DOCSLIB.ORG

Zarstvo and Communism

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Zarstvo and Communism Zarstvo and Communism Zarstvo and Communism: Italian Diplomacy in Russia in the Age of Soviet Communism By Francesco Randazzo Zarstvo and Communism: Italian Diplomacy in Russia in the Age of Soviet Communism By Francesco Randazzo This book first published 2018 Cambridge Scholars Publishing Lady Stephenson Library, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2PA, UK British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Copyright © 2018 by Francesco Randazzo All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. ISBN (10): 1-5275-0899-4 ISBN (13): 978-1-5275-0899-6 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ................................................................................................. 1 Emilio Cassese Chapter One ................................................................................................. 5 Italian Diplomacy and Russia in the Late Nineteenth Century Chapter Two .............................................................................................. 29 Italian Diplomacy between Russia and the Central Empires during the First World War Chapter Three ............................................................................................ 41 Italy, the Revolution, and Civil War in Russia Chapter Four .............................................................................................. 75 From the Bolshevik Revolution to the United Soviet Socialist Republic Chapter Five .............................................................................................. 91 The Russian Civil War, the Polish Question, and Peace Talks in Italian Military Documents from 1917 to 1921 Chapter Six .............................................................................................. 109 Ten Years of Conflictual Politics between Fascist Italy and Soviet Russia (1922–33) Documentary Appendix ........................................................................... 139 Bibliography ............................................................................................ 153 Index of Names........................................................................................ 161 INTRODUCTION The centenary of the Russian Revolution in Italy has stimulated a moment of great critical reflection on the diplomatic relations between the Russian Empire and the Kingdom of Italy along with a historical review of the event from which an epoch-making phenomenon—Soviet communism— was generated. In this context, this long essay by Francesco Randazzo, Zarstvo and Communism: Italian Diplomacy in Russia in the Age of Soviet Communism, undoubtedly represents a satisfactory point of arrival. It is a summary report of Italian and partly foreign archival sources that takes note of recent historiographic contributions on the subject and does not renounce significant documentary acquisitions and further elements of knowledge. The history of relations between post-unification Italy and Tsarist Russia has been based for a long time on the exhaustive studies dedicated to the theme by Giorgio Petracchi, a well-known specialist in Italian diplomatic relations with Tsarist Russia and the Soviet Union. Over the years, the historiographical debate has been further enriched by research on the various aspects of the revolution, focusing on the political, military, and social context, thus helping its greater contextualization. It is no coincidence that contemporary historiography has repeatedly underlined the importance of linking the 1917 revolution to the 1905 revolution, the first true bourgeois revolution in its history. The economic and military defeat of Tsarist Russia against Japan shook the Empire, generating a series of nationalist protests and demonstrations, giving rise, on the initiative of the Social Democrats, to the “Soviets,” the revolutionary organisms directly expressed by the workers. Relying on these historiographical bases and the amount of research carried out in recent years, several scholars, including Francesco Randazzo, have ventured into numerous studies on Italian-Russian diplomatic history starting in 1905 by leveraging the large documentation left by Giulio Melegari, plenipotentiary minister of the Kingdom of Italy in Saint Petersburg between 1905 and 1912. The October Manifesto, issued by the tsar, seemed to be an imperial turnaround through the new constitutional conquests, so much so that Melegari put many hopes in the Russian reform movement. The idyll was not followed, with Nicholas II’s choice to dissolve the first Duma, dominated by the Cadet party, in 1906 showing the fragility of the tsarist government in the eyes of the Italian diplomat. 2 Introduction When even the second Duma was dissolved, the tsar and minister P. Stolypin decided to change the electoral system by introducing martial law. Randazzo's essay then retraces the main stages of the events before and after the Bolshevik revolution, as well as the evolution of diplomatic relations between the Kingdom of Italy and the tsarist empire. The Racconigi Agreement, for example, was the Russian and Italian response to the annexation of Bosnia-Herzegovina to the Austro-Hungarian Empire in 1908. With this agreement, Italy received the green light from Russia, which it lacked at the moment of the occupation of Libya, generating two Balkan wars which further destabilized the geopolitical area, and from which the First World War took inspiration. There is no doubt that the Racconigi Agreement came about during the crisis of the Belle Époque, slipping between