How far do you agree that the failures of the revolutions 1830 and 1848-49 was primarily due to lack of popular support
POPULAR SUPPORT
- Revolutionary opposition groups, forced by repressive policies to organise in secret, failed to establish enough popular
support before the outbreaks to sustain the revolutionary momentum
- Middle-class revolutionary leaders failed to harness the potential of the ‘ordinary’ people; the fear of popular radicalism
and revolution ‘from below’ undermined the 1830–31 revolutions
- The labouring classes, particularly the peasantry, often failed to support the revolutions due to suspicion of the liberal
middle-classes and in some cases welcomed back traditional rulers, e.g. the Papal States
- Mazzini - Although Italian nationalism championed unity it failed to inspire the mass support required to challenge the
restored order in Italy, e.g. Mazzini’s Young Italy movement failed to inspire much of the peasantry in 1848–49 and
acknowledge their economic misfortunes which hindered support
- Peasantry unwilling to support inspired uprisings due to its narrow social base that didn’t provide any improvements for
their economic situation
- Pope - During the 1848–49 revolutions, the Papal Allocution subverted Charles Albert’s attempt to harness popular
nationalism in the First Italian War ofIndependence - Durangos attempt to go to war with Austria was unpopular and
helped lead to the failure
- Many of 1848–49 revolutions did have an element of popular support, e.g. peasant support for Sicilian independence,
growing enthusiasm for Charles Albert in Piedmont, support for Mazzini in Rome and Manin in Venice
LOCALISED and AIMS
- Most of the revolutionary outbreaks were localised with local aims, e.g. Modena refused help to the Papal States
1830–32, Mazzinian revolutions 1848–48
- As a result of the spontaneous outbreak of revolution in both 1830 and 1848, the revolutionaries were often disorganised,
ill-prepared and generally ill-equipped
- Lacked a shared view on how and what unified Italy should be
- Differing aims -began, not in the cause of national unity, but over local issues (e.g. Piedmont - the desire to annex
Lombardy and remove Austrian troops; Lombardy - tobacco monopoly; Venetia - Manin's captivity; Sicily - hatred of
Neapolitan oppression (in fact the cause for revolution in Sicily was about trying to get independence from another Italian
state rather than unification etc.).
- Cooperation between states generally borne out of necessity (Lombardian and Venetian troops helping Charles Albert
through fear of having to face Austria alone)
- Often given in an atmosphere of mutual suspicion (e.g. Charles Albert and the troops he led but distrusted from Naples
and the Papal States).
- Little significant support for the Risorgimento
- In too many cases, once the revolutionaries had overthrown their absolute monarch/Austrian control, they could not agree
on what they wanted to replace it with (e.g. - in Lombardy there was argument over whether to fight for union with
Piedmont or an independent Lombard Republic; -in Sicily a National Guard was formed by the leaders of the new
Constitution to make sure the more radical revolutionaries did not get out of control)
INTERNATIONAL POWERS
- Lack of foreign support e.g. failure of the French to support the 1830–32 revolutions and their active support for the return
of the Papacy in 1848 (despite d’Azeglio’s writings’)
- At no stage during any of the revolutions was help for the cause offered by any international power.
- In fact the French defeated the Roman Republic placing 20,000 troops in Rome to crush the revolution
- Austria -The use of military force in support of the traditional rulers by Austria, primarily Austrian troops which restored old
refractory ruler
- Virtually all the revolutions were only really allowed to gain momentum due to Austrian weakness - mainly following the fall
of Metternich in March 1848 (also see the inability of Austrian troops to cross the Papal states to reach the Neapolitan
rebels mentioned above).
- The resounding defeats of Charles Albert's armies at both Custoza (July 1848) and Novara (March 1849) bear witness to
the fact that Italian forces were simply not equipped to deal with the might of the Austrian Empire and her armies.
- Austria were far too strong for Piedmont and its Italian allies to challenge
- Troppau protocol ensured the they lacked necessary foreign support as powers had the right to intervene to crush any
revolution and give obligatory assistance to rulers
- Troppau Protocol obliging these powers to give assistance to any ruler in Europe being threatened by revolution.
- Following this agreement, Austrian troops played the major role in crushing the outbreak of revolutions
- After crushing each revolt, Metternich ensured that tough reactionary rule was restored.
How far do you agree the strength of Austrian opposition was the principal reason for the slow progress made in the years
1830-1848?
AUSTRIAN OPPOSITION
- Troppau protocol allowed Austria to intervene - Austria restored refractory ruler after revolution
POPULAR SUPPORT
- Revolutionary opposition groups, forced by repressive policies to organise in secret, failed to establish enough popular
support before the outbreaks to sustain the revolutionary momentum
- Middle-class revolutionary leaders failed to harness the potential of the ‘ordinary’ people; the fear of popular radicalism
and revolution ‘from below’ undermined the 1830–31 revolutions
- The labouring classes, particularly the peasantry, often failed to support the revolutions due to suspicion of the liberal
middle-classes and in some cases welcomed back traditional rulers, e.g. the Papal States
- Mazzini - Although Italian nationalism championed unity it failed to inspire the mass support required to challenge the
restored order in Italy, e.g. Mazzini’s Young Italy movement failed to inspire much of the peasantry in 1848–49 and
acknowledge their economic misfortunes which hindered support
- Peasantry unwilling to support inspired uprisings due to its narrow social base that didn’t provide any improvements for
their economic situation
- Pope - During the 1848–49 revolutions, the Papal Allocution subverted Charles Albert’s attempt to harness popular
nationalism in the First Italian War ofIndependence - Durangos attempt to go to war with Austria was unpopular and
helped lead to the failure
- Many of 1848–49 revolutions did have an element of popular support, e.g. peasant support for Sicilian independence,
growing enthusiasm for Charles Albert in Piedmont, support for Mazzini in Rome and Manin in Venice
LOCALISED and AIMS
- Most of the revolutionary outbreaks were localised with local aims, e.g. Modena refused help to the Papal States
1830–32, Mazzinian revolutions 1848–48
- As a result of the spontaneous outbreak of revolution in both 1830 and 1848, the revolutionaries were often disorganised,
ill-prepared and generally ill-equipped
- Lacked a shared view on how and what unified Italy should be
- Differing aims -began, not in the cause of national unity, but over local issues (e.g. Piedmont - the desire to annex
Lombardy and remove Austrian troops; Lombardy - tobacco monopoly; Venetia - Manin's captivity; Sicily - hatred of
Neapolitan oppression (in fact the cause for revolution in Sicily was about trying to get independence from another Italian
state rather than unification etc.).
- Cooperation between states generally borne out of necessity (Lombardian and Venetian troops helping Charles Albert
through fear of having to face Austria alone)
- Often given in an atmosphere of mutual suspicion (e.g. Charles Albert and the troops he led but distrusted from Naples
and the Papal States).
- Little significant support for the Risorgimento
- In too many cases, once the revolutionaries had overthrown their absolute monarch/Austrian control, they could not agree
on what they wanted to replace it with (e.g. - in Lombardy there was argument over whether to fight for union with
Piedmont or an independent Lombard Republic; -in Sicily a National Guard was formed by the leaders of the new
Constitution to make sure the more radical revolutionaries did not get out of control)
INTERNATIONAL POWERS
- Lack of foreign support e.g. failure of the French to support the 1830–32 revolutions and their active support for the return
of the Papacy in 1848 (despite d’Azeglio’s writings’)
- At no stage during any of the revolutions was help for the cause offered by any international power.
- In fact the French defeated the Roman Republic placing 20,000 troops in Rome to crush the revolution
- Austria -The use of military force in support of the traditional rulers by Austria, primarily Austrian troops which restored old
refractory ruler
- Virtually all the revolutions were only really allowed to gain momentum due to Austrian weakness - mainly following the fall
of Metternich in March 1848 (also see the inability of Austrian troops to cross the Papal states to reach the Neapolitan
rebels mentioned above).
- The resounding defeats of Charles Albert's armies at both Custoza (July 1848) and Novara (March 1849) bear witness to
the fact that Italian forces were simply not equipped to deal with the might of the Austrian Empire and her armies.
- Austria were far too strong for Piedmont and its Italian allies to challenge
- Troppau protocol ensured the they lacked necessary foreign support as powers had the right to intervene to crush any
revolution and give obligatory assistance to rulers
- Troppau Protocol obliging these powers to give assistance to any ruler in Europe being threatened by revolution.
- Following this agreement, Austrian troops played the major role in crushing the outbreak of revolutions
- After crushing each revolt, Metternich ensured that tough reactionary rule was restored.
How far do you agree the strength of Austrian opposition was the principal reason for the slow progress made in the years
1830-1848?
AUSTRIAN OPPOSITION
- Troppau protocol allowed Austria to intervene - Austria restored refractory ruler after revolution
