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

Explain Why The Austrian War Of 1859 Was Important In The Process Of Unification

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Explain Why The Austrian War Of 1859 Was Important In The Process Of Unification. The Austrian War of 1859, otherwise known as the Second War of Italian Independence was a conflict fought by Napoleon III of France alongside the Kingdom of Piedmont and Sardinia against the Austrian Empire. The Piedmontese, following their defeat in the First War of Italian Independence, knew from experience that foreign assistance would be regarded as essential when attempting to defeat such a powerful supremacy - following this, Prime Minister Cavour set out to pursue the establishment of affiliations abroad - Britain and France obliged and offered their support, however were reluctant to directly attack Austria. Cavour knew that Austria would have to be provoked to commence any form of conflict in which allies would be inclined to partake. After incensing Vienna with a series of military movements near the border, the Austrians issued an ultimatum on April 23 1859. When their notice was met with disregard, war with Sardinia was triggered 6 days later, drawing France into the encounter. These events preceded the war, although what occurred during the war was of high importance in the path to Italian unification. ...read more.

Middle

Predictably, central Italy witnessed revolution shortly after these proposals. The Piedmontese felt criminally ignored and did not intend to abide by these enforced terms by any stretch of the imagination. Protests arose in Sardinia and Cavour himself resigned in disgust. While the terms agreed upon in Villafranca by Napoleon and Franz Joseph seemed set, they would need to be reaffirmed in the Treaty of Zurich in November to be properly asserted. This arrangement proved to be of no use in the end, as the Piedmontese occupied the central states in a revolt against the pending restoration of the previous monarchs, while the French and Napoleon remained out of this situation; showing no desire to involve themselves any further. Therefore, the French failed to comply with the terms of the treaty of Villafranca and the Austrians were left in a state of vexation and disappointment at this. In the end, the revolts succeeded and the nationalists were satisfied at the new terms that had been proposed - these involved the annexation of the central Italian states with the Kingdom of Sardinia. At the start, the outcome did not appear to be positive; however this can be conceived as a productive stride towards unification. ...read more.

Conclusion

Problems of a moderate degree of importance arguably include the Treaty of Villafranca, which sparked revolution but ultimately amounted to nothing - and Napoleon's disapproval of war, which opened the path to the treaty in the first case. More prominent complications were the rebellions in central Italy, which appeared to ease Napoleon III's stance on the treaty and the resignation of Cavour. Arguably the most pronounced problems were the defeat of Austria at Magenta and Solferino, and the ceding of Nice and Savoy - leading to Garibaldi's future expeditions in attempting to unify Italy. In conclusion, I believe that the battles of Magenta and Solferino were the most important phase which assisted Italian unification during the time of the Austrian War. If it were not for these battles, in particular that of Solferino, the events that followed would never have occurred, and other outcomes may have taken place - the Austrians may have contained their territory in the Italian states, further people may have been killed in other wars, or Garibaldi may never have had the chance or power to play such a remarkable role in unifying Italy - nor may another figure of such inspiration to nationalists have ever emerged. ...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

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. Vietnam war

    On April 27, 100,000 PAVN troops encircled Saigon, which was to be defended by 30,000 ARVN troops. In order to increase panic and disorder in the city, the PAVN troops began shelling the airport. With the closure of the airport, large numbers of people who might otherwise have fled the city found that they had no way out.

  2. How successful was Napoleon III?

    A further way in which Napoleon III was successful in politics was because he managed to liberalise the empire. This began in 1860 when the Corps Legislatif was given the right to challenge the government's intentions and receive a reply.

  1. Why did the war against Austria in 1859 result in the unification of most ...

    Also it was decided that the previous rulers of the Central Duchies (Parma, Modena and Tuscany) would eventually return to rule, respectively. Conversely, Italian unification still had a long way to go, as Austria was allowed to keep Venetia and Cavour handed over Nice and Savoy to France, when he returned as prime minister in 1860.

  2. Compare and contrast Cavour and Garibaldi's contributions to Unification.

    Both Cavour and Garibaldi put a great deal of effort into the unification process - Cavour in mostly diplomatic means and Garibaldi in mostly military. When comparing the roles of Cavour and Garibaldi in Italian unification, it is necessary to take a look at the two parties' eagerness for the cause.

  1. Compare & Contrast Cavour & Garibaldi's Contributions to the Unification.

    Both Cavour and Garibaldi put a great deal of effort into the unification process - Cavour in mostly diplomatic means and Garibaldi in mostly military. When comparing the roles of Cavour and Garibaldi in Italian unification, it is necessary to take a look at the two parties' eagerness for the cause.

  2. Who was more responsible for the success of Italian Unification up to 1861? Cavour, ...

    Garibaldi would play a crucial role in the unification of the whole of Italy, without him there would probably be two independent states. Garibaldi was born in Nice, which at the time was part of France. He was brought up in the working class and would always remain a "People's man."

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