the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire and the creation of the Balkan States, the Italian military campaign in the Aegean, and the possibility of reaching the Straits, proceeding towards the world explosion of 1914. After Racconigi and the parenthesis of San Giuliano as Foreign Minister and the appointment of Sidney Sonnino as his successor, Italian-Russian relations began to creak, so much so that after the outbreak of the First World War, despite the Italian neutrality called into question with the London Pact of April 26, 1915, Russia represented an interlocutor holding off a disappointing ally. The crisis of the Tsarist empire and its subsequent collapse under the blows of the February Revolution caught several diplomats of the time unawares, such as ambassador Andrea Carlotti di Riparbella, who completely underestimated the role of the masses as well as the strength of the Soviets. In the following weeks, as Randazzo points out, fragmentary news items followed one another, out of fear that the revolution could bring distrust to Russia's holding in the conflict. The contemporary defeat of Caporetto pushed the Italian government, terrified of a possible social crisis, to strengthen the censorship of war and create strong anti-revolutionary propaganda. Meanwhile, Carlotti was recalled on October 25, 1917 (November 7) by virtue of his numerous erroneous predictions, and for the returning Tomasi della Torretta things did not go any better when he was forced to move from Saint Petersburg up to Archangel'sk, while the Bolshevik government moved to Moscow. The intervention policy of the Entente led to the departure of all the foreign and military diplomatic personnel still present in the territory controlled by the Soviets and the only direct news on Russia came from the areas where the Italian military missions were located, in Siberia, the Caucasus, and North Russia. The missions flanked the counter-revolutionary governments of the whites against the reds, and the Italians participated militarily in the operations of control and defence Zarstvo and Communism 3 of the territories under the counter-revolutionary government of Admiral Kolčak in southern Siberia. In fact, it is crucial to understand how the whites were about to prevail over the Red Army of Trotsky, pushing until the conquest of Moscow through the Urals and acting in cooperation with the other “white” armies, first of all the voluntary army of General Denikin who, from the region to the north of the Caucasus, was threatening both the Volga and Ukraine. That decisive moment, in which the fate of the Russian civil war was in the balance and which would have been enough for the Bolsheviks to receive an irreparable blow, took shape in the spring of 1919, particularly in the month of April. Until then, the army troops of Kolčak had made a large advance on three fronts: to the north, under the command of General Gajda, in the direction of Archangel'sk, starting from Perm, conquered on Christmas Eve of 1918; in the centre, under the command of General M. V. Chanžin, towards Ufa, which fell in March; and to the south, under the command of General A. Dutov, in the direction of Samara, Kazan, and the Volga River. The historic sliding doors, however, did not occur and passed the Urals, while the Reds took Celjabinsk on July 25, 1918 and reached the Tobol River where, after a pause of several months, they resumed the offensive and swept the last defences, conquering Omsk, the capital of the Siberian government, with the white army in full dissolution. Emilio Cassese CHAPTER ONE ITALIAN DIPLOMACY AND RUSSIA IN THE LATE NINETEENTH CENTURY In the nineteenth century, relations between the European and Asian worlds played an important role in the international relationship studies
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Rapprochement Between America and China During the Nixon
    Bilge Strateji,Bilge Cilt Strateji, 9, Sayı Cilt16, Bahar9, Sayı 2017, 16, Bahar ss.131-147 2017 Rapprochement between America and China during the Nixon Era: A Product of Timing or the Leadership? Nixon Dönemi Amerika ve Çin Arasındaki Uzlaşma: Zamanın bir Ürünü mü yoksa Liderlik mi? Teslim: 31 Mayıs 2016 Onay: 23 Mart 2017 Ali Onur ÖZÇELİK* Abstract This article explores the rapprochement between America and China in the 1970s. By ending two-decade old antagonism and realizing the most impor- tant strategic shift of the Cold War era, both states have changed the course of the world politics since the middle of the Cold War. In elaborating one of the historical events in American foreign policy, the article seeks to find an answer for one big question: Was Nixon a unique leader to initiate the U.S. opening to China or was it purely a product of timing? The findings suggest that although timing provided important motivation for rapprochement, this had not been possible if Nixon did not show his determination. Keywords: : Rapprochement between America and China, Leadership, Re- alpolitik, American Foreign Policy. Öz Bu makale, Amerika ve Çin arasında 1970’lerdeki uzlaşmayı incelemekte- dir. Yirmi yıllık düşmanlığı sonlandıran ve Soğuk Savaş’ın en önemli strate- jik kayışını gerçekleştiren iki devlet, Soğuk Savaş’ın ortasından itibaren dünya politikasının gidişatını değiştirmiştir. Amerikan dış politikasındaki en önemli tarihi olaylardan bir tanesini ele alan bu makele, büyük bir so- ruya: Amerikanın Çin’e açılması için Nixon eşsiz bir lider miydi yoksa bu süreç tamamen zamanın bir ürünü müydü? cevap aramaktadır. Bulgular, za- manlama uzlaşma için önemli bir motivasyon sağlamasına rağmen, Nixon’ın kararlılığı olmasa bu uzlaşmanın imkansız olduğunu önermektedir.
