Chapter IV: , VII (136)

"The most famous, the most widely disseminated, and the most
powerful of all the secret societies which sprang up in Italy
was that of the Carbonari, or Charcoal-makers. … The
Carbonari first began to attract attention in the Kingdom of
Naples about the year 1808. A Genoese named Maghella, who
burned with hatred of the French, is said to have initiated
several Neapolitans into a secret order whose purpose it was
to goad their countrymen into rebellion. They quitted Naples,
where Murat's vigilant policy kept too strict a watch on
conspirators, and retired to the Abruzzi, where in order to
disarm suspicion they pretended to be engaged in
charcoal-burning. As their numbers increased, agents were sent
to establish lodges in the principal towns. The Bourbon king,
shut up in Sicily, soon heard of them, and as he had not
hesitated at letting loose with English aid galley-prisoners,
or at encouraging brigands, to harass Murat, so he eagerly
connived with these conspirators in the hope of recovering his
throne. Murat, having striven for several years to suppress
the Carbonari, at last, when he found his power slipping from
him, reversed his policy towards them, and strove to
conciliate them. But it was too late: neither he nor they
could prevent the restoration of the Bourbons under the
protection of Austria. The sectaries who had hitherto
foolishly expected that, if the French could be expelled,
Ferdinand would grant them a Liberal government, were soon
cured of their delusion, and they now plotted against him as
sedulously as they had plotted against his predecessor. Their
membership increased to myriads; their lodges, starting up in
every village in the Kingdom of Naples, had relations with
branch-societies in all parts of the Peninsula: to the anxious
ears of European despots the name Carbonaro soon meant all
that was lawless and terrible; it meant anarchy, chaos,
assassination. But when we read the catechism, or confession
of faith, of the Carbonari we are surprised by the
reasonableness of their aims and tenets. The duties of the
individual Carbonaro were, 'to render to the Almighty the
worship due to Him; to serve the fatherland with zeal; to
reverence religion and laws; to fulfil the obligations of
nature and friendship; to be faithful to promises; to observe
silence, discretion, and charity; to cause harmony and good
morals to prevail; to conquer the passions and submit the
will; and to abhor the seven deadly sins.' The scope of the
Society was to disseminate instruction; to unite the different
classes of society under the bond of love; to impress a
national character on the people, and to interest them in the
preservation and defense of the fatherland and of religion; to
destroy by moral culture the source of crimes due to the
general depravity of mankind; to protect the weak and to raise
up the unfortunate. … It went still farther and asserted the
un-Catholic doctrine of liberty of conscience: 'to every
Carbonaro,' so reads one of its articles, 'belongs the natural
and unalterable right to worship the Almighty according to his
own intuition and understanding.' We must not be misled,
however, by these enlightened professions, into a wrong notion
of the real purposes of Carbonarism. Politics, in spite of a
rule forbidding political discussion, were the main business,
and ethics but the incidental concern of the conspirators.
They organized their Order under republican forms as if to
prefigure the ideal towards which they aspired. The Republic
was subdivided into provinces, each of which was controlled by
a grand lodge, that of Salerno being the 'parent.' There were
also four 'Tribes,' each having a council and holding an
annual diet.
{1855}
Each tribe had a Senate, which advised a House of
Representatives, and this framed the laws which a magistracy
executed. There were courts of the first instance, of appeal,
and of cessation, and no Carbonaro might bring suit in the
civil courts against a fellow member, unless he had first
failed to get redress in one of these. … The Carbonari
borrowed some of their rites from the Freemasons, with whom
indeed they were commonly reported to be in such close
relations that Freemasons who joined the 'Carbonic Republic'
were spared the formality of initiation; other parts of their
ceremonial they copied from the New Testament, with such
additions as the special objects of the order called for."

_W. R. Thayer,
The Dawn of Italian Independence,
book 2, chapter 4 (volume 1)._

ALSO IN:
_P. Colletta,
History of the Kingdom of Naples,
book 7 (volume 2)._

_T. Frost,
Secret Societies of the European Revolution,
volume 1, chapter 5._

_General Sir H. Bunbury,
The Great War with France,
page 343, and after._

_The Chevalier O'Clery,
History of the Italian Revolution
chapter 3._

ITALY: A. D. 1809 (APRIL-MAY).
Renewed war of Austria with France.
Austrian advance and retreat.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1809 (JANUARY-JUNE).

ITALY: A. D. 1809 (MAY-JULY).
Annexation of the Papal States to the French Empire.
Removal of the Pope to Savona.
Rome declared to be a free and imperial city.

See PAPACY: A. D. 1808-1814.

ITALY: A. D. 1812.
Removal of the captive Pope to Fontainebleau.

See PAPACY: A. D. 1808-1814.

ITALY: A. D. 1812.
Participation in Napoleon's disastrous Russian campaign.

See RUSSIA: A. D. 1812 (JUNE-SEPTEMBER), and after.

ITALY: A. D. 1813.
Participation in the war in Germany.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1813 (APRIL-MAY).

ITALY: A. D. 1814.
Desertion of Napoleon by Murat.
His treaty with the Allies.
Expulsion of the French from the Peninsula.

