• 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

    Why did the League of Nations fail?

    5 star(s)

    By blocking the Suez Canal and the Straits of Gibraltar, Britain would have forced Italy to withdraw from Abyssinia. The only problem with that would have been that Britain would have been putting Anglo-American relations on a bad footing - America needing to export as much as possible to ease the effects of economic collapse.

  2. Marked by a teacher

    Explain how the effects of the First World War caused the collapse of the ...

    4 star(s)

    The Provisional Government did nothing to solve this problem. They wanted to wait for the new government in six months time. They also believed that if they gave land to the peasants, other peasants would desert the army and come home to get land.

  1. What impact did war have on the French Revolution 1789-1799?

    This made the Revolution much more violent and dramatic, and it became extremely radical. Greater centralisation was put into place after the attempts made at decentralisation by the Assembly 1789-1791, and government authority was much stronger than ever before. The effective power in France was moved to Paris inside the CPS, and the power of Paris increased.

  2. To what extent had Napoleon betrayed the French Revolution in his domestic policy by ...

    Napoleon holds even more resemblance to a modern dictator when we look at his schemes of propaganda. He censored many newspapers, and they were also forbidden from discussing anything which may go against Napoleon's rule, or anything too controversial which Napoleon didn't like.

  1. Why was imperialism so popular in Britain 1880-1902?

    Henty was a very popular author of the time period that sold around 25 million copies throughout Britain. Many of his books aimed to instil patriotism in the British public, with stories of 'heroic' British men succeeding in their battles which they face, in novels such as 'By Sheer Pluck' and 'With Kitchener in Soudan'.

  2. To what extent was Napoleon an enlightened despot?

    D.G Wright comments, "In this way, Napoleon rules from above, with only those loyal to him in positions of influence..." Wright is saying that Napoleon was keeping total power by only having those who were devoted to him making decisions of any magnitude.

  1. Bismarck did not plan the unification of Germany. He merely reacted to events.

    Generally, France would not stood still to see a strong united Germany to be at her border. When the crown in Spain was vacant, it had literally opened another great spot for the other great powers to fill in the place.

  2. How stable was the Weimar Republic 1924-29 ?

    Also, Hindenburg being elected, though it was a good choice, became the focus of powerful groups who wanted a more authoritarian system which went against the Republic causing uncertainty and instability in the government. Economically, inflation was cured in 1924 and never was to return.

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