Risorgimento (idea)

To what extent was the unification of Italy a defeat for the spirit of Risorgimento?

One can scarcely ignore Metternich's characterization of Italy as "merely a geographical expression" when considering the state of the country in the early nineteenth century. To be sure, ideas of Italian unity go back to Dante and Machiavelli, and the validity of Metternich's assertion is doubtful even before the rise of Italian nationalism. But Italy was clearly fragmented. In 1815, there were seven sovereign states in the peninsula, and Austrian influence was strong. It is therefore remarkable that in 1861 Italy was unified, with only Rome and the Veneto remaining outside the new state. The concept of Risorgimento, or national revival, has been used to explain this achievement.

The purpose of this essay is first to explain certain aspects of the Risorgimento, and then assess to what extent the ideas of the movement were implemented or ignored in the new Italian state. I shall first discuss the ideological aspects of the movement and then consider the economic and social aspects of the Risorgimento. I shall argue that the concept of a 'spirit of Risorgimento' is problematic at least in the ideological sphere, since there was a variety of differing visions for Italian unification. I shall concentrate on two different thinkers - Giuseppe Mazzini and Cesare Balbo, and argue that the unification of Italy was at least to some extent a defeat to the ideas of both. The economic and social aspects of the ‘spirit of Risorgimento’ are perhaps easier to define. My argument here is that the unification was largely a victory for the economic and social spirit of Risorgimento, though not unambiguously so.

The Risorgimento: ideological aspects

Giuseppe Mazzini, 'the greatest prophet of the risorgimento',¹ wrote of his movement, Young Italy:

Young Italy stands for the republic and unity ... The Republic, because Italy really has no basis for a monarchy ... because if monarchy was the aim of the Italian revolution, all the encumbrances of the monarchical system would inevitably be brought with it - ... repression of the masses who alone have the strength to save us ... Unity, because without unity there can be no true nation ... Federalism would destroy at its roots the mission which Italy is destined to fulfil ... political organization ... must be one and central ...²

Thus, Mazzini aspired for a unitary, republican Italian state. This state was to be achieved by the rising of the people against the rulers, be they foreigners or Italians.³ His democratic aspirations are also reflected in his constitution for the Roman Republic, in which it is stated that "Sovereignty is by eternal right vested in the people ..."⁴. Mazzini conceived of the struggle for Italian unity primarily in moral terms. Mazzini's notion of the state was spiritual; the unification of Italy was a religious duty.⁵ Material gains were always subordinate to this, though he did consider it important that the people were convinced of the economic benefits of unification.⁶ The religious streak in his thinking ties in with the democratic one, since he believed that the will of God would be expressed through the people.⁷

One of the clearest contrasts between Mazzini's ideas and the actual unification of Italy is the role of the majority of the population. Mazzini's belief had been that the people could achieve this aim by rising up; in reality the vast majority of the population was excluded from political participation.⁸ Indeed, there was never much enthusiasm for such participation.⁹ The enthusiasm there was was not utilized by Piedmont. Even though tens of thousands of Italians went to Piedmont to show their belief in its political leadership, the Piedmontese leadership remained ambivalent about mass participation. They feared chaos.¹⁰ Thus, as Giovanni Bovio put it, the unification was achieved by "gentlemen wearing white gloves."¹¹ Indeed, even Garibaldi had not recruited peasants.¹² It should also be noted that the new Italian state hardly conformed to Mazzini's doctrine that sovereignty was vested in the people. The electorate was restricted to a small portion of the male population - in the first elections in 1861 418 696 people voted out of a total population of almost 22 million.¹³ The other point Mazzini had stressed, the creation of a unified state, was indeed achieved.¹⁴ Federalist solutions were rejected, and Piedmontese laws were imposed on the rest of the country.¹⁵

