Unification of Italy Dbq
Unification of Italy: Pros and Cons
After the Congress of Vienna Italy consisted of six separate states. Controversy over whether or not Italy should be unified stirred up during the mid to late 1800’s. The unification of the Italian states was an ongoing debate for quite some time. During the years of the debates people found the unification to be positive change, a negative change, and some had different opinions for their own certain reasons. Those who agreed that Italy should be unified argued that Italy would not survive in the separated states, would be vulnerable to invasions, and would ultimately be weaker overall. Giuseppe Mazzini, an attorney who was exiled from Piedmont and wanted Italy to be unified so that he could return to his home said, “Unity, because without unity there can be no true nation, and without unity there is no strength.” (DOC 1) People for unification believed the combining of Italy states would be beneficial in the end. Vincenzo Gioberti, a priest from Piedmont, said, “The benefits Italy would gain from a political confederation under the moderating authority of the pontiff are beyond enumeration…would increase the strength of the various princes without damaging their independence; it would remove the causes of disruptive wars and revolutions at home, and make foreign invasions impossible. (DOC 3) Some civilians of these states also agreed that the unification of Italy would be just fine. Jessie White Mario, an English journalist who is obviously an opinionated individual being in the field of journalism said, “…Italy would have been free from foreigners, would have been free, independent, and united, had not monarchy stepped in and substituted the petty longings of dynastic ambition for the great national aim.” (DOC 9) On the other hand, some people felt that the unification of Italy would not bring success, but failure. Those who were against Italy becoming a united country felt that the individual regions of Italy were
After the Congress of Vienna Italy consisted of six separate states. Controversy over whether or not Italy should be unified stirred up during the mid to late 1800’s. The unification of the Italian states was an ongoing debate for quite some time. During the years of the debates people found the unification to be positive change, a negative change, and some had different opinions for their own certain reasons. Those who agreed that Italy should be unified argued that Italy would not survive in the separated states, would be vulnerable to invasions, and would ultimately be weaker overall. Giuseppe Mazzini, an attorney who was exiled from Piedmont and wanted Italy to be unified so that he could return to his home said, “Unity, because without unity there can be no true nation, and without unity there is no strength.” (DOC 1) People for unification believed the combining of Italy states would be beneficial in the end. Vincenzo Gioberti, a priest from Piedmont, said, “The benefits Italy would gain from a political confederation under the moderating authority of the pontiff are beyond enumeration…would increase the strength of the various princes without damaging their independence; it would remove the causes of disruptive wars and revolutions at home, and make foreign invasions impossible. (DOC 3) Some civilians of these states also agreed that the unification of Italy would be just fine. Jessie White Mario, an English journalist who is obviously an opinionated individual being in the field of journalism said, “…Italy would have been free from foreigners, would have been free, independent, and united, had not monarchy stepped in and substituted the petty longings of dynastic ambition for the great national aim.” (DOC 9) On the other hand, some people felt that the unification of Italy would not bring success, but failure. Those who were against Italy becoming a united country felt that the individual regions of Italy were