Murat, king of Naples, "foreseeing the downfall of the
Emperor, had attempted to procure from Napoleon, as the price
of his fidelity, the union under his own sceptre of all Italy
south of the Po; but, failing in this, he prepared to abandon
the cause of his benefactor. On the 11th January, 1814, he
concluded a treaty with the Allies, by which he was guaranteed
possession of Naples; and forthwith advancing on Rome with
20,000 men, occupied the second city in his brother-in-law's
empire (January 19); having previously published a flaming
proclamation, in which the perfidy and violence of the
imperial government were denounced in terms which came
strangely from a chief of the Revolution. … At the end of
December, 1813, Eugene had withdrawn to the Adige with 36,000
men, before Bellegarde and 50,000 Austrians; and he was
already taking measures for a further retreat, when the
proclamation of Murat, and his hostile advance, rendered such
a movement inevitable. He had accordingly fallen back to the
Mincio, when, finding himself threatened on the flank by a
British expedition from Sicily under Lord William Bentinck, he
determined on again advancing against Bellegarde, so as to rid
himself of one enemy before he encountered another. The two
armies, however, thus mutually acting on the offensive, passed
each other, and an irregular action at last ensued on the
Mincio (February 8), in which the advantage was rather with
the French, who made 1,500 prisoners, and drove Bellegarde
shortly after over the Mincio, about 3,000 being killed and
wounded on each side. But, in other quarters, affairs were
going rapidly to wreck. Verona surrendered to the Austrians on
the 14th, and Ancona to Murat on the 16th; and the desertion
of the Italians, unequal to the fatigues of a winter campaign,
was so great that the Viceroy was compelled to fall back to
the Po. Fouché, meanwhile, as governor of Rome, had concluded
a convention (February 20) with the Neapolitan generals for
the evacuation of Pisa, Leghorn, Florence, and other garrisons
of the French empire in Italy. A proclamation, however, by the
hereditary prince of Sicily, who had accompanied Bentinck from
Sicily, gave Murat such umbrage that he separated his troops
from the British, and commenced operations, with little
success, against Eugene on the Po, in which the remainder of
March passed away. Bentinck, having at length received
reinforcements from Catalonia, moved forward with 12,000 men,
and occupied Spezia on the 29th of March, and, driving the
French (April 8) from their position at Sestri, forced his way
through the mountains, and appeared on the 16th in front of
Genoa. On the 17th the forts and positions before the city
were stormed; and the garrison, seeing preparations made for a
bombardment, capitulated on the 18th, on condition of being
allowed to march out with the honours of war. Murat had by
this time recommenced vigorous operations, and after driving
the French (April 13) from the Taro, had forced the passage of
the Stura; but the news of Napoleon's fall put an end to
hostilities. By a convention with the Austrians, Venice,
Palma-Nuova, and the other fortresses still held by the
French, were surrendered; the whole of Lombardy was occupied
by the Germans; and in the first week of May the French troops
finally repassed the Alps."

_Epitome of Alison's History of Europe,
sections 775, and 807-808._

ITALY: A. D. 1814-1815.
Return of the Despots.
Restoration of Austrian tyranny in the North.
The Pope in Rome again.

"With little resistance, Northern Italy was taken from the
French. Had it been otherwise, had Murat and Beauharnais
joined their forces, they might have long held the Austrians
in check, perhaps even have made a descent on Vienna; and
although this might not have hindered the ultimate overthrow
of Napoleon, yet it must have compelled the Allies, at the day
of settlement, to respect the wishes of the Italians. But
disunited, and deluded into the belief that they were partners
in a war of liberation, the Italians woke up to find that they
had escaped from the talons of the French eagle, only to be
caught in the clutch of the two-headed monstrosity of Austria.
They were to be used, in the language of Joseph De Maistre,
like coins, wherewith the Allies paid their debts. This was
plain enough when the people of the just-destroyed Kingdom of
Italy prepared to choose a ruler for themselves: one party
favored Beauharnais, another wished an Austrian prince, a
third an Italian, but all agreed in demanding independence.
Austria quickly informed them that they were her subjects, and
that their affairs would be decided at Vienna. Thus, almost
without striking a blow, and without a suspicion of the lot
awaiting them, the Northern Italians fell back under the
domination of Austria. In the spring and early summer of 1814
the exiled princelings returned: Victor Emanuel I. from his
savage refuge in Sardinia to Turin; Ferdinand III. from
Würzburg to Florence; Pius VII. from his confinement at
Fontainebleau and Savona to Rome.

