Cavour is not so much the architect of unification, but a politician reacting to events as they unfolded? how far do you agree

Question 1

Agree- Treaty of Villafranca 1859

Answer 1

• Cavour was excluded from the treaty of Villafranca, the peace agreement following the 2nd war of Italian independence, after France and Austria suffered losses of 17,000 and 23,000 troops respectively. Cavour’s lack of involvement in the war made him appear weak, an ‘architect of unification’ would have put forward his soldiers to be more involved in the war.
• Cavour resigned out of anger and therefore wasn’t present at the treaty of Zurich which formally ended the war; his lack of involvement and the fact that France ceded Lombardy to Piedmont suggest Cavour was not instrumental in unification, and instead sat back and watched as France replaced Austrian dominance with their own.
• He knew votes could be fixed with corruption, bullying and intimidation, suggesting that using the plebiscites organised by the national society was not to achieve democratic unification, but to unify the north of italy no matter what, even if it meant corruption. He was fulfilling a role of self determination favoured by the British just for International recognition

Question 2

Agree- Garibaldis southern expedition

Answer 2

• Cavour was against Garibaldi’s expedition of the 1000 when they left from Genoa to Naples in May 1860, as he was massively against unification with the south because of how backwards and poor they were in comparison.
• he gave Garibaldi no official Piedmontese support and didn’t even believe in him being successful because his weapons were poor and he only had 1200 men
• He sent an army of men down to Naples to stop Garibaldi before he entered the Papal States and upset the pope with his 60,000 men
• Yet at the Teano meeting Cavour was very happy to take the south from Garibaldi.
• This is perhaps the greatest example of pragmatism; annexing the south because of how popular Garibaldi had become, and the threat he posed when he marched towards the Papal States.

Question 3

Disagree- Domestic political development in the 1850s

Answer 3

• January 1855; Cavour appoints himself PM, foreign minister and finance minister, allowing him extensive control to prove Piedmont as a stable government, if undemocratic, that he could grow to become a great power Among Europe. Encouraging French investment would increase piedmonts growth and capability to annex the rest of Italy; suggesting he had a plan for all the power that he gave himself.
• Cavour ended the connubio and sacked rattazzi to keep the agitated right wing stable, as well as ending attacks on the church to keep religion peace. He recognised the importance of stability and manifested it himself to ensure Piedmont was capable of leading unity.

Question 4

Disagree- Diplomatic and economical developments

Answer 4

• Cavour furthered the unification of the North by building Piedmont as the economic centre of the potential italy. He introduced free trade agreements with Belgium, France and Britain, encouraged investment from French banker Rothschild, especially for the Cenis tunnel, trade increased 300% and there were train links between Genoa, Milan (819Km by 1855). This again shows proactiveness of Cavour to develop piedmont, allowing them the strength to go on and incorporate other states.
• Cavour organised secret plombieres meeting with Napoleon in July 1858 to gain their support in removing Austrian control, the biggest impediment to unification in the past 20 years, showing Cavour was doing what he could to remove barriers to unification
• -Cavour formed the secret alliance with France to gain an army of 200,000 troops, in the hope of ridding Austria from Venetia and Lombardy so Piedmont could be expanded
• He gave up Nice and Savoy and the terms seemed to be heavily in Napoleons favour, suggesting a lack of care for other states
• The Bourbon rule in the south was to be unchanged as to not upset the Russian Tsar; showing a level of apathy for the south by this stage

Question 5

Judgement/ line of argument

Answer 5

Cavour could be regarded as an architect of unification in the short term between 1851-58 in the NORTH of Italy because he was clearly proactive in preparing Piedmont to be a political, social and economic hub, involving them in wider European affairs. In the long term he changes to more reactionary measures in terms of unification of the whole kingdom, because he was forced to invade the Papal States to stop garibaldi upsetting the pope and risking a war with France. He also accepted plebiscites in the Papal States due to pressure from GB.

Question 6

Disagree- Crimean war 1854-56

Answer 6

• Cavour involved Piedmonts army in Crimea between 1854-56 out of his own choice
• His involvement saw him gain favour and sympathy from foreign powers, notably GB who aided Garibaldi in the ‘gunboat diplomacy’ during his crossing of the Calabria straights
• gained a seat among the great powers of Europe and. Brough the Italian question to the forefront of European discussion
• 15,000 troops to help the French and British gained him a seat at the congress of Paris in 1856. It was this involvement by Cavour that brought the Italian question to the forefront of European discussion, which clearly came as a result of Cavour’s doing, proving him to be proactive instead of pragmatic in this instance.

Question 7

Criteria

Answer 7

Geographical unification- Architect of northern unification In the short term, reacts to events in the long term which force him to include the south.