WHY DID THE REVOLUTIONS OF 1848 -1849 IN ITALY FAIL? The failures of the 1848 - 1849 revolutions in Italy failed to achieve anything because Italy was divided and each of the revolutions had different aims. Italy was separated into separate states and they all wanted different things to happen, most of the states did not want a money to run them instead they wanted a republic. The desertion of the Pope in the revolution had most of the Catholic supporters of the revolution. None of the states in Italy agreed on anything about from one thing - getting Austria out of Lombardy and Venetia.
“To what extent was the unification of Italy due to the weakness of Austria?” Throughout Europe between 1815 and 1848 swept feelings of nationalism and a desire for unification, including the states collectively known as Italy. This lack of identity was underlined when Count Metternich said “Italy is just a geographical expression.” Nationalism promoted the belief in one language, one culture and the pride in one’s identity. Before unification, life in Italy was frustrating for those who wanted unification. The North and the South states were economically different; the pope influenced the central states. Nevertheless, the process began from 1861 and by 1871 boundaries had been settled.
There was a domino effect after this initially desire:Bavaria wanted Bohemia lands, the King of France sought the Austrian Netherlands, and the Spanish longed for the Austrian territories in Italy. As all of this came about so soon the allies of Austria (Britain, Holland, and Russia) were getting wary of the country. This came to the end of the War of the Spanish
There was a massive divide in the North from the South. The North had an industrial revolution in the late nineteenth century, although Italy’s industrial development was always going to be limited, as they did not have enough key resources such as iron and coal. The poorer side of Italy, the South, was full of peasants and no industrialisation, therefore the South suffered from a bad economy and poor living conditions. In the South, 0.01% of the population owned 50% of the land. That agricultural industry in the South was so corrupt that farmers gained no profit from their livestock and crops, therefore was inefficient and moving backwards.
Because the old ruling house of the Hapsburgs had acquired so much land, the people were diverse and not unified. The Hapsburgs did not acknowledge liberal ideas and banned the talk of them. They also disregarded nationalist thoughts. This only increased the Empires weakness and when the new Ruler Francis Joseph came into power he attempted to fix it, but he neglected the majority of his Empire only granting reforms for the Austrians. Due to discontent and rebels The Hapsburg Empire was separated and the Hungarians gained their own state.
Cavour did many things and has many contributions to Italy. But the main aim was not unified Italy. He hoped that Piedmont would be strong enough to assume the leadership of Italy in the event of another wars with Austria, France and the House of Hapsburg of Austria. Many facts and evidence could see that Cavour did not want a unified Italy. He tried to prevent it and the "unification" was only Piedmontization (tried to extent the influence of Piedmont).
Spoken communication was a small factor, as only a certain population had a large reason to speak it in the first place; lowly or poor people had little say in political matter making their language less relevant. However, the problems with allegiance was very detrimental to the populace’s morale, people were reluctant to work hard for a new order they did not feel a part of, which would later lead to bread riots and aggressiveness to the new Italy, making the unification weak. Further political hiccups came from the
For example the unification of Italy caused tension as the north and south were two different cultures. At this time in Italy language barriers were effecting how unified the country was, as only 2.5% of the population used the Italian language whereas the rest spoke with a regional dialect, therefore it made the liberal state seem weak as there is no sufficient communication happening between the country, because if all people are speaking in a different language everyone will feel excluded and not as “one” like the process of unification is intended. Also the problem of conflicting laws from the different provinces make the liberal state weak as they appear unorganised because there is no proper justice system in place that applies to the whole country. In addition many of the people resented the idea of the north and south being united which furthered the weakness of the Liberal State as there was resistance and little enthusiasm from among the people therefore making the state look weak as they weren’t a unified country as the people disliked the idea. The other major difference between the North and South that caused a weakness for the liberal State was the economy and agriculture.
The fact that Italy had a very limited industry and lack of an efficient infrastructure also meant that hardly any money was being created to pump into the economy to keep it running or pay for these debts. This subsequently led to high inflation, increased taxes and no money being spent on education or public services. Another major economic problem under the liberal regime was the north south divide. The fact that Italy’s economy was poor was only made worse by the north south divide in the country; this divide was to do with agriculture, industrial development and general standards of living. All of which the north fared in much better than the south.
Firstly there was lack of mass support since the Frankfurt Parliament was mostly made out of middle class people, with only one peasant and no workers. Therefore this overwhelming majority did not represent the people who were about 70% peasants. According thus to the demographics a revolution would fail because it would lack manpower, and instead of asking help from the peasants, the revolutionaries preferred to ask help from the rulers. Frankfurt Parliament has also been accused of wasting valuable time. Marxists argue that if the Parliamentarians, who were neither extreme nor violent, had taken faster action, Wilhelm IV and the other rulers would be unable to refuse the new state and its constitution.