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

How accurate would it be to describe Cavour as the architect of Italy?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Alex Mansfield How accurate would it be to describe Cavour as the architect of Italy? According to the historian Arthur Whyte Cavour was the "architect of modern kingdom of Italy". Other historians believe that the other leaders of the Risorgimento such as Garabaldi played a larger part in the unification than Whyte has given them credit for. Some even believed that Cavour did not want a united Italy, but as the Republican activist Pallauicino said "what Cavour wants... is just for Piedmont to be enlarged by a few square miles of Italian soil." Cavour founded his own publication "Il Risorgimento" in 1847 upon the freedom of censorship so could publicise his political ideas for the future of Italy. Cavour became minister of agriculture, commerce and navy he finally became Prime Minister in 1852. The first step towards the unification of Italy seemed to be when Italy joined the Crimean war in 1854 on 5the side of France and Britain. ...read more.

Middle

It appeared that Cavour was satisfied with this agreement showing that neither he nor Napoleon III wanted unification. In fact Napoleon may not have been willing to help if Italy wanted unification as, it would have been a threat on his borders. The two battles at Magenta and Solferino resulted in Piedmont gaining Lombardy. At this time Cavour took advantage of the revolutions in central Italy and Austria's inability to react to send in the Piedmontese army and set up provisional governments. Napoleon III obviously worried about these events and the opinion of the French public signed an armistice at Villafranca. Cavour was furious and resigned knowing he could not continue the war without Frances help. The unification of Italy came a step closer in 1860 when in Tuscany, Parma, Modena and the Papal States the popular mood was unhappy and many states wanted union with Piedmont. Cavour offered Napoleon Nice and Savoy in return for the states of Central Italy. ...read more.

Conclusion

Although he lost Nice and Savoy he gained France's help (much to Mazzini's displeasure who believed only Italians should unite Italy, but he was an idealist.) It was only after the taking of Central Italy in 1860 that unification appeared conceivable. However Cavour was prompted into action by Garabaldi's actions in the south, the result was a "kingdom of Italy. Cavour died in 1861 so he did not live to see the final unification of Italy when Venetia and Rome were added in 1866 and 1870, but he did play an important role in Italy's unification. In conclusion to call him the architect of modern Italy would be too extreme as without Garabaldi's actions in the south it is doubtful whether he would have created the kingdom. Cavour can be viewed as the architect of Italy, an opportunist or even a Piedmontese expansionist. The contribution that Cavour made is still debated over as knew evidence is examined, but I believe that the view of Arthur Whyte is too biased as without the contribution made be others the unification of Italy may not have occurred. ...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. Who was more responsible for the success of Italian Unification up to 1861? Cavour, ...

    This is the limit to the king's involvement as Cavour then operates as the negotiator. "Perhaps because It was generally believed that he alone had defied the Austrians and maintained the constitution in 1849 the king has been given a place with the other "Heroes".

  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. "Mussolini was an all powerful dictator" - How accurate is this statement?

    This situation was in favour of Mussolini because a weaker party meant that Mussolini would be stronger. WAS NOT POWERFUL Italy still remained officially a constitutional monarchy, and was far more liberal than other totalitarian states at the time like Russia or Germany Constitutionally Mussolini was not the highest ranked person in Italy.

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

    Additionally, the idea of Garibaldi being the shaper of a new Italy instead of Cavour was too much for him to take. Luckily Garibaldi recognised his own loyalty to Victor Emmanuel and Piedmont; and Italy, with the exception of Rome and Venetia, was now united.

  1. Facist Italy by John Whittam - review

    Mussolini deals with socialism by means of violence. Terror tactics were more effective than argument and persuasion in dealing with opponents and far less time consuming. By 1922 he had a quarter of two million members. Vast majority were young men who were unhappy soldiers. "Their specific beliefs and aims were less important than their loyal support for the new movement and its leader Benito Mussolini".

  2. Fascist Italy

    He began indoctrinating the Italian people from childhood by interfering with history textbooks and rewriting the curriculum to promote his party. Portraits of Mussolini hung in each classroom; children were presented with a copy of Mussolini's biography, which taught them to believe what Emile Henroit said of him, 'The great

  1. Bismarck up until 1861.

    He is described as usually wearing a heavy belt to support 2 pistols and a heavy duelling sword. During his time at Gottingen University he fought 25 duels, won all and was only injured once. He wasted a lot of time and money drinking and eating too much.

  2. How far do you agree that Cavour made the most significant contribution to Italian ...

    The Red-Shirts took Sicily and he hailed himself Dictator of the island. It will not suffice to give all the credit for these revolutionary movements to Garibaldi, the soldier, however he played contributory role and without Garibaldi, Cavour?s significance would have been diminished.

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