See PAPACY: A. D. 1808-1814;

{1856}

Francis IV. to Modena. Other aspirants anxiously waited for
the Congress of Vienna to bestow upon them the remaining
provinces. The Congress … dragged on into the spring of the
following year. … In Lombardy and Venetia, Metternich soon
organized a thoroughly Austrian administration. The government
of the two provinces was separate, that of Lombardy being
centred at Milan, that of Venetia at Venice; but over all was
placed an Austrian archduke as Viceroy. Each district had its
civil and military tribunals, but the men who composed these
being appointees of the viceroy or his deputies, their
subservience could usually be reckoned upon. The trials were
secret, a provision which, especially in political cases, made
convictions easy. … Feudal privileges, which had been
abolished by the French, could be recovered by doing homage to
the Emperor and by paying specific taxes. In some respects
there was an improvement in the general administration, but in
others the deterioration was manifest. … Art, science, and
literature were patronized, and they throve as potted plants
thrive under the care of a gardener who cuts off every new
shoot at a certain height. … We may liken the people of the
Austro-Italian provinces to those Florentine revelers who, at
the time of the plague, tried to drive away their terror by
telling each other the merry stories reported by Boccaccio.
The plague which penetrated every corner of Lombardy and
Venetia was the Austrian police. Stealthy, but sure, its
unseen presence was dreaded in palace and hovel, in church,
tribunal, and closet. … Every police-office was crammed with
records of the daily habits of each citizen, of his visitors,
his relatives, his casual conversations,—even his style of
dress and diet were set down. … Such was the Metternichian
system of police and espionage that counteracted every mild
law and every attempt to lessen the repugnance of the
Italians. They were not to be deceived by blandishments:
Lombardy was a prison, Venetia was a prison, and they were all
captives, although they seemed to move about unshackled to
their work or pleasure."

_W. R. Thayer,
The Dawn of Italian Independence,
book 2, chapter 2 (volume 1)._

See, also,
VIENNA, THE CONGRESS OF;
AUSTRIA: A. D. 1815-1846;
and HOLY ALLIANCE.

ITALY: (Southern): A. D. 1815.
Murat's attempt to head a national movement.
His failure, downfall and death.
Restoration of the Bourbons at Naples.

"Wild as was the attempt in which, after Napoleon's return
from Elba, the King of Naples lost his crown, we must yet
judge of it both by his own character and the circumstances in
which he was placed. … In the autumn of 1813 communications
took place at Milan between Murat and the leaders of the
secret societies which were then attempting to organise
Italian patriotism in arms. In 1814, when the restoration of
Austrian rule in Lombardy so cruelly disappointed the national
hopes, these communications were renewed. The King of Naples
was assured that he needed but to raise the standard of
Italian independence to rally round him thousands and tens of
thousands of volunteers. … These calculations … were
readily adopted by the rash and vain-glorious monarch to whom
they were presented. … His proud spirit chafed and fretted
under the consciousness that he had turned upon Napoleon, and
the mortification of finding himself deserted by those in
reliance upon whose faith this sacrifice had been made. The
events in France had taken him by surprise. In joining the
alliance against Napoleon he had not calculated on the
deposition of the emperor, still less had he dreamed of the
destruction of the empire. … He bitterly reproached his own
conduct for having lent himself to such results. … When his
mind was agitated with these mingled feelings, the
intelligence reached him that Napoleon had actually left Elba,
on that enterprise in which he staked everything upon
regaining the imperial throne of France. It came to him direct
from Napoleon. … He foresaw that the armies of the allied
powers would be engaged in a gigantic struggle with the
efforts which Napoleon would be sure to make. Under such
circumstances, he fancied Italy an easy conquest; once master
of this he became a power with whom, in the conflict of
nations, any of the contending parties could only be too happy
to treat. He determined to place himself at the head of
Italian nationality, and strike one daring blow for the
chieftainship of the nation. … His ministers, his friends,
the French generals, even his queen, Napoleon's sister,
dissuaded him from such a course. … But with an obstinacy by
which the vacillating appear sometimes to attempt to atone for
habitual indecision, he persevered in spite of all advice. …
He issued a proclamation and ordered his troops to cross the
Papal frontier. … The Pope appointed a regency and retired,
accompanied by most of the cardinals, to Florence. … On the
30th of March his [Murat's] troops attacked the Austrian
forces at Cesena. The Germans were driven, without offering
much resistance, from the town. On the evening of that day he
issued from Rimini his proclamation to the Italian people,
which was against Austria a declaration of war. … A
declaration of war on the part of Austria immediately
followed. … The whole of the Italian army of Austria was
ordered at once to march upon Naples; and a treaty was
concluded with Ferdinand, by which Austria engaged to use all
her endeavours to recover for him his Neapolitan dominions.
… The army which Murat led northward, instead of numbering
80,000 as he represented in his proclamation, certainly never
exceeded 34,000. … Nearly 60,000 Austrians defended the
banks of the Po. … On the 10th of April, the troops of
Murat, under the command of General Pepe, were driven back by
the Austrians, who now in their turn advanced. … A retreat
to the frontiers of Naples was unanimously resolved on. This
retreat was one that had all the disasters without any of the
redeeming glories of war. … At last, as they approached the
confines of the Neapolitan kingdom, an engagement which took
place between Macerata and Tolentino, on the 4th of May, ended
in a total and ignominious rout. … At Macerata most of the
troops broke up into a disorganised rabble, and with
difficulty Murat led to Capua a small remnant of an army, that
could hardly be said to be defeated, because they were worsted
without anything that deserves to be called a fight.
{1857}
From Capua, on the 12th of May, the king sent to Naples a
proclamation granting a free constitution. To conceal the fact
that this was wrung from him only in distress, he resorted to
the miserable subterfuge of ante-dating it from Rimini, on the
30th of March." On the evening of the 18th of May, Murat
entered Naples quietly on foot, and had his last interview
with his queen and children. A British squadron was already in
the harbor. The next night he slipped away to the island of
Ischia, and thence to Frejus, while Queen Caroline remained to
discharge the last duties of sovereignty. On the 20th Naples
was surrendered to the Austrians, and the ex-queen took refuge
on an English vessel to escape from a threatening mob of the
lazzaroni. She was conveyed to Trieste, where the Austrian
emperor had offered her an asylum. The restored Bourbon king,
Ferdinand, made his entry into the capital on the 17th of
June. Meantime, Murat, in France, had offered his services to
Napoleon and they had been declined. After Waterloo, he
escaped to Corsica, whence, in the following October, he made
a foolhardy attempt to recover his kingdom, landing with a few
followers at Pizzo, on the Neapolitan coast, expecting a
rising of the people to welcome his return. But the rising
that occurred was hostile instead of friendly. The party was
quickly overpowered, Murat taken prisoner and delivered to
Ferdinand's officers. He was summarily tried by court martial
and shot, October 13, 1815.

