However, the argument that carries the greatest weight is that the individuals who led these revolts and were at the forefront of the revolutionary movements were not united themselves in how they wanted Italy to unite. Austria clearly had a central role in putting down many of the revolts and so played an important role in both the failure of the 1820-21 revolutions and the ones that took place between 1848-49. Prior to 1820, Italy was unsettled and highly divided with nationalists, liberals and extremists amongst the masses. As the hostility in Italy increased under Austrian rule, secret societies emerged such as ‘The Carbonari’ – which was particularly popular in Southern Italy. By 1815, the aims of these secret societies changed in the direction of driving out the Austrians and restoring old Monarchs.
January 2011 How far do you agree that the revolutions of 1848–49 in Italy were caused primarily by economic grievances? To what extent was French involvement an obstacle to the unification of Italy in the years 1848–70? June 2011 To what extent had the provisions of the Vienna Settlement (1815) relating to Italy been overthrown by 1849? How significant was Victor Emmanuel in promoting Italian unification in the years 1850–70? January 2012 Why did Piedmont become, and remain, the driving force towards closer Italian unity in the years 1848–61?
Liberal Italy faced many problems in this period if it was from corruption in the government or catholic hostility. This showed that the government ( king ) was weak as political and religious opponents were ankle to challenge. The king had most of the power and was able to pass whatever law he wanted no matter how ridicules it was, Italy AT this time was meant to be liberated but with a king being able to do what he wanted it sounds very much like a dictatorship. The government also had substantial amounts of power but the problem was that they were elected by the king. This mean that the government mainly consisted of people with similar ideology as the king.
How Far Does the North South Divide in Italy Explain the Weakness of the Liberal State in 1896-1914 (30 marks) Italy was fully unified in 1870 this was just 40 years before the first world war. The Liberal State governing it was weak for a number of reason such as several opposition groups, the North South and problems from the unification. However the most important reason was the political system itself and the actions of the liberals including the foreign policy and corruption. At the time Italy used a proportional representation (PR) voting system. This meant that every vote counted and the parliament was proportional to them.
To what extent was Italy politically and economically united, 1896-1914? Despite official unification in 1870, Italy still remained somewhat divided, especially so under the Liberal government, 1896-1914. Attempted reforms to ease political and economic divisions had limited success, such as the voting reform of 1912 to introduce universal male suffrage (which increased the popularity of socialism) and modernisation in industries such as steel and hydroelectricity (which consequently widened the North/South divide). Italy still remained partially divided, which prevented total unification, both politically and economically. Firstly, Italy was only partially politically united, namely due to a number of liberal policies.
Hence Italy was economically and politically fragmented. Therefore , in the years 1896-1814, Italy was disunited to a great extent, both economically and politically. Italy was clearly disunited politically in the years 1896-1914, which we see from the various different groups/ parties that were formed during the time to oppose Giolitti’s government. During these years, many different groups spread in Italy like the socialists, anarchists and Marxists. All these groups ultimately meant more hard work for Giolitti, as they all opposed the liberal state and the government of Giolliti and hence wanted reform.
To what extent had the pressing political problems of the 1800s been solved by 1914? After Italy’s unification in 1870 there were immediate political issues facing the new united Italy that needed to be addressed. The government that was formed was incredibly unorganized and not many people knew who was in charge at times, not only this but many of the politicians in power were incredibly corrupt and would happily take bribes, launder money and other underhanded, dishonest actions which would have been frowned upon had people known. The new united Italy was a liberal state which was actually one of the first of its kind, the Liberals had managed to oust the ruling families of each individual state, the old aristocracy and most importantly the pope. However this “liberal” Italy was actually more conservative at heart, the country was a monarchy and not a republic.
The extent of unity within Italy varied immensely between 1896 and 1914, for example in the late 1890’s the North-South divide was undeniable and acted as the socio-economic and political split that separated the country entirely and questioned any possible solidarity within Italy. Unfortunately Italy’s government was equally unstable during this time which is evident as she had 20 different Prime Ministers leading the country between 1896 and 1914; this suggested that no successful decisions could be made. Although, in 1903 this changed with the introduction of Giovanni Giolitti who brought in many reforms that made the Liberal institutions far more secure through changes such as the introduction of real wages which in turn boosted the economy. Personally, I feel that despite Italy’s political and economic growth between 1896 and 1914 the extent of the unification remained questionable, therefore in the following essay I will be examining the key features of this time period to come to a reliable conclusion. Italy was not a democracy in 1896 so the right to vote was held only by the rich due to the parliament being dominated by wealthy landowners, businessmen and professional classes; this resulted in the masses having no say in the Italian government and suggested a low level of equality which consequently led to mass levels of unrest.
Rome was in the prime of the Pax Romana, however the nation had extreme economic issues and was having internal and external battles. The Roman Empire had so greatly grown that their economy was not yet advanced to support the whole the empire. Multiple Germanic tribes tried to conquer land from the Roman Empire. Therefore the armies had to be split up to take on
In 1815 Italy was the country marked by the centuries of plundering attacks by foreign states, and then, in XVIII and early XIX century, by French and Austrian infulences. There was a long way separating the divided Italian states from unification of 1871. What citizens of those states needed were the strong political figures that would lead them to the consolidation. I'd like to concetrate on two of them - Giuseppe Garibaldi and Camillo Cavour. Two marginally different personalities, two different ideas of how should the future of Italy look like, and, therefore, different ways they followed to make those ideas come true.