Cesare Balbo offers a good example of the differences to be found among Risorgimento thinkers, since he is in many ways the opposite of Mazzini. Balbo called the idea of a unified Italian state "childish, no more than a fantasy of rhetorical schoolboys".¹⁶ He thought a federalist solution was the right one, since "Confederations are the type of constitution most suited to Italy's nature and history ..."¹⁷ He totally rejected the idea that the people might play an important role in unification, putting his faith in the rulers and upper classes. He thought democracy was outdated.¹⁸

Balbo's ideas were not fully implemented in the unification, since a federalist model was not adopted. However, it is clear that the people did not have a major role to play in the process of unification. Indeed, the whole Risorgimento is often seen as a movement of a small elite.¹⁹ In this sense, the unification of Italy was not a defeat for the spirit of Risorgimento as understood by Balbo.

The Risorgimento: economic and social aspects

There is also an economic and social aspect to the Risorgimento in addition to the ideological one. As in other parts of Europe, industrialization and industrial capitalism was beginning to develop in some Italian regions, albeit very slowly. This created an interest for merchants and industrialists in unification, since in the Italy of several sovereign states commerce was severely restricted. There were numerous customs borders and high tariffs. There was also a multitude of different weights, measures and coinage systems used in various parts of the peninsula. The lack of a unified state meant that plans for railways were made and implemented by the individual states, and capital could not be raised on a large enough scale to finance, for instance, the construction of communications through the Alps.²⁰ Agricultural profits were also increasing at this time, and many landowners thought a central Italian government might provide economic protection and promote their interests abroad.²¹

There was also a growing hope that the Mediterranean might reclaim its central role in the European economy, with the Italians posed to benefit.²² The decline of the Ottoman Empire might have given the Italians the opportunity for economic dominance in the area. Plans for a Suez canal raised hopes that Italy might be able to play an important role in future trade with the east. All of these were dependent on there being a strong, unified Italian state, however.²³ It is no wonder then, that many wanted to unify and liberalize the economy of the Italian peninsula, not the least of whom was Cavour.²⁴ Many believed that a united Italy would bring immediate economic benefits, including lower taxation.²⁵

This economic aspect of the Risorgimento cannot be understood without the accompanying social transformation underway. As in other parts of Europe, the middle class was asserting itself against the power of the upper classes, and without much regard to the interests of the poorer sections of society. Economic liberalism coupled with nationalism was the ideology of the middle class, since they saw that it could be used to promote their own prosperity.²⁶

The implementation of what might be called the economic and social spirit of the Risorgimento was rather ambivalent. The economy was indeed liberalized. Internal customs barriers and tariffs were abolished, a single currency was introduced, and weights and measurements were standardized. However, this did not bring an instant increase in wealth, as many had been hoping. Many of the major cities suffered in the short term from the abolition of royal courts. They lost some of the public services and building contracts they had previously had. The bureaucracy on this level was reduced. All this perhaps meant higher efficiency and prosperity in the long term, but in the short term it meant a decrease of the wealth that had been rather artificially created. The abolishment of the tariffs also created problems, especially in Southern Italy. Southern industries had been heavily protected - for instance, some southern textile producers had had 100 per cent protection. Naturally, many southern products could not compete with cheaper goods from the north, causing economic hardship.²⁷ There was considerable discontent in the south, and the new state stationed 200 000 troops there.²⁸ Taxes were actually raised.²⁹ On the positive side - for the landowners - the liberalization of the economy enabled a rise in the prices of agricultural goods, boosting profits.³⁰

The middle classes were the beneficiaries of this policy. The Bourbon rulers of Italy had implemented policies favouring the poor rather than the middle classes, such as keeping the price of bread artificially low.³¹ However, there was discontent at the economic effects of the Risorgimento among the middle class as well.³² The growth of Italian gross domestic product in the period 1861-1876 was only 0.9 per cent at an annualized rate, and GDP per capita actually did not grow at all in this period.³³ Thus, the unification was beneficial to the middle classes in that economic policy was designed to suit their interests, but the actual effects of these policies were not as great as had been expected.

