To What Extent Did the Revolutions of 1848-9 Fail in Italy Due to Poor Leadership?
The failures of 1848-9 could be blamed on the poor leadership of Individuals such as Charles Albert and Mazzini. However there are other contributing factors that should be taken into account. Although Charles Albert seems to be successful in uniting the states of Italy to strengthen his campaign, for example, by joining Lombardy and Venetia with Piedmont and merging their armies into one in 1848, and aiding the rebels in Lombardy, his poor leadership effected the outcome of the 1848-9 Revolutions.
Albert was uncomfortable with non-Piedmontese revolutionaries and made them swear an oath of loyalty to Piedmont, nor would he accept volunteers from other states in his army. This lack of unity hindered his chances of success. After Lombardy in particular, Charles Albert was extremely unpopular and was seen as a traitor to liberalism, portraying him as a bad leader. Furthermore his slow and hesitant advance at Custozza, illustrates his inexperience of war, and although he had higher numbers of troops than Austria at this point, he was unprepared and advanced too slowly.
The fact that he quickly abdicates after Piedmont is defeated, leaving Piedmont with fees of 65 million francs to pay for French reparations further illustrates poor leadership as he abandons his state in a time of hardship, therefore emphasizing a weakness of his leadership. Mazzini, although he enforced positive reforms and cooperated with the provisional government in Rome, performed actions that showed signs of weak leadership.
Mazzini made the mistake of releasing the previously captured french soldiers out of the trust that France and Italy could make a peaceful agreement, his naivety towards the situation had bad repercussions on his state and his hopes to persuade the french diplomatically were not realistic. Even though his intentions were good, Mazzini was not a strong leader that the Revolutions of 1848-9 needed.
Furthermore as conditions in Rome grew worse he made radical changes, although some of them were successful, others such as redistributing monastic land to peasants, had little time to take effect and therefore failed to bring the needed change to the popular classes. However poor leadership was not the only aspect holding the revolutionaries back. A lack of unity was preventing the states of Italy from making any significant progress. The failure of Revolutions in Naples and Sicily, for example, were due to the fact that the revolutionaries in Naples split into moderates and radicals.
These two groups, even though they both wanted to expel the foreign occupying country – Austria, were divided in their aims. Whilst the liberals believed that a constitution was necessary, the Radicals favoured republics. Their inability to work together and their separate aims resulted in Failure. In Piedmont, Charles Albert would not accept volunteers from other states in his army, or work with any other revolutionary groups, unless they declared their loyalty to Piedmont. A lack of unity further led to a lack of central guidance.
There was no universally acceptable national leader who could co-ordinate policy, Pope Pius IX had declined the position of Head of Italy, and neither Mazzini or Charles Albert were acceptable for everyone. ~Local revolutionary leaders had no central guidance to rule by and the separate states were all divided, setting up provisional governments of their own chosen methods; extremist, liberal, radical, democratic or monarchist. Not only were the revolutionary movements lacking in guidance from 1848-9, they were inexperienced and lacking in military resources.
They did not have enough support to maintain power once they had gained it. Mass support is an important aspect of a Revolution to insure success. The fact that the liberals viewed politics as a middle-class affair and did not want to encourage popular support or involve peasants, put them at a disadvantage. Liberals did not view social reform as an important issue, therefore they made no efforts to improve the lives of ordinary people. Peasants did not gain from being under a liberal-dominated revolutionary government and found themselves no better off than when they had been under a monarchy before.
Italy’s lack of international allies, was a further reason for the Revolutionary failures of 1848-9. A valuable factor beyond the control of revolutionary leaders, was the strong military powers of Italian enemies. Austria, for example, was a well led vast military force; superior in numbers and equipment. With this advantage, the Austrians were bound to win, even if the revolutionary forces had been able to present a united front. Examples of the Austrian might against Italy are during the Riots in Milan where the Austrians reacted harshly and killed 61 people.
In 1848-9 Italy needed allies to counter balance the Austrian might, however Italy’s lack of International allies put them at a disadvantage. Furthermore the Pope’s influence on Catholic powers in Europe was counter-revolutionary, further preventing Italy from success. France, a traditional enemy of Austria, offered her military aid to Italy, It could be argued that the fact that Charles Albert rejected French help he was responsible for failure, further insinuating that the Revolutions failed due to his bad judgement and his poor leadership.
The Attitude of the Papacy had a strong influence over the Catholic states and surrounding countries of Italy. In 1848, the Pope issued an Allocution. He condemned the war against Austria, and calls Charles Albert, “the Aggressor. ” With this statement he also categorically declines the role of President, claiming that he has no interest in unifying Italy, encouraging people not to join Charles Albert. The people of Italy were given a choice, to join the revolution or the Church. The fact that most states were Catholic and viewed the Pope as God’s messenger, made the decision hard.
As a result, Charles Albert’s Army was weakened as some Catholics left to obey the Pope’s allocution. Pepe however, stayed on with some of his troops, as did Durando, but the fact that the Pope was against Charles Albert’s intentions, reduced their chances of success. In conclusion, the main reasons for the failure of the 1848-9 revolutions consist of a lack of unity and mass support, the attitude of the papacy as well as the power of Austria and other states. Poor leadership, when combined with these contributing factors, had a devastating effect on the outcome of the Revolutions.
