Olivia
How far could the historian make use of sources 1 and 2 together to
investigate the popularity of the Abyssinian War (1935-1936) among the
Italian people?
On October 3rd 1935, Mussolini launched an attack on Abyssinia,
dreaming of the country serving as a base for a large Italian empire in
Africa that perhaps even stretched to the Atlantic coast. Sources 1 and 2
discuss the opinion of the Italian people regarding Mussolini’s action in
Abyssinia. After reading the sources together, I would say that, because
they are quite different in the overarching messages they convey, they
clearly inform the historian of the perspectives of different strata of
society at the time, making them relatively useful as tools to investigate
the popularity of the Abyssinian war among the Italian people.
Source 1 is an account of Mussolini’s announcement of Italy’s victory in
Abyssinia at the Piazza Venezia in Rome on 5 May 1936, written by
writer and journalist Ugo Ojetti. Source 2 is an extract from Christ
Stopped at Eboli by Carlo Levi, who describes the reaction of a southern
Italian town’s peasants to the Abyssinian war. Both sources focus on the
topic of the popularity, or unpopularity, of the Abyssnian war among the
Italian people, however, I would also highlight the deification of Mussolini
as a motif in source 1 and the north-south divide as a theme in source 2.
Source 1 is distinct in its presentation of Italian attitudes to the war in
Africa as purely positive, glorifying the crowd’s reaction to Mussolini’s
announcement by describing the crowd as filled with ‘burning passion’
and ‘raised spirits’. On the other hand, source 2 concentrates on the
detachment from any jingoistic sentiment roused by the Abyssinian war
felt by peasants in the south due to the north-south divide in Italy. I would
say that the use of sources 1 and 2 could aid the historian somewhat in
investigating the popularity of the Abyssinian war among the Italian
people, as the different themes the sources explore exemplify how they
differ entirely in which sphere of society they represent, meaning the
How far could the historian make use of sources 1 and 2 together to
investigate the popularity of the Abyssinian War (1935-1936) among the
Italian people?
On October 3rd 1935, Mussolini launched an attack on Abyssinia,
dreaming of the country serving as a base for a large Italian empire in
Africa that perhaps even stretched to the Atlantic coast. Sources 1 and 2
discuss the opinion of the Italian people regarding Mussolini’s action in
Abyssinia. After reading the sources together, I would say that, because
they are quite different in the overarching messages they convey, they
clearly inform the historian of the perspectives of different strata of
society at the time, making them relatively useful as tools to investigate
the popularity of the Abyssinian war among the Italian people.
Source 1 is an account of Mussolini’s announcement of Italy’s victory in
Abyssinia at the Piazza Venezia in Rome on 5 May 1936, written by
writer and journalist Ugo Ojetti. Source 2 is an extract from Christ
Stopped at Eboli by Carlo Levi, who describes the reaction of a southern
Italian town’s peasants to the Abyssinian war. Both sources focus on the
topic of the popularity, or unpopularity, of the Abyssnian war among the
Italian people, however, I would also highlight the deification of Mussolini
as a motif in source 1 and the north-south divide as a theme in source 2.
Source 1 is distinct in its presentation of Italian attitudes to the war in
Africa as purely positive, glorifying the crowd’s reaction to Mussolini’s
announcement by describing the crowd as filled with ‘burning passion’
and ‘raised spirits’. On the other hand, source 2 concentrates on the
detachment from any jingoistic sentiment roused by the Abyssinian war
felt by peasants in the south due to the north-south divide in Italy. I would
say that the use of sources 1 and 2 could aid the historian somewhat in
investigating the popularity of the Abyssinian war among the Italian
people, as the different themes the sources explore exemplify how they
differ entirely in which sphere of society they represent, meaning the