Conclusion

It seems clear even from the very limited examples I have used of Italian political thinkers of the nineteenth century that the concept of a spirit of Risorgimento is rather problematic. The visions for a future Italian state and the means to achieve it were varied and contradictory - unified or federalist, achieved by the masses or by an elite. Thus, the establishment of a unitary state was either a victory or a defeat, depending on which thinker you look at. The unification was effected by an elite, not the people, but this, too can be either a victory or a defeat. The new state was hardly democratic. The unification brought economic liberalization, but not instant wealth. Liberalization did bring benefits to the middle class, and was therefore a victory for the spirit of Risorgimento, but even the bourgeoisie were not fully content with the effects of unification.

The ambivalence of my conclusions reflects the general character of the Risorgimento. Denis Mack Smith has argued, challenging traditional Italian historiography, that the Risorgimento was not a unified movement, but rather the accumulated effects of distinct thinkers and politicians with differing motivations, which all eventually contributed to unification. The concept of a 'spirit of Risorgimento' is ambiguous, so it is natural to conclude that the answer to my question is also ambiguous. The unification of Italy was not a clear-cut victory or defeat for the 'spirit of Risorgimento'.

References

1. Mack Smith, D., Italy: A Modern History, Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press, 1959, p. 13.

2. Mazzini, Giuseppe, 'Giovine Italia' in Woolf, S.J., The Italian Risorgimento, London, Longmans, 1969, pp. 48-49.

3. Beales, D., The Risorgimento and the unification of Italy, London, George Allen & Unwin, 1971, p. 54; Woolf, S.J., A history of Italy 1700-1860: the social constraints of political change, London, Methuen & Co., 1979, p. 307.

4. Mazzini, Giuseppe, 'Constitution for the Roman Republic' in Woolf, The Italian Risorgimento, pp. 53-55.

5. Mack Smith, Italy, p. 13; Albrecht-Carrie, R., Italy from Napoleon to Mussolini, New York, Columbia University Press, 1950, p. 35.

6. Woolf, History of Italy, p. 307.

7. Albrecht-Carrie, Italy, p. 35.

8. Grew, R., 'How Success Spoiled the Risorgimento' in Salomone, A. W. (ed.), Italy from the Risorgimento to Fascism: an inquiry into the origins of the totalitarian state, Newton Abbot, David & Charles, 1971, p. 40.

9. Beales, The Risorgimento, p. 54; Thayer, J. A., 'Risorgimento Achievement and Post-Risorgimento Problems' in Salomone, Italy from the Risorgimento to Fascism, p. 91.

10. Grew, 'How Success Spoiled the Risorgimento' , pp. 40-41.

11. Thayer, 'Risorgimento Achievement and Post-Risorgimento Problems', p. 89.

12. ibid, p. 91; Mack Smith, Italy, p. 36.

13. Toniolo, G., An Economic History of Liberal Italy 1850-1918, London, Routledge, 1990, p. 51; Holt, E., Risorgimento: The Making of Italy, 1815-1870, London, Macmillan, 1970, p. 259.

14. Grew, 'How Success Spoiled the Risorgimento', p. 49.

15. ibid, p. 45; Toniolo, Economic History of Italy, p. 52; Holt, Risorgimento, p. 260.

16. Balbo, Cesare, excerpt from Delle speranze d' Italia translated in Woolf, The Italian Risorgimento, pp. 45-46.

17. ibid, p. 45; Mack Smith, D., Victor Emanuel, Cavour, and the Risorgimento, London, Oxford University Press, 1971, p. 10.

18. Woolf, The Italian Risorgimento, pp. 44-45.

19. Thayer, 'Risorgimento Achievement and Post-Risorgimento Problems', p. 91; Mack Smith, Italy, p. 36; Toniolo, Economic History of Italy, p. 48.