    [Show full text]
  • The Historical Legacy for Contemporary Russian Foreign Policy
    CHAPTER 1 The Historical Legacy for Contemporary Russian Foreign Policy o other country in the world is a global power simply by virtue of geogra- N phy.1 The growth of Russia from an isolated, backward East Slavic principal- ity into a continental Eurasian empire meant that Russian foreign policy had to engage with many of the world’s principal centers of power. A Russian official trying to chart the country’s foreign policy in the 18th century, for instance, would have to be concerned simultaneously about the position and actions of the Manchu Empire in China, the Persian and Ottoman Empires (and their respec- tive vassals and subordinate allies), as well as all of the Great Powers in Europe, including Austria, Prussia, France, Britain, Holland, and Sweden. This geographic reality laid the basis for a Russian tradition of a “multivector” foreign policy, with leaders, at different points, emphasizing the importance of rela- tions with different parts of the world. For instance, during the 17th century, fully half of the departments of the Posolskii Prikaz—the Ambassadors’ Office—of the Muscovite state dealt with Russia’s neighbors to the south and east; in the next cen- tury, three out of the four departments of the College of International Affairs (the successor agency in the imperial government) covered different regions of Europe.2 Russian history thus bequeaths to the current government a variety of options in terms of how to frame the country’s international orientation. To some extent, the choices open to Russia today are rooted in the legacies of past decisions.
    [Show full text]
  • Transformation of Stereotypical Perception of „The Image of Poles” in the Russian Empire Society During the World War I
    The Person and the Challenges Volume 7 (2017) Number 2, p. 151–164 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15633/pch.2188 Olga Bilobrovets Zhytomyr Ivan Franko State University, Ukraine Transformation of stereotypical perception of „the image of Poles” in the Russian Empire society during the World War I Abstract The cohabitation of different nations in the border of one state creates certain ethnic, social, mental collective nation’s image which changes very slowly. These processes are enhanced during the global historical processes with significant devastating effects which lead to an alteration in public consciousness. During World War І, under the influence of the external crisis circumstances, the necessity to take into account the strategic interests and fundamental values of the nations involved in the war, led to a change in perception of the image of the Pole. The image of a Pole as a disloyal person to Russian statehood had changed into the image of a true confederate in the mutual striving with the enemy. Perception of the Poles as partners in state‑building and international cohabitation became possible only due to global geopolitical changes, the policy of powerful nations, including the Polish territory and the ability of Polish political powers to consolidate their efforts around the idea of statehood restoration. Keywords Russian Empire, the image of the Pole, loyalty, World War І. The Person and the Challenges 152 Volume 7 (2017) Number 2, p. 151–164 1. Introduction The cohabitation of different nations in the border of one state always has its own features caused, among other things, by their status, historical circumstances and conditions of development.
    [Show full text]
  • Background Guide, and to Issac and Stasya for Being Great Friends During Our Weird Chicago Summer
    Russian Duma 1917 (DUMA) MUNUC 33 ONLINE 1 Russian Duma 1917 (DUMA) | MUNUC 33 Online TABLE OF CONTENTS ______________________________________________________ CHAIR LETTERS………………………….….………………………….……..….3 ROOM MECHANICS…………………………………………………………… 6 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM………………………….……………..…………......9 HISTORY OF THE PROBLEM………………………………………………………….16 ROSTER……………………………………………………….………………………..23 BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………………..…………….. 46 2 Russian Duma 1917 (DUMA) | MUNUC 33 Online CHAIR LETTERS ____________________________________________________ My Fellow Russians, We stand today on the edge of a great crisis. Our nation has never been more divided, more war- stricken, more fearful of the future. Yet, the promise and the greatness of Russia remains undaunted. The Russian Provisional Government can and will overcome these challenges and lead our Motherland into the dawn of a new day. Out of character. To introduce myself, I’m a fourth-year Economics and History double major, currently writing a BA thesis on World War II rationing in the United States. I compete on UChicago’s travel team and I additionally am a CD for our college conference. Besides that, I am the VP of the Delta Kappa Epsilon fraternity, previously a member of an all-men a cappella group and a proud procrastinator. This letter, for example, is about a month late. We decided to run this committee for a multitude of reasons, but I personally think that Russian in 1917 represents such a critical point in history. In an unlikely way, the most autocratic regime on Earth became replaced with a socialist state. The story of this dramatic shift in government and ideology represents, to me, one of the most interesting parts of history: that sometimes facts can be stranger than fiction.
    [Show full text]
  • Revolting Peasants: Southern Italy, Ireland, and Cartoons in Comparative Perspective, 1860–1882*
    IRSH 60 (2015), pp. 1–35 doi:10.1017/S0020859015000024 r 2015 Internationaal Instituut voor Sociale Geschiedenis Revolting Peasants: Southern Italy, Ireland, and Cartoons in Comparative Perspective, 1860–1882* N IALL W HELEHAN School of History, Classics and Archaeology, University of Edinburgh William Robertson Wing, Old Medical School, Teviot Place, Edinburgh, EH8 9AG, UK E-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT: Peasants in general, and rural rebels in particular, were mercilessly ridiculed in the satirical cartoons that proliferated in European cities from the mid-nineteenth century. There was more to these images than the age-old hostility of the townspeople for the peasant, and this article comparatively explores how cartoons of southern Italian brigands and rural Irish agitators helped shape a liberal version of what was modern by identifying what was not: the revolting peasant who engaged in ‘‘unmanly’’ violence, lacked self-reliance, and was in thrall to Catholic clergymen. During periods of unrest, distinctions between brigands, rebels, and the rural populations as a whole were not always clear in cartoons. Comparison suggests that derogatory images of peasants from southern Italy and Ireland held local peculiarities, but they also drew from transna- tional stereotypes of rural poverty that circulated widely due to the rapidly expanding European publishing industry. While scholarly debates inspired by postcolonial perspectives have previously emphasized processes of othering between the West and East, between the metropole and colony, it is argued here that there is also an internal European context to these relationships based on ingrained class and gendered prejudices, and perceptions of what constituted the centre and the periphery.
    [Show full text]
  • Venäjän Pitkä Vuosisata 1900–2008 Sitran Raportteja 78
    Venäjä on aina ajankohtainen – hyvässä ja näkökulman naapurin monipolviseen ja Muodonmuutoksia pahassa. Krimin sodan jälkeen Aleksanteri II ristiriitaiseen kehitykseen. Tämän risti- avasi tien uudistuksille ja suuriruhtinas- riitaisen historian rakenteisiin Torvalds kunnan enemmistön kielellisille oikeuksille. pureutuu ja yrittää löytää sen järjen, jonka Seuraava hallitsija ryhtyi venäläistämään olemassaolon runoilija ja ulkoministeriön imperiumin alusmaita. Sitä seuraava johti virkamies Fjedor Tjutšev kielsi. maansa sotaan Japania vastaan. Onneton sota oli kuitenkin Suomelle onnellinen – Kaukasuksen elokuinen sota 2008 nosti sekä taloudellisesti että poliittisesti. taas nämä ristiriitaisuudet esille. Tätä samaa kaavaa tapahtumat ovat noudattaneet senkin jälkeen. Onneton vallankumous 1917 avasi mahdollisuuksien ikkunan suuriruhtinaskunnalle, jolla ei enää ollut suuriruhtinasta. Venäjän/Neuvostoliiton heikkoudet ovat muuttuneet Suomen mahdollisuuksiksi niin kaupassa ja teollisuudessa kuin kansainvälisessä politiikassakin. Samalla naapurin ratkaisut ovat muodostuneet Suomen politiikan haasteiksi. Venäjä/Neuvostoliitto on myös jakanut mielipiteitä eikä tämä jako mitenkään ole Muodonmuutoksia noudattanut tavallisia poliittisia rajoja. Venäjän pitkä vuosisata 1900–2008 Nils Torvalds on toiminut Yleisradion ruotsinkielisen toiminnan kirjeenvaihta- jana sekä Moskovassa että Washingto- nissa. Laaja kokemus sekä intohimoinen Nils Torvalds historianharrastus on antanut hyvän Sitran raportteja 78 Sitran raportteja Suomen itsenäisyyden juhlarahasto
    [Show full text]
  • Braido Pietro, Don Bosco Prete Dei Giovani Nel Secolo Delle Libertà. 1 Vol
    ISTITUTO STORICO SALESIANO - ROMA STUDI - 20 Nella lieta occasione del 90º genetliaco del prof. Pietro Braido l’Istituto Storico Salesiano è lieto di offrire a studiosi, amici di don Bosco e membri della Famiglia salesiana la terza e definitiva edizione, rivista dall’autore, dell’Opera, Don Bosco, prete dei giovani, nel secolo delle libertà frutto di 50 anni di attente ricerche, punto di arrivo degli studi su don Bosco all’inizio del XXI secolo, punto di partenza per nuovi approfondimenti. La circostanza risulta particolarmente felice per la contemporanea apertura delle manifestazioni culturali del centenario della morte del 1º successore di don Bosco, don Michele Rua e l’imminente celebrazione ufficiale del 150º anniversario della nascita della società salesiana. All’autore il grazie più sincero e a tutti i migliori auguri per una feconda lettura. Don Francesco Motto, direttore dell’ISS colleghi ed amici Roma, 24 maggio 2009 ISTITUTO STORICO SALESIANO - ROMA STUDI - 20 PIETRO BRAIDO DON BOSCO PRETE DEI GIOVANI NEL SECOLO DELLE LIBERTÀ “Non il vero, ma il reale cioè il vero con la sua storicità, con la sua concretezza nel divenire, nel tempo” (Ch. Péguy) “Mi raccomando ancora che non si dia gran retta ai sogni etc. Se questi aiutano l’intelligenza di cose morali, oppure delle nostre regole, va bene; si ritengano. Altrimenti non se ne faccia alcun pregio” (lett. a mons. Giovanni Cagliero, 10 febbr. 1885, E IV 314) VOLUME PRIMO Terza edizione corretta e ritoccata LAS - ROMA Nel ricordo degli insigni Maestri Valentino Panzarasa e Franc Walland © 2009 by LAS - Libreria Ateneo Salesiano Piazza dell’Ateneo Salesiano, 1 - 00139 ROMA Tel.
    [Show full text]
  • Elenco Dei Governi Italiani
    Elenco dei Governi Italiani Questo è un elenco dei Governi Italiani e dei relativi Presidenti del Consiglio dei Ministri. Le Istituzioni in Italia Le istituzioni della Repubblica Italiana Costituzione Parlamento o Camera dei deputati o Senato della Repubblica o Legislature Presidente della Repubblica Governo (categoria) o Consiglio dei Ministri o Presidente del Consiglio dei Ministri o Governi Magistratura Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura (CSM) Consiglio di Stato Corte dei Conti Governo locale (Suddivisioni) o Regioni o Province o Comuni Corte costituzionale Unione Europea Relazioni internazionali Partiti e politici Leggi e Regolamenti parlamentari Elezioni e Calendario Referendum modifica Categorie: Politica, Diritto e Stato Portale Italia Portale Politica Indice [nascondi] 1 Regno d'Italia 2 Repubblica Italiana 3 Sigle e abbreviazioni 4 Politici con maggior numero di Governi della Repubblica Italiana 5 Voci correlate Regno d'Italia Periodo Nome del Governo Primo Ministro 23 marzo 1861 - 12 giugno 1861 Governo Cavour Camillo Benso Conte di Cavour[1] 12 giugno 1861 - 3 marzo 1862 Governo Ricasoli I Bettino Ricasoli 3 marzo 1862 - 8 dicembre 1862 Governo Rattazzi I Urbano Rattazzi 8 dicembre 1862 - 24 marzo 1863 Governo Farini Luigi Carlo Farini 24 marzo 1863 - 28 settembre 1864 Governo Minghetti I Marco Minghetti 28 settembre 1864 - 31 dicembre Governo La Marmora Alfonso La Marmora 1865 I Governo La Marmora 31 dicembre 1865 - 20 giugno 1866 Alfonso La Marmora II 20 giugno 1866 - 10 aprile 1867 Governo Ricasoli
    [Show full text]
  • Archivio Federico Chabod
    Archivio Federico Chabod INTRODUZIONE.............................................................................................................. I INTRODUZIONE.............................................................................................................. I 1. PROFILO BIOGRAFICO ..................................................................................................I 2. STORIA DEL FONDO ....................................................................................................VI 3. CRITERI DI ORDINAMENTO .........................................................................................IX FONTI COMPLEMENTARI.....................................................................................XIV LETTERE E DOCUMENTI PUBBLICATI............................................................... XV BIBLIOGRAFIA ......................................................................................................XVII FONDO FEDERICO CHABOD ......................................................................................1 FONDO FEDERICO CHABOD ......................................................................................1 SERIE I CARRIERA SCIENTIFICA E ATTIVITÀ DIDATTICA..............................3 SERIE I CARRIERA SCIENTIFICA E ATTIVITÀ DIDATTICA..............................3 SERIE II COLLABORAZIONI, RICERCA E PRODUZIONE SCIENTIFICA ......13 SERIE II COLLABORAZIONI, RICERCA E PRODUZIONE SCIENTIFICA ......13 SOTTOSERIE .1 COLLABORAZIONI ...................................................................................13
    [Show full text]
  • 38846 Dynastiet Romanov
    NOTER Innledning 1 Marx om zoologi. Bismack om Coburg som Europas stutteri, begge sitert i A. N. Wilson, Vic- toria: A Life (heretter Wilson) 19. Prolog 1 Denne fremstillingen er basert på GARF 601.2.27 Jakov Jurovskijs brev 1920 og 1. februar 1934 pluss ikke-publiserte brev (fem til sammen); dagboken til tsaritsa Aleksandra, juni–juli 1918, oppbevart i GARF 640.1 og utgitt som Last Diary of Tsaritsa Alexander, V. Kozlov og V. Khrustalev (red.) (heretter kalt «Aleksandras dagbok»). Nikolaj IIs dagbok, april–juni 1918, GARF 601.1.217-266 (heretter «ND»). Disse kildene er også oppgitt i Mark D. Steinberg og Vladimir M. Khrustalëv, The Fall of the Romanovs (heretter Fall) 320–366 og også Greg King og Penny Wilson, The Fate of the Romanovs (heretter Fate) 282–317. 2 Tilbud om tronen til Mikhail Romanov er basert på: RGADA 135.111.1.2.1–5, Gramota tsarju Mikhajlu Fedorovitsju, poslannaja v Kostromu s arkhimandritom Feodoritom i bojarinym F. I. Sjeremetevym 2 Marta 1613 (Zemskij Sobors charter til tsar Mikhail Fjodorovitsj angående hans utnevnelse til tronen, 2. mars 1613) RGADA 135.111.1.2.28–44, mars 1613, Gramota ark- hiepiskopa Feodorita i F. I. Sjeremeteva k Zemskomu Soboru (Formell rapport fra Kostroma- delegatene til Zemskij Sobor angående tsar Mikhails samtykke i å bli tsar). Sergei Soloviev, History of Russia (heretter Soloviev) 16.1–15. George Vernadsky, History of Russia (heretter Ver- nadsky) 5.1.278–83. Robert Crummey, Aristocrats and Servitors: The Boyar Elite 1613–89 (her- etter Crummey), 1–28. Michael: Olearius, Travels of Olearius (heretter Olearius) 62, 191, 262, G.
    [Show full text]
  • The Kingdom of Italy: Unity Or Disparity, 1860-1945
    The Kingdom of Italy: Unity or Disparity, 1860-1945 Part IIIb: The First Years of the Kingdom Governments of the Historic Left 1876-1900 Decline of the Right/Rise of the Left • Biggest issue dividing them had been Rome—now resolved • Emerging issues • Taxation, especially the macinato • Neglect of social issues • Free trade policies that hurt the South disproportionately • Limited suffrage • Piedmontization • Treatment of Garibaldi volunteers • Use of police against demonstrations The North-South divide • emerging issues more important to South • Many of Left leaders from South Elections of 1874 • Slim majority for Right Fall of Minghetti, March 1876 Appointment of a Left Prime Minister and the elections of November 1876 Agostino Depretis Benedetto Cairoli Francesco Crispi Antonio Starabba, Marchese di Rudinì Giovanni Giolitti Genl. Luigi Pelloux Prime Minister Dates in office Party/Parliament Key actions or events Agostino Depretis 25 March 1876 Left Coppino Law Lombardy 25 December 1877 Sonnino and Iacini inquiry into the problems of the South Railway construction continues with state aid 26 December 1877 Left Anarchist insurrection in Matese 24 March 1878 Benedetto Cairoli 24 March 1878 Left Attempted anarchist assassination of king Lombary 19 December 1878 Depretis 19 December 1878 Left 14 July 1879 Cairoli 14 July 1879 Left Costa founds Revolutionary Socialist Party of Romagna 25 November 1879 25 November 1879 Left 29 May 1881 Depretis 29 May 1881 Left Widened suffrage; first socialist elected 25 May 1883 Italy joins Austria-Hungary and Germany to create Triplice Use of trasformismo 25 May 1883 Left 30 March 1884 Final abolition of grist tax macinato 30 March 1884 Left First colonial venture into Assab and Massawa on Red Sea coast 29 June 1885 29 June 1885 Left Battle of Dogali debacle 4 April 1887 4 April 1887 Left 29 July 1887 Died in office Francesco Crispi 29 July 1887 Left 10-year tariff war with France begun Sicily 6 February 1891 Zanardelli penal code enacted; local govt.
    [Show full text]
  • ANGLO-RUSSIAN DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS 1907-1914 THESIS Presented to the Graduate Council of the North Texas State University In
    %41o ANGLO-RUSSIAN DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS 1907-1914 THESIS Presented to the Graduate Council of the North Texas State University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSPHY By Rosemary C. Tompkins, B.F.A., B.A., M.A. Denton, Texas May, 1975 1975 ROSEMARY COLBOPN TOMWKINS ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Tompkins, Rosemary C., Anglo-Russian Diplomatic Relations, 1907-1914. Doctor of Philosophy (European History), May, 1975, 388 pp., 1 map, bibliography, 370 titles. No one has investigated in detail the totality of Anglo-Russian relations from the Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907 to the outbreak of World War I. Those who have written on the history of the Triple Entente have tended to claim that France was the dominant partner and that her efforts pulled Great Britain and Russia together and kept them together. Britain and Russia had little in common, the standard argument asserts; their ideological and political views were almost diametrically opposed, and furthermore,they had major imperial conflicts. This dissertation tests two hypotheses. The first is that Russia and Britain were drawn together less from French efforts than from a mutual reaction to German policy. The second is that there was less political and ideological friction between Britain and Russia than previous writers have assumed. The first hypothesis has been supported in previous writings only tangentially, while the second has not been tested for the period under review. Studies of the period have been detailed studies on specific events and crises, while this investigation reviews the course of the Anglo- Russian partnership for the entire seven year period.
    [Show full text]