• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Contrast The Contribution Made By Mazzini, Cavour and Garibaldi to Italian Unification

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Contrast The Contribution Made By Mazzini, Cavour The unification of Italy was a complicated process that started from the 1790s and lasted until the conquest of Rome by the Italian troops in 1871. The Napoleonic Era, however, did not forecast such an outcome of things: at the beginning of the XIX century Italy consisted of separate states that were ruled first by the French, then by the Austrians who did not think about the unity. The 1820s and 1830s signalized the urging need of Italy to change ? people missed the partial freedom that Napoleon gave them and wanted to participate in governing, which was impossible as long as Austria held so much influence within the peninsula. The revolutions of 1820-1 (Piedmont) and 1831-2 (Papal States) showed the citizens that a change is possible. The revolution of 1848 and 1849 gave more hope to the Italian patriots all over the country, for they saw that Milan was able to hold back Austria for some time and for Piedmont was beginning to gain the position of a leader within the States. The shrewd policies of the Piedmontese government and the significant conquests at the South of the Peninsula led to the creation of The Kingdom of Italy in 1861 and then connection of Rome and Venetia. ...read more.

Middle

After 1849 he supported Garibaldi in his attempts to conquer Rome but his role in the unification was coming to the end. The contribution made by Giuseppe Garibaldi was a military one. He engaged himself into the Unification in 1833 when he joined the Young Italy inspired by the idea of an united Italian state. As Mazzini, after the failure in Piedmont in 1834 he escaped to South America. What s important, the time spent by Garibaldi in America was not a wasted period: he learned how to fight at the land, because before, due to his marine origins, he was used to fight on a ship. Like Mazzini, he also gained an important political feature that was recognition in America. When he heard of the planned revolutions during the Spring of Nations, he came back to his motherland with a guerilla called the Red Shirts and helped Mazzini with defending Rome. The actions of Garibaldi were not successful, due to the fact that he was not fully educated in terms of militia and war and once again he fled to America to come back in 1854 and take part in an Austro-Piedmontese war. ...read more.

Conclusion

He even had a conflict with Mazzini: they both disliked each other and did not try to understand the other?s position. He stood in opposition to the figures of nationalists and their ideas. When it came to military actions, Cavour was not taking part with them, he only planned them and as a Prime Minister did accept some military decisions or did not ? for example the decision of taking part in the Crimean War. As a long and complicated process, the Unification of Italy needed the devotion of many people, but it was also in need of leaders that would make the right decision at the right time and be aware of the consequences. Although the contribution made by Garibaldi, Mazzini and Cavour were not equal, together they built an important base for the future of a united Italy. They actions were often ambiguous, but each one of them was the most important person in one field: Mazzini ideologically, spreading the spirit of nationalism all over the country and making attempts to unite the state; Garibaldi militarily, defending Rome, conquering the South and showing the people that victory is not possible; Cavour politically, rationally planning every step of Piedmont and giving up his aims for the greater good. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Here's what a teacher thought of this essay

4 star(s)

This is a knowledgeable response which devotes equal weighting to each of the three figures and uses comparison to explore their strengths. There is a strong amount of detail throughout, although sometimes the author's points are weakened by poor grammar; proof-reading is essential. 4 out of 5 stars.

Marked by teacher Natalya Luck 22/05/2013

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Assess the successes and failures of Mussolini's domestic policy.

    5 star(s)

    It provided entertainment such as cheap holidays, public libraries, free lecture, and theatres much appreciated by the industrious working-class. Major sports were also used to project an image of superiority onto the world; Italy won both the World Cups in 1934 and 1938, and Primo Carrera was World Heavy Weight

  2. Marked by a teacher

    Major Causes of French Revolution

    4 star(s)

    They were not used to paying taxes and were not about to start. Calonne's plans of reform three main elements. Firstly came the economic and administrative reforms designed to fix once and for all the structural problems troubling the royal finances.

  1. Did napoleon betray the Revolution?

    Also education was to be restricted to boys, especially the sons of civil servants and officers - keeping the lyc�es expensive meant that no one below the bourgeoisie could afford to send their children to them. He also abandoned the Declaration of the Rights and Man and the Citizen, which was the main stepping-stone of the revolution.

  2. How did Napoleon maintain control in France between in 1799-1814?

    Napoleon later produced the "Organic Articles" which limited Papal control over French bishops and gave state control over activities of the clergy. Napoleon successfully attached the Church to the State which gave him more influence over the people of France, who other wise might of given support to the Church

  1. To what extent was Napoleon an enlightened despot?

    1800, the 75 French newspapers in existence were cut to just 13, and those remaining paper editors were forced to swear an oath of allegiance to Napoleon. By 1810, all newspaper in France had to acquire licenses to print in Paris, and there also just one official paper, 'Le Moniteur'.

  2. Obstacles to German Unification

    She intended to have a step on German affairs hoping to make a balance in central Europe. Any unification movement would hinder her French influence development in Germany. She strongly oppose to those attempts to unify Germany which will affect herself.

  1. To what extent was Napoleon nothing more than a dictator?

    In this way, the liberal aspects of the voting system were hollow as the government was entirely picked by Napoleon, always favouring the wealthy, in order to fuel his own regime. Ultimately, it denied the people a representative government as the vote provided lacked any real significance.

  2. To what extent were the Bourgeoisie responsible for the outbreak of Revolution in 1789?

    a manifesto to be gain more equality in the society of France. Another reason why the Bourgeoisie were the group responsible for the revolution was that a small group was growing in wealth. The Petty Bourgeoisie, which was originally part of the Third Estate, was dramatically increasing their wealth through

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work