_I. Butt,
History of Italy,
volume 2, chapters 10-11._

ALSO IN:
_P. Colletta,
History of Naples,
book 7, chapter 5,
and book 8, chapter 1 (volume 2)._

ITALY: A. D. 1820-1821.
Revolutionary insurrections in Naples and Sicily.
Perjury and duplicity of the king.
The revolt crushed by Austrian troops.
Abortive insurrection in Piedmont.
Its end at Novara.
Abdication of Victor Emmanuel I.
Accession of Charles Felix.

"In the last days of February, 1820, a revolution broke out in
Spain. The object of its leaders was to restore the
Constitution of 1812, which had been suppressed on the return
of the Bourbons to the throne. … The Revolution proved
successful, and for a short time the Spaniards obtained
possession of a democratic Constitution. Their success stirred
up the ardour of the Liberal party in the kingdom of the two
Sicilies, and before many weeks were over a revolutionary
movement occurred at Naples. The insurrection originated with
the army under the command of General Pepé, and it is worthy
of note that the movement was not directed against the
reigning dynasty, and was not, even nominally, associated with
any demand for national unity. All the insurgents asked for
was the establishment of a Constitution similar to that then
existing in Spain. After a very brief and feeble resistance,
the King yielded to the demands of the military conspirators,
who were strongly supported by popular feeling. On the 1st of
October, a Parliament of the Neapolitan kingdom was opened by
His Majesty Francis the First, who then and there took a
solemn oath to observe the Constitution, and even went out of
his way to profess his profound attachment for the principles
on which the new Government was based. General Pepé thereupon
resigned the Dictatorship he had assumed, and constitutional
liberty was deemed to have been finally established in
Southern Italy by a bloodless revolution. The rising on the
mainland was followed after a brief interval by a popular
insurrection in Sicily. The main object, however, of the
Sicilian Constitutionalists was to bring about a legislative
separation between the island and the kingdom of Naples
proper. … The Sicilian insurrection afforded Francis I. the
pretext he had looked for, from the commencement, for
overthrowing the Constitution to which he had personally
plighted his faith. The Allied Sovereigns took alarm at the
outbreak of the revolutionary spirit in Sicily, and a Congress
of the Great Powers was convoked at Laibach [see VERONA, THE
CONGRESS OF] to consider what steps required to be taken for
the protection of social order in the kingdom of Naples. …
By the Neapolitan Constitution the Sovereign was not at
liberty to leave the kingdom without the consent of the
Parliament. This consent was only given, after much
hesitation, in reliance upon the reiterated assurances of the
King, both publicly and privately, that his one object in
attending the Congress was to avert, if possible, a foreign
intervention. His Majesty also pledged himself most solemnly
not to sanction any change in the Constitution to which he had
sworn allegiance, and … he promised further that he would
not be a party to any reprisals being inflicted upon his
subjects for the part they might have taken in the
establishment of Constitutional liberty. As soon, however, as
Francis the First had arrived at Laibach, he yielded without a
protest to the alleged necessity for a foreign occupation of
his kingdom, with the avowed object of putting down the
Constitution. Without any delay being given, the Austrian
regiments crossed the frontier, preceded by a manifesto from
the King, calling upon his faithful subjects to receive the
army of occupation not as enemies, but as friends. … The
national troops, under General Pepé, were defeated with ease
by the Austrians, who in the course of a few weeks effected,
almost without opposition, the military occupation of the
whole kingdom [February-March, 1821]. Forthwith reprisals
commenced in grim earnest. On the plea that the resistance
offered by the Constitutionalists to the invading army
constituted an act of high treason, the King declared himself
absolved from all promises he had given previously to his
departure. A reign of terror was set on foot. … Signor Botta
thus sums up the net result of the punishments inflicted after
the return of the King in the Neapolitan provinces alone.
'About a thousand persons were condemned to death, imprisoned,
or exiled. Infinitely greater was the number of officers and
officials who were deprived of their posts by the
Commissioners of Investigation.' … The establishment of
Constitutional Government in the kingdom of the Two Sicilies,
and the resolution adopted at the instigation of Austria, by
the Congress of Laibach, to suppress the Neapolitan
Constitution by armed force, produced a profound effect
throughout Italy, and especially in Sardinia. The fact that
internal reforms were incompatible with the ascendency of
Austria in the Peninsula was brought home to the popular mind,
and, for the first time in the history of Italy, the desire
for civil liberty became identified with the national aversion
to foreign rule.
{1858}
In Piedmont there was a powerful Constitutional party,
composed chiefly of professional men, and a strong military
caste, aristocratic by birth and conviction, but opposed on
national grounds to the domination of Austria over Italy.
These two parties coalesced for a time upon the common
platform of Constitutional Reform and war with Austria; and
the result was the abortive rising of 1821. The insurrection,
however, though directed against the established Government,
