unity, commonly called Federalism that even James Madison (the future architect of the Republican Party) acknowledged in describing the Republican form of government-- " And according to the degree of pleasure and pride we feel in being republicans, ought to be our zeal in cherishing the spirit and supporting the character of Federalists." Although legislators had serious differences of opinions, political unity was considered absolutely essential for the stability of the nation. Political parties or factions were considered evil as "Complaints are everywhere heard from our most considerate and virtuous citizens, equally the friends of public and private faith, and of public and personal liberty, that our governments are too unstable, that the public good is disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties, and that measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority…" Public perception of factions were related to British excesses and thought to be "the mortal diseases under which popular governments have everywhere perished." James Madison wrote in Federalist Papers #10, "By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community." He went on to explain that faction is part of human nature; "that the CAUSES of faction cannot be removed, and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its EFFECTS." The significant point Madison was to make in this essay was that the Union was a safeguard against factions in that even if "the influence of factious leaders may kindle a flame…

    • 2387 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Before 1825, rebellions were often led by individual leaders who most of the time did not have the advantage of the aristocracy; they didn't have the ability to be a real political or economic threat to Russian autocracy. The Decembrist revolution in 1825 however changed this as the people involved in the revolution were not simple peasants, they were aristocrats from the upper echelons of Russian society, who wished to make huge political changes in Russia, namely liberating Russia from autocracy and freeing the serfs which was a main part of their agenda. The Decembrists were not successful in their revolution in the end as they were defeated by loyalist troops quite easily due to a lack of unity among the leaders of the Revolution, for example, a single policy or set of aims could not be agreed. The Northern and Southern societies however, were able to agree on one issue, that the revolution must be carried out by the small elite and not by the masses The Decembrists were not able to gain the support of the people they were attempting to free from autocratic subjugation, the masses of…

    • 666 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Benito Mussolini had a large impact on World War II. He wasn't always a powerful dictator though. At first he was a school teacher and a socialist journalist. He later married Rachele Guide and had 5 children. He was the editor of the Avanti, which was a socialist party newspaper in Milan.<br><br>Benito Mussolini founded the Fasci di Combattimento on March of 1919.<br><br>"This was a nationalistic, anti liberal, and anti socialist movement. This movement attracted mainly the lower middle class."1 Fascism was spreading across Europe. Mussolini was winning sympathy from King Victor Emmanuel III. Mussolini then threatened to march on Rome. This persuaded King Victor Emmanuel III to invite Mussolini to join a coalition, which strongly helped him gain more power.<br><br>Benito Mussolini brought Austria on Germany's side by a formal alliance. "In 1937, he accepted a German alliance. The name of this alliance was the Anti Comntern Pact. On April 13, 1937 Benito Mussolini annexed Albania. He then told the British ambassador that not even the bribe of France and North Africa would keep him neutral."2 The British ambassador was appalled and dismayed.<br><br>On May 28, 1937, Mussolini strongly gave thought to declaring war. He then attacked the Riviera across the Maritime. "On September 13, 1937 he opened an offensive into British-garrisoned Egypt from Libya."3 <br><br>On October 4, 1937, while the offensive still seemed to promise success, Benito Mussolini met Adolf Hitler at the Brenner Pass, on their joint frontier. "The two of them discussed how the war in the Mediterranean, Britain's principal foothold outside its island base, might be turned to her decisive disadvantage. Hitler suggested to Mussolini that Spain might be coaxed on the axis side, thus giving Germany free use of the British Rock of Gibraltar, by offering Franco part of French North Africa, and that France might be persuaded to accept that concession by compensation with parts of British West Africa".4…

    • 2199 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    unification of all of the Italian peninsula. Cavour began by seeking to make Piedmont a more important…

    • 411 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    From the years 1781 to 1789, the United States of America were governed under a document known as the Articles of Confederation. Prior to the ratification of today’s United States Constitution, this paper was the layout for the federal government that united the separate thirteen colonies in their movement for independence from Britain. It was put to the test as an effective form of command by a number of problems and events that arose shortly after America gained independence from its mother country. The signing of the Treaty of Paris granted the states new land and a new position in the world as a nation. Various ordinances came about in the mid 1780s to address westward expansion. A group of people known as Nationalists saw the need for a stronger central government, but the separate states and higher classes of American society resented this idea, for fear that their natural rights would be denied. Yeomen farmers were seen as the ideal citizens in the new republic nation that America was trying to forge, however they found themselves facing severe economic pressure. States were raising taxes, their paper money was becoming worthless, and Congress had yet to repay the common people for their service in the Continental Army. Tensions between these lower classed citizens and the gentry erupted in Shays’s Rebellion, which can be seen as the ultimate factor for inspiring change in the American government. Previously, the tedious amending process had made alterations much too difficult to create. In the time that the Articles of Confederation were active, they proved to be an effective form of government in handling western lands, but were substantially less ideal in managing America’s foreign relations.…

    • 1360 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays