Compare & Contrast the contributions of Cavour and Garibaldi in the unification of Italy by 1871.
Cavour and Garibaldi, are two of the most recognisable figures of Italian unification, and for the cause of a united Italy, both did much good. Although their methods were greatly different, their results were similarly impressive; in comparing their influence, military, political and diplomatic avenues might be explored, with the help of examples. In terms of politicking and diplomacy, it was Cavour who took a greater lead – his work in this area was more hands-on. He set up free trade treaties with European powers, and also used the army as a means to ally himself with his contemporaries. By committing the Piedmontese to the Crimean war, Cavour enabled himself to get close to other leaders and therefore, give Piedmont a seat at the table when the spoils were being shared. In this way, he strengthened the province hugely through his politicking. It is here that his relationship with Napoleon went from strength to strength (eventually leading to the war against Austria), and this was significant. It was significant because Cavour gave Piedmont a strong footing, allying the province with the French (and others) – and this foreign support was absolutely key in establishing the base from which Italy could unify. With foreign support – as gained in the Congress of Paris, 1858, and other such meetings - Cavour could create all the machinations of a nation, and this, too, was significant in giving the people the sense of shared purpose and unity. In aligning the province with other nations, Cavour began to forge national identity; and so, too, did Garibaldi with his subversive outpourings, as his passion struck a chord with citizens. Garibaldi was unimpressed with the notion that Nice and Savoy be handed back to France, and this set the tone for a tempestuous relationship with authority. He and Cavour did clash, and rarely saw eye-toe-eye; their differing approaches...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document