had about it nothing of an anti-dynastic, or even of a
revolutionary character. On the contrary, the leaders of the
revolt professed, and probably with sincerity, that they were
carrying out the true wishes of their Sovereign. Their theory
was, that Victor Emmanuel I. was only compelled to adhere to
the Holy Alliance by considerations of foreign policy, and
that, if his hands were forced, he would welcome any
opportunity of severing himself from all complicity with
Austria. Acting on this belief, they determined to proclaim
the Constitution by a sort of coup d' état, and then, after
having declared war on Austria, to invade Lombardy, and thus
create a diversion in favour of the Neapolitans. It is certain
that Victor Emmanuel I. gave no sanction to, and was not even
cognisant of, this mad enterprise. … The troubles and
calamities of his early life had exhausted his energy; and his
one desire was to live at peace at home and abroad. On the
other hand, it is certain that Charles Albert [prince of
Savoy-Carignan, heir presumptive to the throne of Sardinia]
was in communication with the leaders of the insurrection,
though how far he was privy to their actual designs has never
yet been clearly ascertained. The insurrection broke out just
about the time when the Austrian troops were approaching the
Neapolitan frontiers. … The insurrection gained head
rapidly, and the example of Alexandria was followed by the
garrison of Turin. Pressure was brought to bear upon Victor
Emmanuel I., and he was led to believe that the only means of
averting civil war was to grant the Constitution. The
pressure, however, overshot its mark. On the one hand, the
King felt that he could not possibly withstand the demand for
a Constitution at the cost of having to order the regiments
which had remained loyal to fire upon the insurgents. On the
other hand, he did not feel justified in granting the
Constitution without the sanction of his brother and
[immediate] heir. In order, therefore, to escape from this
dilemma, his Majesty abdicated suddenly in favour of Charles
Felix [his brother]. As, however, the new Sovereign happened
to be residing at Modena, at the Court of his brother-in-law,
the Prince of Savoy-Carignan was appointed Regent until such
time as Charles Felix could return to the capital. Immediately
upon his abdication, Victor Emmanuel quitted Turin, and
Charles Albert was left in supreme authority as Regent of the
State. Within twelve hours of his accession to power, the
Regent proclaimed the Spanish Constitution as the fundamental
law of Piedmont. … The probability is … that Charles
Albert, or rather his advisers, were anxious to tie the hands
of the new Sovereign. They calculated that Charles Felix, who
was no longer young, and who was known to be bitterly hostile
to all Liberal theories of Government, would abdicate sooner
than accept the Crown of a Constitutional kingdom. This
calculation proved erroneous. … As soon as his Majesty
learned the news of what had occurred in his absence, he
issued a manifesto [March, 1821], declaring all the reforms
granted under the Regency to be null and void, describing the
authors of the Constitution as rebels, and avowing his
intention, in the case of necessity, of calling upon the
Allied Powers to assist him in restoring the legitimate
authority of the Crown. Meanwhile, he refused to accept the
throne till the restoration of order had given Victor Emmanuel
full freedom to reconsider the propriety of abdication. This
manifesto was followed by the immediate advance of an Austrian
corps d'armée to the frontier stream of the Ticino, as well as
by the announcement that the Russian Government had ordered an
army of 100,000 men to set out on their march towards Italy,
with the avowed object of restoring order in the Peninsula.
The population of Piedmont recognised at once, with their
practical good sense, that any effective resistance was out of
the question. … The courage of the insurgents gave way in
view of the obstacles which they had to encounter, and the
last blow was dealt to their cause by the sudden defection of
the Prince Regent. … Unable either to face his coadjutors in
the Constitutional pronunciamento, or to assume the
responsibility of an open conflict with the legitimate
Sovereign, the Regent left Turin secretly [March 21, 1821],
without giving any notice of his intended departure, and, on
arriving at Novara, formally resigned his short-lived power.
The leaders, however, of the insurrection had committed
themselves too deeply to follow the example of the Regent. A
Provisional Government was established at Turin, and it was
determined to march upon Novara, in the hope that the troops
collected there would fraternise with the insurgents. As soon
as it was known that the insurgents were advancing in force
from Turin, the Austrians, under General Bübner, crossed the
Ticino, and effected a junction with the Royal troops. When
the insurgents reached Novara, they suddenly found themselves
confronted, not by their own fellow-countrymen, but by an
Austrian army. A panic ensued, and the insurrectionary force
suffered a disastrous, though, fortunately, a comparatively
bloodless, defeat. After this disaster the insurrection was
virtually at an end. … The Austrians, with the consent of
Charles Felix, occupied the principal fortresses of Piedmont.
The old order of things was restored, and, upon Victor
Emmanuel's formal refusal to withdraw his abdication, Charles
Felix assumed the title of King of Sardinia. As soon as
military resistance had ceased, the insurrection was put down
with a strong hand."

_E. Dicey,
Victor Emmanuel,
chapters 3-4._

"Henceforth the issue could not be misunderstood. The conflict
was not simply between the Neapolitans and their Bourbon king,
or between the Piedmontese and Charles Felix, but between
Italian Liberalism and European Absolutism. Santarosa and Pepé
cried out in their disappointment that the just cause would
have won had their timid colleagues been more daring, had
promises but been kept; we, however, see clearly that though
the struggle might have been prolonged, the result would have
been unchanged. Piedmont and Naples, had each of their
citizens been a hero, could not have overcome the Holy
Alliance [see HOLY ALLIANCE], which was their real antagonist.
{1859}
The revolutionists had not directly attacked the Holy
Alliance; they had not thrown down the gauntlet to Austria;
they had simply insisted that they had a right to
constitutional government; and Austria, more keen-witted than
they, had seen that to suffer a constitution at Naples or
Turin would be to acknowledge the injustice of those
principles by which the Holy Alliance had decreed that Europe
should be repressed to the end of time. So when the Carbonari
aimed at Ferdinand they struck Austria, and Austria struck
back a deadly blow. … But Austria and the Reactionists were
not content with simple victory; treating the revolution as a
crime, they at once proceeded to take vengeance. …
Ferdinand, the perjured Neapolitan king, tarried behind in
Florence, whilst the Austrians went down into his kingdom. …
But as soon as Ferdinand was assured that the Austrian
regiments were masters of Naples, he sent for that Prince of
Canosa whom he had been forced unwillingly to dismiss on
account of his outrageous cruelty five years before, and
deputed to him the task of restoring genuine Bourbon tyranny
in the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies. A better agent of
vindictive wrath than Canosa could not have been found; he was
troubled by no humane compunctions, nor by doubts as to the
justice of his fierce measures; to him, as to Torquemada,
persecution was a compound of duty and pleasure. … The right
of assembling, no matter for what purpose, being denied, the
universities, schools, and lyceums had to close; proscription
lists were hurriedly drawn up, and they contained not only the
names of those who had been prominent in the recent rising,
but also of all who had incurred suspicion for any political
acts as far back as 1793. … Houses were searched without
warrant; seals were broken open; some of the revelations of
the confessional were not sacred. The church-bells tolled
incessantly for victims led to execution. To strike deeper
terror, Canosa revived the barbarous torture of scourging in
public. … How many victims actually suffered during this
reign of terror we cannot tell. Canosa's list of the
proscribed had, it is said, more than four thousand names. The
prisons were choked with persons begging for trial; the
galleys of Pantelleria, Procida, and the Ponza Islands swarmed
with victims condemned for life; the scaffolds, erected in the
public squares of the chief towns, were daily occupied. … At
length, when his deputies had terrorized the country into
apparent submission, and when the Austrian regiments made it
safe for him to travel, Ferdinand quitted Florence and
returned to Naples. … In Sicily the revolution smouldered
and spluttered for years, in spite of remorseless efforts to
stamp it out; on the mainland, robberies and brigandage, and
outbreaks now political and now criminal, proved how delusive
was a security based on oppression and lies. Amid these
conditions Ferdinand passed the later years of his infamous
reign. … In Piedmont the retaliation was as effectual as in
Naples, but less blood was shed there. Della Torre took
command of the kingdom in the name of Charles Felix. …
Seventy-three officers were condemned to death, one hundred
and five to the galleys; but as nearly all of them had
escaped, they were hanged in effigy; only two, Lieutenant
Lanari and Captain Garelli, were executed. The property of the
condemned was sequestrated, their families were tormented, and
the commission, not content with sentencing those who had
taken an active part in the revolution, cashiered two hundred
and twenty-one officers who, while holding aloof from
Santarosa, had refused to join Della Torre at Novara and fight
against their countrymen. … The King … had soon reason to
learn the truth of a former epigram of his, 'Austria is a
bird-lime which you cannot wash off your fingers when you have
once touched it'; for Austria soon showed that her motive in
bolstering falling monarchs on their shaky thrones was not
simply philanthropic nor disinterested. General Bubna, on
taking possession of Alessandria, sent the keys of that
fortress to Emperor Francis, in order, he said,—and we wonder
whether there was no sarcasm in his voice,—in order to give
Charles Felix 'the pleasure of receiving them back from the
Emperor's hand.' 'Although I found this a very poor joke,'
wrote Charles Felix to his brother, 'I dissembled.' How,
indeed, could he do otherwise? … Charles Felix had in truth
become but the vassal of the hereditary enemy of his line, and
that not by conquest, but by his own invitation."

_W. R. Thayer,
The Dawn of Italian Independence,
book 2, chapter 7 (volume 1)._

ALSO IN:
_P. Colletta,
History of Naples,
books 9-10 (volume 2)._

_A. Gallenga,
History of Piedmont,
volume 3, chapter 6._

_R. H. Wrightson,
History of Modern Italy,
chapters 2-3, and 6._

ITALY: A. D. 1820-1822.
The Congresses of Troppau, Laybach and Verona.

See VERONA, THE CONGRESS OF.

ITALY: A. D. 1830-1832.
Revolt in Modena, Parma, and the Papal States,
suppressed by Austrian troops.

"The Revolution of 1830 [in France] made a natural impression
in a country which had many evils to complain of and which had
so lately been connected with France. The duke of Modena,
Francis IV., sought to make use of the liberal movement to
extend his rule over northern Italy. But at the last moment he
was terrified by threats from Vienna, turned against his
fellow-conspirators, and imprisoned them (February 3, 1831).
The people, however, were so alienated by his treachery that
he fled with his prisoners to seek safety in Austrian
territory. A provisional government was formed, and Modena was
declared a free state. Meanwhile the election of a new pope,
Gregory XVI., gave occasion for a rising in the papal states.
Bologna took the lead in throwing off its allegiance to Rome,
and in a few weeks its example was followed by the whole of
Romagna, Umbria, and the Marches. The two sons of Louis
Bonaparte, the late king of Holland, hastened to join the
insurgents, but the elder died at Forli (17 March), and thus
an eventful career was opened to the younger brother, the
future Napoleon III. Parma revolted against Maria Louisa, who
followed the example of the duke of Modena and fled to
Austria. The success of the movement, however, was very
short-lived. Austrian troops marched to the assistance of the
papacy, the rebellion was put down by force, and the exiled
rulers were restored. Louis Philippe, on whom the insurgents
had relied, had no sympathy with a movement in which members
of the Bonaparte family were engaged. But a temporary revival
of the insurrection brought the Austrians back to Romagna, and
a great outcry was raised in France against the king.
{1860}
To satisfy public opinion, Louis Philippe sent a French force
to seize Ancona (February 22, 1832), but it was a very
harmless demonstration, and had been explained beforehand to
the papal government. In Naples and Sardinia no disturbances
took place. Ferdinand II. succeeded his father Francis I. on
the Neapolitan throne in 1830, and satisfied the people by
introducing a more moderate system of government. Charles
Albert became king of Sardinia on the death of Charles Felix
(27 April, 1831), and found himself in a difficult position
between Austria, which had good reason to mistrust him, and
the liberal party, which he had betrayed."

_R. Lodge,
History of Modern Europe,
chapter 25._

ALSO IN:
_L. G. Farini,
The Roman State, 1815-1850,
volume 1, chapters 3-5._

ITALY: A. D. 1831-1848.
The Mission of Mazzini, the Revolutionist.
Young Italy.

"The Revolution of 1830, ineffectual as it seemed to its
promoters, was yet most significant. It failed in Italy and
Poland, in Spain and Portugal; it created a mongrel monarchy,
neither Absolute nor Constitutional, in France; only in
Belgium did it attain its immediate purpose. Nevertheless, if
we look beneath the surface, we see that it was one of those
epoch-marking events of which we can say, 'Things cannot be
again what until just now they were.' … The late risings in
the Duchies and Legations had brought no comfort to the
conspirators, but had taught them, on the contrary, how
ineffectual, how hopeless was the method of the secret
societies. After more than fifteen years they had not gained
an inch; they had only learned that their rulers would concede
nothing, and that Austria, their great adversary, had staked
her existence on maintaining thraldom in Italy. Innumerable
small outbursts and three revolutions had ended in the death
of hundreds and in the imprisonment or proscription of
thousands of victims. … Just when conspiracy, through
repeated failures, was thus discredited, there arose a leader
so strong and unselfish, so magnetic and patient and zealous,
that by him, if by anyone, conspiracy might be guided to
victory. This leader, the Great Conspirator, was Joseph
Mazzini, one of the half dozen supreme influences in European
politics during the nineteenth century, whose career will
interest posterity as long as it is concerned at all in our
epoch of transition. For just as Metternich was the High
Priest of the Old Regime, so Mazzini was the Prophet of a
Social Order, more just, more free, more spiritual than any
the world has known. He was an Idealist who would hold no
parley with temporizers, an enthusiast whom half-concessions
could not beguile: and so he came to be decried as a fanatic
or a visionary. … Mazzini joined the Carbonari, not without
suspecting that, under their complex symbolism and
hierarchical mysteries they concealed a fatal lack of harmony,
decision, and faith. … As he became better acquainted with
Carbonarism, his conviction grew stronger that no permanent
good could be achieved by it. … The open propaganda of his
Republican and Unitarian doctrines was of course impossible;
it must be carried on by a secret organization. But he was
disgusted with the existing secret societies: they lacked
harmony, they lacked faith, they had no distinct purpose;
their Masonic mummeries were childish and farcical. …
Therefore, Mazzini would have none of them; he would organize
a new secret society, and call it 'Young Italy,' whose
principles should be plainly understood by every one of its
members. It was to be composed of men under forty, in order to
secure the most energetic and disinterested members, and to
avoid the influence of older men, who, trained by the past
generation, were not in touch with the aspirations and needs
of the new. It was to awaken the People, the bone and sinew of
the nation; whereas the earlier sects had relied too much on
the upper and middle classes, whose traditions and interests
were either too aristocratic or too commercial. Roman
Catholicism had ceased to be spiritual; it no longer purified
and uplifted the hearts of the Italians. … Young Italy
aimed, therefore, to substitute for the mediæval dogmas and
patent idolatries of Rome a religion based on Reason, and so
simple as to be within the comprehension of the humblest
peasant. … The doctrines of the new sect spread, but since
secret societies give the census-taker no account of their
membership, we cannot cite figures to illustrate the growth of
Young Italy. Contrary to Mazzini's expectations, it was
recruited, not so much from the People, as from the Middle
Class, the professional men, and the tradesmen." In 1831
Mazzini was forced into exile, at Marseilles, from which city
he planned an invasion of Savoy. The project was discovered,
and the Sardinian government revenged itself cruelly upon the
patriots within its reach. "In a few weeks, eleven alleged
conspirators had been executed, many more had been sentenced
to the galleys, and others, who had escaped; were condemned in
contumacy. Among the men who fled into exile at this time were
… Vincent Gioberti and Joseph Garibaldi. … To an
enthusiast less determined than Mazzini, this calamity would
have been a check; to him, however, it was a spur. Instead of
abandoning the expedition against Savoy, he worked with might
and main to hurry it on. … One column, in which were fifty
Italians and twice as many Poles, … was to enter Savoy by
way of Annemasse. A second column had orders to push on from
Nyon; a third, starting from Lyons, was to march towards
Chambéry. Mazzini, with a musket on his shoulder, accompanied
the first party. To his surprise, the peasants showed no
enthusiasm when the tricolor flag was unfurled and the
invaders shouted 'God and People! Liberty and the Republic!'
before them. At length some carabineers and a platoon of
troops appeared. A few shots were fired. Mazzini fainted; his
comrades dispersed across the Swiss border, taking him with
them. … His enemies attributed his fainting to cowardice; he
himself explained it as the result of many nights of
sleeplessness, of great fatigue, fever and cold. … To all
but the few concerned in it, this first venture of Young Italy
seemed a farce, the disproportion between its aim and its
achievement was so enormous, and Mazzini's personal collapse
was so ignominious. Nevertheless, Italian conspiracy had now
and henceforth that head for lack of which it had so long
floundered amid vague and contradictory purposes. The young
Idealist had been beaten in his first encounter with obdurate
Reality, but he was not discouraged. … Now began in earnest
that 'apostolate' of his, which he laid down only at his
death.
{1861}
Young Italy was established beyond the chance of being
destroyed by an abortive expedition; Young Poland, Young
Hungary, Young Europe itself, sprang up after the Mazzinian
pattern; the Liberals and revolutionists of the Continent felt
that their cause was international, and in their affliction
they fraternized. No one could draw so fair and reasonable a
Utopia for them as Mazzini drew; no one could so fire them
with a sense of duty, with hope, with energy. He became the
mainspring of the whole machine—truly an infernal machine to
the autocrats—of European conspiracy. The redemption of Italy
was always his nearest aim, but his generous principle reached
out over other nations, for in the world that he prophesied
every people must be free. Proscribed in Piedmont, expelled
from Switzerland, denied lodging in France, he took refuge in
London, there to direct, amid poverty and heartache, the whole
vast scheme of plots. His bread he earned by writing critical
and literary essays for the English reviews,—he quickly
mastered the English language so as to use it with remarkable
vigor,—and all his leisure he devoted to the preparation of
political tracts, and to correspondence with numberless
confederates. … He was the consulting physician for all the
revolutionary practitioners of Europe. Those who were not his
partisans disparaged his influence, asserting that he was only
a man of words; but the best proof of his power lies in the
anxiety he caused monarchs and cabinets, and in the
precautions they took to guard against him. … Mazzini and
Metternich! For nearly twenty years they were the antipodes of
European politics. One in his London garret, poor, despised,
yet indomitable and sleepless, sending his influence like an
electric current through all barriers to revivify the heart of
Italy and of Liberal Europe; the other in his Vienna palace,
haughty, famous, equally alert and cunning, … shedding over
Italy and over Europe his upas-doctrines of torpor and decay!"

_W. R. Thayer,
The Dawn of Italian Independence,
book 3, chapter 1 (volume 1)._

ALSO IN:
_W. L. Garrison,
Joseph Mazzini,
chapters 2-5._

_J. Mazzini,
Collected Works,
volume 1._

ITALY: A. D. 1848.
Expulsion of Jesuits.

See JESUITS: A. D. 1769-1871.

ITALY: A. D. 1848-1849.
Insurrection and revolution throughout the peninsula.
French occupation of Rome.
Triumph of King "Bomba" in Naples and Sicily.
Disastrous war of Sardinia with Austria.
Lombardy and Venice enslaved anew.