Why did the early revolutions fail to unite Italy?

by rosielorien (student)

Between 1820 and 1831 there were a series of revolutions that tried to unite Italy but to no avail. Some of which were organised by the secret societies of the time; the Carbonari among others. The Carbonari played a main part in two of the early revolutions, Piedmont and Naples. The revolutions achieved very little in the long term, in Piedmont, Naples and the Papal States, reactionary governments with the help of Austrian Military forces kept a strong hold over their respective states. Some revolutions were successful in overthrowing their Kings and rulers for a short amount of time but this was more due to the ruler’s cowardice than the revolutionaries themselves.

As previously stated there were a number of reasons that the Italian States didn’t manage to overthrow their state rulers. One of these was because of the lack of a clear aim. In the revolution of 1820 in Naples, the Carbonari took control. The Carbonari was characterised in to two main policies; opposition to feudalism and support for constitutional and administrative governments. The Carbonari were much more moderate than other secret societies and wanted to include everyone. They even used people in high power to help them with their revolts! However, the problem with the Carbonari was that the members of the secret societies were not finely selected. Anyone with a dream of a constitutional government was welcomed and therefore people had different ideas and motives for revolting.

Piedmont was the other state that saw revolution erupt in 1820.it would remain an absolute monarchy and King Victor Emmanuel I would keep the old constitution in force from 1770, again the Carbonari lead the over throw but didn’t have a clear aim or plan. They didn’t plan for when Victor Emmanuel abdicated the throne and, although this revolution was successful for a month in the end the liberals were defeated by Austrian troops.

This is a preview of the whole essay

One of the main reasons that the rebels failed to over throw the ruler of state was that Austria’s power and military was too strong and the were waiting to intervene at any point they could. There were a number of occasions that Austrian troops moved in or helped out. In Naples in 1820 revolutionaries rebelled against the churches power of censorship and because freedom of speech was made impossible. In July 1820, King Ferdinand agreed to meet the rebels demands for a constitutional government, limiting the Kings power and abolishing many noble privileges. For sometime it looked as though the uprising had been a success – a new government was appointed and the Carbonari gained many new recruits. Metternich, the Austrian Chancellor at the time, was concerned about these uprisings and invited King Ferdinand to the meeting in Laibach. Here Ferdinand told of the fact that he had been forced to grant a constitution and asked Austria to help him regain his absolute rule. Metternich gladly agreed and in March 1821, he sent Austrian troops in to Naples where they savagely took back the rule and dashed the constitutional monarchy down.

Another example of the power of Austria was in Piedmont. After the news of Naples reached the liberals in Piedmont a revolutionary government run by the Carbonari was set up in the town of Alessandria. An army mutiny in Turin force Emmanuel to abdicate. Charles Albert took charge of the liberals but when Emmanuel’s brother, Charles Felix, returned to Turin, he issued a statement denouncing Charles Albert as a rebel and refused to accept the constitutional government. Charles Felix then appealed to Metternich for aid who then sent Austrian troops in to defeat the liberals (which they did) and until 1823 Piedmont was occupied by the Austrian military.

Similar uprisings took place in the Papal States organised by people resentful of the Churches oppressive rule. The government of the Italian Provinces was formed in Bologna in 1831 but once more the force of the Austrian army was too much for the rebels and moved in to the Papal States and defeated the rebels. From then on minor uprisings were viciously supressed by Metternich’s army leading to more unsuccessful revolutions for the liberals.

Most of the rebellions that took place were not lead by a clear leader and had a lack of organisation, this made it hard for people to know what to do and where to rebel. A prime example of this is Piedmont. The rebels started off being lead by the Carbonari which had gained many new members and was one of the larger secret societies. After Victor Emmanuel abdicated the throne, the Liberals turned to Charles Albert, second in line for the throne, who had successfully appointed a new government. The main problem was that Charles Albert wasn’t first in line for the throne; this made things difficult when Charles Felix, the rightful heir, returned to Piedmont and branded Charles Albert a rebel. This forced Albert to flee the city and left the liberals fighting for a constitution on their own without a leader.

In Naples, the news of a revolution in Spain catalysed a revolution lead by a Priest and supported by one hundred junior officers and soldiers from the cavalry. Thirty Carbonari members advanced on the town of Avellino and a widespread uprising took place. General Guglielmo Pepe led more infantry and two cavalry regiments to join the Carbonari, showing that more than one person thought they were leading the revolution and that there was no clear leader for the people of Piedmont to follow.

In the revolutions of Modena and Parma, the uprisings were lead by a university professors’ son, named Edward Misely. He showed his plans to Duke Francis IV and was betrayed and arrested. The rebels still took over the city of Modena without a leader and set up a provisional government. Without a leader the revolutionaries had little time to organise before Francis came back in to the state and in the end, strong forces were taken by the Duke to stamp out the ‘flame of rebellion’ amongst the people.

For many revolutions there was a clear lack of outside and popular support. None of the revolts constituted a national uprising but were regionally based instead. There was no communication between revolts in separate states. The revolutionary government in Bologna failed to assist Modena when they needed help. This was partly because the ambitions of the liberals and rebels were limited by their localism. As far as popular support goes, the revolutions only really consisted of middle class citizens of each state and were often lead by members of the middle class secret societies. Peasants and commoners were stopped from taking part in the revolts because revolutionaries were worried that they’d take over the new constitutional government and therefore effectively rule the state. This was different in Sicily; the revolution was lead by the workers of Palmero to get independence from Naples and King Ferdinand. Agricultural prices had fallen so the Sicilian peasants (of which there were many), were becoming more and more in debt. Riots started to break out amongst them and could’ve lead to a revolution on a larger scale. However, the peasants of the Italian states didn’t take part in the revolutions because they didn’t mind what sort of governing body had charge over them and their state, as long as they had enough food to eat and a roof over their heads.

The revolutions also lacked outside support from other countries to counter act the threat of Austria and Her military forces. Misely had hoped for support from the French King, Louis Philippe who had just been brought to power by a similar liberal revolution. He very quickly told the Italian revolutionaries that it was no business or responsibility of his to interfere with other countries affairs. Throughout the rest of Italy a policy of non intervention was adopted by all other States of Italy who argued that it was not in their own interest to fight for the cause of other Italians. And so, without the support of outside forces, the Italian states and revolutionaries had no chance of standing up to the Austrian Military.

In conclusion, the revolutionaries had failed themselves because of a lack of aim, a clear leader, support and the fact that the Austrian army was just too strong. Italian nationalists could learn a great deal from the mistakes of their predecessors; to be more prepared, to have a clear and powerful leader and to have a military force strong enough to stand up to the Austrians. But, had early revolutions of Italy lead to a new and unified Italy in the long run? Or was Italy to stay merely a geographical expression?

Rosie Johnson JK