20. Mack Smith, D., The Making of Italy 1796-1870, London, Macmillan, 1968, pp. 8-9; Greenfield, K. R., 'Economic Ideas and Facts in the Early Period of the Risorgimento (1815-1848)' in The American Historical Review, Vol. 36, No 1. (1930), p. 34.

21. Mack Smith, Italy, p. 9.

22. ibid, p. 9. Greenfield, 'Economic Ideas', 37.

23. Mack Smith, Italy, p. 9.

24. Mack Smith, Making of Italy, p. 9; Mack Smith, Italy, p. 9; Toniolo, Economic History of Italy, pp. 44-45; Hearder, H., Cavour, London, Longman, 1994, p. 38.

25. Mack Smith, Italy, p. 49.

26. ibid, p. 36.

27. Mack Smith, Italy, pp. 49-50; Mack Smith, Victor Emanuel, Cavour, and the Risorgimento, p. 34; Toniolo, Economic History of Italy, pp. 53-55, p. 57.

28. Toniolo, Economic History of Italy, p. 49.

29. ibid, p. 34; Hughes, H. S., ‘Reinterpretations of the Aftermath of the Risorgimento’ in Salomone, Italy from the Risorgimento to Fascism, p. 29.

30. Mack Smith, Italy, p. 36.

31. ibid, p. 36.

32. Toniolo, Economic History of Italy, p. 60.

33. ibid, p. 4.

Bibliography

Printed Primary Sources

Balbo, Cesare, excerpt from Delle speranze d' Italia translated in Woolf, S.J. (ed.), The Italian Risorgimento, London, Longmans, 1969, pp. 45-46.

Mazzini, Giuseppe, 'Constitution for the Roman Republic' in Woolf, S.J., The Italian Risorgimento, London, Longmans, 1969, pp. 53-55.

Mazzini, Giuseppe, 'Giovine Italia' in Woolf, S.J., The Italian Risorgimento, London, Longmans, 1969, pp. 48-49.

Printed Secondary Sources

Albrecht-Carrie, R., Italy from Napoleon to Mussolini, New York, Columbia University Press, 1950.

Beales, D., The Risorgimento and the unification of Italy, London, George Allen & Unwin, 1971.

Greenfield, K. R., 'Economic Ideas and Facts in the Early Period of the Risorgimento (1815-1848)' in The American Historical Review, Vol. 36, No 1. (1930), pp. 31-43.

Grew, R., 'How Success Spoiled the Risorgimento' in Salomone, A. W. (ed.), Italy from the Risorgimento to Fascism: an inquiry into the origins of the totalitarian state,Newton Abbot, David & Charles, 1971, pp. 38-55.

Hearder, H., Cavour, London, Longman, 1994.

Holt, E., Risorgimento: The Making of Italy, 1815-1870, London, Macmillan, 1970.

Hughes, H. S., ‘Reinterpretations of the Aftermath of the Risorgimento’ in Salomone, A. W. (ed.), Italy from the Risorgimento to Fascism: an inquiry into the origins of the totalitarian state, Newton Abbot, David & Charles, 1971, pp. 23-34.

Mack Smith, D., Italy: A Modern History, Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press, 1959.

Mack Smith, D., The Making of Italy 1796-1870, London, Macmillan, 1968.

Mack Smith, D., Victor Emanuel, Cavour, and the Risorgimento, London, Oxford University Press, 1971.

Thayer, J. A., 'Risorgimento Achievement and Post-Risorgimento Problems' in Salomone, A. W. (ed.), Italy from the Risorgimento to Fascism: an inquiry into the origins of the totalitarian state, Newton Abbot, David & Charles, 1971, pp. 89-99.

Toniolo, G., An Economic History of Liberal Italy 1850-1918, London, Routledge, 1990.

Woolf, S.J. (ed.), The Italian Risorgimento, London, Longmans, 1969.

Woolf, S.J., A history of Italy 1700-1860: the social constraints of political change, London, Methuen & Co., 1979.

This is another essay I wrote for a history course at the University of York.