How far was Austrian opposition main reason for slow progress of unification 1830-48

Question 1

Introduction

Answer 1

Both external pressure from Austria and internal problems prohibited the progress of unification. For most of the period it was the Austrian strength undermining the unification with the aid of domestic socio-economic problems, but by the 1848 revolutions, it was nationalism and politics that failed to capitalise on the weaker Austrians who were fighting Piedmont that stopped unification coming about sooner. Austria at its weakest was still stronger than nationalism at its strongest

Question 2

factor 1- Agree with statement- Austrian opposition

Answer 2

-The Austrian emperor had relatives in every state of Italy, as part of the civil services, police, politics etc, as well as a spy network that was widespread across the peninsula, allowing Austria political dominance and access to information on any uprisings as soon as they were spotted.
-Metternich famously said “Italian affairs do not exist” and he was right when it came to their insignificance compared to the control of Austria
-the Austrians protected the reactionary pope in the Papal States who refused to modernise
- In 1830-32 revolutions, 5/6 state rulers cried for Austrian help during revolts, eg Duchess Marie Louise in parma (postal convention)
-Metternich’s army was well organised and equipped, able to stop all early revolutions in Bologna, even after some political advances including reformed finance and legal systems. By 1848 revoltions, Austria retained its dominance by beating CA at Custozza in July 1848, and Novara in march 1849
^Austria had a monopoly of control and influence throughout the period, and its no coincidence that the only strong contenders to them was in Piedmont under the King, where there was Austrian absence.

Question 3

factor 2- Divided politics

Answer 3

-Diplomats like Mazzini, Gioberti and Azeglio had the potential to be a unifying factor by the 1848 revolutions, but their aims for a unified Italy differed regarding how it should come about. Mazzini was a devote nationalist who wanted a revolution from below, believing in the Risorgimento, whilst Azeglio believed those already in a position of power should aid CA in leading a unified country, in a revolution from above that doesn’t include the pope. Gioberti believed in Neo-guelphism.
- The new pope in 1846 was the one man who could unite all of italy (90% catholics) however despite early support for CA, his papal allocution showed a distinct lack of support, saying the war didn’t have his blessing against Austria and calling CA the aggressor.
The aims of all these groups, like Mazzini’s 50,000 strong young Italy, were too different and they all refused to work together to unite the country, instead choosing to revolt on small, disorganised scales that only made it easier for Metternich to divide and conquer Italy. Italy still lacked a diplomat who would include and encourage a nationwide revolution against the Austrians, involving peasants and upper classes. In the short term the Austrians were able to stop any small revolts, but in the long term when Austria were weakened and Italy had the chance to fight for it’s own freedom, there was still no decisive mass movement to take over from Austria.

Question 4

Factor 3) socio-economic problems in the south

Answer 4

• socio-economic issues that grasped the majority of the country, most obviously in Sicily and Naples, where life was poor, pre industrial and life expectancy was only 24.
• Lazzaroni too concerned with self-preservation and were largely apathetic towards wider democracy when they were struggling to survive themselves
• When the south did revolt, as they did to start the 1848 revolutions in Palermo following poor harvests and further cholera outbreaks, it was because of hunger, not the need for political change.
• Even in 1848, Sicily and Naples were fighting for independence from each other, they are too politically apathetic to revolt for unification.
• 90% of the kingdom was catholic and received backwards and reactionary teaching from the pope that had no hope of inspiring desires of unification.

^the socio economic situations of the south especially meant that nationalism was almost impossible to translate and appeal to the masses as they had no interest in revolution. if without the severity of social economic problems, Austria’’s military were too dominant and would likely have been able to prevent any further demands for unification.

Question 5

Conclusion

Answer 5

There was more than one barrier that prohibited Italy from uniting throughout 1830-1848, but Austrian dominance was the most prolific throughout the whole period, and even when their strength did decline, most Italians lacked the understanding and leadership from people like Mazzini to really carry out the Risorgimento and lead a national revolution from below. By the end of the period, the divided politics and failed nationalism become more significant because they had the chance to exile Austria, but weren’t pragmatic enough, allowing Austria to reitterate their dominance. Austria consistently able to divide and conquer

Question 6

Weakness of nationalism

Answer 6

Facts

• secret societies; carbonari had 60,000 members in Naples who wanted a constitution, however their existence in Naples where hunger-politics was a bigger concern reduced their successes
• spillo Negro in the Papa; states was anti-austrian and liberal (very small scale)
• Young Italy formed by Mazzini in 1830 had 50,000 supporters, wanted democracy and a republic, only appealing to some middle and upper classes. Their revolts were too small and lacked support eg the Bandiero brothers in 1844 had no more than 19 troops, all were arrested or executed. another 12 were executed for trying to start an uprising in the Piedmont army (mutiny stopped by CA)
• cultural influences of the Risorgimento had very limited impact due to their exclusive upper class audiences, eg Verdi delivered anti-austrian messages through Austria and Leopardi glorified liberty in his works.
• Failed revolutions in Parma/ Modena led by Enrico Misley, and again in the Papal States where the Austrians moved in to protect the pope.

Nationalist movements were far too scattered to have any meaningful significance, and within nationalism there were internal divides regarding what each group was fighting for. The social background of their support was very limited which limited their appeal to the masses, and their failure was linked to Austrian strength because it made it easy for Austria to divide and conquer.